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.
33 public bills, H.R. 9115- 9136; and 11 resolutions, H.J. Res. 191-194; H. Con. Res. 108; and H. Res. 1334-1339 were introduced.
Pages H3828-29
Reports Filed
Reports were filed today as follows: H. Res. 1333, providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 8646) making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2027, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 7726) to amend the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990 to withhold funds from noncompliant States under such Act; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 7892) to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require to the Secretary of Education to use an identity fraud detection system to review each FAFSA to determine whether the FAFSA presents a reasonable suspicion of identity fraud; and providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 8872) to amend part A of title IV of the Social Security Act to target funds to low-income families, strengthen program integrity guardrails for State expenditure of funds, require measurement of improper payments, and establish goals for eliminating fraud and improper payments under the program of block grants to States for temporary assistance for needy families, and for other purposes (H. Rept. 119-676); H.R. 826, to require the Inspector General of the Small Business Administration to submit a quarterly report on fraud relating to certain COVID-19 loans, with an amendment (H. Rept. 119-677); H.R. 915, to authorize small business loans to finance access to modern business software, and for other purposes (H. Rept. 119-678); H.R. 8880, to require the Comptroller General to evaluate Federal cybersecurity assistance to small business concerns, and for other purposes (H. Rept. 119-679); H.R. 8879, to amend the Small Business Act to require a report on small business concern participation in a covered contracting programs, and for other purposes (H. Rept. 119-680); H.R. 8881, to amend the Small Business Act to require the Administrator of the Small Business Administration to report on the use of artificial intelligence and machine learning by the Administration, and for other purposes (H. Rept. 119-681); H.R. 8882, to amend the Small Business Economic Policy Act of 1980 to examine how the competitiveness of small businesses is affected by the enforcement of Federal antitrust laws, and for other purposes (H. Rept. 119-682); H.R. 8312, to establish fraud prevention and program integrity functions and data sharing authorities within the Department of Treasury and a permanent governmentwide Inspector General for Fraud, Accountability, and Recovery, and for other purposes, with an amendment (H. Rept. 119-683); H.R. 8464, to amend title 31, United States Code, to authorize pausing and segmenting payments, and for other purposes, with an amendment (H. Rept. 119-684); and H. Res. 1336, waiving a requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII with respect to consideration of certain resolutions reported from the Committee on Rules (H. Rept. 119-685).
Page H3828
Speaker
Read a letter from the Speaker wherein he appointed Representative Hurd to act as Speaker pro tempore for today.
Page H3777
Recess
The House recessed at 10:36 a.m. and reconvened at 12 p.m.
Page H3781
Recess
The House recessed at 1:21 p.m. and reconvened at 1:30 p.m.
Page H3793
Suspensions: Proceedings Resumed
The House agreed to suspend the rules and pass the following measures. Consideration began Tuesday, June 2nd. American Battlefield Protection Program Amendments Act: H.R. 7618, amended, to amend title 54, United States Code, to modify certain cost- sharing requirements for grant programs under the American Battlefield Protection Program, by a \2/3\ yea-and-nay vote of 404 yeas to 13 nays, Roll No. 192;
Pages H3793-94
Alaska's Right to Ivory Sales and Tradition Act
S. 254, to amend the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 to protect the cultural practices and livelihoods of producers of Alaska Native handicrafts and marine mammal ivory products, by a \2/3\ yea-and-nay vote of 404 yeas to 14 nays, Roll No. 193; and
H.R. 2860, amended, to reauthorize the Northwest Straits Marine Conservation Initiative Act to promote the protection of the resources of the Northwest Straits, by a \2/3\ yea-and-nay vote of 374 yeas to 49 nays, Roll No. 196.
Pages H3810-11
Preventing Waste, Fraud, and Abuse in TANF Act
The House considered H.R. 8872, to amend part A of title IV of the Social Security Act to target funds to low-income families, strengthen program integrity guardrails for State expenditure of funds, require measurement of improper payments, and establish goals for eliminating fraud and improper payments under the program of block grants to States for temporary assistance for needy families. Further proceedings were postponed.
Pages H3805-10
Pursuant to the Rule, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Ways and Means now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted.
Pages H3805-06
H. Res. 1333, the rule providing for consideration was agreed to by a recorded vote of 211 ayes to 207 noes, Roll No. 195, after the previous question was ordered by a yea-and-nay vote of 208 yeas to 207 nays, Roll No. 194.
Pages H3783-93, H3795-96
No Funds for Repeat Child Care Violations Act
The House passed H.R. 7726, to amend the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990 to withhold funds from noncompliant States under such Act, by a yea- and-nay vote of 210 yeas to 207 nays, Roll No. 198.
Pages H3796-3805, H3811-12
Rejected the Subramanyam motion to recommit the bill to the Committee on Education and Workforce by a yea-and-nay vote of 210 yeas to 213 nays, Roll No. 197.
Pages H3805, H3811
Pursuant to the Rule, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 119-32 shall be considered as adopted, in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Education and Workforce now printed in the bill.
Pages H3796-97
H. Res. 1333, the rule providing for consideration was agreed to by a recorded vote of 211 ayes to 207 noes, Roll No. 195, after the previous question was ordered by a yea-and-nay vote of 208 yeas to 207 nays, Roll No. 194.
Pages H3783-93, H3795-96
Directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran
The House agreed to H. Con. Res. 86, directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran, by a yea-and-nay vote of 215 yeas to 208 nays, Roll No. 199. Consideration began on Wednesday, May 20th.
Pages H3812-13
Ukraine Support Act
The House considered H. Res. 518, providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2913) to authorize support for Ukraine. Earlier, the House agreed to the Meeks motion to discharge H. Res. 518, by a yea-and-nay vote of 218 yeas to 204 nays, Roll No. 200. Further proceedings were postponed.
Pages H3813-14
Order of Business: Consideration of H. Con. Res. 84
Agreed by unanimous consent that it be in order at any time to consider H. Con. Res. 84 in the House if called up by the chair of the Committee on Foreign Affairs or his designee; that the concurrent resolution be considered as read; and that the previous question be considered as ordered on the concurrent resolution to adoption without intervening motion except for one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by Representative Mast of Florida and Representative Tlaib of Michigan, or their respective designees.
Page H3814
Directing the President pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution to remove United States Armed Forces from Lebanon
The House considered H. Con. Res. 84, directing the President pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution to remove United States Armed Forces from Lebanon. During the course of debate, exception was taken to certain words used and a demand was made to have the words taken down. After review, the Chair ruled that the words were in violation of the spirit of debate. Without objection, the words were stricken from the record.
Pages H3814-22
Quorum Calls: Votes
Eight yea-and-nay votes and one recorded vote developed during the proceedings of today and appear on pages H3793-94, H3794, H3795, H3795-96, H3810-11, H3811, H3811-12, H3812-13, and H3813. Adjournment: The House met at 10 a.m. and adjourned at 8:32 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: 165 of 363 spoken turns were found. Turns without a time are still listed; they just can't seek.
Morning-Hour Debate
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of January 6, 2026, the Chair will now recognize Members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning-hour debate.
The Chair will alternate recognition between the parties, with time equally allocated between the parties and each Member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip limited to 5 minutes, but in no event shall debate continue beyond 11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today at an important time for American agriculture. Across the country and certainly in the Big First District of Kansas, farmers, ranchers, and agricultural producers are doing what they have always done. They are working hard, taking risks, caring for their land and livestock, and helping feed, fuel, and clothe the world.
Anyone who spends time with producers knows the truth: Farmers are facing real pressure right now. Producers are facing high input costs, tight margins, market uncertainty, and the lasting effects of 4 years of overregulation and sky-high inflation under the Biden administration.
Farmers and ranchers do not need Washington to make their jobs harder. They need Washington to understand the challenges they face and get out of their way. That is exactly what President Trump, Secretary Brooke Rollins, and House Republicans are doing.
We have real leadership that understands the basic truth that food security is national security. A country that cannot feed itself is not secure, and a world without access to American-grown commodities is worse off as a result.
That is why House Republicans have been focused on delivering results for farmers, ranchers, producers, and rural America.
At the end of April, the House passed the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026, which gives producers the stability and certainty that they deserve, authorizes key farm programs, expands market access, improves access to credit, and invests in rural America.
In May, the House passed legislation to allow E15 fuel to be sold year-round nationwide, another commonsense win that strengthens markets for producers, supports American energy, and gives families more choices at the pump.
Later this week, the House will also vote on fiscal year 2027 Agriculture appropriations bills. This legislation keeps USDA focused on its core mission: supporting American agriculture, protecting our food supply, investing in rural communities, and making sure farmers and ranchers have the tools they need to succeed.
I am proud that I have pushed for the inclusion of Kansas priorities, such as funding for Food for Peace, McGovern-Dole, agricultural research, and efforts to align USDA more closely with American farmers.
One of the best examples of Republicans' dedication to the agricultural economy is Food for Peace. Food for Peace is a Kansas-born idea. It began when Cheyenne County farmer Peter O'Brien, whose proposal to use surplus American commodities to feed hungry nations was adopted by the Kansas Farm Bureau, sponsored in Congress by Kansas Senator Andy Schoeppel, and signed into law by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1954.
More than 70 years later, that idea is still powerful: American farmers helping feed hungry people around the world. That program belongs at USDA, where American-grown commodities remain at the center of the mission. Moving Food for Peace back home to its rightful place is better not only for farmers but for taxpayers and a hungry world.
The farm bill we passed in April includes my legislation to permanently move Food for Peace to USDA, and the Ag appropriations bill continues funding for the program.
Last week, I was proud to host USDA Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs Luke Lindberg in the Big First District of Kansas. We visited Kansas State University's milling science facilities and international grains programs, the Kansas Wheat Innovation Center, and the ADM milling facility in Abilene. Under Secretary Lindberg understands what Kansas producers know to be true: We need consistent buyers, strong markets, and a Federal Government that fights for American agriculture abroad.
President Trump and Secretary Rollins embody that well. They are putting producers first, expanding opportunities for American agriculture, and restoring common sense at USDA. After years of inflation, overregulation, and missed opportunities, this leadership is needed, and I am grateful for all the changes.
Mr. Speaker, agriculture is the backbone of the Big First District and our country. Our farmers and ranchers do more than just produce food. They strengthen our economy. They support rural communities. They fuel our Nation. They help feed a hungry world. They remind us that America's strength has always been with our hardworking farmers and ranchers.
House Republicans are delivering for those producers. We passed a farm bill that gives agriculture certainty. We passed year-round E15 to strengthen markets and expand consumer choice. We are advancing an Ag appropriations bill that supports USDA's core mission and invests in the priorities that matter to farm country.
Under President Trump and Secretary Rollins, we finally have an administration that understands American agriculture is setting our producers up for success. American farmers and ranchers feed, fuel, and clothe the world. They deserve a government that has their backs.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Dylan Valle, a proud and devoted member of the SEIU Local 32BJ and a true public servant in our community.
As the Hudson Valley district leader, Dylan represented 4,000 union members fighting for fairer protections, safer working conditions, and dignity for the working class.
Those who knew Dylan will remember his big smile and generous spirit that inspired all those around him.
I am grateful for Dylan's tireless advocacy on behalf of ordinary working people across New York to improve the lives of those around him.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of this body and the entire 16th Congressional District, I extend my deepest condolences to Dylan's family, friends, and all who had the privilege of knowing him. Dylan's devotion to his community will always be remembered, as his legacy will endure.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to a dedicated, longtime Mamaroneck resident, Joseph Germano, who passed away in May, just a few weeks before his 101st birthday.
Born in the village, Joe graduated from Mamaroneck High School in 1943 and immediately signed up for the U.S. Marine Corps during World War II. He served in the Pacific theater on the USS Eldorado and participated in the battles of Iwo Jima, Okinawa, and the Philippines.
After the war, he returned to his hometown and became the owner of a local business for nearly 50 years. Joe was active in veteran organizations, such as the VFW Post 1156 and The American Legion Post 90. He was a leader at St. Vito's Roman Catholic Church and a member of the Mamaroneck Public Library board and the village's traffic commission. He was a fixture at Harbor Island Park throughout the years.
Joe and his wife, Louise, have four daughters, four grandsons, and five great-grandsons. Joe has left behind a legacy of generosity and community commitment, and that will last over the next 100 years.
From the floor of the House of Representatives, we salute Joe Germano, a true son of Mamaroneck.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today during National Immigration Heritage Month to recognize the contributions of immigrants to our Westchester and Bronx communities and to recognize their positive impact on the entire country.
I speak at a time when the Delaney Hall Detention Facility in Newark, New Jersey, houses detainees in horrific conditions. The situation of mass deportation of hardworking individuals seeking a better life is not what the Framers of the Constitution envisioned.
When hopeful immigrants arrive at our shores, they heed the promising words inscribed on the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty: ``Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door.''
Mr. Speaker, as we near our 250th anniversary as a nation, I remind my colleagues that the United States of America is a land of opportunity for all.
Mr. Speaker, it is wonderful that we are celebrating our 250th anniversary. We need to be constantly reminded of what sacrifices were made at the beginning of our country to allow us to be the freest, greatest country in the world. Many men and women sacrificed their way of life and their lives themselves in that effort. We need to keep them in mind, always.
In support of that idea, I rise to recognize the Overmountain Victory Trail Association for its continued work to preserve, protect, and interpret the route to the Battle of Kings Mountain, one of the most significant battles in the Revolutionary War.
Earlier this year, I had the pleasure of meeting with David Doan, the president of the association; his wonderful wife, Jane; and Tom Vaughan, the association's treasurer. All three were immensely passionate about the work they engage in, and it is easy to see why. They all care deeply about sharing one of the greatest stories of the American Revolution.
The Overmountain Victory National Historic Trail spans approximately 300 miles, and patriot militia, known as the Overmountain Men, traveled along it to the Battle of Kings Mountain. In Newland, North Carolina, there is a beautiful mural depicting the Overmountain Men crossing the Yellow Mountain Gap en route to this battle.
What makes their story so unique is that these men did not come from rarefied backgrounds. They came from the Carolina backcountry and Appalachians, and they picked up arms, made the hike of 330 miles, and unleashed liberty upon British forces.
The Battle of Kings Mountain was a pivotal American victory, one that dealt a serious crushing blow to British forces as they tried to gain control over the Southern Colonies.
Mr. Speaker, we ought to recognize the dedicated work of organizations such as the Overmountain Victory Trail Association in helping preserve and share the history of our Nation with generations to come. We are grateful for all they do and salute their efforts.
Mr. Speaker, this week, hundreds of scientists, conservationists, explorers, students, and advocates from across the country are gathered here for the 25th anniversary of America's premier ocean policy event: Capitol Hill Ocean Week, or CHOW. This week marks 25 years of translating science into policy and cultivating partnerships to protect the coasts, fisheries, and habitats that sustain our economy and our world.
As our Nation marks its own 250th anniversary, this week challenges us to reckon with both the threats and opportunities we face as stewards of the ocean: to chart a course for the next 250 years by protecting the ocean because of its importance to our shared prosperity and to the planet.
Mr. Speaker, 250 miles above us, the International Space Station crosses the horizon every 90 minutes. From that vantage point, there are no borders, but there is a lot of blue. More than 70 percent of the Earth is ocean, providing habitat for thousands of known species, driving economies for coasts and nations, and regulating the climate effects on every harvest, port, and storm.
Down here at sea level, we are testing the limits of our blue world. The same waters that feed and connect us are warming, becoming more acidic, and rising faster than at any point in human history.
This Nation was built by the sea. Our maritime heritage runs through every port, fishing village, and coastal community. The science and tools we have built to help us steward our waters have saved countless lives, properties, and habitats. They are among this country's greatest achievements.
We jeopardize that resilience if we fail to manage ocean resources wisely. As climate change accelerates, shifting currents and migrating species are redrawing economic maps and straining international cooperation. These risks undermine trade, safety, and stewardship.
Nearly one-third of the seafood consumed in the United States is now tied to illegal or unreported fishing, a black-market industry worth up to $36 billion a year, often entangled with drug smuggling and forced labor. These networks plague ecosystems, weaken supply chains, undercut U.S. workers and businesses, and erode the rule of law.
The Trump administration is choosing to compound the risks and undermine the country's lead agency, NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, by shedding thousands of its workers and threatening to eliminate its research office. Belittling science in the name of modernization will erode our Nation's talent and further strain our oceans' resources.
Here is the good news. When we choose stewardship, it pays dividends. Every dollar invested in NOAA yields $112 in benefits--in jobs, in stability, and resilience. Ninety percent of the U.S. fisheries are now sustainably managed. American ocean science has stimulated an $827 billion blue economy that supports 3.3 million jobs. That didn't happen by accident. It happened because leaders worked together and kept focus through the countless partnerships that keep our coasts working and our ecosystems thriving.
I represent a significant part of the magnificent Oregon coast. When I visit, I see future ocean leadership, and I see what it can look like: fishers using real-time data to avoid depleted stocks, students mapping kelp forests that store more carbon per acre than any forest on land, and scientists working to research marine energy that can harness the power of the tides to keep the lights on.
Capitol Hill Ocean Week reflects these ambitions and calls us to realize them. That is the vision for future demands: science in service of security and cooperation in service of resilience.
That partnership means embracing the truth that conservation and competitiveness are not opposites. They are inseparable. The same science that restores coral reefs also protects coastal infrastructure. The same satellite technology that tracks illegal fishing also improves disaster response. The same diplomacy that defends marine ecosystems also deters instability and preserves human rights.
After 25 years of organized ocean advocacy, we know the challenges and are equipped with the solutions. What we need now is the shared resolve to turn that knowledge into action.
The ocean won't wait for our politics to calm. Its currents are eroding coastlines and economies. If we delay, we will cede precious resources and influence to those who would exploit both. If we act, we can turn climate risk into resilience by decarbonizing commerce, restoring blue carbon ecosystems, and expanding the industries that will define a sustainable century.
That is the challenge we face to make the ocean once again a source of unity rather than division, abundance rather than scarcity, and cooperation rather than conflict.
As co-chair of the bipartisan House Oceans Caucus, I have seen what is possible when we keep that focus. We have bridged party lines, brought agencies and industries to the same table, and shown that ocean health does not need to be partisan.
The scientists, fishers, explorers, and advocates here at Capitol Hill Ocean Week know that leadership, like the tide, is never still. The future of American prosperity and the blue planet depend on it.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the incredible milestone of Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 1443 in Clarkston, Washington, which celebrated its 100th anniversary on May 26.
For one full century, the venerable post in downtown Clarkston has stood as a sanctuary of service, transforming the heavy, unspoken burdens of global conflict into a legacy of enduring local fellowship.
Mr. Speaker, it is deeply fitting that we celebrate this centennial milestone precisely as our Nation marks its 250th anniversary of American independence. The history of VFW Post 1443 is a microcosm of the grand tapestry of American freedom. It bridges the gap between the revolutionary ideals of 1776 and modern preservation of liberty.
The brave individuals who left Asotin County to fight on distant shores did so to protect the promise of our Republic. Many did not return home. For those who returned and found a home at Post 1443, the memories of their comrades were woven into the work building a century of camaraderie, youth mentorship, and veterans advocacy.
Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking the members and auxiliary of the Clarkston VFW Post 1443 for 100 years of unwavering devotion to our community and the United States of America.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the 24 years of service to the Nation by Chief Master Sergeant Lindsay Moon, Command Chief of the 92nd Air Refueling Wing at Fairchild Air Force Base.
Chief Moon made notable contributions as a developmental flight test boom operator in the development of air refueling operational procedures for the F-35 Lightning and the KC-46 Pegasus. Following that, he was selected to stand up a boom operator exchange program advising the Royal Australian Air Force during initial fielding of their KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport refueling program.
Over the duration of his career, Chief Moon has amassed over 4,300 flight hours, over 1,000 instructor/evaluator hours, 170 test flight sorties, and 132 combat sorties.
Chief and Mrs. Moon will relocate soon to western Washington, where Chief Moon will begin a new career with Boeing.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Chief Moon. On behalf of Congress and a grateful United States, we are grateful for his service.
Mr. Speaker, I also rise today to honor the 24 years of service to the Nation by Colonel Chad K. Cisewski, known to his airmen and the Fairchild community as ``Chewey,'' commander of the 92nd Air Refueling Wing at Fairchild Air Force Base.
Chewey's retirement brings his 2-year command of the 92nd Air Refueling Wing to a close, which in turn caps 24 years of outstanding service to the U.S. Air Force.
The airmen of the 92nd Air Refueling Wing made major contributions to the successful outcome of Operation Midnight Hammer, and for their valiant actions, over 20 airmen of the 92nd Air Refueling Wing were recently recognized with the granting of the Distinguished Flying Crosses and Bronze Star Medals.
Colonel and Mrs. Cisewski will soon begin a new career and a new chapter in their lives where he will be at the Air Force ROTC program at the University of Minnesota, Duluth.
Mr. Speaker, I and all of Spokane, Washington, know Chewey as a humble leader and a true gentleman. Now, all of the United States and Congress knows it as well.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of Congress and a grateful United States, we salute Chewey's service.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the passage of a major milestone for one of Spokane County's oldest institutions: the Nine Mile Store. Located in Nine Mile Falls, Washington, it has reached its 120th continuous year of operation.
The Nine Mile Store has been a community cornerstone for 120 years, going back to the day it was opened by Ed Tormey in 1906 to support the construction of the adjacent Nine Mile Dam.
A few years after its start, the automobile began to slowly replace the horse and buggy, and a hand-cranked gas pump was installed to meet customer needs. Mr. Tormey ran the store for over 30 years before it was purchased by Stephen and Mildred Casadoro, who operated it for nearly 40 years. It would change hands several more times, and now is being operated by Steve and Corrine Rogers who continue its tradition of excellent service to our community.
I am proud to represent its current owners and all of their customers here in Congress. All of the Spokane County area in eastern Washington know of the outstanding nature of the Nine Mile Store, and now so do all of Congress and a grateful American people.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor St. Stephen Baptist Church of Louisville, Kentucky. This year St. Stephen will be celebrating its 100th anniversary as a congregation.
Mr. Speaker, 100 years is an incredible milestone for any person or organization, but St. Stephen's century of service in Kentucky is one that deserves special recognition.
The Book of Matthew tells us that a church can exist wherever two or three gather in His name. Well, 100 years ago, in 1926, it wasn't much more than that, as 14 faithful believers gathered in a borrowed basement and started what has now become the largest Black church in the Commonwealth of Kentucky.
It is a wonderful church. The music is fantastic. The congregation is warm and welcoming. I have recently heard another pastor say that if there is a Mount Rushmore of preachers, Dr. Kevin W. Cosby is on it. Amen.
I want my colleagues here to know that St. Stephen has never just been a place to gather and worship. As Dr. Cosby wrote in his book ``Getting to the Promised Land,'' the Black church cannot exist solely as a place where the community goes to experience a Sunday respite from the pressing burden of our people's history and present. As the preeminent institution for ADOS, Black churches in America must fill their sanctuaries with exhortations to carry out the sort of justice work that will relieve us of that burden.
Not only does it have a proud legacy of service and activism, St. Stephen is an undeniable bedrock of Black education in our Commonwealth and in our country.
Yes, the church offers educational programming, and at several points throughout its history, it has chosen to build an educational building or a family life center instead of merely expanding the size of its worship space. But nowhere is the church's commitment to education more evident than its relationship with Simmons University.
Going back to its beginnings, St. Stephen's first pastor, Reverend B.J. Miller, who led the church for 44 years, was a young Simmons University student. Founded in 1879 by formerly enslaved Baptists, Simmons quickly became a national leader and was only one of two HBCUs in the country with both a medical school and a law school, educating Black lawyers, doctors, teachers, and ministers who went on to lead the civil rights movement just decades later. Reverend Miller himself helped integrate the Southern Seminary and played a vital role in the push for equal rights in Louisville.
Now, here is where things get really interesting. In 1930, the Great Depression, combined with discriminatory policies, forced Simmons to foreclose on its campus. A cornerstone of Black education and a premier institution of higher learning was seemingly gone forever.
I think there are lots of ways to have faith, but one of the ways to have faith is to understand that God has a redemptive plan for us and our world. We don't get to know the details. It might not always be easy. But as the Proverbs tell us, if you trust in the Lord with all your heart, he will make the path straight.
Reverend Miller, who was that Simmons University student, was eventually succeeded by his grandson, Dr. Kevin W. Cosby, who was just 20 years old when he took over the church in 1979. Yes, together, the two of them have shepherded this congregation for 91 of its 100 years.
When Dr. Cosby took over, it was already an amazing church. He took it to new heights. In 1997, he made a very brave decision, maybe even a divine decision, to resurrect the proud tradition of education and purchase the former campus of Simmons College, a decision solely responsible for the rebirth, restoration, and revitalization of the premier Black college that is once again Simmons College of Kentucky.
When Simmons regained accreditation, it was recognized as the Nation's 107th HBCU in 2015, the last HBCU in America. It was the most remarkable comeback in the history of higher education. Next year, the comeback continues as Simmons College once again becomes Simmons University.
None of this success has been accidental or inevitable. It is because of a faithful congregation, a family dedicated to service, and a good and gracious God. What an amazing story. May God continue to bless this church, this college, and this community.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues here to join me in congratulating St. Stephen today and wishing them a second century that is even better than the first.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Jordyn Olson and Summer Funkhouser from Fergus Falls. They were recently awarded the prestigious Girl Scout Bronze Award, the highest honor a Girl Scout Junior can achieve. This award requires dedication, teamwork, and a true commitment to creating lasting change in the community.
These bright young ladies partnered with the Fergus Falls Community Food Shelf to create accessible, kid-friendly meal options for local families. Together, they designed a ``by kids, for kids'' recipe brochure featuring meals and snacks made entirely from items commonly found in a weekly food distribution box. These brochures are now being distributed directly to local families.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Summer and Jordyn on their achievement.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the success of the Tracy FFA Chapter at the 2026 Minnesota State Convention. They had a great showing, including their livestock team taking first place.
The winning team consisted of Carson Lanoue, Melaina Ankrum, Lawton Verlinde, Nolan Verlinde, and Callie Johns. These students dedicated hours to practices, reviewing data, and mastering the professional reasoning required for judging livestock. Their hard work paid off, and they will now advance to compete at the national level in Indianapolis.
I am proud of these students for their dedication, teamwork, and commitment to excellence. They are shining examples of what our students in western Minnesota can achieve. Please join me in congratulating Tracy FFA on their historic performance, and I wish them good luck in Indianapolis this fall.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a true American hero from Ivanhoe, Minnesota: Lois Widmark.
At 104 years old, Lois recently received well-deserved recognition for her extraordinary service during World War II. Serving in the Navy WAVES, Lois was stationed in Washington, D.C., where she worked as a code breaker, utilizing complex machinery to decrypt enemy information.
Lois joined the service because she wanted to do more for our Nation. Her vital, top-secret work contributed to the Allied victory and helped to protect the freedoms that we hold so dear.
Last week, in a special ceremony at her home, Lois was presented with the
On behalf of Minnesota's Seventh District, I thank Lois for her service to our country. We are honored to have such a remarkable veteran in our community.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate and celebrate the Redwood Falls Woman's Club on their 125th anniversary.
Founded in 1901, this organization has been a pillar of the Redwood Falls community. Through generations of leadership and the dedication of its members, these women have left a lasting impression on the area. Their longevity is a testament to the power of civic duty and community service.
I extend my gratitude and congratulations to the members of the Redwood Falls Woman's Club, past and present, thanking them for 125 years of service, leadership, and dedication to making Redwood Falls a wonderful place to live.
Mr. Speaker, like tens of millions of Americans, my family has been impacted by the scourge of the terrible disease of cancer.
My wonderful wife, Andrea, over 1 year ago, battled breast cancer for roughly 18 months. I saw up close the grit, the determination, and the strength that she showed daily to beat that terrible disease.
We were very lucky, but for the grace of God, the incredible care that she received from healthcare providers, and the support that we received from family and friends, that she was able to beat that disease. I count my blessings every day.
Mr. Speaker, you can imagine, given my family's journey, my dismay at an announcement that was made just a few days ago by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. It didn't receive a lot of fanfare, but the agency issued a new rule to implement President Trump's big, terrible bill, H.R. 1.
This rule, in the fine print, makes very clear that it will become more difficult for cancer patients to be able to stay on Medicaid.
Let me repeat that. This pernicious provision that the Trump administration has now proposed would make it more difficult for cancer patients to be able to access and stay on Medicaid.
The question that I am here today to ask of my colleagues is: Why? Why pursue this rule, knowing, as I know you do, Mr. Speaker, that 1 out of every 10 Americans who has a history of cancer are on Medicaid-- 1 out of 10?
Knowing that this is a matter of life and death for millions of Americans, why pursue this type of terrible provision and policy that we know will result in countless Americans no longer being able to access the care that they need to survive?
It is cruel. It is unconscionable in my view.
Mr. Speaker, I am here today on the floor to make a humble request to my colleagues. There is still time to convince CMS, HHS, and the Trump administration to turn back and to not proceed with this rule. Countless Americans and a variety of organizations dedicated to helping cancer patients have publicly asked the Trump administration--have implored the Trump administration--to reverse course.
There is still time, and I would just encourage my colleagues-- request of my colleagues--implore my colleagues to join us in demanding that the Trump administration do the right thing: Rescind this rule on behalf of countless families in our country who are looking to us in Washington for help.
Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of my former colleague from Maryland, Congressman Roscoe Bartlett, on the occasion of his 100th birthday today.
An extraordinary American, scientist, inventor, farmer, and Representative of the Sixth District of Maryland, Roscoe held 20 patents supporting our Nation's defense.
In Congress, he used his scientific expertise to champion energy independence, national security, and small businesses. He raised concerns about our Nation's electric grid and its vulnerabilities years before the issue came to the forefront.
During his 20 years of constituent service, Roscoe never forgot the little guy. He passed legislation such as Robby's Law, allowing military dogs to be adopted by their handlers, as well as helping National Guard members receive overdue pay post 9/11.
His philanthropy has supported organizations such as Heartly House that assists families escaping domestic violence.
Today, he celebrates his birthday with his beloved wife, Ellen, and their family. On behalf of a grateful Nation, I thank Roscoe for his contributions and selfless service.
Madam Speaker, if you watch the news regularly, you probably have witnessed an increasing number of attacks on places of worship.
In the past year, members of the Temple Israel Synagogue in Detroit; Annunciation Catholic Church in Minneapolis; Beth Israel Congregation in Jackson, Mississippi; the Islamic Center of San Diego; and many others have had their greatest fear come true--an attack on their institution due to their religious affiliation.
When one house of worship is targeted, people of every faith ask themselves: Will the next time be at my mosque, church, shrine, or synagogue?
We must find respect amid our diversity and ensure that we continue to defend the fundamental freedom to practice one's religion in this country just as the Founding Fathers intended and as generations of Americans have fought to preserve.
Let us honor the lives of those lost by recommitting ourselves to a country where every person of every faith can worship without fear.
Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize the heroes of Nebraska law enforcement.
Last Friday, as I was participating in the annual La Vista Days celebration, the Papillion Police Department responded to an active shooter at a shopping center just down the road.
Officers located the suspect and began a pursuit that ended in a busy parking lot nearby, where the officers opened fire. The threat was neutralized, and any injuries to the public or law enforcement did not happen.
When the community faced an armed gunman, the men and women of Papillion P.D., La Vista P.D., and the Sarpy County Sheriff's Office ran towards danger. Because of their bravery, everybody went home safe.
Their courage is a testament to the sacrifice law enforcement officers make every day they put on the uniform. I am proud to back the blue, and I thank those serving in law enforcement for keeping us safe.
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the Lebanon War Powers Resolution.
More than 3,000 innocent people have been killed in Lebanon by the Israeli military and over a million are displaced.
These are not abstract statistics. These are real lives--a baby who will grow up without a mother, an elder who was fleeing the only home they have ever known.
Congress must not sit idly by while the Trump administration supports Netanyahu's barbaric warfare. We must not be complicit. We must take action for peace and pass this War Powers Resolution.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H. Con. Res. 84.
Madam Speaker, I rise in favor of the Ukraine Support Act.
In the Massachusetts Seventh Congressional District, I hear from Ukrainians about the necessity of American support to put an end to Putin's attacks. This bill will advance strategic assistance to save lives and negotiate a diplomatic solution to end this war once and for all.
I was proud to sign the discharge petition to force this vote, and I urge all of my colleagues to stand with Ukraine.
Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize two exceptional small business leaders from Indiana's Ninth District, Ted and Dana Huber, who have been named Indiana Small Business Persons of the Year by the United States Small Business Administration.
Ted represents the sixth generation of a family business founded in 1843, when his ancestor Simon Huber left Baden, Germany, and settled in the small southern Indiana community of Starlight, bringing with him the craft of winemaking and distillation that still defines the family today.
Ted and Dana have built that legacy into something remarkable. What began as a fruit farm has grown into one of the Midwest's premier agritourism destinations, welcoming over 600,000 guests annually to their 700-acre property.
The next generation is already carrying it forward. Their sons, Christian and Blake, have both returned from university programs in viticulture and distilling to work alongside their parents on the family farm.
The Hubers didn't just build a business. They helped build an industry. In 1998, the family worked with Indiana legislators to create the farm brandy distillation permit, opening the door for distilleries across the State.
Their willingness to invest not just in their own operation but in the broader agriculture community is exactly what sets Ted and Dana apart. I am proud to recognize them for this well-deserved honor, and I thank them for their generations of contributions to southern Indiana and our State.
Madam Speaker, last week, I joined my colleague Congressman Bill Keating in New Bedford, Massachusetts, for the eighth stop on my End Hunger Now Massachusetts tour.
We started the day at the PACE Community Food Center, an incredible model of a food pantry, where clients can choose their own groceries and get advice from nutritionists on staff. There is dignity in food choice, even when you are poor--especially when you are poor.
We then toured the new culinary center of the New Bedford Public Schools. It is a modern, state-of-the-art kitchen, where healthy and tasty school meals are prepared daily for more than 13,000 students in and around the city.
I thank everyone who joined us on our visits, including PACE Executive Director Pam Kuechler, Jennifer Ferland and Cathy Henriques from the culinary center, New Bedford School Superintendent Andrew O'Leary, New Bedford Mayor Jon Mitchell, and Eos Foundation President Andrea Silbert, among others.
Madam Speaker, what I saw in New Bedford is a shining example of what dedicated people working together can do to thoughtfully, yet boldly, end hunger now.
Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Melissa Kunes, who is retiring from Penn State after 40 years of steadfast service.
Melissa's journey at Penn State began in the early 1990s when she started working in the University's agricultural sciences extension office.
After earning her master's degree in counselor education in 1993, Melissa worked in the Office of Student Aid. Throughout her tenure, she served the university in various capacities before becoming the assistant vice president and executive director for student aid in 2018.
In this role, Melissa has advocated for financial aid funding; implemented LionPATH, the University's student information system; and collaborated with multiple State organizations, like the Pennsylvania Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators.
Melissa and her colleagues have been responsible for administering more than $1.5 billion in financial aid. Over the years, she has helped countless Penn State students attend the university, creating future opportunities in an array of careers.
Madam Speaker, I applaud Melissa for her constant support at Penn State. I congratulate Melissa on this milestone.
Madam Speaker, I rise today to join human rights defenders across the world to call for the immediate and unconditional release of Ruth Eleonora Lopez, who has been held in pretrial detention for over 1 year without any due process and without access to her family or even her lawyer.
A Salvadoran lawyer and human rights defender, Ruth is a political prisoner, unjustly targeted for her tireless fight against corruption and her demands for justice, accountability, and transparency from Bukele's government in El Salvador.
Authoritarians want to strike fear into our hearts. They want to punish dissent, and they want to criminalize those who would be willing to speak truth to power. But we will not concede the power of the people, and we will not be silent.
I unequivocally stand in solidarity with Ruth Lopez, her family, and human rights defenders. I say to them that they are not alone. We are with them, and we will not forget them.
Madam Speaker, ahead of the 82nd anniversary of D-day this Saturday, I rise to honor a distinguished Marylander, Sergeant John Polyniak, a Ranger of the 29th Division, 116th Infantry, Company C, one of the first units to land on Omaha Beach.
While he didn't know it then, that day would lay the foundation for the Allied victory on the western front.
But it didn't come without heavy loss. Mr. Polyniak was severely wounded and left behind as his unit moved forward. It was only hours later when he heard the voice of a medic that he thought he might make it.
He would later undergo three operations and endure pain for the rest of his life. When asked if he was scared, he said that everybody was scared, but he figured that he had a job to do.
To honor their extraordinary sacrifice and heroism, the Army Rangers veterans of World War II were recently awarded a Congressional Gold Medal.
Mr. Polyniak's story reminds us of the unwavering bravery of our men and women in uniform, the importance of learning and preserving our past, and the undeniable strength of our global alliances like NATO.
Providing for Consideration of H.R. 8646, Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agency Appropriations Act, 2027; Providing for Consideration of H.R. 7726, No...
Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, last night, the Rules Committee met and reported out a rule, House Resolution 1333, providing for the House's consideration of four bills.
First, the rule provides for H.R. 8646, the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, to be considered under a structured rule, with 26 amendments made in order. It provides 1 hour of debate, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective designees, and provides for one motion to recommit.
Second, the rule provides for H.R. 7892, the No Aid for Ghost Students Act, to be considered under a closed rule. It also provides 1 hour of debate, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Workforce or their respective designees, and provides for one motion to recommit.
Third, the rule provides for H.R. 7726, the No Funds for Repeat Child Care Violations Act of 2026, to be considered under a closed rule. It also provides 1 hour of debate, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Workforce or their respective designees, and provides for one motion to recommit.
Finally, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 8872, the Preventing Waste, Fraud, and Abuse in TANF Act, under a closed rule. It provides 1 hour of debate, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means or their respective designees, and provides for one motion to recommit.
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and in support of the underlying legislation. The legislation before us this week reflects a straightforward principle: Federal programs should serve the people they were intended to serve. Taxpayer dollars should be spent responsibly, transparently, and accountably.
It should be easy for this simple but important effort to be pursued in an overwhelmingly bipartisan fashion, yet my Democratic counterparts will undoubtedly oppose these bills. In doing so, they will be voting to perpetuate rampant fraud, but that is no surprise since the States flagged for massive amounts of fraud are led by Democratic Governors and State legislatures. Why would they want to clamp down on the fraud Democrats helped perpetuate?
Every week, during debate on the rule, Democrats will use a technique we refer to as gaslighting to accuse and blame Republicans for their own egregious behavior. Let's remember that it was President Biden who eased the rules around Federal childcare billing, which resulted in spending double in some facilities in Minnesota while enrollment stayed flat.
Here we are, doing much more than combating fraud in our legislative package this week. Together, these measures strengthen oversight, close loopholes that have enabled fraud and abuse, support rural America, and ensure Federal resources are reaching the families, students, workers, and communities they were designed to help.
Let me begin with the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. The bill makes targeted investments in the programs that matter most to producers, consumers, and rural communities. It continues to support agricultural research, rural development initiatives, and the critical food safety infrastructure that Americans rely on every day.
For States like Indiana, where agriculture remains one of the largest economic drivers, these investments will yield tangible results. Whether it is supporting corn and soybean producers, livestock operations, food processors, or rural small businesses, this legislation strengthens the industries that sustain local economies and help feed the world.
This bill recognizes a simple reality: Food security is national security. Foreign adversaries are increasingly looking to buy up American farmland, influence our food supply, and gain access to critical agricultural resources. This legislation takes important steps to increase oversight on foreign ownership of U.S. farmland, safeguarding against foreign influence and protecting American agriculture from emerging threats.
In addition to these wins, I am proud we secured over $3 million in community project funding in this bill for Indiana's Ninth Congressional District. This funding will support projects, including critical upgrades to wastewater systems in Borden and Moorefield, expanded sewer service in Greenville, and replacing aging stormwater pipe in Austin.
These projects reflect priorities identified by local leaders and will deliver much-needed updates to aging infrastructure, which will expand economic development opportunities and improve quality of life across the district.
I thank Chairmen Cole and Harris for their work on this legislation and urge my colleagues to support it.
Also included in the rule is the No Aid for Ghost Students Act. Federal student aid was created to help Americans earn a degree, learn a trade, and build a better future. It was never intended to become a slush fund for fraudsters or identity thefts, and that is exactly what is happening.
Bad actors are exploiting the system by using stolen or fake identities to submit FAFSA applications, enroll in classes, collect taxpayer-funded financial aid, and disappear once the money has been issued. The result is millions of taxpayer dollars lost to fraud. Every dollar stolen by a fraudster is a dollar taken away from a student trying to improve their future.
Under the leadership of Secretary Linda McMahon, the Department of Education has already prevented more than $1 billion in attempted student aid fraud through stronger identity verification and fraud detection measures.
This bill builds on that success by making sure taxpayer dollars go to students, not scammers. It strengthens identity verification requirements, requiring schools to verify suspicious applicants before aid is distributed, and it holds institutions accountable when basic safeguards are ignored. We need to restore the integrity of the Federal student aid system and ensure taxpayer dollars reach the students they were intended to help.
Next, Madam Speaker, I will turn to the Stop Child Care Scams Act. Childcare assistance programs are designed to help working parents afford quality childcare so they can provide for their families and pursue economic opportunity. These programs are a lifeline for millions of Americans, but when taxpayer dollars are lost to fraud, it is not just taxpayers who suffer. The families who depend on these services suffer, too.
For years, the Child Care and Development Block Grant program has been vulnerable to waste, fraud, and abuse, yet despite repeated warnings, hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars remain at risk.
Recent reports have uncovered troubling instances where providers received Federal childcare assistance funds without actually serving eligible children and families. Shockingly, during a congressional Oversight Committee hearing, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz recently admitted his State had known about the fraud in its childcare assistance program since 2012 yet took no action. That is unacceptable.
When that happens, families who rely on these services are the ones who ultimately suffer, particularly the hundreds of thousands of families in need of childcare assistance vouchers currently sitting on a waiting list.
The Stop Child Care Scams Act takes commonsense steps to protect both taxpayers and families. It cracks down on providers who attempt to game the system by increasing transparency, strengthening oversight, and adding additional auditing requirements.
Just as importantly, it helps ensure providers caught committing fraud in one program cannot simply move to another State or locality and continue their theft of taxpayer dollars.
My Democrat colleagues are going to say this bill is going to make childcare assistance less available. In fact, it does the opposite. It helps ensure these resources reach the children, parents, and providers they were intended to serve, protecting them from being siphoned off by fraudsters.
Lastly, let's turn to the Preventing Waste, Fraud, and Abuse in TANF Act. For nearly three decades, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program has helped low-income families meet basic needs while promoting the values of work, personal responsibility, and self- sufficiency.
A key strength of TANF has always been the flexibility it provides to States to decide how these funds will best be used.
Congress intentionally designed the program to allow States to tailor services and benefits to the unique needs of their communities, rather than relying on a one-size-fits-all, top-down Federal approach. But as we have already discussed, flexibility must be accompanied by accountability.
Today, TANF is one of the few major Federal assistance programs that is not required to measure and report improper payments under Federal program integrity laws. Let me repeat that. Under TANF, States are not required to report improper payments.
As a result, taxpayers and policymakers often lack basic information about how these funds are being spent and whether these resources are actually reaching the families they are intended to serve.
Recent Government Accountability Office reports have uncovered a major oversight failure within the TANF program that should concern every taxpayer. This bill requires accountability while still preserving State flexibility. It requires States to track and report improper payments, helps identify and reduce waste and fraud, and ensures Federal funds are directed toward the low-income families that they were designed to serve.
A common thread, Mr. Speaker, among each of these bills before us today is that taxpayer dollars should be used responsibly, and taxpayers should have confidence that their hard-earned dollars are being spent for the purposes intended, safeguarding limited resources and directing them to where they are needed most.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bills, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from Indiana for yielding me the customary time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, Republicans with a straight face come to this floor and pretend that these bills are about fraud, waste, and abuse.
What a crock that is.
I mean, you want to talk about fraud, Mr. Speaker? Let's talk about fraud. Let's talk about a President who had to pay $25 million after students got defrauded by Trump University.
Let's talk about how Trump and his family have made more than $4 billion since he became President through crypto schemes, corrupt foreign deals, self-dealing government contracts, shady real estate transactions, and pump-and-dump stock schemes.
Let's talk about the sweetheart deals, the pardons, the loopholes, the contracts, the favors, the corrupt giveaways that seem to follow this administration everywhere it goes.
If my Republican friends want to come down here and lecture America about waste, fraud, and abuse, then they should answer a very simple question: Do they support the deal that gives Donald Trump and his family blanket immunity from Federal investigation or prosecution?
Do they support what amounts to be an unlimited stack of get-out-of- jail-free cards for tax crimes, insider trading, bribes, kickbacks, sweetheart contracts, or any other crimes that could be investigated by the Federal Government?
Is their answer yes or no?
I mean, I am outraged by this, and I think it is corrupt as hell. I think the American people deserve to know why Republicans are so obsessed with attacking poor people but suddenly lose their voice when Donald Trump uses the Federal Government like his own personal protection racket.
That is not what Republicans want to talk about. Their idea of cracking down on fraud is simple: Go after people with the least so they can give more to those at the top. Go after poor families. Go after hungry kids. Go after students trying to get an education. Go after parents trying to afford childcare. Go after pregnant women who need help buying food.
That is what these bills do. That is what these bills do. So let's go through them one by one.
Their TANF bill does not help one struggling family. It gives the Trump administration more power to make the safety net harder to use and easier to weaponize.
Their childcare bill does not bring down the cost of childcare by one penny, not one. It just adds more red tape and more paperwork.
Their student aid bill does not help students. It gives more power to a Department of Education Secretary who has shown zero interest in helping students. It lets them freeze aid based on a barely tested system. And by the way, CBO says it saves taxpayers nothing, zero.
Then we have the agriculture funding bill, and this one is especially rotten. I serve on the Agriculture Committee. I represent farmers. I represent rural communities. I have spent my career fighting hunger, so I know what this bill does.
It hurts farmers. It hurts rural America, and it is a disaster for hungry families.
At the exact moment when families are getting crushed at the grocery store because Trump's economy sucks, Republicans are making it harder for them to buy food.
At the exact moment when farmers are getting squeezed by Trump's tariffs and Trump's war, Republicans are gutting the programs that support them.
At the exact moment when inflation is up and we should be talking about bringing prices down, Republicans are screwing over middle America.
Republicans promised prices would come down on day one. Do you remember that? Well, here we are a year and a half in, and everything is up. Groceries are up. Energy costs are up. Inflation is up.
Their answer to pregnant women paying higher grocery costs is to cut WIC by $200 million, to take nutrition help away from pregnant women and little kids. Who asked for that? Who asked for you to cut one of the most basic, effective, profamily programs that we have? WIC helps pregnant women stay healthy. It helps babies grow. It helps new moms. It helps them buy milk and eggs and vegetables and formula and healthy food, and Republicans want to gut it.
By the way, they want to totally decimate the fruit and veggie voucher, which since 2007 has helped make sure moms of newborns can afford to eat healthy food.
Mr. Speaker, why would you eliminate that? At a time when fruits and veggies are getting more expensive,
I mean, Republicans can always find money for another illegal war. They can always find money for billionaire tax breaks. They can always find money for corporate giveaways. But fruits and veggies for a pregnant or postpartum mom, formula for a baby, food for toddlers, then they have a problem?
What the hell is wrong with these people, Mr. Speaker?
I thought they wanted to Make America Healthy Again. I do, too, but here is the problem, Mr. Speaker: You can't say that you care about children's health while cutting the program that makes sure kids can eat healthy. You can't say that you care about wellness while voting for a bill that will malnourish our communities.
This bill does not stop there. It weakens support for Food for Peace, a program that feeds people facing famine around the world. It is a program that buys from American farmers. It is a program that shows the world that America can still do something decent and humane.
Why cut that? Whom does that help?
What kind of people look at hungry kids here at home, struggling farmers, and rural towns begging for investment and say: Sorry, we need the money for billionaires, for slush funds, for White House renovations, and for an illegal war?
I will ask again: What the hell is wrong with them?
Mr. Speaker, their entire agenda is about supporting those at the very top, the Mar-a-Lago class, and the hell with everyone else.
This rule deserves a ``no'' vote, and this cruel, upside-down agenda deserves to be rejected.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, let's be clear. This bill provides $8 billion for WIC which is the level needed to serve expected participation.
As the Appropriations Committee crafted this bill, they worked with USDA and OMB to get the most recent program data. This funding level reflects that participation, participation that has been declining, and it is not projected to be as high as originally estimated for fiscal year 2027. USDA also expects to have sufficient carryover funds.
Remember, Mr. Speaker, WIC is 2-year funding, and they expect to recover more unspent funds from the States. With the lowered participation estimates and increased carryover funds, $8 billion will fully fund the program full stop. It is completely false to believe that there will be people kicked off of the program. Funding this at the level necessary to meet the need is exactly what we are doing in this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Haridopolos).
Mr. Speaker, what I did notice across the aisle here is that they didn't defend what happened.
What happened? The people stole money.
This isn't a theory. It is a reality. In Minnesota, a person was recently convicted and will serve now 41 years in prison because they committed fraud.
These bills are simply designed to show the reality that people are stealing money from people who make America work every single day.
There was no defense here. It was just the usual hyperbole, the same hyperbole that brought us 9 percent inflation, the same hyperbole that doubled interest rates, and the same hyperbole that raised food prices.
It is the reason why we are now in the majority.
Voters simply want accountability, and they want action. That is exactly what we provide.
We help people who are truly in need and don't turn a blind eye to fraud.
Now we all know why they hated DOGE. It is because it exposed fraud. That is why they didn't like it. We finally put the lights on and said: Hey, enough is enough.
That is why we are here today to talk about fraud. It is because a society that tolerates fraud weakens the bonds of trust that hold this Nation together.
It is not just in healthcare. It is now even in education. For those who don't know, I used to be a teacher, and I know the ultimate civil right is a fantastic education. Now, because of identity theft, people are taking money from those people who want to improve their lives for the better by getting a first-class education.
This is the most commonsense bill that we have had in the 2 years that I have been here. I am proud to support this so the folks who truly need the resources will finally get the resources.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I want to respond to the gentlewoman's comments about WIC. It is really hard for me to believe that I am hearing Republicans speak in the way they are.
Let me begin with a basic lesson in economics. First of all, Mr. Speaker, USDA's April 2026 Food Price Outlook makes it clear that prices are not down, they are up. They are skyrocketing. Food prices are up 2.7 percent from last year. Restaurant prices are up 3.8 percent. Beef and veal prices are up over 12 percent. Fresh vegetables are up 7.5 percent. Nonalcoholic beverages are up 4.7 percent, and grocery prices, overall, have gone way up.
These are not my talking points. These are not Democratic talking points. These are the Trump administration's own numbers. After 16 months of total Republican control of Washington, of everything, you control the House, you control the Senate, and you control the White House, these guys passed tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires. They imposed the tariffs which are one of the reasons why food prices are going up. They started a war that is driving up food and gas prices.
While they tried to put a good face on all of this, the bottom line is they are at fault here.
Pregnant moms' groceries are going up. The food that they need for themselves and for their babies are not going down. They are going up.
By the way, hunger, I should point out to the gentlewoman, is getting worse in this country. It is getting worse. Mr. Speaker, 48 million Americans are food insecure, including 14 million kids. That is what Republican economic policies have done. It is a national catastrophe, and this Republican Congress is doing everything it can to make hunger even worse.
Let me just say this: WIC helps pregnant women. It helps postpartum moms and babies eat nutritious food. It used to be bipartisan. Even the MAHA report talked about the health benefits of the program, and WIC participation has been steadily increasing.
Now, to the gentlewoman's point, there was a slight dip in participation thanks to the Republican government shutdown. If my friends did their homework and did their research and cared about facts, then they would know that. However, the National WIC Association, the voice of 12,000 service providers across the country, have scientific modeling that tells us that participation is expected to continue climbing.
It makes sense. It makes sense given the fact that food prices are going through the roof. People can't afford their basic necessities. We have been in situations in the past where WIC almost ran out of money. Providers, States, and families were scrambling. New moms were worried that their toddlers wouldn't have access to food. I don't think it is a radical idea to want to make sure that the program is fully funded.
This is also something the gentlewoman hasn't responded to, can somebody explain to me why Republicans are cutting the fruit and vegetable benefit that used to be in this bill? What sense does that make?
Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Houchin for yielding the time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule, which includes H.R. 8646, the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2027.
Through this bill, Republicans are making critical investments in American agriculture, considering to fund broadband expansion programs in rural regions like mine in Appalachian Ohio, and providing funding for critical community projects. Counties like those in my district have been left behind for too long when it comes to internet connectivity and repairing water infrastructure that our communities rely on every day. This bill delivers long-overdue support for rural Ohio families so they can have the tools they need to thrive.
Four of my community project funding requests are included in this bill, which would bring $2.5 million back to Ohio's Second Congressional District to fund vital projects, including freshwater infrastructure, outdated wastewater systems, and workforce training, leading to well-paying jobs for the poorest Ohioans. These funds are critical to improving the quality of life for Ohio families in my district, their access to education and employment opportunities, and will make our region a better place to live, work, and raise a family.
In regard to broadband, this bill encourages USDA to coordinate closely with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration to avoid duplication of benefits, protecting funds to ensure every family has access to the internet and, thereby, the modern economy. It additionally encourages USDA to work with all relevant stakeholders, including those with new technologies that may help expand service.
This bill also cracks down on foreign ownership of American farmland by making the Secretary of Agriculture a member of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States and transferring responsibility of tracking foreign land ownership from the Farm Service Agency to the USDA Office of Homeland Security.
Republicans are actively tracking, monitoring, and taking action against adversaries buying farmland. This will better align national security efforts and ensure our Nation's critical food supply is protected for generations to come. After all, food security is national security.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand with my Republican colleagues and urge passage of this bill to protect critical Federal resources for taxpayers who depend on them, ensure our food supply chain and farmland are able to keep food on our families' tables for generations to come, and make sure every rural family can connect to the modern economy.
I thank Chairman Tom Cole, Subcommittee Chairman Harris, and the entire Appropriations Committee for all the hard work they did getting this bill to the floor. I look forward to continuing to work alongside my Republican colleagues to deliver real results to the American people.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I will respond to the gentlewoman with regard to her last comment. Rather than respond substantively to a single thing that I said about Republicans cutting the WIC program, Women, Infants, and Children, that is in the name of the program, rather than responding to why Republicans are cutting the food and veggie program, she responds with a dig at trans people, and that is the Republican Conference in a nutshell. It really is.
We want to fight hunger. They want to fight culture wars. That is the difference here. This bill is an attack on the most vulnerable people in this country. For the life of me, I just don't understand where they are coming from. Their arguments just take my breath away. They waste time on culture wars, but they don't give a damn about the fact that there are 48 million people in this country who are hungry, that there are millions and millions of children in this country who are hungry.
I am telling you, by cutting these programs, you are not saving any money. You are creating more problems. If programs like WIC get cut and other nutrition programs get cut, then people can look forward to a life with a whole myriad of healthcare problems that are going to be very costly. You guys are something else.
Mr. Speaker, I urge that we defeat the previous question. If we do, I am going to offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 8914, which prohibits the use of taxpayer money to create a slush fund to compensate January 6 rioters, MAGA sycophants, senior government officials, and members of the President or Vice President's family.
Mr. Speaker, following President Trump's settlement of his bogus lawsuit against his own IRS, he tried to commandeer nearly $1.8 billion in taxpayer funds to bankroll a slush fund for the January 6 insurrectionists and other aggrieved MAGA loyalists.
After the obvious outcry at this ludicrous use of taxpayer dollars, Acting Attorney General Blanche said yesterday that they weren't moving forward with the fund.
Mr. Speaker, that isn't good enough.
Why? Because no one believes them. I wouldn't trust the Acting Attorney General to tell me the correct time. Even the people who stand to benefit from their roles on January 6 don't believe them.
Enrique Tarrio, the leader of the Proud Boys who was convicted of seditious conspiracy for his role on January 6, told a reporter: ``This isn't an abandonment. . . . I believe even if this fund is killed in courts or at a congressional level, the President will find a way.''
Senator Lindsey Graham, who earlier this year already tried to get millions of taxpayer dollars as payment for the government lawfully subpoenaing his cell phone data, said of Acting Attorney General Blanche's reversal on the fund: ``While I appreciate Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche's statement . . . I am still of the firm belief that there are many victims.'' He then went on to argue for the formation of a new taxpayer fund. Just replace the paused corrupt fund with a new corrupt fund. That is what the Republicans are arguing. You can't make this stuff up.
Mr. Speaker, it is clear that this corrupt fund is not dead, no matter what the Acting Attorney General says. The only way to ensure that this self-dealing taxpayer funded payoff for cop beaters doesn't move forward is to do what the newly free-to-speak-his-mind Senate Republican Whip, Senator Cornyn, said: ``The way to ensure the Trump retribution fund is more than mostly dead would be for Congress to put a stake through it.''
That is exactly what I am offering every Member of this House today: a chance to vote on if they want to kill this slush fund for good or not.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment into the Record, along with any extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?
Mr. Speaker, the $1.8 billion slush fund for insurrectionist cop beaters is one of the most disgraceful, corrupt exercises of Donald Trump's entire Presidency, and that is saying something. Every single Member of Congress needs to go on record as to where they stand on this issue.
The people who stormed the Capitol, attacked police officers, submitted fake electors, lied to election officials, and called to ``hang Mike Pence'' deserve jail time, not my constituents' taxpayer dollars. Even Republicans are appalled and can't stomach this grotesque betrayal of our democracy.
While Americans struggle to afford healthcare and housing and their gas prices keep climbing as a result of the President's reckless and illegal war, Donald Trump is fixated not on the American people but on his $400 million ballroom, renaming the Kennedy Center, covering up the Epstein files, and this outrageous slush fund for insurrectionists and his political allies.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my Republican colleagues to join Democrats in voting to permanently block this slush fund
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I do want to address the WIC cash value voucher funding for the fruit and vegetable benefits since my colleague has mentioned it.
I am not sure if my colleague has noticed but the pandemic is over, thank goodness.
Chicago-area union teachers are finally back to work. We can leave our homes, shop where we want to, and we can return to pre-COVID funding levels and re-center our spending to meet the need.
Let's be clear, we are not eliminating the benefit for fruits and vegetables. We are not even taking it back to pre-COVID levels. We are simply restoring parity to meet the need.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, it is hard to listen to all this. Food prices are going through the roof, and my Republican friends are arguing that we need to reduce a benefit or cut back on a fruit and veggie voucher. Really?
Mr. Speaker, I will get to another matter. I had just talked about the corrupt January 6 payoff fund and taxpayer money going to people that beat cops. That is sick. It is disgusting.
Now let me talk about the other half of the corrupt deal that I mentioned.
Yesterday, the Acting Attorney General of the United States said that the fund was not going forward. I guess we are just supposed to take his word on that. But he also indicated that the other nefarious part of the deal is still going forward.
Tucked into this agreement that Trump hopes you will not notice is a get-out-of-jail-free card for him and his entire family.
I mean, it is right here. Donald Trump, with the help of his personal criminal defense attorney turned Acting Attorney General Blanche, has drafted a separate agreement granting himself, his family, and his businesses full immunity from any violations of Federal law, criminal, civil, or administrative.
Even if this corrupt settlement fund is killed--which I hope we will vote to kill it--the President, negotiating with his own administration, secured a settlement agreement that grants him, his family, and their businesses full immunity. It is unprecedented. It is stunning, and a brazen level of corruption in self-dealing.
For my Republican colleagues who are upset about the fund, are you not equally upset by this attempt to put himself above the law? This amounts to granting himself a super pardon. It means he and his family are free to do any activity they please without the possibility of legal consequences.
Now, let me just read a bit of what this agreement says. The entire Federal Government is: forever barred and precluded from prosecuting or pursuing any pending claims, whether presently known or unknown, against Trump, his family members, and businesses, or collecting any taxes, fines, or other payments due to the U.S. government.
Now, Mr. Speaker, do you realize what this means? It means the Trumps and their businesses are not only shielded from enforcement of any taxes that they might have dodged, or enforcement of any fines or payments they may owe to the government, but from any and all consequences for violating any Federal crimes or civil law. That means that Trump and his family get an unlimited number of get-out-of-jail- free cards for any civil or criminal violations that could be investigated and prosecuted by the Federal Government.
Now, here are a couple of examples of what Trump could be shielding himself from: one, any liability for insider trading or prediction markets, like Kalshi or Polymarket, that Donald Trump Jr. or any other Trump may be involved with; any bribes or kickbacks paid by Jared Kushner, or any other Trump family member, to the Saudi royal family; any allegations of sexual assault by Donald Trump revealed in the Epstein files, he is protected on that; any secret, no-bid contracts Donald Trump Jr., or any other Trump, steered toward companies he has invested in, hundreds of individual stock trades by Trump or any of his family members or businesses that look like insider trading; and the $100 million comprehensive tax audit that Trump has been fighting since 2010.
If this settlement fund was bad, then this is even worse. Every American should know what the President is trying to do, which is trying to put himself above the law.
I remind my Republican colleagues--and I will remind everybody who is paying attention to this--Donald Trump is the President. He is not a king. He is not above the law. Every Member of Congress has a duty to stand up and denounce this corrupt scheme.
We are talking about fraud here today. What do you call this? What do you call this? The silence by my Republican colleagues, the going along to get along that my Republican colleagues demonstrate each and every day on this kind of garbage, that is complicity. That is complicity, and it is wrong.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, in response to the accusations that have been made in this Chamber today against the President of the United States, a government contractor criminally leaked the President's private tax returns. He was convicted and sentenced to 5 years in prison.
The President had every right to fight back. The President took no money from the settlement, not a single dollar. He received a formal apology. A man who has lost billions of dollars since entering politics to serve this country asked for an apology, and that is what he got.
When concerns were raised about the fund, the administration listened and pulled back.
The weaponization of government against political opponents must end. That is exactly what the President is fighting for and what the settlement represents. The people crying foul today are the same ones who cheered when the President's financial records were illegally leaked. The outrage is not credible. Democrats were silent as President Joe Biden pardoned, preemptively in some cases, his entire family.
Democrats today insist on deflecting from the issues we are here to talk: fraud. Republicans have sounded the clarion call on waste, fraud, and abuse that exists within the Federal Government. Meanwhile, Democrats have been content to use hyperbole and vitriolic attacks to hide behind the fact that they have no desire to ferret out this systemic waste, fraud, and abuse that is plaguing our programs.
There is fraud in our Government programs. We have known about it for decades. Democrats seem content to live with it. Republicans in Congress have been consistent in going after it, despite the head-in- the-sand posture by our Democratic colleagues. We went after it in ObamaCare in H.R. 1, and, guess what, the CBO stated that premiums would go down as a result of our work. We went after Medicaid fraud, especially involving illegal immigrants. By the way, a Federal court recently ordered officials to turn over Medicaid information to ICE enforcement.
We went after waste, fraud, and abuse through our rescissions package. Once again, Democrats refused that premise ever existed, even though it is right in front of their eyes. One just needs to look at the ever-revealing childcare center fraud in Minnesota. The universe of money that stands to be squandered by overbilling could reach in the hundreds of millions of dollars.
Worse yet, it has been discovered before, as I mentioned, as has the glaring inability for Minnesota to properly create any enforcement checks. Just earlier this year, the inspector general of Minnesota released an audit that randomly sampled payments to childcare centers in 2023, finding an astonishing 11 percent of government outlays have problems related to attendance and proper payment, and that was simply based on a random sample.
Here is a direct conclusion from the attorney general's report: A lack of oversight to ensure accurate and complete attendance documentation could increase the risk of fraud, waste, and abuse to the CCAP program.
The scandal comes on the heels, also, of the worst COVID fraud scandal ever perpetrated: the $250 million Feeding Our Future criminal fraud enterprise in Minnesota that literally robbed taxpayers of funds intended to help hungry children. An early reporting is potentially discovering concentric circles around individuals and families involved in that criminal enterprise, including these childcare centers.
Before that, in 2019, the State's legislative auditor revealed it could literally prove at least $6 million in fraud from previous years, believing the true number to be greater.
It is not limited to food benefits either. ABC News reported that the student loan fraud that is targeted in this bill we are considering this week, known as ghost students, had thousands of colleges across the country with sophisticated thieves becoming a scourge. The scammers, using stolen or fake identities to enroll in classes online and sign up for Pell grants and loans, then disappear once they get the money, robbing the Federal Government of hundreds of millions of dollars and leaving an untold number of victims in their wake.
There are really only three responses to fraud once it is exposed: You attack it, you cover it up, or you minimize it.
The legislative auditor in Minnesota previously accused the Walz administration of minimizing or dismissing allegations of fraud, citing a shoot-the-messenger attitude. One media outlet characterized Governor Walz as a hands-off leader when it comes to seeking accountability for episodes of fraud and mismanagement on his watch.
Which path will our Democrat colleagues take now that this fraud is being revealed? Will they root it out as we have, or will they turn a blind eye in the mode of Governor Tim Walz?
Just a few months ago, the Massachusetts State Auditor released the Bureau of Special Investigations annual report for fiscal year 2025, which exposed nearly $12 million in public assistance fraud across thousands of cases in the State, including $4.1 million in food stamp fraud. Mass Health, the State Medicaid and CHIP program saw more than $1.3 million in fraud.
Another report, published in April of 2026, found that more than a billion dollars was improperly spent on food stamps in Massachusetts between 2022 and 2024. The cases show just how deep and widespread the fraud is in Massachusetts.
A transportation company allegedly billed Mass Health more than $3 billion for rides that never happened. A tiny bodega, only 150 square feet, somehow pushed nearly $7 million in food stamp trafficking, ringing up a half a million dollars a month like it was a big box store.
One man living illegally in the country stole a dead U.S. citizen's identity for decades, even serving prison time under the alias. After release, he used the same alias to apply for food stamps, stealing thousands in benefits. A State employee even flagged his food stamp application with a note: death match. Yet, it was still approved.
In 2026, fraudsters used more than 100 stolen identities to funnel food stamps into a restaurant supply scheme, stocking up on hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of wholesale meat, all paid entirely on the taxpayers' dime.
It is not surprising, given the lack of oversight, that TANF fraud is so pervasive. Just take a look at Colorado where 135 cases of theft were reported by Pueblo County. Benefit recipients, in one week alone, totaled $73,991 in losses, including 40 TANF Colorado Works customers totaling $19,344.
This is just a short sample, Mr. Speaker, of the fraud committed in primarily Democrat States that we know about.
It is Republicans, once again, that are heeding the call, the request of American families, to root out waste, fraud, and abuse, and protect our tax dollars.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Oh my God, Mr. Speaker, I don't even know how to respond to all of that.
First of all, let me just set the record straight. The gentlewoman said neither myself or anybody on the Democratic side was critical when Joe Biden pardoned his son, Hunter. That is just not true. I have an article here that says: ``Rep. Jim McGovern Criticizes Hunter Biden Pardon, Disappointed President Didn't Honor Pledge.''
So what she just said is just factually incorrect.
Secondly, Mr. Speaker, I am listening to the gentlewoman defend the corruption in the White House, and it is stunning to me. I feel like maybe Todd Blanche wrote those talking points, because that is what I would expect to hear from the Acting Attorney General.
For the record, let's just set the record straight. Remember, Donald Trump sued a government that he runs for $10 billion for leaking information when he was in charge of the same government, with the leaked documents being tax returns, by the way, that every single modern President has released on their own. He promised he would release them. He didn't release them. He won't release them. Why? That is a good question. But every other President not only released them, but we expected them to. Again, what he is complaining about happened under his watch.
The gentlewoman also said that Trump lost a lot of money.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an excerpt from an article in The New Yorker titled: ``Trump's Profiteering Hits $4 Billion.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?
He has made billions since he has been in the White House. I don't know what the hell she is talking about.
Mr. Speaker, I also ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article from Forbes titled: ``Here Are Donald Trump's 10 Best Stock Trades of 2026.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?
Mr. Speaker, when we talk about fraud and corruption, Donald Trump has pardoned or issued commutations for 21 people convicted of healthcare fraud at the same time that my Republican friends voted for giving tax breaks to billionaires.
Philip Esformes, convicted of a $1.3 billion Medicare fraud scheme, one of the largest healthcare fraud schemes charged by the Department of Justice, Donald Trump pardoned him.
Judith Negron, convicted of orchestrating $205 million in terms of a Medicare fraud scheme involving assisted living facilities, she has been pardoned.
Jon Michael Harder, convicted of defrauding people of $120 million in investments through his senior housing and assisted living facilities, he has been pardoned.
I can go right down the list of all of these people that have been pardoned.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record all of the rich and connected fraudsters that have been pardoned by this President.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
Donald Trump Has Issued at least 21 Pardons and Commutations to
Mr. Speaker, this is the most absurdly corrupt and morally bankrupt administration in our history. To hear my Republican friends defend what is happening, to defend the fraud and the corruption that is right out in the open, is pathetic.
Mr. Speaker, I was hoping the gentlewoman would respond to some of my concerns, or maybe engage in debate, or give me some hope that Republicans actually are upset about what is happening right now with all the corruption and the fraud.
I yield myself the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time I have remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts has 4\1/2\ minutes left.
Mr. Speaker, this is not complicated. People are hurting. They are hurting because of Trump's inflation. They are hurting because of Trump's tariffs. They are hurting because of Trump's illegal war. They are hurting because of Trump's failed economic policies that are driving costs up and up and up.
Instead of doing something--anything--to help bring down costs, they are doubling down on the cruelty. They are literally going after pregnant moms and newborns. Literally, they are taking food out of the mouths of hungry kids.
What kind of mean, rotten, awful people do things like that? I can't believe it. It takes my breath away, Mr. Speaker.
They talk about fraud. They talk about waste. They talk about abuse. What a bunch of baloney.
Why don't they start with the billionaires writing their own tax breaks into the tax code.
Why don't they start with giant corporations ripping people off.
Why don't they start with the sweetheart deals, the no-bid contracts, the tax loopholes, or the people cashing in on the chaos.
Why don't they start with the blanket immunity for Donald Trump and his family with the possibility of tax crimes, insider trading, bribes, kickbacks, contracts for companies that Trump's family maybe invested in or anything else that Federal law enforcement might have a reason to investigate.
No, no. Republicans here in Washington, they go after hungry kids. They demonize poor people. They go after pregnant moms. They go after the families struggling to survive.
Mr. Speaker, this is wrong. It is morally bankrupt, and people see it.
They see Republicans talk about health while cutting nutrition.
They see Republicans talk about the deficit while handing out favors to the rich.
They see the grift, and they are sick of it. They are sick and tired of it.
They see that Democrats actually believe in something different. Maybe my Republican friends think we are radical. I don't think it is radical to believe people should be able to afford a decent life. I don't think it is radical to believe parents should be able to afford formula. I don't think it is radical to believe that no child in America, the richest country in the history of the world, should go hungry.
What I think is radical is that the far right, radical MAGA extremists who run this place can find endless money for wars, for billionaires, and for corporate tax giveaways while they steal from new moms and kids who are struggling to eat.
Mr. Speaker, I don't know what is going on in this Chamber, but where is our humanity? Where is our commitment to helping uplift people who are struggling? I say to my Republican colleagues: Where is your heart?
People are looking to us for help during these very difficult economic times, and what they are getting is all the garbage that my friends are bringing to the floor, stuff that does nothing to improve anybody's life.
You want to talk about fraud and you want to talk about corruption? I just gave you a boatload of facts and figures for you to go after.
Instead, when it comes to the Trump White House: Oh, hands off. We are
Again, nobody, no citizen gets that kind of treatment. Again, he is the President, not the king, and people in this Chamber have to start recognizing that fact. Nobody in this country, even the President of the United States, is above the law.
Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on this rule, a ``no'' vote on the rotten underlying legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I am really happy that there is at least some agreement in this debate today from my Democrat colleagues on the other side of the aisle. We agree, as it was mentioned today, that pregnant women carry babies. What a momentous day in this Chamber.
Democrats insist on deflecting from these issues, though, the ones we are talking about today, because it is their leadership in Democrat-run States and their lax policies that have led to rampant fraud. It is no wonder that they are trying to deflect from that conversation about the fraud that their policies have allowed to perpetuate.
Mr. Speaker, the measures discussed here today reflect a clear and consistent commitment by House Republicans to restore accountability, improve program integrity, and ensure that taxpayer dollars are used as intended. From agricultural investments that support rural communities to safeguards against fraud in student aid, childcare, and TANF, this package represents practical solutions to ensure that every Federal dollar is accounted for and, again, targeted to meet the need.
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to moving these bills out of the House this week, and I ask my colleagues to join me in voting ``yes'' on the previous question, and ``yes'' on the rule.
The material previously referred to by Mr. McGovern is as follows:
American Battlefield Protection Program Amendments Act of 2026
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 7618) to amend title 54, United States Code, to modify certain cost-sharing requirements for grant programs under the American Battlefield Protection Program, and for other purposes, as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 404, nays 13, not voting 13, as follows:
Mr. GROTHMAN changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Messrs. MIN and CUELLAR changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 254) to amend the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 to protect the cultural practices and livelihoods of producers of Alaska Native handicrafts and marine mammal ivory products, and for other purposes, on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill.
This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 404, nays 14, not voting 12, as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. There are 2 minutes remaining.
Mr. ARRINGTON changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Providing for Consideration of H.R. 8646, Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agency Appropriations Act, 2027; Providing for Consideration of H.R. 7726, No...
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on ordering the previous question on the resolution (H. Res. 1333) providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 8646) making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2027, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 7726) to amend the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990 to withhold funds from noncompliant States under such Act; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 7892) to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require to the Secretary of Education to use an identity fraud detection system to review each FAFSA to determine whether the FAFSA presents a reasonable suspicion of identity fraud; and providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 8872) to amend part A of title IV of the Social Security Act to target funds to low-income families, strengthen program integrity guardrails for State expenditure of funds, require measurement of improper payments, and establish goals for eliminating fraud and improper payments under the program of block grants to States for temporary assistance for needy families, and for other purposes, on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous question.
This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 208, nays 207, not voting 15, as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. There are 2 minutes remaining.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
So the previous question was ordered.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1333, I call up the bill (H.R. 7726) to amend the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990 to withhold funds from noncompliant States under such Act, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1333, in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Education and Workforce printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 119-32 is adopted, and the bill, as amended, is considered read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for 1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and the ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Workforce or their respective designees.
The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg).
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 7726.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Michigan?
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Stop Child Care Scams Act to fight childcare fraud and protect taxpayer dollars.
Fraud isn't new, but what we have seen in recent years is staggering. Billions of dollars have been stolen from programs meant to help children and families. As Americans work day in and day out to put food on the table and support their families, fraudsters are lining their pockets with dollars meant to help hungry Americans and innocent children.
Let me make one thing perfectly clear. Every dollar stolen through fraud is a dollar that cannot help feed a hungry person or provide childcare for kids and families who need it.
Minnesota, sadly, has become a glaring example of this failure. Fake businesses, like the now infamous Quality Learing Center, claimed to serve children, but in reality, many of these facilities sat empty with no students and no staff.
The scale of this abuse, Mr. Speaker, is staggering. An estimated $9 billion was lost to fraud. That is $9 billion that could have supported real childcare services or fed families in need. Instead, weak oversight allowed criminals to get rich at the expense of children and taxpayers, and it doesn't stop there.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, leaders of the nonprofit group Feeding Our
Unfortunately, this problem extends far beyond the State. Across the country, fraudsters are taking advantage of gaps in oversight while taxpayers foot the bill. That is why this legislation is so important.
In March, my committee passed the eight bills included in this package. I thank Representatives Messmer, Grothman, Onder, Foxx, Wilson, Rulli, Owens, and Miller for their hard work to tackle this problem.
Each of the bills is included in the Stop Child Care Scams Act, which delivers commonsense reforms to restore integrity to these programs. It strengthens auditing and data sharing and increases reporting requirements to detect and prevent fraud. Just as importantly, it kicks fraudsters out of assistance programs, ensuring bad actors can't jump between Federal assistance programs to defraud hardworking Americans.
This bill is guided by a simple principle: Taxpayer money meant for children and working families should never be lost to waste, fraud, or abuse.
Mr. Speaker, we know most childcare providers are doing the right thing, but when fraud runs rampant, it drives up costs, reduces access, and undermines trust in the system. If we want to protect access to affordable, high-quality childcare, we must first eliminate the fraud draining these programs.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the Stop Child Care Scams Act to protect children, restore accountability, and ensure these programs serve those who truly need them.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 7726 because we know that childcare is not a luxury. It is a necessity for millions of American families. Yet, many communities struggle with skyrocketing childcare costs if they can find any childcare at all. Our economy already loses an estimated $122 billion every year due to childcare shortages, and that is a policy failure.
The bill before us does nothing to reduce childcare costs, increase supply, or improve conditions for providers, and it doesn't even reduce fraud. Instead, it creates uncertainty and red tape for States and providers. While the supporters will be discussing the title of the bill, they are not going to be discussing the substance.
I support efforts to reduce fraud in government programs, but this bill doesn't do that. States are already required to report error rates and undergo compliance reviews of the Child Care and Development Block Grant every 3 years. This bill would require States to triple their reporting obligations, diverting CCDBG dollars away from families by increasing administrative costs. More reporting does not reduce fraud.
H.R. 7726 is also extremely vague. It would allow the Health and Human Services Secretary to designate States as high risk and subject them to additional monitoring without defining what additional monitoring or high risk means, and it provides no additional funding to support these new responsibilities.
Furthermore, it expands situations where the State may be in noncompliance, opening the door for this legislation to be weaponized to withhold funding from an entire State that the Trump administration wants to punish.
The bill also mandates permanent disbarment of providers found guilty of fraud regardless of mitigating circumstances, and it is unclear who gets debarred. Is it the individual who was involved, or could it be the entire franchise operating in multiple States?
In many communities, permanently removing even one provider could leave families without options for childcare. Furthermore, debarment from the childcare program requires debarment from the Child and Adult Care Food Program, so innocent families could lose access to food as well as childcare.
This legislation fails to stop fraud. Instead, it imposes needless red tape and bureaucracy on communities that are already strapped for resources. For that reason, Mr. Speaker, I oppose the bill and reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of my bill, H.R. 7726, the Stop Child Care Scams Act, which joins with the administration's efforts to rid the Federal Government of waste, fraud, and abuse.
Last month, President Trump announced serious reforms to safeguard Federal taxpayer dollars spent in the Child Care and Development Block Grant program to ensure that this program is serving the families who need it most. The Stop Child Care Scams Act builds on those actions by enforcing program integrity to ensure every State is compliant with Federal requirements.
Since 2002, the block grant has been identified as a Federal program at risk for improper payments. The Office of Management and Budget, GAO, and HHS have all consistently warned that changes are needed to protect the program from fraud and abuse. In fact, a 2020 GAO report estimated that under the block grant program, there were $325 million in improper payments nationwide during the 2019 fiscal year.
HHS data shows that the rate of improper payments in Minnesota's Federal Child Care Assistance Program is nearly twice the national average. In this case, the State failed to address fraud or repeated noncompliance. This is unacceptable, and there must be real consequences.
In 2024, the owner of several Chicago childcare centers was sentenced to 4 years in prison for stealing more than $3 million of taxpayer funds. That is why I am leading H.R. 7726, the Stop Child Care Scams Act. This bill includes many reforms championed by my colleagues on the Education and Workforce Committee to make commonsense updates to the Child Care and Development Block Grant program so that Federal dollars continue to go to working families, not fraudsters.
Congressman Mark Messmer's Child Care Payment Integrity and Fraud Accountability Act requires States to assess how many block grant payments are fraudulent.
Congressman Glenn Grothman's CRACKDOWN Act lowers the improper payment threshold of grant funds from 10 to 5 percent.
Congressman Bob Onder's Child Care Integrity Monitoring Act requires an audit of State childcare assistance programs every 3 years.
Congresswoman Virginia Foxx's Safeguarding Taxpayer Dollars in Child Care Act prevents fraudulent providers from receiving future grant funds.
Congressman Joe Wilson's No Waivers for Fraud Act leaves sanctions in place for noncompliant States.
Congressman Mike Rulli's Stop Child Care Fraud Act requires States to ensure all relevant agencies have access to necessary data and are examining it to prevent fraud.
Congressman Burgess Owens' Closing the Provider Fraud Gap Act requires GAO to examine the progress that has been made in protecting Federal taxpayer dollars in provider-related programs.
Lastly, my No Funds for Repeat Child Care Violations Act withholds block grant funds from noncompliant States.
Every dollar lost to fraud is a dollar that doesn't support working families. Fraud harms our families. It harms our workforce. Americans should have confidence that their Federal taxpayer dollars are being used responsibly and carefully.
Ensuring accountability for these dollars is not optional. It is sensible, responsible, and a moral choice to protect working families who contribute to our communities and help our local economies thrive.
House Republicans are taking waste, fraud, and abuse seriously, and I urge my colleagues to do the same and support this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from public health and anti-hunger organizations, a couple of dozen of them, that says in part that the provisions of H.R.
Mr. Speaker, I also include in the Record a letter from AFSCME, Education Healthcare Public Services, and SEIU that says in part: ``This bill would enable the administration to withdraw Federal childcare funds abruptly without cause, making childcare less affordable and reliable for working families.''
Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member of the Education and Workforce Committee for yielding.
Stealing from those who need it most is especially egregious, and I can agree with my colleagues on that. But I can't agree with allowing them to punish those that have been defrauded for a second time because that is what this bill really does. It has the same impact on people as fraud.
At the end of the day, the families who these dollars are really meant for, they are not going to get them. They are not going to get the dollars that they need. Instead, the money will have gone to thieves or to nobody at all.
The outcome is just the same. The people who have the least are always the ones who pay the price. In Psalms, since so many profess to be Christians here, the Lord says that because the poor are plundered, that because the greedy groan, He will rise. But God cannot take action on his own. He has given us free will. It is through our
This is clearly more about giving the Trump administration more power to punish their political enemies than it is about preventing fraud. Instead of following the law, allowing the process to play out, this bill gives the Secretary personal discretion to investigate and punish fraud.
This President and his allies stop at nothing to punish people who disagree with them. This administration has not hesitated to not only kill people for speaking out and protesting against the government but to slander their memory after they are gone.
They will tell lies about you and your family to the entire country to justify the unjustifiable, just like they did about Renee Good and Alex Pretti.
When my son Jordan was killed in a shooting, the same man who pulled the trigger tried to justify it by lying about who my son really was. He said that there was a gun in the car when there wasn't; that Jordan was a thug, and he wasn't; that my son and his friends were doing things that they really weren't doing.
I thank God every single day that those lies never caught on, but I remember how insulting that was. I remember thinking: You took my child from me, and now you are going to lie about who he really was just to try to get away with it?
The Trump administration has proven that they cannot be trusted to do the right thing on their own--
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Georgia.
Mrs. McBATH.--or even do something as basic as telling the truth.
This bill makes it easier for this administration to make unilateral decisions at a time when Americans want accountability. I encourage my colleagues to oppose this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 7726, the Stop Child Care Scams Act.
One of the provisions in this bill is the Combating Regulatory Abuse, Closing Known Deficiencies, and Overseeing Waste Nationwide Act, or the CRACKDOWN Act, of which I am the author.
The bill is about a simple principle: Taxpayer dollars that help working families afford childcare should not be lost to waste, fraud, or abuse.
It is not surprising, by the way, the Child Care and Development Block Grant was subject to abuse. It is one of these programs that the Federal Government pays for and the State governments administer--an invitation to abuse.
In any event, the Child Care and Development Block Grant helps low- income families access childcare so parents can work, pursue training, and provide for their children. When the improper payment rates rise too high, it is a warning sign that stronger oversight is needed.
Under current law, States generally do not face corrective action requirements until improper payments exceed 10 percent. That is way too high.
The CRACKDOWN Act would lower the threshold from 10 percent to 5 percent. If the State exceeds that level, we must take corrective action to improve program integrity.
The national improper payment rate is already about 4.9 percent, and 38 States already meet the 5 percent threshold established in the bill.
Wisconsin is a State that learned this lesson the hard way. In 2010, our State faced widespread fraud in its childcare program. Wisconsin responded by strengthening background checks, creating a dedicated fraud unit, and expanding audits. Today, Wisconsin's improper payment rate is below 1 percent. So it can be done. There is no excuse for being over 1 percent, but because we are easygoing, we are going to require that it is under 5 percent.
Waiting until a State reaches 10 percent before requiring corrective action allows problems to grow before they are addressed.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 7726, the Stop Child Care Scams Act.
As families across the country struggle with the high cost of childcare, Republicans are advancing legislation that would make it easier for the Trump administration to withhold funding that helps working people afford childcare and helps providers keep their doors open.
Why? To give President Trump more authority to target States he disagrees with politically under the guise of combating fraud.
We already know exactly how this administration uses this kind of authority. Earlier this year, it implemented its nationwide Defend the Spend policy requiring States to submit a slew of new data to access childcare funding Congress already appropriated.
States were never required by law to provide this information.
As a result, several States have reported being unable to access funding, and the administration refuses to answer basic questions about how this policy works, who reviews the information submitted by States, and how that data is used. This lack of transparency should alarm every Member of this Chamber.
The administration claims this is necessary to combat widespread fraud in our childcare programs, but it has failed to produce any evidence whatsoever. That tells us everything we need to know. This was never about fraud. It is about President Trump's petty political vendetta against blue States.
I submitted an amendment that would have delayed implementation of H.R. 7726 until the administration finally provides transparency into its defend the spend policy, but Republicans refused to allow a vote. Until we get answers, we should not be expanding President Trump's ability to interfere with childcare funding that families depend on.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Owens), the sponsor of one of the bills in this package, in fact, one of the bills that the Democrats voted with us unanimously.
Mr. Speaker, every cent of taxpayer money should be treated as sacred. It comes directly out of the pockets of hardworking Americans. That is why no amount of fraud in Federal public assistance programs is acceptable. The Government Accountability Office, GAO, recently estimated that the Federal Government loses between $233 billion and $521 billion every year to fraud, based on data from 2018 through 2022.
When the government spends the American people's money, Americans should have confidence that their Federal taxpayer dollars are being used responsibly and carefully.
Recent reporting has revealed shocking degrees of waste, fraud, and abuse in Minnesota's Federal childcare assistance program. According to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, HHS, data, the rate of improper payments in Minnesota's Federal childcare assistance program is nearly twice the national average.
In May 2025, an HHS audit of Minnesota's Federal childcare program found repeated failures to verify attendance and comply with payment requirements.
However, the problem is not limited to Minnesota. Since 2002, the Child Care and Development Block Grant, CCDBG, has been identified as a Federal program at risk for improper payments. The Office of Management and Budget and HHS have all consistently
I am proud that this legislation includes my Closing the Provider Fraud Gap Act, which commissions GAO to conduct a study on existing Federal fraud prevention measures in early childhood programs and then report on recommendations to improve fraud prevention.
The Stop Child Care Scam Act is a reasonable and commonsense solution to protect Federal taxpayer dollars from being defrauded.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes.''
The letter says in part: ``These bills give the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services unprecedented authority to withhold all Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) funding from States without cause or due process, bar child care providers for non-fraudulent activity, and burden States with costly activities that don't improve program integrity.''
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Rulli), who is the sponsor of another one of the bills in the package that my Democrat colleagues voted for unanimously with us.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Walberg for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand in support of H.R. 7726, the Stop Child Care Scams Act of 2026. I am honored to see my bill added into this package today.
We are here talking about commonsense legislation to just stop fraud. The Government Accountability Office estimates that the Federal Government loses between $200 billion and $500 billion every year to fraud.
This bill makes sure fraudsters are stopped by adding commonsense requirements like agency coordination and data sharing to monitor fraud, explaining the processes used to investigate and recover improper payments, and highlighting the procedures used to impose sanctions when fraud is actually found.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues today to support this bill, strengthen integrity, and safeguard taxpayer dollars in the childcare block grant program.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding.
H.R. 7726 is supposedly intended to address fraud in childcare programs, but all it actually does is give the administration more power to withhold childcare funding as political retribution.
This is happening particularly at a time when the cost of childcare is skyrocketing. I am so glad we are talking about fraud because this is an administration that has embraced waste, fraud, and abuse.
This is a President who tried to steal taxpayer money by suing his own government and then set up a $1.8 billion slush fund for his friends and allies, and his family has made billions from pay-to-play business deals all around the world.
That is not all, because he has used his pardon power to pardon fraudsters left and right, including white-collar criminals convicted of money laundering; corrupt politicians who stole millions in public funds and even trafficked drugs; and even insurrectionists, including one who was later charged with child sex abuse and molestation.
These pardons have wiped out over $1.5 billion in compensation owed to actual crime victims. The administration has made sure there is no one left to investigate this fraud because the Department of Justice office in charge of investigating corruption used to have 40 attorneys in it, and now it has 2.
That is why, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to recommit this bill back to committee.
If the House rules had permitted, I would have offered the motion with an important amendment to this bill. My amendment would prevent the bill from taking effect until the Department of Justice provides a list of all the individuals pardoned by the President of the United States who were convicted for committing fraud.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment into the Record immediately prior to the vote on the motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Virginia?
There was no objection.
Mr. SUBRAMANYAN. I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will show their commitment to actually addressing fraud by joining me in voting for the motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Walberg for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 7726, the Stop Child Care Scams Act. This package will punish bad actors who steal taxpayer dollars from low-income families who need childcare resources the most.
While fraud and theft may be a time-honored tradition in Somalia, defrauding American taxpayers has consequences. When Nick Shirley blew the lid on the pervasive childcare fraud in Minnesota's Somali community, the infamous Quality Learing Center was forced to shut down. The Somali mastermind of the Feeding Our Future scheme was charged with wire fraud and conspiracy to defraud the United States, and Governor Tim Walz was forced to drop his reelection bid.
House Republicans are restoring integrity to the Child Care and Development Block Grant program which serves about 10 percent of all children in the childcare system. Any waste, fraud, and abuse is an attack on working families and must be rooted out. This legislation will greatly improve oversight of Federal childcare program expenditures and hold fraudsters accountable.
I appreciate the chairman including legislation I introduced, the Child Care Integrity Monitoring Act, in this bill. My bill will restore public trust in the childcare system by codifying HHS' 3-year audit cycle of expenditures, which the Department has been required to do since 2007.
My bill also gives HHS the power to designate States as high risk if they fail their audit, neglect to carry out a corrective action plan, or become noncompliant with their own State plan.
House Republicans will never stop fighting waste, fraud, and abuse because we will not tolerate benefits being stolen from working families. By ensuring that Federal childcare dollars are spent wisely, the Stop Child Care Scams Act of 2026 will improve the quality of life for countless working moms and dads and their children.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage all Members to support this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a link to an article printed in the MinnPost, the headline of which says: ``Here's what's really happening with childcare fraud in Minnesota. Evidence is nowhere near the epidemic levels a viral YouTube video would suggest--but it hasn't stopped a crackdown on child care funding. Here's the fact check.'' https://www.minnpost.com/state-government/ 2026/01/heres-whats-really-happening-with-child-care-fraud-in- minnesota-explained/?gad_source=1&gad _campaignid=9109082086.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Messmer), a sponsor of one of the bills in this package and a great member of the committee.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Stop Child Care Scams Act, which provides a commonsense path toward preventing the rampant waste, fraud, and abuse in our Federal childcare support programs.
Every year, nearly 2 million children receive State and Federal Child Care and Development Block Grant subsidies totaling over $8 billion. These childcare assistance programs allow lower income parents to stay in the workforce so they can create their own economic independence and contribute to the economic development in their communities.
Under the current program requirements, States are supposed to submit a report detailing any errors that are discovered in the administration of the CCDBG grant fund distributions.
Mistakes are not unusual given the changing nature of childcare, but because there is no penalty, the reporting of fraudulent payments is often ignored.
That is why I am pleased that my Child Care Payment Integrity and Fraud Accountability Act is included in today's bill. It requires that States clearly account for any improper payments that have been made so that Americans can see exactly how their money is being spent and leaders can manage what improvements are needed to best safeguard taxpayer dollars.
Preventing fraud and protecting our citizens' hard-earned money is one of the most important things we should be doing in Congress. Americans deserve an end to the waste, fraud, and abuse poisoning our country. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 7726, the Stop Child Care Scams Act of 2026.
Before I came to Congress, I spent my career as a physician in Utah caring for working families. In medicine, you learn to diagnose the root cause of an illness. If a treatment isn't working, you don't double down on a failing protocol. You do the obvious. You should change the treatment.
Unfortunately, Washington has a habit of ignoring the symptoms of our own broken system. While our Federal childcare programs serve a useful purpose, they are being systematically ruined by rampant fraud. We must be clear about who truly suffers when we allow this corruption to go unchecked.
Fraudsters who exploit these programs are stealing directly from the children and families who rely on these resources. This is a moral failure that should transcend party lines. Securing our Federal programs against fraud is Congress' job, and it shouldn't take committed citizens like Utah's own Nick Shirley to uncover these problems.
As the sponsor of the Stop Child Care Funding Fraud Act, I am glad to see similar policies reflected in this bill.
Mr. Speaker, today, we can protect the taxpayer, excise the rot of corruption, and make certain that every Federal dollar intended for America's children actually reaches them. Rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse should be every Member's priority for these people in this Chamber, and I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 7726, the Stop Child Care Scams Act.
This legislation is about something every American should agree on: Childcare assistance should go to children and families who need help, not to criminals and fraudsters who exploit the system for personal gain.
A GAO report found that $325 million in improper childcare payments were made in a single year, enough to fund the childcare programs of nearly one-third of the States in this country. That is money that should have been helping working families, not lost to waste, fraud, and abuse.
In my home State of Minnesota, taxpayers have watched massive fraud schemes unfold in childcare programs under the failed leadership of Governor Tim Walz. Thanks to State officials' repeated failure to provide the oversight necessary to protect programs intended to serve vulnerable children and families, Minnesota taxpayers were scammed out of hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars. These failures undermined public trust and diverted resources away from those who truly needed them.
That is why I introduced the Stop Fraud by SOMALIA Act. My bill was designed to strengthen accountability, protect taxpayer dollars, and ensure that bad actors can no longer exploit childcare programs at taxpayer expense.
I am pleased to see that several provisions for my legislation are included in H.R. 7726. This bill permanently bars fraudulent childcare providers from receiving Federal funds, strengthens Federal oversight and enforcement, and cracks down on providers who falsify records, submit false information, or misuse taxpayer dollars.
Every dollar lost to fraud is a dollar that cannot be used to help a working parent afford childcare or support a child who depends on these services.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 7726 and help restore trust in these important programs.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, millions of families rely on safe, stable childcare in their communities. Unfortunately, the cost of childcare often rivals the cost of housing. Many communities lack adequate childcare altogether.
H.R. 7726 fails to meaningfully improve America's broken childcare system, but it does add unnecessary bureaucratic burdens to States and providers, many of whom are already struggling.
Fraud must be addressed, but in substance, not by discussing the merits of the title of the bill. Smart accountability means strong enforcement paired with practical flexibility. Requiring extra reports and punishing States and providers for minor, inadvertent mistakes does not protect children and doesn't even reduce fraud. It does put programs that families depend on at risk and allows the Trump administration to weaponize this legislation by withholding funding from States that didn't vote for him.
I oppose H.R. 7726, which fails to reduce fraud and prioritizes inflexible mandates over the real-world needs of working families.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
We have the responsibility to ensure taxpayer dollars are used to help Americans, not fraudsters and scammers. Mr. Speaker, if you noticed today, we heard testimony from members of this committee and off this committee, including a Member we just heard from Minnesota, the State with a significant problem that alerted us to the fraud, waste, and abuse that was going on, not simply States or Members that are going to be so-called targeted by the President.
These are Members who understand what went on and how taxpayer funds were being abused through fraud.
For too long, criminals have exploited Federal programs, stealing billions while children and families lose access to critical support. That must end.
The Stop Child Care Scams Act strengthens oversight, closes loopholes, and prevents bad actors from continuing their schemes across multiple programs.
These are straightforward, long-overdue reforms that will make a real difference. Every dollar lost to fraud is a dollar taken from someone who truly needs help.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the Stop Child Care Scams Act.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 7726, which will have detrimental effects on child care in the United States. Fraud at any level is unacceptable, especially if it takes valuable child care away from families. But the Child Care and Development Fund already includes strong safeguards to help the program fulfill its core mission of caring for the Nation's youngest learners while supporting working families. Although this bill may be aimed at ``addressing fraud,'' in reality it will leave many families without the child care assistance they need. The Child Care and Development Fund supports 1.4 million children each month. This bill, which adds onerous oversight requirements and is overly punitive for states that fail to meet requirements, will undermine the ability for the program to do what it is supposed to do--help low-income families afford child care. Any disruptions in the system--including freezing payments across all states--have real and immediate consequences. Child care is essential infrastructure that millions of American families need, and we should treat it as such. I strongly urge my colleagues, to oppose this legislation.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired. Pursuant to House Resolution 1333, the previous question is ordered on the bill, as amended.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was read the third time.
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1333, I call up the bill (H.R. 8872) to amend part A of title IV of the Social Security Act to target funds to low-income families, strengthen program integrity guardrails for State expenditure of funds, require measurement of improper payments, and establish goals for eliminating fraud and improper payments under the program of block grants to States for temporary assistance for needy families, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1333, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Ways and Means, printed in the bill, is adopted and the bill, as amended, is considered read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for 1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Ways and Means or their respective designees.
The gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith).
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 this bill 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 rise today in support of H.R. 8872, the Preventing Waste, Fraud, and Abuse in TANF Act, introduced by my Ways and Means Committee colleague Representative Mike Carey.
With an annual price tag of over $16 billion, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program is a sizable investment and plays a critical support role for families who have fallen on hard times. A core tenet of the program is promoting self-sufficiency through work, a goal I know many of us see as a cornerstone of a successful welfare system.
Unfortunately, right now, there are major weaknesses in the TANF program that make it ripe for waste, fraud, and abuse. Despite the billions of dollars flowing through TANF, it is one of the few Federal programs we have that is not required to account for improper payments.
Additionally, investigations and reporting conducted by the Government Accountability Office found that the 78 percent of TANF spending that goes toward non-assistance activities lacks guardrails to prevent abuse and misuse of these Federal resources.
With instances of fraud occurring at an alarming rate across multiple government programs at the Federal, State, and local levels, Congress must act. That is why the Ways and Means Committee has held hearings and conducted critical oversight to determine what solutions will protect taxpayers and the families who should be benefiting from programs like TANF.
The Preventing Waste, Fraud, and Abuse in TANF Act is a straightforward piece of legislation that addresses four key areas of concern, reflecting priorities of four members of the Ways and Means Committee.
The lead sponsor of this bill, Representative Carey, has fought to keep States from sitting on TANF funds while families struggle. Right now, States are holding on to nearly $8 billion in funds because there are no spending deadlines holding them accountable. This legislation requires that States spend down their TANF funds within a 3-year window.
Representative Arrington, the chairman of the House Budget Committee who is a leader in the fight to rein in waste, fraud, and abuse in government, has championed a provision within this bill that finally requires the Federal Government to track and report instances of improper payments. This reporting is crucial to ensuring that policymakers and the American people know if tax dollars are being spent as advertised.
With her understanding of how States often repurpose TANF funds to cover unrelated gaps in State budgets, Representative Tenney has worked to ensure States only use Federal TANF resources to supplement, not replace, State and local spending.
Thanks to the leadership of Representative Adrian Smith, who has worked to ensure TANF funding is actually going to those truly in need of assistance, this bill includes a provision that establishes an income threshold of 200 percent of the Federal poverty line, which is $62,000 for a family of four, to ensure States are targeting TANF spending to give more to those who are truly in need.
These policies defend against the abuse and misuse of taxpayer dollars and improve the integrity of the TANF program to better support those it was created to serve.
I am grateful for the leadership of the members of the Ways and Means Committee who have made weeding out waste, fraud, and abuse in our Federal welfare programs a priority.
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, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 8872. Democrats strongly oppose fraud, and that is why Representative Judy Chu and I introduced H.R. 2108, the TANF State Expenditure Integrity Act, which would give the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services specific authority to monitor sub-grantee expenditures, to ensure that they are consistent with TANF's purpose of helping poor children.
When they are not, as was the case in the egregious fraud perpetrated by Brett Favre and Governor Phil Bryant in Mississippi, H.R. 2108 would require the State to recover the funds and provide them directly to the poor families they were intended for.
Republicans refused to work with us to enact that bill, which the U.S. Government Accountability Office identified as a bill that addressed their concerns about TANF program integrity.
Instead, less than 48 hours before our markup, they introduced H.R. 8872. This GOP bill would not enable a single fraud investigation. It would not recover a penny for the poor families TANF is supposed to help. It would not have protected the children of Mississippi, when multimillionaire Brett Favre used millions of dollars in TANF funds to build a volleyball stadium and invest in health stocks, nor would it reinstate the fraud-related penalty against Mississippi that the Trump administration canceled.
What H.R. 8872 would do is give Health and Human Services new power to decide what to call fraud and how to measure it. This GOP bill would give the Trump administration new power to seize confidential beneficiary data, levy penalties, and cut off State funding to help poor children.
We know exactly what to expect if we give HHS more power, because this January, the Department of Health and Human Services abruptly froze $10 billion in critical social services funding for five States, including my home
The Trump administration intentionally chose to harm vulnerable families, children, small businesses, and communities in five States: namely, Illinois, California, Colorado, Minnesota, and New York, to settle a political score, and the Republicans in this House remained silent, not a word.
Fortunately, current law limits an administration's authority to weaponize support for low-income families. Consequently, the courts issued a restraining order that is essential to protecting tens of millions of children and families. If they had not, The Century Foundation estimates it would have cost struggling families $400 million in lost earnings and help alone, not to mention the radiating harm to businesses, communities, and economies.
Now, the Republican leadership advances this farce of a bill to erase those protections, all while failing to address the biggest source of TANF fraud.
If Republicans want to protect taxpayers, they should stop accusing hardworking parents and look to the graft and vanity projects they keep enabling.
Over the 17 months he has been back in office, President Trump increased his net worth by over $4 billion by selling cryptocurrency, insider trading, and leveraging his position. Most recently, the President spent $5 million of taxpayer money to coat bronze statues in gold leaf, enough money to buy a week's worth of groceries for 20,000 families.
If Republicans want to protect taxpayers, then, at the very least, Congress should not give HHS any new power to harm families the next time President Trump decides to lash out at a Governor who spoke up about the harm his policies and corruptions have done to American families.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President.
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the Preventing Waste, Fraud, and Abuse in TANF Act.
TANF was created with a clear purpose, and I think it is important to remember this: To help families move from welfare to work, promote self-sufficiency, and support low-income parents and children. That mission is undermined when taxpayer dollars are not properly protected.
When Federal welfare funds are vulnerable to waste, fraud, and abuse, the consequences are real. States face weaker incentives to ensure dollars are spent appropriately. Taxpayers lose confidence in the program and, most importantly, families who truly need assistance lose out because resources are not preserved for them.
As the chairman of the Subcommittee on Work and Welfare, I have worked for years to identify and stop the TANF fraud in the program.
Chairman Jason Smith and I sent a letter to the Government Accountability Office in 2023 requesting information on TANF's program accountability measures.
In response, the GAO issued five reports in 2025 identifying that TANF lacks numerous oversight and financial guardrails expected in public assistance programs. More specifically, the GAO identified 37 States with 162 TANF audit findings. Many of these findings were deemed severe, and the problems repeated over multiple years.
They also found that States are sitting on nearly $8 billion in unspent TANF funds. That is $8 billion of taxpayer money, which has doubled since 2015.
Finally, the GAO recommended that HHS be provided with authority to require States to measure and report improper payments.
This bill that we are debating here today will address many of these findings.
First, it finally would require improper payments reporting in TANF.
Second, it puts in place spending timelines so States aren't sitting on large reserves of funds that aren't making their way to families. This will ensure that States do not tap into those unused funds for needy families when there are State budget shortfalls, which happens way too often.
Lastly, the bill includes a new Federal eligibility guideline and targeting to make sure funds are going to families under 200 percent of the poverty line.
If Congress is going to provide billions of dollars each year for TANF, we have a responsibility and obligation as elected leaders to ensure that dollars are helping the families experiencing genuine financial hardship.
The Preventing Waste, Fraud, and Abuse in TANF Act will reduce fraud, restore accountability, and help preserve TANF benefits for families who truly need them.
We should all be able to agree that welfare funds should go to families who need help and not to fraudsters, wasteful spending, or people or programs that can provide for themselves without Federal assistance.
In closing, I urge my colleagues to support-- The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Madam Speaker, I just want to remind my colleagues that despite the rhetoric we will hear this afternoon on the floor, there is nothing in this bill that actually addresses fraud in the TANF program. Nowhere in H.R. 8872, outside of its title, does the word ``fraud'' even appear in this bill.
Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Chu).
Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 8872, the Preventing Waste, Fraud, and Abuse in TANF Act.
Let me remind us of one of the biggest TANF fraud scandals of all time. Several years ago, former NFL quarterback Brett Favre conspired with Mississippi State officials to steal millions of taxpayer dollars meant for the State's poorest families. He stole this money to build a new volleyball court for his daughter's college.
Why did this happen? It was because under current law, the Federal Government has no authority to conduct oversight into how States spend their TANF block grant funds, which makes up roughly 80 percent of TANF spending.
That is where the biggest oversight gap exists, and this bill before us does nothing about it. Instead, it would require States to only report calculations about over- and underpayments but doesn't investigate fraud itself. By doing this, though, it empowers the administration to use these calculations to justify withholding TANF funds from certain States.
This selective process would only apply to less than 15 percent of total TANF funding. This completely ignores the 80 percent of TANF spending where the fraud is actually occurring. When Republicans brought this bill before the Ways and Means Committee, I offered an amendment to insert into the bill the bill that I had introduced with Congressman Danny Davis, the TANF State Expenditure Integrity Act.
Our bill would finally allow Federal oversight of TANF block grant funding and require States that intentionally misuse TANF funds to direct an equivalent amount toward legitimate assistance for families. Simply put, our bill would actually go after the type of fraud that Republicans claim that they care about.
If my Republican colleagues were truly interested in preventing waste, fraud, and abuse, they would have welcomed my amendment. Instead, they blocked it, but this is no surprise. Their record on fraud speaks for itself.
Donald Trump publicly defended Brett Favre and actually canceled the modest penalty President Biden was able to impose on Mississippi. He is letting everyone off the hook for this blatant fraud, and Republicans in Congress haven't said a word about it.
Not only that. Last Congress, Republicans held a hearing on TANF fraud where they actually apologized to Brett Favre. It was embarrassing, and it was shameful.
For this reason, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to recommit this bill back to committee. If House rules would have permitted, I would have offered the motion with an important amendment to this bill.
My amendment would remove H.R. 8872's provisions empowering President Trump's continued attacks on struggling families and replace them with provisions that actually fight fraud, and that includes my TANF State Expenditure Integrity Act.
My motion to recommit would also address one of the most brazen acts of public corruption in American history: Trump's $1.8 billion slush fund and his sham settlement.
Madam Speaker, I want to emphasize what happened here. The President of the United States sued his own government and got a settlement allowing him to direct $1.8 billion of taxpayer dollars to political allies and January 6 rioters, the violent criminals who assaulted police officers and attacked our democracy.
After receiving overwhelming bipartisan backlash, the Trump administration is now claiming that it won't move forward with the fund. However, a statement is not law. If the administration truly intends to abandon this corrupt scheme, it should have no objection to Congress permanently prohibiting it.
Even that is only part of the story, because no such settlement and statement has been made regarding plans to withdraw the most egregious, self-serving part of this settlement: the provision granting President Trump, his family, and his businesses total immunity from all government audits and investigations before the DOJ, IRS, or any other government agency or department.
While the administration has retreated from its plan to reward Trump's allies with taxpayer dollars, it is charging ahead with giving Trump, his kids, and his companies lifetime immunity from IRS audits and tax prosecution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Madam Speaker, my motion to recommit would invalidate in Federal law the entire settlement agreement, including the slush fund and the immunity provision, and it would forever prohibit any similar corrupt fund in the future.
I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the Record immediately prior to the vote on the motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from California?
Madam Speaker, before I yield to the gentleman from Ohio, I just have to say that it is reckless to say on this floor that someone has stolen anything when they have never been criminally charged for anything. That is very, very bad for any Member of Congress to say that to a regular, everyday American who has never been charged with anything. Democrats should be ashamed.
Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Carey).
Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding and for the opportunity to talk about some commonsense reforms to the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program.
For context, TANF is a bipartisan program that was created over 30 years ago to help struggling families get back on their feet. The program supports families with their immediate needs while promoting a path toward work and self-sufficiency. Taxpayers deserve to have confidence that their tax dollars are being used effectively and as intended.
This is what the Preventing Waste, Fraud, and Abuse in TANF Act actually does. It improves clarity about the integrity of funds, targets assistance to the most vulnerable, and confirms that funds are actually spent. That is what it does.
Without additional safeguards, TANF will remain vulnerable to bad actors. This not only harms the taxpayers but even more so the families who actually need the help.
Congressional Republicans are committed to preventing waste, fraud, and abuse. Ohioans' own Vice President JD Vance and the Task Force to Eliminate Fraud have the exact same goal. The changes proposed in H.R. 8872 will support both of these efforts.
Ultimately, the Preventing Waste, Fraud, and Abuse in TANF Act is about strengthening accountability. H.R. 8872 does not do this by imposing any cuts whatsoever. It doesn't impose any cuts whatsoever.
What this bill really does is ensure that more assistance is actually provided. It preserves the program's flexibility for States to utilize funds in ways that meet the needs of their communities while making sure that the resources are not wasted, misused, or diverted.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill and its noncontroversial proposals to strengthen TANF for the future of our next generations.
Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois for yielding. I want to say to my colleagues, my Republican friends, that I agree with them that the way this program, TANF, was designed, it was a fraudster's dream.
It was designed with so-called flexibility, and the reason I know that is because I was in the Wisconsin State Senate when ``ending welfare as we know it'' was constructed by Tommy G. Thompson, then- Governor of the State of Wisconsin, and it was adopted the following year by Newt Gingrich and President Clinton.
It was designed that way. It was not just since poor Brett Favre, the Wisconsin quarterback, built the volleyball court with TANF dollars, poor thing getting blamed for it.
Before then, States were balancing their budgets with TANF money; cities were building infrastructure projects with TANF dollars; and CEOs who ran the welfare programs in our States were getting bonuses for denying welfare recipients benefits. This didn't just start.
I agree that we should rein in waste, fraud, and abuse with the provisions provided by Dr. Danny Davis and Dr. Judy Chu's bill. This bill doesn't do that at all.
All it does is provide HHS with the power to stop providing support for women and children who need daycare, to be able to do what they did earlier this year, and to freeze $10 billion to blue States. This is all that this does. This does not get at the heart of the problem.
Madam Speaker, I ask our colleagues to vote against this bill, to come together with Dr. Davis and Ms. Chu and the rest of us who want to end the true source of waste, fraud, and abuse, and not abuse our children with this provision.
Taking care of our most vulnerable citizens is what a civilized society does, and it is why Congress created TANF, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. TANF is just that, temporary assistance for the most needy among us.
Like other safety net programs, Madam Speaker, we partner with the States. It is the most efficient way to deliver care.
My question for this body is, should we ever have to worry about the States using TANF dollars for any program other than TANF?
You wouldn't think we would have to worry about that at all, but, Madam Speaker, the report from the GAO, our Government Accountability Office, is in. It seems we do have to worry about States using TANF dollars for other than TANF recipients.
The report is in. They have used it for education programs and college scholarships. They have built roads and enhanced their State transportation systems. The crown gem offender, Madam Speaker, is a State, which will remain nameless today, that has built a sports stadium with TANF dollars. It is not what TANF was intended to do,
That is why I have sponsored a bill with Claudia Tenney from the great State of New York to create TANF dollars as a general revenue targeted specifically to the neediest among us and not as a revenue slush fund for these States. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this bill, H.R. 8872, the Preventing Waste, Fraud, and Abuse in TANF Act, which includes many reforms, but this one right here, States, we have to trust them with the money given.
Madam Speaker, I remind everybody in this room that every TANF family is different, but the typical TANF family is a single mom. She has 2.1 kids. She is working 1.2 jobs. She drives a car that is 16 years old. The back window is taped up. Maybe there is a spare tire that she can't change because diapers elevate higher than car repairs. She is the one we need to make these reforms for.
I urge my colleagues to join me, to join everybody, in voting ``yes'' for TANF reform so that we can help the neediest among us.
Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleagues from the other side: Let's go after fraud, waste, and abuse. But this bill allows the administration to hold back funding for children and families under the guise of fraud. Earlier this year, the administration froze $10 billion in funding for families and children in blue States.
Let's talk about guardrails. A year ago, we gave ICE and CBP seven and three times their annual budgets, respectively. Where are those funds going? ICE just paid $130 million for a warehouse in Georgia that was bought for $30 million the year before. ICE just bought another property in Texas for $123 million that was valued at $11 million. Also, let's not forget Secretary Noem's $170 million luxury jet.
Instead of going after children and families, let's go after these wasteful, fraudulent contracts. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this measure.
Madam Speaker, I rise to support passage of H.R. 8872, the Preventing Waste, Fraud, and Abuse in TANF Act.
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, as it is known, was created to help families in poverty meet urgent needs while supporting work and long-term self-sufficiency.
Unfortunately, Federal TANF funds have become too easy for State governments to use as slush funds for unrelated programs, as you heard my great colleague, Mr. Bean, describe. Some States--he left them unnamed--are using it to build sports stadiums instead of focusing this money on families who are truly in need of assistance.
This is why I am leading this bill with my colleague from Florida, Mr. Aaron Bean, the Protect TANF Resources for Families Act, which is included in this bill package.
This bill says something very simple: Federal TANF funds can only be used to support families in poverty, and they cannot be used to fill State budget gaps.
This bill does not take away State flexibility. States will continue to have flexibility to operate their TANF programs in ways that work for individual communities, but flexibility requires responsibility.
Federal dollars provided for needy families should remain focused on needy families. Struggling families should be able to trust that TANF resources are being preserved for them. Taxpayers have the right to ensure that their money isn't being diverted through unfair State budget maneuvers.
This bill is an important step toward restoring accountability, protecting limited resources, and making sure TANF serves the families who truly need our help.
Madam Speaker, I thank Chairman Jason Smith, subcommittee Chairman Darin LaHood, and my colleague who cosponsors this bill, Aaron Bean from Florida, for marking up this important bill. I also thank our Speaker, Leader Scalise, and Whip Tom Emmer for bringing this bill to the floor.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill to help us end waste, fraud, and abuse, and to provide accountability to our taxpayers.
Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 8872, the Preventing Waste, Fraud, and Abuse in TANF Act.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program provides $16 billion of taxpayer money each year to help low-income families get back on their feet. That is an important mission, but when taxpayer dollars are lost to fraud, improper payments, or poor oversight, that money is not helping a family in need.
For too long, TANF has lacked basic accountability measures that apply to many other Federal programs. In fact, TANF is one of the few Federal programs not required to report an annual improper payment rate. Madam Speaker, you can imagine that is an encouragement of fraud. It should concern every Member of this body.
This bill brings needed accountability to TANF by requiring improper payments be measured and reported. You can see how many improper payments we found in other programs.
With the national debt now exceeding $39 trillion, Congress has a responsibility to make sure every Federal dollar is spent effectively.
Reducing waste and fraud is not about weakening assistance to families in need. It is about protecting those programs so they reach the parents and children who truly depend upon them.
If my colleagues on the other side of the aisle really want to help struggling families, they should join us in making sure that TANF dollars are not lost to waste and fraud but instead go to the people the program was created to serve.
It is not surprising when you have a program funded by the Federal Government and administered by the State government there is fraud.
I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I encourage my Democratic colleagues especially to support this legislation.
Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 8872, the Preventing Waste, Fraud, and Abuse in TANF Act led by my colleague from Ohio (Mr. Carey).
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, TANF, exists for one purpose, which is to help low-income families through difficult times and to support their path toward work, stability, and self- sufficiency. But for too long, TANF dollars have not been managed with the level of accountability that taxpayers and families deserve throughout our country.
The numbers are stark. From 2015 to 2024, unspent TANF balances more than doubled, from roughly $4 billion to $9.7 billion. States held approximately $8 billion in TANF funds rather than spending them on needy families.
In my home State of Ohio alone, more than $600 million was sitting unused. When billions of dollars sit idle year after year, those funds are not helping families find work, support children, or get through a crisis.
This is exactly why Congressman Carey and I introduced the Improve Transparency and Stability for Families and Children Act earlier this Congress. I am pleased those reforms are now incorporated into H.R. 8872.
This legislation fixes the problem directly. It ensures funds actually reach low-income families, sets clear spending deadlines so money doesn't sit idle, holds States accountable, strengthens program integrity by requiring measurement of improper payments, and prevents Federal TANF dollars from being used to replace State spending. I believe everyone can get on board with that.
If we are serious about helping families in need and if we believe in TANF's mission of moving families from welfare to work and towards independence,
Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers. I am prepared to close, and I yield myself the balance of my time.
President Trump's economy has zero job creation. Skyrocketing gas prices and costly childcare make it more difficult and more expensive to work, crushing workers and families. Wage growth is slowing.
Alarmingly, this bill we consider today in the people's House intentionally fails to address any of those problems, nor does this bill take action to punish wealthy and well-connected people, people who stole tens of millions of dollars Congress provided to help some of the poorest children in Mississippi and throughout the country.
Instead, this bill would give the Trump administration's Health and Human Services new power to cut off assistance to struggling families and poor children based on the new ``error rate,'' calculations that they define to advance their cruel designs under Project 2025.
When we help Americans who are struggling pay for food, utilities, or healthcare, Republicans are quick to label it welfare and accuse recipients of fraud.
But when the Department of Justice reaches into taxpayers' pockets and steals $1.8 billion for a slush fund to pay the President and his allies, including convicted criminals who beat police officers guarding the Capitol on January 6, they remain and have remained silent.
When taxpayers' pockets pay for the President's self-anointed immunity for tax fraud not only for himself but also for his businesses and his family, it is truly reprehensible that my colleagues would remain silent.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill and to speak out against the real fraud and corruption poisoning our country. Let's make sure that we continue to help those poor, needy families and poor, needy children who need the benefits coming from a just society.
Mr. Speaker, I will vote ``no'' on this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, waste, fraud, and abuse have no place in our government and certainly no place in programs meant to provide critical assistance to our Nation's most vulnerable.
The Preventing Waste, Fraud, and Abuse in TANF Act is a targeted and timely piece of legislation that protects the American taxpayers' hard- earned money and ensures that resources get to families who are truly in need of our help.
I appreciate my Ways and Means Committee colleagues for the time, attention, and work that they have contributed to this reform effort, and I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired. Pursuant to House Resolution 1333, the previous question is ordered on the bill, as amended.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 1(c) of rule XIX, further consideration of H.R. 8872 is postponed.
Northwest Straits Marine Conservation Initiative Reauthorization Act of 2025
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2860) to reauthorize the Northwest Straits Marine Conservation Initiative Act to promote the protection of the resources of the Northwest Straits, and for other purposes, as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 374, nays 49, not voting 7, as follows:
Messrs. BURCHETT, HAMADEH of Arizona, FRY, COLLINS, McGUIRE, BABIN, LUTTRELL, EZELL, Ms. VAN DUYNE, Messrs. DONALDS, and FULLER changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Mses. SCHAKOWSKY, PELOSI, and BROWNLEY changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
No Funds for Repeat Child Care Violations Act of 2026
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to recommit on the bill (H.R. 7726) to amend the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990 to withhold funds from noncompliant States under such Act, offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Subramanyam), on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk will redesignate the motion.
The Clerk redesignated the motion.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 210, nays 213, not voting 7, 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.
Directing the President, Pursuant to Section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to Remove United States Armed Forces from Hostilities with Iran
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on adoption of the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 86) directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran, on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on adoption of the concurrent resolution.
This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 215, nays 208, not voting 7, as follows:
Mr. COMER changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the concurrent resolution was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 2(c) of rule XV, I rise to provide notice of my intent to offer a motion to discharge the Committee on Rules from further consideration of House Resolution 518.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Did the gentleman sign the petition?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York calls up a motion to discharge the Committee on Rules from further consideration of House Resolution 518.
The Clerk will report the title of the resolution.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks) will be recognized for 10 minutes and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mast) will be recognized for 10 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my motion to discharge House Resolution 518 so that we can consider my bill, the Ukraine Support Act, on the floor this week. I urge an ``aye'' vote, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to vote ``aye,'' and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from New York to discharge the Committee on Rules from the further consideration of House Resolution 518.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. Speaker, the vote we will be taking tomorrow is of historic importance. It is a question of whether we will be able to vote to support Ukraine, punish Russia, and stand for our values.
Let me be clear. I always prefer to move important and complex legislation through regular order.
I asked for the Ukraine Support Act to be marked up in the House Foreign Affairs Committee. I have asked for simple, bipartisan bills on Russia, including some that have passed overwhelmingly in previous Congresses to move through committee or to the floor.
Unfortunately, each and every time I have inquired about moving a bill to address Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine, no matter how bipartisan, I have been turned down. Of course, I am not alone in my frustrations about the inability to move important bills through this Congress. Many Members, on both sides of the aisle, have felt frustrated by the failure of this House to get important legislation across the finish line.
This Chamber must legislate on the important domestic and foreign policy issues of the day. That is our constitutional duty.
Russia's invasion of Ukraine is the largest land war in Europe since World War II. The invasion of a smaller democratic nation by a large authoritarian state is as black and white and pure and simple as it gets.
This vote is not a process vote. It is a statement on whether this Congress and all of its Members stand with and support Ukraine and the people of Ukraine in its fight for freedom, its fight for democracy, and its fight for liberty.
It is also a marker of whether we are against dictatorship, lawlessness, brutality, and the Russia-China no limits pact. I know where I stand. I am solidly on the side of America. I am solidly on the side of Ukraine, and I am solidly on the side of justice.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the noes appeared to have it.
Making in Order at Any Time Consideration of H. CON. RES. 84, Directing the President Pursuant to Section 5(C) of the War Powers Resolution to Remove United States Armed Forces From Lebanon
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order at any time to consider H. Con. Res. 84 in the House if called up by the chair of the Committee on Foreign Affairs or his designee; that the concurrent resolution be considered as read; and that the previous question be considered as ordered on the concurrent resolution to adoption without intervening motion except for 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by Representative Mast of Florida and Representative Tlaib of Michigan, or their respective designees.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Florida?
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House of June 3, 2026, I call up the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 84) directing the President pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution to remove United States Armed Forces from Lebanon, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House today, the concurrent resolution is considered read.
The text of the concurrent resolution is as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The concurrent resolution shall be debated for 1 hour equally divided and controlled by Representative Mast of Florida and Representative Tlaib of Michigan, or their respective designees.
The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mast) and the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Florida?
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, we must end the U.S. participation in the Israeli Government's violent assault on Lebanon.
Over 3,400 people in Lebanon have been massacred since the start of the Israeli apartheid government's brutal invasion and indiscriminate bombing campaign.
Children, Mr. Speaker, medics, journalists, schools, hospitals, churches, mosques have all been targeted by the Israeli Government. Critical civilian infrastructure and entire residential neighborhoods are systematically being destroyed.
More than 1.2 million people have been forced to leave their homes or be killed with the Israeli military telling them they will not be allowed to return.
Last week, Mr. Speaker, the Israeli Government issued a forced displacement order for all the areas south of the Zahrani River, declaring the entire vast region to a combat zone.
Mr. Speaker, that is 14 percent of all of Lebanon, home to hundreds of thousands of people of all faiths as well as over 300 cities and towns, including Lebanon's fourth largest city, Tyre.
That is 14 percent of the country told to either leave or die. This is not a national security, Mr. Speaker. This is an ethnic cleansing campaign. The Israeli leaders and the Cabinet members are open about this. Finance Minister Smotrich literally called for the annexing of at least 10 percent of Lebanon saying that the new Israeli border must be up to the Litani River.
Defense Minister Katz of Israel has openly stated that the Government of Israel plans to pursue an indefinite military occupation of southern Lebanon up to the river, even after the war is over.
The National Security Minister Ben-Gvir has proposed Israel to go even further to conquer and occupy Lebanese territory all the way north of the river.
These are not fringe figures. They are the Israeli security cabinet. They are most powerful decisionmakers in the Israeli Government.
Mr. Speaker, they have made it clear that their goal is to do to Lebanon what they did in Gaza. The Israeli military officials even stated that their aim is to implement ``the Gaza model'' in Lebanon.
I can go on and on in explaining this, but I think what is important to understand is the act of the psychological terror, putting leaflets all throughout Beirut threatening Lebanon with repeat of the remarkable success in Gaza. I want my colleagues to know that over the last 3 months we have already seen these horrific threats become a reality.
This Congress did nothing to save lives in Gaza. We must act now, though, to prevent the same fate in Lebanon. I want folks to know we are here because the United States is not a bystander to these war crimes. It is an active participant.
The Trump administration has engaged in unlawful and unauthorized participation in hostilities as part of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in violation of the War Powers Act.
The Trump administration is providing intelligence, coordinating strikes, and demonstrating overt command over Israeli military decisions, including green-lighting specific Israeli attacks and operations throughout Lebanon, including Beirut.
The President of the United States has, in his own public statements, over a period of months, asserted authority to approve, prohibit, condition, and direct specific Israeli military operations.
In one such example, the Israeli Government sought and was granted Trump's green light for its May 6 strike, the strike on Beirut, and coordinated with the U.S. in advance to coordinate with Israeli officials. Even Israel's State officials mentioned this and said it publicly. Even Israel's own public government state broadcasting station admitted it.
Not only is the Trump administration illegally participating in this violent campaign, but it is openly ignoring congressional oversight, Mr. Speaker, of the U.S. Armed Forces' involvement in Lebanon.
On May 7, Senator Welch and a number of Senators wrote to the administration requesting specific information about U.S. coordination with the Israeli strikes, about the Israeli strikes, and other actions that would violate the War Powers Act, including refueling, intelligence-sharing, targeting, and other assistance.
We all know the Senators have not received any answers, and the executive branch has not even tried to argue that the U.S. role in the Israeli hostilities in Lebanon complies with U.S. law.
Congress must reassert its constitutional authority, Mr. Speaker, and immediately vote to end the U.S. participation in the destruction of Lebanon.
I want to make one thing clear, though, and it is super important for my colleagues to understand. Section 5(c) of the War Powers Act makes it clear that the Lebanon War Powers Resolution only applies to U.S. Armed Forces engaged in hostilities. The resolution will not affect U.S. training and support of Lebanese Armed Forces or the routine protection of U.S. diplomatic facilities, neither of which is involved in hostilities.
The War Powers Resolution exclusively ends the U.S. participation and ongoing Israeli invasion of Lebanon. That is what this vote is about, nothing less.
The American people are tired. They are exhausted, exhausted of these endless wars. They are tired of hearing that we don't have money for healthcare and childcare, yet, here we are, U.S. bombs destroying hospitals and stealing the future of children abroad.
This vote on the Lebanon War Powers Resolution is a clear, moral choice. Do you stand with the Netanyahu government and Trump's endless war crimes, or do you stand with human life, peace, and justice?
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I just listened to my colleague, Representative Tlaib, speak for about 6 minutes, trying to convince us that Israeli action in Lebanon is about ethnic cleansing. Not once in the 6 minutes did my colleague mention Hezbollah, the terrorist organization that Israel is going in there and killing. In 6 minutes of rambling on, not one mention of Hezbollah, not one mention of the 1,729 rockets fired by Hezbollah into northern Israel since April 7, not one mention of the 1,680 UAVs and drones sent into Israel since April 7, not one mention of the 283 Israelis injured or the 15 killed by Hezbollah since April 7. She wants you to believe that it is about ethnic cleansing and not fighting Hezbollah. Okay.
Let's talk about her actual policy. Her actual policy says this: Congress directs the President to remove the United States Armed Forces from Lebanon. Pretty straightforward.
Let me let my colleague know, Representative Tlaib, that the United States is not at war in Lebanon. The United States is not engaged in hostilities in Lebanon. I don't know how else I can say it. This resolution, it is reckless, and it is unserious.
You are asking to remove U.S. troops in a country where we are not in conflict. Israel is killing terrorists. I just listed off all the attacks that have gone on just since early April, but we are not in conflict there.
You are saying we can't keep any military there.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib) to engage in a colloquy.
Can we leave no military there, Representative Tlaib?
I would like to know if Ms. Karam, a university student from the Christian village of Qlayaa in south Lebanon--she wasn't a terrorist. She was murdered on Monday. She was returning home after completing her exams at the Lebanese University in Beirut. Look it up. The Israeli bomb targeted her family's car, killing her alongside her brother, Tony, and her father, James, who is a dental surgeon in the community. He wasn't a terrorist.
Representative Tlaib, I am going to take back my time here, but I will give you some more time to debate. As you can see, I will definitely give you the time. It is tough to understand you when you are yelling.
To my colleague's point--please stay standing because I will yield you more time. It just has to be a back-and-forth.
Apparently, they are not terrorists. Apparently, everybody that Israel was killing in Lebanon, they weren't terrorists, according to my colleague over here. It wasn't terrorists that were firing 1,729 rockets there, 1,680 UAVs, injuring 283, killing 15. Apparently, it wasn't terrorists that were doing that.
Ms. Tlaib, I yield you time again. Will you answer my question: Can we leave no military there?
To get back to your policy, ``remove United States Armed Forces from Lebanon,'' can we leave no U.S. forces there? Does that mean we can't leave any marines in the embassy?
I think it is abhorrent every day that goes by where this Congress does not act, 11 more children would die or have serious injuries as a result of, again, us not pulling back any of the resources and so forth.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to reclaim my time at this point.
We didn't get an answer, apparently, as to if we can--because I am reading the gentlewoman's legislation here, ``remove United States Armed Forces from Lebanon.'' That is just an example of how reckless her legislation is.
It doesn't say anything about, yeah, you can keep the marines that are in the embassy, as an example. That is a pretty big oversight. It doesn't say anything about whether we can keep United States Armed Forces that are on training missions with the LAF--again, pretty big oversight.
Of course, my colleague doesn't want to talk about the fact that the terrorists that Israel is killing there, that they do also use human shields. This is a well-known thing.
Mr. Speaker, at this point, I will say that a vote for this resolution is a vote to support Iran, which I think I have to remind some of my Democrat colleagues is a bad thing. Supporting Iran is a bad thing. I see no acknowledgment over there.
They are actually--my colleagues over here that would vote for this, they are serving as proxies for Hezbollah by bringing this resolution to the floor.
Mr. Speaker, again, we are not at war in Lebanon. There are no combat forces to remove. There is nothing further to say. I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill and not be a proxy for Hezbollah.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair reminds Members to formally yield and reclaim time when under recognition.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, section 5(c) of the War Powers Act, it is in there. You can just read it. It says if it is ``engaged in hostilities.'' If U.S. Armed Forces are there and they are not participating in this ethnic cleansing campaign, then they are fine. If they are there training the Lebanese Armed Forces, they are fine.
This is not what it is about. If you read the War Powers section 5(c), it is very clear. It is in writing in the law of the War Powers Act. It is really important that we understand and not get confusion.
I want to share a so-called, I guess, Amal Khalil. This is a photo of a very prominent Lebanese journalist. Amal Khalil, she was targeted and killed. Amal and her colleague Zeinab were reporting devastation in southern Lebanon when an Israeli drone struck her car near them, killing two civilians. Amal and Zeinab sought shelter in a nearby building, but Israel then struck the building, trapping them under the rubble. But it gets worse. It gets worse.
When rescue and medical workers finally arrived at the scene to rescue Zeinab, they came under fire before they could rescue Amal. They were prevented from returning to the site for hours, Mr. Speaker. Amal was dead by the time her body was recovered over 6 hours later. Amal is only one victim of many of the Israeli military's deliberate, indiscriminate bombings and targeting even of journalists in Lebanon.
Israel has killed 250 journalists and media workers across Lebanon, Palestine, Yemen, even Iran. Our country should not be sharing intelligence and coordinating strikes with the military that hunts and kills journalists for sport.
We must end the U.S. support for this invasion.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Ramirez), my good colleague and one of the cosponsors of the resolution.
Mr. Speaker, again, I want to rise to point out the hypocrisy of those who would claim to care about our children while turning a blind eye to the scale of child suffering inflicted by Trump and Netanyahu's unlawful, unaccountable military operations in Lebanon. And, yes, I did say Trump and Netanyahu's military operations.
While Netanyahu may be dropping the bombs, those operations are blessed by Trump, and the bombs are provided courtesy of the United States Government.
Israeli-executed, U.S.-approved strikes have killed more than 3,400 people, including 240 children.
UNICEF reports that 11 Lebanese children are killed or injured every single day.
Over a million civilians have been displaced. Nearly a quarter of Lebanon's entire population does not have enough to eat.
We are watching another catastrophe of U.S. complicity in destruction, displacement, and death unfold.
Trump, Hegseth, and Netanyahu launched an unlawful war in Iran to remain in power and enrich themselves. Let's be clear: Trump, Hegseth, and Netanyahu will keep expanding their war to further consolidate their power and profit and to stay in power.
My colleagues in Congress have enabled their abuses. They have watched children die, whether it is in Palestine, Iran, or Lebanon, and they have shrugged off requests for action because it is complicated.
What is complicated about this? It is not. The President of the United States is waging an unlawful war, aiding and abetting Israel to violate U.S. and international law, and it is making his friends rich and himself richer, all while children are starving. They are suffering, and they are dying. It is not complicated. It is actually grotesque.
Bottom line: Whether it is Lebanon, Gaza, or Iran, the United States and Israel are violating U.S. and international law, and this Congress has failed to stop them.
But impunity cannot and should not be an option. There shouldn't be more excuses, more endless wars, more blank checks for warmongers paid for by the suffering of children.
It is why Representative Tlaib and I introduced the Lebanon War Powers Resolution--to force Congress to vote, assert our constitutional authority, and end the complicity and unlawful military operations and wars.
Let me end by saying this: Let me make sure I look at you, my colleague here on the right. We cannot bomb our way to peace. True safety is not realized at the end of a barrel of a gun, by a bomb, or via choke hold of suppression or oppression.
I urge my colleagues to support this War Powers Resolution, and I also encourage you to join the Block the Bombs Act.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair reminds Members to direct their remarks to the Chair.
I want to make sure that we no longer are using our authority, our bombs, our resources to bomb children. That is what I want to do. I want to make sure that money is going to healthcare, housing, education--
I will yield back to you in a moment. I am reclaiming.
So the United States Armed Forces that are training the LAF who are fighting Hezbollah, fighting Hezbollah who is killing children there, killing civilians, would you like to see them stay? And I yield you some time.
So they want to go back. They don't want to talk about Hezbollah. Still yet no mention of Hezbollah from our colleagues over there. They don't want us to talk about the support the United States Armed Forces are giving to the LAF to combat Hezbollah because they are not acknowledging them, and apparently, they don't want to see Israel killing Hezbollah, even though it is Hezbollah that is killing Israeli children, Israeli adults, Israeli elders. I gave them the count of rockets, UAVs, casualties, drones; I gave them the count. No mention of it whatsoever.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Miller).
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H. Con. Res. 84, but like most of my colleagues, whether they will admit it or not, I am a little confused.
The United States, to my knowledge, doesn't have any troops in Lebanon. In fact, the last time American servicemembers were deployed in Lebanon was in 1984. Even though the gentlewoman from Michigan believes that the U.S. is the root of all evil, the United States is playing a vital role in advancing peace, security, and stability in Lebanon as we currently speak.
Just a couple of days ago, President Trump brokered a pause to further defensive Israeli military action in southern Lebanon, and the U.S. State Department has hosted several rounds of historic peace talks as we have currently been seeing.
Regardless of what the gentlewoman from Michigan will tell you, the greatest threat to Lebanon remains the Iranian regime and its terrorist proxy, Hezbollah, not the United States and not Israel as that country has come out more of the gentlewoman's mouth than the United States, and I believe that is who she is seeking to remove from Lebanon.
But if my colleagues on the other side actually cared about the people of Lebanon, which it is clear they don't, they would cheer on the elimination of these bloodthirsty terrorists, not advancing meaningless resolutions to denigrate American foreign policy only to embolden them.
For decades, Iran has used Hezbollah to project power throughout the Middle East. In the process, Hezbollah has weakened the Lebanese state and repeatedly drawn Lebanon into conflicts that serve Tehran's interests.
While I can appreciate the passion from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, I do not appreciate their lack of education and understanding of what is really going on there.
Let us be clear. * * * *
No nation can be fully sovereign when an armed group operates outside the authority of its elected--
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Ohio will suspend.
May I inquire as to how much longer this is going to take? We watched this video on C-SPAN already. Can I just inquire what is taking so long?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair is in the process of seeking clarification.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the words.
The Clerk read as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair is prepared to rule.
The words of the gentleman from Ohio contain an allegation that the gentlewoman from Michigan is a butcher and affiliated with a terrorist organization.
Such remarks impugn the patriotism and loyalty of the Member of the House, which is not in order, as stated in section 361 of the House Rules and Manual.
The Chair relies on the precedent of December 14, 2021, as carried in such section of the Manual and finds that the remarks contain personalities and are not in order.
The offending words are stricken from the Record.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, I would also like to submit for the Record an article titled: ``Rashida Tlaib member of secret Facebook group where Hamas terrorists glorified.''
Mr. Speaker, I would also like to submit for the Record the transcript of the Congresswoman from Michigan, the transcript of H. Res. 845, which notes that she is the only one calling for genocide. She was reprimanded bipartisanly by the House of Representatives.
Interesting. I learned something new today. All right.
Mr. Speaker, I also would like to submit for the Record another article: Watchdog release--titled--something titled--an article titled: ``Watchdog releases scathing report on Tlaib's alleged ties to terrorist groups, warning of potential risks.''
Mr. Speaker, as the ranking member of the Rules Committee, what just unfolded in this House makes me sad for this institution.
It is never okay to attack the integrity or character of another Member on the floor. These are serious issues that we are debating here today, and they deserve serious debate. I understand that people have different points of view, but we need to uphold the decorum and the decency of this Chamber. We need to do better.
The fact of the matter is that many of us who are here today are here because we are deeply concerned that Lebanon is suffering a humanitarian crisis. It may seem far away. It may not be in the news every day, but it matters.
Mr. Speaker, 1.3 million human beings have been displaced across Lebanon. That is nearly double the population of my district in Massachusetts.
More than 200 Lebanese kids have been killed--children--children. There were just over 200 kids enrolled at Burncoat Street Preparatory School, where I went to school in Worcester.
I get it. The world is chaotic and a dangerous place, but if we don't stand up for the principles of basic human rights, then as a country, we stand for nothing. There just doesn't seem to be any concern about civilian casualties, wherever they occur.
I oppose violent attacks against people of Lebanon, civilians of Lebanon, against civilians in Israel, against civilians in Gaza. I mean, I detest violence. We all should. We should be leading efforts for peace, not contributing to war and civil unrest.
We ought not to be writing blank checks, one after another, to Mr. Netanyahu, and he is using these funds for these strikes in Lebanon. We bear some of the responsibility for this suffering.
Don't we owe the Lebanese people every ounce of effort we can to end the hostilities? Don't we owe the American people our commitment not to use their hard-earned money in the service of war crimes? Where is our humanity?
The United States gives Netanyahu billions of dollars in military aid every year. Our militaries share intelligence. Reports suggest President Trump has green-lit specific Israeli strikes in Lebanon.
Our support empowers and prolongs the displacement, the occupation, and the bombing of civilians. We cannot look away. If we do not take a stand now, it will forever be a stain on our conscience and our country.
I am tired of all of these endless wars. I am tired of all of the money that we divert from our people here at home, sending it halfway around the world to support conflicts and to support tyrants and dictators who don't care about human rights. It undermines our stability, and it undermines our national security.
Human rights watchers called on allies of the warring parties to pressure them to abide by the laws of war and protect civilians. We must answer that call.
This is a serious matter. This is about basic, fundamental human rights.
Mr. Speaker, I just listened to the Rules Committee ranking member speak, as he is walking away right now, and here is something that he said. I think it is important for the American people to hear: ``Hard-earned money in the service of war crimes'' were his words.
So we are debating right now whether to have our Armed Forces removed from Lebanon. The gentleman is implying that our Armed Forces who are there are engaged in war crimes.
That is impugning our Armed Forces. That is despicable, and it is despicable to say, especially in the light of the fact that, what, our marines who are in the embassy are the ones who are in the service of war crimes? I see that he walked off. He doesn't want to listen to an analysis of his own comments.
The marines in the embassy are engaged in war crimes? Is that what he is saying today?
Those training the Lebanese Armed Forces are engaged in war crimes?
I don't think he wants to defend those comments because he walked off.
Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Fine).
Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, when I heard about this resolution being filed, I obviously had a great deal of interest, a War Powers Resolution related to Lebanon. So I said what we should do--I am not going to impugn the integrity of any Member of Congress. One might debate whether we should impugn the literacy of Members of Congress, because we are hearing about genocide and horrible things that have taken place in Lebanon.
So I got the resolution, and I read it. By the way, the good news is, to anyone watching, it doesn't take long. It is five lines long.
Pursuant to the War Powers Resolution, Congress directs the President to remove the United States Armed Forces from Lebanon by not later than the date that is 7 days after the date of the adoption of this concurrent resolution.
So I naturally asked a question: What United States Armed Forces are stationed in Lebanon? What are we fighting? What war? What genocide are we participating in?
The only troops, the only members of the United States Armed Forces, who are stationed in Lebanon are the marines who protect the embassy. That is it.
You remove them, and you let Hezbollah take over our embassy that is there. But there is another group of marines. There is another group of U.S. Armed Forces who are in Lebanon that, no matter what we passed, we would not be able to bring home: 241 of them died in 1983 by the very same people this War Powers Resolution would embolden and would enable.
This resolution is a disgrace to their memories because what it should be called is the Hezbollah empowerment act of 2026. It is a disgrace to every member of our State Department who protects us over there.
The only beneficiary of this resolution, were it to pass, would not be the good people of Lebanon. See, the United States is not at war with the people of Lebanon. The fact of the matter is Israel is not at war with the people of Lebanon. The civilized world is at war with the Muslim terrorists of Hezbollah, who would be the beneficiary.
While I would not impugn the patriotism or character of any Member of this Chamber, I would question the rationality and common sense of anyone who would consider voting for this. This should be an easy vote to vote ``no.''
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this resolution because it is unconscionable for Congress to allow this conflict to go on.
The United States is complicit in the horrific devastation plaguing Lebanon. Thousands of people have been killed; more than a million people have been displaced; and homes and villages have been completely destroyed.
Israeli officials have openly stated they seek to implement the Gaza model, but in Lebanon. The Gaza model is one of ethnic cleansing, war crimes, mass displacement, and illegal occupation.
How can we in Congress stand by as our Nation is made complicit in such atrocities? U.S. support for conflicts in Gaza and now in Lebanon is about causing irreparable harm to our reputation and our role internationally. We are creating a world in which the United States stands not for peace or security but for destruction, death, and blatant disregard of international law.
This cannot continue. Congress must put an end to this unauthorized use of force. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' and refuse to enable another forever war.
Mr. Speaker, I would just let everybody know, again, there has been no mention of Hezbollah, no mention at all from this side about Hezbollah, the rockets they are firing into Israel, the UAVs, the casualties, or all the Americans that Hezbollah has killed in the past--no mention of either.
I am curious, Mr. Speaker, if the next speaker over there will have any mention of Hezbollah. I will be interested to hear. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Lebanon War Powers Resolution introduced by my friend Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib.
The United States is actively participating in Israel's illegal invasion and bombing of Lebanon and its mass displacement of the Lebanese people. This participation was not authorized by Congress, and it supports strikes that are illegal under U.S. and international law. This resolution is urgently needed to stop using our tax dollars to fund Israeli war crimes.
There has been confusion about what support looks like, so I would like to be specific about what the United States' support looks like here. In southern Lebanon, homes are being leveled with U.S.-supplied bulldozers. Israel is engaging in chemical warfare with U.S.-supplied white phosphorus. The U.S. is providing targeting intelligence for Israeli strikes. There are even credible reports that President Trump personally green-lit specific Israeli military operations in Lebanon.
These examples demonstrate the depth of U.S. involvement and the urgency for Congress to act. This is exactly the kind of military involvement that Congress intended the War Powers Resolution to cover.
I urge my colleagues to consider that by supplying Israel with weapons and logistical support, we are giving Netanyahu the means to continue bombing and displacing thousands and thousands of people. Trump can yell at Netanyahu all he wants, but we can't have it both ways. We can't supply weapons and then be surprised when they get used. We can't supply diplomatic cover for previous violations and then be surprised when Netanyahu threatens to do it again.
The American people overwhelmingly oppose Trump's cruel, wasteful, and illegal war in Iran. If Trump is serious about ending this war, then we must prevent Israeli escalation in Lebanon. Ending our participation in that escalation is a necessary place to start.
As recently as this week's floor votes, Republicans are still out here inventing reasons why we can't help families here in America get food, support students trying to afford college, or fund childcare for working parents here. Meanwhile, they are trying to give $1.5 trillion to the Pentagon, some of which will fund the kinds of U.S. weapons and systems for Israel that are being used to undermine a peace deal with Iran.
My constituents have been clear about this. I suspect many of all of ours have been, as well. They want lower gas prices, better schools, reliable healthcare, dignified work, and affordable homes. They do not want the U.S. and their taxpayer dollars to be complicit in morally abhorrent, wasteful, and counterproductive foreign invasions.
Today, we have an opportunity to weigh in directly and say whether we want to end U.S. participation in an invasion. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this important resolution.
Mr. Speaker, we have had another speaker on the left and still no mention of Hezbollah.
I have a very serious question. This is serious. I understand my colleagues oppose Israel killing Hezbollah terrorists. Do they also oppose the Lebanese Armed Forces killing Hezbollah terrorists? I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a heavy heart to support this War Powers Resolution to stop the U.S. Government from being complicit in a war in Lebanon that is devastating the Lebanese people. Millions of innocent civilians in Lebanon and across the region have been trapped by brutal violence and displacement.
With fighting that just began only a mere 3 months ago, more than 3,500 people have been killed, nearly 11,000 injured, and more than a million displaced in Lebanon alone.
We cannot look at Lebanon in a vacuum. We have to recognize the dangerous parallels to Netanyahu's illegal incursions in Gaza and the West Bank that have also caused mass suffering.
It was reported that, even this week, Donald Trump himself called Netanyahu crazy and claimed that he would be in prison if it was not for him.
What we have witnessed is a devastating pattern: Military force that kills and displaces countless civilians, destroys vital civilian infrastructure and sacred sites, and deepens an endless cycle of violence and trauma.
Mr. Speaker, no one on this side of the aisle supports terrorism or terrorist organizations. For our colleagues to claim so is just wrong.
Just as operations in the West Bank and Gaza have destabilized prospects for lasting peace, pushing a front into Lebanon will not achieve long-term security for the region. As we saw just this week, further acts of violence in Lebanon certainly won't end the President's illegal war.
Families in both Lebanon and Palestine have lost their homes. Children are growing up in fear, and generations have yet to experience a moment of peace. Violent attacks, restrictions on movement, indignities to everyday life, and unfathomable cruelty, these impacts are not just felt in these communities but in our own communities here in the United States, as well.
As family and friends are watching in horror and grief, my own office has received countless heartbreaking stories from family members and colleagues living in Palestine and Lebanon: displacement, loss of homes, livelihoods, and entire communities; children living in fear; and people attacked, beaten, or arrested for merely attempting to live their lives and to pray.
Congress cannot stand silent for a moment longer. Congress has not authorized any war in the Middle East. Just a few hours ago, this body in this House voted to end the illegal war in Iran. We cannot be complicit in these crimes. It is time to end this war. It is time to reclaim our constitutional power.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
It is time to restore the dignity of the United States, and it is time to restore human rights and the standing of the United States here in this country.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has again expired.
Mr. Speaker, I am a Republican. I am not offended by them swearing. It is okay. I can handle it. I can handle nasty looks, too.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, I am going to reference the words of my colleague just now. She said that no one on our side supports terrorist organizations; for us to say so is just wrong. Mr. Speaker, to have an entire debate about Lebanon and removing U.S. Forces from Lebanon that aren't there without a single mention of the word Hezbollah, who is actively trying to kill anybody that they can, that is a support for a terrorist organization.
For our colleagues, I will bring Iran into this more specifically beyond just Hezbollah being a proxy of Iran, for our colleagues to go out there and say day after day that there is no imminent threat from Iran when Iran is absolutely--and acknowledged by everybody bipartisanly--the largest state sponsor of terror, that is a support for the largest state sponsor of terror.
For our colleagues to go out there and pretend as though we haven't been attacked 350 times in the 30 months prior to Epic Fury even beginning, for them to pretend that we were not being attacked, not being struck by Iran, that is a support for terrorists.
Every single time that my colleagues on the other side deny, turn their backs to the United States of America getting hit by the terrorists of Iran or their proxies like Hezbollah or others, they are supporting a terrorist organization.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I think it is really important--you know, I said earlier about Defense Minister Katz not once does he mention Hezbollah. He said literally that we are going to destroy Lebanese homes and villages in accordance with Beit Hanoun and Rafah models in Gaza. I am not joking.
This is Finance Minister Smotrich. He literally threatened the major neighborhoods of Beirut will soon resemble Khan Yunis, a city in Gaza that was destroyed by the Israeli military.
Not one of them mentioned Hezbollah. They talk about greater Israel. They talk about a campaign to spread boundaries, again, with no regard of international law.
I want to put up the photo of Theodossia because she wasn't Hezbollah. She is not a terrorist. She was a young student that just finished her exams. It is disrespectful. If you really care about the Lebanese people, then you would understand the importance of not continuing, again, the indiscriminate bombings that are continuing throughout Lebanon. She should be alive today.
I think it is important, Mr. Speaker, to understand what is happening on the ground if you really care about the Lebanese people like you claim you care about the Iranian people. Everybody claims they care about everybody on the ground and that this is about security. It is not. I think it is important.
I include in the Record a March 25 article from the Guardian titled: ``Israel used white phosphorus to scorch earth in south Lebanon, researcher says.'' That is the title.
Israel used white phosphorus to scorch earth in south Lebanon,
Organizations such as Human Rights Watch have documented Israel's illegal use of white phosphorus multiple times in Lebanon, which is a war crime. They launched it in residential neighborhoods and Lebanese farmland.
Is this what our country is supporting?
White phosphorus is a chemical agent that ignites when exposed to oxygen and burns at up to 800 degrees Celsius, melting human flesh to the bone and poisoning the soil with toxic heavy metals. White phosphorus kills. It leaves survivors with cruel injuries, and burn results cause lifelong suffering.
The only place in the entire northern hemisphere right now that literally fills white phosphorus munitions is right here in the United States in Arkansas. We are supplying these horrific chemical bombs to the Israeli military, and our military is providing operational support, as we speak, for these scorched-earth campaigns that are destroying the very conditions of life in Lebanon.
Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about the human life in Lebanon more because I think it is important to understand. This is Hussein Wehbe. At least 128 medics--he was a medic, 17 years old--128 medics and other health workers have been targeted and killed by the Israeli Government since March, just as they have done in Gaza. They are often killed in what they call double-tap strikes.
American people don't understand this. Double-tap strikes are war crimes where following an initial strike, the Israeli Government comes in, waits for the emergency rescue workers to show up with the ambulances at the scene, and then strikes again.
In Lebanon, we have seen the Israeli Government commit triple-tap, quadruple-tap strikes, an atrocity previously unheard of where team after team of rescuers are completely slaughtered.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record an April 16 Guardian article titled: ``Israel escalates attacks on medics in Lebanon with deadly `quadruple tap.' ''
Mr. Speaker, this is Hussein Wehbe again. He was a 17- year-old. He was a volunteer. He was a first responder with the Lebanese Civil Defense. He was also a Boy Scout. He was killed while trying to save lives.
The next person is Ahmed Hariri. He was also a paramedic and a photojournalist who was killed in a double-tap strike while trying to rescue injured survivors of an Israeli drone strike. He was killed alongside two fellow paramedics less than 2 days after the World Health Assembly passed a resolution calling for the protection of medical personnel in Lebanon.
This is what our country is supporting, Mr. Speaker. This is the military we are coordinating strikes with and providing targeting intelligence with, a military that systematically is targeting and killing civilians.
We must end the U.S. support of these war crimes.
Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time I have remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Michigan has 4\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. Speaker, again I will just reference the remarks of my colleague, examine what was said.
She said that Israel is going scorched earth. I would just tell my colleague that if Israel--and by the way, this is after a little while ago she was saying they are needing the United States of America's intelligence. The context of this is important. If Israel was going scorched earth on them, they wouldn't need American intelligence for targeting.
Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The sheer number of human lives that have been lost already in Lebanon is close to 4,000. We are talking about over 1.2, 1.3 million people forcibly displaced. If you even just look at the map, if we put up the map right now, you can see that bombings are happening outside of where they are claiming that there are security issues.
It is important to know and please understand the impact of us allowing U.S., again, intelligence sharing, coordination, and support of this. I know some of my colleagues claim themselves that the U.S. is not militarily involved. I hear it all the time.
But the facts paint a very different picture that the Trump administration is engaged in unauthorized hostilities and violations of the Constitution and the War Powers Act of 1973.
It is important to understand that the Trump administration's actions of overt command and coordination over Israeli offensive military decisions in Lebanon arguably represent the most well-documented direct U.S. participation in a foreign military's engagement in hostilities in recent decades.
This U.S. role, Mr. Speaker, in the invasion of Lebanon includes ``green-lighting'' specific Israeli military operations in Lebanon, providing them with what is called approval and disapproval over whether they may proceed, a defining function of military command.
Mr. Speaker, on March 12, Israeli media reported that President Trump ``approved the ground incursion'' by Israel into Lebanon ``also authorized expanding it if necessary.''
Also, on April 8, Axios reporters said live on mainstream media: ``Without the green light from Donald Trump, you wouldn't have seen Israel go ahead with these very massive strikes in Lebanon,'' literally strikes that killed 250 people that day.
On May 6, Israel sought, and was granted, Trump's ``green light'' for its May 6 strike on Beirut, Mr. Speaker, and coordinated with the United States in advance, according to Israeli officials. Not us, but the Israeli officials are telling us that the Trump administration is helping them.
As recently as this week, Israeli officials told the press that the Israeli military's forced displacement order and threats to bomb Beirut's southern neighborhoods were coordinated with the United States.
These are elected officials by the Israeli Government making these claims. These are the sources.
This unprecedented public record of direct and overt U.S. command and coordination over Israeli hostilities in Lebanon goes alongside deep U.S.-Israeli operational integration, which the American people don't want.
Meanwhile, the White House continues to ignore congressional oversight efforts regarding the U.S. participation in these hostilities. We still haven't gotten responses to questions that we have. It is important to understand that the violations of the War Powers Act are very clear, as they were clear during the U.S. support of the Saudi-led war on Yemen.
Do you remember that, Mr. Speaker, the Saudi-led war on Yemen?
Both the House and the Senate passed War Powers Resolutions bipartisanly affirming that refueling Saudi aircraft and providing targeted intelligence to Saudi forces constituted U.S. participation in hostilities.
This case is no different. Congress must reassert its authority and cut off U.S. support for this cruelty and this destruction.
Mr. Speaker, when I see that child, I think of my son. Everyone wants to label people of my faith or people who look like me as terrorists. These are human beings. We cannot make them out to be disposable. We must save lives, no matter faith or ethnicity. We must stand against war crimes no matter who is committing it, no matter who it is.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to understand this is about our shared humanity. This is about ending, again, the mass destruction of Lebanon. We should not be playing any role.
Again, I think it is important to understand when we do that and label people a certain way that makes them to be disposable, it will lead to more international law violations of peoples' human rights.
Mr. Speaker, I wasn't planning on speaking on this issue, but as I have listened to this anti-Israel screed, I have to ask why my colleagues across the aisle don't pay nearly as much attention to the ongoing slaughter in South Sudan?
There are a couple of reasons. One, it is Africa. It is not adjacent to Israel. Two, it is not Israel.
The change in the Democratic Party over the last few years has been extraordinary, in their change of their attitude toward Israel. I think it is fair to say in words that cannot be taken down that Hamas terrorists cut the wire several years ago and then live streamed their atrocities. They live streamed their atrocities.
I won't describe them because everybody remembers, but I would recommend that when terrorists, bona fide terrorists, commit atrocities such as we saw on October the 7th several years ago, I would recommend they don't live stream them because if anybody has watched the films that were taken that were live streamed by the perpetrators, they would question this very discussion about Lebanon and about Israel's defense of itself.
Frankly, we could talk about the UNIFIL, the U.N. organization that refused to do their job. Israel is doing the U.N. job that UNIFIL was put there to do, to keep Hezbollah north of the Litani River, and the U.N. force refused to do their job.
We have Israeli families who can't live in their homes in northern Israel, so Israel is doing the U.N.'s job, as well.
I think, as I have listened to this anti-Israel screed, we need a little historical balance in this discussion.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close.
Mr. Speaker, this resolution, again, is beyond reckless and beyond untruthful. The entire arguments that we were listening to of accusing America of participating in a genocide that is not existing, it is Israel going into Lebanon killing Hezbollah terrorists.
I wish they had kept their map up because they showed a large map of all this territory where Israel had gone on the offensive, and they said that they had killed 4,000 people.
Again, Mr. Speaker, if Israel had gone scorched-earth on them, you would have way more than 4,000 dead in all that territory, but what was done was precise strikes against terrorists targeting Israel, Americans, and anybody else whom they could reach out and touch, and they are being killed for that.
This resolution impugns our military. This resolution impugns the patriotism of the U.S. military by saying that they are participating in a war that they are not and by saying that they are participating in a genocide where they are not.
This resolution is certainly shameful in that way, but, again, it is very reckless because it would demand that we remove forces from places like our embassy in Lebanon, remove all forces from Lebanon that would mean removing our Marines from the embassy in Lebanon which, again, just shows how reckless and shameful and how ill thought-out this resolution is.
Mr. Speaker, while it has been an exciting evening with all of these words being taken down and everything else going on, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the previous question is ordered on the concurrent resolution.
The question is on adoption of the concurrent resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Harold ``Hal'' Yoak, a proud veteran, a dedicated educator, a loving husband, and a great member of our community who is celebrating his 101st birthday today, June 3.
Born in 1925, Hal answered the call to serve his country in World War II, serving in the United States Navy from
Then, on Christmas Eve of 1947, Hal married the love of his life, Eileen Whited. Together they shared an extraordinary marriage of 67 years.
Following his military service, Hal devoted the rest of his career to education, retiring from Pacifica High School, where he inspired students through his dedication and his passion.
Today, as we recognize Hal's life and birthday, we celebrate a century defined by service, family, and education.
On behalf of southern California's 46th Congressional District, I am honored to recognize his contributions and wish him a very happy 101st birthday.
Mr. Speaker, Martin General Hospital was Martin County's only hospital until financial distress forced its closure, leaving thousands without nearby emergency care.
Since then, local residents have been forced to travel 20 to 30 minutes or more to see a doctor in emergencies. When seconds count, those delays can be fatal.
The hospital's closure didn't just hurt our health but also the county's local economy, costing over 180 jobs and pulling $33 million from the community each year.
I believe in practical solutions, which is why I am fighting to bring our hard-earned tax dollars back home to work for us.
Mr. Speaker, I have sent President Trump a letter as I advocate for $175 million in Federal funding to reopen Martin General Hospital. Eastern North Carolina families deserve healthcare close to home.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the topic of this Special Order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas?
Mr. Speaker, America's founding generation did not take up arms merely over taxes. They rebelled against a tyrannical government that planted spies in their taverns, searched their homes, and read their private letters.
Benjamin Franklin understood this threat deeply. He popularized the rattlesnake as the symbol of America, first with his ``Join, or Die'' cartoon, and later by praising the defiant motto: ``Don't Tread On Me.''
He also delivered a timeless warning: Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
This year, 2026, marks the 250th anniversary of our Declaration of Independence. There could be no more fitting time to reaffirm the principles of liberty than by dismantling the surveillance state that has quietly eroded them. That starts with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, FISA, which has become the modern incarnation of the general warrants that ignited the revolution.
Created originally to track foreign enemies on foreign soil, section 702 has morphed into a sprawling domestic surveillance machine that sweeps up American's communications and treats the Fourth Amendment like a suggestion.
On June 12, Congress faces another deadline to renew section 702. The intelligence community wants a clean reauthorization, but we are not going to accept that, Congress should not accept that, and no American, if they were actually told the truth for once about what their own government is doing to them, would accept that.
This is not opposition to national security. It is a refusal to sacrifice essential liberty for temporary safety. If Congress is going to renew FISA, then we must enact meaningful changes.
First, repeal the dangerously broad expansion of the term ``electronic communication service provider.'' It now allows the government to compel churches, small businesses, and community organizations to hand over Americans' communications.
Second, strengthen the FISA Courts Amicus Curiae program so independent voices can actually defend Americans' rights in secret proceedings.
Third, close the data broker loophole that allows the FBI, IRS, and every other Federal agency to bypass the Constitution by simply buying Americans' geolocation, metadata, and browsing history off the market.
Most urgently, require a warrant for backdoor searches of Americans' communications.
At peak, the government conducted nearly 3 million warrantless searches of U.S. citizens' data, many of them illegal. Foreign threats must be watched, but Americans deserve probable cause and a real warrant on American soil.
In addition, we must ban the Central Bank Digital Currency permanently. The CBDC is the ultimate surveillance tool that allows the government to track, control, and potentially freeze every purchase you make.
The CBDC cannot ever be allowed to operate in the United States. It is the biggest threat to our privacy.
While we are at it, let's secure our elections by ensuring that only American citizens vote in American elections.
Mr. Speaker, our Founders never intended for us to trade liberty for supposed safety. Our Founders never imagined today where illegal aliens would be voting in our elections.
In this 250th anniversary year of American independence, Congress must draw a line in the sand. Let us stand with our forefathers, the Constitution, and the American people who want secure elections and for the government to stop spying on them.
Reject the rubber-stamped FISA renewal, pass these reforms, secure our elections, ban CBDC forever, restore the Fourth Amendment, and protect our Republic. The rattlesnake is, once again, rattling. It is time for Congress to listen.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs), my distinguished colleague.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I am grateful, indeed, for the opportunity to address one of the most consequential issues facing our great Republic: the Federal Government's warrantless surveillance of the American people.
For years, Americans have watched headline after headline exposing the intelligence community's abuse of its authority, and I thought I would share just a few of those.
Most recently, John Brennan admitted that there is a legion of deep state operatives in DOJ and CIA who are resisting Trump's orders. Why is that important?
It is because they are the ones who violate the warrant requirement, as well.
House approves reauthorization of FISA 702, warrantless spy powers, and yet when you go and read it, we have problems still. We still have problems. Why do we know that? Because the FISC, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, has issued a report. It is classified. Former DNI Director Tulsi Gabbard wanted to declassify that secret but critical court document but was denied. Actually, in my opinion, that needs to be released before we ever take a vote on FISA again.
I will just leave it there on those headlines and get back to this.
President Trump has an agenda. He won the popular vote in a landslide. In my home State, he got 160,000 votes more than the Democrat. How did he do it? Because the people wanted him to get his agenda through, but it is being sidestepped and avoided.
Who are the people that are causing the problem, according to John Brennan? It is the same people that spied on
Section 702 has been used to search the communications of protesters across the political spectrum, 19,000 donors to a congressional campaign, Members of Congress, congressional staff, journalists, and ordinary Americans who did nothing wrong.
Now, it has come to my attention that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court has this opinion that is sitting there. It details significant government compliance failures under section 702. We need that to be declassified. The American people, this great Republic, need to know what their government is doing.
The opinion must be declassified in order for us to know what we are doing in Congress to take a vote on this. Without transparency, the American people and their elected Representatives cannot have a meaningful, fact-driven debate about the future of this powerful authority.
Reports indicate the opinion will show persistent, systemic violations of the law, including U.S. person queries that directly violate the oversight requirements Congress established in the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act, just from a couple of years ago.
One filtering tool tied to these violations has been shut down, but similar tools remain in use. This is exactly why I have consistently pushed for a warrant requirement for U.S. person queries.
The Fourth Amendment is not ambiguous. It says, ``no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause''--not sometimes, not when it is convenient, not unless the intelligence community thinks it takes too long.
We keep hearing the same tired argument: Getting a warrant is too hard. Getting a warrant takes too long. That is simply false. The work we have done in my bill, H.R. 7816, the Protect Liberty and End Warrantless Surveillance Act, ensures that is the case.
H.R. 7816 includes targeted, practical exceptions for imminent threats, cybersecurity emergencies, and consent situations. It protects Americans and preserves the government's ability to act quickly when lives are on the line. Anyone claiming otherwise either hasn't taken the time to read the bill, has read some propaganda, has accepted the intelligence community's narrative, or simply does not want reform.
As we in Congress keep negotiating what FISA and section 702 reform should look like, we seem to be forgetting that my bill is already the negotiated bill. We worked with a wide range of Members and stakeholders. We built a bipartisan coalition, and last Congress, we reached a 212-212 vote on my warrant requirement, one vote away from passing. It was sitting at 212-211 for a long time, and then someone came in and cast a ``no'' vote.
This is fundamentally the same bill. The work has been done. The consensus exists. The excuses have run out. Meanwhile, the intelligence community continues to assure us that: This time, we will follow the rules; this time, we will respect the Constitution; and this time, we will stop violating Americans' privacy.
Mr. Speaker, we have heard that promise for a decade and more. The latest FISA court opinion, the one they are trying to keep classified, proves those promises are empty.
President Trump's administration took historic steps to increase transparency across government, and I appreciate former Director Gabbard's stated commitment to declassify this FISC opinion.
The commitment must be honored. Declassification is essential to restoring trust, strengthening accountability, and ensuring every branch of government operates within constitutional limits.
At the end of the day, this debate comes down to a simple principle: If you want to spy on Americans, you have to get a warrant. That is not radical. That is not partisan. That is the Constitution.
Benjamin Franklin warned that those who trade essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither. For too long, Washington has done exactly that: traded away constitutional privacy for the illusion of security.
We are told that, without warrantless surveillance, America will be less safe. That is wrong. We can have both liberty and safety. It is the government's job to protect both, not force Americans to choose between them.
We cannot allow a legacy going to our grandchildren where they will end up growing up in a country where mass surveillance is normal and constitutional protections are optional. Congress has a responsibility right now to stop that future from becoming a reality.
Let me just add this: When we talk about CBDC, it is the last leg of the stool of surveillance. If CBDC were to become a reality, with the mass surveillance that is in FISA right now, guess what. It wouldn't be too long before we started looking like our main foe internationally, the Chinese. They surveil everything.
Do you know what? The U.K. surveils everything, as well. They watch everything.
What CBDC would do would allow them to shut down the entire banking system or your microbanking system and control you. It could be abused so quickly, so thoroughly, and so completely.
I will tell you that I am grateful for the bipartisan Members who have joined me in this fight. We have a lot of them. We may not agree on much, but we do agree on this: The Constitution still matters. It is real. In just 13 years, we will be celebrating its 250th.
If the government wants to search Americans' communications--which is what they want to do, and it is what they are doing--it must get a warrant. That is the requirement of the Constitution that I took an oath to protect and defend.
Mr. Speaker, and my friend from Texas, Mr. Self, I thank you for this. I would say this: Be careful. There are some illusions out there. There are some false prophets coming forward to tell you that they are going to fix this problem, but they are offering a false doctrine. There should be no hope in that. We should put no faith in that.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for bringing this to light, and I am happy to engage in a colloquy with the gentleman. I am going to talk about a few things. I am going to talk about the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
We use a lot of acronyms around here, so I am going to try to stick to these words so people understand: Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. We will talk about facial recognition software, the kill switch in your car, automatic license plate reader cameras, central bank digital currency, and data centers. All are part of what we are here to discuss tonight, which is your privacy enshrined, guaranteed, in this document that everybody here swears an oath to uphold and defend.
I am sure that my friend from Texas, Mr. Self, can see that this thing is made of paper. Try as it may, it can't defend itself. It depends on men and women of good character and integrity to do that job for it. That is how this system was designed. That is how our Founders saw it. It can't defend itself. It depends on us.
In this document, the Fourth Amendment says: You will not be spied on; you will not be searched; your property will not be seized; and your privacy will not be violated without probable cause and due process. Yet, we know it has been violated, Mr. Speaker, Representative Self.
We all took this oath, and the people who violated it took an oath. The people who violated it, whether they were on the court, whether they were in law enforcement, somehow, someway, the piece of paper couldn't stop the violations to the American people and their personal effect.
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act--let me be clear, Mr. Speaker. What Americans do, what American law enforcement does, what the American intelligence services do to keep us safe regarding foreigners, God bless them, go do it. Do whatever is necessary within the bounds of legality and morality to keep us safe.
It is called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act for a reason, because we are supposed to be surveilling foreigners, foreign countries, foreign entities, foreign individuals, not millions of Americans who were spied on without their knowledge and then found out after the fact. Of course, as the gentleman from Texas knows--well, maybe he doesn't know; I think he does. Well, let me ask you in this colloquy: Who has been held accountable?
No one of note. We spy on millions of Americans and violate their constitutional rights. That seems like a civil rights violation to me, and no one is held accountable.
You couple FISA with facial recognition software, think about the limits of power there. It is ubiquitous now. You can buy this stuff on the open market for yourself, let alone government doing it. It is one thing if a store wants to do it. Maybe you want to do it personally. Maybe your neighbor gives you trouble, and you want to make sure that you see him or her coming before they get there. God bless you. That is your business to protect your property.
But when law enforcement, when the awesome, irresistible power of the government has these things, what are you going to do about it?
Well, I tell you what you are going to do about it--not much, not much. You are going to be bankrupted. Your reputation is going to be destroyed. Maybe you will be falsely accused. When it is all over, when the whole thing is done, you haven't done anything and the government finds nothing, well, they just quietly slink off into the darkness. And you will be left with your shattered reputation, your bankrupt, empty bank account, your destroyed marriage, your destroyed family, your destroyed reputation. That is what you will be left with.
Now, recently, under the guise of safety, this government mandated that every new car in 2027 and beyond will have a kill switch put in it, not because you ordered it, not because you have a family member that you worry is going to drive impaired and you want to make sure you protect them and your fellow citizens. So you say to the dealership: I want to have a switch in this car that I can shut it off in case I feel my loved one is driving impaired.
No. If you are going to buy a car, the government is going to mandate that that be in the car. You're going to get the kill switch whether you want it or not. The car is going to decide, the vehicle--judge, jury, and, as they say, executioner--whether you are going to keep driving or not.
It doesn't matter if it is 2:30 in the morning and Mr. Self--Mr. Self's family member, because Mr. Self is a little bit older than this now--but Mr. Self's family, his beloved family member is taking his wife to the hospital to deliver Mr. Self's grandbaby. Maybe he is driving a little erratically or a little differently than he normally does because the pressure is on. His wife doesn't want to have the baby in the car. She would prefer to have it at the hospital. Well, the car says: Hey, look. Something is off here. I don't like the way you are driving, so I think I will just shut it off and keep everybody safe.
How about this: What about some young lady who is leaving an establishment. She notices somebody watching her, stalking her, following her. She thinks, boy, I either better get home to my father or my husband, or maybe I want to get to the police station. I am a little nervous. I don't know what this person behind me is going to do. Maybe I run the stop sign or whatever.
The car is going to keep you safe. It is going to shut off for you. That is exactly what you need at that moment.
Again, hook this up with facial recognition software before an intelligence surveillance act, and you can see the whole world caving in on you and your privacy. That is the kill switch. Now ubiquitous, automatic--and it is important that you include automatic in this-- automatic license plate reading cameras installed ubiquitously now.
Two years ago, there were probably 500 of them installed. Now, there is 100,000. Businesses are talking about installing them on their location, and businesses are allowed to do that. Maybe they want to determine what time you show up, what you are wearing, what you are buying. It is one thing for a business to do it, but now law enforcement is also accessing it.
Again, when you have to fight the power of the State, it is very, very difficult. And we found out that automatic license plate readers are being installed near gun stores, being installed near gun shows.
Why would that be? To the gentleman from Texas, what if they are installed at your next rally? The law prohibits the Federal Government from compiling a database of those who own guns. But if we have a database of their car, their license plate, model, year of car, what time they came, what time they left, what they were carrying when they came out of the rally, the gun store, the whatever, well, maybe the government didn't get a warrant; but easy enough, Mr. Self, they just buy the data.
Now, I will say this: Myself; Representative Biggs, who is going to be the next Governor of Arizona; Representative Self, trying to save Texas, you won't find any Members more supportive of law enforcement than those three individuals and the people that come up and talk about these issues.
We want a robust law enforcement to go after criminals, to be armed with every single tool necessary for their success and their safety, but--people say: ``Well, you can't say but''--myself, Representative Self, Representative Biggs, and all of those law enforcement officers raised our hands to take an oath to defend this piece of paper that says you will not have your rights violated for expedience because it is easy, because it makes the job easier.
We want their job to be easy, but we have got to set rules here, and we have to follow those rules.
Finally, the Central Bank Digital Currency, I hear people in my office say to me: Nobody knows what you are talking about. CBDC, Central Bank Digital Currency, no one knows what you are talking about, so quit ranting about it. Well, they will know when it is too late, when they no longer have their dollar bills, when they pay with their phone or with their card, and we don't exchange--we are already not exchanging pennies. Oh, it would never happen. We are already not exchanging pennies.
The Central Bank Digital Currency means you will no longer be exchanging dollars, 20s, 50s, 100s. You will no longer exchange them. That will be done with a card. That will be done with a phone, and it will be monitored by the Federal Government at a central bank, digital, card, phone, currency, how you pay for things.
Now, maybe people say to me: Well, why should I care about the cameras? Why should I care about the kill switch? Why should I care about Central Bank Digital Currency? I am not doing anything wrong. Apparently, they haven't read Solzhenitsyn, right, because people didn't do anything wrong in the Soviet Union either.
But as often has been said--and I don't know who the quote really goes to because that is in dispute too, but governments have been known to say things like: ``Show me the man, and I'll show you the crime.''
With all of these things, that is what we are going to have in America. It is slow. It is creeping. It is insidious. It is like boiling the frog.
Representative Self from Texas and me are here to turn down the temperature. We don't want to boil the frog. We are trying to wake the frog up. Don't let this happen in the United States of America. Let's not be like the Communist Party of China with a system of social credits, because after all of this is in place, that will be next.
We say: Well, I am not doing anything wrong. I don't even go to gun shows.
Well, I don't know, there are a lot of people in this country that subscribe and ascribe to climate change theory and theology. It is almost like a religion.
Well, Mr. Self, I don't know, maybe you want to drive a 1978 F-250 with lots of carbon emissions. Mr. Self, I have got facial recognition software. I can see you in that old truck, and now I have got a license plate reader. It doesn't have a kill switch in it, but I
Well, my goodness, you are exceeding your carbon credits for the day, Representative Self. We have to shut that thing off. It is not because your daughter is pregnant. It is just because we disagree with you.
These are the powers that the government should not have. If this is a power that is available, it should be your choice whether you have it in your vehicle, whether you are surveilled on a camera, and whether you let the Federal Government determine whether you can buy something, how much of it you can buy, when you can buy it, how often you can buy it.
Then, finally, I want to talk to you about something that we see happening all across the country now: Data centers.
Now, we understand we are in an existential race against China, who calls us the enemy. They call us the enemy, by the way. China considers the United States of America an enemy, and they would like to defeat us. It is really important that we win this race on artificial intelligence, which requires the use of data centers. But the question is: Where all of these data centers are popping up, is this about the race against China for these data centers, or are we putting a data center up so that we can conglomerate data from automatic license plate reading cameras that are at this store or at that store so that that data can be bought so the other store can say: Well, how can I get this customer from going to that store to this store?
Hold on a second. I am all about commerce and competition, but my license plate and where it is and what it is doing there on what car is my business, not somebody else's business to just use. If they are going to use it, then they ought to pay me for it and ask permission or get a warrant--or get a warrant.
So I applaud my friend from the great State of Texas. I am happy to stick around and have a discussion with him, but we are trying to raise the alarm because the violations have happened. We are pretty sure the violations continue to happen if whistleblowers aren't lying to us.
We also know that some of the intelligence agencies aren't forthcoming with the information, right? So we have questions. We are here because we took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States and all of the amendments--not just some of them, not just when it is convenient, and not just to make things easy for some.
We want to protect America. We want to protect our liberties. We can do both. We have to do both. Just because we have these new capabilities doesn't mean that, suddenly, we walk away from what has made this country great.
I want to, first of all, say that this is about privacy. What we are advocating is privacy.
Mr. Speaker, 250 years ago, the Declaration of Independence had that most famous phrase: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Now, they debated happiness back in those days, and they started out with property. What is pursuit of property?
That is you own what is yours, and that included privacy, the ability of you to control what you own. What we are talking about is losing the ability to control what you own, what you buy, and where you go. That is what we are talking about, is privacy here.
Look, as the gentleman said, we support surveillance on foreign actors on foreign soil, and with a warrant, we support law enforcement to do what they need to do with a warrant.
I want to tell you a story about facial recognition. One of my staff members has a young boy. He is at camp right now, so when they dropped him off at camp, they said: Give us a photograph of your son.
They did so. What they are going to use that for is they have cameras everywhere at this camp to protect the young. What they are going to do is use AI to take one of the pictures that they take randomly, identify his son, chop out a picture with him in the middle of his campmates, and send it to the parents.
Now, that is an okay use. They agree to that, but that same capability will pick you out of a crowd with AI facial recognition. In the wrong hands--any technology in the wrong hands can be used for evil purposes.
Let's get back to cameras. The Ring doorbells, a lot of people have them. In fact, some communities have a lot of them. Law enforcement is now going and demanding--when they think there has been a crime that this camera might have seen, demanding that they be allowed to see what that Ring doorbell recorded. Again, technology can be used for good or for evil.
I want to point out that the United States--even without some of the things we are talking about here--today is one of the most surveilled nations in the world, right up there with China, Russia, some of the Middle Eastern countries. It is one of the most surveilled nations in the world, and that is before we get to CBDC.
I want to go back to Benjamin Franklin, because we are celebrating 250 years this year. Frankly, we don't need to be celebrating just the actual 250 years because we have made it 250 years. We need to be celebrating the wisdom of the Founders. Part of the wisdom is what we have talked about several times here, this statement that is so apropos to what we are discussing tonight: Those who would give up essential liberty and privacy written into the Declaration of Independence, codified in the Constitution--those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty, nor safety.
Why would the safety be temporary? It is because when people come along who will use it for evil purposes, it would not provide safety at all.
Unfortunately, there is darkness within the hearts of men and women. On occasion, we all fall short, and this Constitution exists so that we have a remedy for the times when somebody misuses the awesome power that is provided at the government level, with the use of law enforcement as the enforcer.
I think back to a time not so long ago. There was a pandemic in this country. I was in some state of shock and disbelief that our government told people that they could not work, and that they could not earn a living. They were told that they had to inject an experimental substance into their body or lose their employment. People will say that it can't happen or it can't happen again, but it did happen. It happened just a little while ago.
I am talking to people who say--I see things with my own eyes right now, and I say: ``How did they do that?''
And they said: ``It is AI.''
Mr. Speaker, 6 months ago, we didn't have the capability. We have that capability now.
FISA still exists. Facial recognition software is available. The kill switch is still being mandated for your car. Automatic license plate readers are being installed by the thousands and tens of thousands. We are on the edge--as a matter of fact, we just passed a bill about 1\1/ 2\ weeks ago with a go-live date for a central bank digital currency.
The datacenters that are going to collate all of this information are being put in every single town, in every single State and county, it seems like, across the country, and people don't even know what the datacenter is for. I think people would support them if it was to fight China, but if it is just to collect all this data about all of us, I don't think people are going to go for that.
Yet, I think that is what Mr. Self is getting at this evening. Somebody has to be the stewards of this constitutional right that we have to our own effects, our own privacy, unless there is probable cause that we did something wrong. Not we are going to sweep it all up just in case you did something wrong or just in case we don't like you, and we don't agree with what you are
To the gentleman's point, I want to end with China because a lot of people will say that this is all theory, you are overreacting, and that this is hyperbole. It will never happen here.
But China has something that they call the social credit score. They take your social credit score, and they measure you based on everything--what you buy, what you post on the internet, what you say to your fellow worker, what they see you do, how you drive, everything. Everything, the government takes into account for a social credit score, and then they will tell you how you can live your life based on your social credit score.
It is all on collected data. It is based on collected data.
Mr. Speaker, I would say to my fellow Americans that is what we are facing. We are facing a social credit score if all of this happens: the kill switch, CBDC, and warrantless surveillance on your electronic communications. That is what we are looking at if all of this happens and these cameras proliferate across America.
It has already happened. It is happening. It has already happened.
We already talked about the millions of Americans who were spied on under the guise of foreign intelligence surveillance. We have already talked about that. We have already talked about the government lying to us about the effects of the pandemic and forcing us to inject things into our bodies that were experimental.
These things aren't theory. These things aren't something that might happen in the future. These are things that did happen, are happening, and are happening at a more and more alarming rate, and are ubiquitous and becoming more ubiquitous in our society.
Let me make this point: It can get worse. What you are saying is true, but it can get worse. That is what we are trying to stop. That is why we are sounding the alarm that the surveillance state must be stopped.
The red line in the sand right now is FISA reform. Any FISA reform that does not include a permanent ban on CBDC and securing our elections, I believe, does not cut the mustard.
Well, it is interesting. Every single Republican Member here already voted in favor of limiting the government's ability to install a central bank digital currency. We have had assurances from leadership, from the top to the bottom. We are told that people in the other Chamber are all for it, as well.
It is fascinating and interesting to me that, as much as that may be true, and it is proclaimed, we simply can't seem to get an up-or-down vote on it, which leads me to believe they have every intention of instituting it.
The fact that they put a go-live date in the last bill that we passed should sound the alarm bell to every single American who doesn't want their bank accounts to be monitored and controlled by the Federal Government. Do not allow this to happen.
Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.
The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 8 o'clock and 32 minutes p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until tomorrow, Thursday, June 4, 2026, at 10 a.m. for morning-hour debate.
