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. 9137- 9169; and 3 resolutions, 1340-1342-__ were introduced.
Pages H3909-10
Reports Filed
There were no reports filed today. Speaker: Read a letter from the Speaker wherein he appointed Representative Guest to act as Speaker pro tempore for today.
Page H3833
Recess
The House recessed at 10:48 a.m. and reconvened at 12 p.m.
Page H3838
Recess
The House recessed at 1:26 p.m. and reconvened at 1:30 p.m.
Page H3864
Recess
The House recessed at 3 p.m. and reconvened at 4 p.m.
Page H3867
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure: Communication
Read a letter from Chairman Graves wherein he transmitted copies of one resolution included in the General Services Administration's Capital Investment and Leasing Programs. The resolutions were adopted by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on June 4, 2026.
Pages H3867-73
Directing the President pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution to remove United States Armed Forces from Lebanon
The House failed to agree to 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, by a yea-and-nay vote of 92 yeas to 324 nays with two answering ``present'', Roll No. 201. Consideration began yesterday, June 3rd.
Page H3874
Waiving a requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII with respect to consideration of certain resolutions reported from the Committee on Rules
The House agreed to 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, by a recorded vote of 213 ayes to 211 noes, Roll No. 203, after the previous question was ordered by a yea-and-nay vote of 212 yeas to 210 nays, Roll No. 202.
Pages H3864-67, H3875-77
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agency Appropriations Act, 2027
The House passed 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, by a yea-and-nay vote of 213 yeas to 210 nays, Roll No. 205.
Pages H3840-64, H3877-78
Rejected the Bynum motion to recommit the bill to the Committee on Appropriations by a yea-and-nay vote of 210 yeas to 212 nays, Roll No. 204.
Page H3877
Agreed to
Harris en bloc amendment No. 1 consisting of the following amendments printed in H. Rept. 119-676: Boebert (No. 1) that redirects $2 million in funding from Office of General Counsel to the Office of the Inspector General to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse; Boebert (No. 2) that redirects $2 million in funding from FPAC Business Center to the Farm Service Agency; Boebert (No. 3) that redirects $2 million in funding from Office of the Chief Information Officer to Rural Development Programs; Boebert (No. 4) that redirects $2 million in funding from Office of the Chief Information Officer to Rural Utilities Service; Boebert (No. 5) that redirects $2 million in funding from Office of the Chief Information Officer to the Natural Resources Conservation Service Conservation Operations; Buchanan (No. 6) that increases and decreases the USDA Office of Inspector General by $2 million for the purposes of enforcing existing animal fighting statutes; Figures (No. 7) that increases and decreases the United States Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) account by $2 million to encourage the CFTC to create a pilot program focused on improving digital access and financial literacy in rural communities; Figures (No. 8) that increases and decreases the Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and Broadband Program account by $1 million to prioritize telemedicine and distance learning grant applications from rural applicants located more than 30 miles from a federally qualified health center or community mental health center, with a focus on those providing mental health and substance use disorder services; Flood (No. 9) that redirects $500,000 from the Office of the Chief Financial Officer to support the National Drought Mitigation Center to maintain and update critical drought-related tools used by producers, water- managers, and USDA; enhance new monitoring and modeling; and support USDA in anticipating and reducing the effects of extreme weather on U.S. agricultural producers, livestock, and the economy; Gosar (No. 10) that transfers $2 million from the Chief Information Officer to APHIS port of entry inspections for New World Screwworm; Leger Fernandez (No. 11) that increases and decreases funding for the Agricultural Research Service by $1,000,000 for the purpose of conducting a comprehensive study on large-scale algae-based production for agricultural and livestock uses; Malliotakis (No. 12) that prohibits funding for the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, or Center for Devices and Radiological Health within the Food and Drug Administration to issue or finalize guidance recommending or requiring testing in dogs; Malliotakis (No. 13) that prohibits the National Institute of Food and Agriculture within the Department of Agriculture from funding painful research on dogs and cats; Ogles (No. 14) that ensures FDA does not deprioritize review, inspection, import screening, or shortage-mitigation activities for sterile injectable cancer drugs that are currently listed in shortage and keeps the agency focused on restoring access to critical cancer treatments without weakening FDA's safety standards; Pettersen (No. 16) that increases and decreases the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Research and Education Activities by $10,000,000 for the purposes of research using data and tools available from commercial weather services for wildfire and drought mitigation measures; Stanton (No. 17) that increases and decreases the Farm Services Agency account by $5 million to provide funding for USDA to revise the Livestock Indemnity Program and Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honeybees and Farm-Raised Fish Program to provide compensation to producers for both confirmed and probable Mexican wolf attacks on livestock; Stanton (No. 18) that increases and decreases funding for the Agricultural Research Service by $2 million for the purpose of conducting research on soil erosion and soil health in the arid and semiarid West to reduce risk of exposure to coccidioidomycosis, or ``Valley Fever''; Subramanyam (No. 21) that increase and decrease the value-added agricultural product market development grants account by $10,000,000 to emphasize the importance of value-added agricultural businesses and agritourism farms in the health of American farm economy; Sykes (No. 22) that increases and decreases funding for the Food and Drug Administration by $1 million to emphasize the importance of infant formula and toddler food safety and to demonstrate support for the FDA to consider requiring manufacturers to implement an environmental monitoring regime for contaminants, including cronobacter spp., salmonella, and botulism; Thompson (CA) (No. 23) that increases/ decreases $7,000,000 to APHIS Account to provide needed funding to address the Glassy Wing Sharp Shooter infestation discovered in California; Thompson (PA) (No. 24) that provides $2 million to fund the Grants for Youth Organizations program; decreases the Office of the General Counsel by $2 million; Vasquez (No. 25) that increases and decreases funding by $2 million for addressing challenges facing chile pepper production in the southwest and researching chile pepper farming through precision, data-driven cultivation using AI-powered innovation; and Vindman (No. 26) that redirects $2,500,000 from USDA Office of the Chief Information Officer to fund the Binational Agricultural Research and Development (BARD) Food Security Accelerator. Pages 3862-64 H. Res. 1333, the rule providing for consideration was agreed to yesterday, June 3rd. Ukraine Support Act: The House passed H.R. 2913, to authorize support for Ukraine, by a yea-and-nay vote of 226 yeas to 195 nays, Roll No. 207.
Pages H3879-96
H. Res. 518, the rule providing for consideration was agreed to by a yea-and-nay vote of 216 yeas to 204 nays, Roll No. 206.
Pages H3878-79
Meeting Hour
Agreed by unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at noon on Monday, June 8, 2026 for morning- hour debate. Page 3896 Quorum Calls--Votes: Six yea-and-nay votes and one recorded vote developed during the proceedings of today and appear on pages H3874, H3875-76, H3876, H3877, H3877-78, H3878-79, and H3895-96. Adjournment: The House met at 10 a.m. and adjourned at 10 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: 156 of 242 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 to congratulate the Delaware Black Chamber of Commerce on their recently being awarded a four-star distinction by the United States Chamber of Commerce. Earning this accreditation is no small feat and highlights the commitment to strong leadership, innovative programming, and meaningful contributions that drive economic growth and opportunity.
The Delaware Black Chamber of Commerce is just 5 years old, a testament to what is possible when we choose not to accept barriers but to break them down for the benefit of our communities.
Too often, Black entrepreneurs face higher hurdles to capital, contracts, and connections. This honor recognizes not only Delaware's refusal to accept that fact, but the DEBCC's ability to turn challenge into opportunity and opportunity into achievement.
This accreditation has been granted to fewer than 200 chambers of commerce nationwide, yet another example of the outsized impact of the smallest but greatest State in the Union.
Organizations like DEBCC are building ladders of opportunity and uplifting our neighbors in ways that positively shape our entire State, because when Black businesses thrive, Delaware thrives.
Mr. Speaker, the Delaware Black Chamber of Commerce is an outstanding representation of the First State's commitment to excellence and empowerment. I am thrilled to congratulate them on this distinct honor. Here is to the decades of progress and remarkable impact still to come.
Mr. Speaker, tomorrow, students at Cab Calloway School of the Arts, my alma mater, will walk across the stage, receive their diplomas, and take their first step into whatever comes next for them.
Across Delaware and around the country, thousands of students will do the same as they celebrate graduations of every kind, from high school, college, technical programs, and military training.
I wanted to take a moment to congratulate Delaware's graduates and reflect on the hope that comes with this season.
Every generation is saddled with challenges. Today's graduates will be asked to navigate rapid technical advancement, growing economic uncertainty, and corrosive polarization, but a generation isn't defined by the obstacles it inherits. It is defined by how it confronts those challenges and the future it builds.
In Delaware, I am consistently reminded of the drive and dedication that define the next generation. I see curiosity where others often see cynicism. I see creativity where others see obstacles. I see a generation that is eager to meet challenges with solutions, not just to inherit the future but to shape it.
Young people are the pilots of progress. They see our Nation and our world as the unfinished project that it is, and they strive to make it better.
To everyone graduating this year, dream big, stay curious, and never stop believing in the promise of our Nation. I am confident that you will continue the tradition of leaving our Nation fairer, freer, and more just than you found it.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Deputy Brent Reimer of the Kewaunee County Sheriff's Department for receiving the Wisconsin Professional Police Association's 2026 Certificate of Merit.
This honor recognizes Deputy Reimer's lifesaving actions on November 29, 2025, when he helped rescue a choking individual during a medical emergency.
Acting quickly alongside local first responders, Deputy Reimer used an airway suction device to clear the obstruction and help save the individual's life.
What makes this story even more extraordinary is that before this incident, it was Deputy Reimer who took the initiative to research the device and recommend it for use in the department. Because of that foresight, not only was he able to save this individual's life, but now patrol officers, schools, and nursing homes have access to this lifesaving tool.
Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating Deputy Reimer on this well-deserved award, and I thank him for his service to Kewaunee County and northeastern Wisconsin.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize local leaders across northeastern Wisconsin who have worked tirelessly to support communities impacted by recent flooding.
In April, communities throughout Wisconsin's Eighth District experienced record rainfall with severe weather over several days, causing rivers to overflow their banks, damaging homes, businesses, and infrastructure.
Since then, I have remained in close contact with local leaders and witnessed firsthand how people come together to support one another. Their resilience in the face of devastation has been truly inspiring.
I especially thank the leaders in Shiocton, New London, and Fremont, which were among the hardest hit, for their unwavering dedication to helping their communities recover.
From county executives and sheriffs to emergency management officials and first responders, we are lucky to have such dedicated leaders in northeastern Wisconsin.
Mr. Speaker, when times get tough, Wisconsinites come together. I commend our local officials for their leadership, and I want them to know that I will continue to stand with them every step of the way.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Officer Kelin Charles of the Kewaunee Police Department who recently received an award for his lifesaving actions during a medical emergency in Kewaunee.
On November 12, 2025, Officer Charles responded to what appeared to be a routine call from a man who had passed out. Out of an abundance of caution, he brought Narcan with him in case the situation involved an overdose, a decision that proved critical when he found the man unresponsive.
Officer Charles immediately began lifesaving care. Working alongside other first responders, CPR was performed, an AED was used, and Narcan was administered. These actions gave the man a chance to breathe on his own again.
In a moment of crisis, Officer Charles' decisive actions gave this individual a second chance at life.
Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing Officer Kelin Charles for his quick action, service, and dedication to the people of Kewaunee and northeastern Wisconsin.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a northeastern Wisconsin native, who recently finished his UW-La Crosse track career with a national title.
Luke Schroeder won the NCAA Division III national title in the 110- meter hurdles with a record-breaking time, finishing in a stunning 13.42 seconds.
This is not the first time Luke has gone out on top. During his high school athletic career at Ashwaubenon High School, he won the WIAA Division I State 300-meter hurdles title in his final race.
Schroeder had to overcome many odds to get to this championship victory, from a bulging disc in his back during his sophomore year to the COVID-19 pandemic in his junior year to running on a pulled quad during his senior year. His perseverance shows just how dedicated he is to this sport.
Mr. Speaker, as Luke's career comes to an end, I want to congratulate him on this record-breaking achievement and wish him the best of luck as he begins training for the 2028 Olympics and in all future endeavors that he may pursue.
Mr. Speaker, today, I rise to recognize and celebrate Mayor Beniamino Mazzulla, affectionately known as Benny, of Stone Park, Illinois, on his 25th anniversary as a servant mayor.
Born in Calabria, Italy, Mayor Mazzulla immigrated to the U.S. with his parents in 1976. His family settled in Stone Park, the community he would later dedicate himself to serving.
Mayor Mazzulla's commitment to public service began in 1995, when he served for 2 years as a police officer with the Memorial Park District.
Since taking office as mayor, he has worked tirelessly to strengthen his community by creating programs that support seniors, homeowners, and children; expanding family-oriented activities through a resident- led special events committee; and introducing bilingual village newsletters to ensure that all his constituents get the information they need.
Mayor Mazzulla takes great pride in both his community and his immigrant heritage as a beloved husband, father of three, grandfather, and fluent speaker of English, Italian, and Spanish.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Mayor Mazzulla on this milestone. I thank him for his 25 years of dedicated leadership and enduring commitment to the residents of Stone Park.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the 100th anniversary of Banner Wholesale Grocers, a proud cornerstone of the Chicago business community.
Since its founding in 1926 by Ben Friedman, Banner Wholesale Grocers has served as a trusted partner to independent grocers throughout Chicagoland and across the Midwest.
With a selection of more than 6,000 American and Hispanic products, the company helps local retailers meet the diverse needs of their customers. Its knowledgeable and bilingual team provides the personalized service that has distinguished Banner for generations.
Through a century of hard work, family dedication, and commitment to convenience and quality, Banner Wholesale Grocers has built lasting relationships and earned the trust of countless businesses and families throughout our region.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Banner Wholesale Grocers on 100 years of success. I thank them for their enduring contributions to Chicago and the Midwest. I look forward to seeing many more decades of their success.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today because there is a gun violence epidemic in America. I have spoken loudly and clearly on gun safety again and again, shooting after shooting.
Moments of silence have never been enough. Thoughts and prayers have never been enough. Americans need real action by Congress to end gun violence. They need us to make good trouble.
After Congress decided to do nothing in the aftermath of the horrific shooting at Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, I helped organize a sit-in with my late colleague and friend, John Lewis, and other Members. We sat on this very floor for about 24 hours.
If the people in charge refuse to pass gun safety legislation, I will always make sure that Americans know there are Members of Congress who actually represent their needs and demands.
I continue to echo their voices in this Chamber. We need to pass lifesaving gun safety laws. That means universal background checks, funding and support for community violence intervention organizations, safe storage laws to prevent unintentional shootings, an assault weapons ban, and standard marketing practices to hold the gun industry accountable.
We know those solutions to end gun violence, yet the Trump administration refuses to act. Instead, President Trump and Republicans reversed the progress we have made over the past few years. On day one in the Oval Office, President Trump shut the doors of the White House Gun Violence Prevention Office.
Since then, he continues to pour salt into injury after injury. The Department of Justice terminated over $66
CVI organizations are led by trusted community members who offer job training, mental health resources, de-escalation tactics, and more to keep our neighborhoods safe. CVI strategies are proven, evidence-based solutions to gun violence, yet this administration decided they are inefficient.
After a gunman stormed the White House Correspondents' Dinner, President Trump didn't want gun safety reform. He wanted a ballroom. He wanted to keep himself and his billionaire donors safe while over 120 Americans continue to die every day.
House Republicans are complicit in the Trump agenda to endanger public safety. They are trying to jam through bills that would allow people to mail guns through the United States Postal Service, eliminate background checks, and allow domestic abusers to buy guns.
Make no mistake: They are making our country less safe.
I was proud to play an essential role in passing the first Federal gun safety legislation in nearly 30 years, but Americans cannot wait another 30 years for Congress to act.
We have lost daughters and sons, nephews and nieces, brothers and sisters, and mothers and fathers to gun violence.
One daughter's name was Hadiya Pendleton. Hadiya was a bright student, involved in marching band and volleyball. She was on top of the world when she led her marching band in President Obama's second inauguration. Just 1 week later, she was shot and killed in a park in Chicago.
Hadiya's friends and family started the Wear Orange movement to raise awareness of gun violence. Hunters wear orange to avoid being shot. Now, the color orange has become a beacon for action and advocacy against gun violence.
Today, I introduce the Wear Orange Resolution in honor of Hadiya and every victim of gun violence, just as I have since 2015.
I ran for office because I couldn't stand by and watch as Congress did nothing as children like Hadiya, those in Newtown--and I could go on and on and on--were killed, and also those that have been injured mentally and physically.
While gun violence became the leading cause of death for all children and teenagers in 2020, it has been the leading cause of death for Black children since 2006.
I swore my first oath of office a few months after Hadiya was shot in the Second District. Since then, I have never stopped fighting for victims and survivors of gun violence, and I never will. I will never give up this effort because this epidemic must end.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank the first responders who have worked tirelessly to respond to the hazmat crisis at the GKN Aerospace plant in Garden Grove.
Over Memorial Day weekend, our firefighters, police officers, and other emergency personnel worked around the clock to keep our community safe.
They quickly evacuated over 50,000 residents and businesses who could have been injured by a major explosion.
At the beginning of the crisis, our emergency officials were told that there were only two options: a disastrous explosion or a catastrophic leak. But to our public safety heroes, that was unacceptable, and they accomplished what was initially thought impossible. They neutralized the tank and got our neighbors back in their homes without any dangerous chemicals leaking into our water or air.
I especially thank Orange County Fire Authority Division Chief and Incident Commander Craig Covey, Fire Chief TJ McGovern, Garden Grove Police Chief Amir El-Farra, and Orange County Health Officer Dr. Regina Chinsio-Kwong.
Their leadership was instrumental in mitigating this crisis, and their communication to my office and my constituents was instrumental in keeping our community safe.
The evacuation was lifted last week, the incident has transitioned out of the emergency response phase, but we still need more.
While our community avoided catastrophic physical damage, 50,000 residents and 5,000 small businesses still face major hardship. Families had to spend their emergency funds on unplanned hotel stays, extra grocery runs, and extra supplies and medication.
Businesses lost multiple days of critical revenue over a holiday weekend. People who worked in the evacuation zone missed out on multiple days of wages because their workplace was forced to shut down.
We need to make them whole. I have called on the Small Business Administration to issue its own disaster declaration to open Federal resources for small businesses, and I am calling on GKN Aerospace to compensate the families and small businesses who have lost money because of their crisis.
GKN leadership informed me last night that they are establishing a $3 million fund through United Way to provide relief for those with the greatest financial need.
While this decision is a necessary acknowledgment that they have broken faith with our community, it is insufficient. Every family and small business that was displaced or shut down during this crisis deserves full compensation. I expressed that, and this is nonnegotiable.
It is not enough to just cut checks for the damage already done. We need to make sure that a crisis like this can never happen again. Today, I am advancing legislation to ensure that defense contractors notify the community they operate in of any hazardous chemicals that put residents at risk.
Beyond that, companies must submit to regular third-party audits of their safety practices. Industries must invest in the most advanced, safest technologies that mitigate the risks of a major accident.
Orange County was lucky. We had no deaths and no injuries, but the events in Longview, Washington, remind us of how devastating the worst- case scenario can be.
As my community was picking up the pieces of our hazmat disaster in Garden Grove, we heard the terrible news from the Nippon Dynawave Packaging Company: 11 people perished in a chemical explosion.
My prayers are with the families, and I join their community in the cause for justice and accountability.
In Orange County, the worst is over for now, but our community is still reeling. We need answers. We need accountability. We need justice. I am not going to stop fighting until my community gets the recourse they deserve.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the retirement of my friend and a true Lehigh Valley legend, Coach Barry Search of Parkland High School.
For more than three decades, Coach Search helped shape the lives of countless student athletes. As the head softball coach, he led Parkland to seven conference championships, five district titles, and a Pennsylvania State championship in 2015. Along the way, he built a program known not only for its victories, but for instilling character, discipline, and teamwork in his players.
His service extends far beyond the softball field. Coach Search spent decades as a science teacher, assistant football coach, volunteer firefighter, and fire chief, dedicating his life to serving others.
As he retires, we thank Coach Search for his contributions to Parkland, South Whitehall Township, and our entire community.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an extraordinary student in our region, Emmaus High School junior, Zining Fan.
Recently, Zining became the first student in Emmaus High School history to compete at the Regeneron International Science and Engineering Fair, one of the world's most prestigious STEM competitions, bringing
After advancing through local and State competitions, Zining earned second place in the world in the mathematics division for his original research on knot projections, developing a new mathematical theorem that had never been established before.
His achievement reflects not only exceptional talent and dedication, but also the strength of STEM education in the Lehigh Valley and the Poconos.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Zining, his family, his teachers, and the entire Emmaus High School community on this remarkable accomplishment.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Dr. Percy H. Dougherty of Wescosville, who passed away on May 17 at the age of 83.
Dr. Dougherty dedicated his life to education, public service, and the advancement of the Lehigh Valley. As a professor and department chair at Kutztown University, he mentored generations of students and helped shape the field of geography.
As a Lehigh County Commissioner for 28 years and a member of the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission for nearly four decades, he played a leading role in guiding the growth and development of our region.
Dr. Dougherty will be remembered for his intellect, dedication, and commitment to improving the community he called home.
As a friend, I also recognize he had a great sense of humor, and I always enjoyed speaking with him when I saw him at local events.
Mr. Speaker, I extend my deepest condolences to his wife, Anne; his sons, Robert and Thomas; his grandchildren; and all who had the privilege of knowing him.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Center Valley resident and World War II veteran Walter Rybarczik who recently celebrated his 105th birthday.
Walter served in the U.S. Army Air Corps as a radio operator and gunner aboard B-24s in the Pacific theater. He flew dozens of dangerous missions in service to our Nation, demonstrating extraordinary courage and dedication.
As we recognize this remarkable milestone, we also honor a generation whose sacrifice, service, and patriotism helped secure the freedoms that we enjoy today.
As we recognize this remarkable milestone of Walter's 105th birthday, the people in the Lehigh Valley want to congratulate Walter and also thank him for his service to our country.
Mr. Speaker, this National Gun Violence Awareness Month, I rise today thinking about families in Ohio's 13th Congressional District, families whose lives were changed forever by gun violence.
One of those families is still grieving the loss of LaTeris Cook, a 27-year-old father of four who was killed during a mass shooting at a neighborhood block party in Akron just 2 years ago. What should have been a joyful summer gathering turned into chaos and tragedy. Twenty- eight people were shot. An entire community was and remains traumatized.
Megan Keleman was a recent college graduate who was killed in a Taco Bell drive-through in Tallmadge, Ohio. Her killer, a man who was not allowed to have guns, not only killed her but killed himself in a tragic situation. Her family now mourns her death by advocating for gun safety programs.
Another Akron family continues to carry the pain of losing Cortez Davis, Sr., who was shot and killed in 2021 while picking up a child for a birthday celebration. His mother, Delonda Glover, now works with antiviolence organizations in Akron to help prevent other families from experiencing the same heartbreak. She said something that captures the pain so many families carry after gun violence: ``Losing a child is a different kind of hurt and pain.'' She is right.
Finally, my friend Ericka Weems was killed in 2020 in her home. The crime has gone unsolved, despite national attention. We lost a beloved friend, daughter, educator, and sister.
Because gun violence leaves permanent scars on families and communities long after the headlines fade, my heart goes out to the Cook family, the Glover family, the Keleman family, the Weems family, and every family in Ohio's 13th Congressional District and across the country who are trying to heal after losing loved ones to senseless and preventable violence.
While these tragedies occurred in my district, the truth is they could have happened anywhere in America: schools, grocery stores, movie theatres, workplaces, birthday parties, the United States Capitol. Too many Americans feel like a shooting can happen anywhere at any moment.
Already this year, our country has experienced more than 160 mass shootings. Last year alone, more than 24,000 Americans died by gun suicide.
Since 2020, firearms have been the leading cause of death for children and teenagers in the United States.
In my district, Akron police have responded to 562 calls involving shootings or shots fired through the end of April of this year. That is a 21 percent increase compared to the same time last year.
These are not just statistics. These are children, parents, friends, neighbors, entire communities being forced to rebuild again and again.
But to the people of my district and to the people across America, this threat of living with gun violence every single day, I want to tell you this: It does not have to be this way. We can stop the cycle of violence.
Four years ago, Congress proved progress is possible when we passed the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, the most significant gun safety legislation in decades, because Democrats and Republicans came together to expand background checks, close the dangerous boyfriend loophole, crack down on illegal gun trafficking, invest in mental health services, strengthen school safety, and fund community intervention programs that are saving lives now.
Yet, there is so much more work to be done. It also shows that when Congress chooses courage over politics, we can make our communities safer.
Yet, today, instead of building on that progress, this administration is moving us backward. Just weeks ago, the Trump administration announced efforts to roll back key gun safety protections, including weakening enhanced background checks established under the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, rescinding restrictions on stabilizing braces, and repealing the bump stock ban that President Trump himself put into place after the deadly Las Vegas shooting in 2017.
There are now even proposals that could make it easier to mail handguns through the postal system, opening the door to more gun trafficking and more dangerous weapons flowing into our communities.
Mr. Speaker, if you talk to any law enforcement agency, they will tell you that guns continue to create a problem for the work that they do every day. They encourage us to be smarter on gun safety regulations and ensuring that not only are the communities safer but that those who are sworn to protect and serve us can be safe in their communities, as well.
These rollbacks are a choice, Mr. Speaker, and my constituents cannot wait any longer. Americans are demanding action. They want safer schools, neighborhoods, and communities.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an extraordinary event on Florida's Space Coast.
At the 2026 Space Coast Enlistment Ceremony, more than 230 young men and women took the next step in their commitment to serve our Nation by enlisting in the United States Armed Forces. This is a remarkable event and was the vision of Brevard Public Schools Board Chair Matt Susin, whose leadership helped create a meaningful opportunity to honor these young Americans as they begin a life of service.
As the father of a servicemember, I recognize that these individuals are choosing a path defined by duty, sacrifice, and love of their country. They will serve in the Air Force, Marine Corps, Army National Guard, Navy, and Coast Guard, carrying forward the legacy of those who have defended our freedoms in the past.
The ceremony also brought together 241 Junior ROTC cadets from across Brevard County, a reminder that the next generation is already preparing to lead.
On the Space Coast, we understand freedom is protected by those who are willing to step forward, and today we honor these enlistees, their families, and the leaders like Matt Susin and the members of the Brevard County Schools Board, who are helping to inspire the next generation of American service.
Strengthening Port Canaveral and Florida's Space Coast Ceremony
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight a major investment on Florida's Space Coast.
I was proud to join local leaders at Port Canaveral to announce a $20 million Federal grant that will support the construction of new cargo berths that will strengthen one of the Nation's most important ports.
Port Canaveral is far more than just a cruise destination. It is a critical economic engine for our region, supporting jobs, commerce, and supply chain necessary to keep Florida moving.
This investment will expand not only the cargo capacity but the overall infrastructure that is needed in challenging times. For the Space Coast, this means more opportunities, more jobs, and continued economic momentum for the families and businesses that call the Space Coast home. They will have the fuel necessary in all times of trouble.
This is exactly the kind of practical investment that we need to continue to make sure Florida continues to lead the Nation in growth.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Darcia Jones Francey, a true champion of Brevard County whose impact will be felt for generations.
A third-generation Brevardian, Darcia devoted her life to making her community and our community stronger. She was known as a connector of people, someone who brought together people in support of causes that mattered and endured. This effort is not unnoticed.
Darcia served on countless boards and different community groups, supporting organizations across the Space Coast, from the arts to healthcare and programs helping those truly in need. Her dedication as a volunteer and community work leader helped raise awareness, build partnerships, and strengthen the fabric of Brevard County.
Darcia also had a unique ability to make everyone around her feel valued and important, leaving a lasting impression on all of us who knew her.
Today, we remember Darcia not only for what she did but how she lived--with purpose, passion, and a deep love of our community.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an outstanding veteran, entrepreneur, and leader from Florida's Space Coast, Alec Hall.
Alec is the president of Alliance Cyber, a service-disabled, veteran- owned small business based in Cocoa, Florida.
Through Alec's leadership, Alliance Cyber provides cybersecurity and IT solutions that protect government agencies, nonprofits, and businesses across our State and beyond.
Alec's impact goes far beyond business. Through the Alliance Cyber Gives Foundation, his team supports STEM education, workforce development, and career pathways for transitioning servicemembers, investing directly in the next generations.
It is because of these efforts that we recognize Alec Hall and the amazing work at Alliance Cyber.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the outstanding programs provided by the Village of Port Chester that benefit the senior citizens of that community.
Under the able leadership of Maryann Nielsen in the Port Chester Senior Community Center in Village Hall, the Port Chester Seniors serves hundreds of seniors annually with a daily nutrition program at lunchtime 6 days a week, along with activities and programs to engage seniors of all ages, including on Saturday, which is unique among many other programs.
There are fitness classes from tai chi to chair yoga, mental fitness programs, a variety of board games--mah-jongg; bridge; along with the classic senior staple, bingo. Maryann and her talented crew host annual events, as well, for Valentine's Day, Mother's Day, St. Patrick's Day, and a host of celebrations. There are day trips planned to shopping locales and tourist sites, as well.
The programs are supported by the village board under the leadership of Mayor Luis Marino and Village Administrator Stu Rabin.
From the floor of the House of Representatives, we salute the work of the Port Chester Seniors, the active and energetic members that show that age is more a state of mind.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate Pride Month.
As a supporter of the LGBTQIA+ community and a member of the Congressional Equality Caucus, I rise to honor the achievements in the fight for equality but also refocus on the work that lies ahead.
Many of the champions in the fight for equality are organizations like the LOFT Center in White Plains, New York. This organization provides acceptance and access for the LGBTQIA+ community in the wake of the current administration's attacks on equality.
The LOFT Center offers services ranging from support services, educational seminars, health screenings, training series for allies and businessowners, silver connections for members over 55, and much more.
I commend them for being a champion in this fight, and I am proud to represent such a welcoming district, where people are judged by the content of their character. We will work to ensure that everyone has a place where they are accepted, even in the face of prejudice.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to condemn the intentional dismantling of affordable healthcare in our country.
Following the big, ugly bill last July, which failed to extend the premium tax credits critical to lowering the cost of healthcare for working families, Affordable Care Act enrollment for 2026 has fallen to about 23 million people, a decline of just over 1 million people.
Studies predict that this may climb to as many as 5 million people dropping out of the ACA market by the end of this year alone. This isn't surprising given that the last year represented the highest increase in deductibles ever.
Many Americans have shared their stories about how they cannot afford to take on the rising premiums, and my colleagues choose instead to prioritize nonsense legislation and policies that do nothing to address real problems.
Mr. Speaker, more people will die younger or put off preventative health visits if they do not have access to affordable healthcare. If we will not address America's healthcare situation head-on, then let those of us who are willing to address the situation take action.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of June as National Gun Violence Awareness Month.
As one Minnesotan wrote: ``I am standing up for our children because we are adults. It is our responsibility to make them feel safe.''
I have a stack of notes here from hundreds of Minnesotans who came together after the mass shooting at Annunciation Catholic School, demanding action; calling for commonsense reforms; expressing their grief, anguish, and frustration; and begging for their elected leaders to do something--anything--to respond to the tragedy that left an 8- year-old and a 10-year-old dead, hundreds more forever traumatized, and a community reeling.
What are we doing if we are not listening to the American people and not protecting our children? We need to listen to the American people. We need to act to keep our children safe. We need to ban assault weapons, bump stocks, and high-capacity magazine sales, get weapons of war off of our streets, invest in addressing our Nation's mental health crisis, and the list goes on.
There won't be one policy alone that will end this public health crisis, but what we can't do is nothing. There are so many steps that we could take immediately. Gun violence is an epidemic that has stained our country, and we are going in the wrong direction.
As our country faces hundreds of mass shootings every year, more mass shootings than any country on the face of the planet, the Trump administration is taking an ax to our Nation's gun safety laws and doing the dirty work of the big gun lobby, rolling back dozens of Federal safety regulations, making it easier for criminals to buy and ship guns, cutting funding, and abandoning critical gun violence prevention programs that keep our communities safe. They are doubling down on the number one killer of children in the United States of America.
Gun violence is preventable. Our children deserve to be our priority. They deserve to feel safe. They deserve adults who will act.
Every day we are here in Congress, we are creating the world that our children will inherit. We should be creating a world where children feel safe at school, where they can be healthy and thrive, not where they live in fear and see adults refusing to protect them.
Mr. Speaker, I want to share some examples of what Minnesotans wrote:
``My students should not have to worry about being killed at school.''
``I shouldn't have to worry about if my kids are safe at their school and daycare.''
``My grandchildren go to school every day, and I worry they will be victims. I also am devastated they will live their school lives in fear.''
This is tragic. This is heartbreaking, and this is preventable. It doesn't have to be this way. We don't have to live like this.
We could choose to take steps to make our children and our communities safer. We could create a world with far less gun violence, where people don't live in fear of it, if only Congress had the courage to act.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the lives lost in a horrific, senseless act of violence that took place in Sandy, Oregon, on May 31, 2026.
This is an ongoing investigation. More information will continue to come out in the days and weeks to come, but what we do know is that the Sandy Police Department responded to a domestic violence call that escalated into a deadly shooting that claimed the lives of 37-year-old Jenna Mary Overson, 70-year-old Mary Beth Overson, and 16-year-old Kobyn McClure, and left the entire community fearing for their lives and sheltering in place.
This horrific tragedy has left family, friends, and our entire community grieving from an unimaginable loss and shaken from, once again, senseless violence.
What has stayed with me this week, as our community has begun to process this tragedy, is Kobyn McClure's courage, which deserves to be known far beyond Sandy.
Kobyn was a kind, respectful, and compassionate young man who stepped forward to protect young children in the face of unimaginable fear and danger. Loved ones and community members have shared that his actions during this tragedy helped save the lives of children caught in the middle of this violence.
Though only 16 years old, Kobyn demonstrated a level of bravery and selflessness that many aspire to throughout their entire lives. His actions reflected the very best of our shared values: courage, sacrifice, and a commitment to protecting others, a commitment that Congress would be well to follow.
Kobyn's family, friends, classmates, and neighbors remember him as a young man with a bright future, generous spirit, and heart for others. His legacy will endure through the lives touched and the example he has set for us all.
Jenna Mary Overson was a devoted mother remembered by her friends for her generosity, kindness, and unwavering commitment to her children and loved ones. Her loss leaves an immeasurable, unimaginable void in the lives of those who knew her.
Mary Beth Overson was a beloved mother, grandmother, and friend, whose family and community now mourn a loss that cannot be measured.
Amid this tragedy, we are reminded of the extraordinary dedication of our law enforcement officers and first responders. Members of the Sandy Police Department, the Clackamas County Sheriff's Office, medical personnel, and assisting agencies responded swiftly to a dangerous and evolving situation. One Sandy police officer, Sergeant Garrett Thornton, was seriously wounded multiple times by gunshots while responding to protect others and confront the threat.
We are grateful for the bravery and professionalism demonstrated by every officer, deputy, firefighter, paramedic, and emergency responder who put themselves in harm's way to protect the people of Sandy.
The Sandy community has shown remarkable strength in the days since. Neighbors have come together to grieve, heal, and stand beside one another. Sandy is showing us and the whole country what it looks like to hold together through the unthinkable.
I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the memory of Jenna Mary Overson, Mary Beth Overson, and Kobyn McClure by recognizing Kobyn's extraordinary heroism, thanking the first responders who put themselves in harm's way, and keeping the entire Sandy community in our hearts as they continue to heal.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Sergeant Martin Lugo, a 24-year-old veteran from Tucson, Arizona, who was killed after being wounded during a combat operation in Afghanistan.
Sergeant Lugo enlisted in the United States Army while still a student at Tucson High School. At the time of his death, he was serving on his sixth deployment, having previously completed three tours in Afghanistan and two in Iraq. He served our Nation with extraordinary courage, dedication, and a deep sense of duty.
But Martin was far more than his uniform. He was a son, a friend, and someone deeply loved by his family, friends, and fellow soldiers. Those who knew him remember his generosity, humor, intelligence, adventurous spirit, and his remarkable ability to bring people together. He embraced life fully and led with both strength and compassion.
I also thank Maria, his mother, for allowing me to share Martin's story today.
As we remember Sergeant Martin Lugo, we honor his life, his service, and the sacrifice carried every day by the families of those who serve.
In Maria's words: ``The way we can honor their service is by doing the best we can for ourselves, for each other, and for our country.''
Mr. Speaker, June is Pride Month, a month celebrating the contributions of the LGBTQ community, but it also must be a month of speaking hard truths.
Texas has more anti-trans murders than any other State in the Nation. Over half of Texas victims are Black transgender women.
We cannot celebrate Marsha P. Johnson and not protect the women who look like her.
Last week, Persia Amarra Conway was killed in Houston. She was 33 years old. She was loved, and she is not alone. Jade Roberts, Diamond Brigman, Muhlaysia Booker, name after name after name, were all from Texas, all taken from this Earth, stripped from their loved ones and from their communities.
These killings are happening across our country, and silence is not an option. This Pride Month, I say clearly: We must stop the targeting and killing of members of the trans community in Houston, in Texas, and across our Nation.
Mr. Speaker, 58 years ago this night, in Los Angeles, California, a violent murder occurred. That night, in the Ambassador Hotel, a major candidate for President, Robert F. Kennedy, Sr., was assassinated and denied the right to complete his campaign. No one knows what alternate history might have played out had Bobby lived.
I was 14 years old at the time when my father woke me to go with him to see the breaking news on TV in the middle of the night.
Two months before, the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was murdered much the same way.
If you are under the age of 60, you don't remember either night. It is a matter of historic reference, not lived experience.
After the King assassination, I remember hearing on the radio the voice of my United States Senator from New York say: ``No one can be certain who next will suffer from some senseless act of bloodshed.'' In 60 days, we found out who was next.
Columbine, Parkland, Charlie Kirk, Sandy Hook, Islamic Temple of San Diego, Temple Israel in Detroit, time after time. When gun violence claims innocent lives, some Americans still assert their right to hold highly destructive weapons as necessary for their protection under the Second Amendment rights. They resist any and all gun control. Nothing protects them from the madman who gains access to the weapon.
We treat these deaths as unfortunate outcomes of our society's ideological unwillingness to rein in weapons of destruction.
Mr. Speaker, it is a sad tale told over six decades and counting.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the extraordinary Colman McCarthy, an accomplished writer, philosopher of nonviolence, Catholic activist, educator, golfer, and runner, who cut a singular figure in Montgomery County, Maryland, and in the Washington, D.C., area.
Colman spent his life and his career challenging war, militarism, and what President Eisenhower called the military-industrial complex, writing every week a column that was beloved by thousands of people.
But Colman was not always a famed peace activist. He nearly became a PGA champion and also a Trappist monk before finding his life's work as an educator for peace.
Students who took his classes at BCC High School remember him coming to school on his Raleigh three-speed bicycle and the only homework assignment he ever gave his students: to tell someone that you love them that day.
I hope his memory remains an eternal blessing to our community and a source of joy and comfort to his three sons, John, James, and Edward; his six beloved grandchildren; and to all of his many students, friends, and admirers, among whom I count myself.
A link honoring the life and career of Colman McCarthy can be found at: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/09/business/media/colman-mccarthy- dead.html.
Mr. Speaker, today, I rise to honor the life and legacy of the esteemed elder, Davis Washines, known to many as ``Yellowash,'' of the Yakama Nation.
Washines was a Yakama citizen who took on many roles in his community. He served as police chief, was a fierce advocate for fishing rights and the environment, and was chairman of the Yakama Nation Council.
I had the honor of working with him throughout the years on issues, including Tribal rights and law enforcement,
He will be sorely missed by the entire Yakama community, the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, and all those who knew him.
My deepest condolences are with his family and loved ones during this difficult time.
Mr. Speaker, faith, service, and community came together in a truly powerful way at Walnut Grove Missionary Baptist Church in Roanoke Rapids, North Carolina, where love was not just spoken; it was put into action.
Men on a mission traveled from across the country, answering the call to help build a new church home for the Walnut Grove church family. Volunteers set aside their time not for recognition but because they believe in the power of serving others through Jesus Christ. With skilled hands and servants' hearts, these volunteers are using their talents and Christian faith to make a lasting difference. When people come together with willing hearts, incredible things happen.
Thanks to Pastor Arrington and through faith and teamwork, Walnut Grove's next chapter is being built one act of service, one prayer, and one brick at a time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today with tremendous gratitude and pride to recognize Korean war veteran Ralph Lawrence Gardiner of Longville, Minnesota, as he celebrates his 96th birthday.
Ralph enlisted in the United States Navy in 1952, answering the call to serve during a critical moment in our Nation's history. He primarily served aboard the USS Bushnell, out of Key West, Florida, as a metalsmith, where he welded and fabricated ships and submarines. His ship played a vital role in transporting troops to and from Korea, supporting the brave Americans defending freedom overseas.
During his service, Ralph was awarded the Good Conduct Medal and the National Defense Service Medal, reflecting his exemplary behavior, discipline, professionalism, and devotion to duty.
Even today, living on his own at 96 years old, Ralph continues to embody the strength and dependence and determination that had defined his life for decades.
As he reaches this remarkable milestone, we honor not only his longevity, but also his outstanding service to our Nation, his dedication to his family and community, and the legacy he leaves for future generations.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Nordonia High School girls' flag football team as Ohio's 13th Congressional District's Champion of the Week.
The Nordonia High School girls' flag football team is Ohio's first girls' flag football State champions.
Girls' flag football only became a sanctioned sport in Ohio last July, but even before that, these young women were working hard to bring the State championship home.
Nordonia was one of six high schools that attended the Cleveland Browns inaugural flag football jubilee event back in 2021 and have since been fighting for this sport to become sanctioned and recognized in Ohio.
I congratulate Head Coach Steve Holtz, quarterback Hayden Paul, and all of the players on their well-earned victory in bringing home the inaugural championship trophy. Their passion is laying the groundwork for generations of young women and girls in sports, and we are so proud of them.
I often call our district the birthplace of champions because of basketball greats like LeBron James and Steph Curry, and now this Nordonia girls' flag football team certainly proves that this legacy continues, no matter the sport or your gender.
Mr. Speaker, I extend my congratulations to these outstanding student-athletes and commend them on being named champions of the week.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 8646, and that I may include tabular material on the same.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Maryland?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1333 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 8646.
The Chair appoints the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Evans) to preside over the Committee of the Whole.
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the 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, with Mr. Evans of Colorado in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the first time.
General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed 1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations, or their respective designees.
The gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Harris) and the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Harris).
Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chair, I rise today to bring before the House H.R. 8646, the fiscal year 2027 Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agency Appropriations bill.
I thank Appropriations Committee Chairman Cole for his leadership and quickly moving the fiscal year 2027 appropriations process forward.
I also recognize the ranking member of the full committee, Ms. DeLauro, and the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Subcommittee ranking member, Mr. Bishop, for their work in getting us to this point.
I appreciate the conversations Mr. Bishop and I have had, and while we may not agree on everything in the bill, I know that we are much closer to agreement than some of today's debate and rhetoric may show.
For fiscal year 2027, the subcommittee's discretionary allocation is $26.27 billion, a $380 million, or 1.4 percent, decrease from fiscal year 2026 enacted levels.
In a setting of $2 trillion deficits, these modest spending reductions are necessary.
This legislation reflects a clear, necessary commitment to fiscal responsibility, while ensuring that America's farmers, ranchers, and rural communities remain a top priority and that all Americans have access to a safe food and drug supply.
This legislation builds on the successful efforts of the Trump administration to root out fraud, waste, and
It sets USDA on a responsible and sustainable spending path that will make both the Department and our Nation stronger.
Under President Trump's and Secretary Rollins' leadership, every taxpayer dollar will be spent in the pursuit of putting all American farmers and ranchers first.
I would like to highlight a few areas where the legislation supports the administration's efforts to refocus the Department on its core mission by prioritizing essential functions in a fiscally responsible manner.
The bill provides $1.16 billion for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, or APHIS, to support the Department's efforts to protect our producers from highly pathogenic avian influenza, New World screwworm, and other foreign plant and animal diseases.
The legislation continues to invest in the delivery of farm programs, disaster assistance, and crop insurance to farmers by prioritizing funding for farmer-facing functions.
Following the budget request, the bill moves $50 million of Farm Service Agency IT funds from FSA to the Office of the Chief Information Officer to continue to invest in and implement USDA's One Farmer, One File Initiative.
After accounting for this transfer of funds, no matter what you will hear from the nay-sayers, the bill actually increases overall funding for FSA staff, including for county office staff.
The bill provides important investments in critical agricultural research that will keep our producers on the cutting edge of technology and production practices.
We maintain funding for USDA's flagship competitive grant program, the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative, and protect capacity funding for our land grant universities to ensure our farmers and ag workforce remain competitive with China.
This legislation continues to fund vital rural development programs, including critical infrastructure investments in water and wastewater systems and housing programs, as well as increasing the loan authority for the business and industry and rural electric programs due to increased demand.
For the Food and Drug Administration, the bill provides $3.36 billion in direct appropriations. With increased user fees, FDA has a total budget of $7.1 billion to enable the agency to keep food, drugs, and medical devices safe and effective, as well as advance the Make America Healthy Again initiatives highlighted in the President's budget.
Finally, let me discuss WIC. The bill provides full funding of $8 billion for WIC, which is about 3 percent lower than last year's enacted level, but USDA data clearly shows that WIC participation has been declining and is not projected to be as high as originally estimated for fiscal year 2027. USDA also expects to have sufficient carryover funds to meet all the program needs, if necessary.
With lower participation estimates and increased carryover funding, the $8 billion allocated will fully fund the program. Let me say it one more time. Despite what the naysayers will claim, WIC is fully funded for its needs. No women or their children will lose or be denied coverage.
I believe a credible evaluation of this legislation will conclude that it balances the funding needs of the USDA, FDA, and CFTC while being responsible stewards of our constituents' hard-earned tax dollars. As Mr. Bishop has said, this is a good faith effort to meet the moment, and there are critical things that warrant support.
I am pleased that the bill received bipartisan support out of committee, and we want to keep working with the minority as we move forward in this process.
In closing, I ask for Members' support of this legislation. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 8646. As ranking member of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, I am deeply disappointed by this bill because it fails every American who relies on us for safe food and medicines, resilient farmlands, and vital rural infrastructure.
The FY 2027 House Agriculture appropriations bill is 4 percent below the FY26 enacted levels, a cut of $1.1 billion. It makes substantial reductions across rural development, farm production and conservation, nutrition, and foreign aid programs.
Most notably, House Republicans are proposing to drastically reduce fruit and vegetable benefits for 5 million low-income women, infants, and children in the WIC program. With funding for WIC below 2026 and rising food costs, the National WIC Association says it is quite possible that State agencies will have to turn away eligible families for the first time in 30 years.
To my Republican colleagues and the American people, I ask, does this make sense? Do we not want fresh and healthy food for women, infants, and schoolchildren? Do we want to keep turning this country back instead of moving it forward?
While there is an unauthorized war in Iran, a single week's spending for the war could fully fund WIC for almost an entire year. What is worse, the Department of Defense admits that 25 percent of our servicemembers and military families do not have access to sufficient quality food to meet their basic needs.
The majority is willing to spend billions of dollars overseas but not willing to feed the American troops fighting the war?
This bill not only hurts those struggling to afford to put food on the table, but it also hurts our farmers. There were 46 percent more farm bankruptcies in 2025 than the year before, and the issue is getting worse. USDA's own economists expect farm income to decline by $4.1 billion from 2025 to 2026.
Just as our producers are getting hit with increased fuel and input costs from this unauthorized war and chaotic tariffs, this administration has gutted the experienced Federal workforce and shuttered offices when our producers and rural communities need them the most.
My colleagues and I across this country have gotten calls from farmers and ranchers who tell us that they are showing up to closed or understaffed Farm Service Agency, Rural Development, and Natural Resources Conservation Service offices. The staff they have worked with for years are disappearing, and the cuts to staffing in this bill at those very agencies will only make it harder for them to get the support that they need.
House Republicans also cut funding for water and wastewater grants for poor rural communities, slashing the programs by nearly 50 percent. These are basic human needs, quality-of-life necessities, and essential drivers for local job creation. There are still communities in rural areas across this country that don't have acceptable drinking or wastewater services that need these grants desperately.
This bill slashes rural broadband investments by 20 percent, rural business development grants by nearly 30 percent, and rural energy programs by 50 percent.
We cannot shut the door on our rural communities at a time when we need to do the opposite: invest in research at our land-grant universities and in rural development, preserve our farmland and forests, and ensure the safety of our food, medicine, and medical devices.
This bill is really about everyone. Everyone eats the food we produce. Everyone needs safe medicine and clean water. Everyone relies on affordable fuel and utilities. Unfortunately, the bill before us does not meet our country's needs.
The bill cuts funding for both the Office of Inspector General and the Office of Ethics at USDA, which are responsible for rooting out fraud, waste, and abuse. It slashes funding for the Office of Civil Rights. It nearly does away with the Office of Partnerships and Public Engagement, which means less transparency and less accountability to USDA stakeholders.
I appreciate very much the hard work of the Appropriations Committee staff and their ability to work so quickly after the much-delayed Presidential budget request. On the minority side, I thank Martha Foley, Marie
I also appreciate my colleague, Dr. Harris, very much for agreeing to keep essential funding for rural housing, senior food aid, and the McGovern-Dole food assistance intact. It is simply unfortunate, though, that the bill does not extend the same benefits to nutrition assistance, food security initiatives, and USDA operations.
I am very appreciative of the conversations that we have been able to have with Chairman Harris and the hard work with Chairman Cole and Ranking Member DeLauro in trying to get to a point where we can do what we need to do for the American people through this funding bill.
At this time, I urge my colleagues to oppose the bill and look forward to working with both sides to craft a better bill for our constituents and the American people.
Mr. Chairman, first, I want to reemphasize that WIC is fully funded. Given the decreased participation rate and fully funding the reserve, WIC is fully funded.
Mr. Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), the chairman of the Appropriations Committee.
Mr. Chair, I thank my very good friend, Chairman Harris, for the time.
Today's fiscal year 2027 Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Act recognizes a simple truth: When American agriculture is strong, America is strong.
This measure puts that principle into action. The bill before us supports farmers, ranchers, and rural communities, and invests in research to keep the United States competitive. It invests in food safety through important inspection resources and protects American agriculture from foreign pests and diseases. It reinforces an America First approach by ensuring policies that favor products produced right here in the United States.
At every level, the health and well-being of Americans and our communities are prioritized. We strengthen rural development, implement broadband investments, and reinforce the integrity of critical food and medical supply chains. We also uphold access to nutrition resources by fully funding SNAP and WIC, as well as increasing resources for child school food programs.
Supporting American families also means protecting the Nation and the critical resources we depend upon every day.
It is why the bill further reinforces key national security priorities by tightening oversight of foreign purchases of agricultural land and strengthening FDA oversight of foreign drug manufacturing facilities.
Safeguarding assets and reducing vulnerabilities in these critical areas is significant to defending American resources and reducing strategic vulnerabilities.
And just as importantly, it restores focus and accountability by cutting wasteful programs, eliminating Biden-era regulations, and holding every dollar to a higher standard.
From the farm to the dinner table, this measure puts Americans first by strengthening agriculture, protecting public health, and supporting economic opportunity across the country.
I thank Chairman Harris for his leadership in crafting this bill, and I appreciate his working partnership with Ranking Member Bishop, as well as the hard work of the majority and minority staff.
Mr. Harris and Mr. Bishop may be in different places today, but I have watched them work through the process before and come to common ground, and I am quite confident that will happen again.
Frankly, the process in many ways is just as important as the policy. Having our second full-year appropriations measure on the House floor reflects the commitment to regular order, thoughtful oversight, and the Article I responsibility entrusted to Congress by the American people.
Madam Chair, the chairman has said that spending on WIC in 2026 was lower than in 2025. I point out that there was a government shutdown from October 1, 2025, to November 12, 2025. In October, faced with running out of funds, States asked infant formula companies to send out rebates faster so they could keep running their programs. Using the formula rebates made the average per-person food cost in October 2026 $9 lower than in 2025. But if you discount that month, the average monthly food cost in 2026 was higher than in 2025, not lower. We will do what we always do, and we will get the most accurate estimate for conference from the USDA, and we will use that number.
I yield 6 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), the distinguished ranking member of the full Appropriations Committee.
Madam Chair, I thank the ranking member for yielding. I want to begin by commending Ranking Member Bishop for his leadership on the Agriculture Subcommittee and thank him for his efforts on the legislation. I want to acknowledge the hard work of Chairman Harris on the committee and also my friend Chairman Cole.
Let me also say a thank-you at the outset to the staff: Martha Foley, Alex Swann, and Marie Gualtieri on the minority side; and their counterparts on the majority side: Pam Miller, Elizabeth Dent, Judd Gardner, Nick Seelinger, and Sykes Connell, as well, for all of their work.
I rise in opposition to the bill before us today. It will raise costs for farmers, cut aid for families, and reduce crucial support for rural communities.
In 2025, nearly 7 million women, children, and infants received support through the WIC program. These are families who are struggling to put food on the table, who are doing all that they can to stay afloat while costs for everything from groceries to gasoline continues to go up.
WIC is not fully funded. That includes cuts to the fruit and the vegetable voucher program. Specifically, vouchers, again, for fruits and vegetables have been cut. Denying women, infants, and children full access to nutritious fruits and vegetables is hardly a way to Make America Healthy Again.
WIC works. Multiple studies have found that WIC participation reduces the risk of adverse birth outcomes like premature birth or low birth weight, that it lowers infant mortality, and that it leads to a healthier overall diet for young children.
But this bill does not allow participants to recertify or enroll in the program remotely by failing to extend this option beyond the September 30, 2026, deadline. This is just another cut in disguise.
This option has been invaluable in helping more eligible Americans access their benefits. It has allowed working people to be able to certify without having to travel long distances or take time off from their work.
Virtual recertification is a proven process. It eliminates barriers to access for so many people. It allows more efficient use of taxpayer dollars and making sure that people can feed their families while maintaining program integrity. The American people deserve programs that work to support them and do not impose unnecessary burdens.
This bill also cuts the Food for Peace program by $300 million. That is about 25 percent. This will take money out of the pockets of the American farmers who grow the food that sustains the program while taking food out of the mouths of hungry children around the world who rely on it for their next meal. This is a lose-lose proposition. It is both immoral and irresponsible.
More than 2.2 million Americans do not have access to basic plumbing and running water in their homes, and this problem is even worse in rural areas. Yet, this bill cuts funding for waste and water development programs in rural communities by $62 million. Instead of solving the problem, this bill makes it worse, leaving more Americans without access to basic necessities that we should all expect in the United States.
This bill cuts funding for ReConnect Broadband by 20 percent, a program
As I mentioned a moment ago about hurting farmers and rural communities, the cuts to rural water and waste disposal grants are about 4 percent. Rural business development grants have been cut by 28 percent. The Rural Energy for America Program, or the REAP program, has been cut by 50 percent.
And I would just say to my colleagues that we have a document here that gives you a State-by-State impact of Republican cuts. So it is in black and white. We are not making up the numbers.
It drives growth, the programs that we are talking about. The internet program, it drives growth. It connects people to job prospects and career training. It improves access to medical care. It is crucial at a time when more and more rural hospitals are closing down thanks to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. It expands educational opportunities, helping to ensure that every child is equipped to succeed in the economy of the future.
This bill also eliminates protections for small meat and poultry producers. It is a gift to their larger corporate competitors, which the American Farm Bureau, I might add, is opposed to.
It brings back partisan culture war provisions that have been stripped out of previous Agriculture-Rural Development-FDA bills.
In its current form, this bill raises costs for American farmers. It takes food away from hungry families. It cuts off support for rural communities, and it loudly bangs the divisive culture war drums once more.
I want to encourage my colleagues to oppose this legislation and also encourage my Republican colleagues to work with the Democrats to fix the many serious problems that this piece of legislation contains.
Madam Chair, I will just remind the Chair that we actually provide an additional $250 million in business and industry loans for rural business and industry, and given that there are 100,000 fewer participants in WIC, we fully fund the program.
Madam Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Newhouse).
Madam Chair, I rise today in support of the fiscal year 2027 agricultural appropriations legislation as well as in support of farmers, ranchers, and producers across this Nation.
As a third-generation farmer myself in central Washington, I know firsthand the challenges facing farm country as they produce the food, the fuel, and the fiber for consumers both here and around the globe.
In this legislation we provide key support for international food aid, including the Food for Peace and the McGovern-Dole Food for Progress programs, helping to lift developing nations out of poverty while providing export markets for our farmers right here at home.
We continue critical investments in agricultural research, promotional efforts, loan programs for rural communities, and assistance for specialty crop producers.
This legislation also ensures that the Secretary of Agriculture remain a member of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States to prevent the Chinese Communist Party from purchasing our farmland, which is a matter of national security.
As we find ourselves nearly $40 trillion in debt, we must rein in spending. We must get our fiscal house in order, and we must ensure taxpayer dollars are spent as efficiently as possible.
Madam Chair, this bill does this. This is a good bill.
I thank Chairman Harris and Chairman Cole, as well as Mr. Bishop and Ms. DeLauro and the entire committee staff for their work on making this important piece of legislation as good as it gets.
Madam Chair, I urge all of my colleagues to support it.
Madam Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz), who is the distinguished ranking member of the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee and a member of the Agriculture Subcommittee.
Madam Chair, I rise today to speak in strong opposition to this bill. I am a proud member of the Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee, but right now, our Nation's agricultural economy is in shambles.
Florida is known as a tourism mecca, but our number two economic driver is agriculture.
Our farmers, ranchers, and growers work tirelessly to put food on our table. They need real help, and they need it right now.
On the front end, this President's illegal tariffs body-slammed them, and then this administration's botched war sent fuel and fertilizer costs through the roof. Markets are now as volatile as the extreme storms and droughts they face every year, while this White House not only ignores the problem, they make it worse every day.
Clearly, we should be investing in our hardworking farmers, giving them the tools and resources they need to keep our country fed. Instead, this bill consciously chooses to make life even harder for them by cutting funding for the Department of Agriculture by more than $1.1 billion. It cuts staffing for the Farm Service Agency, which helps farmers access Federal financial help. It contains massive giveaways to the largest meat and poultry producers, yet fails to invest in ag research needed to grow more crops faster and more cheaply.
Madam Chair, do you know who pays for that?
It is our constituents at their local grocery store.
This legislation also directly harms nearly 7 million new mothers, babies, and children who count on the nutrition program for Women, Infants, and Children, or WIC, with cuts of $200 million.
This bill also continues House Republicans' endless assault on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, SNAP, slashing the most effective antihunger weapon the Federal Government has by $6 billion.
When grocery costs skyrocket, SNAP puts food on the table for working families, seniors, people with disabilities, and children. Every dollar cut from SNAP doesn't just disappear from a budget. It shows up in a hungry belly.
Worse still, this bill still continues America's withdrawal from the global stage by decimating international hunger assistance programs, leaving a massive void that China will gladly fill. This bill also makes our food and drug supply less safe, cutting roughly $60 million in discretionary funding from the FDA and boosting the chance that you will bite into your favorite snack, Madam Chair, and find large traces of heavy metals.
For example, this bill blocks FDA's food traceability rule from going into effect until 2028, even though ``Consumer Reports'' recently found high levels of arsenic, lead, and mercury in baby food, infant formula, bubble tea, and dark chocolate.
No one should have to question whether the food they eat is safe, not in this country, but that is another anxiety Republicans want to heap onto our families.
This is a bad bill that does nothing to help our farmers, new moms, children, or any of our constituents who are struggling to make ends meet.
I didn't come to Congress to make life worse for hardworking Americans, so I have no choice but to oppose this bill, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.
Madam Chair, I thank Representative Harris for his leadership as the subcommittee chair of this great committee, and our ranking member, Mr. Bishop. They are two fine gentlemen who have shepherded this bill through. I know it is not perfect for everyone in the room, but I think it is a step in the right direction for the American people.
Madam Chair, I rise today in strong support of our Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act.
This is a fiscally responsible bill that puts our farmers, our ranchers, our consumers, and rural communities first.
It strengthens agricultural research, it protects animal and plant health, it improves food safety, and it makes sure that taxpayer dollars, which we should be concerned about each and every day here, are put first.
For Missouri's Fourth Congressional District, which I have the honor of representing, this bill delivers real wins and real results for them. I was proud to secure more than $4 million in direct Federal investments in our communities.
These are reasonable, responsible, and rational programs and investments that will modernize the Cass County Sheriff's digital forensics unit. It will improve water systems in beautiful Lexington, Missouri. It will build a new public safety facility in El Dorado Springs. It will upgrade wastewater infrastructure in Higginsville, and it will modernize 911 services in Morgan County near beautiful Lake of the Ozarks.
This legislation also reinforces national security by addressing the rising crisis of foreign ownership of U.S. agricultural land while also strengthening oversight of critical supply chains.
Most importantly--most importantly--it supports American producers. It supports rural America, and it advances an America First agenda that works for all families in America.
Together, we are making American agriculture great again. I am proud to be a part of that, and I am proud to be on the Appropriations Committee.
Madam Chair, I urge all my colleagues to get behind this bill. Let's move it forward, and let's put another notch on our belt to get these appropriations bills off the House floor, once again, and over to the Senate.
Madam Chair, it is interesting, looking at the State of Missouri from which Mr. Alford resides, they will lose, in terms of wastewater, $5,567,000 under this bill as compared to last year. In the Fourth District of Missouri, he will lose $467,000.
Madam Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Mrs. Fletcher).
Madam Chair, I thank Ranking Member Bishop for yielding.
Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to this bill and to object that House Republicans on the Rules Committee failed to include the amendment that I offered to increase and decrease funding for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service by $10 million to focus on the threat of New World screwworm.
Yesterday, we learned that the New World screwworm has been found in Texas.
This is something that Texans have been worrying about and have been warning Washington about for nearly 2 years. This flesh-eating parasite, previously eradicated from the United States, poses a huge threat to our cattle, and Texas is home to the largest cattle population in the country. There are more than 12 million cattle, and it is a nearly a $15-billion cattle industry.
We have not seen a screwworm outbreak since the 1970s. It cost the United States hundreds of millions of dollars and took years to eradicate and contain.
An outbreak today will be devastating to U.S. livestock producers and drive up already high costs for beef at the grocery stores that all Americans will see.
Now, for decades, our country has remained relatively pest-free thanks to the hard work of the USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, which is tasked with eradicating and keeping dangers like screwworm at bay.
Last March, though, the Trump administration fired more than 15,000 USDA employees, including more than 1,300 staff at the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, leaving our farmers and ranchers vulnerable.
Plus, the DOGE team, in their infinite wisdom, eliminated a program to contain the screwworm in Central America. This is what happens when you do not listen to the experts and the people who know what they are doing.
Congressman Vicente Gonzalez, who represents south Texas, has warned people in Washington that USDA experts have told him we need to be producing 700 million sterile flies, but the administration hasn't listened.
The threat of New World screwworm is just one consequence of the Trump administration's reckless campaign to eliminate funding for government programs and research initiatives that our country invests in and that Americans rely on. Importantly, this Congress has utterly failed to do anything about it and failed to stop it.
Rebuilding our Federal Government's capacity to respond swiftly during crisis takes time, and as Texas farmers and ranchers can tell you, we are witnessing a crisis unfold before our eyes right now.
Madam Chair, for these reasons and the many others my colleagues have identified, I will be voting against this bill, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.
Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Chair, just to keep the record straight, we actually increased funding for New World screwworm by $4.5 million this year. We count on timely amendments being submitted, but when you submit something just before the bill comes to the floor--we will work with the gentlewoman and we will work as we go through the process to address the threat. We have been addressing it, and we will continue to do it. But that is the reason why the amendment was not included.
With regards to the FDA, the comment was made that somehow we are decreasing funding to the FDA. Just so everyone understands, Madam Chair, there are two sources of funding for the FDA: discretionary funding and the funding based on user fees.
When the funding based on user fees goes way up, we can decrease the discretionary to keep the level adequate. Overall funding for the FDA is up $150 million this year. It has not decreased. Yes, the discretionary part has decreased. But we are making the companies who use the FDA pay the balance, and I think that is good for the American taxpayer.
However, just to resolve anyone's fears, our FDA funding goes up $150 million under this bill.
Madam Chair, I can't say that I am surprised that my Republican colleagues want to cut yet another resource to help women and children get food.
This bill reduces the fruit and vegetable benefit for mothers and young children under WIC, and this goes against actual science-based evidence that tells us what families need to stay healthy.
Cutting these benefits leaves 5.3 million moms and kids without reliable access to fresh fruits and vegetables.
But here is the real kicker: The administration's own Make America Healthy Again report praises WIC's success in increasing fruit and vegetable consumption.
Now, right here on page 34, read along with me. It says: ``WIC has a proven track record of improving children's health.'' It is right there, page 34.
Madam Chair, we know that these benefits work and these benefits help parents bring home apples instead of ultraprocessed snacks, carrots instead of empty calories, and healthier options across the board that set children up for success.
Now, we hear a lot of talk from the same people who are trying to cut these benefits about making America healthier. If they were serious about that goal, I wouldn't have to be standing here right now.
Madam Chair, we should be making it easier for families to afford healthy food, not harder.
For this reason, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to recommit this bill back to committee. If the House rules permitted, I would have offered this motion with an important amendment to this bill.
My amendment would restore the cut this bill makes to the WIC fruit and vegetable benefits and adjusts them to keep up with inflation.
I will keep fighting to make sure that nothing, not inflation and not out-of-touch Republicans in D.C., get to
I hope my colleagues will join me in voting for the motion to recommit.
Madam Chair, I include in the Record the text of my amendment.
Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Chair, let's address the nutrition programs as yet once again.
The SNAP participation rate year over year from February '25 to February '26, that is the last month we have data from, is down 7 percent.
Thank goodness 7 percent fewer Americans actually need the food, need SNAP assistance. So what did we do? We decreased the budget 6 percent. We actually didn't even decrease the budget as much as the participation rate went down. SNAP is fully funded.
Let's talk about WIC. February '25 to February '26--the last month we have available is February '26. Year over year, a decrease of 150,000 people on WIC. That is about 2.5 percent. That is exactly what we decreased the budget by. Why would we budget for people who don't exist?
In the setting of a $2 trillion deficit, why would we put that money in a bill? We have a reserve, $150 million reserve in WIC. God forbid that participation rate goes up because of economic principles or maybe more Americans have children, the money is there. WIC and SNAP are fully funded for the participation rate. Anything else you hear is scary rhetoric.
Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chair, I am really deeply disappointed in the bill. I am just reflecting on the reductions in this bill for rural water and waste disposal grants, 44 percent over last year.
If you look at what is happening with the chairman's district over in Maryland, the State of Maryland will lose $2.203 million for rural water and waste disposal grants and in the First District, it is $1.340 million of that.
The losses for rural energy for America and the REAP program are being cut 50 percent. That is really not doing right by our people in rural America. Being able to lower their energy costs, being able to help our farmers reduce the costs of their production, particularly at this time with the tremendous challenges that our farm communities are facing with costs, it just doesn't make sense to me.
At a time when our farmers are struggling, our rural communities are being left behind, and our families all across America are facing rising costs, this bill moves us in the wrong direction. We should be strengthening the programs that support agriculture, nutrition, and rural America, and we shouldn't be weakening them.
Mr. Chair, for these reasons, I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill and to come together to work toward a measure that truly meets the needs of America's farmers, families, and our rural communities.
Mr. Chair, let's review some of the things we have heard and some of the facts about the bill.
I will start by saying that when Gallup polls the American public, the American public thinks that 43 cents out of every Federal dollar is wasted. That amounts to 43 percent of the Federal dollar wasted, in the minds of Americans. The President was elected to increase the efficiency of the Federal Government, realizing that Americans think 43 percent of the money is wasted.
Mr. Chair, this bill reduces the spending from the enacted level by 1.4 percent.
Now, Americans are probably going to be disappointed because they think that we are wasting 43 cents on a dollar, so why are you only cutting it by 1.4 percent? Because we carefully looked at the programs. We think that is the start we need to make to deliver the assistance that our farmers, ranchers, and rural populations need, given the context that we have to make the government work more efficiently. We think that is what this bill does.
Let's talk about the wastewater. Again, there are two buckets of what affect water and wastewater management in rural areas: a bucket of grants and a bucket of loans.
The grants have been decreased somewhat, but grants make up 10 percent, roughly, of the amount of money available for wastewater programs in rural areas.
We maintained a billion dollars of loan authority for those programs. It was maintained in the bill. We recognized that these rural communities need help, and we generously make loans available to the communities that could not otherwise find funding anywhere else.
We talked about the FDA. The FDA has a $150 million increase when you count on the fact that what we did is said if companies using the FDA for licensing and approval are paying a user fee, and those user fees are going up, the amount collected is going up, we can decrease the amount that the average American taxpayer has to throw into that kitty. That kind of makes sense.
I think that is what the American taxpayer would want. If those drug companies are making money on licensing those drugs, they should pay more of the cost of licensing the drugs. That is exactly what happens under this bill.
We talked about WIC and SNAP. I will just reemphasize that the participation rate in both programs goes down, so we lowered the amount that we allocate to those programs proportional to the decrease in participation rates. That is just good accounting for the American people.
Mr. Chair, this bill achieves a balance that is not easy with a $2 trillion deficit, a $40 trillion debt, and an American public that believes the Federal Government wastes 43 cents of every dollar. This achieves the balance we need to maintain funding to the programs that are necessary and to make sure that we deliver for our farmers, ranchers, and rural communities. Again, we delivered to the nutrition programs while keeping in mind that we have to be very good stewards of the taxpayer dollars because there aren't enough of them to go around.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment under the 5-minute rule. The bill shall be considered as read.
The text of the bill is as follows:
Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics
Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs
funds for strengthening markets, income, and supply (section 32)
Office of the Under Secretary for Farm Production and Conservation
rural electrification and telecommunications loans program account
Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer
Office of the Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural
mcgovern-dole international food for education and child nutrition
The Acting CHAIR. Points of order against provisions in the bill for failure to comply with clause 2 or clause 5(a) of rule 21 are waived.
No amendment to the bill shall be in order except those printed in House Report 119-676, amendments en bloc described in section 3 of House Resolution 1333, and pro forma amendments described in section 4 of House Resolution 1333.
Each amendment printed in House Report 119-676 may be offered only in the order printed in the report, by the Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment except as provided by section 4 of House Resolution 1333, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question. All points of order against such amendments are waived.
It shall be in order at any time for the chair of the Committee on Appropriations or his designee to offer amendments en bloc consisting of amendments printed in House Report 119-676 not earlier disposed of. Amendments en bloc shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective designees, shall not be subject to amendment, except as provided by section 4 of House Resolution 1333, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question.
During consideration of the bill for amendment, the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective designees may offer up to 10 pro forma amendments each at any point for the purpose of debate.
Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 1333, I offer amendments en bloc as the designee of Chairman Cole.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 1 consisting of amendment Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, and 26, printed in House Report number 119-676, offered by Mr. Harris of Maryland.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1333, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Harris) and the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop) each will control 10 minutes.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in favor of this amendment. This is a bipartisan set of amendments en bloc, which includes priorities from Members on both sides of the aisle.
I appreciate Ranking Member Bishop working with us on these amendments and ask for your support.
Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the amendments. The amendments include bipartisan and noncontroversial proposals that have been agreed to by both sides. I support adoption of the amendments, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, as co-chair of the Congressional Animal Protection Caucus, I rise in support of my amendments that are included in this en bloc.
My amendments build on the progress that Congress has already made to modernize Federal research practices, reduce unnecessary animal suffering, and ensure taxpayer dollars are spent responsibly.
The first provision would prohibit the FDA from using taxpayer funds to issue or finalize new guidance documents that recommend or require dog testing for human drugs or medical devices.
More than 3 years ago, Congress ended the FDA's century-old animal testing mandate. Yet, the agency continues to rely on outdated guidance and, in some cases, issues new guidance that pressures companies to unnecessarily conduct tests on dogs before products can be moved to human trials.
Modern, human-based technologies, including organs-on-chips and other advanced testing methods, are often faster, more accurate, and more predictive of human outcomes than traditional dog testing.
The second provision would prohibit USDA funding for significantly painful research on dogs and cats conducted through the National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
Americans love their pets. They are members of our families. Taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize painful experiments on dogs and cats when Congress and Federal agencies have already recognized that these practices should be restricted.
During President Trump's first administration, USDA closed its last remaining cat experiment lab. Congress and the Department of Veterans Affairs have already acted to restrict painful dog and cat testing, and the Department of Defense has likewise ended funding for these practices. This week, we saw EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, our former colleague, announce the goal of eliminating all animal testing by his agency by 2035.
My amendments promote better science, greater accountability, and more humane treatment of animals. They reflect the growing bipartisan consensus that we can advance medical innovation while reducing animal suffering and using taxpayer dollars more responsibly.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support my amendments.
Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the amendments en bloc and specifically on the amendment introduced by me, Representative Valadao, and Representative Costa.
Across my district and in many wine-producing regions of our country, growers are facing a growing threat from a vector known as the glassy- winged sharpshooter, an invasive pest that spreads Pierce's disease amongst the grapevines and kills vineyards.
For many communities, wine grapes are not just a crop. They are the cornerstone of local economy, supporting farmers, small businesses, tourism, and thousands of jobs.
In California alone, the wine community generates sizeable tax revenues at the local, State, and Federal level.
In 2025, the wine economy generated nearly $85 billion in economic activity and paid nearly $6.5 billion in State and local taxes and almost $8 billion in Federal taxes.
If we fail to act, the consequences will be severe. Vineyards that have taken years to establish can be damaged or destroyed, threatening livelihoods and putting significant economic activity at risk.
This amendment recognizes that reality. While it does not provide the funding itself, it sends an important signal as the House and Senate--
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from California.
Mr. THOMPSON of California.--as the House and Senate move toward conference, that additional resources are needed to combat this invasive pest and protect American agriculture, communities, and our economy.
We can pay this now or we can pay a lot more and suffer the devastation if we delay.
Mr. Chair, I urge all my colleagues to support this.
Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Harris) for his leadership on the Committee on Appropriations' Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies.
Mr. Chair, I rise in favor of this en bloc package that includes five of my amendments.
In Colorado's Fourth Congressional District, agriculture is the lifeblood of our communities. I represent thousands of hardworking farmers and ranchers who are raising livestock, growing wheat, corn, millet, and other vital crops that feed our Nation and power their local economies.
My amendments do not increase spending by a single dollar. They redirect $10 million in existing funds from administrative offices and back-office bureaucracies to important programs in the USDA that will help our farmers, ranchers, landowners, and rural communities.
My amendments redirect additional resources for rural utility services and rural development programs in rural communities to help strengthen infrastructure and economic opportunity.
One of my amendments redirects funding to the Farm Service Agency, which works directly with producers to administer farm programs, disaster assistance, and conservation initiatives.
I am also redirecting funding to the Natural Resources Conservation Service operations.
Mr. Chair, I urge everyone to support these important amendments.
Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment No. 22, which calls on the FDA to require infant formula and toddler food manufacturers to implement an environmental monitoring regime for deadly contaminants like botulism and salmonella.
A recent Consumer Reports study found potentially concerning levels of contaminants in more than half of the tested infant formula samples, and we have seen similar reports on heavy metals and contaminants in toddler food.
Parents shouldn't have to worry about whether the food they feed their children is unsafe, and we need to do better.
The report for this bill includes language I requested to strengthen the testing for heavy metals, but we must also monitor for environmental contaminants so we can prevent outbreaks before they happen, like the botulism outbreak from earlier this year.
I urge my colleagues to support this en bloc and to also support my INFANTS Act, which would empower the FDA to take the appropriate action to protect our precious babies.
Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment with Representative Thompson in favor of the urgent emergency funding to address the glassy-winged sharpshooter infestation recently discovered in California.
California is the Nation's leading wine-producing State, and our table and wine grape growers support thousands of jobs in the Central Valley and beyond.
Unfortunately, the industry is facing a serious threat from an emerging outbreak of the glassy-winged sharpshooter. The glassy-winged sharpshooter is an invasive pest that transmits a lethal bacterium that chokes and kills grapevines. There is no cure once the infection occurs, and the sharpshooter's high mobility and rapid
Last month, the California Department of Food and Agriculture and the Fresno County Agricultural Commissioner identified an infestation at a nursery that distributed infected grapes throughout the State. At least 23 counties have already received affected plants, and another 15 counties are expected to be impacted.
If this pest spreads across the State, our growers could face more than $100 million in annual costs to control the damage. At a time when specialty crop industries are already struggling with rising input costs, this is a burden they just can't afford to absorb.
Our growers have already stepped up and have done their part. Since 2001, the industry has invested more than $60 million of its own resources to combat the pest and protect California agriculture, but the scale of this outbreak requires a coordinated Federal response.
This amendment supports an additional $7 million for the APHIS Specialty Crop Pests account, helping ensure USDA has the resources necessary to work alongside growers and State officials to contain this threat before it is too late.
It is a reasonable investment that supports an industry already heavily invested in its own success and protects growers from circumstances beyond their control.
Mr. Chair, I thank Congressman Thompson for his leadership on the issue and look forward to working with him to elevate the need for immediate funding from the USDA, if needed, or to get this additional funding included in this bill.
Mr. Chair, I rise to speak in favor of my amendment to conduct a comprehensive study on large-scale algae production for agricultural and livestock uses.
Algae doesn't sound exciting, but the reality is it could be cheaper feed for livestock, cause fewer methane emissions, and lead to a higher conversion rate of protein. Dairy cows fed algae produce higher milk yields.
Growing algae could also help the economies of Sun-drenched rural areas like New Mexico. Our bright, yellow Sun can help grow green for our cows and our ranchers' pocketbooks.
So let's make something that is cheaper, more nutritious, and better for our planet more accessible to our ranchers. But to get there, we need better research into this feed source. Commercial algae for agriculture is an emerging frontier, and it makes sense for USDA to conduct the studies we need to make it widely available.
Let's pass my amendment and make our ranchers, potential algae farmers, and cows happier.
I urge my colleagues to support this en bloc package and my amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered by the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Harris).
The en bloc amendments were agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. The Chair understands that amendment No. 15 will not be offered.
The Chair understands that amendment Nos. 19 and 20 will not be offered.
There being no further amendments under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Baumgartner) having assumed the chair, Mr. Loudermilk, Acting Chair of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 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, and, pursuant to House Resolution 1333, he reported the bill, as amended by that resolution, back to the House with sundry amendments adopted in the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment reported from the Committee of the Whole? If not, the Chair will put them en gros.
The question is on the amendments.
The amendments were agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 1(c) of rule XIX, further consideration of H.R. 8646 is postponed.
Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the Rules Committee met yesterday and produced a rule, H. Res. 1336, providing for same-day authority when the House considers the forthcoming reconciliation measure from the Senate.
Granting same-day authority will allow the House to advance this legislation to President Trump's desk for his prompt signature and fulfill our commitment to fully fund CBP and ICE so that they can continue their mission of defending the homeland.
Yesterday at the Rules Committee, we heard all sorts of chapter and verse that funding ICE and CBP isn't an emergency. We heard that we should focus on all sorts of other things besides funding law enforcement. It doesn't surprise me given the pitiful record on both backing the blue and securing the border.
As opposed to listening to the rhetoric on the other side, let's look at their record. During the Biden administration, CBP recorded more than 2 million got-aways. That is almost double what was tracked during the previous decade. That is 2 million people who were able to cross into our Nation without any record of who they are.
The Biden administration granted more than 1.3 million inadmissible
The record of Republicans in standing for border security, national security, and the rule of law is crystal clear. Republicans understand the threats posed by our Nation's adversaries, and we are the ones leading the charge to confront those threats, protect the homeland, and protect the American people.
Following the joint military action against Iran and the subsequent regional attacks, there is significant increase of potential threats and retaliatory terror attacks on U.S. soil. We know terrorists are in our country. That isn't rhetoric. It isn't hyperbole. It is a fact, a fact made even more real when more than 380 individuals on the terrorist watch list crossed the open border under Joe Biden's watch.
As Americans face increased threats, it is as important now--more than ever before--to fund ICE and CBP so that the Nation remains safe. Funding these two agencies is a mandate on the part of Congress, not some sort of suggestion that we are to take lightly. Fund ICE. Fund CBP. Protect the homeland now.
That is what Republicans will do. That is the mandate that we will uphold.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx) for yielding me the customary time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, this bill, effectively, lets the majority bring a bill from the Rules Committee straight to the floor in the same day, which would not normally be in order.
Mr. Speaker, what could be such an emergency that Republicans need to pass a special rule to give themselves the authority to jam through at lightning speed? Could it be affordability? No, nothing on affordability.
Could it be lower gas prices or ending the war in Iran? No, nothing there.
Could it be a bill to bring down housing or healthcare costs? Nope. Guess again.
They are passing a special rule to help them jam through billions of dollars more for ICE and CBP, what amounts to yet another blank check for agencies that have violated court orders, terrorized communities, killed American citizens in cold blood, and operated with virtually no accountability.
These agencies already got a massive payday in Trump's big, ugly bill. In fact--and get this--they have more money than they know what to do with. They still have $100 billion--billion with a b--sitting in the bank that they haven't spent yet. These are lawless agencies already flush with cash. For some reason, now Republicans are rushing to give them even more?
I mean, around here, that is what has become an emergency. It is not the cost of groceries and not the cost of gas. No. The emergency is that Donald Trump's immigration policies might have to wait for another blank check.
I mean, give me a damned break. This majority moves at lightning speed when Trump wants something. They move at lightning speed when billionaires want another tax cut. They move at lightning speed when corporate donors want another giveaway. Yet, when regular people need help, suddenly everything is impossible. Can't do it.
When families needed affordable healthcare, Republicans went home. When people demanded that the Epstein files be released, Republicans stalled, they delayed, and they obstructed. That continues.
When working people asked Congress to do something about Trump's tariffs that are driving up prices, Republicans blocked the vote. When we tried to force a debate on Trump's illegal war, Republicans tried to shut that down, too.
That is the pattern, Mr. Speaker. That is the pattern. When Trump says jump, they ask how high. Yet, when the American people ask for affordability, this place grinds to a halt.
This is about priorities, Mr. Speaker. Republicans want to hand tens of billions of dollars to lawless agencies that already have tens of billions of dollars, but they cannot find the same urgency for a mom trying to afford groceries, for a senior rationing medication, or for a family trying to keep a roof over their heads. Isn't that something?
Well, I think this is a rotten, lousy, immoral thing to jam through with same-day authority. I urge a ``no'' vote, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague on the other side of the aisle is saying: What is the emergency? Why are we here today?
Dare I say I agree with my colleagues on the other side. We should not have to be here debating about providing funding for the agencies that secure the borders of the United States of America. Since their creation in 2003, neither ICE nor CBP has ever gone an entire fiscal year without congressional funding through the regular appropriations process.
We should not have to be here right now providing operation funding for two of the most critical agencies in securing our national security. So, what happened?
Congressional Democrats made this an emergency. The only reason we even need this reconciliation legislation is because of Democrats' reckless extremism in completely defunding our ability to secure our Nation's border.
Democrats broke the appropriations process because they want to reopen the southern border, defund Federal law enforcement, and leave American communities vulnerable to violent criminals, potential terrorists, illicit drugs, and deadly contraband.
By expediting the process to pass the Secure America Act, Republicans are proving our top priority is to provide for the public safety and security of American citizens.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oklahoma (Mrs. Bice).
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the rule to allow for consideration of the Senate's forthcoming reconciliation bill.
The legislation comes after Democrats backed out of a bipartisan Department of Homeland Security bill all the way back in February.
As a sitting member of the Appropriations Committee, it was shocking to me that we were able to get all of our appropriations bills across the finish line and to the President's desk, except for Homeland Security. In that moment, Democrats chose to play political games with the safety and security of this Nation.
Thankfully, President Trump used emergency measures to ensure that the Coast Guard, Border Patrol, TSA, and others received pay, but Democrats proved they were more than willing to hold more than 260,000 employees who work at DHS hostage.
While most of the agency was funded in May, additional resources for Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement are still needed. This is why the legislation is so important. It fully funds these agencies for the remainder of the Trump administration.
The difference couldn't be more clear: Under the Biden administration, more than 10 million illegals crossed the southern border. This included drug smugglers, human traffickers, criminal organizations, and even terrorists on the FBI watch list.
This has all changed thanks to President Trump. During the last year, there have been zero releases at the border, and apprehensions in April were 94 percent lower than the monthly average under the previous administration.
Under my friend and fellow Oklahoman, Secretary Markwayne Mullin, I know the Department will continue to ensure our border is closed, ultimately protecting our homeland.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this rule.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
It is hard to take this debate seriously. As I said, and I will say it again, and my Republican colleagues know this, you gave them a whole bunch of money in the big, ugly bill that you all celebrate.
In fact, they still have $100 billion that they haven't spent, $100 billion,
I mean, the priorities around this place are all screwed up. I mean, you talk about America First. Well, this is America last. This is America last. You are cutting programs that help feed pregnant mothers and their kids. You are cutting programs that make sure people don't go hungry and have enough to eat and enough access to nutrition. You are cutting programs that help working people. You are cutting programs that cut healthcare. Here we are, giving an additional $70 billion to agencies that already have $100 billion that they haven't spent.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks to the Chair.
Mr. Speaker, I would just simply say, my Republican friends, when you talk about America First, you are putting America last.
Your constituents are hurting. They are suffering right now. Prices have never been higher. Gas is through the roof. The cost of groceries is through the roof. The cost of everything is through the roof.
Inflation is up, and you can blame Joe Biden. He hasn't been President for a year and a half. That is the usual bs excuse we hear all the time.
The bottom line is, you are intentionally doing this. You are taking money away from people in need in this country, and you are giving it to agencies that have violated the law, that have killed American citizens, and that have not been held accountable. This is outrageous.
Mr. Speaker, I will endeavor to do a better job of following the rules and addressing my comments to you than seems to happen by those who are supposed to know the rules.
I would say this: You hear in this debate that the concern is about affordability, the affordability of housing for Americans, the affordability of healthcare for Americans, the affordability of insurance for Americans, and the affordability of education for Americans.
Democrats say they care about these things, but they do not because the number one thing we can do to make America affordable again is to deport the tens of millions of people who should not be in our country.
Twenty million people living in houses they shouldn't be in drives up housing prices. Twenty million people going to emergency rooms that are being paid for by the taxpayer drives up healthcare costs. Twenty million people sending their kids to school, which costs $10,000 to $20,000 per student in Florida, drives up education costs.
Go look at your auto insurance bill. That line of uninsured and underinsured motorist insurance, that might as well be called illegal immigrant insurance.
When we do these things, we protect our border and make America affordable again, but we also make America safe again.
In my district alone, I want to tell you about three people who have been deported.
Rafael Hayas Salgado from Cuba committed the crimes of homicide, larceny, burglary, flight escape, and resisting an officer.
Alejandro Diaz Torriente from Cuba was arrested for stolen property, burglary, forced entry-residence, forgery of checks, and selling cocaine and marijuana.
Lioneleo Silva-Garcia from Mexico's crimes were lewd or lascivious acts with a minor and sexual assault.
When we don't fund these agencies, we don't find these people, and we don't send them home. Our objective here is not only to make America safe again, but it is to make America affordable again. Passing this rule to fund these agencies will do exactly that.
That is why I will be proud to support the rule and proud to support that reconciliation package when it comes to the floor later today.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
What we just heard is the same tired, old set of grievances and talking points that Republicans bring out here all the time because they don't have any solutions to any of the challenges.
It is the same old playbook: Prices are up, blame immigrants. Gas is up, blame immigrants. Trump starts an illegal war in Iran, blame immigrants. Greedy healthcare companies rip off people and overcharge people for their basic healthcare, let's blame immigrants. Grocery prices are up, blame immigrants.
This party has no solutions to any of the problems. It is just blame immigrants, blame Joe Biden, blame somebody else. They don't want to take any responsibility.
Here is the deal: The agencies that we are talking about have $100 billion that they have not spent--$100 billion. What could you do with $100 billion? You can help a lot of people in this country get through this lousy Trump economy, but, no, $100 billion is not enough. We have a bill to bring another $70 billion to these agencies--$170 billion.
I mean, this is crazy, Mr. Speaker. What the hell is wrong with these people, Mr. Speaker, that this is where their priorities are, putting more money into agencies that do not obey the law, that have killed American citizens, that have basically set up concentration camps in some of our States in which immigrants are being mistreated?
We have American citizens who are being picked up and detained by ICE. We all agree that if people commit crimes--I don't care whether they are an undocumented immigrant or a legal citizen. If you commit a crime, you ought to be held accountable. Nobody disagrees with that.
That is not what this is about. This is about pouring billions and billions of dollars into agencies that already have more than enough.
Where is the compassion? Where is the outrage when my friends bring an appropriations bill to the floor to cut $200 million from WIC? I mean, not a word, not a word. I mean, where is the concern about the fact that people cannot afford their groceries? Nothing. Or that people can't afford to fill up their cars with gas? Nothing. Nothing.
Blame immigrants, and then, for good measure, throw in Joe Biden. I mean, that is what we hear all the time.
Again, these agencies have $100 billion already, and we are cutting programs that help provide people with nutrition and housing. We are cutting programs to help communities rebuild their infrastructure. We are cutting moneys and programs that help people with protecting open- space land.
I should say, they are cutting, not we. We are opposing those cuts, Mr. Speaker, because we think they are immoral, and we think they are outrageous.
But here we are, moving Heaven and Earth, again, not to bring a bill to the floor to help lower costs for anybody, but bringing a bill to the floor beyond the normal process to give agencies that have $100 billion, $70 billion more. I mean, really? I mean, this is outrageous.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
If we defeat the previous question, I will 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 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 they weren't moving forward with this fund. Then later, the same day,
I don't know? Really?
He also said: ``I love it. I think it's so important.''
So it is now clear that the only way to end this corrupt scheme--and it is a corrupt scheme--for good is for Congress to act.
And as the newly free-to-speak-his-mind Senate 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 Republican Senator John Cornyn.
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.
Do my Republican colleagues want millions of dollars to go to the January 6 rioters? I mean, I was here that day. Many of my Republican colleagues were here that day. I was in the Speaker's chair that day. I was the last person off the House floor. I saw those maniacs beating up cops. I will never, ever forget it.
And the fact that they have been pardoned by this President is outrageous. But the idea that they would be financially rewarded? Oh, my God, what is wrong with this place?
So with the vote we are calling for here right now, we can end this slush fund once and for all. And maybe we could take that money and put it toward issues to deal with the affordability crisis, maybe to make law-abiding Americans' lives a little bit easier.
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, this debate boils down to priorities. Republicans have shown that they are willing to move mountains when they want to. They can move mountains for Donald Trump. They can move mountains for billionaires. They can move mountains for corporate donors. And today, they are moving mountains to spend $70 billion more on ICE and CBP.
But for regular people, they are doing nothing. They have done nothing, and they are doing nothing. Families are getting crushed by grocery prices. Workers can't afford rent. Parents are struggling to pay for childcare. Seniors are worried about healthcare. Kids are hungry. Republicans don't care. That is the story of this majority. They have all of the urgency in the world for the worst priorities and no urgency at all for people who actually need help.
They will rush to fund agencies that separate families, that violate rights and bow down to Donald Trump's illegal orders; but they refuse to lift a finger to ease the burdens on working people. It is everything and anything for those at the top, and to hell with everyone else.
So vote ``no'' on this rule. Vote ``no'' on this blank check. These agencies already have $100 billion--$100 billion, billion with a b. They don't need an additional $70 billion. I would urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote ``no'' on these rotten priorities. Let's get back to work and do the work that the people actually sent us here to do. Let's try to do things that actually improve people's lives, not screw them over.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, the Biden-Harris administration abandoned our Border Patrol agents and refused to enforce our sovereign borders. This destroyed morale and increased attrition throughout the front lines of law enforcement who want to do what they signed up for: secure our borders.
It is crucial to our national security that ICE and CBP have the resources and pay they need to accomplish their critical and legal missions of preventing illegal aliens and other public safety threats, narcotics and other contraband from entering our communities, and removing criminal illegal aliens from within our country.
It is not sufficient to hope that we can use the funding from H.R. 1 to fully fund these agencies.
Our colleagues talk about money that Homeland Security has in its budget, but they are quite well aware that the money allocated in H.R. 1 provided supplemental funding to finish building the border wall that was abandoned under the Biden administration, provide funding for additional well-paid frontline personnel to accomplish their Homeland Security missions, and invest in advancements in technology to close exploitable gaps and enhance border interdictions to keep our communities safe. Yes, there is money, but it is mostly for the wall and for technology.
Right now, CBP does not have the personnel that it says it needs. That is why the reconciliation legislation provides supplemental investments in closing the personnel gap throughout CBP; bolstering recruiting, training, and education; and addressing attrition and the morale crisis by funding retention bonuses.
H.R. 1 funding is not sufficient for the everyday operations of securing our Nation's borders, and as our colleague from Oklahoma said, there was an agreement to do this in the Homeland Security bill, and at the last minute the Senate balked and refused to do it.
Mr. Speaker, providing expedited consideration of the forthcoming reconciliation measure will allow us to fund these two mission-critical agencies and the people who support them. Let's move forward, pass this rule, and advance the reconciliation measure that will soon come before us.
I support the rule, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and a ``yes'' vote on the rule.
The text of the material previously referred to by Mr. McGovern is as follows:
Directing the President Pursuant to Section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution to Remove United States Armed Forces from Lebanon
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. 84) directing the President pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution to remove United States Armed Forces from Lebanon, 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.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 92, nays 324, answered ``present'' 2, not voting 12, as follows:
Ms. TENNEY, Messrs. BACON, CLYBURN, Ms. LOFGREN, Messrs. GIMENEZ, WALBERG, KRISHNAMOORTHI, SHREVE, EMMER, RASKIN, and MFUME changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Mr. GARCIA of Illinois, Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN, Mses. WILLIAMS of Georgia, SALINAS, SCANLON, Messrs. NEAL, AMO, JACKSON of Illinois, Ms. UNDERWOOD, and Mrs. McCLAIN DELANEY changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the resolution was not agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Waiving a Requirement of Clause 6(A) of Rule Xiii With Respect to Consideration of Certain Resolutions Reported From the Committee on Rules
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. 1336), waiving a requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII with respect to consideration of certain resolutions reported from the Committee on Rules, 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 212, nays 210, not voting 8, as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. There are 2 minutes remaining.
So the previous question was ordered.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agency Appropriations Act, 2027
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 1(c) of rule XIX, proceedings will resume on 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, on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
Providing for Consideration of the Bill (H.R. 2913) to Authorize Support for Ukraine, and for Other Purposes
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on adoption of the resolution (House Resolution 518) providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2913) to authorize support for Ukraine, 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 the resolution.
This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 216, nays 204, not voting 10, as follows:
So the resolution was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Mr. Speaker, I was absent from the floor and missed Roll Call No. 206. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 206, on agreeing to the resolution providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2913) to authorize support for Ukraine, and for other purposes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 518, the House will proceed to the immediate consideration of the bill (H.R. 2913) to authorize support for Ukraine, and for other purposes, which the Clerk will report by title.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 518, the bill is considered read.
The text of the bill is as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill shall be debatable for 1 hour, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs or their respective designees.
The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mast) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mast).
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Florida?
Mr. Speaker, the question before this House is simple: Will we help Ukraine negotiate from a position of strength, or will we help Putin outlast American resolve?
The Ukrainian people, our NATO allies, and the United States national security cannot afford to wait any longer for this body to act against Russia's brutal war in Ukraine.
In the last 17 months, Russia has redoubled its efforts to break the Ukrainian spirit while waging its illegal war, and this body has failed to meet the moment.
Let me be clear: The administration could be doing more right now without waiting for Congress. President Trump promised to end the war on day one. Seventeen months later, this administration has stalled delivery of assistance that Congress has passed.
It has attacked Ukraine, the victim, while providing cover for Putin who continues to stall, delay, and outlast U.S. support.
We all want this war to end. The question is how? Will we abandon
Or will this body live up to the commitments we have made since the start of this war, that we will support the brave Ukrainians fighting for their future, deliver them the weapons that they need to defend themselves, impose costs on the Kremlin for this immoral conflict, and hold Russia accountable for its war crimes?
This war ends when Putin concludes that prolonged conflict will cost Russia more than ending it. That means proving through action, not words, that the United States and our allies will not walk away.
That is exactly what this bill aims to do. It supports Ukraine's reconstruction, fights Russian malign influence, shores up security assistance for our Baltic allies, and provides Ukraine urgently needed foreign military finance loans to purchase the weapons it needs to defend itself against and push back Russian aggression.
Let me remind my colleagues. Nearly every dollar we invest in Ukraine's security assistance is spent where? It is spent right here in these United States of America supporting American workers, supporting American manufacturers, and supporting American communities.
Mr. Speaker, this is not one of those conflicts where there is a gray area. Vladimir Putin is an authoritarian thug who ordered the invasion of Ukraine for his own imperialistic ambitions. He has ordered the kidnapping of Ukrainian children and the murder of innocent civilians. And as the United States' support has wavered, the carnage has only grown. Mr. Speaker, 2025 was the deadliest year for Ukrainian civilians since the war began.
In the largest land war since World War II, we have seen over a million casualties that Putin chose. And if you believe his ambitions will end with Ukraine, you have not been paying attention at all.
History and Putin have told us otherwise. Some colleagues have raised parts of this bill that could be improved as justification for voting against it. Mr. Speaker, this bill should have gone through regular order, but unfortunately, my request to move Russia bills through regular order have been routinely rejected.
Republican leadership has opposed this bill and repeatedly blocked bipartisan efforts to hold Russia accountable. The Ukraine Support Act was introduced some 14 months ago, and we have forced it to the floor by discharge only because that was the only option left to us.
Now, before I finish, I just have some people that I really need to thank. For 14 months, our majority leader emeritus Steny Hoyer, he has been absolutely tremendous, working and getting this bill to this point today. He used to be the whip or so. He is no longer the whip, but he hasn't lost those whip skills on how to whip people and get them together. That is what he has done, and I have got to thank him and have to say and know that his commitment to the Ukrainian people and to our allies is unwavering and unshakeable. I thank Steny Hoyer.
Let me also thank Representatives Keating and Kaptur and so many other Democrats who have worked tirelessly and been instrumental in this process. Finally, I must thank Representatives Bacon, Fitzpatrick, and Kiley for courageously signing the discharge petition. This indeed has been a team effort and something that the Ukrainian people know that in a bipartisan way we support them in what we will do.
So, Mr. Speaker, it is time for us to do what is right: Support Ukraine. Hold Russia accountable. Show the world and show Putin that the United States does not fold to bullies. Putin's belief that bipartisan U.S. support will fade is as much a fantasy as he believes that he could take Kyiv in a week.
That is how we end this war, and I urge all my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle because there are not people on the floor of the House that support Putin. There are not people on the floor of the House tonight that support Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
I rise to speak, however, in opposition to H.R. 2913, the Ukraine Support Act, and explain, in my judgment, the flaws in this bill. I stand here concerned and somewhat sad that I am here because no one has been a more steadfast supporter of Ukraine than I have, in my judgment.
I thank my colleagues on the Democratic side of the aisle and the Republican side of the aisle who have been so passionate.
I have consistently advocated and voted in support of Ukraine. I have consistently advocated for increased sanctions on Russia. My record of supporting Ukraine is strong. I have made two trips to Kyiv and two other trips to the region, all to rally support in rejection of Putin's stand in Ukraine and call for his defeat.
I led the design and successful passage of the REPO Act in this House and in this Congress to convert billions of dollars of Russian foreign assets for use in Ukraine.
Unfortunately, today, we are confronted, as my good friend from New York noted, with a flawed measure.
First, this bill is 14 months old, and therefore, it doesn't recognize all the changes that have happened over the past year. It actually cuts $100 million in authorized funding for Ukraine annually. The funding cuts do not reflect what the House agreed to in our bipartisan NDAA.
It does not reflect the commitment that our NATO allies have made and only calls for a 2 percent pledge of their GDP in support of NATO when, in fact, President Trump has gotten our NATO allies to pledge 5 percent of their GDP in defense spending. We would be walking back from our own spending plans here, and we would be walking back from the commitment we have gotten from our European allies.
But the bill has other issues that I am concerned with. It lists ``Iran provisions'' in the document rather than refer to Russia.
The bill includes poorly written sanctions policy, including duplicative sanctions that are already in place.
It mandates certain sanctions without any link to a strategic goal of what those sanctions would achieve or meaningful behavioral change in Moscow.
It includes sanctions on financial messaging services like SWIFT, which I think are exaggerated, and in my judgment, could cause countries to move to a Chinese messaging system rather than a Western- based system.
So there are others, and that is why I have disappointment today that I am on this House floor in opposition to it.
I agree with my friend from New York, too, that this House should take up a bill that can pass and have bipartisan support to counter Putin and send a message from both Chambers in this Capitol that we reject Putin's invasion of Ukraine and the murderous regime that he leads.
My better alternative is the Financial Services bill passed almost unanimously by Zach Nunn called the PEACE Act. It would cut off Russian energy revenues, channel billions from Moscow's sovereign assets to Ukraine to defend itself, and it is past time for that bill to be on this House floor. I have urged House leadership to bring the PEACE Act to the floor. I again ask House leadership to bring the PEACE Act to the floor.
This is a well-crafted bill that will hold Putin accountable, hold Russia accountable, and will demonstrate that on a bipartisan, bicameral basis this Congress is for Putin leaving Ukraine, Ukraine having a sovereign nation, and this country having a great new friend on the Continent of Europe.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the esteemed gentleman from the State of Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), who is an original cosponsor on this important measure, the former whip, and the majority leader emeritus of the House.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, Mr. Meeks, who is ranking member of this committee. I thank all those who had the courage to stand up and sign this bill. I would say to my friend who just spoke, whom I have
Mr. Speaker, to paraphrase General Eisenhower, the eyes of the world are upon us. Since Putin launched his perfidious invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the House has taken 12 votes to support the Ukrainians in defense of their freedom, of their sovereignty, and of international law.
Over all 12, an average of 80 percent of this House--80 percent of this House--has voted to hold firm to the principle that Ukraine must win this war and Putin and his war crimes must lose it, 12 bills, an average of 80 percent of the House of Representatives voting for it, and, in addition, that America has a pivotal role in supporting Ukraine.
The last time, however, that we voted on a Ukraine assistance package was April 2024. My friend said he was for Ukraine, but not today. I have heard so many times: I am for Ukraine, but not this bill; yes, I will be with you on Ukraine, but not now.
In 2025, American aid to Ukraine fell by 99 percent. Thankfully, international aid to Ukraine stayed close to 2024 levels because European allies stepped up and delivered a 67 percent surge--not a 2 percent, not a 4 percent, not a 5--67 percent surge in military assistance and a 59 percent rise in humanitarian aid.
Europe is carrying its weight in helping Ukraine.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
In the 2 years since we last approved a package, Ukrainians have endured two bitter winters of war.
It is time for us to act. Russian drones have continued to rain terror on civilian neighborhoods. Driven, in part, by their extraordinary advances in drone technology, however, Ukraine is carrying the day.
A generation of young Russians have been sacrificed for Putin's pride. In this moment at the end of my tenure in Congress, I hear echoes from its beginnings when the Cold War was in terminal phase.
Ronald Reagan traveled to Berlin in 1987. Standing in front of the Berlin Wall, just 2 years before it fell, he told of how the Soviets tried to outlast the West during that decade's nuclear-arms surge.
The Soviets had dug their heels in, but Reagan declared the alliance held firm. This is about the alliance holding firm.
Today, we can declare to Vladimir Putin, just as President Reagan did, that our alliance holds firm and that America holds firm. President Reagan had said earlier in 1983 our adversaries ``must be made to understand we will never . . . ''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has again expired.
President Reagan said in 1983 our adversaries ``must be made to understand we will never compromise our principles and standards [nor] ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire.''
He was talking about the Soviet Union and Russia today.
``To do so would mean abandoning the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil.''
Mr. Speaker, this is a moment. This is a moment to choose between right and wrong and good and evil, not tomorrow, but today, tonight. This is a moment to stand with those who are fighting on the front lines for democracy, sovereignty, and international law.
This is a moment for all of us, together, Democrats and Republicans, Americans and our allies, to hold firm.
Let's hold firm and vote ``yes'' on this bill and send a message to the world and to the Ukrainians.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments from Mr. Hoyer, and I want to touch on them for a moment.
He made the point that military spending from Europe has surged 67 percent and aid from Europe has surged 59 percent. I am exceptionally glad to see that take place.
However, let's make sure that we give credit where credit is due. There is a reason that military spending in Europe didn't surge by 67 percent in 2024 or 2023. There is a reason that aid didn't surge 59 percent in 2022.
President Trump forced Europe to raise the spending. He said that the burden is going to be on you, Europe, to carry your weight.
In addition, he did something. He demanded something from Europe: that they defend their own backyard.
We should all be praising President Trump for getting them to carry the burden of the war going on in the European backyard. I am glad to see them spend it, and I hope they spend 10 times more, but let's give the credit where it is due.
Mr. HOYER.--but what he did was get the Europeans to understand they needed to carry their part of the load. I congratulate him for doing that.
However, why they have surged is because they see the proximate, immediate danger caused by Russians' avaricious appetite for more land and empire. That is why they surged, and we ought to stay with them because we also need to be concerned about a leader in Putin who wants to create another empire.
Mr. Speaker, I was happy to yield to the gentleman a few moments, and I absolutely affirm what he said. I agree with what the gentleman said, and I think Secretary Rubio has affirmed this no less. Secretary Rubio said: We are not neutral, a neutral arbiter in the war between Russia and Ukraine. We believe in Ukraine. We want Ukraine to win. We are not neutral in this.
Absolutely, they see the threat. Europe sees the threat, and we are glad that they are now stepping up in a much more substantial way.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Self), who is the chairman of the Subcommittee on Europe.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to return our attention to this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2319.
I am not sure we want the eyes of the world on this bill. I would, Mr. Speaker, like to ask my colleagues across the aisle who discharged this bill: Do you want to see an end to this war?
It is increasingly obvious that it will end, and when it ends, it will be through negotiations. If my friends support this bill, then clearly they are not interested in peace because the consequences would tie the hands of this President and could lead to future hostilities that would bleed over into Europe.
As the chairman of the Europe Subcommittee, I cannot tell you, Mr. Speaker, how much I believe that, but they offered no solutions. It went into the spectrum, they have not offered us an AUMF or a declaration of war. At the other end, they choose to support an unserious bill that would constrain the President's ability to negotiate that peace.
Or is this a simple messaging bill against President Trump?
The Ukraine Support Act is filled with mandatory sanctions provisions that would significantly constrain the President in his negotiations with Russia. This includes congressional review requirements, mechanisms that tie the hands of the President rather than afford him the leverage to pursue a settlement agreement.
My colleague across the aisle and the ranking member typically emphasize the importance of diplomacy, dialogue, and development. Yet, by supporting this bill, they are going back on their words. Successful diplomacy requires flexibility, yet this bill provides the opposite.
The Ukraine Support Act is also riddled with problems that my colleague Mr. Hill has already mentioned, problems that call its credibility into question.
It contains provisions that are already addressed elsewhere in law, including redundancies with the fiscal year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act. It includes outdated provisions, cross-referencing errors, and language that does not reflect current policy. Iran? Really?
In one section, the bill extends the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative at $300 million per year for fiscal years 2026 and 2027, yet Congress has already authorized $400 million. The legislation would, therefore, authorize a lower amount than current law.
I ask my Democrat colleagues: Do you support cutting assistance to Ukraine in addition to tying the President's hands?
The bill also includes a sense of Congress encouraging NATO allies to spend at least 2 percent of GDP on defense. This has been a magnificent achievement to get to 5 percent, 3.5 percent on defense and 1.5 percent on infrastructure.
Is your intent to reduce the commitment of NATO member nations? They are watching this debate right now, and they are advocating for 2 percent. Regardless of what they say, the bill has 2 percent in it. Vladimir Putin would love you for that, especially after President Trump successfully worked with our allies to raise their commitment to 5 percent.
Mr. Speaker, for this reason and many others, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the Ukraine Support Act.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I remind the gentleman that I heard the President of the United States say that Ukraine should give up, basically, because they don't have the cards. He said to Vladimir Putin do what you will. These are words out of the President's office, not mine.
Mr. Speaker, in reference to the bill raised by Chairman Hill, I want the public to know that I fully supported that bill. In fact, I voted for it in committee. I am on the Financial Services Committee also, and the fact that it hasn't hit the floor a year after it was marked up in committee tells you everything that you need to know about Republican leadership's willingness to put bills on the floor that hold Putin accountable. Because if they would put bills on the floor that would hold him accountable, we would not have had to discharge this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Keating), the ranking member on the Europe Subcommittee and an original cosponsor of this important measure.
Mr. Speaker, it is important to recognize as we stand here today in the midst of a war with Iran, as the President is trying to secure an agreement that would require them not to pursue nuclear weapons, that the United States already has a commitment in an agreement with the then-third largest nuclear power, Ukraine.
In the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, Ukraine agreed to relinquish all of their nuclear assets and move away from their nuclear ambition in exchange for an agreement with the United States that we would be there, be there to defend them in the case of aggression and actions by another country.
That day has come, and we are going to honor our future agreements. If we do that, we must certainly honor this agreement. We have to look at the agreements we are already committed to.
Russia's illegal aggression has been accompanied by mass killings, kidnapping and displacement of thousands of Ukrainian children, serial rapes by Russian soldiers, and the targeting of innocent civilians.
These are war crimes, and the war crimes alone command our full support for Ukraine's defense. At the same time, Russia's illegal aggression represents a direct threat to our NATO allies, particularly the Baltic States.
Before the full-scale invasion, Russia made their ambitions crystal clear that the Baltic States were a target and that NATO sovereignty was at stake, as well.
It is important to realize that, in Ukraine, we don't share that commitment alone. Europe as a whole has given $226 billion in assistance. That is 25 percent more than the $174 billion that the United States has appropriated.
European countries continue to increase support, while the Trump administration lessens American support. However, we know that the future cost of NATO conflicts is far greater in dollars and in lives, and we know we have to support Ukraine to make sure that we are not falling into that greater cost.
Our commitment to Ukraine remains our best defense economically and in terms of our national security as well as for our shared democratic values.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, let me start with a simple premise: What Russia did was terrible, and Vladimir Putin is a bad guy. Hopefully, there is no one in this room who disagrees with that, but I also think that when you file a piece of legislation, it comes with an obligation to draft it carefully because laws have meaning. This proposed piece of legislation is incredibly poorly drafted. It contains numerous critical drafting errors.
For example, in section 313, which is related to dual-use export controls for Russia, subsections (e)(2), (f), and (g), the bill starts to mention Iran rather than Russia. It is clear after re-reading it that someone just copied and pasted from another bill that didn't have anything to do with Ukraine or Russia. It was a bill relating to Iran. They just simply forgot to switch the countries.
We deserve better than that as we debate a bill. Some of the sections are outdated, and they would harm U.S. national security.
Section 102(b)(5) urges all NATO allies to dedicate at least 2 percent of their GDP to national defense. As has been said at the June 2025 Hague Summit, they agreed to 5 percent. Why would we pass a bill that says we want you to do 2 percent?
We have NATO allies that ain't so great anymore. I would focus on Spain, for example. Why would we in this room want to pass something where we as a body are saying: No, you don't have to do 5 percent. Two percent would be A-OK.
The worst thing about this bill is that it would actually hurt Ukraine. It wouldn't even help them. Section 204 extends the USAI at $300 million for each of fiscal years `26 and `27 and moves the program's sunset to December 31, 2027. Under current law, thanks to the FY 2026 NDAA, the $400 million for fiscal year 2026, and roughly $800 million across fiscal years 2026 and 2027, extends the program through December.
This bill is not about helping Ukraine. This is not about standing up to Vladimir Putin. This is about engaging in Trump derangement syndrome as President Trump tries to bring this in for a landing.
Mr. Speaker, this bill should be voted down, and frankly, given the drafting errors, we shouldn't even be spending the time talking about it.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the fine ranking member from the State of New York, who has worked so very hard on this for the time this evening, and to all of our colleagues who support H.R. 2913, the Ukraine Support Act.
Mr. Speaker, it is not a partisan bill. Democrats voted for it. Republicans voted for it. Independents voted for it.
In 2014, without provocation, Russian dictator Vladimir Putin first invaded the sovereign nation of Ukraine. Since 2022, he has been killing its people with his full-scale invasion.
Our free world must stand tall against tyrants, not mollycoddle them. Liberty is not negotiable. The war-torn people of Ukraine are not asking us for charity. They are asking for our partnership, along with our closest, time-tested allies in the European Union.
During the last century, in World Wars I and II, over 330,000 American soldiers' lives were sacrificed for liberty, for us. The greatest gift the 20th century bequeathed to us was their victory.
Liberty must not be squandered. It must be reaffirmed. For this Congress, that time is now.
We must not turn our backs on Ukraine's long-suffering people, especially over 20,000 children of Ukraine
Now, Iran, in cahoots with Putin's Russia, makes the drones killing American soldiers in the Middle East. It is Iranian-made suicide drones that Russia launches to murder thousands of Ukrainians in their homes and its soldiers at the front.
Ukraine has come to America's defense with its cutting-edge interceptor drones. Consider their noble commitment. Now, will we come to Ukraine's aid?
The people of Ukraine fully know their fate is intertwined with our own. A ``yes'' vote sanctions Putin's Russia, that dictatorship. A ``yes'' vote forestalls further Russian encroachment across the European Union, our time-tested allies. A ``yes'' vote aids Ukraine.
If we fail to secure liberty's front in Europe, the next strategic reality we will face is defending our interests against an emboldened, nuclear-armed, expansionist Russia at a much, much higher cost.
Mr. Speaker, voting ``yes'' for liberty is an imperative, first, last, and always.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Mast for yielding time to speak on our national security and this critically important issue of supporting our partners and allies and deterring our adversaries.
As a member of both the Foreign Affairs Committee and Homeland Security Committee, I have strong opinions on this topic. It is a fact that Russia and its actions continue to threaten American allies, innocent civilians, and the global economy.
This is an issue that demands serious conversations, bipartisan dialogue, and a sincere interest in advancing our Nation's foreign policy interests, including achieving peace in Ukraine.
What we are seeing, though, is that as we are working through this legislative process and trying to find ways where we can reject Russia's unprovoked aggressions and support Ukraine's right to freedom, peace, and self-determination, what we are doing is looking at legislation that is outdated and insufficient to achieve this goal.
Our Nation, since the beginning of this conflict, has supported Ukraine with over $137 billion in total security assistance. We have also won commitments from our European allies to finally step up their defense contributions.
The goal should now be to achieve a final end to this conflict and secure lasting, honorable peace for the Ukrainian people. This bill falls far short of that.
What we are seeing is that this legislation makes a number of mistakes. First, it cuts funding to the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative. This bill states that it would extend security assistance at $300 million for fiscal years `26 and `27. However, Congress already passed funding in last year's NDAA that funds security assistance at a level of roughly $800 million across the same fiscal years.
Potentially worse still, the bill calls for NATO allies to dedicate at least 2 percent of their GDP to national defense. As I mentioned, under this administration, we have made the historic achievement of getting our NATO allies to commit to 5 percent. This bill literally moves us backward, and a decrease in NATO defense member spending would be the result.
Second, it also includes outdated and redundant provisions. Sections of this bill attempt to authorize programs like foreign military financing for allies and partners in the region. Again, Congress already passed similar provisions in the NDAA through the Baltic Security Initiative.
Finally, there are a number of drafting errors that are too numerous to state, but again, this outdated approach is not what is needed at this time.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage Members to do the right thing, to come together in a bipartisan way. We can work in an honest fashion and a serious way to get the achievements that we are actually looking for for America's interests and also for our partners and allies around the world.
Mr. Speaker, today's vote, are we going to stand with good or are we going to stand with evil? That is what this is about tonight.
Ukraine is a democracy, a free market, and rule of law. It has been invaded by a dictator who throws its enemies off of roofs, poisons his adversaries, and attacked his neighbor, which is four times smaller than Russia.
What is the goal? To eliminate their independence, culture, and people because he wants to control those old borders of his that he has had. We have to stand for the good side tonight.
What does this bill do? It provides $1.3 billion in direct military aid, $8 billion in military sales, and tough sanctions on Russia. We should have done this a year ago. We could have done this in a bipartisan way a year ago, but we have not.
This decision is needed now. Russia is bombing Ukrainian cities every night with ballistic missiles and hypersonic missiles. We had better be there to help them, or in the history books, it is going to say the United States failed when it was most needed.
I know this: I want this House to stand on the right side. I want Republicans to stand where Ronald Reagan would be if he were here right now. Ronald Reagan would be voting ``yes'' tonight. He would be standing up for Ukraine and opposing Russia. This is our Churchill moment or our Chamberlain moment. By God, I am going to choose Churchill, and this House better choose Churchill tonight.
Mr. Speaker, I think a point has to be made on the vote that is going to take place in the next hour. I am a little bit afraid that people are going to look at that vote and view it as a statement of fact as to where this body stands on Ukraine.
I think something has to be pointed out that I think, unlike other votes--and the gentleman from Maryland has told us there is an average of over 300 people who voted similar to what he was trying to do in the past.
This vote comes before us on a discharge petition. There are flaws that have been pointed out in it. I think the flaws are going to receive greater attention from me because, for certain reasons, bills brought forth on discharge petitions are frowned upon in this institution.
I want everybody to understand that when this bill passes, probably passes with like 250, 260 votes, it doesn't mean that the commitment to Ukraine has dropped that much from the past votes last year to now. It is, I believe, because the bill came to the floor in a discharge petition.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Ukraine Support Act.
This vote transcends politics. This vote is about freedom. Just days ago, Russia launched over 650 drones and 73 missiles at Ukrainian cities. Families were murdered in their homes, and children were forced into shelters.
Once again, Vladimir Putin showed the world that he has no interest in peace. He is only interested in terror.
Five years into this illegal war, the Ukrainian people are defending their country against Russia's brutal aggression. Against all odds, they have transformed and modernized their military into one of the strongest and most capable fighting forces in Europe. They have pioneered technologies that are changing warfare itself, from advanced drone operations to battlefield innovation that militaries around the world are now studying.
Mr. Speaker, I have stood shoulder to shoulder with Ukrainian soldiers on the front lines during this conflict. I have heard the artillery fire. I have watched young men and women defend their country with extraordinary courage. They remind me of another generation of fighters: the Americans who defended democracy abroad during World War II, our Greatest Generation. They are fighting for their freedom. They are fighting for democracy. They are fighting for global peace and global security.
Mr. Speaker, the Ukrainian people are not asking for Americans to fight this war. They are asking for the tools to defend themselves and for the partnership of a nation that has always stood for liberty.
The Ukraine Support Act strengthens Ukraine's ability to protect civilians; extends lend-lease authority; provides critical military assistance; sanctions Russia's war machine, its shadow fleet, and those responsible for kidnapping innocent Ukrainian children by the tens of thousands; and makes clear that aggression on this planet has consequences.
We must send a clear message not only to Russia but to every dictator watching us tonight around the world: America will not stand by while free nations are attacked.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Members on both sides of the aisle.
I understand the passion behind this. As a still-serving combat veteran--and also for the Chairman's combat service--I think we are committed to making sure that aggressors are held accountable.
That is exactly why I authored the bipartisan PEACE Act--targeted sanctions that truly stop the Russian war machine. Peace through strength was mentioned tonight. Peace through the PEACE Act can be delivered. My bill passed the Committee on Financial Services 53-1, with great credit to Mr. Meeks. This is something we worked on together and both support.
Challengingly, I would offer that the bill before us tonight takes us on a different path. I would be remiss to not say this is a bill more about politics than policy, and I am concerned that it is a tactical error to move forward when it threatens real strategic deterrence of what this body can deliver.
I understand our mutual aim is to hold Russian aggression accountable, but, my friends, this is not the plan. We have a better option, and we have a clear plan before us.
The PEACE Act moved through committee. It earned bipartisan support, and it is ready for consideration now. And, yes, it has been months in the making, but we have held it every single time. Challengingly, the bill before us is now more than a year and a half outdated.
Our bill would cut off foreign financial assistance to Russia, and it includes Chairman Hill's REPO Act, money that would be seized back so that it can go back to help the Ukrainian people and pay for Russia's aggression. It stops the shadow fleet. It ends Russia's illicit oil sales, and it truly does what we want through targeted sanctions that have been approved.
My friends, if we truly want to stand together, let's stop Russia. Let's lead with a plan that truly restores peace to Europe. This is our greatest strength. Let's enforce the penalties, enact a timeline, incentivize a ceasefire, and let's make sure that peace can be achieved with the PEACE Act.
Mr. Speaker, I provided the decisive signature for the Ukraine Support Act to bring it to the floor for a vote because the time to act is now.
We have all been inspired by the enduring courage and resilience of the Ukrainian people, encouraged by their recent battlefield gains, and horrified by the latest Russian brutality.
Recent events make it all too clear this conflict will continue to cause death and devastation on a tragic scale if the dynamic does not change. We have the power to change the dynamic.
Today, we can provide potentially decisive leverage. We can make it clear that the United States will continue to stand with the Ukrainian people and provide the material support necessary for their self- defense. We can make it equally clear that Russia will pay a severe price for its unprovoked aggression and ongoing violence.
This is what is required for constructive negotiations to end this conflict. This is what is required for peace. This is what is required to vindicate the international norm against wars of conflict, without which the world would revert to an era where bloodshed was a much more common theme in human affairs.
This legislation will protect America's national interests, will support our vital alliances, will uphold our highest values, and will reassert the role of Congress in advancing all of these goals.
I thank Mr. Meeks for offering this legislation, as well as the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), and the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bacon) for their leadership, their statesmanship in rallying support for it. I encourage all Members to vote ``aye.''
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), a woman of courage, who has traveled to Ukraine many times and stands for the Ukrainian people, the distinguished Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished once and future chair of the Committee on Foreign Affairs for his steadfast leadership and determination for the people of Ukraine.
I rise today in strong support of the Ukraine Support Act and thank Leader Hoyer for his persistence and his determination to bring this legislation to the floor and, of course, Marcy, who has been our inspiration, Marcy Kaptur.
The Ukrainian people are not asking us to fight their war. That has been said. They are asking for tools to defend their sovereignty, their democracy, and their lives.
As President Zelenskyy wrote to Congress just days ago: ``We value every human life, and that is exactly why we are seeking a real peace.''
But supporting Ukraine is not only about Ukraine. It is about deterring aggression everywhere. It is about standing up to authoritarianism, and it is about reaffirming that the United States does not abandon those who fight for freedom.
Let us also not forget that well over 70 percent of U.S. funding allocated to Ukraine is spent in the United States, a direct investment in our economy, American workers and industries.
While some have been unwilling to stand up to Vladimir Putin, this Congress must. This bipartisan legislation sends a clear and unmistakable message: The American people stand with Ukraine, and we will stand against Russian aggression--Russian aggression which includes kidnapping of tens of thousands of little children, which includes raping of mothers in front of their children and in front of their parents. It is about killing families. Their assaults on civilians are sinful, in my view.
Let us pass this bill to strengthen Ukraine's hand to hasten a just and lasting peace, and to uphold the values that make America a beacon of hope to the world. ``Glory to Ukraine''; ``Slava Ukraini.''
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Himes), the ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Meeks for yielding me the time.
Five days ago, I was in Ukraine, and I saw what so many of us have seen: truly remarkable courage, absolute commitment to fighting for their freedom, innovation like you would not believe, and, interestingly, something I had not seen before in my previous trips to Ukraine, which was the optimism and joy in the face of missiles and destruction that the Ukrainians are winning.
They are winning because they are executing deep strikes into Russia, which have resulted in 30 percent of Russia's refining capacity being eliminated. They are winning because they are retaking territory, and they are winning because they are inflicting a staggering and horrible number of casualties, 30,000 a month, on the Russians.
The Russians are responding to the fact that they are losing by lashing out in desperate fashion, saying diplomats should leave Kyiv, attacking Romania with a drone, because they know they are losing. This is an inflection point.
We could debate for 6 months or 12 months. We have done that before, and the Ukrainians paid with their lives for
The Ukrainians that I spoke to are the bravest people I have ever seen fighting for their freedom. They want to know one thing. They are wondering whether the people here, in the home of the free and the land of the brave, will be side by side with them. That is all they are wondering. They just want a little help. They don't want our people. They want our technology, and they want to know that we are there with them.
Look around this Chamber. This is the Chamber in which we made the sacrifices to defeat communism. This is the Chamber in which we made the decisions to defeat Nazism. Since 1857, when we have been meeting in this Chamber, we have stood for freedom and liberty. Those who opposed it with buts and conditions, history was not kind to their memory.
Let's do what we have always done and support the brave Ukrainians in their desire for freedom.
Mr. Speaker, I would just remind the ranking member of the Intelligence Committee that he said that we should give Ukraine--they just want a little bit of help. The United States of America, to this moment, is giving them far more than just a little bit of help, and that should not be ignored.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Quigley), who is the co-chair of the Congressional Ukraine Caucus and who has traveled to that war zone over five times.
My first question is: If my friends across the aisle don't like this bill, why don't they draft their own? Why did this bill have to be forced on them? Why was it necessary to do a discharge petition? Where was their excitement about doing anything?
My second question is: Why hasn't the President of the United States said who he wants to win this war? He still has not said who he favors.
My next question is: When my friends talk about peace and they say that we need to be flexible, I want to know details. Does that mean we are going to give Putin a reward for raping and pillaging the Ukrainian people and that we are going to reward them with the land that they took in this aggressive nature?
This is the time to make those decisions.
We are now about to celebrate our 250th anniversary of independence, and we are reminded that our Nation was born in defiance of tyranny. Ukraine is fighting that same fight today, and this fight is the same reason we fought the Second World War.
Putin's goal stretches well beyond Ukraine. He seeks to erase a democracy, to replace freedom with fear, and to prove that brute force can triumph over the rule of law.
Mr. Speaker, for over a year, the House Republican leadership has yielded to Donald Trump's peculiar friendship with Vladimir Putin and blocked action on this measure.
Every day that Republicans look the other way, Ukrainians die. Over 55,000 of them have perished. Over 20,000 children have been kidnapped. The war that Trump promised to end in a single day is now in its fifth murderous year.
Trump has continued to send signals to Vladimir Putin that his brutal aggression is okay. He has reduced U.S. direct support for Ukraine by 99 percent. He has withheld even the modest funds that this Congress approved last year. He has removed American troops from Europe, diverted essential defensive weapons that would protect Ukrainians elsewhere, and remained silent while Putin destroyed American businesses in Ukraine and provided intelligence to Iran to target Americans. Most recently, he has indicated to NATO that when Putin creates a further crisis, the U.S. will offer less, if any, help.
As Putin tests the resolve of the civilized world, Trump has shown that he has no resolve. He is too weak to lead and too reckless to be followed.
With my own name on some of the first sanctions legislation that this Congress approved against Russia and with two of the measures that I have authored since then incorporated in this measure, I am glad to see that we finally get some action.
Since March, thanks to Trump's incredible lifting of sanctions, Vladimir Putin is getting about $200 million a day, including today, in revenue to oil his war machine.
Tonight, let's unite to resist the appeasers and seek a victory for everyone in this world who values self-determination, democracy, and freedom.
Mr. Speaker, much has been said which I agree with on the Democratic side. This is a fight for supporting a country that is standing up to aggression from Russia; lies from Russia that they weren't going to invade Ukraine when they did it; and people who have killed innocent children, women, and civilians on a regular basis with missile attacks and drone attacks.
We need to stand with democracy, with freedom, and with courage and against authoritarianism and against Putin. I support this resolution, am proud to do it, and thank the Ukrainian people for their sacrifices and their valor.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, the camera of history is rolling, and history will show where each Member stands at this time as Ukraine's war rages on. It will show who stood with Ukraine and with democracy and who stood with Vladimir Putin and his evil regime.
Putin believes he can outlast American resolve. I don't believe he can. Today, we have the chance to prove him wrong.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues, Democrats and Republicans alike, to stand with the people of Ukraine and pass this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to just begin with the final comments of the ranking member. He said that it is a chance to prove you stand with Ukraine.
We could do absolutely nothing in this Chamber today, and all of us would still be standing with Ukraine. We have been standing with Ukraine since the onset of this war, which began under President Joe Biden. We have been standing with Ukraine.
A vote for this bill doesn't prove that you are pro-Ukraine. I believe that analysis of this bill proves that you didn't take a look very well about how it does affect citizens of the United States of America.
As Secretary Rubio said and as I mentioned already, we are not a neutral arbiter in the war between Russia and Ukraine. We have sent tens of billions of dollars in security assistance to Ukraine since the start of the war. We continue to share intelligence to this very moment. We continue to send arms. We have levied countless sanctions against Russia that are still in place today.
I could tell you that I personally cheer every single time Ukraine hits a Russian target.
This bill is not about helping Ukraine defeat Russia. This bill is about trying to stop President Trump and trying to tie his hands and limit his ability to negotiate.
President Trump has successfully ended longstanding conflicts around the globe. In just the last 18 months, he has ended the October 7 war between Israel and Hamas; the war between Armenia and Azerbaijan, which had been a 30-year-long conflict; between Egypt and Ethiopia, a longstanding diplomatic crisis that risked all-out war; between Pakistan and India, who were on the verge of all-out war, which could have turned nuclear if not stopped; war between the DRC and Rwanda; between Kosovo and Serbia; and between Cambodia and Thailand.
President Trump has been working on conflicts successfully across the globe. Those are just some of the successes that he has been able to accomplish in the last 18 months, despite
I think the reality is that in order to end this war, we have to bring Russia to the table. I think we all know that.
I personally would much rather prefer that our coalition--and it is a strong coalition that includes the United States of America--bring Vladimir Putin to his knees, but as long as Vladimir Putin has nukes, the coalition is not going to do that.
Why? Let's explain it very clearly. The only reason that there is not more being done militarily in response to Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine is because they have nuclear weapons. The only reason that there is not a United States of America bunker buster through the ceiling of the Kremlin is because Russia has nukes. It is the only reason that Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia--take your pick--don't have heavy armor rolling all the way to Siberia: It is because Russia has nukes.
In fact, this is why Iran absolutely should not have a nuclear weapon. This is something that has been apparently forgotten by my colleagues. We do not want to have to negotiate with a terrorist state that proves to be an imminent threat to the United States of America every single day and have them be armed with a nuclear weapon.
That is why I find it so interesting that Democrats want to pull out all the stops against Russia while doing absolutely nothing to stop Iran, which, in the 30 months prior to Epic Fury beginning, attacked the United States of America over 350 times. That, to me, is amazing.
What this bill would do is tie the President's hands. I have mentioned that already. It would prevent him from negotiating an end to the war. The President has tried his best to get my colleagues to read between the lines about how they would be affecting the United States of America domestically by pushing this policy. He laid it out yesterday in his Statement of Administration Policy, which speaks very specifically about the far-reaching provisions, like the sanctions on SWIFT and the imposition of mandatory sanctions without the appropriate waivers for their limits.
To bring this back domestically and what that memo was about in part is this: Sanctions on this bill would be a kill switch on American nuclear power. Under President Trump, we are finally weaning off nuclear fuel, but that does take time. The truth is, Russia has a stronghold on global enriched uranium supplies, and Russian suppliers are intertwined in our nuclear energy supply chain as well as that of Europe's.
Recently, Russia accounted for nearly 30 percent of enriched uranium purchased by United States reactor operators, underscoring both the continued dependence on foreign-controlled enrichment capacity and the need for an orderly transition to secure domestic supply chains. That number is now lower than it was, thanks to President Trump, but the sanctions in this bill would strain an already vulnerable U.S. nuclear supply chain overnight.
These sanctions don't just impact us here at home, as I mentioned already. They would have devastating consequences to European energy. As Europe realized through oil and gas, they are highly dependent on Russia. They have been working to wean themselves off, which President Trump warned them about in his 45 administration, saying why is the United States of America paying all this time, troops, and treasure to protect Europe through NATO when they are so intertwined with Russia, and they are highly dependent in Europe on Russian enriched uranium.
In addition--this has been mentioned numerous times--the bill is filled with outdated measures and basic errors. To give a few of those examples that have already been mentioned, the bill includes funding for Ukraine security assistance that was already passed as a part of this year's NDAA. In fact, the bill would provide $100 million less per year than what was passed in the NDAA. That is a pretty important oversight.
It has been mentioned that the bill calls for 2 percent of GDP military spending from NATO. It was already congratulated by some of my colleagues that the President has worked to make sure that NATO spends 5 percent of their GDP in terms of military spending, and he has been wildly successful in making sure that that takes place.
This bill, in my opinion, is an unserious bill to attack President Trump that was crafted basically a year and a half ago, while he was actively engaged in the high-stakes negotiation to end this war since it started.
I do believe that people on both sides of this bill want to help Ukraine, but supporting this bill does not somehow say you are stepping away from Ukraine or that you all of a sudden stand beside them.
Again, we could do nothing here today, and the status quo that we have been supporting Ukraine since the onset of this war would continue. I believe that this is about a cudgel to fight against President Trump and tie his hands, as I have said already.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 518, the previous question is ordered on the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in grief for the 11 men who lost their lives and in hope for those still recovering from injuries suffered at the Nippon Dynawave Paper Mill in Longview, Washington, in the worst industrial tragedy in Washington State history.
As we confront the loss of lives and horrific injuries, God forbid that we shirk from accountability for the current state of affairs or the responsibility You placed on us to improve them. Let us honor the skill and humanity of these men who were each created in Your image.
Forgive our willful ignorance to the hardship and danger that greed, self-interest, and neglect have brought on our brothers and sisters across the Nation. Forgive us for demanding others zealously preserve Your creation while we ourselves abuse it.
Guide the hands caring for the wounded. Grant discernment and wisdom to the investigators and all those seeking answers. Be a comfort and strength to the grieving and lost and those working to rebuild. Instill in us a fearless spirit in serving our people.
Amen.
I ask everyone in the Chamber to join me in a moment of silence.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Will all Members and guests please rise for a moment of silence.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at noon on Monday next for morning-hour debate and 2 p.m. for legislative business.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Nebraska?
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Pearl River resident Kevin Haugh, a retired FDNY EMS captain, who bravely battled ALS and passed away last Friday.
Kevin dedicated 38 years to FDNY EMS, retiring as captain after a lifetime of service to the State of New York. He was a 9/11 first responder, a member of the National EMS Memorial Service, and a member of The Four Paul Foundation. Throughout his distinguished career, he was not only a hero in the field but a mentor for those who served alongside him.
Kevin was the founding member of the FDNY EMS Pipes and Drums, serving as the lead bass drummer and retiring as the drum major, in which he took great pride in service, tradition, and his Irish heritage.
He was also a Fourth Degree Sir Knight in the Knights of Columbus St. Dominic's Council 5343, a member of The American Legion, Pearl River Elks Lodge, and the Ancient Order of Hibernians, where he served as their grand marshal in the 2023 Pearl River St. Patrick's Day parade.
Kevin will be deeply missed by his mother, Ann; his son, Michael; and all who knew him. He will be remembered for the life he built through service, dedication, and an unwavering commitment to serving his community. His memory will always be a blessing.
Agriculture is the largest industry in my Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Farmers are stewards of our land. For some, they carry generations of family work. For all, they fulfill our most basic need. Their crops feed us.
When an extreme, unexpected cold front hit at the end of April, it was devastating for many of our crops, especially the fruits, apples, peaches, and pears. Our Commonwealth's specialty crop industry could face staggering losses between $150 and $200 million. Losses of this magnitude, especially impossible to prepare for, would be insurmountable to our farmers, especially in our rural communities.
That is why my colleagues and I, alongside Governor Josh Shapiro, urged Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins to declare a Secretarial Disaster Declaration, a truly bipartisan effort to bring much-needed relief to our crop growers.
I am grateful that last week, Secretary Rollins signed the declaration for 17 counties, allowing our farmers to secure necessary recovery loans. When our farmers thrive, we all do.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remember retired Centre County Judge David Grine, who passed away in May at the age of 81.
From an early age, David dedicated his life to public service, enlisting in the Army following his graduation from State College Area High School, and he later served as a police officer.
A proud Penn State alumnus, David earned a bachelor's degree and later graduated from the Dickinson Law School.
In the late seventies, he served as Centre County District Attorney and was a judge of the Centre County Court of Common Pleas. From 2008 to 2012, he served as president judge and was appointed senior judge status in 2021.
In his final retention vote in 2011, more than 85 percent of Centre County
David is survived by Karen Grine, his wife of 55 years; his two children; and his four grandchildren.
Mr. Speaker, David was a mentor to generations of aspiring attorneys and judges and leaves behind an enduring legacy of public service in Centre County. God bless David and his family.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate another St. Louis star and in honor of Pride Month. I would like to recognize Jordan Braxton, an incredible champion of our community.
After identifying internally as female her entire life, Jordan made the decision to socially transition in her fifties. Her story is an inspiration to members of the LGBTQ+ community in the St. Louis region.
Jordan has found a lifelong passion for advocacy work. Over the past four decades, she has educated and mobilized people to join the fight against the HIV/AIDS epidemic. Now, as the community empowerment manager for Vivent Health, she hosts educational programs and community engagement events for the St. Louis region and beyond.
Mr. Speaker, I commend Jordan for her advocacy and thank her for all the love she pours into her work.
I will keep fighting in Congress to protect the rights and freedoms of everyone, no matter how they identify.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in reflection and gratitude of Reverend Roy McVeigh for his years of guidance, encouragement, and stewardship at Trinity on the Hill Global Methodist Church in Augusta, Georgia.
For decades, Roy has been a pillar of leadership in youth ministry, faithfully investing in generations of young people. A devoted Christian, father, grandfather, and friend, Roy's influence extends far beyond the walls of our church.
I witnessed firsthand the profound influence he had on all four of my children and now my grandchildren. It was because of Roy that Robin and I were able to watch our four children grow in their relationship with our Lord and Savior, one of life's greatest blessings. In fact, it was that influence and their influence that changed my life.
As Roy and Kathy begin their next chapter in North Carolina, I am reminded of his favorite Bible verse, John 3:30, which tells us: ``He must increase, but I must decrease.'' These profound words reflect the humility and faith that have defined his ministry for many years.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Roy on a well-earned retirement, and may God continue to bless him and Kathy and their entire family in the days ahead.
Mr. Speaker, today this Congress just voted to cut the WIC program that provides nutrition to pregnant women and children by over $200 million. Many of the same members who voted to cut funding for pregnant women and children to be able to afford food are also actively supporting giving $1 billion to the President for his ballroom, $1.8 billion, to reward cop-beaters and white-collar criminals as part of the President's slush funds, and $1 billion a day on an unnecessary war in the Middle East.
How corrupt and morally bankrupt could this Congress be, that we are taking food out of the mouths of children and pregnant women and using it to pay for vanity projects for the President of the United States? This Congress has failed the American people.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the heroic efforts of our first responders in Orange County. Ten days ago, a call came in to the Orange County Fire Authority from a local industrial plant saying the facility was about to explode. Immediately, we evacuated 45,000 people from the blast radius.
The Red Cross set up shelters. The city of Anaheim set up beds and food. The city of Stanton mobilized responders to evacuate the residents, and Garden Grove established a secure perimeter.
There are heroes everywhere in our community. Many of the people who sprang into action are civil servants or volunteers who worked around the clock to make sure that everybody was safe on Memorial Day.
I am grateful to all our emergency responders and for our friends and neighbors who helped out to make sure that not one life was lost.
I thank our first responders, our volunteers, and our community members.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday I proudly voted to pass an Iran War Powers Resolution to rein in this unraveling President. This was the fourth attempt by Democrats to assert our authority as a coequal branch of government and to say: No more to this war of choice.
Every Democrat in this House Chamber heard the cries of Americans saying no more to the billions spent on war instead of investing here at home.
Mr. Speaker, why did it take us this long? This war has gone on for more than 90 days. The price tag continues to rise by the billions every week, and every American feels the economic pain of this war at the gas pump.
Let me be clear: This is the first step toward stopping this war. Republicans in the Senate and the President still stand in the way of ending it. It is time for them to listen to the American people, just as Democrats did this week.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Coach Jack Clark, the architect of one of the greatest college sports programs in the history of the United States and his induction into the Bay Area Sports Hall of Fame.
A remarkable athlete from a young age, Jack played varsity football and rugby at the University of California before shifting his focus solely to rugby and playing for the U.S. national rugby team, where he was selected the first American to be amongst the best rugby players in the world.
Since 1984, Jack has served as the varsity rugby coach at Cal, leading the team to an astounding 31 national championships. He also coached the U.S. national rugby team to the 2003 World Cup. Jack's mentorship has touched the lives of countless young athletes in California and, indeed, from across the country.
Please join me in recognizing this remarkable leader and coach, Jack Clark, for his induction into the Bay Area Sports Hall of Fame and for his legendary career as Cal's head rugby coach. Go Bears.
Mr. Speaker, we pause today to honor the life of Spencer Leek, Jr., a son of Chicago, a steward of a sacred family legacy, and a servant of countless families in their moments of deepest sorrow.
The story of the Leek family is, in many ways, the story of Black perseverance in America. In 1933, Reverend
Spencer Leek, Jr., carried that mission forward with devotion, compassion, and grace. From answering phones at age 12 to becoming a licensed funeral director and vice president of Leek and Sons, he understood that his work was not merely a business, but it was a ministry. He comforted the grieving, uplifted the forgotten, and ensured that every family, regardless of means, was treated with respect and humanity.
For generations, Leek and Sons has stood as a trusted institution in Chicago and across this Nation in Chicago and America's Black communities. Spencer Leek, Jr., strengthened that institution by remaining deeply devoted to family, community, and service. He helped shepherd home-going celebrations for civil rights leaders, public servants, artists, and everyday citizens, whose lives mattered equally in his eyes.
His legacy reminds us that history is not only made by those who stand before huge crowds, but also by those who quietly serve others with fidelity and love.
Mr. Speaker, we honor Spencer Leek, Jr., by continuing his commitment to dignity, compassion, and community.
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 into the Record.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Illinois?
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues for their presence.
Mr. Speaker, I ask the question: Which side of history are you standing on? Now, some of you are here because you want to be here. Some of you are here simply because you walked past this floor to get somewhere else.
Either way, God has a plan, and that plan today is that you are going to hear the truth because this is a Special Order hour, and the order I have been given not by the Speaker of this House but by God, who made us all equal in his eyes, through this Republic, has never fully agreed and understood by all Members of this body that we have the right to stand in this well on the floor of the people's House and ask every Member of this body a question that cannot be avoided. It cannot be postponed, and it cannot be answered with procedural language or partisan talking points.
The question is this: On the eve of America's 250th birthday, which side of history are you standing for?
Now, I want you to notice something. In a few weeks, this Nation is going to celebrate. There are going to be parades. There are going to be speeches. They are going to have fireworks that light up the skies from sea to shining sea. Politicians on both sides of this aisle are going to stand at podiums and invoke the Founding Fathers and speak about liberty and justice and the greatest democracy the world has ever seen.
I want to ask you, gently, at first: What democracy are you talking about because I know my history, and I was born in this country, and I have read the documents.
The democracy that we are celebrating this summer, the democracy of 1776, did not include me or my ancestors, did not include my grandmother or my great-grandparents, did not include my great-great- grandmother who was somebody's property under the law of this land. It did not include the millions and millions of women and children who built this country's wealth with their bodies and their blood and their genius and were given in return not citizenship but chains.
In 1776, it was not a democracy. In 1787, it was not a democracy. They counted us as three-fifths of a human being to give slaveholders more power in this very Congress.
In 1865, it was not a democracy. We got the 13th Amendment and got the Black codes in the same season. In 1868, it was not a democracy. The 14th Amendment was ratified while African Americans and elected officials were being murdered across the South.
In 1870, it was not a democracy. The 15th Amendment was passed, and within 10 years, the Supreme Court had gutted its enforcement, and the Redeemers had taken back the South at the point of a rifle.
In 1920, our country was not a democracy. Women got the right to vote, but most Black women in the South could not exercise it. America did not overcome.
By any honest definition, it was not a democracy in this country until August 6, 1965, the day that President Lyndon Baines Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act, the day that this Nation finally, after 189 years of claiming to believe in democracy, extended a meaningful, enforceable, protected right to vote to all of its citizens regardless of race, 189 years in the making.
Let that sink into your spirit: 189 years of fireworks, 189 years of founding myths. ``We the people,'' it was said, and not one day of actual democracy for the people who look like me.
I am 60 years of age. I was born in 1966. In 1965, the Voting Rights Act was passed. I am the first generation of Americans ever born with equal rights under the law of this land. My generation is the first in 250 years. We are the first, 60 years of age.
If that doesn't disturb you, if that doesn't shake something in your soul, if you can hear that and feel nothing, then I want to suggest respectfully that something has gone wrong, something has gone morally numb.
Now, the Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision in Louisiana v. Callais, has gutted section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, has taken the spine out of the only serious legal protection that Blacks, Mexicans, women, and others have had since 1965. It has done, with legal language and constitutional reasoning, what the White Citizens' Council and the Ku Klux Klan used to do with economic pressure and shotguns. They have changed the method. They have not changed the mission.
Mr. Speaker, it is now my privilege and pleasure to yield to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Garcia), one of the leading outstanding voices for human rights and democracy in the United States of America and my colleague and friend.
Mr. Speaker, I am honored to be joined by the first Mexican American to serve in the United States House of Representatives from the entire Midwest. He has fought for the rights and well-being of his constituents and all Americans for decades. I am honored to yield to the gentleman, the first person of Mexican-American ancestry to serve in the House of Representatives from the State of Illinois, the Honorable Congressman Mr. Chuy Garcia.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Jackson for leading this Special Order hour for the Congressional Progressive Caucus, shining a spotlight on the Voting Rights Act, progress that has been made, and, most importantly, efforts to dismantle it and disenfranchise millions of people across the land and undermine our democracy.
Let me share a personal story. I arrived in the United States in 1965, the same year the Voting Rights Act was passed. I was a little boy from Durango, Mexico. I didn't speak a word of English, let alone know about the Constitution or the Founding Fathers, but I understood one thing: My parents believed in this country and brought me to this country because they knew that we could do better and that we could pursue our dream of a better life in America.
Years later, I became a citizen.
The Voting Rights Act gave me the opportunity I never dreamed possible: running for office. It was not because power invited me in, but because people in my community organized. We built power and exercised our right to vote. That is the magic of the Voting Rights Act.
Yet, it is precisely why Republicans have been working for decades to weaken our voting rights. When our opponents recently broke Black neighborhoods in Memphis into pieces, they knew exactly what they were doing. In Tennessee, Alabama, and Louisiana, getting rid of majority Black districts isn't accidental, either.
Heading to Court to make section 2 of the Voting Rights Act weaker, it is deliberate, and when Republicans push a bill that prevents married women from voting over name changes and restricts some eligible voters, that is their plan.
This is not election integrity. It is Klan tactics in a business suit, the Jim Crow school of law. They do not say ``literacy test'' anymore. They say: Bring us new paperwork. They don't say ``Whites only'' anymore. They say: Race neutral.
To them, fair means our communities can contribute to society by working and paying taxes, but we are not worthy enough to elect our own Representatives. It also means that you can pack, slice, and scatter Black and Latino voters, as long as those calling the shots label it smart politics.
Chicago's Latino community waited decades for real representation in Congress. The Fourth Congressional District of Illinois became the first Latino-majority congressional district in the Midwest because the Voting Rights Act had teeth and because our communities refused to disappear.
The only thing that they wanted was a level playing field, to be represented. We organized and won the Fourth Congressional District. Thirty years later, there is still just one other Latino in Congress from the whole Midwest region. She is a Latina, and I am proud to serve with her.
Representation matters, and that is why our opponents are attacking our voting rights. Nobody spends years in court trying to weaken voters who do not matter. They do not redraw maps because we are weak. They redraw maps because we are powerful. They fear Black power. They fear Latino power. They fear Asian power. They fear working people standing together and saying: We will not bow to white supremacy.
Right now, it is Black districts, but Latino districts are next, mark my words. Right now, it is Black districts, but Latino districts will follow.
They are coming after our power because they are afraid of what happens when working people stand together. I learned that from Harold Washington. Before he became Chicago's first Black mayor, Harold Washington served in this House of Representatives from the First District of Illinois, Representative Jackson, and helped to strengthen the Voting Rights Act. When I served with him as a member of the Chicago City Council, I saw true multiracial democracy come alive because of the Voting Rights Act.
So let's call the attack on working rights on voting rights for what it is: It is about power and control.
Our neighbors did not cross rivers and bridges, march in the streets, organize in church basements, fight in courtrooms, and knock on doors to sit down now.
I came here the year the Voting Rights Act became law. Sixty years later, I am here to say: We are not sitting down. We are not turning back. We will continue to work today for voting rights and representation for all.
I thank Congressman Jackson for raising his voice and the awareness for all of our American people to know.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Chuy Garcia for his remarks. I must say it is a pleasure and the privilege of a lifetime to serve in Congress with a childhood hero and friend of mine, my colleague, Congressman Chuy Garcia.
I would like to also note for the Record, Congressman Garcia was the chair of the Illinois Legislative Black Caucus when President Barack Obama was a former State senator from the State of Illinois. Congressman Garcia has always affiliated himself with the working class. He has never forgotten his roots. I thank him for his service and his kind words and his steadfastness.
Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege and indeed my pleasure to introduce, to share with my colleague Congressman Takano.
This is indeed LGBTQ month, Pride Month. Congressman Takano is the first person of the LGBTQ community and of color to openly serve in the House of Representatives. Congressman Garcia was the first Mexican American.
Mr. Takano is the first person of Japanese ancestry to serve in the United States House of Representatives. Many people of our community have just gotten to this great body that has contributed so much, but he is also the son and great-grandson of immigrants that were detained in U.S. concentration camps of Japanese ancestry. He bears the history and the lineage and the legacy of that tormented history, and he proudly serves. He has contributed so much for so many.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Takano), and I thank him for his service.
I thank Congressman Jackson for yielding. I thank him for that wonderful introduction. I won't claim to be the first Japanese American in Congress. There were many that came before me, such as Senator Inouye, Senator Spark Matsunaga, and many others such as Bob Matsui in the House of Representatives. But all of what you said about my family having been interned or incarcerated during World War II, that is the burden of history that I do carry and it is something that I think is very important and relevant to today.
I want to focus on the Voting Rights Act, which is the topic of this Special Order presented by the Congressional Progressive Caucus tonight.
In 1965, when I was probably 4 years old, President Lyndon B. Johnson gave a historic address to the Congress in the wake of Bloody Sunday. Bloody Sunday, you will recall, is that moment in Selma when John Lewis, among others, crossed the Edmund Pettus Bridge and were met with State troopers and the local police and they were bludgeoned and whipped and were charged by officers on horseback because they were marching to Montgomery to demand voting rights.
What America saw shocked their conscience, and what they saw was what shocked the conscience of America. It led President Johnson to address Congress, and he said these words before in this very Chamber to a joint session. He said: ``The most basic right of all was the right to choose your own leaders.'' A few months after that speech, the Voting Rights Act was the law of the land. And that is our topic today.
The voting rights protections, the Voting Rights Act protections were historic and gave rise to what historians consider the second Reconstruction era because for the first time in history the government ensured that minority Americans, Americans of color, could elect their own preferred candidate. The practice of gerrymandering to dilute the ability for communities of interest, communities of color to be able to elect their preferred candidate was the norm.
So one of the people who benefited from that first redistricting after the 1965 Voting Rights Act was put into law was Barbara Jordan from Houston, Texas, the first Black woman to represent the South and a personal hero of mine.
She was elected to Congress in a newly drawn Houston, Texas, district in 1972. I remember watching Barbara Jordan on television as a 13- or 14-year-old. She was famously a member of the House Judiciary Committee that was considering Articles of Impeachment against then-President Richard Nixon.
She famously called herself on the dais an inquisitor, and she recounted how improbable it was that she was an inquisitor sitting on the House Judiciary Committee.
She was there in great part because of the Voting Rights Act. If you just learned the history about this remarkable Member of Congress, she said on the House Judiciary Committee: ``My faith in the Constitution is whole; it is complete; it is total.'' That declaration made a huge impact on me. To see an African-American woman who talked about how improbable it would be for her to be a Member of Congress, it made me, a very young boy, believe that some day I could be a Member of this body.
Thanks to the Voting Rights Act, this Congress is the most diverse Congress in history. With 26 percent of its
The Supreme Court has taken a wrecking ball to that progress in its decision in Louisiana v. Callais. Now Republican Governors and State legislatures have canceled primaries to ram through maps, oftentimes in a matter of days, that suppress the voting power of Black and Hispanic Americans.
Mr. Speaker, instead of the Republican Party passing bills to lower the cost of living, they have seen fit to rig maps to try and keep the Republicans in power.
The Republicans would rather shred the single most transformative piece of legislation in the history of our democracy that has ever been, and they will do it if it means that the President can continue to build his ballroom, continue his insane war, and enrich himself and his family.
The President knows that if congressional maps were fair there would be enough of us here in Congress who would demand accountability for the grift he is running out of the White House. There would be enough voices demanding that he get the help he urgently needs as he continues to unravel in front of the world.
However, Mr. Speaker, my faith in the Constitution is whole, it is complete, and it is total. I know that while the Supreme Court may have dismantled the Voting Rights Act, Congress is not powerless, and the American people, in spite of the efforts to rig the maps and to draw districts to keep Republicans in power, we can and will prevail in the coming months. We will have the votes. If we have the votes, then we can put an end to gerrymandering and restore and strengthen protections against racial discrimination in voting so that every voice counts.
There is no question that this Supreme Court is facing a crisis of credibility. Americans are questioning the Court's legitimacy to make decisions based on the law and the history of this country.
Mr. Speaker, it is also time to put a check on the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court that has taken a wrecking ball to the Voting Rights Act.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Takano. I thank him for honoring his family's history and legacy. I am thankful for his service. I thank him for his voice during this critical hour when America's democracy is being challenged.
Mr. Speaker, it is now my honor and my privilege to share this podium with an outstanding young man of Indian ancestry and of the Hindu faith. He is the first person of Asian and Hindu faith to grace this esteemed body under this dome, on this floor, and in this well.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the honorable gentleman from the great State of California (Mr. Khanna).
Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Jackson for his leadership and vision on this 250th anniversary year of our country. He spoke out when there was silence in this body, when our leadership was distracted, and when the country was consumed by Donald Trump's diversions.
The gentleman spoke out and said that there was a case in the Supreme Court that is gutting the Voting Rights Act and that will take away from Black Americans the right to freely choose their Representatives. We were all complacent while the gentleman was sounding the alarm.
My friend knew, as the son of the great Reverend Jackson and as someone who has spent his entire life fighting for civil rights, he knew the dangers when powerful people try to strip away civil rights and freedoms from Black Americans.
Unfortunately, Congressman Jackson was right. A Supreme Court decision has been the fastest rollback of Black freedom and Black political rights since Rutherford Hayes ended Reconstruction.
Now I read that they want to go after districts with representation of majority Black Americans, majority Asian Americans, I don't believe they should go after my district just because it happens to be a majority Asian-American district with people of all backgrounds having a community of interest. I don't think they should be splitting up Congressman Jackson's district just to give the Democrats a little bit more of a partisan advantage, to take away a community that has struggled for freedom and civil rights for decades and split that up and not allow them to freely choose who their Representative is. That is what is going on in this country, and it is wrong.
Tonight, as someone who is the grandson of a freedom fighter who spent 4 years in jail with Gandhi and as someone whose parents sacrificed everything they had so that I could have a chance, I stand in solidarity with my friend to say that we have come too far to roll back.
I stand both for my friend's voting rights amendment and affirmative amendment next week which he will be introducing and for his standing up for voting rights in majority-minority districts.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Ro Khanna for his leadership and lending his voice. He is another first in the House of Representatives whom I am proud to call a Democrat, and I am proud to call a great American who is standing on the right side of history.
Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to introduce the next speaker who is the first in her family to graduate from college and went on to become a critical care physician and steadfast public servant. She answered the call to public service. She understands the urgent need to help ensure and help provide care for all Americans.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the honorable gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Dexter).
Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Jackson for convening this Special Order hour and for humbling me with such a kind introduction, but mostly for the gentleman's leadership and his steadfast commitment to protecting the Voting Rights Act.
When I was completing my medical residency in Colorado in the early 2000s, I distinctly remember standing in line for hours to vote with two small children in tow at the single polling location available to me. It was hours with toddlers in the glory of Colorado's most unpredictable weather.
That experience was a world away from voting in my home State of Oregon where, since 1996, our State has proudly chosen to vote entirely by mail. It is safe and secure. You can't hack paper. It is harder to intimidate a voter in their own home, and turnout is higher. In fact, in 2023, Oregon had the single highest voter turnout in the Nation.
That is how representative democracy is supposed to work. People should be able to easily exercise their voices and to use their power.
For generations, the Voting Rights Act helped move us closer to that promise. It stood as one of the most successful civil rights laws in our Nation's history, borne from those who marched, bled, and died for the right to have a say in their government.
Today, that promise is under assault. Over the last decade, a series decisions handed down by a radical Supreme Court has steadily weakened voting protections. Most recently, Trump's hand-picked Supreme Court Justices gutted section 2 of the Voting Right Act which allowed voters to challenge racially discriminatory maps.
This has unleashed a wave of racist gerrymandering across the South designed to dilute Black voting power, erase hard-won gains of the civil rights movement, and rig the political system for Republicans to stay in power.
In Alabama, the far-right Republican State legislature is now moving forward with a congressional map that all but erases one of two majority Black districts.
This is a map that judges in Alabama rejected, but that Trump's handpicked, radical Supreme Court is letting move forward.
It is a betrayal, and that betrayal and assault is why last month I traveled to Montgomery, Alabama, with Members of Congress from the Northeast to the West to stand in solidarity and to say: We are not going back.
Standing there, I felt the weight of history. The people, including the gentleman's father, courageously led this Nation in the fight against segregation and Jim Crow. They will not stand alone now.
We will fight back, and we have the playbook in front of us. This fight is
Our role here in Congress is clear: to serve as a check on a judiciary that is straying from its constitutional role and weakening the protections that ensure free and fair elections for all Americans. That is why I support term limits for Supreme Court Justices, a binding and enforceable code of ethics for the Court, and to ensure no court and no State legislature can ever again undermine the sacred right to vote.
Congress must pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to restore Federal protections against racial discrimination in voting. The right to vote is the foundation of our democracy. Oregonians sent me here to protect it, and I will keep fighting to do just that.
Mr. Speaker, I am so appreciative of the Congresswoman Dexter's words and her leadership.
Mr. Speaker, I am honored to introduce our next speaker whose district was effectively disenfranchised last year during the longest delay in inducting a Member to the House of Representatives. She is also the first Latina ever elected to Congress in the entire history in the State of Arizona.
She is a woman who comes from a proud, progressive, and staunchly American legacy in the ancestry of her father, Raul Grijalva, who stood with us, who led us, and who taught us. He stood by his values. He has instilled those, and he poured those into his outstanding daughter who is now, I am proud to say, the Congresswoman from the great State of Arizona.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Mrs. Grijalva).
Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Jackson for his steadfast leadership in this fight to protect our democracy, and I thank the CPC for bringing us together for this Special Order hour.
Mr. Speaker, we often talk about the right to vote as if it is just another issue before Congress. It is not just another issue. It is foundational. The right to vote is how people make their voices heard. It is how communities hold their government accountable. It is the foundation upon which every other right rests.
This is why the Supreme Court's decision in Louisiana v. Callais is so alarming. For generations, we have marched, organized, and sacrificed to secure protections enshrined in the Voting Rights Act. Those protections helped ensure that communities of color could fully participate in our democracy and elect Representatives who would fight for their interests.
Today, those hard-won protections are being chipped away piece by piece. We are already seeing the consequences across the South. Politicians are rushing to redraw maps and dilute the political power of communities of color. Instead of expanding participation in our democracy, they are looking for new ways to silence voters, undermine fair representation, and make it more difficult for people to get involved in our democracy.
As an Arizonan, this fight feels especially personal. The Voting Rights Act is not some abstract law to the people I represent. Southern Arizona is home to communities whose political representation has been protected by the Voting Rights Act for generations. Those protections helped ensure that Latino voters and other communities of color had meaningful opportunity to elect leaders who understood their experiences and would fight for them.
The truth is, without the Voting Rights Act, Arizona's political landscape would look very different. The Voting Rights Act helped make it possible for leaders like my dad, Congressman Raul Grijalva, to serve southern Arizona. It helped make it possible for me to stand here today as the first Latina ever elected from the State of Arizona to Congress.
That representation did not happen by accident. It happened because generations fought to ensure that every community, regardless of race, language, or ZIP Code, could have an equal voice in our democracy.
That is why what is happening today is so dangerous. When courts weaken the Voting Rights Act and politicians engage in racial gerrymandering, they are not just changing lines on a map. They are weakening the voices of entire communities, undermining the promise of equal representation, and silencing people, period.
Congress must act. We must restore the full protections of the Voting Rights Act. We must defend fair representation. We must strengthen our democracy so that every community has equal voice and equal opportunity to be heard.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time, and I thank the honorable and great Congresswoman Grijalva for her remarks.
Mr. Speaker, the arch-segregationists have changed their method. They have not changed their mission. The mission has always been the same: control who votes, control who counts, control who can challenge the powerful, control the map, control the district, control the outcome, and control the future.
Crack the Black community across three districts, pack it into one so overwhelmingly it elects one Congressman where it should elect two. Dilute the vote until it is so thin it cannot quench the thirst for justice. Then stand before the cameras and say: We believe in color blindness. We believe in equal protection. I don't see race. I don't see color. We believe every vote counts the same.
A lie dressed up in the Constitution is still a lie.
Let me make the history plain to my colleagues who might have missed it or who might have arrived late to this speech or to this subject.
After the Civil War, the 15th Amendment was passed in 1870. It said the right to vote cannot be denied on account of race. Within a decade, follow me closely, the Supreme Court in Cruikshank, gone; the poll tax, gone; the literacy test, gone; the Grandfather Clause, gone; the White primary, gone. Gone meaning gone from the grasp of Black citizens. Gone meaning the right existed on paper and nowhere else.
It took Jimmie Lee Jackson being shot by a State trooper in February 1965; it took John Lewis and Hosea Williams and 600 people walking across the Edmund Pettus Bridge on a Sunday morning in Selma, Alabama-- walking peacefully, walking prayerfully, walking legally toward a courthouse to register to vote--and getting beaten with clubs, trampled by horses, gassed in the open air on American soil--broadcast on American television for the world to see--that is what it cost to get the Voting Rights Act passed.
This was paid for in blood. It was not a speech, not a court brief, not a strongly worded letter, but blood on the Edmund Pettus Bridge.
Mrs. Viola Liuzzo, a White mother from Detroit, shot dead in her car, called a Negro lover on the Alabama highway because she came to help register people to vote. She believed in America. Chaney, Goodman, and Schwerner, two Jews and a Black man, buried in the Mississippi River. The four little girls--Addie Mae, Cynthia, Carole, and Denise--blown apart in their church on a Sunday morning in Birmingham. They all died so that America could vote and finally become a full democracy. They paid in full.
The question today is whether this Congress intends to honor their payment or to squander it.
I will talk to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, not at them but to them, because I believe we have something in common. Beneath the party, the discipline, and ideological positioning, there is a human being who understands that what is happening in this country now is fundamentally wrong.
I will ask them directly: What side of history do they want to be recorded on when they stood up at their town hall and talked about freedom? Were they telling the truth?
When they invoked the Founding Fathers and the Constitution, were they telling the truth? What side of history will they be on when they put their hand on their heart and they put their hand on the Bible and swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, were they telling the truth?
What side of history do they want to be recorded on? Because the Constitution includes the 14th Amendment. The Constitution includes the 15th Amendment. The Constitution includes the mandate that Congress shall have the power to enforce these amendments by
Let me say something about this word that keeps being propped up: ``color blindness.'' They say the Constitution requires color blindness. They say that we must treat all citizens the same regardless of race. They say the Equal Protection Clause demands it, and I want to say yes, I agree. I have always agreed. Every sensible person agrees, but here is what they are leaving out.
Color blindness applied to the remedy while the disease is still active is not justice. It is called ``malpractice.''
You cannot break a man's legs for 200 years and then hand him a pair of crutches and say now we treat you equally before the law, no special treatment. The legs are still broken. Our democracy is still in its infancy. The crutches are the remedy and the remedy is not the problem. It is the solution.
That is why we need the Voting Rights Act and section 2 for protection.
Notice how the legislator in Tennessee right after this law was passed inaccurately went to the gravesite, went to the balcony of the Lorraine Motel where Reverend Martin Luther King was assassinated and attacked that one district, that African-American district.
When Louisiana drew two majority Black congressional districts to have equal representation, it was not creating racial inequality. The racial inequality was already there. This was the cure, written into 200 years of American history in slavery, a century of Jim Crow, separate but equal unequal laws, decades of deliberate under funding and exclusion and redlining and deliberate disenfranchisement.
The district was the answer to the inequality, not the cause of it. To call the remedy unconstitutional while the disease runs free, that is not law, Mr. Speaker. That is protection of power by people who benefit from this power and this disaster of a decision.
I will recognize my colleagues who have spoken up, but the silence is deafening. For 250 years, as we celebrate our great country, a country, indeed, in progress of equal justice for all, where just 60 years ago was the starting line of democracy, 60 years ago was my birth and my timeline, and already the forces of regression and those great- grandchildren and grandchildren of the segregationists are now tearing down the guardrails that got us to a more pluralistic America.
The question has not been completed, and it is not complicated. The question is not subtle. The question is not one reasonable people can be on different sides of.
You are either for voting rights or you are against them. You are either for democracy or you are against it. You are either standing on the side of Selma, or you are standing on the side of the men who swung the clubs on the Edmund Pettus Bridge.
There is no middle ground. There is no procedural abstention. History does not grade on a curve.
Choose your side, colleagues. History will be watching. The future is listening. The people are watching. History will not forget.
Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time is remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has 2 minutes remaining.
Mr. Speaker, as we discuss the dismantling of voting rights and how many of my colleagues and I will continue to stand up to defend our most sacred right, I am proud to be joined by my colleagues who have stood up for the right side of history.
Mr. Speaker, I want to say something about what I have heard and what I have not heard from the other side. My colleagues on the other side have had a great deal to say about constitutional principles, but I have not heard a plan to protect the votes for all Americans. I have not heard them say how these congressional maps will be fair for all people. I have heard a great deal about legal frameworks, but I have not heard a single proposal to replace the protection that Callais has taken away.
I have heard about process and procedure through the proper channels, but I have not heard anyone on the other side of the aisle stand up and say in plain language that Black voters deserve full and equal representation and that this Congress will make sure that they get it. Why not? It should not be a complicated sentence.
Let me talk about the history for a moment because one of the things I have heard today is the suggestion that we are living in the past. That is not true. We are relitigating things that have already been solved. It is time to move forward. We want to go forward to make America better and to keep America strong.
Unfortunately, there is an eerie silence. There is a duplicity and a complacency, and trying to rest upon the laurels. There is something to be said by God himself about trying to turn a blind eye toward injustice. It should haunt your conscience.
Your children are watching. The future will be taking note. History shall record us all. What side of history will you stand on? Will you say anything to stand up for justice?
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I thank you for your consideration.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Deano's Italian on being named the Best Italian Restaurant in the State of Georgia.
Deano's is a beloved family-owned and -operated Italian restaurant in Dublin, Georgia. This great honor highlights how a small town eatery with a deep compassion for its community can compete with restaurants in larger cities across the State.
The restaurant was evaluated on multiple criteria, such as food quality, consistency, atmosphere, and its overall dining experience. Voters noted that what made Deano's stand out was its combination of authentic Italian cuisine and southern hospitality.
The city of Dublin also believes this achievement will bring business to nearby shops, cafes, and local attractions, creating a meaningful impact on their economy.
Deano's has proven just how far commitment to customers can take you. This level of service is a great example of Georgia's growing tourism industry.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate Augusta ``Gussie'' Gammon's 100th birthday.
Gussie has dedicated much of her life to public service and an unwavering commitment to the Republican Party.
Born on June 25, 1926, in Philadelphia, Gussie moved to Georgia in 1983, becoming a strong force within Republican politics by founding four women's Republican clubs and serving as a delegate to three Republican Presidential conventions. She also served as Glynn County campaign manager for President George H.W. Bush and Congressman Jack Kingston.
Aside from her work in politics, she founded Johnson Insurance Agency in 1969 in the Florida Keys with her late husband. Together, they raised four daughters and were blessed with eight grandchildren and eight great-grandchildren.
Gussie later married Don Gammon, with whom she continues her remarkable journey.
Mr. Speaker, it is my great honor to wish Ms. Gammon a happy 100th birthday.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Dr. Paul Brooksher, who retired from the position of superintendent of Bryan County Schools this year.
Paul has faithfully worked in public education for 31 years, serving as superintendent for 14 of them. Bryan County is one of the fastest- growing school systems in Georgia, and Paul has worked tirelessly to lay the foundation necessary to support this growth through effective investment in teachers, facilities, and programs.
After he announced his retirement, his colleagues encouraged him to reconsider, a true testament to how well-
Paul said he was ready to step into a new chapter of his life, one where he could focus on spending time with the ones he loves the most.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Paul for his contribution to the education of young Georgians, and I wish him the very best.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Dr. Randy Kluender for his more than 40 years of experience and service in the field of dentistry.
Randy currently serves as the president and a board of trustees member of the Georgia School of Orthodontics. He has enjoyed a wonderful and fulfilling career, including as administrator at the University of Colorado and leadership roles in the American College of Dentists and Omicron Kappa Upsilon.
Chosen for ADEA's Harry Bruce Legislative Fellowship in Washington, D.C., Randy brought a wealth of experience to legislative issues concerning dentistry. There, he worked to increase funding for the National Institutes of Health and the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research.
Above all, Randy is a man of good character who has spoken with numerous prospective dental students, conveying his passion and the importance of upholding ethical standards in dentistry.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Frederick Muller, who passed away on May 19, 2026.
Muller was a UPenn and Georgetown graduate, husband, Navy lieutenant, and successful investment manager.
During the Cuban missile crisis, Muller served to enforce the naval quarantine of Cuba.
After 2 years in the North Atlantic, he served an additional 2 years with the Navy intelligence unit in Washington.
In addition to his military service, Muller was also successful professionally. He founded, grew, and eventually sold his own institutional investment firm.
Outside of work, Muller continued to serve others in new ways. In Georgia, he was a trustee for the Savannah Country Day School, a member of the University of Georgia Library's Board of Visitors, a member of the Trust Committee of Saint John's Episcopal Church, and a trustee of the Mighty Eighth Foundation.
Frederick Muller leaves behind a legacy of family devotion, military service, American entrepreneurship and servant leadership.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Jere's Antiques in Savannah on their 50th anniversary.
Since 1796, Jere's Antiques has been a major source of supplies for antique auction houses, designers, and individuals.
Over the years, he has created a destination filled with history, craftsmanship, and timeless beauty.
From sourcing extraordinary pieces across England and Europe to welcoming generations of customers into his Savannah showroom, Jere's passion and dedication have never wavered.
Jere's success is not only measured in business achievement, but in the countless people he has inspired, helped, and connected with over the decades.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Jere for preserving the past, enriching Savannah's homes, and all of his hard work for the past 50 years.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and the legacy of James G. Minter, Jr. of Inman, Georgia, who passed away on May 27, 2026, at the age of 95.
Minter was a proud graduate of Fayette County High School and University of Georgia, where he earned a degree in journalism.
Following his education, he served his country as an infantry training officer during the Korean war before beginning a distinguished journalism career with The Atlanta Journal and The Atlanta Constitution.
Over the course of decades, Minter became the executive editor of the combined Atlanta Journal-Constitution, helping shape one of Georgia's leading newspapers.
Beyond his professional accomplishments, he was a devoted husband, father, grandfather, great-grandfather, and lifelong member of the Methodist Church.
I extend my deepest condolences to his wife of 70 years, Anne; his family; and all who knew and loved him. We honor his service, his leadership, and his enduring impact on his community.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor McHugh ``Mac'' Maurin, who will be turning 100 years old on June 4.
Mr. Maurin served our country as a Navy World War II veteran.
He was raised in Reserve, Louisiana, where he attended and graduated from LSU in 1951 following the war.
After graduating, he began to work as a civil engineer in the roofing manufacturing industry.
His successful career took him and his family to New Jersey, Texas, and finally Peachtree City, Georgia, in 1981.
He then retired to Concord, Georgia, before following his youngest daughter to St. Marys.
Mr. Maurin's accomplishments also extended to the home and family he created. He raised six children with his late wife, Peggy, who passed away earlier this year, after more than 72 years of marriage.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Maurin for his service and wish him a happy birthday.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Commander Nathaniel L. Robinson for his dedication to protecting the American people.
Commander Robinson is the commanding officer of the Coast Guard Marine Safety Unit, where he serves as Captain of the Port, officer in charge of marine inspections, Federal maritime security, and on-scene operations throughout coastal Georgia.
He is a graduate of the University of West Florida, Southern New Hampshire University, and the U.S. Air Force Command and Staff College.
For his esteemed work, Commander Robinson received a certificate in executive leadership from the University of Notre Dame.
Prior to the Coast Guard, he was the director of marketing for the Naval Aviation Museum Foundation. He was granted his commission from the United States Coast Guard's Officer Candidate School in 2006.
His decorations include the Meritorious Service Medal, Coast Guard Commendation Medal, Coast Guard Achievement Medal, and Commandant's Letter of Commendation Ribbon.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Commander Robinson for his outstanding service.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and to honor Mr. O.V. Lewis of Blairsville, Georgia, for his upcoming 95th birthday on June 16, 2026.
O.V. joined the Young Harris College faculty in 1952, after teaching high school for 2 years in Wayne and Appling Counties in south Georgia. During his time at Young Harris, he served as an accounting instructor for 48 years and as a registrar for 31 years.
He retired in 2011, with the longest tenure of any previous college employee, but his service in advancing Young Harris College's mission did not end there. Through generous philanthropy and planned giving, he established the O.V. Lewis Endowed Scholarship to advance the education of future generations.
In 2022, O.V. was honored with the Nancy Louise Haynes Stevens Sanderson Robertson Outstanding Friend Award.
O.V. will tell you his fondest memories center around his time with Young Harris College faculty and students. The feeling is reciprocal. Many former students, such as myself, still maintain close relationships with him and credit him with having a significant influence on their success in life and careers, all because of O.V.'s unparalleled commitment to his students in the classroom and beyond their graduations.
Mr. Speaker, I thank O.V. for his outstanding commitment to furthering the education of so many students, and I wish him a very happy 95th birthday.
Mr. Speaker, we are going to actually try to do something that is a little complex, so I apologize. I apologize for those trying to keep track.
If I start speaking like a machine gun--once again, I have had a stunning amount of coffee--just wave at me, and I will slow down.
I am going to try to actually explain and walk through what we talk about constantly, and that is waste and fraud. I have got three silos here, and I am going to try to fight for some understanding:
What is real in its fiscal impact.
What is sort of commercial fraud. Hey, we screwed up in the way we wrote a piece of legislation. The administration, the bureaucrats actually have allowed leakage--some of the leakage being hundreds of billions of dollars.
And over here are bad actors, you know, the group from Nigeria that has actually been conning unemployment fraud like we went through during COVID.
I also need to actually try to explain debt and deficits when our borrowing is stunning. So I was going to just start with this article. It is something simple, but I am going to use it as a benchmark.
This convicted felon gets a million dollars a year to sell obsolete internet services. You paid for it. So we have a con artist that set up an internet company, got a government contract. He gets a million dollars a year. It is outrageous. We should actually have the technology, the discipline, the way we write legislation, the way we do our appropriations to stop it. But you have got to understand a million dollars is what we borrow about every 12 to 15 seconds.
I need to put this in perspective, because so often here we get our brothers and sisters, Members of Congress, come behind these microphones, and we talk about what we are going to save on something. They don't seem to understand the burn rate. I think yesterday, we hit $94,000 a second in borrowing. So often the debate here, more money has been borrowed in the debate than the actual piece of legislation is going to save.
So let's actually try to walk through this and walk through these sorts of silos and then understand the punch line. I am going to do this three or four times.
A number of the things you would consider fraud, I consider fraud. There are lobbyists outside in this hallway, it is their client's business model. That is what makes this so difficult.
When you get groups from even your home district coming and saying, ``David, you don't want to reform this. That is our business model. We would have to change things,'' that is actually the real punch line when we use the term ``waste and fraud.''
Let's start with the board we often start with just so, once again, we have a benchmark of understanding. Your country is going to borrow about $2 trillion this year, and there is some noise in that number. It is actually--in some ways, we would score it as more in the Joint Economic Committee because we actually are crediting ourselves back some of the student loan money, but let's just stick with $2 trillion.
Do you see here in the blue? That is really what we vote on, nondefense, discretionary, and defense. Most of this red, almost all of it, is formulaic, but this is actually where much of the fraud is. Maybe that is the reason we don't touch it enough because the fraud is in Medicare, the fraud is in Medicaid, and the fraud is in other programs that are on autopilot. They are formulaic.
You reached a certain age. You get this benefit.
You have paid into the system. You get this benefit.
You fall under a certain income. You get this benefit, except within there, particularly in the Medicaid system--you have seen the analysis the Joint Economic Committee has done, or my joint economic Republicans have done over the last year on the number of ways States--States--are the driver of the fraud.
So let's actually walk through that.
If I came to you right now and told you that New York, the number of home healthcare aides--this is a Medicaid program where grandma is poor, she needs help, I have someone at home who needs help, and there is a program that came really out of COVID or was expanded out of COVID where I can actually hire my friends, my families, my nieces, my nephews.
What happens, for every 1,000 residents in New York over age 65 in 2024, which is when we have the data, for New York, I have 171 people. So think of that: 1,000 people over age 65, I have 171 people receiving a check for this program. I have shown some charts here in the past that this was the number one job creator, I think, in New York City over the last couple of years.
Is that fraud? I think it is, but it is leakage in the design of the system. We are being cheated by the State of New York, and then you start to take a look. Well, New York is 171, but California, for every 1,000 people over age 65, they have 139 people receiving these checks.
The fascinating thing is that when we first exposed this months ago-- and we had Secretary Kennedy in front of us about a month ago and we actually talked about this in the hearing, and he said that it is one of the most outrageous things that he has ever come across in his time at HHS--the month before that, my office was full of people angry at me. There are people buying editorials.
That is one of the great scams right now is to set up AI, you put up an editorial, and there is almost anyone who will publish it because that is actually a lobbyist for this leakage, and this is billions and billions and billions and billions of dollars.
Remember, if New York had the same cost of its Medicaid system--not Medicare--Medicaid--this is healthcare for the poor--and they had the same average cost as the rest of the country, it is $50 billion a year. It is $50 billion a year.
So at one point, I showed you the article. It is outrageous. It is $1 million, about 15 seconds of borrowing. We are going to borrow about $7 billion today, so $50 billion starts making an impact. Starting to understand the scale of these numbers, and you start to realize that the top 15 producers by spending per claim, you start to actually look at some of the things.
California actually has some magic. They must have some magic with their Medicaid system because they are able to create their own codes.
Within those codes, we have one that is called Medi-Cal Personal Care Services Program, and this has been around since--2019 to 2024 is my data. On average, that code costs $876. Most of that money is paid for you by Federal taxpayers.
Is this waste and fraud? Well, it is unlike any other State. It is unlike any other code. This is an example, when you hear the politicians say ``I am going to get rid of waste and fraud,'' and we make it sound like it is somebody snuck across the border and stole money or someone on the internet from the other side of the world stole money, all of those are true, but it is the design of the system that we have developed.
In the end of this stack, I am going to walk through a series of solutions, but understand that when we tried to just trim down some of the growth of Medicaid spending last summer and the left just attacked, attacked, attacked, and we would show, but what about this fraud, what about this fraud, what about this fraud, the discussion goes silent.
It is in the math. This stuff was being audited during the last Democratic nomination. We just never fixed it.
So you start to take a look at ``Top 15 Producers by Medicare Claims,'' and you start to look back to the personal care. It turns out that there were 1,000,257 claims filed under this. The scale--to understand the scale of some of these frauds, this is in the billions, and we allow this.
Does this meet your definition of waste and fraud, because HHS--we are going to walk through a series of things that MedPAC has tried to identify for years that we can't seem to get enough votes here to even run a piece of legislation to try to fix it.
Look, a couple more of these boards, and then we are going to have some fun
It isn't some dodgy person in a dark room. It is actually how we are administering our programs and how poorly we are doing our jobs.
All right. ``Top 15 Producers by Medicaid Spending.''
Personal care services. Think of this: $139 billion from 2019 to 2024. It is $139 billion. That starts to add up to be real money. Maybe instead of screwing around this place where we are trying to do rounding errors or covering seconds of borrowing--which even in some of the debates earlier today, that is what we were doing--how about we start going after the things that have b's in front of it. I am going to show you a couple where there are t's in front of it, trillions in front of it.
If we are going to actually try to convince the brothers and sisters, the taxpayers, the voters, and the American citizenry of what is going on--debt and deficits and demographics in this State--that in a little over 6 years, Medicare trust fund is empty, and hospitals, those that get their Medicare part A money, are going to take a 12 percent cut, and guess what is also happening around this same time. The Social Security trust fund is empty, and people on Social Security, under the current law, are going to take a 24 percent cut, and we are going to double poverty.
How are we going to turn to people and say that this is over $630 billion to fix it in just a single year, and the next year is more and the next year is more? How many people are going to look at us and say that you have not taken care of the waste and fraud problem. How am I going to trust you to actually make me take a cut or make me pay more taxes or redesign the systems or do other things? We have to build some trust, and you build the trust by stopping this insanity.
Let's actually have a little bit more fun here. The New York Post headline, ``Notoriously Fraudulent New York Health Program Lost $1.2 Billion to Scammers and Middlemen.'' It was ten times--ten times--the money stolen in Minnesota.
Why haven't you heard about this? If scammers are bleeding our Medicaid systems around the State, why is it so hard to actually say-- we hold hearings on this. We have discussions about it, and then we produce a piece of legislation, and it is almost impossible to get sponsors on it because the next moment, it turns out that some of these middlemen that you and I would consider fraudsters hire lobbyists or actually bring groups of people here saying ``But that is our business model.''
You start to look at other things.
You start to look at other things, City Journal, ``Gavin Newsom's Empire of Fraud: California has lost at least $180 billion to fraud, according to officials and experts.'' It is program after program after program after program. $180 billion is real money.
Is the California delegation willing to help us fix this?
Here is your problem. You start to look at some of these things: unemployment fraud, $32.6 billion; Medicaid fraud, that one was only $178 million; homeless spending, let's see, billions and billions, doesn't actually give me a number.
You start to look at these things, and the waste and fraud are in the design of our programs. There is the fraud where somebody stole your Social Security number and did this, but the real money is how poorly we designed the programs that are meant to help our brothers and sisters, particularly those in poverty.
Let's have some more fun with this, if you call this fun. CalMatters, sham hospice scheme--remember, this is something my team--I chair the Oversight Subcommittee in the Ways and Means Committee. We have been now working on this for months and months and months. ``Sham hospice schemes are bilking Medicare,'' and some Medicaid, ``and harming California seniors.''
We actually believe this scheme--if you have been reading the papers, L.A. Times and I believe The Wall Street Journal have done stories on this. The amount of fraud, particularly in L.A. County, on hospice-- these are some of the most frail in our society. These are supposed to be the brothers and sisters we are loving as they are near ending life, except there is an entire fraud network.
I am going to actually show you--let's just talk about it before I try to show you. Someone finally did a little bit of data and found there are hospices where there are half a dozen, a dozen, two dozen at the same P.O. Box, and it went on for years.
Are we really that moronic to not run a simple data system and say: Wait, does this make sense? I have multiple hospices billing from the same P.O. Box. Does this make any sense?
Let's take a look at some more headlines: HHS Office of Inspector General report highlights CMS potentially overpaid Medicare Advantage organizations $462 million based on current unreported--I want to explain this one. Let's get a little complicated.
This is what they call MedPAC. This is the group of experts and auditors that look mostly at Medicare Advantage. Medicare Advantage is now 55 percent of all of our seniors who choose Medicare. They choose not part A, part B, but they go on what is called Medicare part C. That is Medicare Advantage.
In here, the latest report says, it comes in about 114 percent higher than fee-for-service. Medicare Advantage was supposed to come in at 95 percent of the cost. That difference, about $1.6 to $2 trillion over 10 years, it turns out it is real money.
How many Members of Congress have bothered to actually break this binder and read these MedPAC reports?
I introduced a piece of legislation a year ago to not cut services but to get rid of the risk scoring and the star rating, all the ways it was being defrauded, and that is what this board is about.
What happens when you have people in Medicare Advantage is that the insurer is going out and saying an acute stroke diagnosis code, except the data says it is a fake code. It is not something anyone has. That is how they are defrauding Medicare Advantage.
It is not a cut of services we are talking about. Yet, the number of lobbyists and the number of social media platforms that are somehow paid by those PR firms beat the crap out of those of us who have been trying to fix it.
Is this what you consider waste and fraud? Of course, it is. The difference is, those of us trying to fix it have to take on an army of people who make their money from it. That is actually, if you want to start to stabilize, even demonstrate to bond markets we are starting to take serious our leakage, our bleeding, our borrowing--remember, we are going to borrow $7 billion to $8 billion just today.
Where are my brothers and sisters here who will tell you how conservative they are, how tough they are, how truth-teller they are? How many of them are going to sponsor the legislation to help me fix this? So far, for almost 1 year, not a single sponsor other than myself.
Let's actually go through some more. Let's go through my home. Actually, no, let's do Minnesota first. Minnesota is always fun to go through. All right, 5 Eyewitness News: ``Audits--Lack of security reviews left Minnesota's SNAP system vulnerable to breaches, fraud.''
If you have read the story of nutrition support, we are trying to help the most vulnerable in our society, and it is full of fraudsters and fraudsters and fraudsters. How does someone not catch it when the same Social Security number is used over and over, when there is no Social Security number, when the same location has more people signed up for a benefit than there are people in that immediate area?
Keep that in mind because I am going to walk you through some of the solutions, but this stuff is absolutely outrageous, and then you start to take a look. Channel 7 Eyewitness News: `` `Ghost students' can steal your identity, enroll you in school, and take loans out in your name.''
We had people getting student loans who don't exist. Many of them had been buying your personal ID, your personal information, on the dark web, signing you up, putting you in debt. Then, you get to figure out how to unwind it as they are walking away with the money. This is another sense of the incompetent design in these programs.
All right, a little bit more, and this one, I happen to actually have had a fascinating experience with: ``Arizona sober living crisis: 140 indicted in billion-dollar Medicaid scheme.'' We think it is $2.8 billion.
Let me walk you through this. We call this the sober living home scam in Arizona.
Two Christmases ago, this last Christmas--we have sort of a family tradition. We go up to the Navajo Nation. We will call it the Nation. My parents used to do some work up there more as part of a church group. We have actually been up there and installed Starlink satellite dishes so that some of what we call chapter houses actually could have broadband, so they could have telehealth. My little girl has actually helped to do sheep herding.
It is a fascinating place. It is monstrous. I have had friends on the Navajo Nation come up to me and say: David, you realize my uncle disappeared 7 years ago? A van showed up here in Kayenta. They were recruiting people who might have had a drinking problem. They put them in the van, and they disappeared.
It turns out, they were being driven down to Phoenix, being stuck in a sober living home, being billed to the Medicaid system, which we call AHCCCS, Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System. Then, when the benefit was over, they were thrown out and rolled to another sober living home.
I had multiple acquaintances, friends from the Navajo Nation, say they have family members they can't find. They have disappeared. This is beyond the fraud of stealing $2.8 billion. Most of it actually isn't State money. It is also Federal money because of the way the match works.
There are people who have died. People have lost their lives because of how criminal this was, and it went on for a decade.
Then, our model is, we are going to indict a bunch of people. We are never going to get the money back. Almost none of these people will ever really go to jail or prison.
Have we lost our minds? Yes, we have.
DOJ announces a record-breaking take down of healthcare fraud schemes--okay, let's actually walk through a couple. The Justice Department has cracked down on a Pakistani national who allegedly orchestrated a $650 million fraud scheme in Arizona's Medicaid system.
How does this happen? How many times have you actually heard the attorney general, the county attorneys, these things, get up and say: We finally busted a fraud scheme that has been going on for years and years, and there is this much money missing. Now, all the money got shipped overseas, so we are not going to get any of it back, but we are going to file indictments on people who are not in the country anymore or were never in the country.
Have we lost our minds?
So here are a couple more of these because I am under a clock here. ``DOJ and CMS healthcare 2025 fraud crackdown.'' If you take a look at--and you have got to give the Trump administration, you have got to give Kennedy, you have got to give Dr. Oz credit because they are trying. Look at the chart. $1.3 billion and trying to crack down and stop some of the fraud.
But here is your problem: Just Medicare will spend $1.1 trillion this year.
So you have got to understand the scale. $1 billion is a stunning amount of money. A trillion is a thousand billion dollars. So start to look at these.
Now, this one I wanted to use as an example of how perverse Washington, D.C., and Congress have become. Let's look at this headline: ``Duplication of radiology imaging studies . . .''
What is the cost? My economists last year, we did--and it is a rough estimate--we were coming up with $25 billion to $35 billion in duplicative scans. You bust up your knee. You are out snow skiing. You get an MRI on your knee. Then you go to your hometown, and what is the first thing that happens? They redo the scan. CTs, MRIs, ultrasounds, X-rays. We have been proposing a simple idea. Take the scan when you get it. Attach it to your smartphone, and it travels with you. When you get to your doctor or your next appointment, they hit a button, and, boom, it is up on the big screen, and they can see, oh, yes, you have a fracture or you don't have a fracture.
Let's say at the top end my economist came up with $35 billion. I have already had multiple lobbyists in my office doing everything they can to stop that piece of legislation from ever getting a hearing because it turns out the duplicate scans are their business model.
So the point I am trying to sell here is: You and I, we go out on the stump, and we say we are going to go after waste and fraud, except the lobbyist in the back of the room is pissed at us because that fraud that you and I know does not make you healthier, does not make society better, does not provide an actual service is their business model.
``South Florida man sentenced in $2.2 million Medicare fraud and money laundering scheme . . .'' How many times have you picked up a newspaper publication or gone online and heard the stories about durable medical equipment fraud in South Florida. How is it possible it still goes on in a time with the technology we have.
Let's see, what else do I have on this one. ``Pasadena clinic receives $34 million in Medicare skin graft scam . . .'' Oh, this one was fun. It turns out we spend about 4, 5 years here trying to stop this, and they lobbied. It was one of the craziest things ever. Companies that ended up getting indicted were here with their CEOs lobbying us not to reform the system. This is where they would grow skin--diabetic retinopathy, these things, you know, skin patches, and all the sudden the price skyrocketed because the way the codes and the billing worked.
Eventually CMS had to come in and do Congress' job for them because Congress was so incompetent we couldn't actually do it. CMS came in and said we are just stopping it. We are going to allow this handful of companies to do it because at least they have some trusted history, and they were screaming at us.
It turns out when we did the research on them, the number that were absolute fraudsters--billions and billions of dollars were stolen. Once again, the Medicare trust fund is gone in 6 years, and we are not fixing these things.
Look, I am going to do a little skipping to the end because we are running out of time. Please, give CMS some love and support because working with my office we are finally starting to act like professionals and do things that the private sector has been doing for 20 years.
Here is a simple example. How many of you have a credit card? How many of you have ever used your credit card in a spot you are not normally at? How many of you, the moment you start using the credit card you start getting text messages and phone calls saying: Hey, is this actually you? That is a data system from 20 years ago. You are telling me that as we start to protect consumers and strengthen the programs, as we are starting to actually build models to start to protect and stop some of the bad payments, we don't have the technology? Of course, we have the technology. It is off-the-shelf technology.
We have a data person who has come to our office multiple times who is an expert in stopping fraud in healthcare. He said: Do you realize that there is a package that is $1,500 a month that would have stopped that sober living home fraud in Arizona? We would have seen that things don't match. The addresses don't match. The Social Security numbers don't match. There are multiple billings that roll and roll and roll.
When you have $11.7 billion saved just by the Treasury Department building a system that is sort of a do not pay list--let me give you an example that is from 20-plus years ago. Twenty-plus years ago I was the Maricopa County treasurer. We did this thing called positive pay, and it wasn't new technology. Here are our payees, the people we are going to pay checks to, we owe, because as the county treasurer you are the guy issuing the checks to pay for things. And over here is the list. When they didn't match, we didn't pay. That is 20-plus-year-old technology. Treasury has started to do a version of that, and it has already saved over $11 billion stopping fraudulent checks going out the door.
I want to make an argument in my last couple minutes before I hit the end of my time. What we do in government is insane. How many of you would build a business model where I am going to pay 6 percent, 7 percent of my payments are going to be fraud, but don't worry about that. Eventually we are going to hire a bunch of auditors. Then we will hire some lawyers. And then we will hire some law enforcement. And then we will try to go recover the money. Of course, we never actually recover the money. And most of the time we never get to put someone in prison, but we will get to do great press releases.
The age of hiring buildings full of auditors and lawyers is over. We live in the time of technology where these checks should never, ever, ever--the fraudulent checks should never get out the door. If you read any of the data magazines or articles or talk to some of the experts we are starting to develop here, we can catch this and stop it.
Mr. Speaker, the argument I am trying to make here, and if I haven't done it particularly elegantly, I am trying, is we need the public to believe we have finally woken up and become great stewards of their money. The reality of the waste and fraud is huge, but the scale of our borrowing, the scale of our debt, which is driven by our demographics-- next year, we are going to have fewer under 18 than we had 20 years ago and double the number of 65 and up. In 28 months, over half of Federal spending will go to our brothers and sisters who are 65 and up.
We are going to have to deal with the reality of our demographics and our math. Maybe the public will believe us when we can also say we stopped the scam artists. We stopped the missed design. We stopped the way we have screwed up the model on Medicare, Medicaid, and so many of the programs which were designed to help people and not enrich fraudsters.
Mr. Speaker, I think we are up against time, so I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.
The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 10 p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until Monday, June 8, 2026, at noon for morning-hour debate.
