Skip to Content

Do you allow analytics?

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.

Referandom is here: Tinder for Congress 🔥

Support Referandom

HouseFloor Session

July 21, 2026

Speeches 107Members 89Roll Calls 4Video 11 hr 55 min

Congressional Record ↗

0:00 / 11:54:58

Official video: Office of the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives

Colors show party. A speech without a time was not found on the video; tap it to read it in the transcript.

Bills Debated

H.R. 8800 →H.R. 8884 →H.Con.Res. 113 →H.Res. 1438 →5 members spoke
H.R. 8800 →H.R. 8884 →H.R. 6955 →H.R. 7008 →H.R. 9770 →H.Con.Res. 113 →H.Res. 1438 →1 member spoke
H.R. 6955 →2 members spoke
H.R. 6955 →H.Res. 1438 →10 members spoke
H.R. 9770 →H.Res. 1438 →3 members spoke
H.R. 8800 →33 members spoke
H.R. 8800 →H.Res. 1438 →3 members spoke

Roll Calls

H.R. 1118Vote to See ResultValue Over Cost Act of 2026On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended
H.R. 6955Vote to See ResultMain Street Capital Access ActOn Passage
H.R. 6955Vote to See ResultMain Street Capital Access ActOn Motion to Recommit
H.R. 9770Vote to See ResultContinuing Appropriations Act, 2027On Passage

Speeches and Other Business

Routine Business (14)

01House of Representatives Tuesday, July 21, 2026
02Designation of Speaker Pro Tempore
04Honoring Former Mayor Dolly Perez
05After Recess
06After Recess
H.R. 1118 →
08After Recess
H.R. 9770 →
10Removal of Names of Members as Cosponsors of H.R. 9336
H.R. 9336 →1 member spoke
11Hour of Meeting on Tomorrow
1 member spoke
12Removal of Name of Member as Cosponsor of H.R. 9535
H.R. 9535 →1 member spoke
13Adjournment
1 member spoke
14Deletions of Sponsors From Public Bills and Resolutions

Daily Digest

Public Bills and Resolutions Introduced
28 public bills, H.R. 9795- 9822; and 6 resolutions, H.J. Res. 203-204; H. Con. Res. 114; and H. Res. 1443-1445 were introduced.
Pages H5022-23
Reports Filed
There were no reports filed today. Speaker: Read a letter from the Speaker wherein he appointed Representative Stutzman to act as Speaker pro tempore for today.
Page H4685
Recess
The House recessed at 11:43 a.m. and reconvened at 12 p.m.
Page H4697
Recess
The House recessed at 1:11 p.m. and reconvened at 1:31 p.m.
Page H4705
Suspension: Proceedings Resumed
The House agreed to suspend the rules and pass the following measure. Consideration began Monday, July 20th. Value Over Cost Act: H.R. 1118, amended, to amend title 41, United States Code, and title 10, United States Code, to provide best value through the multiple award schedule program, by a \2/3\ yea-and-nay vote of 421 yeas to 1 nay, Roll No. 252;
Pages H4705-06
Agreed to amend the title so as to read
``To amend title 41, United States Code, to provide best value through the multiple award schedule program, and for other purposes.''.
Page H4706
Recess
The House recessed at 8:10 p.m. and reconvened at 8:31 p.m.
Pages H5007-08
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027
The House considered H.R. 8800, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year. Consideration is expected to resume tomorrow, July 22nd.
Pages H4736-H5000, H5001-18
Pursuant to the Rule, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 119-33 shall be considered as adopted in the House and in the Committee of the Whole, in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Armed Services now printed in the bill.
Pages H4746-H4966
Agreed to
Rogers (AL) en bloc amendment No. 1 consisting of the following amendments printed in part A of H. Rept. 119-755): Strong (No. 10) that inserts the text of the TRUST Act; Ogles (No. 11) that requires DOD to not enter contracts with providers that provide advance disclosure of cyber security vulnerabilities to entities based in countries of concern; Houchin (No. 13) that requires drivetrain systems for Army advanced combat tracked vehicles to be sourced from U.S. firms, unless U.S. drivetrain manufacturers receive substantially equal competitive access in the relevant foreign market; Wilson (SC) (No. 16) that establishes a Classroom Safe Haven Force Protection Pilot Program; Luna (No. 21) that requires the Secretary of Defense to designate Department of Defense activities, support, and operations at the southwest land border as a named operation within 180 days of enactment; Luna (No. 23) that requires the Secretary of Defense to ensure that no political appointee of the Department of Defense is subordinate to any career civilian employee of the Department; Ogles (No. 24) that expresses the sense of Congress that DOW participation in international defense exhibitions should be conditioned on the full participation of Israeli companies and the absence of discriminatory restrictions targeting Israel; Gottheimer (No. 25) that requires the Secretary of Defense and Secretary of State to use every opportunity at NATO forums/forums with Major Non-NATO Allies to ensure that member countries do not enforce ICC warrants against one another's militaries; Luttrell (No. 29) codifying Executive Order No. 14401, titled ``Accelerating Medical Treatments for Serious Mental Illness'', into law; Norman (No. 31) that terminates any pilot program authorized by the Act no later than two years after enactment, unless the provision authorizing the program specifies an earlier termination date; Norman (No. 32) that requires the cost of any project funded with financial support from the Department of Defense to disclose the cost to taxpayers; Austin Scott (GA) (No. 33) that authorizes Federal grants and cooperative agreements to support the operation and maintenance of National Guard facilities necessary for organizing, training, and equipping the National Guard for both State and Federal missions; Austin Scott (GA) (No. 35) that establishes a United States-Poland Military Space Cooperation Program to strengthen bilateral cooperation in support of military space operations, resilience, and preparedness; Austin Scott (GA) (No. 36) that extends and modernizes the Indo-Pacific Maritime Security Initiative by authorizing unmanned systems experimentation, improving funding flexibility, and extending the program through 2031; Austin Scott (GA) (No. 37) that raises the funding limit for the Regional Defense Fellowship Program from $35 million to $50 million to expand defense education, regional expertise, and partner-nation engagement opportunities; Arrington (No. 38) that requires the Department of War to submit a report that identifies, assesses, and mitigates risks arising from acquisitions of land near U.S. military installations from China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and foreign terrorist organizations; Mace (No. 39) that increases line 9 (PE 0602204F) of the Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force account for aerospace sensors by $4.3 million for compact semiconductor based fast neutron detectors. Offset by decreasing the same amount allocated to Aircraft Procurement Navy, Line 28, F-18 Series; Mace (No. 40) that increases line 9 (PE 0602204F) of the Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force account for aerospace sensors by $8.5 million for ultra-high temperature thermal coatings for hypersonic vehicles. Offset by decreasing the same amount allocated to Aircraft Procurement Navy, Line 28, F-18 Series; Griffith (No. 41) that amends Section 1021(b) of the FY12 NDAA to limit the authority of the U.S. military to indefinitely detain individuals pursuant to the 2001 AUMF, to exclude American citizens from being subject to detention; Evans (CO) (No. 42) that increases funding amount for Rotary Wing Aviation Lift Upgrade Enhancement and offsets from Aviation Assets (O&M), Army by $12M; Patronis (No. 43) that exempts military housing from National Historic Preservation Act requirements to expedite necessary repairs that protect families and to reduce project maintenance costs, which by the Army's own estimates are three times as expensive for historic homes; Cloud (No. 45) that requires the Secretary of Defense to carry out an operational pilot program under the Hybrid Space Architecture initiative to evaluate the use of commercially available orbital data center services and space-based cloud computing capabilities relevant to national security space and joint mission requirements; Amo (No. 46) that authorizes APEX Accelerators to assist small businesses in acquiring procurement contracts for defense articles for AUKUS; Arrington (No. 47) that requires U.S. Special Operations Command to carry out a pilot program to provide anonymous nonmedical counseling services to members of the special operations forces and families of such members using a novel anonymous telehealth platform; Barragan (No. 48) that directs the Department of Defense to assess geothermal energy potential at military installations and identify locations where geothermal resources could enhance energy resilience; Barrett (No. 49) that requires the Secretary of Defense to submit an action plan to Congress for advancing the deployment of the Airborne Collision Avoidance System-X; Baumgartner (No. 50) that increases funding by $5 million for Defense-wide RDTE to accelerate the manufacturing of advanced reactive materials used to enhance the lethality of munitions; Begich (No. 51) that authorizes the Secretary of the Air Force to convey approximately 50 acres of land at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson to the Municipality of Anchorage, contingent on an independent appraisal and a determination that the parcel is excess to base needs, in accordance with the North Anchorage Land Agreement among the State of Alaska, the Municipality, and Eklutna, Incorporated; Begich (No. 52) that strengthens cyber incident reporting requirements for operationally critical DoD contractors by adding a mandatory 72-hour reporting deadline for the discovery of any hardware, software, or firmware manufactured by or linked to Chinese entities within covered networks, in addition to existing requirements to report cyber incidents; Begich (No. 53) that adds a three-year annual reporting requirement to the Berry Amendment seafood provision, directing the Secretary of Defense to report on the volume and origin of seafood procured by commissaries and exchanges, disaggregated by domestic and foreign source, and the steps taken to maximize domestic sourcing; Begich (No. 54) that requires the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to brief Congress within 90 days on the feasibility of letting original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) fast- track their existing suppliers into DoD procurement systems, with a focus on improving readiness, reducing red tape, and preventing counterfeit parts in military aircraft ground support equipment; Begich (No. 55) that directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy, in coordination with the Secretary of the Navy, to submit a report within 180 days assessing the feasibility of establishing common certification standards across NAVAIR and NAVSEA supply chains; Begich (No. 56) that directs the Secretary of Defense, acting through the MDA, to report on DoD's strategy for developing resilient and distributed missile defense sensing architectures, covering current infrastructure vulnerabilities, modular and transportable sensing capabilities, open systems approaches, scalable radar integration, and acquisition barriers, and authorizes the use of appropriated funds to initiate pilot efforts implementing the report's recommendations; Bergman (No. 57) that amends Rest and Recuperation Absence to provide Service members stationed at designated overseas locations greater flexibility in how they utilize authorized rest and recuperation (R&R) leave earned through tour extensions; Bergman (No. 58) that increases funding amount for Next Generation Combat Vehicle Technology and offsets from Ship Depot Operations Support (O&M), Navy by $7M; Bergman (No. 59) that increases funding amount for Ground Technology and offsets from Ship Depot Operations Support (O&M), Navy by $10M; Bergman (No. 60) that increases funding amount for Rapid Prototyping Program and offsets from Ship Depot Operations Support (O&M), Navy by $4.9M; Bergman (No. 61) that allows for tuition assistance to be used to pay for institution fees and allows the SECDEF to increase the per- semester-hour cap to $350; Biggs (AZ) (No. 62) that modifies the Mining Schools Act to tighten the definition of mining schools; Biggs (AZ) (No. 63) that requires the Department of Defense to perform an audit; Biggs (No. 64) (SC) that calls for a study exploring the feasibility of allowing departments and agencies to have critical mineral purchasing and reselling capabilities for the purpose of reducing the bureaucratic burden and increasing the speed of purchasing minerals for projects within those departments and agencies; Biggs (SC) (No. 65) that specifies phased inventory benchmarks for com- bat coded fighter aircraft; Biggs (SC) (No. 66) that requires the Secretary of War to establish a pilot program evaluating the use of secure, commercially available digital faith-based platforms to enhance the spiritual fitness, mental health, and operational readiness of servicemembers and their families; Boebert (No. 67) that prohibits the acquisition, procurement, or lease of non-tactical electric vehicles containing any component produced by child and slave labor; Boebert (No. 68) that requires the Secretary of Defense, within 90 days of passage of the NDAA, to present a comprehensive plan for securing all United States military bases against drone-based threats; Boebert (No. 69) that requires the DoD to report on institutions of higher education that have received DoD funding and hosted a Confucius Institute; Boebert (No. 70) that requires the Secretary of the Air Force, within 60 days of passage of the NDAA, to present a comprehensive plan for F-16 fighter recapitalization for the 140th Wing of the Colorado Air National Guard; Buchanan (No. 71) that requires the Secretary of Defense to report to Congress on the threat of artificial intelligence- powered attacks, scams, and fraud to U.S. military installations, operations, and personnel; Buchanan (No. 72) that requires the Department of the Navy and the Marine Corps to strengthen tactical vehicle risk management by establishing clearly defined responsibilities for vehicle commanders and implementing standardized procedures that enable first-line supervisors to identify, assess and mitigate operational risks during training and mission execution; Buchanan (No. 73) that directs the Secretary of Defense to carry out a pilot program to provide certain members of the Armed Forces with continuous glucose monitoring technology; Buchanan (No. 74) that requires the Secretary of Defense to provide a report on the implementation of the Go for Green (G4G) nutrition program at military dining facilities; Buchanan (No. 75) that requires the Department of the Army to submit a report on whether operational units have sufficient personnel, resources and organizational capacity to effectively implement ground-safety programs related to tactical vehicle operations; Buchanan (No. 76) that directs the Department of Defense to inventory legacy semiconductor dependencies in major weapon programs and submit a plan to eliminate reliance on foreign single- source suppliers; Buchanan (No. 77) that directs the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the Navy to begin and complete an assessment of their installation-wide food programs according to the recommendation; of GAO-24-106155 within 180 days of the enactment of this act; Buchanan (No. 78) that requires the Secretary of Defense to submit a report within one year of enactment to the congressional defense committees on progress made by each military department, to reduce training-related accidents, fatalities, and serious injuries; Buchanan (No. 79) that requires the Department of Defense to identify best practices for nutrition, fitness, and chronic disease prevention programs across the services and share successful models department- wide; Buchanan (No. 80) that requires the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to Congress assessing how military personnel use wearable devices for health, fitness, readiness, training, recovery, and operational purposes, including during deployments and combat; Burlison (No. 81) a sense of Congress regarding award of the Medal of Honor to Gregory McManus for acts of valor; Calvert (No. 82) that requires the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, to commission an independent review of Department of Defense financial management execution benchmarks, including their origin, methodology, authoritative basis, and traceability to Department-wide policy or guidance; Cammack (No. 83) that requires the Department of Defense to expand coordination with the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Justice regarding efforts to target fentanyl and precursor chemicals; Cammack (No. 84) that requires the Department of Defense to develop and submit a strategy for identifying, assessing, and countering foreign malign influence activities conducted in the cognitive domain by foreign adversaries; Cammack (No. 85) that requires the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a component- level assessment of the Department of Defense's reliance on Chinese- sourced materials in munitions, microelectronics, and energy storage systems; Cammack (No. 86) that requires the Secretary of Defense to prioritize partnerships with institutions of higher education conducting research in hypersonics, biotechnology, and artificial intelligence when carrying out research, development, test, and evaluation activities; Cammack (No. 87) that requires the Secretary of Defense to assess vulnerabilities in military medical supply chains, including the Department's reliance on sources located in China for active pharmaceutical ingredients and medical devices; Cammack (No. 88) that requires the Secretary of Defense to conduct an assessment of the risks posed by foreign adversary-controlled digital platforms to operational security, force protection, military personnel, and military installations, and directs the Secretary to submit a report to Congress identifying those risks, including threats related to data collection, foreign influence operations, and propaganda activities, along with recommendations to mitigate them; Cammack (No. 89) that requires the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of Commerce, to develop a strategy for the adoption, fielding, integration, and scaling of artificial intelligence technologies across the Department of Defense and the defense industrial base, and directs the Secretary to submit that strategy to Congress, including barriers to adoption, workforce and infrastructure requirements, opportunities for collaboration with industry and academia, and recommendations to improve deployment of artificial intelligence technologies; Cammack (No. 90) that requires the Secretary of Defense to establish procedures to ensure continuity of care for pregnant and postpartum servicemembers and military spouses during a permanent change of station, including coordination between military treatment facilities, timely transfer of medical records, assignment of a receiving provider, and measures to prevent interruptions in prenatal, obstetric, postpartum, and behavioral health services, and directs the Secretary to report to Congress on implementation of those procedures; Cammack (No. 91) that requires the Comptroller General to conduct an audit of the extent to which entities owned, controlled by, affiliated with, or subject to the influence of the Chinese Communist Party participate in Department of Defense contracts and supply chains, and directs the Comptroller General to submit a report to Congress identifying areas of exposure, associated risks to military readiness and national security, known ties to the People's Liberation Army or Chinese state-owned enterprises, and recommendations to reduce identified risks; Cammack (No. 92) that requires the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with FEMA, to submit an annual report identifying National Guard equipment shortfalls in each state and assessing how those gaps affect disaster response capabilities, including hurricane response; Carbajal (No. 93) that requires any cut flowers or greens purchased by the Department of Defense for display be grown domestically; Carey (No. 94) that requires the Secretary of Defense to submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the use of intergovernmental support agreements for military installations funded by a working- capital fund; Carson (No. 95) that requires DoD to report on the impact and transition of research funded through the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs, including research with potential for use in the Military Health System, operational medicine, or clinical practice; Carson (No. 96) that amends Sec. 1524(g) to require DoD to make publicly available an unclassified summary of each semiannual report on its policy for autonomous and AI-enabled systems, to the maximum extent practicable; Carter (GA) (No. 97) that prohibits the Secretary of Defense awarding an eligible telecommunications contract to an entity if the Secretary determines that the entity is subject to foreign ownership, control, jurisdiction, or legal obligations that could require disclosure of Department of Defense information or Department of Defense network operational data to a foreign government; Carter (LA) (No. 98) that prohibits DoD/DoW procurement and commissary sales of seafood originating or processed in China; Casar (No. 99) that requires a GAO study assessing the child care programs that exist across the Department of Defense including: Child Development Centers, Family Child Care, Military Child Care in Your Neighborhood, and Child Care in Your Home; Case (No. 100) that requires the Space Force to assess the security, physical, cyber, and geopolitical vulnerabilities of commercially owned and operated satellite ground-based nodes located within the Indo-Pacific; Case (No. 101) that counters People's Republic of China influence and activities in the Freely Associated States; Case (No. 102) that requires a study on the potential benefits of establishing a Strategic Infrastructure Partnership Initiative to assist INDOPACOM in identifying, developing and implementing dual-use infrastructure projects; Cisneros (No. 103) that requires the Department of Defense to establish an early release notification system for victims of sexual assault through the UCMJ; and Cleaver (No. 104) that increases funding to the Combat and Operational Medicine Program, R&D research by $5 million for alpha-gal syndrome research. Offsets $5 million from Combat and Operational Medicine Program, R&D Advanced Development;
Pages H4970-87
Boebert amendment (No. 4 printed in part A of H. Rept. 119-755) that strikes section 518, relating to the pilot program on modernization of drug testing using voice-based risk assessment technology to identify servicemembers for drug testing (by a recorded vote of 265 ayes to 161 noes with one answering ``present'', Roll No. 258);
Pages H4970, H5010-11
Hunt amendment (No. 7 printed in part A of H. Rept. 119-755) that amends the NDAA to protect a critical component of California's defense fuel supply chain by ensuring the continued operation of the Santa Ynez Pipeline System, which transports domestically produced crude oil to refineries that supply Department of Defense installations (by a recorded vote of 215 ayes to 214 noes, Roll No. 260);
Pages H4991-93, H5011-12
Crank amendment (No. 17 printed in part A of H. Rept. 119-755) that establishes a presumption of approval for qualified DoD servicemembers and civilian employees seeking authorization from their facility commander to carry personal firearms on military installations (by a recorded vote of 215 ayes to 214 noes, Roll No. 265);
Pages H4999-H5000, H5015
Mace amendment (No. 19 printed in part A of H. Rept. 119-755) that prohibits gender related medical care under TRICARE (by a recorded vote of 219 ayes to 208 noes, Roll No. 267); and
Pages H5003-05, H5016-17
Mace amendment (No. 20 printed in part A of H. Rept. 119-755) that prohibits male participation in female sports at DoDEA schools (by a recorded vote of 221 ayes to 203 noes, Roll No. 268).
Pages H5005-06, H5020
Rejected
Boebert amendment (No. 1 printed in part A of H. Rept. 119-755) that sought to strike section 1213 relating to the deadline for the Afghanistan War Commission's final report, and maintains the current statutory reporting deadline (by a recorded vote of 65 ayes to 361 noes, Roll No. 255);
Pages H4967-68, H5008-09
Boebert amendment (No. 2 printed in part A of H. Rept. 119-755) that sought to strike section 521 and replaces it with a prohibition on foreign nationals attending the United States Military Academies (by a recorded vote of 61 ayes to 360 noes, Roll No. 256);
Pages H4968-69, H5009
Boebert amendment (No. 3 printed in part A of H. Rept. 119-755) that sought to strike section 524, which removes the existing statutory limit on the number of cadets who may receive alternative service obligations to pursue professional athletic careers, thereby preserving the current cap (by a recorded vote of 65 ayes to 359 noes, Roll No. 257);
Pages H4969-70, H5009-10
Hunt amendment (No. 6 printed in part A of H. Rept. 119-755) that sought to amend the NDAA to ensure that no court may issue injunctions that impair military readiness, military fuel supply, or defense- related logistical support (by a recorded vote of 208 ayes to 219 noes, Roll No. 259);
Pages H4987-91, H5011
Gallagher amendment (No. 8 printed in part A of H. Rept. 119-755) that sought to open up a study to be conducted to explore mechanisms by which federal authority can preempt or otherwise mitigate state actions that effectively undermine domestic refining capacity critical to national defense (by a recorded vote of 212 ayes to 216 noes, Roll No. 261);
Pages H4993-94, H5012-13
Carter (GA) amendment (No. 9 printed in part A of H. Rept. 119-755) that sought to preempt state and local laws that impose requirements different from federal standards on certain defense-related recycling, disposal, and materials recovery activities (by a recorded vote of 201 ayes to 224 noes, Roll No. 262);
Pages H4995-96, H5013
Crane amendment (No. 14 printed in part A of H. Rept. 119-755) that sought to prohibit the Department of Defense from using taxpayer funds to cover the costs of foreign military personnel participating in bilateral or multilateral military exercises conducted with the United States (by a recorded vote of 61 ayes to 365 noes, Roll No. 263);
Pages H4996-97, H5013-14
Crane amendment (No. 15 printed in part A of H. Rept. 119-755) that sought to prohibit funds for Ukraine Security Assistance except for U.S. embassy security in Ukraine (by a recorded vote of 76 ayes to 350 noes, Roll No. 264);
Pages H4997-99, H5015-16
Boebert amendment (No. 18 printed in part A of H. Rept. 119-755) that sought to codify Executive Order 14183 implement a ban on transgender service members by requiring all personnel to serve in accordance with their biological sex, citing military readiness and discipline (by a recorded vote of 212 ayes to 217 noes, Roll No. 266); and
Pages H5003-03, H5015-16
McDowell amendment (No. 26 printed in part A of H. Rept. 119-755) that sought to authorize the Secretary of Defense to establish a school choice pilot program for members of the Armed Forces (by a recorded vote of 214 ayes to 216 noes, Roll No. 269).
Pages H5006-07, H5026-27
H. Res. 1438, the rule providing for consideration, was agreed to by a recorded vote of 14 ayes to 211 noes, Roll No. 254, after the previous question was ordered by a yea-and-nay vote of 213 yeas to 209 nays, Roll No. 253.
Pages H4698-H4705, H4706-07
Main Street Capital Access Act
The House passed H.R. 6955, to make improvements to the Federal banking laws, by a yea-and-nay vote of 270 yeas to 155 nays with one answering ``present'', Roll No. 271.
Pages H4707-31, H5018-19
Rejected the Garcia (TX) motion to recommit the bill to the Committee on Financial Services, by a yea-and-nay vote of 210 yeas to 216 nays, Roll No. 270.
Pages H5018-19
Pursuant to the Rule, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 119-35 shall be considered as adopted, in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Financial Services now printed in the bill.
Pages H4707-22
H. Res. 1438, the rule providing for consideration, was agreed to by a recorded vote of 214 ayes to 211 noes, Roll No. 254, after the previous question was ordered by a yea-and-nay vote of 213 yeas to 209 nays, Roll No. 253.
Pages H4698-H4705, H4706-07
Making continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2027
The House passed H.R. 9770, making continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2027, by a yea-and-nay vote of 220 yeas to 205 nays, Roll No. 272.
Pages H4731-36, H5019-20
H. Res. 1438, the rule providing for consideration, was agreed to by a recorded vote of 214 ayes to 211 noes, Roll No. 254, after the previous question was ordered by a yea-and-nay vote of 213 yeas to 209 nays, Roll No. 253.
Pages H4698-H4705, H4706-07
Meeting Hour
Agreed by unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 11 a.m. tomorrow, July 22nd.
Page H5020
Senate Referrals
S. 1041 was held at the desk. S. Con. Res. 37 was held at the desk.
Pages H5000-01
Senate Message
Message received from the Senate appears on pages H5000-01. Quorum Calls_Votes: Five yea-and-nay votes and sixteen recorded votes developed during the proceedings of today and appear on pages H4705-06, H4706-07, H4707, H5008-09, H5009, H5009-10, H5010-11, H5011, H5011-12, H5012-13, H5013, H5013-14, H5014-15, H5015, H5015-16, H5016-17, H5017, H5017-18, H5018-19, H5019, and H5019-20. Adjournment: The House met at 10 a.m. and adjourned at 10:28 p.m.

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.

Official Text ↗

High Cost of War

George LatimerDemocrat, New York

Mr. Speaker, I rise today more than 5 months since the American people were forced into a war of choice in Iran. As the President's negotiations fail, Americans are still bearing the expense every day. This is all while Russell Vought and Pete Hegseth claim the cost of the war to be roughly $30 billion, but the President's request for extra funds puts the true cost at a staggering $100 billion, if not more.

With this money, we could have instead paid for: 66 million Social Security retirement checks, 2 years of free school lunch for every child in the United States, 2 million teachers' salaries, 1 million 4- year college degrees, or the entire SNAP program for a year, serving 40 million Americans in need of food assistance.

It is imperative that Congress exercise our congressional oversight authority so that these stratospheric costs receive due scrutiny and the voice of the people we represent may be heard.

George LatimerDemocrat, New York

Mr. Speaker, I rise today as President Trump lays the groundwork for a namesake arch right here in the heart of our Nation's Capital. Despite the arch's violation of a height restriction for D.C. buildings, a panel consisting of the President's allies is likely to permit the plans.

Unfortunately, this symbolism of corruption coming from the President of the United States is not novel. Need I remind the American people that he has already demolished the White House Rose Garden, planned to take over a 100-year-old public golf course in Washington, D.C., and plastered two large posters of his likeness on government buildings along The National Mall, just to name a few, and also placing his name on our coinage and currency.

Donald Trump is trying at every attempt to enshrine his legacy in Washington, D.C., but legacy doesn't always mean being remembered for your name. This Nation is not a hotel chain. He is leaving rather a legacy of being the most un-American President we have ever had.

George LatimerDemocrat, New York

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Disability Pride Month. In July of 1990, Congress passed the Americans With Disability Act, also known as the ADA.

The passage of this landmark legislation was seen as an international victory for many Americans with disabilities and inspired similar legislation in 181 countries worldwide. The ADA changed the way we view disabilities and brought a level of compassion and understanding for those with a disability, oftentimes invisible.

We celebrate this month with pride, for the one in four Americans reported to have a disability and the millions around the world who want to continue without limitations.

In the name of furthering the ADA's mission, we must continue to create a country that is equitable, inclusive, and accessible for everyone, regardless of differences or limitations.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President.

Official Text ↗

The Wonderful Mccourt Family

Virginia FoxxRepublican, North Carolina

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize John McCourt and his wonderful wife, Eileen, who are the epitome of the American Dream.

John began his career in 1970 in County Tyrone, Ireland, in the screening equipment business on the factory assembly line for Powerscreen International Limited. After building his reputation and business acumen across Europe, he and his wife, Eileen, relocated their family to the United States, and he soon established his own distributorship in Texas.

Fast-forward to today, and the McCourt family runs a highly successful equipment business with a reputation and a track record that is steeped

I was fortunate to meet members of the McCourt family recently in Washington through Associated Equipment Distributors. They are a wonderful group of dedicated people.

The wonderful story of their parents, John and Eileen, as well as the story and success of their entire family, is something to marvel at, Mr. Speaker.

We should all take the time to recognize the impeccable, business- driven and value-driven people in our communities and across the Nation like the McCourt family for all they do in supporting our great American economy.

Virginia FoxxRepublican, North Carolina

Mr. Speaker, I rise to highlight a very insightful and pertinent report from the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, ACTA, titled: ``A Broadside for the Nation, Preparing College Students for Informed Citizenship.''

ACTA is a wonderful, nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting academic excellence, academic freedom, and accountability through the trustees at America's colleges and universities as well as informing and engaging the general public.

The broadside is reminiscent of the many broadsides published during the revolutionary period that were so important in informing the people along with getting their support for the revolution.

Being an informed citizen isn't passe. It is one of our most sacred responsibilities as Americans and one we cannot afford to abandon or ignore.

As the report's authors lay out: ``True patriotism includes a commitment to and appreciation of American values and principles. Since the founding of our Nation, our greatest leaders have recognized that our freedom and our prosperity depend on informed and engaged citizens.''

We just celebrated 250 years of American greatness, Mr. Speaker, and we ought to do all that we can to learn of and espouse the values and principles that make America the greatest country in the world.

Michael Poliakoff, the president of ACTA, captured this sentiment perfectly in this report: ``The birth of America 250 years ago amazed the world, and our founding documents have inspired the search for freedom and human rights throughout the world. The colleges and universities built and maintained by the vision and generosity of generations of Americans owe it to the Nation to ensure that every student they graduate understands the precious heritage we share.''

Let us not forget the wisdom of Thomas Jefferson who once opined on this very issue: ``If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.''

I commend ACTA and the many authors who contributed to this report for calling attention to this issue. It is one that we all would do well to wholeheartedly support.

Official Text ↗

Recognizing University at Buffalo President Satish Tripathi

Timothy M. KennedyDemocrat, New York

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of an extraordinary leader, educator, and public servant whose vision has transformed the University at Buffalo and our entire community.

After 15 years as president of UB, Dr. Satish Tripathi is concluding a remarkable chapter of service defined by innovation, collaboration, and an unwavering commitment to academic excellence.

During his tenure, the University at Buffalo has reached new heights. Enrollment has grown to nearly 30,000 students. Flourishing scientific research has positioned UB among the Nation's premier public research institutions, and UB has strengthened its role as an engine of economic opportunity, helping to launch and nurture hundreds of local startup companies.

UB is attracting world-class faculty and empowering the next generation of innovators, scientists, engineers, and healthcare professionals.

Under Dr. Tripathi's leadership, the medical school found a new home on the Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus, strengthening the connection between higher education, healthcare, and the revitalization of our great city.

UB has become a cornerstone of New York's Empire AI initiative, ensuring that western New York sits at the forefront of AI innovation.

Yet, Mr. Speaker, if you ask Dr. Tripathi about these extraordinary accomplishments, he is quick to credit the students, faculty, staff, alumni, and community partners who have helped make them possible.

That humility has long been one of his defining qualities. His leadership has never been about personal recognition. It has always been about building an institution that empowers others to succeed.

He will continue serving UB as a researcher and educator, focused on advancing the ethical development of artificial intelligence and mentoring the next generation of scholars. The University at Buffalo, western New York, and our Nation are stronger because of Dr. Tripathi's leadership. His legacy will be measured in the lives he has changed and the brighter future he has helped create with generations of students.

On behalf of a grateful community, State, and Nation, I thank Dr. Satish Tripathi for his extraordinary service, congratulate him on an exceptional presidency, and wish him continued success as he begins this next chapter.

Godspeed to Dr. Tripathi.

Timothy M. KennedyDemocrat, New York

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate a remarkable milestone for western New York: The 50th anniversary of The Belle Center in Buffalo, New York.

For one-half of a century, The Belle Center has been a place where every child has been welcomed, every family is valued, and every family is given the opportunity to thrive.

Under the exceptional leadership of Executive Director Lucy Candelario and her dedicated team, The Belle Center has continually evolved to meet the changing needs of Buffalo's west side. Through early childhood education, after-school programing, workforce development, and services for families and seniors, The Belle Center has remained steadfast in its mission to meet Buffalonians where they are and provide the support they need to build brighter futures.

As our neighborhoods have grown more diverse and new challenges have emerged, the center has answered the call by expanding educational opportunities, welcoming new Americans through English language learning, supporting working families, and celebrating the rich cultures that make our community stronger.

As we celebrate this golden anniversary, we also celebrate the countless staff members, volunteers, and community partners whose dedication has transformed lives and strengthened the City of Good Neighbors.

Today, I join western New York in congratulating The Belle Center on 50 extraordinary years of service. May it continue to uplift our neighbors, strengthen our community, and carry forward Father Belle's enduring legacy of compassion and service for generations to come.

I congratulate The Belle Center.

Official Text ↗

36th Anniversary of Ada

Steny H. HoyerDemocrat, Maryland

Mr. Speaker, one of the proudest moments of my time in public service was sponsoring the Americans with Disabilities Act and seeing it through to enactment.

I was honored to work closely with House and Senate colleagues, leaders like Bob Dole, Tom Harkin, Tony Coelho, Steve Bartlett, Orrin Hatch, and Ted Kennedy, just to name a few. We passed it on a bipartisan basis, and it was signed into law by President George Bush in 1990.

This month, we celebrate the 36th anniversary of the ADA. In those 36 years, that law has made a transformative difference for millions of Americans. It did so not only for physical access to public and private spaces of public accommodations but also in ensuring reasonable accommodations in workplaces and nondiscrimination in every facet of American life.

We have seen it strengthened through legislation like the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 and through the courts with decisions like Olmstead v. L.C. in 1999.

That decision concerned the ADA's nondiscrimination rule and applied it to the forced segregation of disabled people away from their communities, a historic tragedy in centuries past.

The Olmstead ruling affirmed that States are required to provide disability services in the most integrated setting possible: in schools, workplaces, and even individuals' homes.

Last month, the Department of Justice issued new guidance that the ADA does not guarantee--according to them--a right to live and receive services in integrated settings. Instead, it reinterprets the Olmstead's decision as only prohibiting States from unnecessarily institutionalizing those with disabilities without adequate justification and that it did not establish a general integration mandate.

Frankly, that is absurd. Olmstead merely affirmed what Congress had clearly intended in the ADA. Unlike when we speculate on what our Founders' intent was in paraphrasing certain parts of our Constitution, when it comes to laws enacted 36 years ago, we can go right to the source.

Let me be absolutely and unambiguously clear, as the House sponsor of the ADA: An integration mandate, as outlined correctly in the Olmstead ruling, was our intent.

Senators Dole, Kennedy, and Hatch may no longer be here to state it, but I am sure former Senator Harkin and former Representative Coelho, Bartlett, and others, who were involved in drafting and enacting the law, will affirm the same.

Among the findings expressly listed in the text of the ADA was that, ``Society has tended to isolate and segregate individuals with disabilities, and, despite some improvements, such forms of discrimination against individuals with disabilities continue to be a serious and pervasive social problem,'' according to the Olmstead case.

The Department of Justice is wrong and ought to retract its new guidance to States and communities.

At the same time, we have also seen the Trump administration use disability rights as an excuse to undermine ballot access and trample on the Help America Vote Act, which I also had the honor of sponsoring.

The same principle just outlined about Olmstead applies here as well. It was never Congress' intent in writing the ADA that accommodating people with disabilities should be used as an excuse to limit Americans' right to vote, just as it should not be issuing a rule penalizing Americans with disabilities for living at home with their families and caregivers and slashing Medicaid funding, upon which so many in the disability community rely.

I certainly hope statements like this one--from someone who was intimately involved in the writing of the ADA and stated from the floor--will serve as a reminder of the legislative intent of the ADA and of the Congress: It is truly all about nondiscrimination, public accommodation, equal access, and, yes, integration as much as possible within communities.

We cannot turn the clock back to the time before the ADA, when those with disabilities were ostracized, isolated, and locked away.

I am proud of the part I played in changing that. All of us should be proud that this institution came through and delivered in both promise and practice. Let us continue to do so today.

Official Text ↗

Recognizing Robert Bentley

David J. TaylorRepublican, Ohio

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a homegrown veteran and great American hero, Mr. Robert Bentley.

Known as ``Bob'' by his friends and family, Mr. Bentley was a student at Jefferson High School in Adams County, Ohio, in 1968, when he made the courageous decision to leave school and answer the call to serve his country as a teenager.

After attending basic and advanced military training, Bob served in Vietnam as a Specialist 4 in the United States Army from April 1969 to December 1970. Bob joined countless young Americans who set aside their own personal ambitions to defend the Nation they loved. His honorable service left a lasting legacy in his family, community, and our great Buckeye State.

I am proud to not only commend Bob for his selfless service but to congratulate him for being awarded an honorary high school diploma by the Adams County Ohio Valley School Board in recognition of his sacrifice and dedication. My staff was honored to attend

We congratulate Bob. This year, his high school education is complete.

Veterans like Bob continue to inspire those in southern Ohio and the whole Nation through outstanding courage, deep patriotism, and remarkable selflessness. It is heroes like him that preserve our Nation's values and the freedoms that we hold so dear.

We thank Bob for his service.

David J. TaylorRepublican, Ohio

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the White Oak High School's head baseball coach Chris Veidt for his 500th career win this year.

As a long-standing head coach of 35 years, Coach Veidt has made his mark not only on the diamond but throughout Highland County as well.

Buckeye baseball has always been in Coach Veidt's blood. After graduating from Logan High School in 1982, he played competitively at the University of Rio Grande and Wilmington College, where he ultimately earned a degree in physical education. He went on to obtain a master's in health and sports science from the University of Dayton. Go Fliers.

Afterward, he applied his extensive knowledge as an assistant coach for the Wilmington baseball team, helping the Quakers clinch the State championship in 1989.

Over the course of his coaching career, Coach Veidt has earned five SHAC Coach of the Year Awards, nine Southeast District Coach of the Year honors, multiple State and regional recognitions, and was inducted into the Ohio High School Baseball Coaches Association Hall of Fame in 2024. He earned a place in the Southeast District Coaches Association Hall of Fame in 2014, and has served as an OHSBCA State Poll voter since 1993. To top it all off, Coach Veidt was awarded the OHSAA Sportsmanship, Ethics, and Integrity Award at the end of the 2026 season.

It is devoted figures like Coach Veidt whose impact stretches far beyond the baseball field and into the lives of their players, their families, and their communities.

The mentorship, leadership, and commitment he has demonstrated toward hundreds of student-athletes has developed the next generation of leaders. He has cheered his players on for nearly four decades, and now Ohio is rooting for him.

I congratulate Coach Veidt on a storied career and 500 wins.

David J. TaylorRepublican, Ohio

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an outstanding southern Ohioan who has served thousands of Chillicothe families for nearly six decades, Dr. John Seidensticker.

Following in his grandfather's footsteps, John attended medical school and started working in internal medicine at the Chillicothe Hospital in 1967. After gaining experience, he moved over to endocrinology, which he ultimately specialized in.

Over the decades of practicing medicine, John served multiple generations of Buckeye families and witnessed firsthand how advancing technologies changed the medical field.

When the Chillicothe Hospital became Adena Health in the late 1990s, John was instrumental in creating their hospice program after seeing a need for additional care in our local aging population. John took pride in getting to know his patients over the years and became well known in the community for his genuine concern and excellent care.

This year marks his retirement after an incredible 59 years of practicing medicine. John shared that he loves his work and will find it challenging to step back into this new season but is looking forward to spending time in his home workshop making canes and walking sticks. Even in his retirement, he will be contributing in a new way to help people meet their community's needs.

I thank Dr. Seidensticker for his tremendous dedication to our community and congratulate him on his retirement. It is because of outstanding health care providers like him that generations of southern Ohio families are able to live healthier and more prosperous lives.

Official Text ↗

Honoring Christopher Doyle Matthews

William R. KeatingDemocrat, Massachusetts

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Christopher Doyle Matthews, a friend and longtime member of my staff. We were devastated to have learned just a few weeks ago of his passing.

Chris was born in Boston on December 15, 1989, to Richard and Mary- Ellen Matthews and was proudly raised in Scituate, Massachusetts. He grew up loving boats and the water, his parents' classic rock and roll music, and politics.

When columnist Mary McGrory famously observed that ``every baby born in Massachusetts is born with a campaign manager's gene,'' she could have very well been inspired by Chris.

With political instincts that were second to none, Chris was a go-to organizer in Massachusetts politics. He was, without question, one of the Commonwealth's sharpest political minds, a true generational talent.

Even at a young age, there are not many candidates from the South Shore of Massachusetts who did not seek out Chris' help or his opinion. He served as the chair of the South Shore Democratic Caucus, and as a Democratic leader with the Massachusetts State Committee, the Plymouth County League, and several South Shore town committees in Massachusetts. Candidates and voters alike trusted Chris because of his belief that government can change people's lives for the better.

Chris' untimely and sudden death has sent shock waves through our congressional family. He served in various positions with us for a decade and a half. He started as a 20-year-old volunteer on my first campaign for Congress and, over time, moved to be my district outreach and communications director when he passed away suddenly and untimely at the age of 36.

At a time in America when some have doubts and when hope can seem remote, remember Chris Matthews if you ever begin to lose faith in this country.

Remember that Chris was more than a congressional aide. He took the belief that through our actions, we can all bring forth needed change, and he brought it with him through many interstate bus rides to canvass distant pivotal States and to the doors of the families he inspired.

Remember through his example that public service is a genuinely noble vocation. As a trusted member of our office, he helped countless veterans, families, and those who could not advocate for themselves.

Remember his laugh and his wry, often biting, humor, insightfully contrasting the way things are to the way things should be. Remember his authentic belief that in this country, people can bring about progress and meaningful change. It was real to him, and his sincerity shone through.

I imagine if Chris wanted us to remember anything, it would be that he was a loving partner and father figure to Molly and Eli, that he was a compassionate and reliable son and brother, and that he was the most steadfast of loyal friends.

Though we wish we had more time with him, his memory will continue to give us faith that one person can significantly make better the lives of all those around him, and all of us in our office certainly know this to be true.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to have known Chris Matthews and to honor his life. I ask my colleagues to join with me in recognizing his commitment to this institution and to the people of Massachusetts. May his memory be a blessing.

Official Text ↗

Recognizing Pamela Irvine

Ben ClineRepublican, Virginia

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an extraordinary Virginian whose life has been defined by service to others. After 45 years of leadership, Pam Irvine is retiring as president and CEO of Feeding Southwest Virginia.

When Ms. Irvine founded the organization in 1981, it began with little more than a vision--and even the food bank's first truck caught fire on the road. Undeterred, she persevered, building

Under her leadership, Feeding Southwest Virginia has grown from distributing 1 million pounds of food annually to more than 20 million pounds, serving 26 counties and 9 cities, and helping more than 127,000 neighbors each month.

Guided by compassion, faith, and an unwavering belief that no one should go hungry, Pam Irvine has transformed the fight against hunger throughout southwest Virginia.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of Virginia's Sixth Congressional District, I thank Pamela Irvine for her extraordinary service, congratulate her on an exceptional career, and wish her every happiness in her well- deserved retirement.

Ben ClineRepublican, Virginia

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Luray Fire Department of Luray, Virginia, as it marks an extraordinary milestone: 125 years of dedicated service to the people of Luray and Page County.

Founded in 1901 and chartered in 1933, the Luray Fire Department has stood as a proud, all-volunteer, and nonprofit organization with the goal of protecting the lives and property of so many for over a century. From its early days when the department attended its first State Firefighters Convention in Staunton and a year later sent its first reel team to a State contest in Portsmouth, the department has remained the cornerstone of community safety and pride.

With a membership of nearly 100 volunteers, the LFD has celebrated many milestones and accomplishments since then, and it continues to strengthen community ties through annual traditions such as the concert and ceremony held on September 11 as well as its raffle and fundraiser held on September 12.

Today, we honor the men and women, past and present, whose selfless service reflects the very best of our Commonwealth. Join me in celebrating the strong and brave Luray Fire Department on 125 years of steadfast commitment to not only their community but to the Nation.

Ben ClineRepublican, Virginia

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the passage of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2027 out of the Budget Committee last week.

Congress' primary responsibility is to defend the American people and preserve the strength of our Nation, and this resolution reflects that duty. It invests in our warfighters; supports our ranchers, farmers, and producers; and secures the integrity of our voting systems with the SAVE America Act.

For rural districts like Virginia's Sixth, this resolution delivers real support and stability for our farmers. It empowers our national defense, stands behind our warfighters, secures our food supply, and ensures American elections are decided only by American citizens.

This budget reflects a commitment to responsible governance while restoring the faith and confidence of voters in our election system.

Mr. Speaker, this resolution reflects a vision of a stronger, safer, and more prosperous America. It demonstrates our commitment to defending our Nation, supporting the American people, and governing with responsibility. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution this week and join us in advancing policies that strengthen our country for generations to come.

Official Text ↗

Consider New Approach to Cuba

James P. McGovernDemocrat, Massachusetts

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about United States policy toward Cuba, or rather our lack of a coherent policy and our decades-long failure to help the people of Cuba.

Cuba is our neighbor. We have lived side by side for centuries. Our histories are intertwined. Our futures are, too.

Almost 10 million people live on the island of Cuba. They go to school and work, raise families and go about their lives, and crave freedom and justice, but the people of Cuba struggle to realize their aspirations.

The Cuban Government deprives the people from enjoying their civil and political rights. Freedom of expression and assembly are severely curtailed. The recent release of 2,000 prisoners was welcome, as is the recent release of Luis Manuel Otero Alcantara, a political prisoner in the Defending Freedoms Project of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, but over 700 prisoners of conscience remain behind bars, according to Human Rights Watch.

Yet, for all the abuse of the Cuban people by the Cuban Government, so too has the United States deprived the Cuban people of enjoying their economic and social rights. The crushing U.S. embargo has stunted their economic development and caused immense hardship. These U.S. policies are human rights violations.

America's cruel and illegal blockade is creating a severe humanitarian crisis, denying energy imports, which the Cuban people depend on for their healthcare, food distribution, and livelihood.

Cubans recently experienced the eighth collapse of their power grid since October 2024. Some 3 million Cubans experience water shortages every single day, and the U.N. reports that infant mortality has doubled to 9.9 per 1,000 births. Childhood cancer survival rates have fallen from 85 to 65 percent. Supplies of essential medicines are only 30 percent of normal.

What we are witnessing in Cuba, as some have characterized it, is basically Gaza in slow motion: man-made starvation with the help and complicity of the United States of America.

Meanwhile, arrogant politicians in Washington tell Cubans on the island that they must suffer violations of their economic and social rights as the only way to restore their civil and political rights. This is an insult to their dignity, and it is wrong.

The six-decade embargo has been a miserable failure. Over and over we see that it does not work. It only emboldens hard-liners and makes things worse for regular people.

Now, we hear that the administration is plotting military action against Cuba. This would be horrible, wasteful, inhumane, and illegal.

Cuba is not doing anything that would legitimize a war. Congress has approved no declaration of war, no Authorization for Use of Military Force. Military action against Cuba would make America a rogue State, aligning us with Russia, China, Iran, and others that believe that international rules don't matter.

If we want to know why invading Cuba would be such a disaster, look no further than Venezuela. Meet the new boss; same as the old boss. The Venezuelan people still have no democracy or human rights, while listening to Marco Rubio lecture them with empty promises about freedom and self-determination. Their economy was still in shambles even before the earthquake.

Trump and Rubio are pals with the new President. The U.S. has immense leverage, but we are not using it to restore democracy, improve human rights, or fight hunger. The security apparatus remains in place. Political prisoners remain in jail. Oil revenues go to the elites.

The people of Venezuela deserve better, and the people of Cuba do not deserve to be screwed over in the same undignified and illegal manner.

Cubans deserve to shape their own future, not have it selected for them by arrogant politicians in Washington.

There is a better way. Ten years ago, the U.S. tried a better approach. We tried diplomacy. We tried engagement. We tried talking to each other, working through our differences, and guess what. It started working.

American tourists went to Cuba. We dropped barriers. We opened up relations. Things started getting better for the Cuban people, and there was hope that some day they could shape their own future.

My U.S.-Cuba Trade Act, H.R. 7521, would reverse our decades of failed policies toward Cuba. It would repeal the statutory basis of the embargo. It would give us tools to work with the Cuban people on economic and political progress. It would ensure that Americans and Cubans can be good neighbors.

We must chart a shared path to the future, built not on fear and threats or marked by invasion and blockade. The future we must build is one of good will and diplomacy, reinforced by trade and exchange.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to consider a new approach to Cuba. It is

Official Text ↗

Remembering Wes Anderson

Michael BaumgartnerRepublican, Washington

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to note the passing of a great American, a great patriot, and a friend, Mr. Wes Anderson of Spokane, Washington.

Wes was known across the communities of Spokane County for his exemplary service to fellow veterans who knew him best as ``Doc.''

Wes was a lifelong Spokanite whose life was defined by service, first in Vietnam where he served as a hospital corpsman and later across our communities where he had time for every veteran.

The moments in Vietnam crystallized a lifetime of determination to serve veterans when, on his return to the United States, he had to fight his way through a crowd of war protesters on his flight home. His service to veterans took the form of over five decades of service through leadership roles in the Veterans of Foreign Wars, where he was honored for his work as a chaplain, and through various initiatives, small and large, that included his support for the residents of Spokane's veterans homes, 20 consecutive years of cleaning the Spokane Vietnam Veterans Memorial on each Memorial Day, and his volunteer work for veterans organizations such as Heroes Homestead.

With Wes' passing, there is a void in our community that will be felt for many years to come.

Mr. Speaker, Wes was a patriot, a great American, and a friend. I speak for the entire Spokane community when I say that he will be sincerely missed.

Michael BaumgartnerRepublican, Washington

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Eastern Washington University Eagles football team as they prepare for what promises to be a fantastic 2026 season.

Everyone in eastern Washington knows that EWU plays some of the most exciting brands of football in the Western United States, and I know personally that their tailgating in Cheney is second to none.

They are led by Coach Best, a former All-Big Sky center and Eastern Washington alum who has had an exemplary career as coach of the Eags.

The Eastern Washington Eagles have a stacked schedule this fall with away games at Northern Arizona, South Dakota, University of Washington, UC Davis, University of Idaho, and Utah Tech, while welcoming schools like Northern Iowa, Cal Poly, Northern Colorado, Montana, Montana State, and Portland State to Cheney.

I look forward to a great season of Eastern football, and I know the Eastern Eagles will be very competitive. I am sure the coach, his staff, every student-athlete, and the student body of Eastern all look forward to this exciting season.

Go Eags.

Michael BaumgartnerRepublican, Washington

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Spokane native Tim Merck, an outstanding businessman, philanthropist, and family man. He and his wife, Beth, have raised an outstanding family.

Tim built a multimillion dollar business in Spokane from the ground up, Old World Christmas, which was known across the country and across the world as providing the best Christmas ornaments anyone can find.

Today, I also want to recognize a bit of trivia about Tim. When he sent his son and daughter to Notre Dame, he realized that there was not a leprechaun sculpture on Notre Dame's campus, and Tim set out to rectify that. Tim and Beth Merck, along with their children, Jon and Katherine, have long demonstrated a commitment to preserving stories and dreams in their operation.

Jon and Katherine fulfilled a dream for their grandmother by attending and graduating from Notre Dame. When they noticed that the leprechaun was not there, they reached out to the president, and today, there is this leprechaun statue at gate 10 of the Purcell Pavilion, the very gate through which the Leprechaun Legion enters the arena to cheer on their basketball and volleyball teams.

This is a tremendous story. Tim is also a very proud graduate of the University of Idaho, and upon presenting the leprechaun, he said: I guess it takes a Vandal to make sure that the students of Notre Dame have a leprechaun to celebrate.

Mr. Speaker, Tim is a great American and a great friend. I love him and Beth. Go Vandals. Go Irish.

Official Text ↗

Standing up for Cuba

Maxine DexterDemocrat, Oregon

Mr. Speaker, the American people need to know that their government is intentionally suffocating the nation of Cuba. There is no other way to describe what is happening.

Earlier this month, I traveled to Cuba with a congressional delegation to see firsthand how U.S. policy is affecting this country that is just 90 miles off our shore.

This is a country that is known for its joy and for its culture. It is a country that has had a glimpse of prosperity and promise during the Obama administration when relations were normalized and decades of sanctions lifted, only to have Trump reinstate the blockade in 2017.

Normalized relations led to an explosion of opportunity for small businesses, international investment, and cultural exchange. Hope was contagious.

Today, much of that hope has disappeared.

Ultimately, it comes down to fuel. Immediately after coming back into office in January of 2025, Trump decisively cut off the ability for any fuel to get into their country--fuel the country depends on to run its electrical power plants, vehicles, and generators.

Cuba is not a nation that can produce its own, so without imported fuel, there is no electricity. This has reverberations across every aspect of Cuban life.

Families cannot go to the grocery store as they always have done and keep their groceries in a fridge or a freezer because they do not have reliable electricity. Meat, milk, and medicine spoil with the power outages that plague the nation. Basic services have broken down. Daily life is a constant struggle.

Cuba's public health system and its medical training programs are the envy of much of the world. Their healthcare system is filled with highly qualified, well-trained physicians, and yet the hospital I toured in Havana was nearly empty.

Physicians have no patients because they have no transportation, no buses to get there. They have tens of thousands of people waiting for surgeries because supplies are insufficient and only a fraction of their operating rooms are running.

I saw three CT scanners, their only scanners in this hospital, all broken down, an MRI machine also not working, and a handful of working ultrasounds, because parts cannot be imported.

I sat face-to-face with these doctors and understood the deep pain that they are feeling, having the skills and the will to care for people but being denied the opportunity for political reasons.

The difference is here in the U.S. we have never had the political will to ensure that every American has access to healthcare.

As a physician, I do not know what it is like to care for every patient that comes in my door without worrying whether they can afford it. In Cuba, they have spent decades fulfilling their promise to make healthcare a human right. Every person has access to healthcare for free. Can you imagine?

They made it a reality. We should be aspiring to that commitment to human health, not punishing an entire population for it.

Congress must not continue standing by while our own government intentionally inflicts hardship on an entire nation.

The Cuban people deserve dignity, safety, and self-determination. It is

I am calling on every Member of this Congress to cosponsor Representative McGovern's legislation to end the U.S. trade embargo on Cuba and move this nation toward normalized relations.

As Trump continues to act erratically abroad, Congress must send a clear and unified message: There will be no military action against Cuba.

It is time to stand up for the people of Cuba. This is about basic human decency. Congress cannot look to this administration to find that.

From Havana to Portland, we will stand up, and that means ending this cruel blockade now. I will use every tool at my disposal to make this happen, and I am asking every one of my colleagues to join me.

Official Text ↗

One Year of Working Families Tax Cuts

Tracey MannRepublican, Kansas

Mr. Speaker, just over a year ago, President Trump signed the Working Families Tax Cuts into law on July 4, 2025.

One year later, the results are clear. American families are keeping more of the money they earn. Businesses are investing. Farmers and ranchers have stronger risk management tools, and our Nation is once again putting American workers first.

Our legislation prevented the largest tax increase in American history and made President Trump's 2017 tax cuts permanent.

During the most recent filing season, 97 percent of taxpayers received a tax cut, and $82 billion was returned directly to the American people. Nearly 70 percent of those receiving relief earned less than $100,000.

This law was written for working families, small businesses, seniors, farmers, ranchers, and Americans who get up every morning and work hard to build a better life.

More than 7.5 million workers claimed the no tax on tips deduction. More than 29 million claimed no tax on overtime. Nearly 40 million families claimed the enhanced child tax credit, and more than 35 million seniors benefited from the enhanced deduction for seniors.

These are real savings for Americans buying groceries, paying rent, putting gas in the car, and raising a family.

The Working Families Tax Cuts also delivered for Kansas agriculture. I called this legislation farm bill 1.0 because it strengthened the farm safety net and gave family farms more options to invest in their operations and keep their agricultural assets in the family.

It expanded access to affordable crop insurance, improved risk management tools for livestock producers and specialty crop growers, strengthened disaster and conservation programs, and provided immediate tax relief for farmers, ranchers, and small rural businesses.

It also significantly increased the death tax exemption, protecting nearly 2 million family farms and helping ensure that land, livestock, and operations can be passed from one generation to the next.

In the Big First district, agriculture is our way of life. Producers face unpredictable weather, volatile markets, and rising input costs. They deserve certainty from Washington, not higher taxes and more red tape.

This law also made historic investments in rural America by creating the Rural Health Transformation Program and providing $50 billion over 5 years to improve rural healthcare access in places like the Big First district of Kansas.

The bill also supported President Trump's work to secure our border and restore integrity to Federal programs. American taxpayers should not be forced to fund benefits for people who enter our country illegally. The Working Families Tax Cuts helps ensure that Medicaid and SNAP resources serve eligible, working Americans while supporting the men and women serving our communities and enforcing our laws.

Mr. Speaker, 1 year ago, President Trump and congressional Republicans made a commitment to working families. We promised lower taxes, a stronger economy, support for rural America, and policies that put American citizens first.

Mr. Speaker, 1 year later, Americans are seeing the benefits. The Working Families Tax Cuts are helping families keep more of their money, protecting family farms, strengthening rural communities, and creating greater opportunity across our country. Promises made. Promises kept.

Official Text ↗

Honoring Ms. Yolanda Jackson

Terri A. SewellDemocrat, Alabama

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a dear friend and extraordinary woman of faith, and a living testament to courage and resilience: Ms. Yolanda Jackson.

This week, the O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center at the University of Alabama at Birmingham will present Yolanda with its Iron Strong Award for her courageous battle with breast cancer. I cannot think of anyone more deserving of this recognition.

I have known Yolanda for more than 20 years. We became fast friends as neighbors in 2005, after we moved into the same apartment complex in Birmingham, Alabama. But our connection actually began years earlier. While working as a human resource consultant for the city of Selma in the early nineties, Yolanda became known to my mother, Nancy Gardner Sewell--Selma's first Black city councilwoman--and she adored Yolanda. It was a wonderful reminder of how small and how special our Alabama family can be.

Over the past two decades, we have celebrated life's blessings together, and we stood beside one another through some of life's toughest moments. Yolanda has been there for me, just as I try to be there for her, and I am extraordinarily grateful for her friendship. My life is richer because she is in it.

Not long after moving to Birmingham in 2005, Yolanda was diagnosed with breast cancer. She would go on to face two more cancer diagnoses in 2022 and again in 2024--three cancer diagnoses, three difficult battles, and three remarkable victories.

Throughout every step of that journey, Yolanda received exceptional care from the physicians, nurses, and staff at the O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center at UAB. Her final treatment was in October of 2025. Her treatment was a success. Today, I am grateful to say that she remains in remission.

When you ask Yolanda where she finds her strength, her answer is simple: her faith. She believes that even at our hardest moments, God is at work, and that through suffering, he walks beside us, gives us strength to endure, and uses our trials to shape our character, deepen our faith, and make us into the people he wants us to be.

Yolanda has lived that belief every day of her life. She encourages everyone facing cancer to hold on to hope, to stay positive, and never stop fighting. She believes we all need someone to love, something to look forward to, and something to live for.

For Yolanda, that purpose shines brightest through her beautiful family. In 2019, she welcomed and adopted two precious twin boys, Ayden and Jayden, into her life. Last year, she opened her heart again by adopting their younger brother, Kyrie. Those three boys are truly blessed to have such a loving, faithful, and determined mom.

Today, we celebrate Yolanda. We also celebrate the extraordinary work of the O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center at UAB. Their groundbreaking research, innovative treatments, and compassionate care have transformed countless lives, and Yolanda's story is a powerful testament to their mission.

Today, we celebrate an iron strong survivor, my dear friend Yolanda Jackson. More than that, we celebrate an iron strong woman, a faithful servant, a devoted mother, loyal friend, and an inspiration to everyone blessed enough to know her.

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Yolanda on this well-deserved honor. Her courage, her faith, and her unwavering hope inspires everyone who has been privileged to know her.

I ask my colleagues in the United States House of Representatives to join me in congratulating Ms. Yolanda Jackson and wishing her beautiful family many years of continued health,

Official Text ↗

Legacy of American Liberty

John J. McGuire IIIRepublican, Virginia

Mr. Speaker, imagine riding 40 miles through dark Virginia woods to save the American Revolution.

In June 1781, militia Captain Jack Jouett did just that, galloping from Louisa County in the Fifth District to Monticello, also in the Fifth District, to warn Governor Thomas Jefferson of an impending British capture. Jouett's warning saved Jefferson and the general assembly in Charlottesville, preserving our young Nation's leadership.

These heroes are deeply tied to Virginia's historic Fifth Congressional District, which still includes Albemarle and Louisa County today.

In 1789, the Fifth District hosted a legendary race: James Madison, the father of the Constitution, campaigned against his friend and neighbor, James Monroe, the Revolutionary War veteran who was the father of the Monroe Doctrine. Madison won, becoming Virginia Fifth District's very first Representative.

From Jack Jouett's courage to the vision of three Presidents, the legacy of American liberty was forged right here in Virginia's Fifth Congressional District.

John J. McGuire IIIRepublican, Virginia

Mr. Speaker, Virginia's Fifth can tell one remarkable founding story through four names.

Thomas Jefferson gave the Nation its words in the Declaration of Independence and served as Virginia's wartime Governor and our third President. He left this district with Monticello and the University of Virginia.

James Madison gave those words structure, helping shape the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Though Montpelier now sits just outside today's Fifth, his work still lives in Charlottesville through the university he helped build and lead.

James Monroe was a soldier, diplomat, Governor, and the fifth President. He gave us the Monroe Doctrine, and he carried that work forward from his Albemarle home, Highland.

Jack Jouett rode through the night from Louisa to Charlottesville to warn Jefferson and save Virginia's leadership from capture.

Together, these Virginians helped write, defend, and steady the American experiment.

John J. McGuire IIIRepublican, Virginia

Mr. Speaker, Virginia's Fifth Congressional District began with Thomas Jefferson. He gave independence its voice as the principal author of the Declaration, then helped secure liberty again through the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom and the founding of the University of Virginia.

Beside him stood James Madison, Jefferson's close collaborator and the Nation's constitutional architect. Known as the father of the Constitution, Madison helped win ratification through the Federalist Papers and then steered the Bill of Rights through Congress.

James Monroe carried that Virginia legacy from soldier to statesman. A Continental Army veteran, he later helped to negotiate the Louisiana Purchase, presided over the Era of Good Feelings, and gave American diplomacy a landmark win in the Monroe Doctrine.

Connecting them all is militia Captain Jack Jouett, whose overnight warning in 1781 helped Jefferson and Virginia leaders escape British capture, protecting the cause these Founders were still building.

Official Text ↗

Cuban Blockade Is Inhumane

Mark PocanDemocrat, Wisconsin

Mr. Speaker, I just got back from a fact-finding trip to Cuba a week ago after having visited the country 30 years ago and 3\1/ 2\ years ago, as well. Let me tell you what I found on this trip.

The United States' blockade of Cuba is crushing the Cuban people. We are hurting the very people who we profess to care about, and we are not doing so for national security reasons but for political reasons.

Here is what I saw. Our blockade is inhumane. Food, medicine, fuel for energy, literally everything you need to live and thrive, is blocked by us. It is not just us. We forced the world into an involuntary global blockade, as well, as we will punish anyone who does business with these sanctions.

Our boot is on the throats of the Cuban people after over 65 years of blockading their government. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Our punishing of the people of Cuba has not brought the regime change that some politicians want, but we are pushing our boot harder onto the necks of the people. Insanity.

Mr. Speaker, we had a period of time of lifting the restrictions under Barack Obama. Guess what. Americans visited Cuba. The people of the country thrived and loved our country, and America was no less safe.

All of that got taken away by Donald Trump. In fact, we didn't just go back to the same old repression. Instead, we went to new levels of sadism against the Cuban people. Ships can't bring supplies due to our blockade. Goods can't be exchanged with the Cuban people because of our blockade. Medicine--even in war, we allow medicine through. Medicine and medical parts can't get to the Cuban people due to our blockade.

Cuba is a nation that trains doctors who serve around the world, especially in Central and South America. Yet, in Cuban hospitals, MRI and CAT scan machines sit idly because they can't get the parts they need to fix them. I have seen it with my own eyes.

The infant mortality rate has doubled due to the tightening of the blockade. Nearly 14,000 kids and 100,000 adults are waiting for surgeries.

When the power goes out, which it does quite often due to our oil ban, surgeons finish surgeries with the light from their cell phones because of our blockade.

In fact, while I was there, the power went out across the country for the second time that week: 42 hours down, then 1\1/2\ hours of power, and then a shutdown again. Garbage is lining the streets because garbage trucks can't pick up trash, causing additional health hazards.

We say that we want to transform the country with a more robust private sector, yet we make it harder for small businesses to open and thrive. I have talked to small business owners there, one who went from 400 employees to 12 due to our blockade. The government in Cuba announced 176 reforms for helping private businesses, but our government refuses to acknowledge a single one. Bluntly, the U.S. Government is lying to the American people about Cuba.

I met with some ambassadors from other countries, and one thing really stuck. One said that it was like a silent Gaza. No, there aren't bombs destroying buildings and neighborhoods, but there is a destruction of the power system. There is a devastation to their healthcare system. There is an attack on their ability to educate their children.

The people of Cuba are hurting economically more than ever, all due to the U.S. sanctions and blockade, not because of the Cuban Government.

Mr. Speaker, their governing system certainly isn't ours. We disagree with some of their actions, for sure. Unfortunately, Secretary of State Marco Rubio is making this personal and political rather than about the best interests of the United States.

The State Department just published a ridiculous report about the threat to America from Cuba. It may be the stupidest, most fantastical, most biased thing I have ever read from a government agency. Enough.

The people of America are tired of war and regime change. We want things in our country addressed, like being able to make a good wage and have groceries, healthcare, and gas be more affordable. Yet, starting another conflict while in a quagmire in Iran is the last thing we need.

We don't want another Gaza in Cuba. We need to end the blockade.

Official Text ↗

Honoring James Robert Yaroszeufski

Ryan MackenzieRepublican, Pennsylvania

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the service and sacrifice of Army veteran James Robert Yaroszeufski.

James served honorably in the United States Army during the Vietnam war. During his service, he was wounded in combat and awarded the Purple Heart in recognition of the sacrifices he made in defense of our Nation.

His military record also includes the Army Commendation Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, and Vietnam Campaign Medal.

Like so many veterans of his generation, James answered our Nation's call during a difficult chapter in our history, serving with courage and honor.

Although he passed away in 2015, his service and sacrifice deserve to be remembered.

On behalf of the people of the Lehigh Valley and Poconos, I honor James Robert Yaroszeufski's legacy and thank him for his faithful service to the United States.

Ryan MackenzieRepublican, Pennsylvania

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the service and sacrifice of Vietnam veteran Michael T. Matsko.

Michael enlisted in the United States Navy in 1964 and deployed to Vietnam in 1968, during the Tet Offensive.

Serving with the brown water Navy, he was wounded when his base at Quy Nhon came under attack. Despite suffering combat injuries that left him with retained shrapnel, he returned to duty and completed his deployment in service to our Nation.

Like so many Vietnam veterans, Michael has carried the lasting effects of war long after returning home. Yet, he has remained committed to serving others by sharing his experience with students and community groups, helping future generations better understand the sacrifices made by those who served in Vietnam.

Michael was also honored by his fellow veterans by creating a commemorative keepsake from recycled American flags, preserving their stories and ensuring their service is never forgotten.

On behalf of the people of the Lehigh Valley and the Poconos, I thank Michael Matsko for his courage, his service, and his continued dedication to preserving the legacy of America's veterans.

Ryan MackenzieRepublican, Pennsylvania

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the service and sacrifice of Army veteran Robert ``Bob'' Green, Jr.

Bob served honorably in the United States Army from 1969 until 1975, including two tours in Vietnam with the 196th Light Infantry Brigade.

Over nearly 6 years of service, he rose to the rank of staff sergeant and answered our Nation's call during one of the most challenging periods in our history. His courage and dedication were recognized with numerous military honors, including the Bronze Star Medal, Purple Heart, Republic of Vietnam Cross of Gallantry, Vietnam Service Medal, National Defense Service Medal, and a Good Conduct Medal.

These decorations reflect not only Bob's bravery in combat but also his steadfast commitment to serving his fellow soldiers and our country.

On behalf of the people of the Lehigh Valley and the Poconos, I thank Robert Green, Jr., for his courage, sacrifice, and his honorable service to the United States.

Ryan MackenzieRepublican, Pennsylvania

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Dan Schantz, a longtime Lehigh Valley farmer and leader in Pennsylvania agriculture.

For decades, Dan built one of the region's most recognizable greenhouse businesses, serving generations of families across the Lehigh Valley with the quality and dedication that became synonymous with the Schantz name.

On behalf of the people of the Lehigh Valley and the Poconos, I extend my deepest condolences to the family of Dan Schantz. We honor his lasting contributions to our agricultural community, and may his legacy and memory be everlasting.

Official Text ↗

No More Endless Wars

Seth MagazinerDemocrat, Rhode Island

Mr. Speaker, in recent days, three more American servicemembers have been killed in the Iran war, while another is missing, and 1,600 civilians have been killed--not combatants--with our tax dollars.

Here at home, the average price of gasoline is above $4 a gallon again, and we continue to spend billions of dollars of taxpayer money on this unnecessary war that President Trump started. This is money that could have been spent to make people's lives better here at home.

President Trump got us into this war for no good reason, with no good plan, and no regard for the pain that it is causing. The American people are tired of endless wars, tired of unnecessary bloodshed, tired of children being bombed in their schools with our tax dollars, and tired of our best and brightest coming home in caskets for a war that nobody can explain.

It is time to put the adults back in charge. Put experienced negotiators at the table to find an end to this unnecessary war, not the President's relatives and real estate buddies.

It is time to elect a new majority here in Congress that takes our responsibility to be a check on the President seriously. We need people here in Congress who have the courage to say ``no'' when the President has a bad idea, especially when it gets people killed.

We grieve for the American servicemembers who have lost their lives in this war and for their families, and we pray that the Members of this Congress can find the courage to stand up and end this unnecessary war.

Official Text ↗

Recognizing Colorado Army National Guard Aviators

Jeff HurdRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Colorado Army National Guard aviators who saved a life on one of Colorado's most challenging peaks.

Earlier this year, a hiker was stranded on Crestone Peak, more than 14,000 feet above sea level. Flight for Life cannot reach that altitude. Ground crews could not reach this hiker. The mission fell to our Colorado Army National Guard aviators.

Chief Warrant Officer 5 Mike Antinora and Chief Warrant Officer 4 Josh Friederichs flew their Black Hawk helicopter at the limits of its capabilities, hovering at 14,380 feet, while Sergeant Noah Jordan and Staff Sergeant Jake Beehler worked the hoist, lowering 180 feet of cable to reach where no one else could.

They brought that hiker home safely.

This is what our National Guard does not just in combat overseas but here at home when no one else can answer the call.

I am proud to recognize Chief Warrant Officer Antinora, Chief Warrant Officer Friederichs, Sergeant Jordan, Staff Sergeant Beehler, and rescue technicians Gerrit Padgham and Steven Gosselin. Colorado is safer because of their service.

Jeff HurdRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Juan Agredano and his family, owners of C & J Cafe in Delta, Colorado, a community institution that has served Western Slope families since the 1980s.

When I visited last month, I was welcomed the same way every customer is: like family. This is no accident. It is the culture that Juan; his wife, Robin; and their daughter, Jennifer, have built through decades of showing up for their community day after day.

C & J Cafe is the kind of place that doesn't just feed people. It brings them together.

Whether it is the legendary cinnamon rolls, said to be the largest in Delta County, or simply the warmth at the door, the Agredanos have made their restaurant a cornerstone of community life.

When the challenges of COVID threatened restaurants across the country, Juan and Jennifer kept showing up. They kept serving their neighbors, and their neighbors never forgot it.

I am proud to represent a district with families like the Agredanos whose hard work, generosity, and commitment strengthen the communities they call home.

Jeff HurdRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Grand Valley Power as it celebrates 90 years of keeping the lights on in Colorado's Third Congressional District.

In 1936, a small group of farmers in the Grand Valley could not get electricity. The costs were too high, and the power lines simply didn't reach that far. So, they did what western Coloradans do: They came together to solve the problem themselves.

Neighbor by neighbor, they built what became Colorado's first, and today its oldest, rural electric cooperative. Within a year, electricity reached 250 homes and farms for the very first time. What many Coloradans already took for granted transformed lives across Mesa County.

Today, Grand Valley Power serves more than 18,000 members across the county. It remains not for profit, member owned, and rooted in the same cooperative spirit that inspired its founders nine decades ago.

Ninety years is a testament not only to a successful electric cooperative but to the enduring power of neighbors working together to strengthen their communities.

I am proud to recognize Grand Valley Power and everyone who carried that mission forward.

Jeff HurdRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Dennis Webb, who is retiring after nearly 20 years of covering the environment and natural resources for the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel.

Out West, public lands are not an abstraction. They shape how people work, ranch, hunt, and live. Dennis helped the people of the Western Slope understand the policies that shaped those lands, from water rights to grazing to wildfires and wildlife management.

His reporting earned the respect not only of readers across western Colorado but of legislators and officials in Denver as well as here in Washington, D.C.

Good journalism doesn't tell people what to think. It helps them understand the issues well enough to think for themselves. Dennis did that with clarity, fairness, and a deep understanding of the West.

Thoughtful local journalism is increasingly rare, and western Colorado is better because Dennis Webb devoted his career to getting the story right.

I wish Dennis a well-earned retirement, and I thank him for his service to readers on the Western Slope.

Jeff HurdRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Patrick Morrissey, a Colorado Hall of Fame wrestler whose great achievement came long after the wrestling mat.

Patrick was a Colorado State champion and an All-American, but in 2019, at just 48 years old, he was diagnosed with early-onset Parkinson's disease. Rather than retreat, he leaned into the same determination that defined him as an athlete.

In June 2024, Patrick joined a four-man crew to row 2,800 miles across the Pacific Ocean, from California to Hawaii. For 41 days, he battled towering waves, relentless winds, and the daily challenges of Parkinson's before reaching the shores of Kauai.

Patrick became the first person with Parkinson's to row the mid- Pacific. Along the way, he and his teammates raised more than $41 million for Parkinson's research.

Patrick's story reminds us that courage is not measured by the obstacles that we face but by our determination to keep moving forward.

I am proud to represent Patrick Morrissey and his family, whose example has inspired countless others.

Official Text ↗

No Data Centers

Rashida TlaibDemocrat, Michigan

Mr. Speaker, Michiganders are clear: No data centers. I am introducing a new bill, the No AI Data Centers on Federal Lands Act.

Our bill would permanently ban large data centers on Federal lands, including military bases. It would also remove any existing qualifying AI data center and mandate site remediation to protect our health and our environment.

Our Congress needs to act quickly because we all know that the Trump administration is selling our land to Big Tech right now. We know that the Department of Defense has already requested $30 billion to build hyperscale data centers. They want untested software to make life-or- death decisions in our U.S. military.

These data centers will be built without Clean Air Act permits. Imagine all of this under the Trump administration's new rule that revokes environmental protections.

The administration is also working for Big Tech right now, not us. We should be making it more difficult for the Trump administration to outsource military decisions to the Big Tech companies. We all know they put profit before our lives.

We should protect our public lands from data center destruction. Everywhere I go in my district, all throughout Michigan, our residents are telling us data centers are not welcome. AI data centers bring noise, light, air, and water pollution. Already we know they increase energy costs by as much as 267 percent. Think about that.

Our residents are choking on smog right now from wildfires. This past weekend, we know neighborhoods surrounding Detroit had the worst air quality in the world, and they want to make the climate change crisis even worse.

We already are paying too much for utility bills right now, yet the Pentagon wants to place heavier costs on the shoulders of hardworking Americans by choosing, again, Big Tech instead of us.

Our corrupt, AI-addicted President cannot be allowed to sacrifice our Federal lands so that Big Tech billionaires can get richer.

I will continue to push back against harmful data centers alongside our residents to protect our public lands, health, and environment. Together, we can safeguard our public lands and also prevent higher utility bills. We can tell this President that AI shouldn't be making military decisions and AI shouldn't trump our public health and our environmental laws.

Rashida TlaibDemocrat, Michigan

Mr. Speaker, I am introducing the FAIR Credit Act to restore the credit reports of victims of predatory lending, fraud, and financial abuse.

Mr. Speaker, I want you to know that this is not a Republican or Democratic or Independent issue. This is an American issue.

The FAIR Credit Act would address inaccuracies in credit reports found by over a third of consumers. These are our residents. Imagine a third of our residents right now are hurt by credit reports that aren't even accurate.

This is an economic justice bill. Credit records are riddled with errors that prevent people from obtaining jobs, housing, cars, and loans, loans to help them thrive.

Our neighbors are constantly targeted by predatory lenders and scams, especially our senior citizens. For my seniors, my bill would establish the right to free credit monitoring and identity theft protection services. They shouldn't have poor credit because they fell victim to scams.

Medical debt should also be prohibited from being on a credit report. It is not their fault they got sick. It shouldn't bring them down and be able to put them in survivor mode because they got sick and couldn't afford the health costs. Oftentimes, we know that patients need lifesaving medical procedures and aren't even aware of the cost in advance.

Adverse credit reports should not drag people down when they are already drowning in medical debt. People who have survived domestic and financial abuse also shouldn't have negative information on their credit reports that they are not even responsible for.

Instead, our bill offers a pathway for them to remove negative information so they can start a healthy financial life.

The FAIR Credit Act removes negative information after 4 years, down from 7 years, because we know economists and others have said 7 years is not even a good indicator.

Our neighbors across the country should not be denied economic opportunities that we know will get them out of survivor mode and help them be able to thrive. A lot of this is because we have a flawed credit report process in our country.

Our residents deserve the FAIR Credit Act. Our residents deserve these changes. This one should be an easy one for many of my colleagues here in this Chamber.

Official Text ↗

Recognizing Final Flight of A-10 at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base

Juan CiscomaniRepublican, Arizona

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the last official A-10 flight at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Arizona.

On July 29, the 357th Fighter Squadron commander, Lieutenant Colonel Ryan ``Clutch'' Rutter, and the 355th Operations Group commander, Lieutenant Colonel Rodney Dwyer, will mark the end of a phenomenal 50- year chapter of A-10 operations in Tucson.

This spring, Davis-Monthan also celebrated the graduation of the final class of the A-10C Thunderbolt II student pilots from the 357th Training Squadron, marking the end of A-10 training at the base.

These milestones bear historical significance and represent a longtime connection between the A-10, Davis-Monthan, and the Tucson community.

The A-10 Thunderbolt II, nicknamed the Warthog, has great military significance not just in Tucson but across the Nation. Designed during the Cold War to combat Soviet tanks in Europe, this aircraft is the Air Force's only one built exclusively for close air support, or CAS.

The A-10 has served the U.S. military for decades. While it will no longer be in use at Davis-Monthan, this aircraft will continue to be an essential asset of our Nation's military.

I thank Lieutenant Colonels Rutter and Dwyer, for their outstanding leadership at Davis-Monthan. I congratulate both lieutenant colonels, the 357th Fighter Squadron, and everyone at Davis-Monthan on an extraordinary 50 years of A-10 operations.

The last official A-10 flight on July 29 will be remembered as a significant milestone at Davis-Monthan, and our community will proudly remember this incredible 50-year chapter in our city's history.

Juan CiscomaniRepublican, Arizona

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remember and honor a dear friend, Linda Barber, who tragically passed in June. She was surrounded by her family and was certainly welcomed home by her husband, Jim, whom she missed dearly and spoke of often.

My wife, Laura, and I are incredibly saddened by this loss to our community.

Linda was deeply loved and involved in Pima County politics for several decades. From serving as a precinct committeeman since 1972, being a legislative district chairman, president of several entities, chairman of the Pima County party, a vice chair of the State party, and office manager of the Arizona Governor's Office, she dedicated her life to making a difference in Arizona.

Linda truly cared about our community and the people around her. She was always there for us. She was a great friend to our family and a big supporter of all of us, as well as many in our community.

I am beyond grateful for Linda's leadership, her friendship, and the example she set for those who knew her.

Laura and I are keeping the Barber family and their loved ones in our prayers. As we all grieve this devastating loss, we always remember her smile and kind heart.

Linda gave so much to those around her. She will be greatly missed, and her legacy will live on through all of those she impacted, which are many.

May my dear friend Linda rest in peace.

Official Text ↗

Congress Must Respond

Analilia MejiaDemocrat, New Jersey

Mr. Speaker, I rise today with urgency. Weeks ago, President Trump fired every remaining Commissioner of the Federal agency charged with protecting the integrity of our elections. This Chamber has not reckoned with that fully, and it should.

The Election Assistance Commission exists to help carry out free and fair elections in this country. It was structured by law with four bipartisan members precisely so that no single administration could control how our elections are run. That structure is the point.

For over a year, this administration pressed that very Commission to require a passport or original birth certificate as a condition for voter registration. Millions of Americans do not have ready access to either document.

The Commission would not act on this demand, and the courts agreed. Both checks held.

Then, days after the Supreme Court granted the President new authority to remove the heads of independent agencies in a case that had nothing to do with elections, the President used that very authority in order to eliminate every Commissioner.

This was not incidental. It was the removal of the officials standing between this President and a policy his own Commission and the courts have rejected.

Last Thursday night, he took his case to national television. In a prime-time address from the White House, the President declassified documents he claimed proved foreign interference and widespread fraud in the election he lost over 5 years ago.

He alleged a foreign government has compromised the voter data of 220 million Americans and that 278,000 noncitizens were registered to vote. Independent fact checkers, who reviewed those very documents, found that they did not support the claim made about them.

He presented no evidence of a single fraudulent vote because 5 years and 64 court cases have never produced even one.

This Chamber has now watched the same pattern twice: raise unproven claims of fraud, then use them to justify removing the very safeguards standing in the way; first the Commissioners and now a prime-time address built to manufacture support for legislation his own party could not pass on its merits, the SAVE Act.

House Republicans have pushed it through, and Senate Republicans have tried repeatedly to force it through as a reconciliation amendment, needing only a simple majority, only to see it blocked each and every time.

Under this bill, a driver's license does not satisfy the registration requirement. Only a passport, an original birth certificate, or naturalization papers would.

Consider what that means: 146 million Americans do not hold a valid passport, and roughly 69 million married women hold birth certificates that no longer match their legal names. When Kansas tried a version of this requirement, 31,000 eligible citizens, 12 percent of all applicants, were blocked from registering--not noncitizens, citizens.

Mr. Speaker, this has never been a matter of election integrity. It is a matter of who holds power in this country and who is permitted to participate in choosing it.

When a party grows uncertain it could win on the merits, the next move is rarely to accept that outcome. It is to lay the groundwork in advance so any unfavorable results can be dismissed before a single vote is counted.

This Chamber should be prepared to say clearly every time that surfaces that this is not a defense of democracy. It is a preview of what happens if this administration does not like what voters decide.

Congress has an obligation to respond. We must enact durable, statutory protections for the administration of Federal elections so that no single official can dismantle them by executive action.

We must pursue meaningful reform of the Supreme Court, including term limits and enforceable ethical standards because a Court that keeps expanding this President's authority is not exercising oversight. It is, in fact, removing it.

Each of these actions taken individually may appear isolated. Taken together, however, they constitute a sustained effort to narrow the American

Official Text ↗

Recognizing Vance Taylor on His Retirement

Julie FedorchakRepublican, North Dakota

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a distinguished North Dakotan, Vance Taylor. After 26 years as president and CEO of the North Dakota Mill, Vance is retiring following a remarkable career of service.

Under his leadership, the mill became the largest single-site flour mill in the Nation. That success was built through strategic investments, innovation, and an unwavering commitment to North Dakota farmers.

Just as importantly, Vance built a culture rooted in teamwork and respect. His leadership strengthened one of the State's most important institutions and helped support communities across North Dakota.

North Dakota agriculture is stronger because of Vance Taylor's service. We congratulate him on an extraordinary career and wish him all the best in retirement.

Julie FedorchakRepublican, North Dakota

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Dr. Marshall Stewart on his appointment as the 16th president of North Dakota State University.

Leading one of North Dakota's premier public universities is both an extraordinary honor and an important responsibility. It means preparing the next generation of leaders, advancing groundbreaking research, supporting our State's world-class agricultural innovation, and strengthening the NDSU community for years to come.

Throughout his career, Dr. Stewart has demonstrated a commitment to expanding opportunity and partnerships. Students are at the center of his work. His vision of serving North Dakotans in every corner of our State reflects the values that have long defined North Dakota State University.

North Dakota is proud to welcome Dr. Stewart to the Bison family, and I look forward to working with him as NDSU continues to educate future leaders, drive innovation, and strengthen communities across our great State.

Julie FedorchakRepublican, North Dakota

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Bowman County Veterans Wall in Bowman, North Dakota.

This remarkable memorial stands as a lasting tribute to the brave men and women who answered our Nation's call to serve. Each name etched into the wall represents a story of courage, sacrifice, and unwavering devotion to our country. Together, they remind us that the freedoms we enjoy each day were secured by those willing to defend them.

What makes this memorial especially meaningful is that it continues to grow. Through the dedication of volunteers, families, and community leaders, more veterans are being recognized, ensuring their service will never be forgotten. That commitment to honoring those who served reflects the very best of North Dakota.

The Bowman County Veterans Wall is more than a monument. It is a promise that the sacrifices of our veterans will be remembered, their legacy preserved, and their example passed on to future generations.

I thank everyone who helped make this tribute possible. I also thank our veterans and their families, for their service, their sacrifice, and their love of our country. May God bless them all.

Julie FedorchakRepublican, North Dakota

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Cathy Dub on her appointment as president and CEO of the North Dakota Mill.

This well-earned achievement reflects years of dedicated leadership and service to one of North Dakota's most important institutions.

Since joining the mill in 2014, Cathy has helped strengthen an organization that plays a vital role in supporting our farmers, growing our economy, and creating value for communities across our State.

The North Dakota Mill is a source of pride for generations of North Dakotans. As the only State-owned flour mill in the Nation, it has long demonstrated that ingenuity, work ethic, and agricultural excellence define our State.

Cathy's experience, steady leadership, and deep commitment to the mill's mission have prepared her well for this role.

I congratulate Cathy on this well-deserved appointment, and best wishes for continued success in the years ahead.

Julie FedorchakRepublican, North Dakota

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an outstanding young North Dakotan, Casia Steinhaus.

Casia recently earned the prestigious Goldwater Scholarship, one of the Nation's highest honors for undergraduate students pursuing careers in science, math, or engineering.

This highly competitive scholarship recognizes exceptional academic achievement, leadership, and promise in scientific research. It is a testament to Casia's academic excellence and hard work at the University of North Dakota. Her accomplishment reflects not only her own dedication but also the bright future of North Dakota's next generation of innovators, researchers, and problem-solvers.

I have no doubt this is only the beginning for Casia, and I wish her continued success as she pursues her studies and serves our country through her talents.

Official Text ↗

Honoring Gerard "Jerry" Jonas

Brian K. FitzpatrickRepublican, Pennsylvania

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of an absolute legend, Gerard ``Jerry'' Jonas of Levittown, Bucks County, Pennsylvania, whose passing on July 11 marks the loss of a remarkable American story from the battlefields of Korea to the neighborhoods of Lower Bucks County.

As a young man, Jerry answered the call to serve in the United States Marine Corps during the Korean war. Like so many in his generation, he came home, took off his uniform, and quietly went to work, building a better future for his family and our surrounding community.

In 1956, Jerry and his beloved late wife, Elizabeth, bought their home in Cobalt Ridge in Middletown Township and helped lay the foundation of Queen of the Universe Parish as original parishioners. Their home became a gathering place for their parish and a spiritual anchor, reflecting the values of love, integrity, and responsibility.

Mr. Speaker, Jerry was a gifted and versatile writer. He contributed to America's early space and missile programs as a technical writer and editor for General Electric, helping communicate the work of our scientists and engineers at a pivotal moment in the Cold War. He later led advertising at Ballantine beer, and he spent decades in journalism and sports media.

In each chapter of his career, he brought the same curiosity, craftsmanship, and work ethic that defined his heroic military service.

Even in retirement, Jerry did not stop serving. For more than a decade, he volunteered with Operation Stand Down, working to support homeless veterans in our community. At an age when many would have withdrawn from public life, Jerry leaned in, using his time and experience to lift up those who were struggling at home.

Mr. Speaker, Jerry Jonas' life offers us a clear example of what it means to be a good citizen, a good neighbor, and a good, decent, and honorable human being. He loved his family. He loved our country. He loved Bucks County. He lived his faith, and he worked to leave his corner of the world better than he found it.

Jerry Jonas' story is the story of Levittown. It is the story of Bucks County, of men and women who answered the call to serve, came home, built strong families and communities, and never stopped giving back.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the entire U.S. House of Representatives and the people of the First Congressional District of Pennsylvania, we extend our deepest condolences to Jerry's family,

May God bless the memory of Jerry Jonas, a devoted husband, a devoted father, a proud marine, and a lifelong servant to our community.

Official Text ↗

Trump Accounts for Children

Joe WilsonRepublican, South Carolina

Mr. Speaker, led by President Donald Trump, Speaker Mike Johnson, and House Republicans, the Working Families Tax Cut Act created Trump Accounts, giving families the opportunity to invest in the future of their children.

The account is a new tax-deferred opportunity for children under 18, providing retirement savings. Contributions can add up to $5,000 a year. Additional support is provided by leading companies and generous philanthropists.

Children born between 2025 and 2028 will be eligible for a one-time, $1,000 Federal Government deposit. Once the child turns 18, they can use the money for expenses such as education, first home purchases, starting a business, or other use.

Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, God bless our troops. Trump is reinstituting peace through strength, revealing war criminal Putin lies, insulting Trump, mocking Trump, providing targeting intelligence to Iran to murder American troops, and leading President Trump to endorse the Lindsey Graham sanctions act to enable victory for Ukrainians.

Official Text ↗

Exercising Constitutional Scrutiny

George LatimerDemocrat, New York

Mr. Speaker, this week we were horrified to learn of the death of four U.S. servicemembers in Jordan and Kuwait as a result of the ongoing war with Iran.

The President and the Pentagon may dismiss these deaths as unfortunate consequences of war; however, I do not accept these catastrophic events as acceptable in any way, shape, or form.

Someone must answer to the American people why soldiers serving at support bases neither in Iran nor the at the Strait of Hormuz are being exposed to enemy fire. Are there adequate defenses in place? If not, why? If so, why are they not working?

If the entire Middle East is a battlefield, as a consequence of this President's war, then this administration has to be honest with the American people about the scale of the conflict we were led to believe was winding down.

Mr. Speaker, I implore my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to join us in exercising constitutional scrutiny that our constituents demand on the many other excesses that have occurred during this current administration.

Official Text ↗

Honoring Steve Stroud

Tim MooreRepublican, North Carolina

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Steve Stroud, a friend and a true leader who transformed North Carolina.

After attending North Carolina State University, he built one of North Carolina's most respected commercial real estate firms, shaping the growth of the Triangle region. His impact extends far beyond commercial development.

As the first chairman of the Centennial Authority, he played a pivotal role in the building of what is now known as the Lenovo Center and bringing the Carolina Hurricanes to North Carolina. His determination helped secure our State's first major league professional sports franchise, boosting economic growth, tourism, and pride throughout all of our communities.

He was a leader who saw possibilities where others saw obstacles. He believed in North Carolina, invested in our people, and dedicated his life to creating opportunities for others.

From humble roots in Rutherford County to the Research Triangle, he left a positive, lasting impact on communities all across North Carolina.

Mr. Speaker, as we mourn his passing, may we remember Steve Stroud for his enduring legacy of leadership, service, and love of our great State. Our prayers are with his family and friends.

Official Text ↗

Gen Z Food and Hunger Summit

James P. McGovernDemocrat, Massachusetts

Mr. Speaker, last week I spoke with 160 incredible anti-hunger advocates as part of the fourth Gen Z Food and Hunger Summit.

Shocking research from Purdue University shows that nearly one in three members of Gen Z have experienced food insecurity--one in three. Let that sink in. In fact, many of the young people I met experienced hunger firsthand. Congress ought to listen to them. I will continue to amplify and uplift their voices.

Gen Z leaders at the summit came together to strategize, holding over 150 congressional meetings to highlight their generation's struggle to afford food.

Mr. Speaker, I am so glad the next generation of Americans is impatient

There is a lot to be discouraged by these days, but the young people I met at the Gen Z Food and Hunger Summit give me hope. I am grateful for their energy, and I am grateful for their passion and our shared work to end hunger.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my Republican colleagues and members of this administration to pay attention to them. We live in the richest country in the history of the world, and we have 50 million Americans who are hungry and food insecure. It is unconscionable. It is shameful, and we can do something about it.

Official Text ↗

Congratulating Reva Foster

Herbert C. Conaway, Jr.Democrat, New Jersey

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate Reva Foster on her retirement from Willingboro Township, where she served as director of the senior citizen center, as well as executive director of the Department of Aging and Veterans Affairs, and community affairs.

After joining Willingboro Township in 1993, she became a fierce advocate for seniors and veterans in the region. Under her leadership, the town's senior services program grew into a highly respected, State- recognized resource that provided a welcoming community for generations of residents.

Her responsibility expanded to include the township's community affairs and Veterans affairs departments where she continued to champion programs that have improved the quality of life for Willingboro residents.

As a reflection of her achievements, in 2020, the senior citizen center was renamed the Reva Foster Senior Center, and in 2024 she was inducted into New Jersey Hall of Fame.

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Reva and thank her for her career of tireless advocacy and service.

Official Text ↗

Honoring Jefferson Holland

Sarah ElfrethDemocrat, Maryland

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of a friend, Jefferson Holland, poet laureate of Annapolis and a modern-day Chesapeake troubadour.

Anyone fortunate enough to know Jeff knows that he is a pillar of our community who has dedicated his life to capturing and sharing the essence of the Chesapeake Bay through song, story, and poetry.

Leading up to America's 250th anniversary, Jeff spearheaded Poets Afloat, a unique celebration featuring original poetry by locals, inspired by the rich history, characters, and spirit of Annapolis and Anne Arundel County.

Mr. Speaker, I will leave you with Jeff's own words that capture Annapolis' role in Nation's history--words I couldn't put to paper but words I hope this entire Chamber can take to heart: Let Annapolis show the world how democracy is done with justice, not with vengeance; with the truth, not outright lies; with good sense and consensus.

Official Text ↗

Providing for Consideration of H.R. 8800, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027; Providing for Consideration of H.R. 8884, Removing Barriers to Work for Disabled Americans Act...

Virginia FoxxRepublican, North Carolina

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1438 and ask for its immediate consideration.

The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from North Carolina is recognized for 1 hour.

Virginia FoxxRepublican, North Carolina

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts, 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.

Virginia FoxxRepublican, North Carolina

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from North Carolina?

There was no objection.

Virginia FoxxRepublican, North Carolina

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and the underlying legislation.

Yesterday, the Committee on Rules met and produced the rule, H. Res. 1438, providing for the House's consideration of H. Con. Res. 113, H.R. 9770, H.R. 8800, H.R. 8884, H.R. 7008, and H.R. 6955.

This rule provides for consideration of H.R. 8800, the Fiscal Year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act, under a structured rule and makes in order 320 amendments.

The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and the ranking member of the Committee on Armed Services or their respective designees, and one motion to recommit.

Additionally, the rule provides that upon House passage of H.R. 8800, the Clerk shall add the text of S. 1383, the SAVE America Act, to the bill and transmit it to the Senate as one bill.

The bill further provides for consideration of H.R. 8884, the Removing Barriers to Work for Disabled Americans Act, under a closed rule.

The rule provides for 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Armed Services or their respective designees and one motion to recommit.

The rule further provides for consideration of H. Con. Res. 113, establishing the congressional budget for fiscal year 2027, under a closed rule. The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on the Budget or their respective designees.

Additionally, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 7008, the Stop Insider Trading Act, under a closed rule.

The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on House Administration or their respective designees and one motion to recommit.

The rule further provides for consideration of H.R. 6955, the Main Street Capital Access Act, under a closed rule.

The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Financial Services or their respective designees and one motion to recommit.

Finally, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 9770, the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2027, under a closed rule.

The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on House Administration or their respective designees and one motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, the rule and its six underlying measures are a direct reflection of our Republican majority's expressed commitments on multiple fronts.

Contrary to the predictable and entirely incoherent hubbub that will reverberate from the other side of the Chamber during today's debate, Republicans remain at the helm, like we always have, and remain focused, as we always have.

It is okay to tune out those on the other side of the aisle while they are blathering on, Mr. Speaker. Their fevered, political rhetoric does not carry an iota of substance.

There is a great deal of business to attend to this week, Mr. Speaker. All of us understand that time indeed is of the essence here.

Let's talk for a moment about that business.

H. Con. Res. 113 begins the process to provide urgent, necessary resources for our Nation's firefighters, reinforce election integrity measures, and support the hardworking men and women of our agricultural community so that our Nation's food supply and food security remain as strong as they possibly can be.

H.R. 9770 upholds Congress' explicit Article I duties to fund the Federal Government so that its operational continuity does not lapse or is subjected to the same disgraceful political subterfuge that our colleagues across the aisle engaged in last year.

H.R. 8800, the keystone of Congress' mandate to provide for the common defense of the Nation, delivers for our Nation's servicemembers, allocates the resources necessary to maintain a strong posture of defense and deterrence, and confronts waste, fraud, and abuse head-on.

H.R. 8884 allows disabled Americans, who want to join the workforce to better their own lives, to do so without having to worry about whether their disability benefits will disappear abruptly.

H.R. 7008 prohibits Members of Congress, their spouses, or dependent children from purchasing publicly traded stocks, while also implementing the requirement--that the American people overwhelmingly support--of requiring a photo ID to vote in Federal elections.

It is entirely disingenuous for the other side to use fear-mongering tactics to scare people into believing that Republicans are trying to take away anyone's right to vote. That is downright false.

Finally, H.R. 6955 makes life more affordable for Americans, while also empowering Main Street, by ensuring that community lenders are no longer burdened by ill-advised mandates that make it harder for them to serve families, small businesses, and local economies.

That is the business at hand, Mr. Speaker.

We are not here to entertain the ever-so-tired ranting and raving from our colleagues across the aisle that the sky is falling, the world is ending, or any kind of absurd political musings they may want to spout off.

We are here to do the people's business, the business that makes America stronger, more secure, and more prosperous.

As we celebrate the 250th year of the greatest country in the world, Republicans are working hard to strengthen America and help it endure.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

James P. McGovernDemocrat, Massachusetts

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from North Carolina for yielding me the customary time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, this Congress is an absolute mess. The gentlewoman from North Carolina says that our rhetoric doesn't carry a bit of substance.

But let me begin by asking a question of the American people, a very simple question: Are you better off today than you were 1\1/2\ years ago?

It has been 18 months since Donald Trump returned to the White House. Republicans have controlled every lever of power in Washington for over 1\1/2\ years. They control the House. They control the Senate. They control the White House. They even control the Supreme Court.

That is the one simple question to me that matters more than anything else that we will debate today. In fact, it is the only thing that matters, really. Is it easier to fill up your gas tank? Are your rent bills more affordable? Are your groceries cheaper? Have your prescription medicine costs gone down? Does your paycheck go further?

In short, Mr. Speaker, has life gotten easier for anybody over these last 18 months, or has it gotten harder? I think most people, including most Republicans, if they are being honest with themselves, know the answer.

They don't need a politician or a fancy economics degree to say that things are not better. They are not better. In fact, they will tell you that things are worse--much, much worse.

They see it every time they tap their credit card at the gas station. They see it every time they check out at a grocery store. They see it every month when their rent is due, when their electric bill comes in, and when the pharmacist says that their kids' medicine is more expensive. They see it when their paycheck just doesn't go as far as it used to.

This is the Republican economy. These are their prices, and it is their policies that have failed America miserably.

Donald Trump and Republicans promised they would use their power to lower costs on day one. Well, it is year two, and costs are not lower, which by any definition would make that a broken promise.

Mr. Speaker, why are prices up? Why is life harder? Why are things worse off now? The reason is simple: It is because instead of working with Democrats to fight for everyday people, Republicans have made one decision after another to help the rich and the powerful and, basically, hurt everybody else.

I have example after example. Are things better off because of Trump's tariffs, Mr. Speaker? The tariffs the New York Federal Reserve says are almost exclusively paid by American consumers, American farmers, American manufacturers, and American companies, does that make anybody better off?

I don't think most people would say that tariffs have made their lives better. I would say that the tariffs have made their lives worse, more expensive, more difficult.

What about the war in Iran--a new, endless, illegal war, another one of Donald Trump's broken promises? Does anyone think that has made life better for the American people?

Maybe it has made life better for defense contractors. Maybe it has for the crazy neocon warmongers who get a kick out of another war, but not for everyday people.

We have spent probably well over $100 billion on this illegal and reckless war. That is $100 billion. That is not helping make sure that Americans don't go hungry. That is not lowering healthcare costs, lowering people's rents, or lowering gas prices. It is on this crazy war, a war of choice that the President had no plan for.

He doesn't know what the hell he is going to do next. This is nuts. In fact, we are now 5 months into a war that these guys said would only last a couple of weeks. They have declared victory like six times, yet the Strait of Hormuz is still closed. More American troops, sadly, were killed this weekend. Gas prices are back above $4 a gallon. Inflation continues to skyrocket.

Does anybody think that has made life better for most Americans? There has been 5 months of war in the Middle East. I can go right down the line.

Republicans promised better healthcare. Instead, they passed a law that takes hundreds of billions of dollars out of Medicaid and leaves millions more people uninsured. How the hell does that make anybody's life better?

Republicans promised lower taxes, except they chose another tax giveaway for those at the very top, and they pat themselves on the back for the pennies they gave to everyone else. Has that made life better for people?

After 18 months of higher costs, more inflation, new wars, costly tariffs, and stunning, stunning corruption, now they are bringing us a continuing resolution that kicks the can down the road.

They are bringing us a pathetic excuse of a stock trading ban that fails to address the much larger culture of corruption and self-dealing coming out of the White House, and they are bringing us a budget framework authorizing $73 billion for Trump's illegal Iran war, $12 billion as a Band-Aid to help farmers that their policies continue to hurt, and another $10 billion to rig the November elections.

That is nearly $100 billion in new spending with no offsets, meaning this bill could very well increase the debt by over $100 billion. Whatever happened to the old-fashioned Republicans who wanted to pay for things, who didn't want to increase the deficit or the debt? I guess that is a thing of the past.

Not one thing in this reconciliation bill, by the way--not a single damned thing--will be about affordability. Not one thing will lower prices. That is called being out of touch, Mr. Speaker.

There will be time to debate their crummy bills on the floor this week, but this hour is about priorities, and Republicans have their priorities all out of whack. Their agenda has only made things better for those at the top, for the Mar-a-Lago members and CEOs with private jets, the donor class and the corporate special interests. Things are better for them, but for the rest of America, their agenda has been a disaster.

The policies of this Republican Congress are a dumpster fire for everyday people, a total disaster. Their tariffs are crushing people. Their war is driving up costs. Their toxic environmental policies are filling our air with smoke and our food with parasites, and Americans are dying in the Middle East for their war.

Again, Mr. Speaker, when I go back home and I ask people if they are better off than they were 18 months ago, they don't even answer. They laugh because it is such a ridiculous question. It is so obvious that all of us are worse off because of this Republican majority and because of this administration,

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Virginia FoxxRepublican, North Carolina

Mr. Speaker, I will just note that our priorities are not out of whack. The number one role of the Federal Government is the defense of this Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Fuller).

Clay FullerRepublican, Georgia

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the rule. This important legislation is required to allow Republicans in this House to advance important priorities for the American people, including funding legislation to keep our government operating.

Unfortunately, it has become clear, as the House has considered appropriations legislation on the floor and in Chairman Cole's committee, that Democrats are trying to hold our government hostage.

This legislation will make clear where Democrats stand. Will they vote against keeping the government working for the American people, or will they vote to keep us hostage?

Will they vote with me to fund important priorities, such as the programs that will allow communities in my district and many others to clean up and recover from years of PFAS contamination, or will they vote to hold hostage programs that will make Appalachia communities, like mine, healthier all to score political points?

I know where I stand. I know where leadership in this body stands. I promised my constituents that I would be a warrior for north Georgia, and I am proud to do that today.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this rule.

James P. McGovernDemocrat, Massachusetts

Mr. Speaker, I am a little confused. The gentleman who just spoke maybe doesn't know this, but the government funding deadline isn't for months away, and he is scolding us as if it is now.

I am going to tell you what the crisis is right now. It is that people can't afford to live.

The gentlewoman from North Carolina said that our priority is about national security and national defense. I have news for her. National security means more than the number of bombs we have.

It also means healthcare for people. It means whether people can afford food, whether they can afford rent, whether they can afford to put gas in the tank of their car or pay their everyday bills, and whether they have a good job that allows them to support their family. Those are all sources of our national defense and our national security.

I will just say one other thing. I don't know how the hell our national defense and national security are served when the President takes us into an illegal, risky war in the Middle East, a war of choice, that he has no plan for.

Our troops are being put into harm's way, and this President has no plan about how to conduct this war or what the heck he is doing there. That is not national security.

Mr. Speaker, I urge that we defeat the previous question. If we do that, I will offer an amendment to the rule to make in order an amendment to H.R. 7008 consisting of the text of H.R. 6731, the Restore Trust in Government Act.

This bill is the Democratic proposal for a more comprehensive and robust stock trading ban than is found in the Republican plan. It is one which also includes the President of the United States and the Vice President.

There is a level of corruption that we have never ever seen in the White House. What is the response from our Republican colleagues? Silence. They are scared of the guy in the White House. They won't challenge this corruption, so he makes billions and billions of dollars while hardworking Americans struggle.

Mr. Speaker, in the first year of his term, President Trump cashed in to the tune of more than $2 billion--billion with a b.

In 2025 alone, the President completed over 21,000 stock trades. His investment accounts grew by over $850 million. He tweets out glowing endorsements of companies after he buys their stocks. Now, he is considering having people pay to get early access to his social media posts so they can cash in, too.

We need to ensure that people can trust their government to work for them and not enrich himself. This means banning stock ownership by Members and by this President.

That is what the Democratic proposal will do. Let the House decide and make this amendment in order. That is all we are asking, is to allow us to have this debate. You can vote however you want.

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?

There was no objection.

James P. McGovernDemocrat, Massachusetts

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Jayapal) to discuss our proposal.

Pramila JayapalDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Speaker, let me be clear about what my colleagues are trying to do in their bill that they are advancing. They are trying to advance a fake stock trading ban. I want to be very clear: Their bill does not block insider trading, no matter what it is called.

It does not ban stock trading, which is the number one issue for over 80 percent of Americans who want Members of Congress to stop padding their own pockets instead of addressing their constituents' interests, things like ending the illegal war in Iran, bringing down gas prices, bringing down grocery prices, and investing in housing. None of that is going to be protected.

Their bill allows Members to still purchase private stocks, keep public stocks that they already own, and act on legislative matters that directly increase the value of their stocks. It allows Members to continue selling stocks that they know will decrease in value based on insider information they got while in Congress.

Their bill would do nothing to stop Congressman Rob Bresnahan, who just last year dumped $130,000 worth of stock in four Medicaid providers before he voted to slash Medicaid for constituents and people across the country.

It would do nothing to stop Congresswoman Lisa McClain, whose husband bought at least $100,000 worth of stock in Elon Musk's AI company shortly before its model was adopted by the Defense Department.

A Common Cause report published at the end of 2025 said that Members of Congress made 13,324 trades, totaling a whopping $635 million in 2025. This is absurd. No wonder we are governing in a moment when public trust is at historical lows.

Only 2 in 10 Americans trust the government to do what is right for them, and they are constantly seeing their elected officials selling them out to the highest bidder. They see the people elected to represent them instead making decisions to increase their own personal wealth and pad their profits.

Who is to blame for thinking that there is no trust in Congress, in the government, when there is a President who is openly profiting from the American people? He generated at least $2.2 billion in income in his first full year in office. Now, he is selling Wall Street firms early access to Truth Social posts, where he brings out information that is ``market movers.'' This is literally the highway to making profit.

The Republican proposal is nothing but a sham to score cheap political points before they go home to their constituents. It tries to make you forget that there is a real solution that I helped co-lead called the Restore Trust in Government Act, which actually does ban stock trading. It does ban insider trading. It does root out corruption in government. It does prohibit Presidents, Vice Presidents, Members of Congress, and their dependent children, spouses, and trustees from owning and trading individual stocks.

If this Republican majority were to bring that bill to the floor, if we were allowed to force a vote on these bills, they would actually pass, and Republicans would have to admit that their bill does nothing.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President.

Virginia FoxxRepublican, North Carolina

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are skirting very closely to having their words taken down when they call out individual Members.

Mr. Speaker, our colleagues sometimes ask who is to blame for the lack of trust of Members of Congress. It is Members of Congress and the press who call into question acts that are done by Members of Congress that are totally legal.

We already have laws in place against insider trading. There have been a couple of Members of Congress who have been prosecuted for that, and that is appropriate, but the Stop Insider Trading Act will prevent that.

I believe, and Republicans believe, that no lawmaker should profit off of insider information. I frankly don't know how people get the insider information, but the top line of the legislation we are bringing here, the Stop Insider Trading Act, led by Committee on House Administration Chairman Bryan Steil, will ensure that lawmakers cannot use their positions to profit off insider information, if there is insider information.

The Stop Insider Trading Act has a prohibition on stock purchasing. It bans Members, their spouses, and their dependent children from purchasing securities issued by publicly traded companies. It requires Members to file a public notice at least 7 days but no more than 14 days in advance for any intended stock sale with the Clerk of the House of Representatives or the Secretary of the Senate. Then, if a Member of Congress, spouse, or dependent child decides not to sell a covered investment, the Member must publicly withdraw the notice prior to its expiration.

There are penalties, Mr. Speaker, for violators. They will be assessed a fine equal to $2,000 or 10 percent of the value of the transaction, whichever is greater, and then any net gain realized from a transaction. This is designed to make sure that Members do not take advantage of any potential information or advantage that the Member has.

Mr. Speaker, we want to restore public trust in this institution. Members are doing their jobs diligently. They do not want to be under a cloud. News outlets and social media accounts have garnered significant attention for aggregating the stock trades of Members of Congress.

Under the STOCK Act of 2012, lawmakers are prohibited from using nonpublic information for their own financial benefit, but many Americans have become concerned that the STOCK Act is insufficient and stronger measures must be implemented.

The Stop Insider Trading Act will increase transparency and reinforce to the American people that Members are working for them, not themselves.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

James P. McGovernDemocrat, Massachusetts

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to respond to the gentlewoman. I am just a little confused. I thought I heard her say that we already have laws to deal with stock insider trading. If that is the case, then why are we doing a bill to ban stock insider trading?

I mean, the bottom line is we are doing it because it is a problem, and our objection is the fact that they are basically excluding somebody who is violating the law in our face right now, blatantly, who is in the White House, who is making countless millions, if not billions, of dollars on some really shady deals. Quite frankly, it makes Richard Nixon look like a Boy Scout.

I mean, the deal is the American people are sick of it. They want us to clean up Washington. That includes Congress, and that includes the executive branch.

I just also would like to kind of highlight kind of the absurdity of all the stuff. We have six different bills that we are talking about here today, but I want to read a tweet from a Republican, Tom Massie.

He says: ``The House will pass a $12 billion bailout for farmers suffering from high fuel & fertilizer prices caused by the Iran war, expensive equipment & parts caused by tariffs, and lower sales prices for commodities due to trade disputes with China. But the GOP is fighting communism!''

The Republican leadership had a big press conference earlier today. It was all about communism, but I have to say to Mr. Massie, I don't think I have heard truer words spoken by a Republican Member of Congress. I really appreciate that, the truth, the accuracy of what the situation is.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Olszewski).

Johnny Olszewski, Jr.Democrat, Maryland

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this rule.

I agree, it is past time that we ban congressional insider trading. No one should benefit from public service, but wouldn't the easiest way to do that be to just completely ban stock trading entirely, not take the baby steps attached to this bill included in the rule?

Still, I was open to voting for the bill, to accept that incremental but wholly insufficient progress. What I am not open to, Mr. Speaker, is accepting modest progress on stock ethics, insufficient progress in exchange for significantly compromising American voting rights, and that is also exactly what this bill would do. It would add unnecessary and unrelated provisions that make it harder for Americans to vote.

Republicans can't even be bothered to provide the IDs they would have Americans be required to have in order to vote. In fact, that was in the bill, and they took it out. That is not reform, Mr. Speaker. That is a bait-and-switch.

It is one more ruse by this Republican majority to distract the public from their inability or their unwillingness, or both, to rein in costs and address corruption.

The American people deserve so much better. I urge a ``no'' vote.

Virginia FoxxRepublican, North Carolina

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, the voter ID provisions in this bill amend the Help America Vote Act to require States to obtain a photo ID from an individual to vote in person in a Federal election or to require a copy of the photo ID to be submitted with a ballot cast other than in person.

These requirements do not apply to an absent uniformed services voter or an individual provided the right to vote other than in person by the Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act.

The bill permits voters to use several different forms of photo ID: a valid State-issued motor vehicle driver's license that includes a photo of the individual and an expiration date, a valid State-issued identification card that includes a photo of the individual and an expiration date issued by a State motor vehicle authority, a valid United States passport for the individual, a valid photo identification card for the individual issued by the Department of Defense or the Department of Veterans Affairs, or a valid identification document issued by a Tribal government that includes a photo of the individual and an expiration date.

While my friends across the aisle claim the bill will prevent individuals who cannot afford a photo ID from voting, this is nothing but false alarmism. The Supreme Court has held photo ID laws are constitutional only where the State provides a photo ID to those who do not have them. In other words, a photo ID requirement in the bill is not a barrier to voting for someone who cannot afford to pay the typical photo ID fee.

The data supports that Democrats are being disingenuous when they claim this bill would suppress voting. The nonpartisan National Bureau of Economic Research tracked 1.6 billion data points over an 8-year period. This massive amount of data confirms strict voter ID laws have no statistically measurable negative impact on voter participation.

This comprehensive, multiyear study found zero negative impact on overall registration or turnout, no drops in participation among minority or young voters, and an increase in Hispanic participation in some ID law States.

Photo ID as a form of verification is a part of American life. Americans must show an ID to participate in a wide range of everyday activities, including boarding a plane, entering government buildings, cashing their checks, buying a gun, and enjoying Olive Garden's Never Ending Pasta Bowl.

Politico just announced that more than 6,000 noncitizens were registered to vote in New Jersey and have been voting since 2023. This is clearly an issue which must be addressed.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

James P. McGovernDemocrat, Massachusetts

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, you know, one of the frustrating things about kind of where we are in terms of political debate in this country is that issues that really matter to regular people are being ignored or being shoved aside because, quite frankly, Republicans don't want to do anything about it.

They know that their agenda is unpopular. They know that people are struggling with the issue of affordability. They know that people are having a tough time paying their rent, filling up their gas tanks, affording healthcare costs--I can go on and on and on--buying food, and they don't want to talk about that. They know that the American people kind of are sick and tired of what they are doing here, and so they are trying to divert attention.

I just want to address something that happened this morning, and that is the Republican leadership in this House held this wackadoodle press conference. I have never quite seen anything like it, trying to divert attention away from issues of affordability and get people to look someplace else.

Basically, the Republican Party's new favorite talking point is calling Democrats Communists. I mean, oh, my God, Mr. Speaker, I mean, really? Really? Communists? Did we accidentally step into a time machine?

I get it. I get it. They don't want to talk about the real issues, the bread-and-butter issues. They don't want to talk about affordability. I guess my question is, is Joe McCarthy back from the dead? It sounds like that is who wrote all the garbage coming from Republicans about communism. These guys dust off the same, tired, old talking points every time they are backed into a corner.

Every time a new poll comes out saying that their economic agenda sucks, what they do is they change the subject. They try to divert attention. It is pathetic. But, fine, if they want to play that game, let's play that game.

Let's talk about the Republican Party, a party that worships one man above the Constitution in a cult of personality, a party that demonizes immigrants and says they poison the blood of our country, a party that calls the free press the enemy of the people and sics the Justice Department on journalists they don't like.

It is a party that says their political opponents are internal enemies and calls them ``the enemy within.'' It is a party that is okay with invading our allies, including other democracies, and it is a party that punishes their political opponents.

It is a party that has deployed troops on our own streets, that wants to use the American military on the American people. It is a party that believes any unhinged lie, fantasy, and conspiracy theory as long as it comes from one man.

It is a party that tries to lock up Members of Congress for exercising their free speech rights. It is a party that has tried to violently overthrow the results of a free and fair election in the United States of America.

It is a party that, in fact, pardoned everyone who invaded this building on January 6, 2021, and tried to throw out the votes of millions of Americans because the President couldn't accept a loss.

How dare that party lecture anyone.

How dare they talk about communism when their own party has totally lost touch not just with the founding ideals of this country but lost touch with reality itself?

If we are going to start assigning political labels based on conduct, then let's call things by their proper names. The Republican Party has become the party of fascism, full stop. They have become a party of far-right fascists who are hell-bent on destroying our country and our way of life. Every single time they call us Communists, it is nothing more than a projection of their own radicalization. They don't want to talk about that, and they definitely don't want to talk about their higher grocery prices or skyrocketing gas prices or higher inflation or the cost of healthcare or their new endless illegal war that has now cost over $100 billion.

Instead, they scream and they yell because they have nothing else left to offer.

This would be funny, Mr. Speaker, if it weren't so pathetic and so unhinged.

Mr. Speaker, Democrats are patriots who love this country enough to fight for it. We are fighting to make it easier for people to afford groceries. We are fighting to try to make it easier for people to afford rent, prescription drugs, and healthcare. We will not be lectured by a fascist Republican Party that offers the American people nothing but lies, fear, endless culture wars, and tax breaks for billionaires.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Virginia FoxxRepublican, North Carolina

Mr. Speaker, I think after that, I will reserve the balance of my time.

James P. McGovernDemocrat, Massachusetts

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I want to return to the question I asked at the start of this debate: Are Americans better off than they were 18 months ago?

Think about the family sitting at the kitchen table tonight. The rent is due. The electric bill is higher, and groceries cost more. The gas tank is on empty. A prescription is waiting at the pharmacy. Somebody is trying to figure out which bill they can put off for 1 more week.

That family does not need a lecture about how great Donald Trump is. They know what life costs, and they know it costs more--much, much more--than it did 18 months ago.

Eighteen months is long enough to judge a majority by its choices. There is a lot packed into this rule, a budget resolution, a continuing resolution, a Defense bill, a disability bill, a banking bill, a bill on Congressional stock trading, and a bill to rig the elections. I could go on and on and on.

Republicans could not--could not--find a single provision for us to consider today about lowering the cost of housing, or lowering the cost of food, or lowering the cost of medicine or healthcare or electricity.

There is nothing--nothing in anything we are going to be considering does any of that or focuses on any of those issues. They have time to weaken bank oversight. They have time to combine a watered-down stock trading bill with new restrictions on voting. They have time to bring back bills that failed weeks ago. They have time to protect the President, bail out powerful special interests, and finance another endless war.

However, helping working people somehow never makes the cut. It never makes the cut.

Mr. Speaker, these bills are not just stacks of paper. They are statements on our values. They tell people who matter, who gets hurt, who gets helped, and who are expected to fend for themselves.

The answer from MAGA has been painfully clear, Mr. Speaker: The greedy get protected. The well-connected get rewarded, and everyone else gets told: Sorry, maybe next time.

Again, I ask: Are Americans better off?

The answer is ``no.''

Do the measures in this rule lower their costs, improve their healthcare, make them safer, or give them greater peace of mind?

The answer is absolutely ``no.'' Nothing does that.

We will hear talks about socialism and communism and all this other stuff to get people to not focus in on the fact that they are getting screwed over.

The American people deserve more than excuses. They deserve more than distractions. They deserve more than another blank check for the people on top from this failed Republican majority. They deserve a government that is on their side. They deserve a government that is on their side, and that is not what they are getting here.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on this rule.

We have to do better. We have to do better. The American people are hurting, and my friends on the other side of the aisle behave like everything is just fine and nobody is noticing.

Go and do in-person townhalls in your districts, I would say to all my colleagues who are listening, and you will get an earful. People have had it. They are fed up with the corruption in Washington. They are fed up with the policies that reward the well-off and well- connected. They are tired of getting screwed over.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Virginia FoxxRepublican, North Carolina

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, we live in the greatest country in the world. We just celebrated the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. We have a lot more to be talking about, about the founding of this country, and I hope people will pay close attention to that.

We do have a government that is on the side of the American people. We believe in capitalism. Our friends across the aisle constantly talk about how much people need to be paying more in taxes. We believe on the Republican side that the people have a right to what they have earned and not that the government should take their money and spend it the way the government wants to spend it.

Let me remind our colleagues that just 1 year ago H.R. 1 delivered the largest middle- and working-class tax cut in U.S. history. Low- income workers realized the largest percentage reduction in their tax liability.

Yes, we indeed care about the American people and the fruits of their labor. Nearly 40 percent of taxpayers have claimed one of President Donald Trump's signature cuts this year.

This tax season over 7.5 million filers claimed no tax on tips, with an average deduction of over $7,000. Over 29 million filers claimed no tax on overtime with an average deduction of over $3,100, and over 35 million seniors have claimed the enhanced deduction for seniors with an average deduction of over $7,500.

We do, indeed, care for the American people in allowing them to keep the fruits of their labor.

More than 5.5 million Trump Accounts have been opened with 1.4 million eligible for the $1,000 pilot program contribution. Nearly 40 million families have claimed the enhanced child tax credit, and over 127 million filers, or 90 percent of all tax filers, have claimed the permanently doubled standard deduction.

We do, indeed, care for American taxpayers.

I am not at all surprised by the recent rant from our colleague when one-half of the Democrats could not vote for a resolution against socialism.

Mr. Speaker, it is really no secret that this is a week of monumental importance in the people's House. The rule and six underlying measures carry with them a commitment to deliver upon the priorities of the President, the Nation, and the American people.

Some are quick to write off the progress that this Republican majority has made thus far, and they are dead wrong in doing so.

This week, Mr. Speaker, we will continue to build upon that progress in just the one issue I discussed, H.R. 1.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the previous question and ``yes'' on the rule.

The material previously referred to by Mr. McGovern is as follows:

Virginia FoxxRepublican, North Carolina

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous question.

The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.

James P. McGovernDemocrat, Massachusetts

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.

Official Text ↗

Value Over Cost Act of 2026

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1118) to amend title 41, United States Code, and title 10, United States Code, to provide best value through the multiple award schedule program, and for other purposes, as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered.

The Clerk read the title of the bill.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Burlison) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.

This is a 15-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 421, nays 1, not voting 9, as follows:

Mr. STANTON, Ms. McCOLLUM, and Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''

So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

The title of the bill was amended so as to read: ``A bill to amend title 41, United States Code, to provide best value through the multiple award schedule program, and for other purposes.''.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Official Text ↗

Providing for Consideration of H.R. 8800, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027; Providing for Consideration of H.R. 8884, Removing Barriers to Work for Disabled Americans Act...

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. 1438) providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 8800) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 8884) to amend title II of the Social Security Act to reauthorize demonstration authority for the disability insurance program; providing for consideration of the continuing resolution (H. Con. Res 113) establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2027 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2028 through 2036; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 7008) to amend chapter 131 of title 5 to require certain restrictions on stocks for Members of Congress and their spouses and dependents, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 6955) to make improvements to the Federal banking laws, and for other purposes; and providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 9770) making continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2027, and for other purposes; and for other purposes; on which the yeas and nays were ordered.

The Clerk read the title of the resolution.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous question.

This is a 5-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 213, nays 209, not voting 9, as follows:

So the previous question was ordered.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.

The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.

James P. McGovernDemocrat, Massachusetts

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

A recorded vote was ordered.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 214, noes 211, not voting 6, as follows:

So the resolution was agreed to.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Official Text ↗

Main Street Capital Access Act

J. French HillRepublican, Arkansas

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1438, I call up the bill (H.R. 6955) and ask for its immediate consideration by the House.

The Clerk read the title of the bill.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Financial Services, printed in the bill, an amendment in

The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for 1 hour, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Financial Services, or their respective designees.

The gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hill) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) will each control 30 minutes.

The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hill).

J. French HillRepublican, Arkansas

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this bill.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Arkansas?

There was no objection.

J. French HillRepublican, Arkansas

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Main Street Capital Access Act.

As a former community bank founder and CEO in my hometown of Little Rock, Arkansas, I have seen firsthand the important role that our community banks and credit unions play to drive the economic engine of America and help Main Street grow and thrive.

During the financial crisis, they were there. During the COVID pandemic, they were there, staying up all night to close emergency paycheck protection loans.

Every Member of this body knows this and knows it well. They have their own story from their own town about how that local financial institution was there for a customer, for a family, to help a startup, to help a business or restaurant cope with the pandemic.

Community banks and hometown credit unions know their customers. They understand the needs of their communities, and they keep capital flowing where it is needed most.

When a family is trying to buy their first home, they often walk into the offices of a community bank where that lender knows them, recognizes their goals, and is invested in their success.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said on this House floor many times this year, our banks under $10 billion make 6 out of 10 home construction loans.

When a local farmer or entrepreneur needs the capital to expand or initiate their crop for the year, they need someone who understands their particular business and is committed to seeing them succeed and, thereby, their communities succeed.

I loved my role as a hometown Main Street community banker and investor. Even to this day, almost three decades later, I smile driving by that restaurant location that I helped grow or driving by a building or a shopping center or a doctor's practice that our small bank helped finance--finance its construction, finance its future, finance its home for those employees.

Community banks make that possible, and this bipartisan Main Street Capital Access Act gives them the tools they need to keep capital flowing where it is needed most up and down our main streets in our beautiful country.

For decades, Washington has made it harder for community banks to thrive and operate efficiently. The Dodd-Frank Act, passed in the heat and horror of the global financial crisis, took the approach that many community and midsize banks across our Nation were faced with the same rules and the same level of scrutiny of the largest, most systemically important institutions. It was just too much, Mr. Speaker.

That approach, that overkill, has stifled local lending, constrained economic growth, accelerated industry consolidation--something I hear about from Members on both sides of the aisle all the time--and pushed important financing activity for both families and businesses out of the regulated financial sector. Again, I don't believe that was a goal by the proponents of Dodd-Frank after the financial crisis.

Our local lenders, Mr. Speaker, too often now spend more time on check-the-box compliance requirements rather than serving their communities.

When I made my presentation to our party here in the House to chair our Committee on Financial Services, I said that the impact of Dodd- Frank and other rules had focused Main Street bank presidents staying up all night worrying, not about their loan pipeline, not about where to get their next lending officer. Instead, they are up all night wondering how they can afford another compliance officer to try to meet this standard that is, in my judgment, unreasonable for a small, straightforward, local bank.

Our committee Republicans, with their great leadership from our subcommittee chair, Andy Barr of Kentucky, have worked mightily over the years to find a bipartisan set of solutions to exactly the problem I outline today.

Recently, the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, which became law, contained nine community banking provisions that provided this sort of thematic, clear, needed relief to America's local lenders and expanded financing for both residential mortgages and housing construction and development. These measures that we are debating today in the Main Street Capital Access Act were in that same philosophy of what we just overwhelmingly passed in both Chambers just a few days ago.

Mr. Speaker, I say today that we are building on the success of our 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act with Main Street Capital Access Act. We are expanding access to capital, supporting American businesses, and ensuring our financial system remains the most dynamic and diverse in the world.

This bill delivers on those goals. It spurs formation of new banks. It brings this commonsense tailoring back to regulation. It restores fairness and transparency in bank supervision. It helps banks attract, retain, and diversify important funding sources from sources of deposits, and it removes unnecessary barriers that have limited lending in communities across this country.

Mr. Speaker, with all of this effort, we have seen solid bipartisan support, input, and leadership in developing this bill. Expanding access to capital strengthens our local economies. It gives entrepreneurs the confidence to invest, businesses the ability to grow, and families the opportunity to build long-term wealth through that most abundant of American dreams: owning their own home.

When Main Street banks succeed, our communities thrive. I thank my colleague again, my friend, the chairman of our Subcommittee on Financial Institutions, the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Barr), for his tireless efforts in developing this bill and his commitment to strengthening community banking, not only in Kentucky but across our Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I also thank his hardworking colleague who has spent hours tirelessly thinking through the best approach to these provisions, and that is the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Foster) of Chicago.

Their collaboration will benefit our country, and I hope that we see a strong, bipartisan vote on this bill in this Chamber today.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Maxine WatersDemocrat, California

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, let me start by saying that we all care about community banks and credit unions.

For that reason, I was pleased to work with Chair Hill on a package of community bank provisions included in our landmark housing bill, the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act.

Now, even though Trump refused to sign it, that legislation has become the law of the land. That law not only will get America back in the business of

Importantly, that bill did not have handouts. It did not have handouts for megabanks, Big Tech, payday lenders, debt collectors, or credit bureaus. That is not the case for the bill that is before us today.

H.R. 6955 is Wall Street deregulation--that is what it is--hiding as a community bank bill. This package is made up of 24 Republican bills with just two Democratic bills.

Today, we mark the 16th anniversary of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act being signed into law. That is the law that bears the name of the late great and former Chairman Barney Frank. Unlike President Trump, President Obama knew when to sign a good bill when he saw it.

That law was passed in response to the 2008 financial crisis when, in case my Republican colleagues have forgotten, millions of Americans lost their jobs, their homes, and their life savings.

Yet, H.R. 6955 ignores these lessons and rolls back a long list of safeguards and oversight of the largest banks. Importantly, the Nation is grappling with an affordability crisis and surge in financial scams and fraud, costing consumers tens of billions of dollars. This was all made worse when Trump shut down the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Voting for H.R. 6955 would add insult to injury by thwarting a future CFPB from issuing rules, such as fixing credit reporting or reining in debt collectors or abusive medical debt practices. Maybe that is the point.

Interestingly, Rules Committee Chairwoman Foxx said the quiet part out loud yesterday. She confessed that Republicans love deregulation. That is what this bill is all about. It is not affordability and not protecting consumers. It is about deregulation for Wall Street's megabanks.

Mr. Speaker, what is more is that this bill ignores lessons from the failures of Silicon Valley Bank and other regional banks just 3 years ago. Those large regional banks failed after Congress rolled back capital, liquidity, and other rules specifically for those banks.

Nevertheless, this bill allows even more of these large banks to escape critical safeguards, which risks even more failures and harm to Americans and small businesses.

If H.R. 6955 were to become law, it would be the most sweeping deregulation of Wall Street since the 2008 financial crisis.

Two sections of the bill, sections 203 and 204, amend 15 different banking and consumer protection laws and would increase more than 40 different regulatory thresholds. There are so many laws being rolled back. The committee report for this bill is over 600 pages long, mostly to show how all these different laws are amended.

In fact, the sponsors of this bill were so zealous to raise thresholds that they increased two thresholds that will aid bad actors who commit fraud against a bank or a large financial institution.

You can't make this up. There is a provision that will increase the amount that individuals can defraud a bank or future AIG by and then get government money to buy those failed assets for their own benefit.

The largest labor union in the U.S., the AFL-CIO, and consumer advocates like Americans for Financial Reform and others wrote a letter saying that taken together, these changes would be more damaging than the sum of their parts, leaving the financial system dramatically weaker and more vulnerable to instability and crisis.

Now, Republicans made some technical changes at the request of Trump regulators, but let me give you another example of what they didn't fix.

Wells Fargo, which many of you may remember created millions of fake consumer accounts and has been the subject of countless enforcement actions for consumer harm, like discrimination and anti-money- laundering deficiency, would have a new tool to delay future enforcement actions when consumers have been harmed.

Mr. Speaker, instead of letting Wall Street put Americans and our economy at risk again, we should be addressing the affordability crisis caused by Trump's failed economic policies and endless war with Iran.

Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to oppose this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

J. French HillRepublican, Arkansas

Mr. Speaker, our next speaker has worked tirelessly to assemble this package of bills that will help our Main Street banks and credit unions thrive, grow, better serve their customers, and, in turn, be able to see their local economies benefit.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Barr), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions.

Andy BarrRepublican, Kentucky

Mr. Speaker, I want to start by applauding my good friend from Arkansas, Chairman French Hill, for his leadership on this critical legislation. Great job working across the aisle for bipartisan support for this legislation that will help strengthen Main Street America.

The Main Street Capital Access Act is exactly the kind of reform needed to advance this committee's goal of making community banking great again. Over the past 18 months, we have worked hard to develop over two dozen banking reform bills--many of them with strong bipartisan support--and combined them into one multifaceted package designed to strengthen our community financial institutions, not big banks, like the ranking member is referring to, community banks, Main Street banks, midsize banks.

If we want to help hold big banks accountable, then what we need is competition. Competition and choice are good for America, good for consumers, and good for financial stability.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a link to 14 letters of support from the Consumer Bankers Association, the American Bankers Association, the Bank Policy Institute, the Independent Community Bankers of America, the National Association of Home Builders, and others: https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:US:4c869bbb-74d2-4d1e- befb-1b3aba1a0be3

Community banks and credit unions are the financial backbone of this country. They finance farms, factories, first-time home buyers, and the local entrepreneurs who create jobs in every corner of America. These institutions don't just serve communities. They are part of the community.

Here is the hard truth: Community banks have suffered under a regulatory framework that forgot who the system should serve. For too long, Washington has been writing rules as if every bank and credit union in America is a trillion-dollar global institution. They are not. They are our hometown banks and community financial institutions.

These guardrails that the ranking member talks about rolling back, we are not rolling back guardrails for big, multitrillion-dollar banks. We are talking about small community financial institutions.

The goal is simple: Regulation should follow the risk, not the ZIP Code or the political fashion. A $500 million community bank in rural Kentucky, rural Arkansas, or rural Michigan should not be regulated under the same framework built for a trillion-dollar institution operating around the globe. That means higher costs, fewer loans, more forced consolidation. This hurts everyday Americans by reducing both access to credit and opportunities for small business growth.

The Main Street Capital Access Act is about changing that. It is about rightsizing this regulatory framework to ensure that community lenders get back to what they do best: serving their customers and their communities.

Main Street opens the door for new bank formation, improving transparency in the chartering process, making applications more predictable, and ensuring rural and underserved communities can once again see new institutions formed instead of watching their local banks disappear.

You want to hold big banks accountable? Allow new banks to form.

It also restores proportionality to regulation, updating capital leverage and enhanced prudential standards to actually reflect a bank's risk profile, not just an arbitrary static asset threshold. That means less money spent on regulatory gymnastics and more money available for loans in your communities.

We are also bringing fairness and due process back to the supervision process. Banks and credit unions should not

Main Street also addresses the structural problems that are driving consolidation. This legislation requires regulators to ensure clarity and predictability in the merger process so that healthy banks can grow and troubled banks can find partners before they fail. It ensures that when banks do fail, like Silicon Valley Bank, community banks aren't shut out of the resolution process by design.

Finally, this legislation recognizes reality: Innovation is happening. The question is whether it happens inside the banking system, where it is supervised and safe, or outside, where it isn't. This bill lets banks partner, modernize, and compete.

Community banks, Mr. Speaker, are the financial infrastructure of America--rural America, suburban America, urban America. When they thrive, small towns thrive. When they are regulated out of existence, capital dries up and opportunity for local ownership disappears.

The Main Street Capital Access Act is a critical step toward restoring the financial backbone of this country.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this legislation.

Maxine WatersDemocrat, California

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez), the ranking member of the Committee on Small Business.

Nydia M. VelázquezDemocrat, New York

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 6955.

Community banks and credit unions are the foundations of our financial system. As ranking member of the House Small Business Committee, I understand better than most the role they play in our communities, offering small business loans, farm loans, and mortgages. They are critical lifelines to our rural and underserved communities that have been left behind by our biggest banks.

While I believe in sensible tailoring to help community banks and credit unions do what they do best--deliver personalized products to meet the needs of their customers--this bill moves far beyond sensible tailoring.

Instead of focusing on modest improvements, this package represents the largest amount of bank deregulation since before the financial crisis. It includes sweeping reforms that will not only significantly roll back necessary safeguards and weaken oversight, but it will also undermine consumer protection and antidiscrimination measures and hamper the CFPB's ability to issue new rules. This deregulation package will push risk into the shadows and make the next publicly financed bailout more likely.

This is especially concerning at a time when financial regulatory agencies are under political attack, pursuing industry-friendly agendas, and are starved of resources. That is why more than 25 labor, consumer, housing, economic justice, and public interest organizations are opposing this bill.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.

Maxine WatersDemocrat, California

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from New York.

Nydia M. VelázquezDemocrat, New York

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill.

J. French HillRepublican, Arkansas

Mr. Speaker, our next speaker has worked in this House for over a decade, speaking on behalf of Main Street Michigan. From that real estate community, from his own background, his own business entrepreneurship and that of his family, he knows the value of how our local financial institutions help grow an economy and have more opportunities.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga), the vice chairman of the House Committee on Financial Services.

Bill HuizengaRepublican, Michigan

Mr. Speaker, as a small business owner, I have seen it. I have lived it. When community banks disappear, families and small businesses lose the local lenders who know their communities and their customers best. Less competition means fewer financing options, higher borrowing costs, and less investment on Main Street, not Wall Street, as some of my colleagues are trying to assert.

This bill lowers unnecessary regulatory costs for community and midsize banks, not those big business center banks on Wall Street and in New York and around the world. In fact, this ends debanking. Mr. Speaker, it restores the flexibility these institutions need to better serve you and your family.

I am also pleased that this bill includes two of my bills: the FDIC Board Accountability Act, which strengthens governance of the FDIC board on behalf of smaller institutions, and the Enhancing Bank Resolution Participation Act, which simply seeks to bring more qualified bidders into failed-bank resolutions when disaster strikes.

Better oversight and broader participation can protect depositors. It is going to promote competition. It reduces further concentration in the banking system, and I would think, Mr. Speaker, we would want that. However, it appears that some on the other side do not.

This package makes it easier to form new banks, strengthens local funding and liquidity, and helps community lenders put more deposits to work financing homes, small businesses, and entrepreneurial dreams.

At a time when Americans are struggling with everyday expenses, Washington should not make credit more expensive through needless red tape.

H.R. 6955, the Main Street Act, will promote competition. It will expand access to capital and help make life more affordable for American families.

I thank the chairman both of the full committee as well as our subcommittee, and I urge passage.

Maxine WatersDemocrat, California

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Let me be clear: Dodd-Frank has not led to bank consolidation. That trend began when Congress repealed Glass-Steagall almost 30 years ago. What Dodd-Frank has done is ensure the longest stretch of economic growth in a generation. The threat to community banks is not Dodd- Frank, but it is to repeal it and return to their needless days, reckless days that led to the 2008 financial crisis.

Just last week, we passed my bill as part of the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act. My bill eased the requirements on new banks. H.R. 6955, however, would set new banks up for failure. In fact, the bill undermines much of what we were trying to accomplish when we worked together in a bipartisan way.

What we have to do at this point in time is understand a provision of the housing bill that was carefully negotiated. Mr. Speaker, I thought we all were supposed to be in support of the housing bill. Everybody raved about the greatness of it. Now, 10 days after it became law, now some on the opposite side of the aisle are already trying to undo the bill.

Now, this bill will actually make it easier for more, not less consolidation. The bill is bad for new banks but great for megabanks.

Let me just say this: We all talk about loving community banks. I want you to know it is not the talk about loving community banks, it is action and what we do for or against them. I want you to know the big megabanks don't even want them in their doors. They don't even want to have those working behind the counter serving us. They have you serving from outside the bank.

When you can get in touch with them, I want you to know, you have got to go through a hell of a menu to try to talk with someone that maybe in a community bank you can talk to.

Do you know why we love community banks? It is because they understand the community. They know the people in the community. They work with you when you have a problem.

The megabanks don't know you, don't care about you, don't do anything to assist you, and hope you can't get through their menus in order to speak with anybody.

I say, it is not a lot of talk about loving community banks. It is action and what you do.

Now, then you come in here talking about how much you love the community banks, yet you know that you can't get the deregulation that you are doing unless you hid behind the community banks. If you love the community banks, all you have got to do is work with us to separate the regulations in a way that it does not undermine the community banks.

If you want to be fair, charge all your big friends and all the big banks everything they should be charged with regulation.

This is about whether or not you are going to use your power to literally undo what we have worked so hard to do to give the average person a decent chance with a bank, and that is community banks.

Mr. Speaker, I am asking for a ``no'' vote on this bill because, in the final analysis, I know that if you get away with these deregulations, we are going to have consolidation. It will only be five banks, almost only five big banks in the country that control everything. I am asking for a ``no'' vote, and I reserve the balance of my time.

J. French HillRepublican, Arkansas

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, let me address that comment that the ranking member has articulated, which is that somehow this bill reduces the power of community banks to compete with the big, globally systemic banks that she described.

I would really argue just the contrast. This bill tailors the regulatory compliance so that a bank with a straightforward, simple business plan that is well managed, that is well capitalized can have a lower tailored compliance cost compared to the one-size-fits-all approach that was a part of Dodd-Frank aimed at those big, Wall Street globally systemic banks.

Secondly, if you don't want them to grow, then you want community banks to have access to more capital. That is offered in this bill. You want them to be more successful. That is offered in this bill.

You want them to be able to buy a failing bank on their own or with partners to compete with the biggest banks in the country who are just simply given banks that need resolution at the FDIC. If a small bank fails in some State, they just let the big banks bid on them.

This bill creates competition. Chairman Barr walked through that. This actually increases the chance for entrepreneurs to acquire, unfortunately at the demise of a local bank, so that it is not sold to some big Wall Street lender.

I could go on with all the benefits of this bill that is tailored and focused on the growth and success of our Main Street institutions, but I can think of no better person to help me make that case than the next speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Loudermilk), the vice chairman of our Financial Institutions Subcommittee.

Barry LoudermilkRepublican, Georgia

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the Committee for his hard work on this and for including several of my provisions in this bill that is designed for the small guy.

I obviously rise in support of H.R. 6955 not only because it is a good bill, but also because I recognize the need to rightsize Federal regulations and gain more transparency into the financial regulatory process.

For too long, Federal financial regulators have taken this one-size- fits-all approach. If we applied that same status to ourselves, then let's just issue every Member of Congress one suit of clothes so that we all wear the same suit of clothes. Now, we wouldn't accept that because we would only have clothes to fit the largest Member of Congress.

What we are saying is that is what we have in the financial services industry right now. We need to tailor the regulations to fit the business model of the business, especially the small business. That is why I am proud that my TAILOR Act has been included in this package.

I can't stress enough the importance of the TAILOR Act because it is for the little guy. It is important because it requires all future regulations to be tailored to the risk of the regulated institution. It rewards institutions that adopt sound risk management practices with fewer regulations and punishes those who take an unhealthy amount of risk.

I also wish to highlight my New BANK Act, which requires Federal financial regulators to publish annual reports on applications received for creating new financial institutions. These reports will help give critical insights to the current de novo chartering process and how Congress can reduce complexities and redundancies in the system.

To conclude, Mr. Speaker, I believe this legislative package with my bills included is much more aligned with the goal of a safe and sound financial system that works for all the American people, and I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Maxine WatersDemocrat, California

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Garcia), who is a big supporter of community banks.

Sylvia R. GarciaDemocrat, Texas

Mr. Speaker, I rise against H.R. 6955. Instead of the Main Street Act, this bill, Mr. Speaker, should be called the Wall Street wins Main Street loses act.

It does not help end the affordability crisis, feed hardworking Americans, or keep a roof over their heads. Instead, this bill sneaks in deregulatory measures, further weakens the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and weakens community reinvestment and anti- discrimination safeguards.

For this reason, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to recommit this bill back to committee.

If the House rules had permitted it, I would have offered the motion with an important amendment to this bill. My amendment would limit the provisions of this bill from applying to any globally systemically important bank holding companies. Simply put, it ensures that the bill's deregulatory provisions do not apply to megabanks.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment into the Record immediately prior to the motion to recommit.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from Texas?

There was no objection.

Sylvia R. GarciaDemocrat, Texas

Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues will join me in voting for the motion to recommit. Let's send this back to Committee so that we can make sure that it truly works for our community banks and that it does not give Wall Street another big win.

J. French HillRepublican, Arkansas

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Loudermilk who spoke a moment ago. The vice chairman of our Subcommittee on Financial Institutions made a very good point also about how this bill strengthens competition.

Chairman Andy Barr of Kentucky, Ranking Member Waters of California, and Mr. Loudermilk all mentioned the importance of encouraging de novo banks, meaning start-up banks, particularly in our fast-growing communities that have seen disproportionate business and population growth, like south Florida or other places across the Nation.

All three of those Members have something in common, which is they support greater de novo provisions. We had Ms. Waters in the housing bill, and we have two in this bill that encourage start-up banks and encourage the regulators to work and have a better strategy for start- up financial institutions because that means that they can meet the growth.

What does that do, Mr. Speaker?

It increases competition for the biggest companies because they are close to customers, they have a business strategy, and they are unique to the marketplace. That is another example of how this bill is, in fact, counter to the assertion that it is only geared towards Wall Street institutions.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Meuser), who understands finance from both the point of view of one of our biggest and most industrial States, Pennsylvania, having been a statewide officer as well as a highly successful manufacturer and entrepreneur. Mr. Meuser is the chair of our Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee.

Daniel MeuserRepublican, Pennsylvania

Mr. Speaker, I commend our chairman, French Hill, for his excellent leadership.

I do rise in support of the very appropriately named Main Street Capital Access Act introduced by Chairman Hill and Subcommittee Chairman Barr. The legislation does exactly what it says. It supports access to capital for Main Street.

At the start of this Congress, Chairman Hill said one of our Committee's priorities was to make community banking great again. Since then, we

Mr. Speaker, 20 years ago, community banks financed 65 percent of home loans in this country. Today, it is less than 30 percent. This bill helps reverse that trend. It lowers capital hurdles so new community banks can form, and it tailors bank regulations so small and midsize banks are regulated fairly.

These changes allow banks to extend more mortgages, be more competitive on small business loans, and improve access to credit for all Americans. This is a housing bill, a small business bill, an affordability bill, and an access to capital bill.

Importantly, the bill also includes legislation to codify President Trump's executive order preventing debanking, such as my bill, the SAFE Guidance Act, which affirms guidance does not have the effect of law.

Both guidance and reputational risk were weaponized under previous administrations to debank legitimate, legal businesses.

This bill corrects those wrongs. This legislation supports community banks, protects Main Street across the country, and I urge support.

Maxine WatersDemocrat, California

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time for each side is remaining.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from California has 15 minutes remaining. The gentleman from Arkansas has 8\1/2\ minutes remaining.

Maxine WatersDemocrat, California

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I will mention again one of the atrocities that I have been able to experience working on these issues.

Again, Wells Fargo was fined $3.7 billion just a few years ago for widespread mismanagement of automobile loans and mortgages. Their actions included unlawful fees and even repossession of cars.

Now, someone would say, $3.7 billion, well, I want you to know they make so much money that is just a cost of doing business. They will keep doing it if we keep allowing them to get away with what they are trying to get away with today.

If my friend wants a guarantee that this bill helps Wells Fargo, then he should support Ms. Garcia's amendment that says that megabanks can't benefit from this bill, but I guess he won't.

After all, my friend knows that today is Dodd-Frank's birthday, and he is the skunk at the party. There is so much that we could point out that the average citizen knows in dealing with their banks. The average citizen is tired of being treated in the way that they are treated by their banks.

I tell my friend that he is correct in the support that he did for the big bill that Mr. Hill and I worked so hard on. We have a lot in that bill.

But let me point out one of the things in that bill that gives us cause to be concerned. Right now, Mr. Speaker, if you find a residence that you would like to buy, particularly if you are in a rural community, or you may be a low-income community, but you work every day and you can afford a house for maybe $90,000 to $100,000, the bank doesn't want to be bothered with you. The bank wants the big loans. The bank wants the million-dollar loans. They want the half-billion-dollar mortgages. They don't want the small mortgages.

Guess what, Mr. Speaker. They don't do them.

As a matter of fact, many communities where there are residents who could afford the houses in their community are sold out to private equity firms and others who come and buy these houses for pennies on the dollar, but they won't sell them to you, Mr. Speaker, because you don't look like a big profitmaker for them.

I am so pleased I worked with Mr. Hill, and we have done something to change that to encourage the banks to pay attention to those who can afford that $90,000 house, that $100,000 house, that $150,000 house, that $200,000 house. They are working every day. They can afford it, but the banks are not interested.

My friend tells me that we should not be concerned about deregulation that puts these banks in a position where they are not only moving toward consolidation, but they are taking over banking in ways that will help them to get richer and richer.

Guess what, Mr. Speaker. They will keep paying the fines, the big banks will, because that is the cost of doing business, and they still make money. This is outrageous. This is ridiculous.

No more deregulation. No more looking at how you can frame it in such a way, Mr. Speaker, that you are saving the community banks. Mr. Speaker, you are not saving the community banks. As a matter of fact, you are putting them out of business.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

J. French HillRepublican, Arkansas

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from the beautiful territory of Guam (Mr. Moylan). He has a strong background in financial services, healthcare, business, and insurance.

James C. MoylanRepublican, Guam

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 6955, the Main Street Capital Access Act.

When the people of Guam set out to enterprise new business ventures, we turn to our community banks to raise capital. However, much of America's financial system is not designed with small businesses in mind. While big banks have the resources to cut through red tape, small community ventures often struggle to comply with a regulatory regime that never had them in mind.

The Main Street Capital Access Act makes commonsense reform, tailoring regulations so small lenders can comply, while opening more resources to the new banks, small banks, and rural banks which serve communities like Guam. This bill will give the Guam business community a fair chance, and I thank the Financial Services Committee for their work on this legislation.

Maxine WatersDemocrat, California

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, proponents say this bill is just for community banks, but here we have another example of the Big Banks sneaking in their rollbacks.

I have four postings from the Bank Policy Institute, which represents all of the largest banks, like Wells Fargo. These postings advocate for indexing regulatory thresholds to nominal GDP instead of inflation. Why? It allows more and more banks to escape regulatory scrutiny.

This bill will give Trump's regulators--and only Trump's regulators-- the opportunity to index 40 different thresholds to let large banks off the hook. Wall Street is making record profits while they are helping them.

Mr. Speaker, for those of us who really care about community banks, we want to keep them because they service their communities in a more profound way. Again, I will repeat: They know and understand when you have a problem, you can call a big bank and you will find nobody. You will go through different menus that they have, but you will not be able to walk into the bank and talk to somebody sitting at a desk who will help you with your problem. Do I have to say more?

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

J. French HillRepublican, Arkansas

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Knott).

Brad KnottRepublican, North Carolina

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 6955, the Main Street Capital Access Act.

For the vast majority of our Nation's history, community banks were the primary artery into progress for all Americans. That reality is being threatened today by sloppy and ineffective policies that originate right here in Washington, D.C.

Whether it is the Dodd-Frank regulatory structure or the millions of rules and regulations that are in existence today, community banks have been choked out by these all-encompassing regulations.

With administrative costs rising every year, local banks simply cannot afford to operate. We can see this most clearly in 1980 where there were more than 14,000 community banks in the United States. Now because of the regulatory structure of the current market, there are roughly 4,000 community banks. This stifles lending, reduces competition, and makes it harder for Americans, especially in rural communities, to access capital. Put plainly, the current regulatory climate punishes community banks, and it benefits larger international banks.

My home State of North Carolina has long had a proud history of vibrant community banks. Today, there are very few exceptions to this, but there are really only two choices for community banks in today's market if they want to survive. That is to grow large enough to be acquired or to merge with another institution. Whether it was Wachovia, First Citizens, BB&T, or Bank of America, each of these began in North Carolina as a local community bank before growing and becoming a key player in our economy through a merge or an acquisition.

It is time to restore a market that welcomes and protects community banks, a market that encourages competition, and most importantly, one that serves the American citizen. H.R. 6955 does just that.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Hill for his important work on this legislation, and I strongly urge my colleagues to support this bill today.

Maxine WatersDemocrat, California

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, a wide variety of labor, consumer, and civil rights groups are strongly opposed to this bill. Let me read from one of the letters we received: ``The National Community Reinvestment Coalition (NCRC) and our network of 700+ community organizations urge Members to oppose H.R. 6955, the Main Street Capital Access Act and vote no on the House floor.''

That is what we are being urged to do by our supporters.

``H.R. 6955 is a broad bank deregulation package that would weaken fair lending transparency, community accountability, bank supervision, and merger review. The bill would reduce the tools regulators and communities rely on to detect redlining, monitor access to credit, evaluate bank mergers, prevent harmful consolidation, and hold financial institutions accountable to the people they serve.''

The signers of the letters don't just come from blue States but from all over the United States of America. This includes Build WyCo from the great State of Kansas. We also have Building Neighborhoods Together in Pennsylvania, Fair Housing Center of Northern Alabama, and Freedom Equity in Ohio. More signers include Georgia Advancing Communities Together, the Neighborhood Recovery Community Development Corporation in Texas, and the United States Broadway Corporation in New Mexico.

I could go on and on, but there is no time for that.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the letter from NCRC.

Maxine WatersDemocrat, California

Members have a choice today. Whose side are you on? Do you want to advance Donald Trump's deregulatory agenda to help out his wealthy friends on Wall Street, or are you on the side of working families, labor unions, consumers, and civil rights groups like those all over the country who just want equal and fair access to affordable financial products and services?

For many of you who have been in this struggle with banks, where you have tried to get help with all kinds of issues, I want you to, again, go to your bank where you have a problem--don't go because they are only available on the phone--and state your problem. See who you can get to talk to. See if you can get an appointment. See if you can get some answers to the questions that you have.

You can't do this with these big mega banks. They don't have time for you. They don't have time to listen to you talking about how you only have $200,000 and you want to buy this House around the corner. They are not interested in that.

They are interested in the big money. They are interested in not only providing the loans for those who are spending a half million or so on a bank that they are trying to use to get a house.

It is clear: The Big Banks are sick and tired of the way that they are being treated. They know they have a lot of power and a lot of friends in the Congress of the United States of America.

They don't know a new day is coming and a new way is coming. People are learning more and more why they have a right to be disturbed about the way that they are being treated.

I tell people: Don't be afraid to confront those Big Banks. Call us. Get your legislator to help you out. That is what we are supposed to do. Sometimes they can't find us.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

J. French HillRepublican, Arkansas

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Maxine WatersDemocrat, California

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I have another letter that says: ``This dangerous bank deregulation package would undermine core safeguards and supervision, push risk into the shadows, and make the next publicly financed bailout more likely. Further deregulation is especially alarming at a time when financial regulatory agencies are under political attack, pursuing industry-friendly agendas, and starved of resources, and when there is effectively no oversight of financial markets.''

It was signed by the AFL-CIO, Americans for Financial Reform, and dozens of others.

Mr. Speaker, I include this letter in the Record.

Maxine WatersDemocrat, California

Mr. Speaker, we know how to support community banks and credit unions. We just did that with our landmark housing bill, and I was pleased to work with the chairman of that committee, Mr. Hill. It became law just a few days ago and included five Republican bills and four Democratic ones that were focused on supporting community banks.

Now, here come Republicans to push for what they and their allies want: financial deregulation. This bill has 24 Republican provisions compared to just 2 from Democrats.

In fact, I am disappointed that my friends on the other side of the aisle are advancing provisions that even contradict our carefully crafted bipartisan agreement in the housing bill.

There is a provision in this bill on de novo banks that goes beyond our bipartisan deal, allowing regulators to decide whether to make permanent reforms that really should be for Congress to decide.

We struck a compromise in passing the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, and I think everyone who voted for that should honor that compromise.

Ultimately, Mr. Speaker, this bill is a distraction from what Congress should be focusing on: ending the affordability crisis caused by Trump's failed policies.

Nothing in this bill will help consumers afford groceries or pay for gas. Do you know who is not suffering during the affordability crisis? Wall Street. This bill would loosen the guardrails on Wall Street mega banks even as they report record profits.

Even Chairwoman Foxx admitted that this bill is all about deregulation and rolling back Dodd-Frank, a law she said she strongly dislikes. Chairman Hill said they received drafting assistance from Trump's regulators and banks, but not from organizations that represent workers or consumers.

Mr. Speaker, we are not stupid. We understand that Trump controls all of his so-called organizations that are independent. He tells them what to do. We get that. He is in control. He is running this country. Those people who are selected to run these so-called independent agencies are those who will do nothing but what they are told to do.

That is probably because the groups who represent actual people oppose this bill. That is what they are told to do. That is the leadership they have.

Now is not the time to plant new seeds for the next crisis. Now is not the time to juice the mega banks' profit margins. Now is not the time to legitimize Trump's efforts to gut the CFPB, fair lending, and other consumer protections.

Again, I am so proud and pleased with the work we did in a bipartisan manner. I am so proud and pleased that we were able to negotiate through some very tough times. I am so proud to announce that we had to give some, and we took some. They gave some, and we worked it out.

I don't know exactly what they are being told by Trump, but I know Trump is in charge, and he is charging a lot of what is going on.

I urge my colleagues to please vote ``no'' on this bill, and support the citizens, support their constituents, not Wall Street.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

J. French HillRepublican, Arkansas

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Arkansas has 5\1/2\ minutes remaining.

J. French HillRepublican, Arkansas

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, first, before I start, I thank the ranking member and the committee members on her side of the aisle for their work with us on developing this bill over many months.

Mr. Speaker, two-thirds of the bills in this package that we are voting on, the Main Street Capital Access Act, are supported by Members on the Democratic side of the aisle. This is a truly bipartisan package of bills.

We have significant work and support from individual Members on the Democratic side of the aisle in partnership with House Republicans.

I also thank Maura Woosley, who is the majority staff director, Jae Jang, and their entire team in the majority working with the minority staff, and the minority staff to craft this package. In Congress, you can't put together the kinds of successful legislative packages that the House Financial Services Committee has done in this Congress without a very hardworking and competent staff. I thank them on both sides of the aisle.

I thanked Andy Barr, our majority subcommittee chair, a few minutes ago, but I will also thank Dr. Bill Foster of Illinois, who serves as the ranking member on our Subcommittee on Financial Institutions for his collaboration with Mr. Barr on this succesful bill.

Mr. Speaker, I heard a lot of charges about this bill, that somehow this bill benefits Wall Street versus Main Street, and I just couldn't disagree more. I noted that two-thirds of these bills have strong Democratic support, along with our Republicans.

Secondly, there is nothing in this bill that weakens consumer compliance. The fair lending laws, the fair housing laws, and the equal credit opportunity laws, all those consumer statutes are upheld in this text. They are not really affected by this text.

Banks have to comply with those laws. They had to comply with those

Secondly, it is our hometown banks, both rural banks and urban banks in our towns and cities, that benefit from this banking set of provisions. As the ranking member noted, in our housing bill that we collaborated on successfully--that we got passed and it became law on July 10--banks had some provisions there that helped them.

This is the same theme continuing in this bill. If you are a small, well-managed bank under $6 billion, you get some relief, Mr. Speaker. If you are well-managed, have good capital, you can help schedule your exams.

I was with a community banker in North Carolina this week. The bank is smaller than $500 million, and I said, how are things going? He said, it is going great except when I have five exams in a row and then the loan pipeline goes to zero. Because, guess what, I am the chief loan officer and the chief compliance officer in this small bank, and when my community bank is filled with bank examiners for an IT exam, a trust exam, an investment exam, an AML, anti-money laundering, and Bank Secrecy Act exam, a loan quality exam, a consumer compliance exam, I can't make loans.

If you are well-managed and have high capital, you get some relief in this bill. That is who this bill, Mr. Speaker, is aimed at. If you have a concern that your exam was unfair, we return some fairness in the exam process. You can go and actually question, was my exam fair or not? Whose idea was that, Mr. Speaker? Democrat from Michigan Don Riegle, U.S. Senator, 1995. Was it ever implemented? No, but it will be implemented when this bill becomes law.

This bill is focused on more capital, more deposits, more business, more success for our community banks, which in turn helps every one of our towns in this country.

Who is for it? Community development financial institutions, our CDFIs, have bipartisan support. They are for this bill. Our community development officials across the Nation are for this bill, as they were for the housing bill. The National Bankers Association, our national association for African-American bankers, wrote a letter for this bill.

Mr. Speaker, this bill has overwhelming support to increase competition and help our community banks thrive and succeed, which means our towns will thrive and succeed.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, I urge everyone on both sides of the aisle to support this bill. Echo Alexander Hamilton, our first Secretary of the Treasury, when he said that our banks in this early founding of our Nation are the nurseries of our national wealth.

Mr. Speaker, today, 250 years later, long after the adoption of our government, our community banks, our credit unions, they are the nurseries of the national wealth that help our families and our businesses succeed.

I urge a ``yes'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.

Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, the previous question is ordered on the bill, as amended.

The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was read the third time.

Sylvia R. GarciaDemocrat, Texas

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to recommit.

The Clerk read as follows:

The material previously referred to by Ms. Garcia of Texas is as follows:

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XIX, the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit.

The question is on the motion to recommit.

The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the noes appeared to have it.

Sylvia R. GarciaDemocrat, Texas

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.

Official Text ↗

Continuing Appropriations Act, 2027

Tom ColeRepublican, Oklahoma

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1438, I call up the bill (H.R. 9770) making continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2027, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

The Clerk read the title of the bill.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, 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 Appropriations, or their respective designees.

The gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole) and the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) each will control 30 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole).

Tom ColeRepublican, Oklahoma

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the measure under consideration.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Oklahoma?

There was no objection.

Tom ColeRepublican, Oklahoma

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 9770, the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2027.

This Congress has a constitutional duty to fund the government. If Article I teaches us anything, it is that governing means doing the work, not waiting for a crisis. It is a responsibility I have never viewed as optional and one I have remained committed to honoring through regular order.

Over the last year, Mr. Speaker, the House Committee on Appropriations has acted to fulfill our fiscal year 2027 responsibilities. Previous partisan shutdowns and political headwinds never deterred us from doing our work. In fact, we refused to let political dysfunction become an excuse for inaction.

So, line by line, bill by bill, we delivered all 12 regular appropriations bills out of committee. This was accomplished before the end of June, the earliest date on record since fiscal year 2020. We have also passed three of these bills across this very floor with bipartisan support. I am deeply proud of the engagement, discipline, and focus of our cardinals and appropriators and the support of our colleagues in this Chamber.

While I wish I could say the same momentum and determination is being exercised on the other side of the Capitol, it is not. Senate Democrats won't even allow markups to progress. It is impossible to negotiate full-year funding when circumstances make clear that one side is willing to bring the process to a standstill before it can even leave committee.

The hard reality before us is straightforward. The fiscal year deadline is outpacing the work that remains.

Our Conference refuses to let the obstruction and inaction of Senate Democrats trigger another manufactured shutdown at the end of September.

That is why we are acting before a funding lapse crisis, not in response to it.

This clean, short-term continuing resolution simply keeps the government open, protects the progress we have made, and preserves the path to full-year appropriations.

For anyone questioning this legislation, the facts are simple:

It extends the government funding deadline to December 4, denying any party the opportunity to manufacture leverage before elections.

It contains no poison pills or partisan riders.

It prevents harmful disruptions to our national security and the vital programs our constituents rely on.

And it preserves the House's progress toward completing full-year fiscal 2027 appropriations.

You see, it is never too early to do the right thing.

In fact, after Senate Democrats forced the two longest government shutdowns in American history and abandoned previously negotiated funding agreements more than once, we have every reason to act early and every responsibility to do so.

The House will make clear to the Nation where we stand, and it is on the side of stability, certainty, and the American people.

Additionally, supporting this bill does not limit, hinder, or halt any work on the full-year appropriations for any of the 12 bills.

The choice is clear: Either Members will vote to keep the government working or they will vote to risk another unnecessary shutdown.

I know which option my constituents expect. I know which option gives families relying on nutrition assistance or disaster relief the certainty they need. I know which options our troops, veterans, TSA agents, and government employees deserve. I know which option I will choose.

I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for this responsible measure, and I look forward to continuing the fiscal year 2027 appropriations process in the coming months.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Rosa L. DeLauroDemocrat, Connecticut

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, for those of you who may not know and have not been following this process closely, I would like to bring you up to speed on how we came to consider this piece of legislation before us today.

On Friday afternoon, after everyone had gone home for the weekend, Republicans released a bill to extend government funding from September 30 through December 4. Republicans introduced the measure with no bipartisan negotiation, little advanced notice, and without any information from the government agencies as to what funding they will actually require to continue their operations for the duration of the bill.

The final Homeland Security bill that passed unopposed in April was bipartisan, and it was by a voice vote. And it was in that direction because it included a provision to remove all of the funding for the Border Patrol.

Chair Cole's bill does not continue that agreement. That prohibition is removed by this continuing resolution, which would allow Homeland Security Secretary Mullin to transfer billions of dollars to the Border Patrol.

We assumed that the removal of this language was a mistake--no harm, no foul--so before the bill was introduced, we reached out to our colleagues across the aisle, informed them of the error, and shared language to fix it. Yet, they refused to do so.

Instead, they chose to introduce a bill that would allow Secretary Mullin

The American people support these protections, protections like mandating the use of body-worn cameras, not just taking the money for them and then refusing to turn them on; prohibiting operations at sensitive locations like schools, hospitals, and houses of worship; requiring agents to get a warrant from a judge before kicking in someone's door; allowing independent investigations into misconduct; ending racial profiling; and taking off the masks.

The need for these protections is as urgent as ever. In recent weeks, immigration agents have shot and killed residents in Maine and in Texas, neither of whom were targets of enforcement operations. We cannot in good conscience allow billions of dollars to flow to these agencies without major reforms to keep our constituents safe from further violence.

I want to say clearly and plainly that Democrats do not want a government shutdown. There would be no need for one. There are still 2 months before the funding deadline. There is no need to rush through an incomplete extension. We ought to take the time to gather the information we need to get it right the first time.

I might add that yesterday afternoon we received a list of the programs that have been compiled by the Federal agencies detailing the additional provisions the agencies believe are necessary to sustain their operations through December 4.

Mr. Speaker, we received this late yesterday afternoon. There are over 50 programs listed by the agencies to take some action so they can be protected during a continuing resolution, and many of these provisions are not included in the bill that we are considering today.

I asked my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to look through the list. There may be something in your community, in your district, that is very important to you, and it is not in this bill which you are going to potentially vote for today.

Among these efforts, there are changes to support wildfire suppression operations. They provide public housing agencies with funding to maintain housing assistance for tens of thousands of households, and they continue programs that provide utility assistance for rural communities.

If you ask people today what are the highest costs they are paying for today in an affordability crisis, it is the cost of utilities. That assistance is not in this bill.

It is no surprise that the measure that we are considering failed to include these provisions. After all, the bill was introduced 3 days before we had this information, but that is the problem. Rushing this bill to the floor haphazardly without carefully considering the various needs that must be met is no way to govern, and it is irresponsible.

This resolution was dropped on us on Friday afternoon without any bipartisan negotiation. Had we been consulted, there are several provisions we would have pushed for to strengthen the measure and to protect congressional prerogatives, including the reversal of a proposed Federal rule from the Office of Management and Budget that allows political appointees--political appointees in the Trump administration to unilaterally block or terminate grant funding if they deemed it not sufficiently in line with the President's policy priorities.

If we had taken the time to negotiate this measure, we could be here touting a bipartisan agreement with a plan to fully fund the government for the next fiscal year before the end of this Congress. Instead, we are scrambling--scrambling to jam through a one-sided, stopgap measure 2 days before everyone leaves for the August recess.

At minimum, I cannot support this bill without the inclusion of the technical language regarding the Border Patrol that was agreed upon in April. Beyond that, the decision to pursue this path without any bipartisan negotiations gives me serious reservations moving forward.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Tom ColeRepublican, Oklahoma

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Womack), my very good friend, and chairman of the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Subcommittee of the full Appropriations Committee.

Steve WomackRepublican, Arkansas

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, Mr. Cole, for giving me this time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to support H.R. 9770, the Continuing Appropriations Act of 2027, in hopes that it is not necessary. If we were to complete our work as the Framers had intended and outlined for us, we wouldn't be standing here today.

This is an insurance policy. This ensures that, assuming we don't finish our work by the end of September, by the end of this fiscal year, our government will be held harmless. Who could argue an insurance policy that holds a government harmless when we begin a new fiscal year?

Under the leadership of Mr. Cole, the House Appropriations Committee, as you just heard, has advanced all 12 bills out of committee. We have done our job well before the end of the fiscal year. Three of these full-year funding bills have already cleared the floor and are ready for action in the Senate.

That is sizeable progress toward our goal of restoring regular order in this appropriations process. I am exceedingly proud of the work my colleagues and I have done in crafting responsible bills that rightsize the discretionary side of our budget, but I am also pragmatic.

I am aware of the political realities that lie before us right now, and the very fact is that we have a job to do, and time is running out on us. Too often, Mr. Speaker, we wait until the eleventh hour to create some kind of a process by which we can avoid a real catastrophe, gambling with the functions of government that people depend on.

H.R. 9770 is a clean solution to extend government funding until December 4, ensuring zero disruptions to the operations of programs like SNAP, like WIC, the National Flood Insurance Program, disaster relief fund, and scores of other programs.

It is no secret that I am not a fan of CRs. No self-respecting appropriator would ever embrace a CR. My preference has always been to fulfill our Article I responsibility before the deadline, following through on the job that the American people sent us to Washington to do. Passing this CR is a much better alternative than to threaten the government shutdown at the expense of the American people.

This CR does not prevent us from continuing our work on full-year fiscal year 2027 appropriations. Instead, it provides a runway to work with our Senate counterparts and iron out a final agreement, all while preventing the abyss of uncertainty created by a lapse in appropriations.

Mr. Speaker, for 43 days, a stalemate in Congress caused an unnecessary and costly government shutdown as political games took priority over our constitutional responsibility. The shutdown impacted many services and programs that our constituents count on. It crippled biomedical research, upended infrastructure projects, and risked our national security.

As chairman of the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Subcommittee, I can speak directly to the impact it had on agencies within our jurisdiction. Prior to the shutdown, the FAA was already falling short of its controller staffing targets. The shutdown exacerbated that problem.

Without the promise of a paycheck, many of these air traffic controllers opted to take other employment opportunities instead of doing the job that the American people needed them to do. The results were canceled or delayed flights and ground stops at airports across the Nation.

By the end of the shutdown, Mr. Speaker, 6 million people had been affected, not to mention the estimated costs incurred by the U.S. travel sector of $150 million a day.

This is just one of many examples of the catastrophic consequences of a government shutdown. What we are doing

We have a binary choice later today on this bill. You are either going to vote for continuing the appropriations that fund the discretionary side of government till December 4, or you will be in the column voting to shut the government down. I think it is a pretty simple, no-brainer kind of vote.

I encourage my colleagues--including my friend, the ranking member, Ms. DeLauro from Connecticut--to vote ``yes'' on this bill.

Rosa L. DeLauroDemocrat, Connecticut

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I might add, with all this concern about the folks who were out of work, who were waiting in long lines, about our folks in the Coast Guard and others, it was my proposal that said: Let's fund those agencies. Since there is difficulty about ICE and about Border Patrol, let's fund the agencies and move forward.

It took Republicans 79 days to decide that that was the good fix, and, therefore, we could pay those people. They kept them dangling in the wind for those 79 days, all because they would like to continue to fund rogue agencies that are lawless, that are putting at risk people in our communities--and more than at risk with, most recently, two people killed, one in Maine and one in Texas.

The Homeland bill passed--I am going to mention it again--unopposed in April, a voice vote, because it included the provision to remove all funding for the Border Patrol.

This continuing resolution doesn't continue that agreement. As I said, we viewed that there was an error that was made because it would allow Homeland Security Secretary Mullin to transfer billions of dollars to the Border Patrol, the same agency responsible for harassing and killing American citizens.

Again, what we tried to do was to reach out to our colleagues on the other side of the aisle in good faith. We crafted the language, informed them of the error, and shared the language to fix it. They have refused to do so and continue to refuse to do so.

One has to ask the question: Why? Who wants to shut down a government? I certainly don't. Democrats do not want a government shutdown. If I had my way, we would be able to fund the government on a bipartisan basis through the appropriations process, one bill at a time.

Unfortunately, it seems increasingly likely that, at some point, a continuing resolution will be necessary. That does not mean we must rush through an incomplete, hastily constructed, one-sided stopgap measure that fails to adequately meet the government's funding needs.

Agencies only came up with their needs yesterday afternoon, over 50 of these needs. I admonish my colleagues on the other side of the aisle: Read it carefully because something that may affect your community and something you care deeply about, and seeing that agency move forward during a period of a continuing resolution, may be in here, but not on what you will vote on this afternoon.

I am disappointed that the apparent error in this measure--which, again, allows the Secretary of Homeland Security to transfer billions of dollars, in direct contravention of the agreement--has not been corrected. I would much rather be standing before you to tout a bipartisan agreement that, in fact, moves us forward through the appropriations process on a bipartisan basis.

It is a partisan path that my colleagues have taken us on here, without all the information necessary to draft an adequate funding extension and without consulting anyone else on their proposal. This is a go-it-alone approach. You know what? That is not a way to govern. We know that, especially those of us who sit on the Committee on Appropriations. It is not a go-it-alone approach.

My colleagues have to engage. They have to be involved in a negotiation, which is what we were involved in in April, and we came to a conclusion. That is what we should be doing now: engaging in a negotiation, coming to a conclusion, and fixing what is an error in the drafting of the language of the continuing resolution.

Don't hold us up and pass a bill that doesn't meet the needs of the American people.

I strongly urge my colleagues to take the time. Let's get it right the first time. Let's come to the table. Let's negotiate an agreement we can all support. Let's work together to fully fund the government for fiscal year 2027. That is what we can do. There isn't any question in my mind that we can do that.

All of these obstacles that you want to put forward with arguments about who wants to shut the government down, let's get real: Fix the error that was made. Fix the error that was placed in that bill. We said no money for Border Patrol unless there would be the protections. There is an open door to Border Patrol, and there are no protections.

I believe the American people have sent us here to do the work on their behalf, to make sure that we address the issues that we care about. We can do that, and it wouldn't take very long. I don't know what the reluctance is to fix the error that would be made and set us on a path to be able to pass bipartisan bills and a continuing resolution that we can all support. It is what I am committed to doing.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage a ``no'' vote on this legislation in its current form. I yield back the balance of my time.

Tom ColeRepublican, Oklahoma

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

I want to begin by complimenting my good friend, the ranking member of the full Appropriations Committee. She has bargained with us throughout this process in good faith, and it has been a pleasure to work with her.

I have often been quoted, and I will say it here on the House floor, you can trust Rosa DeLauro. When she gives you her word, she keeps her word. We have no complaint at all with our friends on the other side of the aisle in the House and certainly not with our distinguished ranking member.

I will tell you, we have not seen that same sort of good faith from the Senate of the United States, particularly the Senate Democrats. Quite frankly, they came to a bill agreement last year when we were trying to get the first three bills out--which we succeeded working together in doing--that, gosh, let's just keep working. What we want is a clean continuing resolution and a short date.

We gave them both those things. Instead, they then added new demands unrelated to the subject at hand, demands that, frankly, we did not agree with, did not accept. What did we get? We got a 79-day full shutdown, as my friend pointed out. We don't think that is acceptable. We want to continue the process.

Second, we negotiated again earlier this year. Again, we thought we had an agreement. We made concessions to our friends on the other side, concessions which we thought really weren't concessions. They were helpful suggestions from the Democrats. Let's add more training for our men and women in ICE, you know, Department of Homeland Security. Let's have some additional training. Let's have some additional funding. Those were all things we agreed to, and then once again we got another shutdown.

Frankly, we just want to make assurance. I have no doubt we can negotiate differences, including some of the concerns my friend raised today, in the time we have between now and September 30. What we don't want is a government shutdown used and perverted for political purposes 5 weeks before an election. We think that is a risk that we are running in dealing with the Senate.

While we have worked productively, we have gotten bills out on both a partisan and a bipartisan basis, we haven't seen that in the Senate. Honestly, they haven't passed a single appropriations bill yet. They have refused to sit down and negotiate in good faith in the Senate.

I would say our friends in the House have negotiated in good faith. We actually did backflips last year to give our friends in the House the measures that needed to get passed in the form that they asked to pass them. They kept their word. We passed all those bills.

In the Senate, frankly, we did not get that kind of response. We gave them those things. Instead, we got a shutdown; a shutdown that, frankly, was inexplicable. We want to avoid that. We have presented here today a bill

It does not have any poison pills in it. There is nothing in the bill that my friends object to. If they want to put additional things in the bill, fine, we can talk about that, but let's just assure that funding is going to go on no matter what. That is all this clean continuing resolution does.

Look, I have been around here long enough to know that tensions rise as you move toward an election. I have been around here long enough to see Members on both sides of the aisle try to leverage a shutdown to extract additional concessions. We want to avoid that.

We want to continue to both move bills across this floor. Obviously, we have moved ours out of committee. We want to give the Senate time to do the same thing. Count me as skeptical that they are going to do much before the election.

We want to make sure between when we leave here on September 30 and that election, and sometime beyond that, December 4, that the government continues to function, and we are available to negotiate at any time.

We, as my friends on the House side have done, have kept our word in those negotiations. They have been in good faith. All this does is make sure that we do not have a shutdown come September 30, nor do we have a wild effort by either individual Members or either party to demand things in exchange for keeping the government open.

The government will be open until the election is over. I actually think that is a concession and a favor to everybody. It is a favor to the American people to make sure that they are not inconvenienced and endangered by a government shutdown.

If we have to wait until after the election until our friends in the Senate want to sit down and work, then we will wait until after the election. We don't have to wait through a shutdown. We don't have to create the temptation for individual Members to exploit an artificial deadline of the end of the fiscal year.

We just need to keep working, as we have, productively. That is all this bill does. There are no poison pills in it. There is no increase in funding. There is no other extraneous legislation attached to it. It is a clean, simple CR to avoid a shutdown before a scheduled election and to give us enough time after that election to sit down, either resolve our differences--which is what I hope we can do--or if we need additional time, we will look at that then.

If there are other matters along the way, we are happy to sit down and talk about those. We just want to take the possibility of a government shutdown off the table.

Some people may think that is being cautious. Those people would probably not be aware that we went through the longest full government shutdown in American history triggered by our friends in the United States Senate, the Democrats in the United States Senate.

Some people might think that, you know, again, we run the risk of our borders. We had to resort to extraordinary measures to continue to fund the Border Patrol. Why anybody is mad at the Border Patrol, I will never know. All they have done is their job. We have had no known illegal entries in the United States in over a year. That is something to be proud of. Why the Border Patrol is mixed up in this, I will never know, but I am happy to talk to my friends about it on the other side.

Let's do the prudent thing, as my friend, Mr. Womack, said. Let's take out an insurance policy. Let's remove the option of a government shutdown, and let's continue to work in good faith. We have done that in this House. That is why all 12 bills are out of committee.

I commend my friends on the other side. They made their points. They made their arguments. They supported a couple of those bills, others they might not. The point is, they worked in good faith. That has not happened in the United States Senate.

We have had two shutdowns triggered by people that historically condemn any shutdown. Their argument has always in the past been: Let's keep the government open while we negotiate. That is all this CR does. It ensures no artificial deadline, and it ensures we will get the election in the rearview mirror without shutting down the government as we move into an election.

We think this is a prudent thing to do. I hope some of my friends on the other side will accept that view and vote accordingly. If not, we will try to do this on our own, but we would prefer to do it in cooperation with our friends. Again, that is all we are trying to do.

I would urge, Mr. Speaker, that my colleagues support this bill, that we make sure there is no government shutdown come the end of the fiscal year, and that we make sure we can conduct our elections in November without the threat of a shutdown leading into those elections. Then we would prudently try to resolve our differences on the other side of the election.

It is pretty simple stuff. Again, we are willing to talk about other matters that our friends want to bring up. We just want to take the option of a shutdown off the table. It is that simple. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.

Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, the previous question is ordered on the bill.

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 ayes appeared to have it.

Rosa L. DeLauroDemocrat, Connecticut

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.

Official Text ↗

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 8800.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Alabama?

There was no objection.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438 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. 8800.

The Chair appoints the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Moran) 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. 8800) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes, with Mr. Moran 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 amendments specified in the first section of House Resolution 1438 and shall not exceed 1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Armed Services or their respective designees.

The gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith) each will control 30 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers).

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, throughout our committee's oversight hearings this year, we have heard a consistent theme: The defense industrial base, the foundation of our military power, is in deep trouble. Over the last 30 years, the defense

In the 1990s, America had 51 prime defense contractors. Today only six remain. Skilled talent has left the workforce, leaving hundreds of thousands of defense manufacturing jobs unfilled. Excessive regulation pushed small businesses, startups, and private capital out of the defense business. Inconsistent demand signals discouraged prime contractors from investing in production capacity.

As a result, our stockpiles of critical defense articles have fallen to dangerously low levels. That includes critical minerals, which we have very little capacity to mine, refine, or process.

While America allowed vital manufacturing capability to erode, China did not. China's shipbuilding capacity dwarfs ours. They are outproducing us on ships, drones, and munitions. They control over 90 percent of the world's critical mineral refining and processing capacity, and they have embedded themselves deep within our defense supply chains.

The consequences are clear. There are growing doubts about our ability to sustain a protracted conflict against China and our other adversaries, and that is unacceptable.

We must take action to address these problems before American deterrence erodes any further.

The FY27 NDAA, takes that action. This year's bill is focused on revitalizing the defense industrial base. We are giving industry the certainty it needs to invest, expand, and produce faster. We are cutting needless regulations that prevent innovative businesses from working with the Pentagon. We are reviving our organic industrial base by improving conditions at our depots, arsenals, and shipyards. We are securing our supply chain by giving the Department authorities to better identify vulnerabilities and then replace them with domestic or allied sources, and we are creating new jobs and helping Americans build advanced technical skills.

In addition to revitalizing the defense industrial base, the NDAA meets our other crucial needs. We are raising pay for servicemembers and improving housing, education, and childcare for military families. We are strengthening our nuclear deterrence and missile defense, while maintaining a strong posture to deter our adversaries, and we are prioritizing the development of innovative technologies that will give our warfighters the edge in future conflicts.

To support these policies, we are authorizing $1.15 trillion in discretionary funds to match President Trump's historic budget request. For the first time in 40 years, we have been presented a budget that accounts for the true cost of American deterrence. This top line begins to reverse the damage caused by decades of underinvestment in the U.S. military.

However, we understand that with this historic investment comes an even more urgent need to guard against waste, fraud, and abuse. The bill does so by cutting nearly $30 billion in wasteful spending, reducing fraudulent payments, and providing new authorities to ensure the Pentagon achieves a full, clean audit within 24 months.

Peace through strength doesn't begin on the battlefield. It begins in our factories, our depots, and our shipyards. This bill reflects our commitment to rebuilding that foundation. It will build the ready, capable, and lethal fighting force we need to deter China and other adversaries.

Mr. Chair, I urge all my colleagues to support it, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

First of all, I want to thank Chairman Rogers for the process that he put together on this bill. In committee, I think we had a very fair and open process, certainly the way the bill was put together originally. The chairman did a lot of work in the last couple of years on acquisition reform, and we did that in a bipartisan way. It is reflected in the substance that was in the bill. Then we had a very good debate. A lot of amendments were offered, and I think it was handled in a very bipartisan way. So the product has a lot of good aspects to it, and the chairman mentioned most of them.

The continuation down the road of acquisition reform can best be summed up as we need to innovate faster at scale. The chairman did a great job of describing why that is so important and the progress we have made and why this committee has played such a crucial role in helping to make that happen. I think we should be proud of that.

I think the bill also reflects support for the troops, as the chairman mentioned: a pay raise, but more than that, just genuinely making sure that they and their families have the support that they need. This builds off of the Quality of Life task force that we had 2 years ago to continue to show strong support for our troops, and, yes, crucially the oversight component.

We are really focused on trying to get the Pentagon to a place where they can pass an audit, where we can be more confident that the money that they are spending is being effectively spent, and I think this bill reflects that.

The chairman didn't mention this, but we have had a lot of frustrations with this particular Pentagon in terms of their not providing information in a timely manner to us and to the American public. We have a number of provisions in this bill that require that or fence funding for aspects of the Pentagon to get them there.

I will say also a couple of Democratic amendments did pass in the process. We got collective bargaining for all defense employees back in on a bipartisan vote. We also changed back to the base names that the commission put in place, which I think is a very positive step. There are a lot of good things about this bill and certainly about the process as it came out of committee.

There are just three problems from the Democratic perspective. First of all, the rule is incredibly partisan. There are a number of issues on the size of the budget, the number of oversight issues concerns, and concerns we have about the war in Iran. None of those amendments were ruled in order.

I just don't think that is the way this process should work. They should be ruled in order. If they want to vote them down, then vote them down, but they have completely blocked any of those Democratic amendments. Of the amendments that are up for debate, I believe that only one is a Democratic amendment.

There is a lot of mutually agreed upon stuff that is en bloc, but on the truly controversially important amendments, they don't give us a chance to even have the debate. Those debates are incredibly important because there are a lot of concerns we have, not so much with this bill as with the Department of Defense as it is currently being run, and as the President is currently exercising national security defense policy in this country.

I will mention just two: number one, the war in Iran. We are all sort of, I guess, in collective denial about what an utter disaster this has been and how it is getting worse every day. We lost four more servicemembers over the weekend. This is after we have been told over and over and over again that Iran is completely obliterated, they have no military capacity whatsoever.

Yet, they are still launching missiles. They are still launching drones. They are still wounding and killing American servicemembers and threatening shipping throughout in the Strait of Hormuz. The degree to which the President is not living in reality on the war in Iran is unbelievably alarming.

Why do we let this continue?

Why doesn't the Republican Party Speaker say: Yes, it would be great if we could drop a certain number of bombs on Iran and they would quit, and they would give up, and they would abandon their nuclear program. They would abandon their support for terrorism. They would get rid of their ballistic missile program. They would open up the Strait of Hormuz.

There is no plan to make that happen, and yet the President keeps going forward, keeps dropping more bombs deplenishing our stockpile, placing us at greater risk, and creating greater global chaos.

Whatever else may be said about the NDAA, there are a lot of positive aspects to it. It will continue to support the Department of Defense which the President is using to wage this war, this incredibly disastrous, terrible decision of a war. That makes it very difficult to support this. We need to get peace now, and that would help.

Second, the amount of money. You add it up, this is $1.15 billion. They want $350 billion for a reconciliation package, and they want another $90 billion in a supplemental package. That puts them at $1.6 trillion.

Could we effectively spend $1.6 trillion in the Department of Defense? Maybe. I question whether or not they could spend that much money that quickly, that effectively. Sure, there are a lot more missiles, drones, ships, and planes we could buy.

We have a $40 trillion debt. We are making cuts in Medicaid and other healthcare programs in order to fund this $1.6 trillion. Even then, we are still driving up the debt because we insist on doing $4 trillion in tax cuts. The math just doesn't add up.

We cannot support a defense budget of that size when we know that it is making it more likely that we are going to struggle to fund crucial domestic programs in healthcare, infrastructure, energy, and all kinds of areas that are an incredible priority. The dollar figure is simply too high.

Mr. Chairman, in closing--this is a plea that always falls on deaf ears, but I will try--you can't vote to increase the debt by $4 trillion and then a couple months later vote for a balanced budget amendment. We are not living

The lack of fiscal reality is one of the two biggest problems with this bill. The other one is the continued support for the war in Iran that is implicitly included in it.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wittman), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces.

Robert J. WittmanRepublican, Virginia

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support today of H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027.

I thank Chairman Rogers and Ranking Member Smith for their leadership in putting together this critical piece of legislation. I also thank my friend and subcommittee Ranking Member Don Norcross for his partnership in leading the Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces.

Also, I thank our Tactical Air and Land professional staff: Michael Kirlin, Heath Bope, Caroline Kehrli, Brooke Alred, Amelia Litynski, Jay Vallario, and Andrew Smith.

The FY27 NDAA takes several steps to ensure that our servicemembers operate with unmatched capabilities to deter and defeat any adversaries.

This bill allows the Secretary of War to enter into multiyear procurement contracts for both the F-15EX and F-35 aircraft.

H.R. 8800 prioritizes helicopter and rotorcraft procurement, authorizing the purchase of additional Chinook, Black Hawk, and Grey Wolf helicopters. It also fully funds the Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft program to continue development of the MV-75 Cheyenne.

Our forces must excel in both offensive and counter-small UAS mission sets.

This bill also assists the Department in achieving this by standardizing sUAS operating systems, establishing sUAS test ranges to inform and accelerate drone innovation.

To counter such systems, the bill strengthens the definition of counter-UAS systems and applies standards for networked, autonomous, kinetic capabilities for sUAS defense.

This NDAA also emphasizes the importance of our munitions supply. It directs the Army to expand and upgrade facilities used to manufacture 155-millimeter artillery rounds and advances the integration of novel energetics into weapon systems.

Lastly, the bill leans into innovation by expediting the development and procurement of nontraditional intermediate-range fires capabilities.

Mr. Chairman, this is an extremely strong bill that sends a signal to our servicemembers that we have their back. I urge this bill's passage.

Joe CourtneyDemocrat, Connecticut

Mr. Chairman, as ranking member of the Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces, I yield myself 2\1/4\ minutes.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to endorse many provisions of the Seapower and Projections Forces mark of the 2027 NDAA, which our subcommittee crafted under the able leadership of my good friend, Chairman Trent Kelly.

A whole range of much-needed Navy warships and auxiliary platforms are authorized in this bill using multiyear contracting, which will save money for the taxpayer and provide certainty to our shipbuilding industrial base to invest and grow.

The bill authorizes $15 billion for the Pentagon's number one acquisition priority, the Columbia-class ballistic submarine program. It also provides $12.5 billion for Virginia-class attack submarines and full funding for shipyard wage improvements and workforce pipelines which are vital to hiring and retention.

Adding more Virginia subs will grow our undersea fleet and keep our commitment to Pillar One of the AUKUS security agreement to sell three in-service subs to the Australian Navy in the 2030s.

Multiyear contracts for destroyers and oilers are also included, as well as investments in missiles and hypersonics from unmanned surface vessels.

Ukraine has demonstrated how effective unmanned systems are in their defense against Russia's Black Sea invasion, and we must embrace that trend and expand our unmanned capabilities.

There are areas of disagreement in this bill. Particularly, its approval of the administration's request for $1 billion for obsolete battleships without a detailed design.

I would note, last month the Senate Armed Services Committee wisely voted to reject this wasteful request. That money should, instead, be spent for the Marine Corps' request for new landing ships, which is missing from both this bill and the new reconciliation bill.

Mr. Chair, the NDAA has passed for 65 consecutive years because of disciplined avoidance of irrelevant hyperpartisan amendments. Unfortunately, the NDAA rule passed earlier today merging the NDAA with a completely nongermane voter suppression bill, the SAVE America Act, violates that long tradition.

If Republican leadership is serious about passing a 66th NDAA with bipartisan support, the SAVE America Act merger should be stripped from the bill or later in conference.

Mr. Chairman, I look forward to achieving that outcome, if not today, then later in the NDAA negotiations with the Senate.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. DesJarlais), the chairman of Strategic Forces Subcommittee.

Scott DesJarlaisRepublican, Tennessee

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in favor of the Fiscal Year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act.

As the chairman of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, I was proud to work in a bipartisan fashion along with my friend Ranking Member Seth Moulton on some of the most consequential issues to our national security.

This legislation authorizes full funding to keep modernizing the Nation's nuclear forces as well as the Department of Energy's scientific and production capabilities upon which our deterrent depends.

It also approves acquisition flexibility for the nuclear enterprise and refocuses statutory requirements related to plutonium pit production on the long-term need for the deterrent.

We authorize significant increases for many programs that support the Golden Dome Initiative and border missile defense efforts, including space-based sensing, development of the Next-Generation Interceptor, and procurement of Standard Missile 3 interceptors.

In space, we require a single official to lead the vital positioning, navigation, and timing enterprise and eliminate the current PNT bureaucracy. We also streamline redundant space acquisition organizations to build on the progress made last year to reform acquisitions.

Perhaps most importantly, this bill authorizes a historic increase in the Space Force's budget. This will allow them bring online the next generation of systems necessary to fight and win in space and support new missions to address emerging threats.

This bill prioritizes the industrial base, expands U.S. defense production capacity, and supports the President's request to raise all servicemembers' pay. It rebuilds depleted munition stockpiles through new authorities and saves taxpayers over $30 billion by cutting inefficient programs and government bureaucracy.

I encourage all of my colleagues to vote in support of this legislation.

Joe CourtneyDemocrat, Connecticut

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi), the ranking member of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Readiness.

John GaramendiDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I begin by honoring those members of the military that lost their lives recently in the Iran conflict.

Mr. Chair, I thank Chairman Rogers and Ranking Member Smith for their leadership. It has also been a pleasure to work with Chairman Bergman. He is a great partner. I also thank the Readiness Subcommittee, both on the majority and minority sides.

I am proud of what we were able to accomplish this year, authorizing over $2 billion for new barracks and dormitories and other critical infrastructure projects. The bill includes positive

Good provisions do not cure the larger problems this bill faces. I voted against this bill in committee and will on the floor.

This bill cannot continue to increase military spending while the administration unilaterally misuses our Armed Forces at home and abroad, as they intend to fight immigration and Iran.

This bill also authorizes more than $1.5 trillion, plus another $300 billion in the reconciliation bill, which apparently will be with us soon, plus another $80 billion or $90 billion to pay for the Iran war. This is an outrageous and dangerously irresponsible amount of spending.

Increasing the budget is not a strategy. Without discipline and oversight, it rewards programs that are over budget, behind schedule, and failing to deliver.

How is all this paid for? It is paid for with cuts to healthcare. Medicaid is eviscerated in the upcoming months ahead. The children's food programs, in schools and out, are not there. They will go hungry. Several hundred billion dollars in healthcare is gone, and it goes on and on. This could not possibly be in our interest.

The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.

Joe CourtneyDemocrat, Connecticut

Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentleman from California.

John GaramendiDemocrat, California

I haven't even gotten to my favorite issue, the Sentinel and the programs of our nuclear arsenal. Again, why? We don't need the Sentinel. We don't need to spend billions on it. We can get along quite well with the existing Minuteman.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Kelly), the chairman of the Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee.

Trent KellyRepublican, Mississippi

Mr. Chair, I start by commending the chairman for his leadership over the committee for the last 6 years.

I am excited to highlight a few of the many wins for the Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee in this year's bill.

The committee-reported product authorizes the procurement of the fourth Columbia-class submarine, two Virginia-class submarines, two guided missile destroyers, and two amphibious warships. Combined with incremental funding authority for long-lead time components for the Virginia-class program, multiyear procurement authority for destroyers, and multiship procurement authority for future amphibious warships, we are supporting responsible investments in the future of our surface fleet and in the continued growth of our subsea advantages.

At the same time, we are growing our asymmetric capabilities, investing in transformational and innovative unmanned systems like the MQ-25 carrier-launched unmanned aircraft and unmanned surface vehicles to complement our traditional platforms in a lethal and high-low mix.

The bill also contains parts of the SHIPS for America Act, which will help us down the path to a rejuvenated maritime industrial base.

We are also reinforcing our commitment to our force projection and airborne combat capabilities, with procurement of intra-theater airlift, 12 P-8 maritime patrol aircraft, 6 E-2Ds Hawkeye airborne early warning aircraft, a new strategic sealift vehicle, and a bulk fuel vehicle. We also provide authorities for cost savings and a consistent demand signal to industry for a multiyear procurement of E- 2D aircraft, as well.

The challenges of our global security environment are only growing more complex, but what cannot change is our ability to project American power. The technology and platforms may change with the moment, but the end goal remains the same: peace through strength.

This is a strong bill that makes essential steps toward delivering on the promise now and for the years to come.

Mr. Chair, I urge all Members to vote ``yes.'' I also thank my Ranking Member, Joe Courtney, and the staff: Kyle Noyes, Kelly Goggin, Jeanine Womble, Abby Snyder, and my personal staff, Semaj Redd, Shields Armstrong, and our fellow, Marc Mundy for all their hard work.

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for allowing me to speak in favor of the FY27 NDAA.

Joe CourtneyDemocrat, Connecticut

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Norcross), the ranking member of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces.

Donald NorcrossDemocrat, New Jersey

Mr. Chair, I thank Ranking Member Smith and Chairman Rogers for crafting this bill.

Mr. Chair, this bill continues the Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee's proud bipartisan tradition and reaffirms our shared responsibility for managing strategic risk. In particular, I thank Chairman Wittman and our subcommittee staff for building this strong bipartisan bill.

I am, however, disappointed that some in the majority would kill the bipartisan hard work that we have done on this bill. Our servicemembers and their families deserve better.

Mr. Chair, this bill authorizes funding levels for key defense programs, including $4.3 billion for helicopter procurement, $3.3 billion for the F-35 program, over $3.9 billion for ground combat vehicles, and over $4.9 billion for key weapon systems procurement.

Mr. Chair, this bill also addresses the risks and the costs of military modernization without sacrificing oversight, such as authorizing multiyear procurement for the F-15EX and the F-35 aircraft, conditional on procuring sufficient spares for each aircraft; requiring the Air Force to budget for procurement a sufficient number of E-7A aircraft; and authorizing multiyear procurement for key munitions, coupled with strong funding for the munitions industrial base.

Mr. Chair, this bill also includes legislation that fortifies the Office of the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation. I have great concern with this administration's plan for the DOT&E. We must ensure this office remains independent and relevant.

Finally, I thank our subcommittee professional staff, including Jay Vallario, Mike Kirlin, Heath Bope, Caroline Kehrli, Brooke Alred, and certainly my personal staff, Sam DeVito, Naajidah Khan, and our defense fellow Captain John Dacier for their work on this bill.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bacon), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Cyber, Information Technologies, and Innovation.

Don BaconRepublican, Nebraska

Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027. I thank Chairman Rogers and Ranking Member Smith for their leadership in compiling this bill. By the way, it passed with a huge bipartisan majority in committee.

I also thank my friend and subcommittee ranking member, Mr. Ro Khanna, for his collaboration this year, and I appreciate the great subcommittee staff who do such a fantastic job.

As we have seen across modern battlefields, technology is evolving at a faster rate than ever before. Artificial intelligence, cyber, quantum, biotechnology, and other emerging capabilities are changing the way wars are fought and won.

The United States is the gold standard for scientific innovation, and it is of the utmost importance that we remain committed to equipping our servicemembers with the most up-to-date, state-of-the-art, and mission-relevant tools available.

This year's NDAA delivers on that promise by supporting our defense industrial base, our science and technology communities, and our warfighters. The FY27 NDAA helps lay the foundation for our future technological edge by providing budget certification authority for the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to enable better oversight of the military services' S&T budgets and priorities.

This bill also requires the Department to review, update, and modernize its policies on leveraging AI for military functions, ensuring more secure and robust development of AI capabilities.

The FY27 NDAA also helps tackle the ``valley of death'' by requiring more formal integration and technology

Finally, this Defense bill importantly restores our defense spending to 4.5 percent of the GDP, which is critical to deter conflict and reinforce America's commitment to ensuring security and stability around the world.

This NDAA is a strong, bipartisan bill that takes care of our servicemembers and promotes U.S. military dominance, and I urge all my colleagues to support H.R. 8800.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Houlahan), the ranking member of the House Subcommittee on Military Personnel.

Chrissy HoulahanDemocrat, Pennsylvania

Mr. Chair, I thank the ranking member, Mr. Smith, for yielding me the time.

Mr. Chair, today, I have the opportunity to speak briefly with regards to the fiscal year 2027 NDAA.

The bipartisan bill that passed out of committee includes many quality-of-life provisions and priorities for our servicemembers and their families. These issues have an immeasurable impact on our recruitment and our retention efforts as well as on readiness.

The bill includes a targeted pay raise in which junior servicemembers would get higher pay increases. These improvements to servicemembers' paychecks should provide welcome relief to military families who are still struggling with ever-increasing gas and food prices caused by the ill-conceived and poorly executed tariffs and the current war with Iran.

H.R. 8800 also addresses the growing concerns about medical readiness and access to healthcare by reversing efforts by the Department to limit the scope of services available at military treatment facilities. We need to make sure that military treatment facilities and military health systems can deliver a force that is medically ready to deploy at a moment's notice and, just as importantly, we must be sure that the medical providers themselves have the requisite skills to address whatever injuries might come their way.

The bill expands ongoing efforts to improve access to safe and quality childcare by including au pairs in the Child Care in Your Home pilot program and establishing a student internship program to improve recruitment and staffing of military child development centers. It provides a process by which military families executing a permanent change of station will receive timely and relevant relocation assistance and available childcare and food access services in advance of that military duty station move.

Finally, the bill requires the Department to issue regulations banning the Department of Defense personnel from insider trading on prediction markets, a necessary and crucial step in safeguarding our national security.

We brought this bill to the floor in a bipartisan fashion, and I urge my colleagues to reject poison pill riders that will destabilize this important work and to not insert bipartisan politics over the well- being of our servicemembers.

This NDAA, like many previous defense bills, should continue to be bipartisan.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Bergman), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Readiness.

Jack BergmanRepublican, Michigan

Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding.

Each of us swore an oath to support and defend the U.S. Constitution. It is the basis for which we serve.

Within our Constitution is the enumerated responsibility of Congress to raise an army and maintain a navy. Our committee fulfilled our constitutional duty when we reported the National Defense Authorization Act to the floor today.

As our chairman indicated, we are delivering on President Trump's request to authorize the first of two defense appropriations, including this authorization of $1.15 trillion.

While there is much to be made about the generational investments in ships and aviation, this bill also fully supports the sustainment of the defense enterprise. It strengthens our Nation's commitments to our servicemembers and their families, and it delivers major quality-of- life initiatives, including significant funding for facilities.

Now, it is easy for some Members to reject this bill because it provides too much money for our national security. Theirs is a false hope that a chaotic and irreverent global disorder will never reach the shores of our magnificent Nation.

I reject this premise. I believe we are already in a strategic race for the continued rise and stability of our Nation.

This defense budget sits as the cornerstone of this great enterprise. We need to fulfill our constitutional responsibility, and we need it now.

I thank my Subcommittee on Readiness ranking member, Mr. John Garamendi, and our personnel and professional staff that serve our Subcommittee on Readiness for their work on this bill. We are united in purpose, in making our Department of War a presence to be respected in both peace and, if necessary, prevail in conflict.

I commend Chairman Rogers and Ranking Member Smith for delivering this magnificent defense bill.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chair, I don't have any further speakers at this point, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Jackson), chairman of the Subcommittee on Intelligence and Special Operations.

Ronny JacksonRepublican, Texas

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027.

I will begin by thanking Chairman Rogers for his leadership in bringing the NDAA to the floor for the 66th consecutive year.

As chairman of the Subcommittee on Intelligence and Special Operations, I am especially proud that this bill provides our Special Operations Forces, the Defense Intelligence Enterprise, and the Security Cooperation Enterprise with the tools and resources needed to execute the Department's National Defense Strategy and counter an ever- changing threat landscape.

Crucially, this bill provides an approximately $1.3 billion increase in funding for U.S. Special Operations Command to address critical needs within its programs. The bill also invests in a wide range of intelligence capabilities and disciplines, including my provision to develop a periodic ISR strategy to make better threat-informed decisions.

We continue to ask more of our Special Operations Forces, uniform and civilian intelligence personnel, and Security Cooperation Enterprise personnel. This year's NDAA ensures that they are equipped with the capabilities necessary to maintain their operational edge over any adversary.

I also highlight that this bill advances critical reforms to revitalize our defense industrial base, restore lethality, and deliver on President Trump's Peace Through Strength agenda.

I was proud to lead efforts to support test and training space for unmanned aerial systems, incorporate foreign military sales demand into domestic industrial base assessments, and to officially restore the name of the Department of War.

Finally, I recognize the tremendous work of the professional staff from the ISO Subcommittee and my personal office in developing this bill. I also thank Ranking Member Jason Crow for his hard work in this endeavor.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 8800.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chair, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Fallon), chairman of the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.

Pat FallonRepublican, Texas

Mr. Chairman, I thank Chairman Rogers for his dedication. He is a great American truly, and it has been an honor to serve under him. I also thank Ranking Member Smith for his good-faith efforts to do everything he can to protect our country. He is truly a credit, and I thank him from the bottom of my heart for his work on this bill.

The fiscal year 2027 NDAA contains substantial wins for servicemembers and their families and continues the committee's tradition of improving the quality of life of servicemembers and their families by authorizing a substantial pay raise, expanding childcare,

Additionally, this bill invests in our defense industrial base by completely restructuring the pay and personnel policies for our wage- grade employees in order to increase wages and reward our hardest workers with quicker promotions and more substantial bonuses.

The fiscal year 2027 NDAA includes essential reforms that we all know are critical to refocus our military on warfighting and lethality by requiring all personnel actions to be based on individual merit and demonstrated performance, rather than race, ethnicity, or sex, and preventing the weaponization of administrative investigations.

Mr. Chairman, I strongly urge the passage of the fiscal year 2027 NDAA so we can deliver on our promises to our servicemembers and their families.

I personally wish to thank from my personal office: Andrew Bond and Jay Knoxville, and also our professional staff here: Dave Giachetti, Hannah Kaufman, Ali Evers, Ellie Bender, Anna Reed and from the minority staff: Ilka Regino and Michaela Reardon for their work on this bill. They have all been really great to work with, and I think we had a wonderful year. I also thank again the leadership from the chairman and the ranking member.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson), my friend and colleague.

Joe WilsonRepublican, South Carolina

Mr. Speaker, I am grateful to support the National Defense Authorization Act.

We all appreciate Chairman Mike Rogers for his leadership and commitment for our men and women in uniform and for promoting peace through strength.

We are in a conflict we did not choose between dictators with rule of gun invading democracies with rule of law.

This National Defense Authorization Act prepares America for emerging threats from our adversaries who, working together, seek to destroy our hard-won freedom.

This bill makes clear that we stand with our allies against murderous invasion. America is engaged in worldwide competition. There is inclusion of robust authorization for nuclear modernization, emerging technologies, information operations, and industrial capacity advancements.

President Donald Trump has made it clear: We will defend American families with our allies and give our warriors the tools they need to win.

Israeli research has been vital for missile defense, and Ukraine is leading on drones and robotics.

The late Sergeant Thomas Caughman of Lexington, South Carolina, an American hero, is correct: Freedom is not free.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Virginia (Mrs. Kiggans).

Jennifer A. KiggansRepublican, Virginia

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Fiscal Year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act.

As a Navy veteran, former helicopter pilot, Navy spouse, and Navy mom, I know our military is only as strong as the men and women who serve.

This bill puts our warfighters first by supporting a pay raise of up to 7 percent and providing them with the training, equipment, and resources they need to fight, win, and return home safely.

It strengthens American airpower, rebuilds our munitions stockpiles, advances unmanned and next-generation technologies, and invests in ships the Navy needs.

It also supports American shipbuilders, ship repair professionals, aviators, and maintainers who keep our fleet at sea and our aircraft in the sky.

I am proud that my provisions will accelerate the development of American-made unmanned surface vessels, bring greater transparency to TRICARE, fight to protect pharmacy choice, expand access to childcare, and improve military nursing staff shortages.

This bill delivers peace through strength for our military, for our families, and for Virginia's Second Congressional District and Hampton Roads.

Mr. Chair, I urge its passage.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Guam (Mr. Moylan), an outstanding member of the Armed Services Committee.

James C. MoylanRepublican, Guam

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the Fiscal Year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act.

Guam is on the front line of America's national security in the Pacific. This bill delivers nearly $1.9 billion in vital defense investments on the island while ensuring the people of Guam remain a priority.

This legislation secures an extension to the H-2B workforce provision through 2035 to guarantee long-term stability for our local economy.

It sets a target for military commissaries to source at least 15 percent of produce from local farmers, expanded workforce credentialing for our students, and protected local land by removing a proposed military acquisition of over 100 acres.

Guam has carried a tremendous share of our Nation's defense responsibilities for generations.

As the people of Guam continue to serve this country, the passage of this NDAA will, in turn, serve our island.

Mr. Chairman, I urge our colleagues to support the passage of this bipartisan bill.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mills), another outstanding member of the Armed Services Committee.

Cory MillsRepublican, Florida

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Likewise, the gentleman from Alabama is an amazing chairman. We appreciate everything he has done for the National Defense Authorization Act but also for our warfighters.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong support of my amendment in the National Defense Authorization Act.

Right now, our Nation's Defense Industrial Base is facing a massive supply chain crisis. We need to innovate, be agile and resilient, and we need to win.

The answer is right here in our small businesses, especially our employee-owned small businesses, also known as ESOPs.

In 2021, the Department of Defense created a pilot program to incentivize contracting with high-performing, worker-owned companies. It was a great idea, but under the current rules, a business must be 100 percent employee-owned to qualify.

Mr. Chairman, that rigid rule locks out nearly 6,500 ESOPs nationwide, covering 14 million to 15 million American workers. It makes the program completely unusable for the vast majority of ESOPs in place in every district represented in this Chamber.

My amendment fixes this by aligning the ESOP threshold with the Small Business Administration rules and giving the Department of War the discretion to rate these companies on merit and not formula.

Data shows that employee-owned companies consistently perform better, stay resilient, and deliver higher value. By lowering this arbitrary barrier, we support these businesses while we boost competition in the DOW procurement, support American workers, and drive Federal dollars back to the Main Street.

Let's empower our small businesses, strengthen our national security, and pass this amendment.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Strong), a former member of the Armed Services Committee.

Dale W. StrongRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment. This amendment would compromise the intent of the program.

Congress created and strengthened the pilot program to incentivize the Department of Defense to contract with businesses that are wholly owned by their employees.

This wasn't a partisan idea. It was championed by Members from across the political spectrum because it works for the Department and for the workforce.

My district is home to companies that have flourished under full employee ownership, and their success underscores exactly why this program was designed the way it was.

Yes, this amendment would extend that benefit to partially owned firms where a single owner or a small group retains control. The benefit shifts away from the employees this program was designed to reward and undermines the very purpose of the pilot program.

For this reason, I respectfully oppose the amendment.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. McGuire), a freshman member of the Armed Services Committee.

John J. McGuire IIIRepublican, Virginia

Mr. Chairman, I thank Chairman Rogers and Ranking Member Smith for their leadership.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this historic National Defense Authorization Act.

In the Navy, we used to say: The more you sweat in peace, the less you bleed in war.

For decades, our Defense Industrial Base was allowed to decay, but thanks to President Trump, our Secretary of War, and this Armed Services Committee, we are finally turning the ship around. This bill supercharges our industrial base and builds on last year's acquisition reforms.

For Virginia's Fifth District, this bill unleashes local expertise in munitions manufacturing and next-generation nuclear power. We wouldn't have a country without our men and women in uniform. We owe them the best we have.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Once again, I thank the chairman for the process that we went through here. I have made the arguments. I don't want to restate them and belabor them, but we are deeply concerned about the ongoing war in Iran. There is no plan, no direction, continually rising costs. We are also concerned about the amount of money that is being poured into defense, at the same time that we are seeing cuts in Medicaid, cuts in food stamps, cuts in a variety of programs that are enormously important, and tax cuts that continue as the deficit and the debt get ever higher.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.

First, I will take a minute to thank my friend, Ranking Member Smith, for his tremendous partnership in fashioning this piece of bipartisan work that is so important for our Nation. He has been a great partner, and I do want everybody to know that.

This is a very important bill. It provides critical authorities for our warfighters to keep us free and safe.

I urge all Members to support it, and 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.

In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Armed Services, printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 119-33 shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as the original bill for purposes of further amendment under the 5-minute rule and shall be considered as read.

The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations

Subtitle H--Family Programs, Child Care, and Dependent Education

TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED

Subtitle C--Provisions Relating to Acquisition Workforce Development

TITLE XVI--SPACE ACTIVITIES, STRATEGIC PROGRAMS, AND INTELLIGENCE

Subtitle B--Defense Intelligence and Intelligence-Related Activities

Subtitle A--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment

Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations

Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations

Subtitle H--Family Programs, Child Care, and Dependent Education

TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED

Subtitle C--Provisions Relating to Acquisition Workforce Development

TITLE XVI--SPACE ACTIVITIES, STRATEGIC PROGRAMS, AND INTELLIGENCE

Subtitle B--Defense Intelligence and Intelligence-Related Activities

Subtitle A--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment

Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations

Line Program Element Item Request Authorized ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

001 0601102A DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES......... 215,322 225,322

002 0601103A UNIVERSITY RESEARCH INITIATIVES... 63,102 83,102

003 0601104A UNIVERSITY AND INDUSTRY RESEARCH 53,598 71,098

005 0601275A ELECTRONIC WARFARE BASIC RESEARCH. 64,031 64,031

006 0601601A ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND 2,500

009 0602135A COUNTER SMALL UNMANNED AERIAL 26,523 29,023

010 0602141A LETHALITY TECHNOLOGY.............. 232,046 239,546

011 0602143A SOLDIER LETHALITY TECHNOLOGY...... 68,018 90,518

012 0602144A GROUND TECHNOLOGY................. 44,146 46,646

013 0602145A NEXT GENERATION COMBAT VEHICLE 70,540 75,540

014 0602146A NETWORK C3I TECHNOLOGY............ 53,373 70,873

015 0602147A LONG RANGE PRECISION FIRES 24,086 31,586

016 0602148A FUTURE VERTICLE LIFT TECHNOLOGY... 17,727 20,227

017 0602150A AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY 36,113 43,613

021 0602183A AIR PLATFORM APPLIED RESEARCH..... 43,700 53,700

022 0602184A SOLDIER APPLIED RESEARCH.......... 2,429 2,429

023 0602213A C3I APPLIED CYBER................. 63 63

024 0602275A ELECTRONIC WARFARE APPLIED 51,184 46,184

025 0602276A ELECTRONIC WARFARE CYBER APPLIED 9,857 9,857

026 0602345A UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS LAUNCHED 22,871 22,871

027 0602386A BIOTECHNOLOGY FOR MATERIALS-- 14,979 14,979

029 0602785A MANPOWER/PERSONNEL/TRAINING 14,275 14,275

030 0602787A MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY................ 149,221 142,221

030A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS............... 32,883 32,883

031 0603002A MEDICAL ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY....... 17,876 17,876

032 0603007A MANPOWER, PERSONNEL AND TRAINING 11,113 11,113

033 0603025A ARMY AGILE INNOVATION AND 3,325 5,825

035 0603041A ALL DOMAIN CONVERGENCE ADVANCED 3,575 3,575

036 0603042A C3I ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY........... 1,211 3,711

037 0603043A AIR PLATFORM ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.. 23,471 20,471

038 0603044A SOLDIER ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY....... 3,951 3,951

039 0603116A LETHALITY ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY..... 31,812 39,312

040 0603118A SOLDIER LETHALITY ADVANCED 125,121 120,121

041 0603119A GROUND ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY........ 25,043 40,043

043 0603135A COUNTER SMALL UNMANNED AERIAL 156,520 154,020

044 0603275A ELECTRONIC WARFARE ADVANCED 156,326 149,326

045 0603276A ELECTRONIC WARFARE CYBER ADVANCED 15,278 15,278

046 0603345A UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS LAUNCHED 33,129 33,129

047 0603386A BIOTECHNOLOGY FOR MATERIALS-- 22,402 22,402

048 0603457A C3I CYBER ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT.... 8,509 8,509

049 0603461A HIGH PERFORMANCE COMPUTING 215,090 210,090

050 0603462A NEXT GENERATION COMBAT VEHICLE 118,207 143,607

051 0603463A NETWORK C3I ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY... 48,490 93,790

052 0603464A LONG RANGE PRECISION FIRES 422,590 430,090

053 0603465A FUTURE VERTICAL LIFT ADVANCED 14,984 19,984

054 0603466A AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE ADVANCED 63,924 78,924

056 0603920A HUMANITARIAN DEMINING............. 7,619 7,619

056A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS............... 80,717 80,717

058 0603305A ARMY MISSLE DEFENSE SYSTEMS 8,367 12,367

059 0603308A ARMY SPACE SYSTEMS INTEGRATION.... 59,573 91,573

061 0603619A LANDMINE WARFARE AND BARRIER--ADV 31,374 31,374

062 0603627A SMOKE, OBSCURANT AND TARGET 5,596 5,596

063 0603639A TANK AND MEDIUM CALIBER AMMUNITION 277,248 257,248

064 0603645A ARMORED SYSTEM MODERNIZATION--ADV 23,594 23,594

065 0603747A SOLDIER SUPPORT AND SURVIVABILITY. 4,109 4,109

066 0603766A TACTICAL ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE 98,331 113,331

067 0603774A NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS ADVANCED 5,310 5,310

068 0603779A ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY TECHNOLOGY-- 19,499 19,499

069 0603790A NATO RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT..... 5,145 5,145

071 0603804A LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER EQUIPMENT-- 12,822 12,822

072 0603807A MEDICAL SYSTEMS--ADV DEV.......... 1,017 1,017

073 0603827A SOLDIER SYSTEMS--ADVANCED 56,122 56,122

074 0604017A ROBOTICS DEVELOPMENT.............. 20,290 20,290

075 0604019A EXPANDED MISSION AREA MISSILE 235,593 210,593

077 0604035A LOW EARTH ORBIT (LEO) SATELLITE 319 319

078 0604036A MULTI-DOMAIN SENSING SYSTEM (MDSS) 99,471 99,471

079 0604037A TACTICAL INTEL TARGETING ACCESS 4,123 4,123

080 0604100A ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES.......... 10,077 10,077

084 0604114A LOWER TIER AIR MISSILE DEFENSE 162,074 162,074

085 0604115A TECHNOLOGY MATURATION INITIATIVES. 314,671 304,271

086 0604117A MANEUVER--SHORT RANGE AIR DEFENSE 460,980 460,980

087 0604120A ASSURED POSITIONING, NAVIGATION 18,993 18,993

088 0604121A SYNTHETIC TRAINING ENVIRONMENT 219,137 219,137

089 0604129A ADVANCED POWER APPLICATIONS....... 48,000 48,000

091 0604135A STRATEGIC MID-RANGE FIRES......... 211,848 211,848

092 0604182A HYPERSONICS....................... 82,939 82,939

099 0305251A CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS FORCES AND 22,889 21,889

099A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS............... 261,466 261,466

100 0604201A AIRCRAFT AVIONICS................. 30,658 35,658

101 0604270A ELECTRONIC WARFARE DEVELOPMENT.... 2,807 2,807

102 0604601A INFANTRY SUPPORT WEAPONS.......... 55,296 64,296

103 0604604A MEDIUM TACTICAL VEHICLES.......... 23,763 23,763

104 0604611A JAVELIN........................... 10,217 10,217

105 0604622A FAMILY OF HEAVY TACTICAL VEHICLES. 43,003 43,003

108 0604642A LIGHT TACTICAL WHEELED VEHICLES... 6,142 6,142

110 0604710A NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS--ENG DEV..... 418,427 418,427

111 0604713A COMBAT FEEDING, CLOTHING, AND 6,701 6,701

112 0604715A NON-SYSTEM TRAINING DEVICES--ENG 29,685 31,685

113 0604741A AIR DEFENSE COMMAND, CONTROL AND 14,276 14,276

114 0604742A CONSTRUCTIVE SIMULATION SYSTEMS 5,618 5,618

115 0604746A AUTOMATIC TEST EQUIPMENT 9,625 9,625

116 0604760A DISTRIBUTIVE INTERACTIVE 7,883 7,883

117 0604798A BRIGADE ANALYSIS, INTEGRATION AND 26,602 26,602

118 0604802A WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS--ENG DEV.... 124,881 174,881

119 0604804A LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER EQUIPMENT-- 65,238 65,238

120 0604805A COMMAND, CONTROL, COMMUNICATIONS 5,541 5,541

121 0604807A MEDICAL MATERIEL/MEDICAL 9,744 9,744

122 0604808A LANDMINE WARFARE/BARRIER--ENG DEV. 17,586 17,586

123 0604818A ARMY TACTICAL COMMAND & CONTROL 42,584 42,584

124 0604820A RADAR DEVELOPMENT................. 58,260 58,260

126 0604827A SOLDIER SYSTEMS--WARRIOR DEM/VAL.. 5,663 5,663

127 0604852A SUITE OF SURVIVABILITY ENHANCEMENT 78,331 78,331

128 0604854A ARTILLERY SYSTEMS--EMD............ 709,192 651,692

129 0605013A INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT 121,525 116,525

130 0605018A INTEGRATED PERSONNEL AND PAY 102,694 102,694

131 0605030A JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK CENTER 21,561 21,561

132 0605031A JOINT TACTICAL NETWORK (JTN)...... 50,390 50,390

133 0605035A COMMON INFRARED COUNTERMEASURES 11,573 11,573

134 0605036A COMBATING WEAPONS OF MASS 5,605 5,605

135 0605037A EVIDENCE COLLECTION AND DETAINEE 5,513 5,513

136 0605038A NUCLEAR BIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL 13,864 13,864

137 0605041A DEFENSIVE CYBER TOOL DEVELOPMENT.. 3,519 3,519

138 0605042A TACTICAL NETWORK RADIO SYSTEMS 3,804 3,804

139 0605047A CONTRACT WRITING SYSTEM........... 4,777 4,777

141 0605051A AIRCRAFT SURVIVABILITY DEVELOPMENT 106,621 96,621

142 0605052A INDIRECT FIRE PROTECTION 175,352 175,352

143 0605053A GROUND ROBOTICS................... 192,185 182,185

144 0605054A EMERGING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVES... 147,881 164,881

145 0605058A TERMINAL HIGH ALTITUDE AREA 1,053,983 1,053,983

146 0605144A NEXT GENERATION LOAD DEVICE-- 2,380 2,380

147 0605148A TACTICAL INTEL TARGETING ACCESS 35,769 35,769

151 0605224A MULTI-DOMAIN INTELLIGENCE......... 49,594 49,594

152 0605231A PRECISION STRIKE MISSILE (PRSM)... 288,304 288,304

153 0605232A HYPERSONICS EMD................... 446,616 446,616

154 0605233A ACCESSIONS INFORMATION ENVIRONMENT 33,770 33,770

155 0605235A STRATEGIC MID-RANGE CAPABILITY.... 82,550 82,550

157 0605241A FUTURE LONG RANGE ASSAULT AIRCRAFT 2,140,569 2,267,786

159 0605244A JOINT REDUCED RANGE ROCKET (JR3).. 16,014 16,014

161 0605275A ELECTRONIC WARFARE SYSTEMS 99,691 99,691

162 0605330A C2 TRANSPORT...................... 45,370 45,370

163 0605331A C2 APPLICATIONS................... 488,401 488,401

164 0605332A C2 DATA........................... 306,019 306,019

165 0605333A C2 INFRASTRUCTURE................. 64,849 64,849

166 0605345A UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS LAUNCHED 816,433 816,433

167 0605347A COUNTER UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS 359,182 359,182

169 0605457A ARMY INTEGRATED AIR AND MISSILE 126,623 126,623

170 0605531A COUNTER--SMALL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT 695 695

172 0605625A MANNED GROUND VEHICLE............. 290,069 290,069

173 0605766A NATIONAL CAPABILITIES INTEGRATION 17,211 17,211

174 0605812A JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL VEHICLE 2,749 2,749

175 0605830A AVIATION GROUND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT. 951 951

176 0303032A TROJAN--RH12...................... 3,946 3,946

178 0304270A ELECTRONIC WARFARE DEVELOPMENT.... 125,301 125,301

178A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS............... 89,121 89,121

179 0604256A THREAT SIMULATOR DEVELOPMENT...... 60,233 60,233

180 0604258A TARGET SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT........ 16,488 16,488

181 0604759A MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT.............. 106,140 106,140

182 0605103A RAND ARROYO CENTER................ 10,737 10,737

183 0605301A ARMY KWAJALEIN ATOLL.............. 7,051 7,051

184 0605326A CONCEPTS EXPERIMENTATION PROGRAM.. 55,596 55,596

186 0605601A ARMY TEST RANGES AND FACILITIES... 469,723 479,723

187 0605602A ARMY TECHNICAL TEST 62,303 62,303

188 0605604A SURVIVABILITY/LETHALITY ANALYSIS.. 31,283 31,283

189 0605606A AIRCRAFT CERTIFICATION............ 1,983 1,983

190 0605706A MATERIEL SYSTEMS ANALYSIS......... 19,013 19,013

191 0605709A EXPLOITATION OF FOREIGN ITEMS..... 10,481 10,481

192 0605712A SUPPORT OF OPERATIONAL TESTING.... 60,733 60,733

193 0605716A ARMY EVALUATION CENTER............ 65,565 65,565

194 0605718A ARMY MODELING & SIM X-CMD 15,608 15,608

195 0605801A PROGRAMWIDE ACTIVITIES............ 52,978 52,978

196 0605803A TECHNICAL INFORMATION ACTIVITIES.. 27,004 27,004

197 0605805A MUNITIONS STANDARDIZATION, 44,851 62,351

198 0605857A ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY TECHNOLOGY 3,256 3,256

199 0605898A ARMY DIRECT REPORT HEADQUARTERS-- 54,276 54,276

200 0606002A RONALD REAGAN BALLISTIC MISSILE 118,585 118,585

201 0606003A COUNTERINTEL AND HUMAN INTEL 5,802 5,802

202 0606118A AIAMD SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT & 653,653 646,653

203 0606942A ASSESSMENTS AND EVALUATIONS CYBER 6,468 6,468

205 0603778A MLRS PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.. 17,780 17,780

206 0605024A ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT.... 6,613 16,613

207 0607101A COMBATING WEAPONS OF MASS 488 488

208 0607131A WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS PRODUCT 21,553 21,553

209 0607136A BLACKHAWK PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT 35,147 35,147

210 0607137A CHINOOK PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT 7,277 7,277

211 0607139A IMPROVED TURBINE ENGINE PROGRAM... 100,000

213 0607145A APACHE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT......... 30,759 30,759

214 0607148A AN/TPQ-53 COUNTERFIRE TARGET 90,981 80,981

215 0607150A INTEL CYBER DEVELOPMENT........... 13,694 13,694

216 0607212A TENCAP ENHANCEMENTS............... 20,982 20,982

219 0607665A FAMILY OF BIOMETRICS.............. 1,640 1,640

220 0607865A PATRIOT PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT....... 219,046 219,046

221 0203728A JOINT AUTOMATED DEEP OPERATION 11,255 11,255

222 0203735A COMBAT VEHICLE IMPROVEMENT 492,364 502,364

224 0203752A AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT 239 239

225 0203758A DIGITIZATION...................... 1,615 1,615

226 0203801A MISSILE/AIR DEFENSE PRODUCT 2,054 2,054

229 0205778A GUIDED MULTIPLE-LAUNCH ROCKET 73,639 73,639

232 0303140A INFORMATION SYSTEMS SECURITY 15,932 15,932

234 0303142A SATCOM GROUND ENVIRONMENT (SPACE). 4,870 4,870

237 0305179A INTEGRATED BROADCAST SERVICE (IBS) 6,870 6,870

238 0305219A MQ-1 GRAY EAGLE UAV............... 2,590 2,590

239 0708045A END ITEM INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS 68,097 85,097

239A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS............... 47,342 47,342

240 0608041A DEFENSIVE CYBER--SOFTWARE 94,095 91,095

001 0601103N UNIVERSITY RESEARCH INITIATIVES... 47,500

002 0601153N DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES......... 525,399 527,899

003 0602114N POWER PROJECTION APPLIED RESEARCH. 38,838 43,838

004 0602123N FORCE PROTECTION APPLIED RESEARCH. 137,779 145,279

005 0602131M MARINE CORPS LANDING FORCE 57,567 60,067

006 0602235N COMMON PICTURE APPLIED RESEARCH... 40,433 40,433

007 0602236N WARFIGHTER SUSTAINMENT APPLIED 60,350 60,350

008 0602271N ELECTROMAGNETIC SYSTEMS APPLIED 74,603 74,603

009 0602435N OCEAN WARFIGHTING ENVIRONMENT 64,693 64,693

010 0602651M JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS APPLIED 4,105 4,105

011 0602747N UNDERSEA WARFARE APPLIED RESEARCH. 52,515 55,015

012 0602750N FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES APPLIED 305,357 300,357

013 0602782N MINE AND EXPEDITIONARY WARFARE 24,634 34,634

015 0602861N SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT-- 74,378 74,378

016 0603123N FORCE PROTECTION ADVANCED 50,869 50,869

017 0603271N ELECTROMAGNETIC SYSTEMS ADVANCED 8,635 8,635

018 0603273N SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY FOR NUCLEAR 114,767 114,767

019 0603640M USMC ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 287,897 292,897

020 0603651M JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS 8,727 8,727

021 0603673N FUTURE NAVAL CAPABILITIES ADVANCED 445,977 440,977

022 0603680N MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.. 79,132 116,632

024 0603758N NAVY WARFIGHTING EXPERIMENTS AND 66,395 76,395

027 0603128N UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEM............ 35,706 35,706

029 0603207N AIR/OCEAN TACTICAL APPLICATIONS... 76,141 76,141

030 0603216N AVIATION SURVIVABILITY............ 20,010 20,010

031 0603239N NAVAL CONSTRUCTION FORCES......... 7,726 7,726

032 0603254N ASW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT........... 20,070 20,070

033 0603261N TACTICAL AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE.. 3,239 3,239

034 0603382N ADVANCED COMBAT SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY 32,263 38,263

035 0603502N SURFACE AND SHALLOW WATER MINE 32,451 32,451

036 0603506N SURFACE SHIP TORPEDO DEFENSE...... 9,920 9,920

037 0603512N CARRIER SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT....... 8,806 8,806

038 0603525N PILOT FISH........................ 1,339,052 1,339,052

039 0603536N RETRACT JUNIPER................... 275,300 275,300

040 0603542N RADIOLOGICAL CONTROL.............. 704 704

042 0603561N UNDERSEA WARFARE SYSTEM 132,885 138,885

044 0603563N SHIP CONCEPT ADVANCED DESIGN...... 353,893 363,893

045 0603564N SHIP PRELIMINARY DESIGN & 666,640 666,640

046 0603570N ADVANCED NUCLEAR POWER SYSTEMS.... 392,426 392,426

047 0603573N ADVANCED SURFACE MACHINERY SYSTEMS 269,961 274,961

048 0603576N CHALK EAGLE....................... 149,351 149,351

049 0603581N LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP (LCS)........ 12,576 7,576

050 0603582N COMBAT SYSTEM INTEGRATION......... 18,819 18,819

051 0603595N OHIO REPLACEMENT.................. 331,577 346,577

052 0603596N LCS MISSION MODULES............... 46,239 16,239

053 0603597N AUTOMATED TEST AND RE-TEST (ATRT). 18,070 18,070

054 0603598N ATRT ENTERPRISE RAPID CAPABILITY.. 87,585 97,585

055 0603599N FRIGATE DEVELOPMENT............... 212,041 212,041

056 0603609N CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS............ 10,216 10,216

057 0603635M MARINE CORPS GROUND COMBAT/SUPPORT 521,995 501,995

058 0603654N JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE 43,568 43,568

059 0603713N OCEAN ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY 15,903 25,903

060 0603721N ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION.......... 19,347 19,347

061 0603724N NAVY ENERGY PROGRAM............... 59,591 156,591

062 0603725N FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT............ 13,738 18,738

063 0603734N CHALK CORAL....................... 995,658 995,658

064 0603739N NAVY LOGISTIC PRODUCTIVITY........ 929 929

065 0603746N RETRACT MAPLE..................... 655,551 655,551

066 0603748N LINK PLUMERIA..................... 498,853 498,853

067 0603751N RETRACT ELM....................... 87,999 87,999

068 0603764M LINK EVERGREEN.................... 593,835 593,835

069 0603790N NATO RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT..... 5,513 5,513

070 0603795N LAND ATTACK TECHNOLOGY............ 985 985

071 0603851M JOINT NON-LETHAL WEAPONS TESTING.. 14,152 14,152

072 0603860N JOINT PRECISION APPROACH AND 73,813 73,813

073 0603889N COUNTERDRUG RDT&E PROJECTS........ 6,500 6,500

074 0603925N DIRECTED ENERGY AND ELECTRIC 94,825 97,325

076 0604027N DIGITAL WARFARE OFFICE............ 182,205 176,205

077 0604028N SMALL AND MEDIUM UNMANNED UNDERSEA 24,598 24,598

078 0604029N UNMANNED UNDERSEA VEHICLE CORE 62,460 62,460

081 0604112N GERALD R. FORD CLASS NUCLEAR 111,241 111,241

082 0604127N SURFACE MINE COUNTERMEASURES...... 17,762 17,762

083 0604272N TACTICAL AIR DIRECTIONAL INFRARED 14,974 14,974

084 0604286N NAVY ADVANCED MANUFACTURING....... 10,016 10,016

085 0604289M NEXT GENERATION LOGISTICS......... 24 24

086 0604292N FUTURE VERTICAL LIFT (MARITIME 5,314 5,314

087 0604295M MARINE AVIATION DEMONSTRATION/ 47,152 95,152

088 0604320M RAPID TECHNOLOGY CAPABILITY 125,999 125,999

089 0604454N LX (R)............................ 18,574 18,574

090 0604536N ADVANCED UNDERSEA PROTOTYPING..... 164,512 164,512

091 0604545N ADVANCED SHIP BUILDING INDUSTRIAL 20,000

092 0604636N COUNTER UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS 20,833 20,833

093 0604659N PRECISION STRIKE WEAPONS 206,873 206,873

094 0604707N SPACE AND ELECTRONIC WARFARE (SEW) 8,657 8,657

095 0604786N OFFENSIVE ANTI-SURFACE WARFARE 104,527 168,527

097 0605513N UNMANNED SURFACE VEHICLE ENABLING 255,135 255,135

098 0605514M GROUND BASED ANTI-SHIP MISSILE.... 16,307 16,307

100 0605518N CONVENTIONAL PROMPT STRIKE (CPS).. 1,341,416 1,341,416

101 0105519N NUCLEAR-ARMED SEA-LAUNCHED CRUISE 175,000

102 0207147M COLLABORATIVE COMBAT AIRCRAFT..... 213,934 213,934

104 0303354N ASW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT--MIP...... 3,206 3,206

105 0304240M ADVANCED TACTICAL UNMANNED 1,979 1,979

107 0304797N UNDERSEA ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE / 13,563 13,563

108 0603208N TRAINING SYSTEM AIRCRAFT.......... 80,617 80,617

109 0604038N MARITIME TARGETING CELL........... 216,514 216,514

110 0604212N OTHER HELO DEVELOPMENT............ 976 976

112 0604215N STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT............. 4,399 4,399

113 0604216N MULTI-MISSION HELICOPTER UPGRADE 88,855 88,855

114 0604230N WARFARE SUPPORT SYSTEM............ 73,080 73,080

115 0604231N COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEMS....... 73,534 73,534

116 0604234N ADVANCED HAWKEYE.................. 390,260 390,260

117 0604245M H-1 UPGRADES...................... 66,446 66,446

118 0604261N ACOUSTIC SEARCH SENSORS........... 48,875 48,875

119 0604262N V-22.............................. 252,335 252,335

120 0604264N AIR CREW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT...... 21,582 21,582

121 0604269N EA-18............................. 131,683 131,683

122 0604270N ELECTRONIC WARFARE DEVELOPMENT.... 168,985 168,985

123 0604273M EXECUTIVE HELO DEVELOPMENT........ 69,438 69,438

124 0604274N NEXT GENERATION JAMMER (NGJ)...... 50,332 50,332

125 0604280N JOINT TACTICAL RADIO SYSTEM--NAVY 409,318 412,318

126 0604282N NEXT GENERATION JAMMER (NGJ) 497,011 457,011

127 0604307N SURFACE COMBATANT COMBAT SYSTEM 425,060 425,060

128 0604329N SMALL DIAMETER BOMB (SDB)......... 64,428 64,428

129 0604366N STANDARD MISSILE IMPROVEMENTS..... 539,279 539,279

130 0604373N AIRBORNE MCM...................... 8,567 8,567

131 0604378N NAVAL INTEGRATED FIRE CONTROL-- 42,177 42,177

132 0604501N ADVANCED ABOVE WATER SENSORS...... 67,900 67,900

133 0604503N SUBMARINE SWFTS MODERNIZATION..... 195,361 195,361

134 0604504N AIR CONTROL....................... 41,610 41,610

135 0604512N SHIPBOARD AVIATION SYSTEMS........ 30,970 30,970

136 0604516N SHIP SURVIVABILITY................ 7,861 7,861

138 0604522N AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE RADAR 96,642 96,642

139 0604530N ADVANCED ARRESTING GEAR (AAG)..... 60,518 60,518

140 0604558N NEW DESIGN SSN.................... 237,103 237,103

142 0604567N SHIP CONTRACT DESIGN/ LIVE FIRE 19,429 19,429

143 0604574N NAVY TACTICAL COMPUTER RESOURCES.. 3,415 3,415

144 0604601N MINE DEVELOPMENT.................. 158,666 158,666

145 0604610N LIGHTWEIGHT TORPEDO DEVELOPMENT... 102,159 102,159

146 0604654N JOINT SERVICE EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE 8,509 8,509

147 0604657M USMC GROUND COMBAT/SUPPORTING ARMS 69,478 69,478

148 0604703N PERSONNEL, TRAINING, SIMULATION, 8,316 8,316

149 0604727N JOINT STANDOFF WEAPON SYSTEMS..... 1,447 1,447

150 0604755N SHIP SELF DEFENSE (DETECT & 156,167 156,167

151 0604756N SHIP SELF DEFENSE (ENGAGE: HARD 296,261 296,261

152 0604757N SHIP SELF DEFENSE (ENGAGE: SOFT 196,761 196,761

153 0604761N INTELLIGENCE ENGINEERING.......... 6,426 6,426

154 0604771N MEDICAL DEVELOPMENT............... 6,900 6,900

155 0604777N NAVIGATION/ID SYSTEM.............. 3,388 3,388

156 0604850N SSN(X)............................ 315,914 315,914

157 0605013M INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT 14,380 14,380

158 0605013N INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT 149,089 149,089

159 0605024N ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT.... 3,459 3,459

160 0605180N TACAMO MODERNIZATION.............. 1,662,723 1,552,723

161 0605212M CH-53K RDTE....................... 139,273 139,273

162 0605215N MISSION PLANNING.................. 82,618 82,618

163 0605217N COMMON AVIONICS................... 133,855 133,855

164 0605220N SHIP TO SHORE CONNECTOR (SSC)..... 4,519 4,519

165 0605285N NEXT GENERATION FIGHTER........... 68,498 68,498

167 0605450M JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND MISSILE (JAGM) 189,866 189,866

168 0605500N MULTI-MISSION MARITIME AIRCRAFT 87,173 87,173

169 0605504N MULTI-MISSION MARITIME (MMA) 52,951 52,951

170 0605516N LONG RANGE FIRES.................. 186,735 186,735

171 0605611M MARINE CORPS ASSAULT VEHICLES 12,461 12,461

172 0605813M JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL VEHICLE 2,413 2,413

173 0204202N DESTROYERS GUIDED MISSILE (DDG- 50,166 50,166

174 0301377N COUNTERING ADVANCED CONVENTIONAL 15,563 15,563

175 0302315N NON-KINETIC COUNTERMEASURE SUPPORT 23,146 23,146

181 0304785N ISR & INFO OPERATIONS............. 274,478 274,478

183 0306250M CYBER OPERATIONS TECHNOLOGY 8,962 8,962

184 0604256N THREAT SIMULATOR DEVELOPMENT...... 16,453 16,453

185 0604258N TARGET SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT........ 22,653 17,653

186 0604759N MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT.............. 112,458 104,458

187 0605152N STUDIES AND ANALYSIS SUPPORT--NAVY 4,336 4,336

188 0605154N CENTER FOR NAVAL ANALYSES......... 28,310 28,310

191 0605853N MANAGEMENT, TECHNICAL & 124,898 124,898

192 0605856N STRATEGIC TECHNICAL SUPPORT....... 4,260 4,260

193 0605863N RDT&E SHIP AND AIRCRAFT SUPPORT... 170,699 170,699

194 0605864N TEST AND EVALUATION SUPPORT....... 470,492 470,492

195 0605865N OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION 31,902 31,902

196 0605866N NAVY SPACE AND ELECTRONIC WARFARE 21,498 21,498

197 0605867N SEW SURVEILLANCE/RECONNAISSANCE 25,144 25,144

198 0605873M MARINE CORPS PROGRAM WIDE SUPPORT. 70,013 70,013

199 0605898N MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D................ 33,533 33,533

200 0606295M MARINE AVIATION DEVELOPMENTAL 19,165 19,165

201 0606355N WARFARE INNOVATION MANAGEMENT..... 35,931 35,931

202 0606942N ASSESSMENTS AND EVALUATIONS CYBER 11,282 11,282

203 0305327N INSIDER THREAT.................... 2,214 2,214

204 0902498N MANAGEMENT HEADQUARTERS 2,054 2,054

208 0604840M F-35 C2D2......................... 469,779 469,779

209 0604840N F-35 C2D2......................... 428,545 428,545

210 0605520M MARINE CORPS AIR DEFENSE WEAPONS 133,041 133,041

211 0607658N COOPERATIVE ENGAGEMENT CAPABILITY 120,782 120,782

212 0101221N STRATEGIC SUB & WEAPONS SYSTEM 1,051,736 1,051,736

213 0101224N SSBN SECURITY TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.. 65,856 65,856

214 0101226N SUBMARINE ACOUSTIC WARFARE 114,279 114,279

215 0101402N NAVY STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS..... 88,572 88,572

216 0204136N F/A-18 SQUADRONS.................. 271,429 278,429

218 0204229N TOMAHAWK AND TOMAHAWK MISSION 76,653 76,653

219 0204311N INTEGRATED SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM.... 71,901 71,901

220 0204313N SHIP-TOWED ARRAY SURVEILLANCE 954 954

221 0204413N AMPHIBIOUS TACTICAL SUPPORT UNITS 1,526 1,526

222 0204460M GROUND/AIR TASK ORIENTED RADAR (G/ 66,255 66,255

223 0204571N CONSOLIDATED TRAINING SYSTEMS 115,839 115,839

224 0204575N ELECTRONIC WARFARE (EW) READINESS 198,560 198,560

225 0205601N ANTI-RADIATION MISSILE IMPROVEMENT 80,491 72,442

227 0205632N MK-48 ADCAP....................... 123,011 123,011

228 0205633N AVIATION IMPROVEMENTS............. 108,505 97,655

229 0205675N OPERATIONAL NUCLEAR POWER SYSTEMS. 252,893 252,893

230 0206313M MARINE CORPS COMMUNICATIONS 268,983 248,983

232 0206623M MARINE CORPS GROUND COMBAT/ 79,031 79,031

233 0206624M MARINE CORPS COMBAT SERVICES 19,915 19,915

234 0206625M USMC INTELLIGENCE/ELECTRONIC 149,055 139,055

235 0207161N TACTICAL AIM MISSILES............. 122,518 110,267

236 0207163N ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR-TO-AIR 24,675 24,675

237 0207255N MQ-25 STINGRAY.................... 513,308 513,308

238 0208043N PLANNING AND DECISION AID SYSTEM 3,491 3,491

242 0303138N AFLOAT NETWORKS................... 68,369 68,369

243 0303140N INFORMATION SYSTEMS SECURITY 79,128 79,128

244 0305192N MILITARY INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM 5,187 5,187

247 0305220N MQ-4C TRITON...................... 10,515 10,515

248 0305232M RQ-11 UAV......................... 19,842 19,842

249 0305241N MULTI-INTELLIGENCE SENSOR 49,898 49,898

250 0305242M UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS (UAS) 20,750 20,750

251 0305421N MQ-4C TRITON MODERNIZATION........ 344,890 344,890

252 0307577N INTELLIGENCE MISSION DATA (IMD)... 787 787

253 0308601N MODELING AND SIMULATION SUPPORT... 16,401 16,401

254 0702207N DEPOT MAINTENANCE (NON-IF)........ 8,097 8,097

255 0708730N MARITIME TECHNOLOGY (MARITECH).... 1,710 1,710

255A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS............... 2,755,838 2,755,838

256 0608013N RISK MANAGEMENT INFORMATION-- 13,017 13,017

257 0608231N MARITIME TACTICAL COMMAND AND 25,299 25,299

001 0601102F DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES......... 296,535 301,535

002 0601103F UNIVERSITY RESEARCH INITIATIVES... 91,394 96,394

003 0602020F FUTURE AF CAPABILITIES APPLIED 44,029 44,029

005 0602102F MATERIALS......................... 139,872 152,872

007 0602202F HUMAN EFFECTIVENESS APPLIED 103,170 103,170

008 0602203F AEROSPACE SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGIES.... 397,809 402,809

009 0602204F AEROSPACE SENSORS................. 164,962 169,962

011 0602298F SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT-- 10,285 10,285

012 0602336F NUCLEAR DELIVERY SYSTEMS TECH 27,031 27,031

013 0602602F CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS............ 130,146 125,146

014 0602605F DIRECTED ENERGY TECHNOLOGY........ 91,798 91,798

015 0602788F DOMINANT INFORMATION SCIENCES AND 149,174 174,174

016 0603032F FUTURE AF INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGY 282,004 282,004

017 0603112F ADVANCED MATERIALS FOR WEAPON 32,808 37,808

018 0603199F SUSTAINMENT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 13,277 13,277

019 0603203F ADVANCED AEROSPACE SENSORS........ 72,149 72,149

020 0603211F AEROSPACE TECHNOLOGY DEV/DEMO..... 260,212 312,712

022 0603273F SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY FOR NUCLEAR 165,949 172,949

023 0603456F HUMAN EFFECTIVENESS ADVANCED 20,338 20,338

024 0603601F CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY... 131,397 128,397

025 0603605F ADVANCED WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY....... 13,744 13,744

026 0603680F MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.. 99,908 102,408

027 0603788F BATTLESPACE KNOWLEDGE DEVELOPMENT 31,938 46,938

028 0604776F DEPLOYMENT & DISTRIBUTION 29,109 24,109

030 0603036F MODULAR ADVANCED MISSILE.......... 15,099 15,099

031 0603260F INTELLIGENCE ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT. 4,012 4,012

033 0603742F COMBAT IDENTIFICATION TECHNOLOGY.. 25,888 25,888

034 0603790F NATO RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT..... 2,320 2,320

035 0603851F INTERCONTINENTAL BALLISTIC 72,112 72,112

036 0604001F NC3 ADVANCED CONCEPTS............. 14,394 14,394

037 0604003F ADVANCED BATTLE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 1,040,945 1,035,945

039 0604005F NC3 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT & 61,355 61,355

041 0604009F AFWERX............................ 3,589 6,089

042 0604010F NEXT GENERATION ADAPTIVE 513,681 462,313

043 0604015F LONG RANGE STRIKE--BOMBER......... 2,862,677 2,862,677

046 0604033F HYPERSONICS PROTOTYPING........... 345,769 345,769

047 0604041F FAMILY OF AFFORDABLE MASS MISSILES 525,223 472,701

048 0604060F NORAD & USNORTHCOM (N&NC) 39,257 39,257

049 0604183F HYPERSONICS PROTOTYPING-- 806,142 806,142

050 0604257F ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY AND SENSORS... 38,756 38,756

052 0604317F TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER............... 2,196 2,196

053 0604327F HARD AND DEEPLY BURIED TARGET 186,385 186,385

054 0604336F NUCLEAR DELIVERY SYSTEMS 91,550 91,550

055 0604343F ADVANCED TANKER SYSTEMS........... 13,036 13,036

056 0604414F CYBER RESILIENCY OF WEAPON SYSTEMS- 44,377 44,377

057 0604609F REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS & CONCEPT 57,575 57,575

058 0604668F JOINT TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT 57,802 57,802

059 0604776F DEPLOYMENT & DISTRIBUTION 5,136 5,136

060 0604858F TECH TRANSITION PROGRAM........... 166,061 163,455

061 0604860F OPERATIONAL ENERGY AND 61,000 183,000

064 0606004F NUCLEAR ENTERPRISE RESEARCH & 1,105 26,105

065 0606005F DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION OFFICE..... 183,398 183,398

067 0207147F COLLABORATIVE COMBAT AIRCRAFT..... 1,373,740 1,236,366

068 0207179F AUTONOMOUS COLLABORATIVE PLATFORMS 57,217 51,496

069 0207420F COMBAT IDENTIFICATION............. 1,692 1,692

071 0207455F THREE DIMENSIONAL LONG-RANGE RADAR 22,335 22,335

072 0207522F AIRBASE AIR DEFENSE SYSTEMS 85,305 85,305

073 0207606F JOINT SIMULATION ENVIRONMENT (JSE) 302,801 302,801

074 0208030F WAR RESERVE MATERIEL--AMMUNITION.. 14,663 14,663

075 0302060F LOOKING GLASS NEXT................ 65,277 65,277

076 0303010F AF ISR DIGITAL INFRASTRUCTURE..... 24,455 24,455

077 0305236F COMMON DATA LINK EXECUTIVE AGENT 26,401 23,761

079 0305913F PERSISTENT SURVEILLANCE........... 29,325 29,325

080 0701200F ENTERPRISE SELECT CLASS II........ 949 949

081 0708051F RAPID SUSTAINMENT MODERNIZATION 27,475 27,475

082 0808736F SPECIAL VICTIM ACCOUNTABILITY AND 1,652 1,652

083 0808737F INTEGRATED PRIMARY PREVENTION..... 4,271 4,271

084 0901410F CONTRACTING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 25,815 25,815

085 1206415F U.S. SPACE COMMAND RESEARCH AND 34,719 34,719

086 0604200F FUTURE ADVANCED WEAPON ANALYSIS & 35,142 35,142

087 0604201F PNT RESILIENCY, MODS, AND 710,780 710,780

088 0604222F NUCLEAR WEAPONS SUPPORT........... 86,921 86,921

089 0604270F ELECTRONIC WARFARE DEVELOPMENT.... 260,233 220,233

090 0604281F TACTICAL DATA NETWORKS ENTERPRISE. 110,151 110,151

091 0604287F PHYSICAL SECURITY EQUIPMENT....... 8,743 8,743

092 0604288F SURVIVABLE AIRBORNE OPERATIONS 2,218,921 2,218,921

093 0604602F ARMAMENT/ORDNANCE DEVELOPMENT..... 96,762 87,086

094 0604604F SUBMUNITIONS...................... 3,599 3,599

095 0604617F AGILE COMBAT SUPPORT.............. 19,348 19,348

096 0604706F LIFE SUPPORT SYSTEMS.............. 21,328 21,328

097 0604735F COMBAT TRAINING RANGES............ 132,783 119,505

098 0604932F LONG RANGE STANDOFF WEAPON........ 565,679 565,679

100 0605056F OPEN ARCHITECTURE MANAGEMENT...... 43,482 39,134

101 0605223F ADVANCED PILOT TRAINING........... 72,174 64,957

102 0605238F GROUND BASED STRATEGIC DETERRENT 4,521,370 4,521,370

103 0605296F MICROELECTRONICS SECURE ENCLAVE... 224,664 220,664

104 0101125F NUCLEAR WEAPONS MODERNIZATION..... 23,066 23,066

105 0102417F OVER-THE-HORIZON BACKSCATTER RADAR 173,975 173,975

106 0207039F COGNITIVE ELECTROMAGNETIC WARFARE. 50,496 50,496

107 0207110F F-47.............................. 5,037,904 4,971,525

108 0207279F ISOLATED PERSONNEL SURVIVABILITY 16,001 16,001

109 0207328F STAND IN ATTACK WEAPON............ 115,882 115,882

110 0207407F ELECTROMAGNETIC BATTLE MANAGEMENT 45,322 45,322

111 0207701F FULL COMBAT MISSION TRAINING...... 6,501 6,501

112 0303008F SATURN............................ 4,771 4,771

116 0305282F JOINT FIRES NETWORK (JFN)......... 313,982 313,982

117 0401221F KC-46A TANKER SQUADRONS........... 543,788 315,788

118 0401319F VC-25B............................ 555,195 555,195

119 0401334F LARGE AIRCRAFT SURVIVABILITY 17,996 17,996

120 0701212F AUTOMATED TEST SYSTEMS............ 15,900 15,900

121 0804772F TRAINING DEVELOPMENTS............. 4,947 4,947

123 0604256F THREAT SIMULATOR DEVELOPMENT...... 44,526 44,526

124 0604759F MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT.............. 235,405 220,405

125 0605101F RAND PROJECT AIR FORCE............ 13,312 13,312

127 0605712F INITIAL OPERATIONAL TEST & 13,562 13,562

128 0605807F TEST AND EVALUATION SUPPORT....... 1,802,502 1,747,802

131 0605829F ACQ WORKFORCE- CYBER, NETWORK, & 439,592 437,592

132 0605831F ACQ WORKFORCE- CAPABILITY 1,206,669 1,206,669

134 0605833F ACQ WORKFORCE- NUCLEAR SYSTEMS.... 342,650 342,650

135 0605898F MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D................ 6,209 6,209

136 0605976F FACILITIES RESTORATION AND 367,369 367,369

137 0605978F FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT--TEST AND 298,924 298,924

138 0606017F REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS AND 21,678 19,511

139 0606398F MANAGEMENT HQ--T&E................ 7,507 7,507

140 0208201F OFFENSIVE SMALL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT 30,187 30,187

141 0303255F COMMAND, CONTROL, COMMUNICATION, 18,068 18,068

142 0308602F ENTEPRISE INFORMATION SERVICES 80,342 80,342

143 0702806F ACQUISITION AND MANAGEMENT SUPPORT 12,132 10,919

144 0804776F ADVANCED DISTRIBUTED LEARNING..... 238 238

145 0901215F PRODUCTIVITY INVESTMENTS.......... 4,017 4,017

147 1001004F INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES.......... 4,514 4,514

148 0604222F NUCLEAR WEAPONS SUPPORT........... 10,029 10,029

149 0604233F SPECIALIZED UNDERGRADUATE FLIGHT 22,071 22,071

150 0604283F BATTLE MGMT COM & CTRL SENSOR 44,187 44,187

152 0604840F F-35 C2D2......................... 1,128,748 1,138,748

153 0605018F AF INTEGRATED PERSONNEL AND PAY 31,777 31,777

154 0605024F ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY EXECUTIVE 130,610 117,549

155 0605117F FOREIGN MATERIEL ACQUISITION AND 4,676 4,676

156 0605229F HH-60W............................ 87,881 87,881

157 0605278F HC/MC-130 RECAP RDT&E............. 34,932 34,932

158 0606018F NC3 INTEGRATION................... 36,521 36,521

159 0101113F B-52 SQUADRONS.................... 1,478,648 1,478,648

160 0101122F AIR-LAUNCHED CRUISE MISSILE (ALCM) 570 570

161 0101126F B-1B SQUADRONS.................... 273,552 273,552

162 0101127F B-2 SQUADRONS..................... 418,178 398,178

163 0101213F MINUTEMAN SQUADRONS............... 79,313 79,313

164 0101316F WORLDWIDE JOINT STRATEGIC 44,424 44,424

165 0101318F SERVICE SUPPORT TO STRATCOM-- 56,203 56,203

166 0101328F ICBM REENTRY VEHICLES............. 733,182 733,182

168 0102110F MH-139A........................... 7,046 7,046

169 0102326F REGION/SECTOR OPERATION CONTROL 709 709

171 0202834F AVIATION SUPPORT EQUIPMENT-- 1,028 1,028

172 0203345F OPERATIONS SECURITY (OPSEC)....... 45,000 45,000

173 0205219F MQ-9 UAV.......................... 16,723 16,723

174 0205671F JOINT COUNTER RCIED ELECTRONIC 2,816 2,816

176 0207133F F-16 SQUADRONS.................... 527,739 527,739

177 0207134F F-15E SQUADRONS................... 322,889 322,889

178 0207136F MANNED DESTRUCTIVE SUPPRESSION.... 8,128 8,128

179 0207138F F-22A SQUADRONS................... 950,375 950,375

180 0207142F F-35 SQUADRONS.................... 47,388 47,388

181 0207146F F-15EX............................ 133,274 133,274

182 0207161F TACTICAL AIM MISSILES............. 98,861 93,975

183 0207163F ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR-TO-AIR 53,277 53,277

184 0207172F JOINT ADVANCED TACTICAL MISSILE 500,422 500,422

187 0207242F SPECIAL PROGRAM APPLICATIONS...... 35,149 35,149

188 0207247F AF TENCAP......................... 50,913 50,913

189 0207249F PRECISION ATTACK SYSTEMS 14,602 14,602

190 0207253F COMPASS CALL...................... 66,514 66,514

191 0207268F AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT 205,938 205,938

192 0207325F JOINT AIR-TO-SURFACE STANDOFF 133,092 133,092

193 0207327F SMALL DIAMETER BOMB (SDB)......... 25,497 25,497

194 0207410F AIR & SPACE OPERATIONS CENTER 158,871 142,984

195 0207412F CONTROL AND REPORTING CENTER (CRC) 18,137 18,137

196 0207418F AFSPECWAR--TACP................... 5,206 5,206

198 0207431F COMBAT AIR INTELLIGENCE SYSTEM 33,700 33,700

199 0207438F THEATER BATTLE MANAGEMENT (TBM) 7,014 7,014

200 0207439F ELECTROMAGNETIC WARFARE INT REPROG 73,523 73,523

202 0207452F DCAPES............................ 5,254 5,254

203 0207457F AIR FORCE SPECIAL WARFARE 24,423 24,423

204 0207461F FLIGHT OPERATIONS SYSTEMS......... 15,978 15,978

205 0207521F AIR FORCE CALIBRATION PROGRAMS.... 2,220 2,220

207 0207590F SEEK EAGLE........................ 36,710 36,710

208 0207611F READINESS DECISION SUPPORT 6,823 6,823

209 0207697F DISTRIBUTED TRAINING AND EXERCISES 83,659 73,659

210 0207701F FULL COMBAT MISSION TRAINING...... 6,644 28,644

211 0208006F MISSION PLANNING SYSTEMS.......... 122,175 109,958

212 0208007F TACTICAL DECEPTION................ 48,857 43,972

213 0208087F DISTRIBUTED CYBER WARFARE 71,868 69,868

214 0208088F AF DEFENSIVE CYBERSPACE OPERATIONS 76,758 76,758

218 0208288F INTEL DATA APPLICATIONS........... 7,511 17,511

219 0301025F GEOBASE........................... 403 403

226 0301377F COUNTERING ADVANCED CONVENTIONAL 1,343 1,343

228 0301401F AF MULTI-DOMAIN NON-TRADITIONAL 2,754 2,754

229 0302015F E-4B NATIONAL AIRBORNE OPERATIONS 50,873 50,873

230 0302315F NON-KINETIC COUNTERMEASURE SUPPORT 4,024 4,024

233 0303131F MINIMUM ESSENTIAL EMERGENCY 254,837 254,837

234 0303133F HIGH FREQUENCY RADIO SYSTEMS...... 33,215 33,215

235 0303140F INFORMATION SYSTEMS SECURITY 117,658 117,658

236 0303248F ALL DOMAIN COMMON PLATFORM........ 71,312 71,312

238 0304100F STRATEGIC MISSION PLANNING & 89,663 89,663

239 0304109F THRESHER.......................... 109 109

242 0304260F AIRBORNE SIGINT ENTERPRISE........ 98,319 98,319

243 0304310F COMMERCIAL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS...... 1,713 1,713

246 0304784F LONG ENDURANCE--AIRBORNE ISR...... 16,570 16,570

249 0305022F ISR MODERNIZATION & AUTOMATION 16,188 16,188

250 0305099F GLOBAL AIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT 4,210 4,210

251 0305103F CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE......... 318 318

252 0305111F WEATHER SERVICE................... 29,331 29,331

253 0305114F AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL, APPROACH, AND 61,895 61,895

254 0305116F AERIAL TARGETS.................... 1,704 1,704

257 0305128F SECURITY AND INVESTIGATIVE 9,642 9,642

258 0305146F DEFENSE JOINT COUNTERINTELLIGENCE 2,469 2,469

259 0305155F THEATER NUCLEAR WEAPON STORAGE & 24,364 24,364

261 0305179F INTEGRATED BROADCAST SERVICE (IBS) 18,266 18,266

262 0305206F AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE SYSTEMS... 34,273 34,273

263 0305207F MANNED RECONNAISSANCE SYSTEMS..... 17,114 17,114

264 0305208F DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/SURFACE 85,365 85,365

266 0305221F NETWORK-CENTRIC COLLABORATIVE 9,146 9,146

268 0305240F ISR TRANSPORT AND PROCESSING...... 312,037 277,037

269 0305249F AF JWICS ENTERPRISE............... 19,324 19,324

270 0305600F INTERNATIONAL INTELLIGENCE 62,000 62,000

271 0305836F C2IMERA........................... 11,393 11,393

272 0305903F COCOM MOBILE COMMAND AND CONTROL 2,013 2,013

273 0305984F PERSONNEL RECOVERY COMMAND & CTRL 1,783 1,783

274 0307577F INTELLIGENCE MISSION DATA (IMD)... 3,151 3,151

275 0401119F C-5 AIRLIFT SQUADRONS (IF)........ 76,233 76,233

276 0401130F C-17 AIRCRAFT (IF)................ 178,130 198,130

277 0401132F C-130J PROGRAM.................... 16,628 16,628

278 0401134F LARGE AIRCRAFT IR COUNTERMEASURES 12,323 12,323

279 0401218F KC-135S........................... 121,742 141,742

280 0401318F CV-22............................. 45,699 45,699

281 0401334F LARGE AIRCRAFT SURVIVABILITY 50,111 50,111

283 0708610F LOGISTICS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 21,518 21,518

284 0801380F AF LVC OPERATIONAL TRAINING (LVC- 23,472 23,472

285 0804743F OTHER FLIGHT TRAINING............. 1,950 1,950

286 0901202F JOINT PERSONNEL RECOVERY AGENCY... 2,035 2,035

287 0901218F CIVILIAN COMPENSATION PROGRAM..... 4,248 4,248

288 0901220F PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION.......... 2,678 2,678

289 0901226F AIR FORCE STUDIES AND ANALYSIS 81,252 65,002

291 0901538F FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT INFORMATION 3,316 3,316

292 0901554F DEFENSE ENTERPRISE ACNTNG AND MGT 38,301 38,301

293 1201921F SERVICE SUPPORT TO STRATCOM--SPACE 700 700

293A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS............... 29,113,107 29,113,107

001 0601102SF DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES......... 20,833 20,833

002 0601103SF UNIVERSITY RESEARCH INITIATIVES... 14,426 14,426

004 1206601SF SPACE TECHNOLOGY.................. 234,190 256,690

005 1206310SF SPACE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 313,738 313,738

006 1206616SF SPACE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 126,427 139,927

007 0604002SF SPACE FORCE WEATHER SERVICES 3,581 6,581

008 1203010SF SPACE FORCE IT, DATA ANALYTICS, 45,971 45,971

010 1203622SF SPACE WARFIGHTING ANALYSIS........ 128,546 128,546

011 1203710SF EO/IR WEATHER SYSTEMS............. 144,434 144,434

012 1203955SF SPACE ACCESS, MOBILITY & LOGISTICS 9,724 9,724

013 1206410SF SPACE TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT AND 1,246,316 1,246,316

014 1206427SF SPACE SYSTEMS PROTOTYPE 87,730 87,730

015 1206438SF SPACE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY.......... 62,031 62,031

016 1206458SF TECH TRANSITION (SPACE)........... 241,056 241,056

017 1206617SF OPERATIONAL TEST & TRAINING 265,215 265,215

018 1206730SF SPACE SECURITY AND DEFENSE PROGRAM 102,140 102,140

019 1206760SF PROTECTED TACTICAL ENTERPRISE 155,885 155,885

020 1206761SF PROTECTED TACTICAL SERVICE (PTS).. 449,434 449,434

022 1206857SF SPACE RAPID CAPABILITIES OFFICE... 9,950 9,950

023 1206862SF TACTICALLY RESPONSIVE SPACE....... 86,306 86,306

024 1203269SF GPS III FOLLOW-ON (GPS IIIF)...... 123,793 123,793

025 1206421SF COUNTERSPACE SYSTEMS.............. 43,702 43,702

026 1206422SF WEATHER SYSTEM FOLLOW-ON.......... 34,756 34,756

027 1206425SF SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS SYSTEMS. 1,317,841 1,317,841

028 1206431SF ADVANCED EHF MILSATCOM (SPACE).... 10,157 10,157

030 1206440SF NEXT-GEN OPIR--GROUND............. 761,425 761,425

031 1206442SF NEXT GENERATION OPIR.............. 209,851 209,851

032 1206443SF NEXT-GEN OPIR--GEO................ 485,703 485,703

033 1206444SF NEXT-GEN OPIR--POLAR.............. 415,000

034 1206445SF COMMERCIAL SATCOM (COMSATCOM) 68,554 68,554

035 1206446SF RESILIENT MISSILE WARNING MISSILE 3,564,176 3,564,176

036 1206447SF RESILIENT MISSILE WARNING MISSILE 1,413,662 1,413,662

037 1206771SF COMMERCIAL SERVICES............... 23,752 73,752

038 1206853SF NATIONAL SECURITY SPACE LAUNCH 2,748 2,748

039 1206855SF EVOLVED STRATEGIC SATCOM (ESS).... 1,838,718 1,838,718

042 1206392SF ACQ WORKFORCE--SPACE & MISSILE 260,731 260,731

043 1206398SF SPACE & MISSILE SYSTEMS CENTER-- 13,717 13,717

044 1206399SF SSC ENTERPRISE ENGINEERING & 230,848 230,848

045 1206759SF MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT--SPACE....... 65,731 65,731

046 1206860SF ROCKET SYSTEMS LAUNCH PROGRAM 19,965 19,965

047 1206864SF SPACE TEST PROGRAM (STP).......... 29,598 29,598

049 1201212SF SERVICE-WIDE SUPPORT (NOT 28,425 28,425

051 1203040SF DCO-SPACE......................... 481,251 481,251

052 1203109SF NARROWBAND SATELLITE 855,860 855,860

053 1203110SF SATELLITE CONTROL NETWORK (SPACE). 92,537 92,537

054 1203154SF LONG RANGE KILL CHAINS............ 1,392,025 1,392,025

055 1203155SF SPACE-BASED MOVING TARGET 253,355 253,355

056 1203156SF DATA TRANSPORT AND NETWORKING..... 164,974 164,974

057 1203165SF NAVSTAR GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM 115,000 115,000

058 1203173SF SPACE AND MISSILE TEST AND 22,487 22,487

059 1203174SF SPACE INNOVATION, INTEGRATION AND 10,538 10,538

060 1203182SF SPACELIFT RANGE SYSTEM (SPACE).... 56,781 56,781

061 1203330SF SPACE SUPERIORITY ISR............. 64,290 64,290

064 1203906SF NCMC--ITW/AA SYSTEM............... 25,092 25,092

065 1203909SF BALLISTIC MISSILE EARLY WARNING 128,630 128,630

066 1203913SF NUDET DETECTION SYSTEM (SPACE).... 114,004 114,004

067 1203940SF SPACE SITUATION AWARENESS 294,902 294,902

068 1206423SF GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM III-- 332,313 332,313

072 1206772SF RAPID RESILIENT COMMAND AND 109,190 109,190

073 1207440SF AUTOMATE SAT C2................... 1,524,300 804,900

074 1208053SF JOINT TACTICAL GROUND SYSTEM...... 92,731 92,731

074A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS............... 17,330,381 17,330,381

075 1208248SF SPACE DOMAIN AWARENESS/PLANNING/ 617,062 631,062

001 0601000BR DTRA BASIC RESEARCH............... 15,070 15,070

003 0601108D8Z HIGH ENERGY LASER RESEARCH 17,667 17,667

004 0601110D8Z BASIC RESEARCH INITIATIVES........ 87,091 97,091

006 0601120D8Z NATIONAL DEFENSE EDUCATION PROGRAM 165,488 215,488

007 0601122E EMERGING OPPORTUNITIES............ 387,633 387,633

008 0601228D8Z HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND 99,706 125,706

009 0601384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE 27,425 27,425

011 0602000D8Z JOINT MUNITIONS TECHNOLOGY........ 32,145 32,145

012 0602023E ACCESS AND AWARENESS.............. 110,096 110,096

013 0602024E WARFIGHTING PERFORMANCE........... 364,141 364,141

014 0602025E MAKING, MAINTAINING, SUPPLY CHAIN 1,624,523 1,624,523

017 0602128D8Z PROMOTION AND PROTECTION 4,260 4,260

018 0602230D8Z DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION..... 43,405 43,405

019 0602234D8Z LINCOLN LABORATORY RESEARCH 10,045 18,045

020 0602251D8Z APPLIED RESEARCH FOR THE 59,560 59,560

022 0602384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE 207,186 197,186

023 0602668D8Z CYBER SECURITY RESEARCH........... 18,575 23,575

029 0602718BR COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS 157,287 157,287

030 0602751D8Z SOFTWARE ENGINEERING INSTITUTE 7,069 7,069

031 0602890D8Z HIGH ENERGY LASER RESEARCH........ 50,408 50,408

032 0602891D8Z FSRM MODELLING.................... 6,635 6,635

033 1160401BB SOF TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT........ 50,856 55,856

034 0603000D8Z JOINT MUNITIONS ADVANCED 64,251 64,251

036 0603055D8Z OPERATIONAL ENERGY CAPABILITY 165,060 205,060

038 0603122D8Z COMBATING TERRORISM TECHNOLOGY 73,618 323,618

039 0603133D8Z FOREIGN COMPARATIVE TESTING....... 24,950 24,950

040 0603142D8Z MISSION ENGINEERING & INTEGRATION 144,454 144,454

041 0603160BR COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS 509,160 509,160

043 0603180C ADVANCED RESEARCH................. 482,573 545,573

044 0603183D8Z JOINT HYPERSONIC TECHNOLOGY 424,422 454,422

045 0603225D8Z JOINT DOD-DOE MUNITIONS TECHNOLOGY 45,375 45,375

048 0603288D8Z ANALYTIC ASSESSMENTS.............. 36,917 36,917

049 0603289D8Z ADVANCED INNOVATIVE ANALYSIS AND 51,960 51,960

050 0603330D8Z QUANTUM APPLICATION............... 60,333 60,333

051 0603331D8Z FUTURE GENERATION WIRELESS 5,000 5,000

052 0603342D8Z DEFENSE INNOVATION UNIT (DIU)..... 522,559 540,559

053 0603375D8Z TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION............. 982,694 917,694

054 0603379D8Z ADVANCED TECHNICAL INTEGRATION.... 79,268 79,268

055 0603384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE 310,308 310,308

056 0603467E DARPA ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 1,568,124 1,568,124

057 0603468E ADVANCED COMPLEX SYSTEMS.......... 540,362 540,362

058 0603469E ADVANCED ENABLING TECHNOLOGIES.... 331,007 331,007

059 0603618D8Z JOINT ELECTRONIC ADVANCED 49,083 49,083

060 0603662D8Z NETWORKED COMMUNICATIONS 696,297 661,297

062 0603680D8Z DEFENSE-WIDE MANUFACTURING SCIENCE 581,847 599,347

063 0603680S MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.. 49,787 52,287

064 0603712S GENERIC LOGISTICS R&D TECHNOLOGY 18,791 18,791

065 0603716D8Z STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH 60,774 60,774

066 0603720S MICROELECTRONICS TECHNOLOGY 139,923 139,923

072 0603781D8Z SOFTWARE ENGINEERING INSTITUTE.... 10,227 10,227

073 0603834D8Z BIOSURVEILLANCE PROGRAM ADVANCED 9,800 9,800

074 0603838D8Z DEFENSE INNOVATION ACCELERATION 310,977 293,477

075 0603924D8Z HIGH ENERGY LASER ADVANCED 201,125 206,125

076 0603941D8Z TEST & EVALUATION SCIENCE & 3,834,080 3,580,302

077 0603945D8Z INTERNATIONAL INNOVATION 158,345 154,345

080 1160402BB SOF ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 126,085 126,085

081 0603161D8Z NUCLEAR MATTERS, ADVANCED 44,685 44,685

082 0603600D8Z WALKOFF........................... 227,158 227,158

083 0603851D8Z ENVIRONMENTAL SECURITY TECHNICAL 125,066 125,066

085 0603882C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 1,360,611 1,360,611

086 0603884BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE 391,307 391,307

087 0603884C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE SENSORS. 865,420 868,420

088 0603890C BMD ENABLING PROGRAMS............. 1,457,437 1,180,437

089 0603891C SPECIAL PROGRAMS--MDA............. 1,742,778 1,742,778

090 0603892C AEGIS BMD......................... 927,870 979,870

091 0603896C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE COMMAND 939,987 939,987

092 0603898C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE JOINT 50,430 50,430

093 0603904C MISSILE DEFENSE INTEGRATION & 57,892 57,892

094 0603906C REGARDING TRENCH.................. 29,807 29,807

095 0603907C SEA BASED X-BAND RADAR (SBX)...... 274,204 274,204

096 0603913C ISRAELI COOPERATIVE PROGRAMS...... 300,000 300,000

097 0603914C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE TEST.... 1,065,474 1,065,474

098 0603915C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE TARGETS. 518,506 538,506

099 0603923D8Z COALITION WARFARE................. 10,082 10,082

101 0604016D8Z DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CORROSION 2,675 2,675

102 0604023D8Z JOINT MUNITIONS COMPONENT 7,893 7,893

103 0604102C GUAM DEFENSE DEVELOPMENT.......... 212,413 232,413

104 0604115C TECHNOLOGY MATURATION INITIATIVES. 59,700 84,700

106 0604125D8Z ADVANCED MANUFACTURING COMPONENTS 52,122 52,122

107 0604162D8Z CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS 945 945

108 0604181C HYPERSONIC DEFENSE................ 213,783 263,783

109 0604250D8Z ADVANCED INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES.. 2,626,130 2,626,130

110 0604294D8Z TRUSTED & ASSURED MICROELECTRONICS 156,743 159,243

111 0604331D8Z RAPID PROTOTYPING PROGRAM......... 238,800 308,800

114 0604400D8Z DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD) 2,024 2,024

115 0604539D8Z DEFENSE AUTONOMOUS WARFARE GROUP.. 1,000,000 1,000,000

116 0604551BR CATAPULT INFORMATION SYSTEM....... 7,500 7,500

117 0604555D8Z OPERATIONAL ENERGY PROTOTYPING-- 53,505 93,505

119 0604679D8Z OFFICE OF STRATEGIC CAPITAL (OSC). 18,955 18,955

120 0604682D8Z SUPPORT FOR STRATEGIC ANALYSIS.... 2,802 2,802

122 0604791D8Z MULTI-DOMAIN JOINT OPERATIONS 32,001 32,001

123 0604797D8Z JOINT ENERGETIC TRANSITION OFFICE. 6,278 6,278

124 0604826J JOINT C5 CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT, 28,314 28,314

125 0604834D8Z BIOSURVEILLANCE PROGRAM 7,000 7,000

126 0604873C LONG RANGE DISCRIMINATION RADAR 125,074 125,074

127 0604874C IMPROVED HOMELAND DEFENSE 1,344,824 1,344,824

129 0604878C AEGIS BMD TEST.................... 61,969 61,969

130 0604879C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE SENSOR 52,919 52,919

131 0604880C LAND-BASED SM-3 (LBSM3)........... 25,102 25,102

132 0604887C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 53,761 53,761

133 0604924D8Z HIGH ENERGY LASER ADVANCED 44,485 44,485

134 0202057C SAFETY PROGRAM MANAGEMENT......... 2,146 2,146

135 0208059JCY CYBERCOM ACTIVITIES............... 31,735 31,735

137 0208086JCY CYBER TRAINING ENVIRONMENT (CTE).. 120,814 111,814

139 0305103C CYBER SECURITY INITIATIVE......... 2,160 2,160

140 0305245D8Z INTELLIGENCE CAPABILITIES AND 15,047 15,047

142 1206895C BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM 95,819 95,819

144 0604123D8Z CHIEF DIGITAL AND ARTIFICIAL 11,197 11,197

145 0604133D8Z ALPHA-1 DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES.... 969,825 929,825

146 0604161D8Z NUCLEAR MATTERS, SYSTEM 14,919 14,919

147 0604384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE 261,947 234,447

148 0604771D8Z JOINT TACTICAL INFORMATION 10,200 10,200

149 0605000BR COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS 16,713 16,713

150 0605013BL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT 13,620 13,620

151 0605021SE HOMELAND PERSONNEL SECURITY 9,334 9,334

152 0605022D8Z DEFENSE EXPORTABILITY PROGRAM..... 5,943 5,943

153 0605027D8Z OUSD(C) IT DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES 273,253 268,253

154 0605080S DEFENSE AGENCY INITIATIVES (DAI)-- 51,265 51,265

156 0605210D8Z DEFENSE-WIDE ELECTRONIC 7,918 7,918

157 0605294D8Z TRUSTED & ASSURED MICROELECTRONICS 51,202 51,202

158 0605310D8Z MILITARY AVIATION AND INSTALLATION 4,072 4,072

159 0605649D8Z ACQUISITION INTEGRATION AND 92,689 92,689

160 0605755D8Z RADIOLOGICAL AND NUCLEAR DEFENSE 3,090 3,090

161 0605772D8Z NUCLEAR COMMAND, CONTROL, & 2,985 2,985

162 0205401JCA COUNTER--SMALL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT 580,348 580,348

164 0305282K JOINT FIRES NETWORK (JFN)......... 35,000 35,000

165 0305304D8Z REAL PROPERTY ANALYTICS........... 2,573 2,573

166 0305310D8Z COUNTERPROLIFERATION ADVANCED 12,751 12,751

168 0603829J JOINT CAPABILITY EXPERIMENTATION.. 12,332 12,332

169 0604122D8Z JADC2 DEVELOPMENT AND 2,109,895 2,079,895

171 0604774D8Z DEFENSE READINESS REPORTING SYSTEM 8,921 8,921

172 0604875D8Z JOINT SYSTEMS ARCHITECTURE 11,094 11,094

173 0604940D8Z CENTRAL TEST AND EVALUATION 1,153,754 1,113,754

175 0605001E MISSION SUPPORT................... 108,101 108,101

176 0605100D8Z JOINT MISSION ENVIRONMENT TEST 234,700 234,700

177 0605126J JOINT INTEGRATED AIR AND MISSILE 69,820 69,820

179 0605131D8Z LIVE FIRE TESTING................. 9,020 9,020

180 0605142D8Z SYSTEMS ENGINEERING............... 21,992 21,992

181 0605151D8Z STUDIES AND ANALYSIS SUPPORT--OSD. 5,255 5,255

182 0605161D8Z NUCLEAR MATTERS MANAGEMENT SUPPORT 21,862 21,862

183 0605170D8Z SUPPORT TO NETWORKS AND 26,878 26,878

184 0605200D8Z GENERAL SUPPORT TO 10,695 10,695

185 0605384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE 89,467 89,467

192 0605711D8Z CRITICAL TECHNOLOGY ANALYSIS...... 10,913 10,913

193 0605790D8Z SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH 8,435 8,435

194 0605797D8Z MAINTAINING TECHNOLOGY ADVANTAGE.. 35,512 35,512

195 0605798D8Z DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY ANALYSIS....... 165,450 165,450

196 0605801KA DEFENSE TECHNICAL INFORMATION 57,576 57,576

197 0605803SE R&D IN SUPPORT OF DOD ENLISTMENT, 34,359 34,359

198 0605804D8Z DEVELOPMENT TEST AND EVALUATION... 35,106 35,106

199 0605898E MANAGEMENT HQ--R&D................ 5,383 5,383

200 0605998KA MANAGEMENT HQ--DEFENSE TECHNICAL 3,489 3,489

201 0606005D8Z SPECIAL ACTIVITIES................ 19,260 19,260

202 0606100D8Z BUDGET AND PROGRAM ASSESSMENTS.... 10,678 10,678

203 0606114D8Z ANALYSIS WORKING GROUP (AWG) 11,668 11,668

205 0606220D8Z OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF WAR 75,000 77,000

206 0606225D8Z ODNA TECHNOLOGY AND RESOURCE 3,264 3,264

207 0606300D8Z DEFENSE SCIENCE BOARD............. 6,307 6,307

208 0606301D8Z AVIATION SAFETY TECHNOLOGIES...... 986 15,986

209 0606771D8Z CYBER RESILIENCY AND CYBERSECURITY 30,746 30,746

211 0606775D8Z JOINT PRODUCTION ACCELERATOR CELL 6,215 6,215

212 0606829D8Z SUSTAINMENT TRANSITION 29,408 29,408

215 0204571J JOINT STAFF ANALYTICAL SUPPORT.... 5,088 5,088

216 0207834D8Z BIOSURVEILLANCE PROGRAM........... 7,000 7,000

217 0208045K C4I INTEROPERABILITY.............. 72,581 72,581

218 0303169D8Z INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RAPID 6,416 6,416

219 0305172K COMBINED ADVANCED APPLICATIONS.... 5,566 5,566

221 0305208K DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND/SURFACE 2,951 2,951

222 0305248J JOINT STAFF OFFICE OF THE CHIEF 67,007 67,007

223 0804768J COCOM EXERCISE ENGAGEMENT AND 90,424 90,424

225 0808737SE INTEGRATED PRIMARY PREVENTION..... 5,768 5,768

226 0901598C MANAGEMENT HQ--MDA................ 31,863 31,863

228A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS............... 36,977 36,977

229 0604011D8Z NEXT GENERATION INFORMATION 5,893 5,893

231 0604538D8Z ECONOMIC DEFENSE UNIT (EDU)....... 403,903 403,903

232 0607162D8Z CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS 2,931 2,931

233 0607210D8Z INDUSTRIAL BASE ANALYSIS AND 1,177,356 1,234,856

234 0607310D8Z COUNTERPROLIFERATION MODERNIZATION 11,304 11,304

235 0607327T GLOBAL THEATER SECURITY 6,010 6,010

236 0607384BP CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE 82,695 82,695

237 0607385BR COUNTER WEAPONS OF MASS 4,108 9,108

238 0607757D8Z RADIOLOGICAL AND NUCLEAR DEFENSE 2,794 2,794

239 0208085JCY ROBUST INFRASTRUCTURE AND ACCESS.. 155,613 155,613

240 0208097JCY CYBER COMMAND AND CONTROL (CYBER 85,958 85,958

241 0208099JCY DATA AND UNIFIED PLATFORM (D&UP).. 84,687 84,687

245 0302019K DEFENSE INFO INFRASTRUCTURE 13,312 13,312

246 0302609V COUNTERING THREATS AUTOMATED 11,710 11,710

247 0303126K LONG-HAUL COMMUNICATIONS--DCS..... 10,508 10,508

248 0303131K MINIMUM ESSENTIAL EMERGENCY 10,307 10,307

250 0303140D8Z INFORMATION SYSTEMS SECURITY 35,214 35,214

252 0303140K INFORMATION SYSTEMS SECURITY 33,502 33,502

253 0303153K DEFENSE SPECTRUM ORGANIZATION..... 49,466 49,466

254 0303171K JOINT PLANNING AND EXECUTION 10,615 10,615

257 0303430V FEDERAL INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES 50,900 50,900

265 0305104D8Z DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL BASE (DIB) 17,077 17,077

269 0305146V DEFENSE JOINT COUNTERINTELLIGENCE 6,751 6,751

270 0305172D8Z COMBINED ADVANCED APPLICATIONS.... 18,912 18,912

272 0305186D8Z POLICY R&D PROGRAMS............... 11,740 11,740

275 0305199D8Z NET CENTRICITY.................... 55,673 55,673

282 0305387D8Z HOMELAND DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY 1,730 1,730

283 0305601K MISSION PARTNER ENVIRONMENTS...... 15,464 15,464

293 0306250JCY CYBER OPERATIONS TECHNOLOGY 1,303,094 1,308,094

294 0307609V NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY 19,840 19,840

297 0708012K LOGISTICS SUPPORT ACTIVITIES...... 2,051 2,051

298 0708012S PACIFIC DISASTER CENTERS.......... 2,500

299 0708047S DEFENSE PROPERTY ACCOUNTABILITY 2,829 2,829

302 1160403BB AVIATION SYSTEMS.................. 216,781 216,781

303 1160405BB INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.. 109,227 109,227

304 1160408BB OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS.......... 279,478 310,178

305 1160431BB WARRIOR SYSTEMS................... 435,074 468,108

306 1160432BB SPECIAL PROGRAMS.................. 25,761 25,761

309 1160483BB MARITIME SYSTEMS.................. 351,721 351,721

310 1160490BB OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS 25,747 40,747

311 1203610K TELEPORT PROGRAM.................. 22,244 22,244

311A 9999999999 CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS............... 8,923,353 9,102,253

312 0608140D8Z ENTERPRISE PLATFORMS AND 481,775 475,775

313 0608500D8Z WEAPONEERING CODE SUSTAINMENT..... 23,071 23,071

314 0608648D8Z ACQUISITION VISIBILITY--SOFTWARE 64,364 64,364

316 0608776D8Z DEFENSE INNOVATION UNIT FIELDING.. 433,867 430,867

317 0303150K GLOBAL COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEM. 124,329 124,329

009 0604139D8Z GOLDEN DOME FOR AMERICA--MDA...... 367,000 367,000

015 0901159D8Z GOLDEN DOME FOR AMERICA........... 30,971 30,971

001 0605118OTE OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION... 101,365 151,542

002 0605131OTE LIVE FIRE TEST AND EVALUATION..... 11,000 108,109

003 0605814OTE OPERATIONAL TEST ACTIVITIES AND 76,492

Line Item Request Authorized ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, ARMY..... 20,563 20,563

TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, NAVY..... 266,212 266,212

TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, AIR FORCE 4,440,414 4,440,414

TOTAL NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE 5,700 5,700

TRANSACTION FUND.....................

TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE- 1,273,760 873,760

WIDE.................................

TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL FUND, DEFENSE 1,501,344 1,501,344

COMMISSARY AGENCY....................

TOTAL CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS 55,972 55,972

DESTRUCTION, DEFENSE.................

TOTAL DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER- 918,002 921,002

DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEFENSE.............

TOTAL OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL 506,343 506,343

TOTAL COMBAT AND OPERATIONAL MEDICINE 20,341,643 20,591,243

PROGRAM..............................

TOTAL PRIVATE SECTOR CARE PROGRAM.... 22,175,472 22,175,472

TOTAL OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS........... 51,505,425 51,358,025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Energy And Water Development, And Related

Agencies

Appropriation Summary:

Nuclear Energy.......................... 160,000 160,000

Defense Uranium Enrichment D&D.......... 253,000 0

Atomic Energy Defense Activities

Total, National Nuclear Security 32,801,543 32,796,543

Administration...........................

Total, Environmental & other defense 8,168,039 8,379,039

activities...............................

Total, Atomic Energy Defense Activities... 40,969,582 41,175,582

Total, Discretionary Funding.............. 41,382,582 41,335,582

Idaho sitewide safeguards and security.... 160,000 160,000

Total, Nuclear Energy..................... 160,000 160,000

Defense Uranium Enrichment D&D Program.... 253,000 0

Program decrease........................ [-253,000]

Total, Defense Uranium Enrichment D&D..... 253,000 0

Stockpile Management

Stockpile Major Modernization

Total, Stockpile Major Modernization...... 3,213,899 3,263,899

Stockpile services

Subtotal, Stockpile Services.............. 3,243,651 3,243,651

Total, Stockpile Management............... 6,457,550 6,507,550

Production Modernization

Primary Capability Modernization

Subtotal, Los Alamos Plutonium 2,392,891 2,392,891

Modernization............................

Subtotal, Savannah River Plutonium 2,248,523 2,248,523

Modernization............................

Total, Plutonium Modernization............ 4,912,311 4,912,311

Total, High Explosives and Energetics..... 251,765 251,765

Total, Primary Capability Modernization... 5,164,076 5,164,076

Secondary Capability Modernization

Total, Secondary Capability Modernization. 2,018,546 2,093,546

Tritium and Defense Fuels Program

Total, Tritium and Defense Fuels Program.. 880,781 880,781

Non-Nuclear Capability Modernization

Total, Non-Nuclear Capability 449,008 449,008

Modernization............................

Capability Based Investments............ 203,163 203,163

Warhead Assembly Modernization.......... 47,965 47,965

18-D-680 Material Staging Capability, PX 22,500 42,500

Total, Production Modernization........... 8,786,039 8,881,039

Stockpile Research, Technology, and

Engineering

Assessment Science

Total, Assessment Science................. 1,504,309 1,504,309

Engineering

Total, Engineering........................ 335,043 335,043

Rapid & Advanced Capabilities........... 499,209 499,209

Inertial Confinement Fusion

Total, Inertial Confinement Fusion........ 913,736 913,736

Advanced Simulation and Computing....... 909,765 909,765

Weapon Technology and Manufacturing 405,413 405,413

Total, Stockpile Research, Technology, and 4,567,475 4,567,475

Engineering..............................

Infrastructure and Operations

Operations of facilities................ 1,752,310 1,752,310

Safety and environmental operations..... 217,902 217,902

Maintenance and repair of facilities.... 1,384,323 1,384,323

Recapitalization........................ 1,203,127 1,203,127

Construction:

Total, Construction....................... 203,700 203,700

Total, Infrastructure and operations...... 4,761,362 4,761,362

Secure transportation asset

Operations and equipment................ 443,075 443,075

Program direction....................... 143,996 143,996

Total, Secure transportation asset........ 587,071 587,071

Defense Nuclear Security

Operations and Maintenance.............. 1,305,793 1,305,793

Total, Defense nuclear security........... 1,305,793 1,305,793

Information technology and cybersecurity.. 935,000 935,000

Legacy contractor pensions................ 40,869 40,869

Total, Weapons Activities................. 27,441,159 27,586,159

Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Programs

Material management and minimization

Total, Material management & minimization. 265,804 265,804

Global material security

Total, Global material security........... 390,574 390,574

Nonproliferation and arms control....... 214,494 214,494

Defense nuclear nonproliferation R&D

Total, Defense nuclear nonproliferation 819,000 819,000

R&D......................................

Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation 1,689,872 1,689,872

Programs.................................

Nuclear counterterrorism and incident

Total, Nuclear Counterterrorism and 685,595 685,595

Incident Response Program................

Legacy contractor pensions................ 14,128 14,128

Total, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation... 2,389,595 2,389,595

Naval reactors operating.................. 1,551,574 1,551,574

Program direction......................... 71,841 71,841

Construction:

25-D-530 Naval Examination Acquisition 80,000 80,000

14-D-901 Spent Fuel Handling 691,953 541,953

Total, Construction....................... 771,953 621,953

Use of prior-year balances................ -1,676 -1,676

Total, Naval Reactors..................... 2,393,692 2,243,692

Program Direction......................... 577,097 577,097

Total, Federal Salaries And Expenses...... 577,097 577,097

Closure sites:

Closure sites administration............ 500 500

Richland:

River corridor and other cleanup 69,000 134,000

Central plateau remediation............. 795,124 795,124

Richland community and regulatory 12,000 12,000

Construction:........................... 0

Total, Construction--Richland............. 0 6,000

Total, Richland........................... 876,124 947,124

Office of River Protection:

Waste Treatment Immobilization Plant 466,000 466,000

Rad liquid tank waste stabilization and 984,000 984,000

Construction:

Total, Construction--Office of River 495,000 595,000

Protection ..............................

Total, Office of River Protection......... 1,945,000 2,045,000

Idaho National Laboratory:

Idaho cleanup and waste disposition..... 472,726 472,726

Idaho community and regulatory support.. 3,295 3,295

Total, Construction--Idaho................ 4,000 4,000

Total, Idaho National Laboratory.......... 480,021 480,021

NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.. 1,955 1,955

Nuclear facility D & D

Total, NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites.... 362,707 362,707

Oak Ridge Reservation:

OR Nuclear facility D & D............... 289,297 289,297

Total, OR Nuclear facility D & D.......... 289,297 289,297

U233 Disposition Program................ 70,000 70,000

OR cleanup and disposition.............. 85,800 85,800

Total, Construction--Oak Ridge............ 57,828 57,828

Total, OR cleanup and waste disposition... 213,628 213,628

OR community & regulatory support....... 5,100 5,100

OR technology development and deployment 3,500 3,500

Total, Oak Ridge Reservation.............. 511,525 511,525

Savannah River Sites:

Savannah River risk management 465,620 465,620

Total, Savannah River Risk Management 465,620 465,620

Operations...............................

SR Community and Regulatory Support..... 5,450 5,450

Savannah River National Laboratory 90,719 90,719

Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste 1,066,000 1,106,000

Total, Construction--Savannah River sites. 82,500 82,500

Total, Savannah River sites............... 1,710,289 1,750,289

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant............. 400,020 400,020

Construction:

Total, Construction--Waste Isolation Pilot 72,000 72,000

Plant....................................

Total, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant........ 472,020 472,020

Program Direction......................... 297,318 297,318

Program Support........................... 20,320 20,320

Safeguards and Security................... 291,482 291,482

Technology Development and Deployment..... 16,012 16,012

Total, Defense Environmental Cleanup...... 6,983,318 7,194,318

Environment, health, safety and security

Program direction....................... 81,179 81,179

Environment, Health, Safety & Security.. 150,761 150,761

Total, Environment, Health, safety and 231,940 231,940

security.................................

Office of Enterprise Assessments

Program direction....................... 56,632 56,632

Enterprise Assessments.................. 32,183 32,183

Total, Office of Enterprise Assessments... 88,815 88,815

Specialized security activities........... 471,082 471,082

Office of Legacy Management

Legacy management....................... 177,716 177,716

Program direction....................... 22,670 22,670

Total, Office of Legacy Management........ 200,386 200,386

Defense-related administrative support.... 187,475 187,475

Office of hearings and appeals............ 5,023 5,023

Subtotal, Other Defense Activities........ 1,184,721 1,184,721

Total, Other Defense Activities........... 1,184,721 1,184,721 ------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Acting CHAIR. No further amendment to the bill, as amended, shall be in order except those printed in part A of House Report 119-755, amendments en bloc described in section 3 of House Resolution 1438, and pro forma amendments described in section 4 of that resolution.

Each further amendment printed in part A of House Report 119-755 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 1438, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question.

It shall be in order at any time for the chair of the Committee on Armed Services or his designee to offer amendments en bloc consisting of amendments printed in part A of House Report 119-755 not earlier disposed of. Amendments en bloc shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 40 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Armed Services or their designees, shall not be subject to amendment except as provided by section 4 of House Resolution 1438, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question.

During consideration of H.R. 8800 for amendment, the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Armed Services or their respective designees may offer up to 10 pro forma amendments each at any point for the purpose of debate.

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed in part A of House Report 119-755.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Chair, I rise as the designee of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy), and I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

The text of the amendment is as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Colorado.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of amendment No. 1. This amendment strikes section 1213 of the bill, which would delay the deadline for the Afghanistan War Commission's final report. Instead, it maintains the reporting deadline already established in current law.

The American people, our veterans, Gold Star families, and all who served in Afghanistan deserve timely answers. Congress created this commission to examine two decades of war, learn from our successes and failures, and ensure those lessons are not forgotten.

Delaying that work only postpones the accountability and transparency that the commission was created to provide. This amendment does not change the commission's mission. It does not alter its responsibilities. It simply ensures that the work Congress has already directed is completed on the timeline we originally required.

We owe it to those who served, those who sacrificed, and the American people to keep this important effort on track.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support amendment No. 1, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Jason CrowDemocrat, Colorado

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Colorado is recognized for 5 minutes.

Jason CrowDemocrat, Colorado

Mr. Chair, I understand my colleague's eagerness to conclude the Afghanistan War Commission's work and to have a full accounting of our Nation's longest war, a war that spanned 20 years, trillions of dollars, millions of combat tours, thousands of American lives lost, tens of thousands of American lives and families forever altered.

I do not want a half measure. I do not want an accounting that is not full and complete. When this body, when this Congress, and the Armed Services Committee created the Afghanistan War Commission years ago on a bipartisan basis, we structured this to be a full and complete accounting. Both sides appointed their Members. We have a Republican co-chair and a Democratic co-chair.

The work of this commission has been impressive so far: over 350 interviews, tens of thousands of documents reviewed, and field hearings across this Nation.

The work is not yet complete. Both the Republicans on the commission and the Democrats on the commission say as much. They need another year to make sure that it presents a clear picture of the things we did right and the things we did wrong so that we are not condemned to repeat the same mistakes from the past, as the saying goes.

Yes, I want a timely result. The thousands of Americans who gave their lives and the tens of thousands who stepped up to serve deserve a full and complete accounting of what happened and, ultimately, what went wrong.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment and make sure that we have the time necessary to have the complete story so we can fix it, do it better, and ensure that this never happens again.

Mr. Chair, I implore my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Chairman, as was stated, this war was two decades. I don't believe the commission needs two decades to complete its work.

Mr. Chairman, I urge support of my colleagues for this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Jason CrowDemocrat, Colorado

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers), the chairman of the Armed Services Committee.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chair, Congress established the Afghanistan War Commission to provide the American people with accountability and transparency after 20 years of war that claimed nearly 2,500 American servicemembers.

The commission has interviewed hundreds of senior leaders across four administrations and reviewed thousands of sensitive records.

While the commission has completed a first draft of its report, government shutdowns and delays in accessing certain agency records have made a 1-year extension necessary.

I share the desire for accountability, but we don't get it if the commission is forced to turn in an incomplete product. This extension will ensure the commission's work is complete and accurate.

Mr. Chair, I urge all Members to oppose the amendment, respectfully.

Jason CrowDemocrat, Colorado

Mr. Chair, once again, the work of this commission has been incredible. We are not asking for 20 years. We are not asking for 2 years. We are asking for a 1-year extension so that the Republicans and the Democrats who have dedicated their time to a full and thorough accounting of our Nation's longest war can do so on a professional and bipartisan basis.

We have heard from the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee whose leadership helped establish this commission, as well. We need to do this right. The men and women who made the ultimate sacrifice and their families deserve all the answers and all the accountability. An additional 1-year extension is necessary to complete that.

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado will be postponed.

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed in part A of House Report number 119-755.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer amendment No. 2 as the designee for Mr. Roy.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

The text of the amendment is as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Colorado.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Chair, I rise in support of amendment No. 2.

America's military service academies have a clear and important mission: to educate, train, and prepare the next generation of officers who will lead our Armed Forces.

Admission to these institutions is highly competitive, and every available appointment represents a significant investment by the American taxpayer. This amendment ensures that those limited opportunities are reserved for American citizens who are preparing to serve our country in uniform.

Our first responsibility must be to young Americans who are willing to swear an oath to the Constitution and commit themselves to the defense of this Nation. Our service academies should remain focused on producing American military leaders for the American Armed Forces.

I urge my colleagues to support amendment No. 2. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Chrissy HoulahanDemocrat, Pennsylvania

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 minutes.

Chrissy HoulahanDemocrat, Pennsylvania

Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise in opposition to this amendment. This amendment would, indeed, eliminate one of the most successful and the very least expensive national security investments the United States has ever made.

Since as far back as 1863, our service academies have welcomed a small number of exceptional international cadets and midshipmen to study alongside America's future military leaders, and the results have been extraordinary.

Those students return home to become generals, chiefs of defense, ambassadors, and senior government officials in their own lands. They leave with lifelong relationships with the Americans that they trained with, alongside, and a firsthand understanding of the American military professionalism, civilian control of the military, and the very values that define our armed services. Those relationships matter.

In moments of crisis, nations do not simply rely on treaties, they rely on trust, and trust is built between people long before it is tested between governments. This program, indeed, builds that trust. It does so for roughly 60 students per service academy each year.

This isn't charity. It is strategy. We educate the future military leaders from allied nations, and we also send our own cadets and midshipmen overseas to study as well. Both sides built on trust, both sides better officers. America is safer because of it.

Show me another defense investment that creates future allies, strengthens military-to-military relationships around the world, and expands American influence for the cost of educating a couple hundred students. You won't find one.

Supporters of this amendment claim that they are putting America first, and I disagree. America leads because other nations choose to train with us, to fight alongside of us, and to learn from us.

Choosing isolation over influence does not make America stronger. It makes America smaller.

If Members are concerned about capacity at these service academies, then let's expand that capacity and fund additional cadets or more ROTC, create more opportunities for more Americans to serve, but do not dismantle a program that has quietly strengthened American national security for generations.

That is not a stronger defense--it is a weaker one--and yet another example of how undervalued and misunderstood American soft power is by this administration.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Chrissy HoulahanDemocrat, Pennsylvania

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers), the esteemed chairman of the Armed Services Committee.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chair, this amendment strikes a provision that prohibits the enrollment of Chinese, Russian, Iranian, and North Korean students at our military academies and replaces it with an outright ban on all foreign students, including our allies.

The fact is, there is tremendous benefit in having our cadets study and train alongside cadets of our allies and partners.

Furthermore, the law requires that allies who send students must pay the full tuition and room and board expenses so that the U.S. taxpayer is not paying a dime for those foreign students.

The law also requires these students to be vetted by Homeland Security, State, and DOW to ensure they are not a threat. Finally, the law caps the number of accepted so that no Americans are displaced by the foreign students.

The underlying bill already codifies the prohibition of those students from our adversaries. We shouldn't extend that prohibition to our allies. As such, I oppose this amendment.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Chairman, this is an example of what the American people are frustrated with right now. We have a majority here. The American people gave Republicans a trifecta, and every time that Republicans step up to put America first, to make our industries, our military, our economy stronger, we side with Democrats to limit those capabilities.

I have talked with Americans from coast to coast. From our southern border to our northern border, from the heartland of America to the Rocky Mountains, people want us to do the right thing and put Americans first.

This is a commonsense amendment that reserves these special, limited opportunities for American citizens. Our service academies, again, should remain focused on producing American military leaders for the American Armed Forces.

When we see this kind of behavior of crossing the aisle to limit these possibilities for Americans, it is exactly why people back home watch us here on the House floor and get frustrated. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Chrissy HoulahanDemocrat, Pennsylvania

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. Elfreth), my friend and colleague and fellow member of the Armed Services Committee.

Sarah ElfrethDemocrat, Maryland

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment that would prohibit international students from attending our United States military academies, including the United States Naval Academy in Annapolis where I have the privilege of representing.

Mr. Chair, this shortsighted, isolationist amendment would have a serious negative impact on U.S. foreign partnerships with allied and friendly forces. For decades, foreign military officers have attended the United States military service academies with strong bipartisan support. This program actually makes our military and our national security stronger.

Thousands of these officers have gone on to serve as reliable military partners to their U.S. counterparts and strengthen diplomatic and military ties.

Let's be clear: American students benefit just as much. They benefit from this program by gaining experience working with officers from allied nations in a controlled environment before entering a coalition operation.

In fact, U.S. officers are more confident in partnering with international counterparts who graduated from the academies, as they share a common education in military strategy and doctrine.

International students also only occupy a very limited number of positions. Only 1 percent of midshipmen are international students.

The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.

Chrissy HoulahanDemocrat, Pennsylvania

Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Maryland.

Sarah ElfrethDemocrat, Maryland

This means these students do not impact the opportunities for qualified American counterparts. Again, the countries sending these international students foot the entire bill. This is not on U.S. taxpayers.

As Russia and China actively educate foreign military officers to expand their influence, the U.S. needs to maintain this program so that partner nations don't seek an education elsewhere.

Fundamentally, this amendment is misguided. It is xenophobic, and it does not understand the utility and value of educating international students. Every future allied chief of defense who trained in the U.S. is a strategic asset that would be nearly impossible to replicate through diplomacy alone. That is the true intent and value of the program.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Chairman, again, I urge my colleagues to support Chip Roy's amendment No. 2, and put American cadets first. I yield back the balance of my time.

Chrissy HoulahanDemocrat, Pennsylvania

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado will be postponed.

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 printed in part A of House Report 119-755.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer amendment No. 3 as the designee for Mr. Roy.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

The text of the amendment is as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Colorado.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of amendment No. 1300.

Our Nation's military service academies exist to develop officers for the United States Armed Forces.

Every cadet and midshipman receives a world-class education funded by the American taxpayer in exchange for a commitment to serve our country.

This amendment restores a longstanding cap on the number of cadets who may be released early to pursue professional athletics. Exceptional athletic talent is something we certainly should celebrate, but the primary mission of our service academies is military service, not professional sports.

This amendment helps ensure that early releases remain the exception, not the rule. It preserves the longstanding balance our service academies have maintained for years. Our military academies should remain focused on preparing leaders of character for our military, as Congress intended.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support amendment No. 1300 offered by Chip Roy of Texas, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers).

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chair, President Trump has made it a priority to ensure that our cadets and midshipmen are treated like other college athletes and are able to compete on a level playing field with other Division I universities.

The current statutory limit of five slots per year for cadets and midshipmen to ``go pro'' is burdensome and prevents superior athletes from choosing to attend a service academy.

These folks will still need to satisfy the 5-year service obligation in the Reserves where they will be an effective recruiting force for our military academies. As such, I respectfully oppose this amendment.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I associate myself with the remarks of Chairman Rogers. I agree with his reasons for opposing it. I urge the body to oppose it.

Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado will be postponed.

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 printed in part A of House Report 119-755.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Chair, I rise as the designee of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy), and I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

The text of the amendment is as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Colorado.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of my colleague Chip Roy's amendment No. 1301.

This amendment strikes the pilot program that would authorize voice analysis technology as a substitute for additional drug testing.

Our Armed Forces rely on proven standards to ensure military readiness, maintain good order and discipline, and uphold public confidence. Traditional drug testing has long served as a reliable and established tool in meeting these objectives. Before replacing a proven system with a new and untested technology, Congress should be confident that the alternative has demonstrated the same level of reliability and effectiveness.

This amendment takes a straightforward approach. It maintains the current standard rather than authorizing a pilot program to substitute for traditional drug testing. Our military deserves policies built on proven methods, not unnecessary experimentation.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support amendment No. 1301, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Pat HarriganRepublican, North Carolina

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina is recognized for 5 minutes.

Pat HarriganRepublican, North Carolina

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition today to the Roy amendment. Section 518 is a limited, responsible pilot. It authorizes, but does not require, the Secretary of War to test a risk- informed approach to drug testing, using voice-based assessment to help target where physical testing is actually warranted. It does not replace it. It stays inside the existing Drug Demand Reduction Program, it comes with privacy protections, a report back to this committee within 1 year, and it sunsets automatically with no action after 3 years. This amendment would kill that pilot before the Department ever has the chance to evaluate it.

The Department of War spends roughly $120 million a year on drug testing and burns more than 4.6 million servicemember hours doing it, even though only a small fraction of tests ever come back positive. A risk-informed approach could return millions of those hours to training and mission execution and save the taxpayers tens of millions of dollars a year. This is not about weakening drug testing. The statute requires the pilot to preserve deterrence, readiness, and good order and discipline. It is about testing whether we can apply our standards more intelligently instead of spreading the same blunt process across a force that is overwhelmingly clean.

This is a readiness issue. It is a taxpayer issue, and it is a servicemember dignity issue all at once. The Roy amendment defends an expensive, outdated status quo over a cautious, measurable pilot that has built-in oversight. Congress should be encouraging this kind of disciplined modernization, not blocking it before the Department of War ever gets the data.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment and preserve section 518.

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado will be postponed.

The Acting CHAIR. The Chair understands that amendment 5 will not be offered.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 1438, I offer amendments en bloc.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.

Amendments en bloc No. 1 consisting of amendment Nos. 10, 11, 13, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25, 29, 31, 32, 33, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, and 104 printed in part A of House Report 119-755, offered by Mr. Rogers of Alabama.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith) each will control 20 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alabama.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chairman, at this time I reserve the balance of my time.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum).

Betty McCollumDemocrat, Minnesota

Mr. Chair, I thank the ranking member for yielding.

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendments in en bloc No. 2 which would reauthorize the Defense Production Act for 5 years.

This administration has shown exactly how it intends to use the Defense Production Act authorities, to preempt State and local law, to bypass Tribal consultation, and to take equity stakes in mining companies when it benefits the administration's allies and some family members.

As a former State legislator, I am particularly concerned about the administration's weaponization of the Defense Production Act to override State and local laws, laws that are enacted to protect our communities.

The Defense Production Act is an important tool for the Department of Defense to work with our industrial base to meet our national security needs, and it does not mean Congress should reauthorize sweeping emergency powers without real guardrails.

We need language that protects Tribal consultation, prohibits the waiving of environmental law, and institutes strong oversight in anticorruption measures.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment. I thank the House for its patience with the issue I was having with my throat.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chairman, at this time I have no speakers, and I urge adoption of the en bloc package. I yield back the balance of my time.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chair, I too have no speakers and also urge adoption of the en bloc package. I yield back the balance of my time.

André CarsonDemocrat, Indiana

Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of my amendments to H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027, Carson Amendments No. 95 and No. 96. Both amendments are included in a bipartisan En Bloc.

My first amendment, Carson Amendment No. 95, is straightforward. It requires the Department of Defense to prepare a report for Congress and the public on the impact of research funded through the Congressionally Directed Medicat Research Programs, or CDMRP. The report would show how CDMRP-funded research is making a real-world impact for service members, veterans, and the American people.

It would also identify promising research that is ready to move into clinical or operational use, and where those breakthroughs may be getting stuck. That matters because a discovery only fulfills its promise when it reaches the people who can benefit from it. This report would give Congress better information to clear bottlenecks and strengthen the path from research to treatment.

This kind of report matters because CDMRP sits at the intersection of military health needs and broader medical progress. It supports medical research nationwide on serious health challenges tied closely to service, including brain injuries and toxic exposures. It also complements the work of the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Veterans Affairs by supporting innovative research that may not fit neatly into other federal programs.

Those investments are already delivering results. CDMRP-supported research has advanced work on brain injury, toxic-exposure-related respiratory conditions, and other military health challenges. Its cutting-edge work on orthotics and prosthetics has also helped injured warfighters regain mobility and independence.

But because this program is so important, Congress needs a clearer picture of its full impact. We should know which projects are improving care and strengthening military readiness. We should also know which discoveries are ready for broader clinical or operational use.

That is what my amendment is designed to do. It gives Congress and the public a better view of CDMRP's value, and what is needed to move more medical breakthroughs into care. It also gives the military community, advocates, and the public a clearer view of what these investments are achieving. That kind of transparency can build even more support for this exemplary program.

This amendment is about making a strong program even stronger by giving Congress better information about what is working and how more promising discoveries can reach the people who need them. The CDMRP has a proven record of supporting high-impact medical research. It deserves our continued support, and it deserves careful oversight that helps good programs deliver even more.

My second amendment, Amendment No. 96, applies the same principle of public transparency to military artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence is transforming warfare. It can help our armed forces move faster, understand threats sooner, and protect our country in a more dangerous world. That matters, especially as we face growing threats and strategic competition with China.

But we also need to be honest about the risks. We should not pass weapons of war to algorithms without human judgment, oversight, and accountability.

This bill takes an important step by requiring the Department of Defense to update how it manages these systems. But that work should not happen behind closed doors alone. If the military is developing policies for AI-enabled weapons, the public needs to know what rules and safeguards are being put in place.

My amendment does that in a careful way. It requires DoD to share a public summary of how these systems are being approved and overseen, while protecting classified information and sensitive military operations. That means more transparency for the American people, without compromising national security.

The public deserves to understand how these powerful systems are evolving, and how the military plans to use them. Americans deserve a voice in this debate, and they cannot have that voice if basic facts are locked behind closed doors.

I urge my colleagues to support these amendments through the bipartisan En Bloc.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered by the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers).

The en bloc amendments were agreed to.

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6 printed in part A of House Report 119-755.

Wesley HuntRepublican, Texas

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

The text of the amendment is as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hunt) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.

Wesley HuntRepublican, Texas

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, as a West Point graduate and Army combat veteran, I begin by thanking the members of the Armed Services Committee. They have put forth legislation that protects our troops and helps ensure the United States remains ahead of its adversaries. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to offer my amendments today.

From my time in uniform, I know firsthand that the brave men and women who raise their hands to defend this country are the backbone of our military. Especially with the conflict in Iran today, I am grateful more than ever that our sons and daughters are keeping us safe here at home and abroad.

Another essential pillar of military strength is energy. Without it, our jets don't fly, our ships don't sail, and our weapon systems do not function properly.

Energy security is not merely an economic concern. It is a national security concern. That is why I am grateful for the opportunity to offer amendment No. 818 to hopefully be included in the NDAA.

Amendment No. 818 would strengthen and secure the domestic energy supply chain that supports defense installations across the country. Today, California imports nearly 70 percent of all of its oil from foreign countries, and 30 percent of the oil comes from the Middle East.

It is not hyperbole to say that California has become dependent on the very oil that Iran is attempting to control through the Strait of Hormuz. This has led to a spike in gasoline prices for California residents. It has also exemplified why our military installations should not be reliant solely on foreign oil.

Washington State imports nearly 50 percent of its oil from abroad, despite having critical Navy and Air Force bases that need energy.

To prove this point one last time, Hawaii, home of the U.S. Pacific Command, relies almost entirely on foreign oil, 90 percent to be exact. Mr. Speaker, 60 percent of Hawaii's oil comes from Argentina, 15 percent from Libya, and nearly 10 percent from Nigeria.

How could one of our most significant military commands be 90 percent dependent on foreign oil? We could do it right here in our own country, specifically in my own home State of Texas.

However, we export hundreds of billions of dollars of energy from my home State. Despite these serious supply chain risks, companies working to address them too often face frivolous litigation from climate groups, even when those lawsuits weaken our military readiness.

Amendment No. 818, supported by the Department of War and HASC Subcommittee Chairman Bergman, would help address frivolous litigation targeting companies that supply our military installations with energy.

If the United States finds itself in a conflict with China, the last thing our military should face is a jet fuel shortage caused by baseless litigation tying up our domestic energy producers.

Importantly, this amendment does not lower environmental permitting standards or weaken existing reporting requirements.

This legislation merely secures a supply chain that is heavily dependent on foreign countries that could be weaponized against us if we don't fix it now.

Mr. Chairman, if we are serious about our military readiness, I respectfully ask the Chamber vote ``yes'' on amendment No. 818, and I reserve the balance of my time.

John GaramendiDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. GARMENDI. Mr. Chair, I am trying to figure out if this is a drill baby drill or is this just get even with California. This really sounds strange to me, that a State that so much does not want to have the Federal Government messing with that State, the State of Texas, that the Representative from Texas would put forth an amendment that would specifically remove California's ability to regulate energy operations within the State of California.

I would hope that the application of this might just as well go to the State of Texas as it does to California. Perhaps, I will propose an amendment that that be the case.

The reality is that this is not good public policy. There are many reasons why an energy project should not be built. Maybe it is because it goes right through a school or destroys a community. Maybe it is because there are environmental issues or economic issues, but this would simply give to, in this case, the Secretary of War, Mr. Hegseth, the opportunity to say that this energy project in California is necessary, even though it may have little or anything to do with the current war effort in Iran or any other place.

I don't get it. If you are really interested in States' rights, why would you be proposing this amendment, particularly if you happen to be from Texas, which may be the center of States' rights?

Here we go. What are we doing here?

If you are a Tribal Government and you want to put a pipeline through that Tribal land, the Tribal Government has absolutely nothing to say about it if the Secretary certifies that it is necessary for defense, or maybe it is a community, or maybe it happens to be a river or a lake.

All the Secretary has to say is, hey, this is necessary for national defense. Come on. This is bad public policy.

Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Wesley HuntRepublican, Texas

Mr. Chair, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

John GaramendiDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, we seem to be fighting over who gets the last word, so let me take a shot at the last word.

If you are interested in the power of the State to regulate its environment, to regulate its communities, roads and streets, and rivers and lakes, then you should be opposed to this amendment. Why would we do this? This has little to do with national defense. This has everything to do with sticking it to California.

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Wesley HuntRepublican, Texas

Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. Does the gentleman ask unanimous consent to reclaim his time?

John GaramendiDemocrat, California

Yes.

The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman is recognized.

There was no objection.

John GaramendiDemocrat, California

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Carbajal).

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I oppose this amendment. We know that the military does not need this provision to ensure a stable supply. We already are the largest oil producer in the world, producing nearly 14 million barrels of oil a day.

Let's be clear: This is not about energy independence or national security. It is about giving Big Oil special treatment at the expense of California. Under this amendment, a single certification from the Secretary of Defense unlocks sweeping legal protections for fossil fuel projects. States and local governments cannot interfere. Courts are told to presume that delaying this project harms national security on the Secretary's word alone, and we know what that means.

Challengers cannot dispute the Secretary's determination and developers

It is interesting to me that this amendment is sponsored by Congressman Hunt from Houston, where Sable Offshore Oil's headquarters is located.

Sable Offshore, of course, is the operator of the Santa Ynez Pipeline System, which the Trump administration forced back online over the objections of California. This is the pipeline that caused the devastating Refugio oil spill in 2015 in my district.

My constituents, who must live with the risk this operation poses, are overwhelmingly opposed, but the Trump administration used the Defense Production Act to preempt State law.

The State of California is challenging that authority in court. I guess Sable is worried about losing in court, as they should be, because this amendment would allow the company to avoid accountability by moving to a more favorable court, blocking the California lawsuit, and preventing any court from issuing an injunction against this project.

Let me be clear again: This isn't about national security. This is a bailout for polluters.

Mr. Chair, I oppose this amendment, and I urge my colleagues to also vote ``no.''

The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.

Wesley HuntRepublican, Texas

Mr. Chair, this is, in fact, an issue of national security. As somebody that is from Texas, what I understand very clearly is that we don't need fewer electrons; we need more.

While we are looking for the next abundant source of energy for the future, we ain't getting there, unfortunately, for many people in this room on the other side of the aisle, without energy and oil and gas, especially when it comes to putting fuel in the Apache helicopter that I flew in combat 55 times, supplying energy for our forces abroad, and for our allies abroad, as well.

The only thing that we are trying to do is make sure that we produce it safer, cleaner, and better here in this country than anywhere in the entire world.

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hunt).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes appeared to have it.

John GaramendiDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas will be postponed.

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7 printed in part A of House Report 119-755.

Wesley HuntRepublican, Texas

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

The text of the amendment is as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hunt) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.

Wesley HuntRepublican, Texas

Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chair, amendment 1085 addresses a very similar challenge as amendment 818, but through a more targeted approach.

This amendment would require the U.S. Army to acquire an easement along the Santa Ynez pipeline in California--not property ownership, but an easement.

For more than a century, the U.S. Army has used its existing authority under title 10 to acquire easements that protect critical supply chains.

During World War II, the United States Government routinely condemned land that was used to build ammunition plants to supply our troops in Europe.

In 1941, when U-boats threatened tanker routes supplying the Northeast, Congress gave the government condemnation authority for pipeline rights-of-way. The impact of that legislation ensured that the war effort in Europe was kept fueled.

Amendment 1085 follows that same proven model: a Federal property interest securing a privately operated fuel corridor our military depends on.

California agencies and State legislators have filed repeated lawsuits against the pipeline in an effort to shut it down, even though California imports almost 70 percent of its oil. About half of the oil California imports is from oil that transits through the Strait of Hormuz.

This should not be an acceptable acquisition method for our defense installations that need energy to carry out our mission.

It is no secret in Washington that one of the biggest threats the United States faces--and the whole world, for that matter--is the threat of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. We must be prepared for this should it happen in the not-so-distant future.

We must keep our military installations fueled and energized by domestic sources if we are to maintain deterrence. Along with that, we also want to ensure that we don't engage in any conflict in the Pacific.

Amendment 1085 would affirm that this pipeline is important to national security to keep our military on the West Coast supplied with domestic-sourced energy.

Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to this amendment.

The ACTING CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, this amendment is an outrageous attack on States' rights dressed up as a fake energy emergency.

My colleague refers to a national emergency during World War II where the Army and our country's posture was different. The current environment is not legitimate. It is not a legitimate war environment as he refers to from the past.

Let us be clear about what this does. It would allow the Federal Government to seize California's owned lands through eminent domain for the Santa Ynez pipeline system.

This is the same pipeline that caused the 2015 oil spill off the coast of Santa Barbara in my district.

Instead of trying to restore it to safe operating condition, Sable has spent years ignoring and evading California law to try to restart this operation, and not using the latest and best technology available.

California's State Fire Marshal also already indicated the pipeline is not in safe operating operation, but Sable does not think a little thing like State laws or the health and safety of our coasts should stand in the way of their profits.

At the company's request, the administration stripped California of its oversight of the pipeline and used the Defense Production Act to force it to restart operations, and this was before this illegitimate Iran war.

Apparently, that was not enough. Now, Sable is asking its friends in Congress to rig the system in its favor, seize California lands, and issue an irrevocable operating permit. Yes, these are friends from another State.

Let's talk about the hypocrisy here.

What happened to States' rights? This is the most blatant example of corrupt Federal overreach, so why aren't my colleagues across the aisle up in arms? Oh, because it is not convenient.

No one should be able to use the Federal Government as their personal trump card to trample on State laws and regulations for their personal profit, no matter the party, no matter the State.

Unfortunately, this amendment fits a broader pattern of attacks on California by this administration, attacking our clean air standards, undermining our offshore wind industry, and now trying to bulldoze our environmental protections for Big Oil--a Big Oil handout.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this dangerous project and the precedent it sets.

Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Wesley HuntRepublican, Texas

Mr. Chair, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 2 minutes remaining, and the gentleman from Texas has 3 minutes remaining.

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi).

John GaramendiDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, we need to be very, very clear about what this is all about. This is about a company--one company using the Congress and the power of this Congress to feather its nest, to conduct an oil exploration program off the coast of California that can, and has, in the past been extremely detrimental to the communities in California and to the environment of California.

We ought not be doing this for any single company. This is not a national security issue and certainly not a national defense issue. This is about Sable using this Congress to further enrich itself at the expense of California, the environment, the communities along the coast, and particularly the communities in Santa Barbara County.

Mr. Chair, I urge a strong ``no'' vote.

Wesley HuntRepublican, Texas

Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.

The ACTING CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas has 3 minutes.

Wesley HuntRepublican, Texas

Mr. Chair, oil is a globally-traded commodity. This is a one team/one fight conversation.

It doesn't matter which State you are from. Oil production for the United States and every electron that we are able to produce is very critical to our national defense; and also the needs of not just the United States, but also our allies.

We in Texas fully understand that. It is time for the entire country to understand that we have got to get in this fight together if we are going to continue to have abundant energy sources for the future so we can live the lives we have been accustomed to living and continue to defend this great Nation.

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I am a marine. I served our country. I know what it is like to fight for our country and to stand up and be ready to be called when we need to do so. But to use the Defense Production Act for a frivolous reason undermines our democracy and undermines the integrity of what we are about, and when we really need to use it, it makes a mockery of us.

Mr. Chair, this is ludicrous. We should not proceed forward with this amendment.

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hunt).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes appeared to have it.

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas will be postponed.

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8 printed in House Report 119-755.

James GallagherRepublican, California

Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of amendment No. 8, and I urge its adoption.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

The text of the amendment is as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallagher) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.

James GallagherRepublican, California

Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of amendment No. 8, and I urge its adoption by this body.

My amendment requires the Federal Government to take a hard look at how the collapse of America's domestic refining capacity threatens our national security and military readiness and what tools exist when State level actions undermine refining capacity as they have in California and, thus, undermine our Armed Forces that we rely upon.

For years, dangerous and, quite frankly, stupid California policy led by Gavin Newsom and Sacramento Democrats have waged an ideological war on the oil and gas industry, and, thus, California's refining industry has been decimated by crushing regulations and Green New Deal mandates.

Today, California produces less than 23 percent of the oil and gas that it consumes and imports more than 65 percent of its crude oil from foreign countries, places like Venezuela, like Ecuador, like the Middle East--some of these countries with horrendous environmental records, with rain forests that are being burned down as we speak. And we are shutting down domestic production that we have in Kern County to our own detriment.

Meanwhile, what has happened to our gas prices in California? They have spiked to the highest in the Nation. Just now, today, the average price of gas in California is $5.50 a gallon. Do you know what it is in North Carolina? $3.72 a gallon. That is policy. That is what we are talking about. Our jet fuel supplies have been reduced by a million gallons.

This is due to the loss of the Valero refinery in the East Bay and the Phillips 66 refinery in Los Angeles, all due

California is also home to 32 military installations, including some of our Nation's most strategically important bases: Travis Air Force Base, Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, Naval Base San Diego, Camp Pendleton, and Beale Air Force Base, just to name a few.

Our servicemembers cannot train, deploy, or fight without reliable access to fuel. Congress should not and cannot stand by while California's failed energy policies undermine the energy infrastructure our military depends on.

As the saying goes, energy security is national security. My amendment simply directs that the Federal Government identify what can be done to protect the rest of the refining capacity that we have in California that is essential to the West Coast and is essential to America's national defense.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense amendment. I can't imagine why the opposing party would ever oppose this when we need affordable energy now.

Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I served in North Carolina in Camp LeJeune. I know the weather there. I know North Carolina, and I also know why I live in California.

I am opposed to this amendment. Once again, this amendment has nothing to do with national security, as much as people want to say that over and over and over.

Yet, it has everything to do with politically motivated attacks on State policies that the other side of the aisle happens to disagree with. Just call it what it is. It specifically requires a report on ways for the Federal Government to preempt State laws, including, once again, through national security waivers.

Mr. Chair, how far the principled have fallen. I thought the Republican Party was the party of States' rights. Maybe it is selective States' rights. But apparently that principle only applies when they agree with the State's policies. Let's call it what it is: selective.

This amendment would strip States of their ability to adopt stronger protections for their communities' air, water, and public health. Unfortunately, it appears that States' rights take a back seat when there is a favor to be done for Big Oil.

This amendment is a roadmap for the Federal Government to undermine States that choose to protect their residents. In places like California, communities have fought for stronger safeguards against pollution and environmental hazards, not weaker ones.

That is why we also believe in renewable energy, something this administration does not. If we were really concerned about energy and diversifying our energy capacity, we would support offshore wind.

This President has gone to great lengths to kill offshore wind projects in California. Let's not talk about energy supply when we are doing everything possible to just give a handout to the oil industry.

Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

James GallagherRepublican, California

Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to the time remaining.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 2\1/2\ minutes remaining.

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi).

John GaramendiDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, isn't this an interesting amendment? I happen to resent all of northern California's oil refineries, all five of them. Yes, things are changing. It is not just because it is necessary for all of the environmental reasons that we should be aware of and that seem to be totally ignored by our colleagues on the other side of the aisle. Yet, the reality is that there really is a need for the kind of projects that my colleague from Santa Barbara just spoke to: offshore wind.

Why is it that this administration is killing the offshore wind projects in California? Why is this administration killing the solar and geothermal projects in California?

Now we have from our Republican colleagues some crying about whether we ought to give an open door to our refineries so that they can do anything that they want to do, and we are going to use the Comptroller of the Department of Defense to write some sort of a document about why it is necessary.

The reality is that we need to move forward. The refineries are going to go forward. It may very well be that some in northern California, as in southern California, will shut down. Why? It is because there is a dramatic change that is occurring in this Nation as to how we are going to use energy. Why would we want to stop that process?

This makes very, very bad public policy that we have used the Comptroller to do what should be done by the staff of the minority party.

James GallagherRepublican, California

Mr. Chair, it is good that my colleague from California brought up principle, because his party used to be the party of the working class. But it certainly no longer is that, with $5.50 a gallon for gas. The working class in California is being decimated.

Do you know what else is happening? Those good-paying refinery jobs in Benicia, California, that used to be at the Valero refinery are gone because of bad policy, and those people no longer have those jobs.

Yes, the gentleman is right. We should be talking about principle. We should be talking about actually serving our constituents who have been plagued with the worst energy prices in the Nation.

Don't belie the argument. This is about national security because we have all of those bases that I mentioned on the West Coast. They need that fuel supply. They need that jet fuel that they can no longer get from Benicia. They can no longer rely on that. This is absolutely germane to national defense.

What are they so worried about? This amendment is simply calling for a review. It is calling for a study to see what we can do. Are my colleagues afraid of what it might find? Are they afraid of what it might find, that the Democratic policy, far from being one that is diverse and looks to all forms of energy, has put all of its eggs into one basket, solar and wind, to great detriment?

We should be looking at all forms of energy, including our oil and gas. We produce oil and gas in Kern County safely, environmentally friendly. Instead, my colleagues are importing it from countries that have no such record.

Absolutely, I decry what the gentleman is saying today. I decry California's policy. It deserves a review, and we should be using the Federal Government to ensure that our refinery capacity stays stable, that it is affordable, and that it is ready for our men and women of the military.

Again, I ask my colleagues to support this amendment. It is germane. It is much needed in these times.

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I think I heard that my colleague supports offshore wind, which is in contrast with the President. I am assuming he disagrees with the President.

Mr. Chair, I am willing to yield for the purposes of a colloquy to ask for an answer to that question. I kind of heard that the gentleman supported offshore wind.

The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallagher).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes appeared to have it.

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California will be postponed.

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9 printed in part A of House Report 119-755.

Earl L. "Buddy" CarterRepublican, Georgia

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

The text of the amendment is as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.

Earl L. "Buddy" CarterRepublican, Georgia

Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act of 2027.

This amendment addresses a serious defense industrial base and national security issue: ensuring the United States can efficiently recycle, recover, and reuse materials from defense articles and scrap metal without being blocked by inconsistent State and local rules.

Our military depends on secure and reliable access to strategic and critical materials. At a time when China controls or influences major portions of global critical mineral and metal supply chains, the United States cannot afford to waste recoverable materials from our own defense systems, equipment, and munitions.

This amendment ensures that the physical or mechanical processing of scrap metal, as well as the disposition and recycling of defense articles, is governed by a clear Federal standard rather than a patchwork of conflicting State and local requirements.

While this amendment is expressly focused on critical metals that often incorporate sensitive military technology, the amendment prevents non-identical State or local rules in this narrow area while preserving applicable Federal standards.

It is limited in scope to ensure chemical treatment, stabilization, fixation, and neutralization of waste are expressly excluded, preserving State authority over hazardous chemical processes and maintaining existing environmental protections.

We have repeatedly heard from both Republicans and Democrats a litany of concerns over how dependent the United States is on foreign sources for critical minerals. We know how incredibly difficult it is to build a new mine and refining capacity in the United States.

I would like to hope that we can at least come together and agree to keeping sensitive technology and the materials that can be recovered from our military equipment within the domestic supply chain.

This is not about lowering safety or environmental standards. This is not about lowering safety or environmental standards. The amendment is narrowly focused on physical and mechanical scrap processing and defense article recycling. It does not cover chemical treatment, stabilization, fixation, or neutralization of waste generated by that processing.

At a time of growing global instability, we should be doing everything possible to strengthen domestic supply chains, reduce dependence on adversaries, and support the defense industrial base.

This amendment is a commonsense national security measure that helps ensure critical materials from defense articles can be responsibly recovered, recycled, and reused for America's security needs.

Mr. Chair, I respectfully urge my colleagues to support this amendment and its inclusion in the NDAA, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I oppose the amendment. Don't get me wrong. I am glad to see my colleagues across the aisle recognize that recycling needs to be part of our minerals and materials strategy. We absolutely should be recovering valuable materials instead of relying entirely on new mining.

This amendment isn't really about recycling, is it? It is another attempt to use national security as a phony justification to override State laws that this majority doesn't like. What happened to States' rights again? Are we being selective again?

It would prevent States and local governments from enforcing requirements governing the recycling and disposal of defense materials unless those requirements are identical to Federal law. Many States and localities have adopted stronger safeguards to protect communities from pollution and industrial hazards. We know that defense equipment can pose significant risks to surrounding communities.

In an era where this administration is trying to roll back every single environmental and public health protection it can, an amendment like this is particularly dangerous. I know. I served in the Marine Corps. I serve on the House Armed Services Committee.

Mr. Chair, I strongly oppose, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Earl L. "Buddy" CarterRepublican, Georgia

Mr. Chair, will you make sure that the gentleman is looking at the same amendment that I am proposing here, because he obviously does not understand it.

This is not about lowering safety or environmental standards. This amendment is narrowly focused on physical and mechanical scrap processing and defense article recycling. It doesn't cover chemical treatment. It doesn't cover stabilization, fixation, or neutralization of waste generated by that processing.

Mr. Chair, respectfully, I ask you to make sure he is looking at the right amendment here, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I don't know what they teach in Georgia. In California, let me tell you, we learn how to read and write. I understand this amendment.

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi).

John GaramendiDemocrat, California

Mr. Chairman, this is the fourth amendment in a row that basically preempts State laws of many different kinds. Frankly, I don't understand why we are doing this. I didn't understand, but I have come to understand we are doing this for a specific company that now has a contract to recycle military equipment at the Sierra Army Depot in California.

Basically, what this amendment does is to reduce or eliminate any California law about recycling, the safety of it, the disposition of the hazardous materials, and the way in which they may be affecting the land, the people, or the environment if the California law is

We are faced with a situation here of totally removing the ability of the State, any State, actually--this isn't just for California; this is for every State--the ability of the State to regulate the recycling and the disposition of hazardous defense materials in the State of California.

Why would we do that? What is the logic behind this except to benefit a single company, which is exactly what this does? Why would we do that? Just like the previous three amendments, to benefit one company: Sable. Here we are taking our time, providing a specific opportunity for that company to operate.

With regard to the Sierra facility, I am familiar with it. I am also familiar with the Federal laws in that area. They do not protect the people who are doing the work. They do not protect the community around the depot.

Earl L. "Buddy" CarterRepublican, Georgia

Mr. Chair, for the life of me, I do not understand why they want to cut off their nose to spite their face. This is national security here, Mr. Chairman. This is not trying to preempt the laws. It is narrowly focused. We are talking about recycling national defense materials that include critical minerals, scrap metal.

For the life of me, I don't understand how this is benefiting one company. It is benefiting the United States of America. This is recycling. This is environmentally safe, environmentally sound, environmentally friendly.

Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, in California, we really believe it is important to protect the public health of our constituents, so I am flabbergasted that this is trying to undermine the standards that we want to have to protect our public health from hazardous and toxic materials.

Now, if you live in another State and the people want to have lesser standards for hazardous materials that could damage their public health, hurt their public health, that is one thing, but to try to undermine those standards in California is another.

This amendment does exactly that. It tries to undermine the will of the State of California and its people. I reserve the balance of my time.

Earl L. "Buddy" CarterRepublican, Georgia

Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to how much time I have remaining.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia has 1 minute remaining.

Earl L. "Buddy" CarterRepublican, Georgia

Mr. Chair, this is commonsense legislation. This is not trying to benefit one company. This is trying to benefit the United States of America, both environmentally and, more importantly, our national security. It is recycling material of critical minerals that we need.

It ensures that the physical and mechanical processing of scrap metal, as well as the disposition and recycling of defense articles, is governed by a clear Federal standard rather than a patchwork of conflicting State and local requirements.

We are not trying to preempt anyone. We are just simply trying to secure America, trying to be environmentally friendly, and trying to recycle. I reserve the balance of my time.

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, in California we have higher standards. It is about public safety. It is about making sure we protect the public health.

If you want to lower your standards somewhere else, knock yourselves out, but in California we are going to fight for the people that elected us to protect their public health.

We know recycling. We know how to do it in a safe and responsible fashion, and we will not lower our standards as other States have done.

Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Earl L. "Buddy" CarterRepublican, Georgia

Mr. Chair, obviously, I am not getting through here. I am just flabbergasted. I do not understand how the gentleman doesn't understand how this benefits the United States of America.

Forget about California. Forget about Georgia. We are talking about the United States and national security.

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, again, I will say it is interesting how two individuals could see something so different. Like I said, in California, it is all about protecting our public health, using recycling in a safe and responsible fashion.

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes appeared to have it.

Salud O. CarbajalDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia will be postponed.

The Chair understands that amendment No. 12 will not be offered.

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 14 printed in part A of House Report 119-755.

Elijah CraneRepublican, Arizona

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

The text of the amendment is as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Crane) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.

Elijah CraneRepublican, Arizona

Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment, which prohibits funds in this act from covering expenses for foreign militaries participating in exercises with our Armed Forces. If adopted, my amendment would require foreign participants in joint military exercises to cover their own travel, lodging, per diem, and other costs.

As a former servicemember, I understand these operations strengthen military readiness and serve as a powerful deterrent to our adversaries, but that doesn't mean American taxpayers should be picking up every incidental cost for a foreign participant joining these drills.

Our national debt is closing in on $40 trillion, and for several years running, the interest we pay on it alone has surpassed our entire national defense budget. No line item is too small to review, including all of the miscellaneous costs we currently absorb for foreign partners.

According to the House Armed Services Committee staff, we spent $8.1 million on partner expenses in Q2 of this fiscal year. Extrapolated over a full year, these costs run us $32 million, money that belongs in American pockets, not on someone else's expense report.

This debate isn't confined to the Halls of Congress. Two weeks ago, our NATO allies met in Ankara, largely to discuss their own path toward spending 5 percent of GDP on defense. If our allies can move closer to that benchmark, they can cover their own dinner when they train alongside the most elite fighting force the world has ever known.

We also support our partners with personnel, munitions, intelligence, and most of the weaponry and aircraft used in these exercises. Since we are already doing the heavy lifting, it is responsible to expect our partners to cover their own incidentals.

Some of my colleagues may argue this amendment sends the wrong signal to our partners. I firmly disagree. Every serious cost-sharing arrangement between nations works the same way: We cover our personnel. They cover theirs. Asking our allies to pay their own hotel bill doesn't weaken an alliance. Carrying their tab indefinitely is what erodes the case for continued burden sharing on our end.

My amendment also preserves flexibility for legitimate national security needs as the Secretary of War may waive this prohibition when necessary. Prior to issuing the waiver, the Secretary must submit a detailed justification to committees of jurisdiction in the House and Senate at least 30 days in advance.

In plain terms, my amendment keeps Congress' oversight role intact without tying the Secretary's hands. Moreover, my approach doesn't pull back from our commitments to undermine what these exercises are meant to accomplish. Our allies aren't going to walk away from the partnership because we stop paying for their lodging and meals. These drills will continue, just without the unnecessary taxpayer subsidy attached to them.

As Members of this body, we cannot be derelict in our responsibility. The American people sent us here in large part to confront this debt, and that means reviewing every line item, no matter how small and how small the savings look in isolation.

It is time to relieve taxpayers of an expense that was never theirs to carry and shift it back to our allies, where it belongs. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this sensible amendment. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Washington is recognized for 5 minutes.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chair, I yield myself 2 minutes.

We need partnerships and alliances, and right now they are struggling for a variety of different reasons. We don't need to lump anything else onto the pile of we want to separate ourselves from our partners and allies.

Here I could go down a rabbit hole of complaints about the way the Trump administration treats our partners and allies. It is driving them away, creating major rifts. I mean, just yesterday, we decided that we are going to put a 50 percent tariff on Canada, apparently because the wind is blowing south from their wildfires, and we don't like the smoke.

We need to show our partners and allies that we are with them. We need to begin reversing some of the damage that all of the belittling and insults that the Trump administration has done to our allies has caused. This amendment moves us in the opposite direction.

It is also important to note that these training exercises are of substantial benefit to the U.S. We need these partners and allies. We want them to have the same basic doctrine and methods that we have. It is part of what we do in NATO.

We are bringing them in to make sure that they are properly integrated in our efforts. There is no need to sort of push them further away over a relatively minor amount of money.

I would also point out that we started the war in Iran. We are engaged in a major conflict in Latin America that everybody has sort of forgotten about, but we are at war with all the narcoterrorists down there. We are trying to stand up to China. We are asking the rest of the world to be with us on a lot of stuff that they have serious doubts about.

I think we should spend a little bit of time showing them that we value their partnership, that we want their help, that we need their help. This amendment takes us in the wrong direction.

Mr. Chair, I urge the body to oppose it, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Elijah CraneRepublican, Arizona

Mr. Chair, my colleague said that our partners are struggling. I want to remind my colleague that we are pushing $40 trillion in debt. If that is not struggling, then I don't know what is.

My colleague also said that we need to be showing them that we value the partnership. As I laid out in my opening testimony, we also support our partners with personnel, munitions, intelligence, and most of the weaponry and aircraft used in these exercises. I think that is showing them that we value the partnership.

As a servicemember myself, I acknowledge we do receive value from these partnerships, but we shouldn't ask the American people sitting in the gallery right now and all over the country to foot the entire bill. Let's be honest. Our allies also get value from these partnerships, so asking them to pay for the incidentals like their lodging, their hotels, and their food, that is not asking a lot when you look at everything that we provide, Mr. Chair, in addition to world-class training.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chair, one point of clarification. When I said what our allies are struggling with, what they are struggling with is the idea of staying alive with the U.S., with the understanding that the U.S. still values those partnerships. I wasn't referring to any sort of financial struggle to them.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers), who is the chairman of the committee.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chairman, while I agree with the amendment's intent to increase burden sharing, I must respectfully oppose it.

The Department of War opposes this amendment.

Secretary Hegseth requested funding for these authorities in the budget because training with our allies and partners is essential to U.S. military readiness. Many of our partners, specifically those in the Western Hemisphere and the Pacific, cannot participate in joint exercises without some limited financial assistance from the U.S.

Those exercises are critical to ensuring American forces can train and operate effectively alongside our allies and partners in a conflict with China. Defunding those programs would only make it harder to strengthen burden sharing to deter China and to defend the homeland.

Mr. Chair, I urge all Members to oppose this amendment.

Elijah CraneRepublican, Arizona

Mr. Chair, I appreciate the comments from my colleague in bringing up the Department of War and the Secretary of War. It is for that reason that in this amendment we actually preserve the flexibility for legitimate national security needs, and we offer the Secretary of War the option to waive this provision when necessary.

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chairman, I urge the body to oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Crane).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.

Elijah CraneRepublican, Arizona

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will be postponed.

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 15 printed in part A of House Report 119-755.

Elijah CraneRepublican, Arizona

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

The text of the amendment is as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Crane) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.

Elijah CraneRepublican, Arizona

Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment which ends the Department of War's security assistance to Ukraine for the coming fiscal year apart from funding to protect our Embassy.

For decades, the American people have made clear their opposition to using taxpayer dollars to position the United States as the world's police force.

We have spent blood and resources overseas yet have achieved few tangible wins for hardworking citizens while our Nation has deteriorated from within. Today, Congress appropriated approximately $187 billion for Ukraine and the broader response to this war, funding that could instead go toward problems here at home. We don't have a clear picture of where all of it has ended up.

The Government Accountability Office has already found that the Department of War has misvalued billions of dollars in weapons handed over to Ukraine. Furthermore, the Department's own inspector general has flagged gaps in tracking equipment that went missing or was destroyed. Despite the inspector general and independent auditors flagging corruption, risks, and gaps in oversight, Congress keeps appropriating anyway.

It is sensible to pause and audit our prior funding before continuing to deliver substantial resources.

We also must weigh our own bandwidth given the unrest in the Middle East and rising tensions in the Pacific. Every dollar asset we commit to Ukraine is a dollar or asset unavailable to deter threats more directly relevant to America's national security.

According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, our stockpiles of key munitions, such as Patriot interceptors are already stretched thin by simultaneous demands from the Middle East, the Pacific, and Ukraine. We can't simply flip a switch to restock these weapons as rebuilding depleted inventories requires years of effort and significant cost. Rather than bringing us closer to a lasting resolution, our involvement has prolonged this conflict and drained our stockpiles to shield another nation.

We have also far outpaced our European partners in both financial and security support despite this conflict bearing more directly on their own livelihoods than ours.

Our allies across the Atlantic should take the initiative instead of banking on American taxpayers to underwrite their security. I will also note the current Ukrainian leadership has suspended national elections under martial law, banned rival political parties, and moved against domestic media outlets it considers a security threat. This is worth remembering the next time someone frames this as a fight for democratic values.

It is also risky to keep escalating tensions with a nuclear-armed rival as this conflict grows more destructive on both sides.

Although my amendment halts financial assistance for the coming year, it does not abandon the region or restrict outside assistance to Ukraine. Our Embassy retains full funding to maintain a secure diplomatic presence, and nothing in this amendment stops our European partners from stepping up if they decide it is worth the investment. However, it is not our responsibility to defend the borders of a nation thousands of miles away while failing to address the challenges we face at home.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in refocusing our priorities on the American people by supporting this sensible amendment.

Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Sarah ElfrethDemocrat, Maryland

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to this amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Maryland is recognized for 5 minutes.

Sarah ElfrethDemocrat, Maryland

Madam Chair, this amendment prohibits the use of funds for Ukraine security assistance.

This amendment would halt all U.S. aid for Ukraine, a democratic ally, in its existential fight for freedom and sovereignty against Russia.

After Russia's full-scale invasion just 4 years ago, Ukraine has far exceeded global expectations by withstanding Russia's initial invasion, integrated Western weapons systems, and becoming a leading innovator in military technology.

Ukraine is fighting an effective war, and they are degrading the combat power of a major strategic competitor without the deployment of U.S. troops. Russia is losing eight soldiers for every Ukrainian casualty, a dramatic loss on the battlefield for a military that was previously ranked one of the strongest in the world just a few years ago.

Madam Chair, we cannot abandon our ally at this time and give Russia and Mr. Putin exactly what they want. Russia has consistently tried to diminish Western military support to Ukraine because our assistance directly affects the battlefield and Russia's long-term military strength.

When we abandon Ukraine, we abandon our global allies. It would put the U.S. on an island standing alone in abandoning Ukraine as our NATO and European allies have stepped up to answer this call pledging billions in support for Ukraine.

Support for Ukraine must transcend party lines because this is not a conflict between Democrats and Republicans. It is a conflict between Democratic freedoms and autocracy. That is why I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and reaffirm our bipartisan support for Ukraine at this critical juncture in the war.

Madam Chair, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers), who is the chair of the House Armed Services Committee.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Madam Chair, thanks to President Trump's PURL initiative, our European allies are funding the vast majority of Ukraine's defense. That is exactly as it should be. However, even though our allies pay for those U.S. weapons with that money, the Department still needs the funding to implement the President's policy.

This amendment would also defund intelligence-sharing and end-use monitoring that has kept U.S. weapons from ending up in the wrong hands.

The administration continues to support providing Ukraine intelligence and PURL Initiative in an effort to force Putin to the negotiating table. We shouldn't cut off the President's negotiating leverage.

Madam Chair, for those reasons, I respectfully oppose the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Elijah CraneRepublican, Arizona

Madam Chair, I will comment really quickly on something that my colleague said. He made the typical ``we are fighting for diplomatic values'' argument. I want to reiterate that the Ukrainian leadership has suspended national elections under martial law, banned rival political parties, and moved against domestic media outlets it considers a security threat. Those are hardly democratic values. I reserve the balance of my time.

Sarah ElfrethDemocrat, Maryland

I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith), my colleague and member of the House Armed Services Committee.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Madam Chair, on that last point, Ukraine was a sovereign democratic state before Russia invaded. Yes, they are in the middle of a war, so their ability to maintain typical democratic principles is in jeopardy precisely because of the invasion. Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus in the middle of the Civil War. In a wartime, you are in a different position. Let's remember what Ukraine was before Russia invaded them and has brutally attacked them for over 4 years now. They were a sovereign, democratic state.

Second, Russia is a threat not just to Ukraine but to the region. They could potentially move on against the Baltics, Romania, or Poland if they are successful in Ukraine.

Lastly, to reiterate the chairman's point, we can achieve peace if Putin knows he can't win. We need to show resolve that we will stand with Ukraine as our allies have stepped up so much in the last couple of years to do so. That is what will bring this war to an end, is Putin knowing that he is not going to be able to take Ukraine. That forces him to the bargaining table. We need to send a strong message that we are not abandoning Ukraine. We are standing with them.

Elijah CraneRepublican, Arizona

Madam Chair, my colleague brings up that the Ukrainians were a Democrat sovereign state prior to the war to justify their President Zelenskyy canceling elections. I doubt my Democrat colleagues on the other side, Madam Chair, would feel the same way if President Trump were to cancel elections while we are at war. I don't think that justifies at all canceling elections.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Sarah ElfrethDemocrat, Maryland

Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson).

Joe WilsonRepublican, South Carolina

Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

America has always stood on the side of freedom against dictators: Hitler, Stalin, Castro, Assad, Maduro, Khamenei, and Putin. As a supporter myself of Senator Barry Goldwater, he was right when he said: ``Why not victory?''

War Criminal Putin is losing his murderous invasion of Ukraine. He underestimated the resolve of Ukrainians and energized NATO with the admission of Sweden and Finland, as President Donald Trump has achieved 5 percent member defense spending.

President Donald Trump knows that appeasement endangers American families. President Donald Trump courageously tried to stop Putin sending Javelin missiles to Ukraine, placing American troops in Poland, and stopping the corrupt Nord Stream 2 pipeline.

As the Senate works to advance Senator Lindsey Graham's bipartisan sanctions legislation to decimate the Putin war machine, the House should send a strong signal that America will stand for peace through strength.

Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to join me in voting ``no.''

Sarah ElfrethDemocrat, Maryland

Madam Chair, may I inquire as to how much time I have remaining.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman has 1 minute remaining, and the gentleman from Arizona has 30 seconds.

Sarah ElfrethDemocrat, Maryland

I reserve the balance of my time.

Elijah CraneRepublican, Arizona

I yield back the balance of my time.

Sarah ElfrethDemocrat, Maryland

Madam Chair, I share with this group every time I am at a townhall or in the grocery store and people ask me how this body, how this Congress works together, I point to our remarkable bipartisan support of Ukraine as an example of something we can do well and do together.

That very idea is being challenged by this amendment today. I am so grateful to the chair of the committee, to Mr. Wilson for standing up for what is right.

We cannot be isolationists in this world anymore. We know where that leads us. Our support, our commitment, our words to our democratic ally in Ukraine is essential, not just to their survival but to the future of a free Europe.

Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Crane).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.

Elijah CraneRepublican, Arizona

Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will be postponed.

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 17 printed in part A of House Report 119-755.

Jeff CrankRepublican, Colorado

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

The text of the amendment is as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Crank) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.

Jeff CrankRepublican, Colorado

Madam Chair, I rise today to offer my amendment to return common sense to decisions surrounding a member of the United States Armed Forces' constitutional rights.

Since 2015, our men and women in uniform have required approval from their base commander to carry a personal firearm on that installation.

Let's be clear: Constitutional rights are the baseline for all Americans, guaranteed to all Americans, and can only be restricted in thoughtful and specific decisions.

The Department's policy for the last 10 years has instead approached the Second Amendment from a no-first perspective, requiring our servicemembers to seek government approval to exercise their Second Amendment right. That is not how the Constitution works.

Madam Chair, I find it hard to reconcile the idea that it is these same men and women who use firearms every single day in training and in defending our country who are being denied access to their personal property.

Our servicemembers are extensively trained in firearms safety and in best practices. Yet, the Department treated them as blanket security risks.

I am grateful to the Secretary of War for taking recent action to ensure that applications for conceal carry on Department property are reviewed with a presumption of approval, returning these decisions to a commonsense yes-first perspective.

My amendment codifies this presumption to ensure that we are protecting the rights of our troops and adds a layer of accountability, requiring the Department to tell a servicemember why their application was rejected.

My amendment is straightforward: It preserves a base commander's ability to protect their installation and to deny the right to conceal carry. It restores the universal applicability of constitutional rights, especially to those men and women who serve us every day, and it increases transparency in those decisions.

Madam Chair, I thank Chairman Rogers for his support and his assistance in this effort. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Jill N. TokudaDemocrat, Hawaii

Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Hawaii is recognized for 5 minutes.

Jill N. TokudaDemocrat, Hawaii

Madam Chair, let's be clear: Our servicemembers already have the ability to bring personally owned firearms into military installations. They simply have to meet commonsense Department of Defense safety requirements, be legally eligible, properly trained, meet age requirements, demonstrate responsible conduct, and safely transport and store their firearms.

Those aren't burdens. They are basic safeguards.

This amendment turns that standard on its head. Instead of commanders deciding who can safely carry a personal firearm on base, it creates a presumption that requests should be approved unless commanders can justify saying no. It weakens commander authority and lowers the safety standards that have protected our installations for years.

When we lower standards around firearms, we increase risk. We have lived through the consequences. Some of the deadliest mass shootings on military installations were carried out with personally owned firearms. At the same time, our military continues to face a heartbreaking suicide rate, with firearms accounting for the vast majority of Active- Duty suicide deaths.

We should be strengthening safe storage, responsible ownership, and commander discretion, not making it easier for firearms to be carried and stored on our bases with fewer safeguards.

Military installations are not public parks. They are secure workplaces. They are homes for military families and critically important national security assets. Commanders must have the authority to protect the people entrusted to them.

If we expect discipline, readiness, and accountability from our troops, we should expect the same when it comes to firearms on our installations.

Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to reject this reckless amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Jeff CrankRepublican, Colorado

Madam Chair, I appreciate my colleague's concern. It is always interesting that there are some who put all of these stipulations on the rights of firearm owners, on the Second Amendment.

I always wondered to myself what would happen if we put those same restrictions on the First Amendment, if they had to get approval from the base commander before they exercise their First Amendment right, if they had to get approval from the base commander before they went to church and their First Amendment right to worship God as they see fit. I wonder how some of my colleagues might think of that, Madam Chair.

This is a commonsense approach. These are the men and women who use firearms every single day to defend our rights, our First Amendment rights, our Second Amendment rights, and all of our constitutional rights guaranteed to us in the Bill of Rights. That is who we are talking about.

If we can't trust them to be responsible gun owners, then who in the world can we trust?

Madam Chair, my colleague talked about that a military installation is a place where there are homes. Does a soldier have a right to defend their family in their own home?

These would seem to me to be basic rights, and I guarantee that to the Founders of our Constitution, this is an absolute basic right.

Could you imagine our Founders looking at us today deciding whether the men and women of the militia, the people who carry and use firearms every day to defend us, whether or not they are capable, whether or not government can grant them the right to carry a firearm and defend themselves?

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Jill N. TokudaDemocrat, Hawaii

Madam Chair, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cisneros).

Gilbert Ray Cisneros, Jr.Democrat, California

Madam Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. The FY16 NDAA already granted the Department the authority to establish a process for servicemembers to carry personal firearms on base.

It is simple. The chain of command has the authority to grant these requests. However, Secretary Hegseth's MOU from April, which this amendment codifies, has a presumption of approval that weakens an installation commander's authority and would require them to essentially prove a negative to deny a request.

The process that we established was dependent on a servicemember's need for personal or force protection. Yet, this amendment strips that requirement or any justification for that matter in order to carry a personal firearm on base.

The Secretary's logic is that adding more firearms at military installations would make it safer. No law enforcement agency would ever suggest that more people carrying personal weapons makes any place safer. While our military personnel are trained to use firearms, they are not all trained to be law enforcement, and no one should ever take the law into their own hands.

There is nothing in this amendment that would restrict locations for personal firearms. Does that mean junior enlisted servicemembers who account for roughly half of all military suicides are now permitted to carry in the barracks under this amendment?

Are personnel now allowed to walk around the commissaries, schools, the exchange, or libraries with a firearm? More guns does not make us more safe.

Expanding access to personal firearms on base increases the risk of servicemember suicide. Independent research, including reviews commissioned by the Department of Defense itself, has found that greater access to firearms is associated with increased suicide risks among servicemembers.

There is a clear lack of consideration by Republicans for servicemembers' and their families' well-being and safety here.

Madam Chair, I urge all my colleagues to oppose this amendment.

Jill N. TokudaDemocrat, Hawaii

Madam Chair, may I inquire as to the time remaining.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Hawaii has 1 minute remaining.

Jill N. TokudaDemocrat, Hawaii

Madam Chair, this amendment is a dangerous solution in search of a problem. Not only is it absolutely unnecessary, but it constrains base commanders in their duty to keep facilities, servicemembers, and families safe.

Madam Chair, I strongly urge my colleagues to oppose this reckless amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Crank).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes appeared to have it.

Jill N. TokudaDemocrat, Hawaii

Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado will be postponed.

The Acting CHAIR. The Committee will rise informally to receive a message.

The Speaker pro tempore (Mr. McDowell) assumed the chair.

Official Text ↗

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 18 printed in part A of House Report 119-755.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

The text of the amendment is as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Colorado.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Madam Chair, I rise today in support of America's brave men and women in uniform to ensure America's warriors have the tools and environment they need to defend our Nation.

Shortly after taking his second oath of office, President Trump acted to protect our servicemembers. He signed an executive order prioritizing military excellence and readiness to prevent radical transgenders from serving in the United States military.

My amendment codifies this executive order, ensuring the integrity of America's great Armed Forces is not jeopardized.

Gender dysphoria was considered a mental disorder by psychologists for decades until 2019. Even the leftist World Health Organization listed it as a mental illness in the international classification of diseases.

According to the Williams Institute, 81 percent of transgender adults have seriously contemplated suicide. That is 15 times higher than the general population. Forty-two percent of transgender adults have attempted suicide, and 56 percent have harmed themselves. People with gender dysphoria are a danger to themselves and others.

The United States military possesses the most powerful weapons known to man. We are the largest Air Force and Navy in the world, with nuclear weapons, artillery, and a host of other weapons with immense destructive capacity.

Every day we trust our brave men and women in uniform to protect us and to use these weapons that we possess responsibly for the defense of America.

We the people have placed our faith and trust in our Armed Forces, and they have placed their faith in this Congress to make responsible policy.

The United States of America cannot allow mentally ill individuals to possess and operate these weapons, and this Congress cannot allow transgenders to jeopardize the safety and readiness of our Armed Forces.

My amendment protects America's servicemembers, ensures force readiness, and prevents dangerous individuals from accessing destructive weapons. No other severely mentally ill person would ever be allowed in the Armed Forces, and this Congress should not make any exception for gender dysphoria. The risk to the American people and our Armed Forces is simply too great.

Secretary Hegseth has often highlighted the need to restore the warrior ethos in the Department of War. After the Armed Forces endured 4 years of waste, fraud, and abuse under the Biden administration, President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have restored the United States military to greatness.

Keeping weapons out of the hands of dangerous, mentally ill individuals is a critical step in maintaining this warrior ethos.

I am proud to support the President in ensuring the United States Armed Forces remains the finest military in the world.

My amendment to codify the President's executive order ensures servicemembers are of sound mind, body, and discipline, and no future administration can rescind these protections for America's heroes.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mark TakanoDemocrat, California

Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mark TakanoDemocrat, California

Madam Chair, this amendment would codify President Trump's executive order banning transgender Americans from serving in the United States military.

Since that order came down, the military branches have forced out Americans who have served their country bravely and honorably, leaving entire professional careers behind and gaps in the units and chains of command they once held together.

This amendment would codify that exclusion into law. There are no grounds to exclude trans people from the military except for hatred, prejudice, and bigotry. There is no evidence that having transgender troops negatively impacts military readiness.

Our military is strongest when every qualified servicemember is able to serve. Who are we as a country when strong, qualified, patriotic candidates who want to serve their country are turned away simply because of ignorant legislating?

The American people want Congress to support our servicemembers, not waste time rooting out the ones they want to use as political pawns.

I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

Madam Chair, since a member of this committee did not reserve the time, I reserve my right to close at this time.

I would just say if gender dysphoria isn't a mental illness, then why do 42 percent of those who identify as transgender attempt suicide?

We don't hand nuclear weapons and fighter jets to people in that kind of crisis. We shouldn't start now. We should be helping these people in real ways rather than handing them weapons of destruction.

This is a very serious issue that we should address right now. No other severe mental disorder gets a waiver into the United States military. Schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, major depression, they are all disqualifying. Gender dysphoria is no different, except politicians changed the label.

My amendment treats it exactly the same. Madam Chair, I urge adoption of my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. I now recognize the gentleman--

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

No. I closed.

The Acting Chair. The gentlewoman's time has expired.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

That was not a member who claimed time from this committee. He was not able to claim the time in opposition.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman's time has expired.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

And he doesn't get any time to close.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is now recognized.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

He has no time remaining, Madam Chair.

He is not a member of the committee, and he claimed time in opposition. You didn't, sir.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman will suspend. The gentlewoman has used up all of her time.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

My time, my right to close, and I closed.

The ACTING CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 4 minutes remaining.

Lauren BoebertRepublican, Colorado

There are no further arguments on this amendment.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Could you please tell her what the rules are?

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 4 minutes.

Mark TakanoDemocrat, California

Madam Chair, I yield 90 seconds to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Jacobs), my colleague.

Sara JacobsDemocrat, California

Madam Chair, it seems like my colleague on the other side of the aisle has just as little understanding of parliamentary procedure as she has understanding of military readiness.

This amendment is a waste of time. The trans military already exists. This executive order is already in effect. So what does this amendment actually do? It makes discrimination permanent.

RAND and the Pentagon have already studied this. They concluded that allowing trans Americans to serve openly doesn't hurt unit cohesion, operational effectiveness, or readiness. Commanders said it made their force stronger.

Do you know what actually hurts readiness? Kicking out trans servicemembers despite their stellar performance and discharging people we have spent time, money, and resources training because of who they are, not how they performed. That costs money. That hurts readiness.

Secretary Hegseth loves talking about the importance of meritocracy in the military, but kicking out qualified people because he doesn't like their identity is the exact opposite of meritocracy.

If you are really cynical and think that trans people only serve to get their healthcare paid for, you would be wrong. The Pentagon spent 6,400 times more on trans servicemembers' career development than on their healthcare.

One of the trans servicemembers I met told me that their most costly procedure was for their shoulder reconstruction after being injured in the line of duty. For the record, shoulder reconstruction has nothing to do with being trans.

Here is the double standard at the heart of this amendment. Hormone therapy is standard, evidence-based care. They just made a whole new policy about it.

The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.

Sara JacobsDemocrat, California

The same medical treatment can't strengthen readiness for a cisgender man and hurt readiness when a trans servicemember needs it.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman is no longer recognized.

Mark TakanoDemocrat, California

Madam Chair, I yield 90 seconds to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Sorensen).

Eric SorensenDemocrat, Illinois

Madam Chair, I rise today in strong opposition to Representative Boebert's amendment.

I am proud to live in an Army town, and I am the only LGBTQ person to serve on the House Committee on Armed Services.

I find it outrageous that this Commander in Chief and his loyalists want to kick true Americans out of the military for a reason that does not pertain to a person's capability as an effective soldier, sailor, airman, or marine--all because they think there is something inferior or less than if you are trans.

We know what happens in our country when we lose the most qualified members. We saw it during Don't Ask Don't Tell. LGBTQ servicemembers are critical and essential to our Armed Forces.

When any American is called to serve our country, there should be no requirements other than can you do the job and exceed the expectation.

I really don't understand how you can justify this. On one side, hiring should only be by merit, but then on the other side of your mouth, you only want harmful restrictions on those who are highly qualified for the work.

One of the greatest things about being American is being one of many.

In 250 years, we know the value of our country is marked by the service and the sacrifices of those who came before.

Playing politics isn't just cruel because it discriminates. It is cruel because it puts other servicemembers at risk.

I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment because all Americans who serve should be able to serve with dignity, respect, and our Nation's thanks.

The Acting CHAIR. Members are reminded to address their remarks to the Chair.

Mark TakanoDemocrat, California

Madam Chair, let me conclude by saying that trans servicemembers are honorable. Trans servicemembers are truthful. Trans members are disciplined. Trans members are heroic. Trans members have sacrificed for our country. They are physically and mentally fit to serve and have made America safer.

Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes appeared to have it.

Mark TakanoDemocrat, California

Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado will be postponed.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Madam Chair, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Ryan).

Patrick RyanDemocrat, New York

Madam Chair, I thank our esteemed ranking member for his leadership.

I am here to speak in strong opposition to the entire bill, but I do have to say: To see folks who have never worn the uniform on this House floor try to fight culture-war BS when we are in the middle of an actual war is a grave, grave disservice to those in uniform.

My opposition to this bill is deeply personal. It is personal to me. Having served 27 months in combat in Iraq, I watched us double down on a losing strategy year after year while my friends and fellow soldiers, many of whose names are on this memorial bracelet I wear, fought and died.

It is personal to the now 18 families who lost their loved ones in this reckless war in Iran--sons, daughters, husbands, wives, somebody's whole world. It is personal to the hundreds more wounded, many carrying injuries that will last their entire lives from this war.

It is personal to the American people, people who are working hard, doing everything that they are asked, while watching the cost of their gas, their groceries, and their utility bills skyrocket; watching the President and Hegseth spend over $100 billion of their hard-earned taxpayer dollars while they continue to flail and fail.

Now they are trying to ask for another $1.5 trillion of my constituents'--our constituents' taxpayer dollars to double down on this reckless, ill-conceived war.

This is a straight-up betrayal from a President, by the way, who promised to end wars, not start wars; a President who has never spent a single day in uniform but is more than willing to send other people's kids to fight in his wars; a President who is now blatantly disregarding the widely held will of the American people and the bipartisan view of this Congress as recognizing the successful passage of a War Powers Resolution by escalating this war rather than winding it down. We can't let that happen.

On behalf of all of our constituents, on behalf of the American people, we have to stop throwing good money after bad. We have to stop repeating the mistakes of the forever wars that my generation fought and served in.

That is why I have been fighting to include my No Funds for Iran War Act in this NDAA, to make sure we don't spend a single penny more on this reckless forever war in the Middle East; to make sure we are investing here at home to lower housing costs, lower grocery costs, lower utility costs, and lower healthcare costs. That is what the American people want. That is what I am fighting for, and that is what my colleagues here are fighting for.

Unfortunately, Mr. Chair, since the majority has refused to include my provision in this bill, I do plan to offer a motion to recommit this bill back to committee, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. Chair, I include in the Record the text of my amendment.

Patrick RyanDemocrat, New York

Mr. Chair, truly, especially to my colleagues of both parties who have worn the uniform of this country, it is foundational and enshrined in our Constitution that it is this body that has say, not a single, unitary executive, to send us to war.

This legislation is common sense and bipartisan. I urge my colleagues to support it.

Adam SmithDemocrat, Washington

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 19 printed in part A of House Report 119-755.

Nancy MaceRepublican, South Carolina

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

The text of the amendment is as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, the gentlewoman from South Carolina (Ms. Mace) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from South Carolina.

Nancy MaceRepublican, South Carolina

Mr. Chair, let me be clear. There are two biological sexes: male and female. They are assigned at conception and cannot be changed. Biology doesn't care how many hormones someone pumps into their bodies or how they mutilate their bodies. Biological reality cannot be changed by medical intervention.

In the Fiscal Year 2025 NDAA, Congress prohibited TRICARE from covering medical interventions to treat gender dysphoria, which would result in the sterilization of children. This was an important step, but there is more to be done.

This language failed to prohibit the Department of War from chemically and surgically mutilating our servicemembers and their children and performing a number of sick procedures on our kids.

This amendment would prohibit the Department of War from covering or furnishing any chemical or surgical mutilation procedures through TRICARE--not one dime for cross-sex hormones, not one dime for taxpayer-funded puberty blockers, not one dime for taxpayer-funded surgeries, all in the name of gender-affirming care and this crazy gender woke ideology.

The Federal Government and, particularly, the Department of War should not be in the business of funding the chemical and surgical mutilation of our citizens. This is not healthcare. It is the butchering of healthy bodies, and American taxpayers should never pay for it.

Not only do these disgusting trans chemical, trans surgical interventions often cause permanent infertility, sterility, and sexual dysfunction, but they can actually increase depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation. They can cause cancer among those on whom these medical procedures are performed.

This amendment restores common sense to military healthcare. It aligns the Department of War with the growing international medical consensus that these interventions, particularly for children, are extremely harmful.

This amendment ensures that Defense health dollars are spent on advancing the health of our servicemembers and their families, not undermining it, and certainly not on advancing an ideology based on delusion. We

Mr. Chair, I urge all Members to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Gilbert Ray Cisneros, Jr.Democrat, California

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.

Gilbert Ray Cisneros, Jr.Democrat, California

Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. This amendment bans gender-affirming care for servicemembers and their dependents under TRICARE.

Recently, the Secretary of Defense just came out in support of gender-affirming care for our male servicemembers by providing the testosterone testing and treatment for those who need it.

The DOD Secretary and Republicans have already canceled health coverage for less than 1 percent of the population within the Department of Defense. The Secretary is currently kicking out transgender servicemembers, and now this cruel amendment is targeting dependents of servicemembers who are receiving hormone therapy and mental health counseling for gender dysphoria.

Dependents not receiving adequate healthcare is a factor pushing people to separate from the military. This culture war ideology amendment can result in a readiness gap issue.

I strongly oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

I reserve the balance of my time.

Nancy MaceRepublican, South Carolina

Mr. Chair, testosterone treatment for men serving in our military isn't gender-affirming care. We want the most masculine, the most muscular, the toughest warfighters in the world because they are in the trenches. They are doing combat. They are the ones who are putting their lives on the line.

The idea that chopping someone's penis off is risking military readiness is ludicrous. We are talking about mentally ill men that think having a menstrual cycle means bleeding out of your rectum. That is how crazy and insane this conversation is.

Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Gilbert Ray Cisneros, Jr.Democrat, California

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Takano).

Mark TakanoDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

Once again, my Republican colleagues are moving forward with a sweeping ban on necessary healthcare, including mental health care for children.

This isn't about cost. This isn't about force readiness. In fact, this amendment will harm our military's force readiness.

This amendment will force servicemembers out of the military either for their own sake or for the sake of their children since this amendment bans mental health care for trans children.

There are and will be trans children born to military households. That is a fact. What parent would choose staying in their job if that means denying their child access to mental health care?

This amendment makes it impossible for the military to retain servicemembers with trans children. This is an inhumane, wasteful, regressive amendment, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Nancy MaceRepublican, South Carolina

If you think your kid is trans and you are the parent, your kid needs to be taken out of your household. It is insane to think--you are hearing these stories this week in the news how somebody's 2-year- old knew that, when they were born a girl, they are actually a boy and all this craziness.

Children have creative imaginations. They imagine that they might be a monkey. That doesn't mean you feed them bananas and leave them in a jungle because they think they are Curious George. It is insane.

This is a mental health crisis. Anyone who is mentally ill should not be serving in our military, and they absolutely should not be serving in combat.

Every dollar spent by the Department of War on chemical and surgical sex change procedures is a dollar not spent on preparing the readiness of America's warfighter.

Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Gilbert Ray Cisneros, Jr.Democrat, California

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Jacobs).

Sara JacobsDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I don't believe that 435 Members of Congress should play pretend doctor and try to decide the medical care of servicemembers or their children that we have never met. In fact, even the physicians in this body know that there is a legal and ethical standard: that a doctor has to establish a patient-physician relationship, like an evaluation or an exam before prescribing care. None of us should be overriding the actual doctors who decide what kind of care is and isn't necessary.

For the record, every major medical association in this country, representing over 1.3 million American doctors, recognizes that trans healthcare and gender-affirming care is safe, effective, and medically necessary.

Prescribing any kind of care, whether it is puberty blockers or hormones or anything else, doesn't happen on a whim. It is after a rigorous, deliberate, multi-step physical and psychological evaluation by doctors.

Here is the worst part about all this, the double standard at the heart of this amendment: Gender-affirming care is standard evidence- based care. In fact, the military relies on it for cisgender troops: troops with thyroid conditions, low testosterone, or other hormone needs. They just made a whole new policy about it.

My colleague literally said: It is to make sure someone is more masculine. Making someone who is masculine more masculine is literally the definition of affirming one's gender with gender-affirming care.

The same medical treatment can't strengthen readiness for a cis man and hurt readiness when a trans servicemember or our military families need it.

A blanket ban on healthcare is a cruel punishment for kids. Denying them mental health care and therapy is especially disgusting when they are more likely to feel alone and isolated because of the vitriol they hear from people in this very body, people in power like my colleagues.

We are better than this. Our troops are better than this. Our troops deserve better than this.

Nancy MaceRepublican, South Carolina

Mr. Chair, you just heard it from California: cis man. I don't even know what a cis man is. That sounds ridiculous.

Talking about pretend doctors, I think we had a pretend doctor testify on the Hill this week. The president of a prestigious university could not testify that only women can give birth to babies. Someone who is supposed to be training medical physicians and medical doctors here in the United States couldn't say under oath, in Congress, that only women can give birth to babies. I don't think you can trust medical doctors that say being tranny is a thing.

Treating somebody's low T or thyroid, if they are a man, that seems like a natural, biological thing, but not for a woman. If you give a woman a ton of testosterone, it erodes the lining of her bladder. She eventually becomes incontinent. The other hormones are going to eventually give her breast cancer.

It is just a crazy ideology. We need to follow actual science, follow biology, and not these doctors and universities that are training medical doctors, that are making millions and millions of dollars by keeping people on prescriptions, on medicines that drive them crazy, to shoot up schools, churches, and synagogues. All these tranny shootings, all these mass shootings, it is actually insane. They should not be serving in the military.

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Gilbert Ray Cisneros, Jr.Democrat, California

Mr. Chair, gender dysphoria is real. It is a real diagnosis, and there is a treatment for it. Yet, our colleagues want to deny them.

Both in this debate and in the previous debate, my colleagues have said gender dysphoria is a mental health issue, and it needs to be treated. Yet, they want to deny individuals, the dependents--family members of our servicemembers and those servicemembers--the treatment required in order to help and support them.

I have a friend, because of this Nation's policies, who is being forced--is leaving this country so that her daughter can go get the treatment that she can get in another country.

This policy, this amendment, is cruel. It is meant to just basically root

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from South Carolina (Ms. Mace).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes appeared to have it.

Gilbert Ray Cisneros, Jr.Democrat, California

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from South Carolina will be postponed.

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 20 printed in part A of House Report 119-755.

Nancy MaceRepublican, South Carolina

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

The text of the amendment is as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, the gentlewoman from South Carolina (Ms. Mace) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from South Carolina.

Nancy MaceRepublican, South Carolina

Mr. Chair, women and girls have fought for so long to have equal opportunities in education and athletics. As the first female graduate of the Citadel's Corps of Cadets, no one understands this more than I do.

Unfortunately, these rights are now under attack. Over 900 medals have been stolen from women and girls by biological males. This flies in the face of common sense and our most basic notions of fairness and women's rights.

Even if some of my colleagues are too afraid to say it, every person in this room knows that men and women are biologically distinct. This truth has been obvious to every civilization in the history of mankind. Yet, mediocre male athletes are forcing their way into little girls' locker rooms and onto their courts and fields. Women and girls are being robbed of athletic opportunities. Make no mistake, this is misogyny masquerading as progress.

This amendment would prohibit biological males from participating in schools administered by the Department of Defense Education Activity.

DoDEA schools serve the children of our warfighters, and they should not have to worry about their little girls having their private spaces invaded, having their accomplishments and opportunities stolen from them, and being injured competing against men.

We have seen countless women's volleyball teams across the country forfeit instead of having to face biological men and risk the same physical injuries experienced by Payton McNabb.

In Massachusetts in 2023, a female field hockey player had her teeth knocked out by a biological male during a game.

In 2024, a high school women's basketball team was forced to forfeit after a 6-foot bearded male athlete injured three of their players, leaving girls in pain and injury on the court.

These are the predictable consequences of a policy which dresses up biological ignorance as compassion.

I urge all Members to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Sara JacobsDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.

Sara JacobsDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, it is unfortunate that, once again, I am here fighting with my colleague from South Carolina to prevent her from injecting culture wars into our military.

Let's clear up a few things. This amendment isn't about the Olympics. It isn't about the World Cup. It isn't even about college-level athletics. It is about discriminating against kids in preschool, from preschool to high school, whose parents are serving this country.

These are kids who are trying to find a place where they fit in and belong, and this amendment makes them a political and physical target.

Military kids change schools frequently due to their parents' careers. They have mastered the art of saying good-bye to their new friends, their home, their routine because they do it so often.

They have missed birthdays and holidays and milestones with their parent when they are deployed, and sometimes they have to grow up too soon, taking on additional responsibilities when one parent is away.

We should be doing everything we can to make sure that these kids get to be kids. However, this amendment does the opposite. It politicizes kids who just want to play on a soccer team with their friends.

My colleague talks a lot about men forcing their way into girls' locker rooms. Well, this amendment actually is about forcing men into girls' locker rooms. It actually makes young girls more vulnerable to the likes of Larry Nassar, who would celebrate a policy like this because it makes it easier to victimize little girls.

Think about it: Actual predators will be happy about this amendment. It could force any girl, especially tall, muscular, or more masculine- presenting girls to have to undergo invasive exams to prove that they are a girl. It could require girls of all ages to answer personal questions about their bodies and physical development to adults they may not know.

I remember being a girl growing up, and as comfortable as I may be now talking about my period with all of you, that would be my worst nightmare in middle school, but that is the experience we would be forcing on millions of little girls around the country; not just trans girls, all girls. Talk about an invasion of little girls' privacy.

At the end of the day, what is this really accomplishing? The number of trans girls in DODEA schools competing in sports is incredibly small. I bet the author of this amendment doesn't even know of any. This isn't a crisis, but my colleague is pretending it is to score political points.

The parents of these military kids serve so we can have debates in this Chamber. The least we can do is not make their kids the collateral damage in culture war fights.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no,'' and I reserve the balance of my time.

Nancy MaceRepublican, South Carolina

Mr. Chair, trans girls aren't real girls. Trans women aren't real women. Cis women, nobody knows what that is. It is not actually a thing.

There are significant physical, biological differences between men and women. Biological men generally have greater muscle mass, bone density, cardiovascular capacity, physical strength than women, and the risk of physical injury is real.

The irony and the hypocrisy to say that banning biological men from girls' locker rooms and sports makes them less safe is ludicrous. It is actually the trannies that are going into prisons or going into schools, going into locker rooms, going into bathrooms.

The LGBTQ-plus-plus-plus whatever it is, queer, these are the people that are putting women at risk. They are raping them in our prisons. They are assaulting them at schools, in the locker rooms, in the bathrooms. This is the kind of thing that we don't want our very masculine, high-T warfighter having to worry about his little girl when he is out there killing the real bad guys. We want to keep them safe.

As a survivor, I know what the vulnerabilities are for women in private spaces and how vulnerable we are at all ages. This bill would protect the little girls of our warfighters across the country.

Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Sara JacobsDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Takano).

Mark TakanoDemocrat, California

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this amendment. This amendment's language opens the door to invasive, degrading, and humiliating physical examinations of children, children who simply want to play softball or join a basketball team. That is creepy.

This amendment would require the Department of Defense Education Activities schools to determine eligibility for girls' sports teams based on a girl's reproductive system. This amendment will empower child predators.

We can have a nuanced conversation about eligibility rules for elite sports teams, but this amendment is a one-size-fits-all approach that dictates the same rules for a kindergartner wanting to play soccer as a 12th grader participating in competitive basketball. It does so in the most dangerous way, by opening young girls to invasive exams.

Our communities thrive when every child, including trans children, can be part of a team, learn sportsmanship, and challenge themselves. They falter when we write exclusion into our laws.

Nancy MaceRepublican, South Carolina

Mr. Chair, I would encourage my colleagues on the left side of the aisle to read Martina Navratilova's X account today, talking about how confirming she was a woman was not invasive. It was a simple cheek swab. This is the fear politics of the left, and that says a lot about how far they have gone.

To say that trans kids just want to be on a team with our little girls, if there is a tranny on a team with our daughters, they need to be kicked right off. If they are in a locker room with our girls, they need to be kicked right out.

We have seen some really crazy stories of grown men with beards shaving at the sink with little girls in towels in the corner of the locker room scared to death and vulnerable to sexual predators. We all know the tranny thing really is about sexual gratification. Sexual attraction to being dressed as a woman has nothing to do with them thinking that they are a woman.

In fact, they are mocking being a woman. They are mocking our femininity, and they are mocking the rights that we fought for for hundreds and hundreds of years. It has not been long since women actually got the right to vote. There are still ceilings to be broken in this country. It is not going to be done by some mentally ill man in a skirt.

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Sara JacobsDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, may I inquire how much time I have remaining.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California has 1\1/2\ minutes remaining.

Sara JacobsDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, my colleague says that we are just fear- mongering about what these bans would actually mean, but we have actually already seen how trans sports bans have been used to target all girls.

A high school athletic association secretly investigated a female athlete without telling her or her parents to see if she was trans. She was not.

The same association had investigated other complaints, receiving them because ``an athlete doesn't look feminine enough,'' and none of those allegations that the students were trans were verified to be true.

In another incident, a Utah State school board member falsely suggested in 2024 that a high school basketball athlete was trans, subjecting her to relentless harassment and bullying, including threats of violence.

In Florida, a school investigated a trans student's participation in girls' sports, and investigators repeatedly asked other individuals, all children, to describe how the student appeared in various stages of undress.

If this does not disturb you about how our young girls will be treated in sports, then you are clearly not paying any attention. Let's be clear: Trans girls and trans women are much more likely--four times more likely than Cis people to be the victims of violent crime, not the perpetrator.

Let's also be clear about something. The author of this amendment has led her own investigations that have failed, trying to prevent our colleagues from being able to use the restroom.

She is talking about the right to vote. Her side of the aisle is literally pushing to take away a woman's right to vote because of the SAVE Act, and Secretary Hegseth doesn't think women should have the right to vote or serve in the military. This is absurd. I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from South Carolina (Ms. Mace).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes appeared to have it.

Sara JacobsDemocrat, California

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from South Carolina will be postponed.

The Chair understands that amendment No. 22 will not be offered.

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 26 printed in part A of House Report 119-755.

Addison P. McDowellRepublican, North Carolina

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

The text of the amendment is as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McDowell) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina.

Addison P. McDowellRepublican, North Carolina

Mr. Chair, today I rise to offer an amendment to H.R. 8800. My amendment would authorize the Secretary of War to establish a school choice pilot program for members of the Armed Forces.

Over the past 5 years the number of States that have chosen to prioritize education freedom for parents has skyrocketed. On this issue, Americans

Despite overwhelming support, many military families are barred from participating in school choice initiatives because they are either stationed in States without school choice or they are located in one State but domiciled in another.

This amendment would authorize the War Secretary to establish a school choice pilot program for full-time Active-Duty military members.

Mr. Chair, there is no reason why parents who are dedicating their lives in service to our country should not have the same rights as other parents to decide where their kids go to school. This honors a provision in the Department's budget request.

Mr. Chair, I urge all my colleagues to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Joe CourtneyDemocrat, Connecticut

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Connecticut is recognized for 5 minutes.

Joe CourtneyDemocrat, Connecticut

Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.

As a member of the House Armed Services Committee and the Education Committee, I represent a military district with about 7,000 sailors and officers. Many of those children use local schools which the Federal Government partially reimburses through the Impact Aid Program.

The notion that we are going to start a new program--and really this program is about who pays. It is about funding vouchers. It is not really whether or not military families have a choice in terms of whether they themselves want to go to a parochial school or to a private school. That is not the point. The point that we are talking about here is, again, that this is going to put a stress on the Pentagon's budget, who already, as I said, underfunds Impact Aid and DoDEA schools. If you look at the President's budget that came over, Mr. Chair, there was actually a cut to Impact Aid in terms of what was sent over.

We are going to be in a fight over at the Appropriations Committee to restore funding. Again, as someone who represents a district with public schools that are proudly in the business of offering education for K-12 students, this, again, is just going to be another pressure, external pressure, in terms of reducing what, in fact, these communities really deserve, which is to have the military fully compensate an item that families really depend on in terms of making sure whether they are deployed or whether when they are on base they are getting education and that the local community is not taking an unfair hit in terms of paying for those services.

Again, this amendment would generate a new cost to the Pentagon's budget in terms of DoDEA funding and Impact Aid funding who, again, today are not actually up to the levels that fully paid for those services. For that purpose, I oppose the amendment.

Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Addison P. McDowellRepublican, North Carolina

Mr. Chair, all this bill does is establish a pilot program so that parents serving in our military have the same rights as other parents to decide where their children go to school.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Joe CourtneyDemocrat, Connecticut

Mr. Chairman, this is a voucher program, and vouchers cost money. That is really the issue that I think the proponent really didn't, in my opinion, adequately address.

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Tokuda).

Jill N. TokudaDemocrat, Hawaii

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to this amendment.

Mr. Chair, we all want the same thing for our military families. While our servicemembers carry out the mission to protect and defend our Nation, we have a duty to care for the loved ones whom they leave behind. For families with school-aged children, that means investing in safe, stable, high-quality schools where every child can learn, grow, and thrive.

This amendment does the opposite. It creates a new, unfunded voucher program that diverts taxpayer dollars to private, including religious, schools instead of strengthening the public schools that educate most of our military-connected children.

This year, taxpayers are investing $3.6 billion in DoDEA schools, but the majority of military-connected students attend local public schools, which receive just $70 million in Impact Aid, even though they lose local property tax revenue because of nearby military installations. These schools welcome military children every time new orders arrive, helping them navigate new classrooms, new communities, and the challenges of constant moves and deployments.

If Congress is prepared to invest more in military children's education, and I fully support that, we should be investing where most of them are already learning: our public schools.

This amendment also falls short for families raising children with disabilities. Public schools are legally required to identify students with disabilities and provide the services and accommodations they need. Private schools are not. They may lack specialized staff or refuse to admit a child altogether.

Unlike public schools, private schools are not required to follow the same Federal civil rights protections. Taxpayer dollars could fund schools that discriminate in admissions based on disability, religion, sex, sexual orientation, and other characteristics.

A voucher is not a real choice if a school can simply turn a child away.

Our military families deserve better. Let's strengthen the schools they rely on, fully support DoDEA and public schools through Impact Aid and ensure every military child has access to a well-funded, accountable education.

Joe CourtneyDemocrat, Connecticut

Mr. Chair, may I inquire how much time is remaining.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Connecticut has 1\1/4\ minutes remaining.

Joe CourtneyDemocrat, Connecticut

Mr. Chair, I think Congresswoman Tokuda did a very nice job in terms of laying out the reality of what is actually going on in communities where military installations and military bases exist. Those are tax exempt properties where the communities are, again, more than glad to educate the children of military servicemembers. They have to find a way to finance the cost of that education. Unfortunately, the existing programs in place today, DoDEA and Impact Aid, fall short in terms of making sure that those communities are fairly reimbursed.

Mr. Chair, we are not in a place where there should even be a discussion about starting new funding programs for education paid for by the taxpayer until we keep the promise to those communities that we are going to reimburse the cost of educating military schoolchildren.

For that reason, Mr. Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote from all our colleagues, and I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McDowell).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes appeared to have it.

Joe CourtneyDemocrat, Connecticut

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from North Carolina will be postponed.

The Chair understands that amendment No. 27 will not be offered.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.

The motion was agreed to.

Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. McDowell) having assumed the chair, Mr. Babin, 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. 8800) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

Official Text ↗

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill, H.R. 8800.

Will the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Weber) kindly take the chair.

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill (H.R. 8800) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes, with Mr. Weber (Acting Chair) in the chair.

The Clerk read the title of the bill.

The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier today, a request for a recorded vote on amendment No. 26 printed in part A of House Report 119-755 offered by the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McDowell), had been postponed.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings will now resume on those amendments printed in part A of House Report 119-755 on which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:

Amendment No. 1 by Ms. Boebert of Colorado.

Amendment No. 2 by Ms. Boebert of Colorado.

Amendment No. 3 by Ms. Boebert of Colorado.

Amendment No. 4 by Ms. Boebert of Colorado.

Amendment No. 6 by Mr. Hunt of Texas.

Amendment No. 7 by Mr. Hunt of Texas.

Amendment No. 8 by Mr. Gallagher of California.

Amendment No. 9 by Mr. Carter of Georgia.

Amendment No. 14 by Mr. Crane of Arizona.

Amendment No. 15 by Mr. Crane of Arizona.

Amendment No. 17 by Mr. Crank of Colorado.

Amendment No. 18 by Ms. Boebert of Colorado.

Amendment No. 19 by Ms. Mace of South Carolina.

Amendment No. 20 by Ms. Mace of South Carolina.

Amendment No. 26 by Mr. McDowell of North Carolina.

The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote after the first vote in this series.

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.

The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.

The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.

A recorded vote was ordered.

The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 15-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 65, noes 361, not voting 10, as follows:

Messrs. BRESNAHAN, WEBSTER of Florida, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Messrs. McCAUL, SHREVE, PALMER, and HUIZENGA changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''

Messrs. CLOUD, JOYCE of Pennsylvania, HAMADEH of Arizona, ROSE, LUTTRELL, BALDERSON, CISCOMANI, and McGUIRE changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''

So the amendment was rejected.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 2, printed in part A of House Report 119-755, offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.

The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.

The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.

A recorded vote was ordered.

The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 61, noes 360, not voting 15, as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.

Mr. KNOTT changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''

So the amendment was rejected.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Stated against:

Glenn GrothmanRepublican, Wisconsin

Madam Chair, I was in a vital meeting with Torres of California. Had I been present, I would have voted NO on Roll Call No. 256.

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 3, printed in part A of House Report 119-755, offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.

The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.

The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.

A recorded vote was ordered.

The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 65, noes 359, not voting 12, as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. (Mrs. Cammack) (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

So the amendment was rejected.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Luz M. RivasDemocrat, California

Madam Chair, I missed three votes during a vote series today. Had I been present, I would have voted NO on Roll Call No. 255, NO on Roll Call No. 256, and NO on Roll Call No. 257.

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 4, printed in part A of House Report 119-755, offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.

The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.

The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.

A recorded vote was ordered.

The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 265, noes 161, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 9, as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.

Messrs. GROTHMAN, and VAN ORDEN changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''

Ms. De La CRUZ, Messrs. JACKSON of Illinois, MRVAN, Ms. SCANLON, Mr. ESPAILLAT, Mrs. DINGELL, Messrs. DeSAULNIER, BEYER, LUTTRELL, PATRONIS, HERN of Oklahoma, RILEY of New York, Mrs. McBATH, Mr. BARRETT, Mses. PELOSI, MATSUI, McCOLLUM, Mrs. BICE, Messrs. THOMPSON of California, MOULTON, WESTERMAN, Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ, Mr. AMO, Ms. BUDZINSKI, Mr. CARBAJAL, Ms. LOFGREN, Messrs. PALMER and STANTON changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''

So the amendment was agreed to.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 6, printed in part A of House Report 119-755, offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hunt), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.

The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.

The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.

A recorded vote was ordered.

The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 208, noes 219, not voting 9, as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.

So the amendment was rejected.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 7, printed in part A of House Report 119-755, offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hunt), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.

The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.

The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.

A recorded vote was ordered.

The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 215, noes 214, not voting 8, as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.

So the amendment was agreed to.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 8, printed in part A of House Report 119-755, offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallagher), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.

The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.

The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.

A recorded vote was ordered.

The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 212, noes 216, not voting 8, as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.

So the amendment was rejected.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 9, printed in part A of House Report 119-755, offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.

The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.

The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.

A recorded vote was ordered.

The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 201, noes 224, not voting 11, as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.

So the amendment was rejected.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 14, printed in part A of House Report 119-755, offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Crane), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.

The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.

The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.

A recorded vote was ordered.

The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 61, noes 365, not voting 10, as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.

So the amendment was rejected.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 15, printed in part A of House Report 119-755, offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Crane), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.

The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.

The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.

A recorded vote was ordered.

The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 76, noes 350, not voting 10, as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.

So the amendment was rejected.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Stated against:

Glenn GrothmanRepublican, Wisconsin

Madam Chair, I missed the vote due to a meeting. Had I been present, I would have voted NO on Roll Call No. 264.

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 17, printed in part A of House Report 119-755, offered by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Crank), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.

The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.

The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.

A recorded vote was ordered.

The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 215, noes 214, not voting 8, as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.

So the amendment was agreed to.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 18, printed in part A of House Report 119-755, offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.

The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.

The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.

A recorded vote was ordered.

The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 212, noes 217, not voting 7, as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.

So the amendment was rejected.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 19, printed in part A of House Report 119-755, offered by the gentlewoman from South Carolina (Ms. Mace), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.

The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.

The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.

A recorded vote was ordered.

The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 219, noes 208, not voting 9, as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.

So the amendment was agreed to.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 20, printed in part A of House Report 119-755, offered by the gentlewoman from South Carolina (Ms. Mace), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.

The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.

The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.

A recorded vote was ordered.

The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 221, noes 203, not voting 12, as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.

So the amendment was agreed to.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 26, printed in part A of House Report 119-755, offered by the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McDowell), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.

The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.

The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.

A recorded vote was ordered.

The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 214, noes 216, not voting 7, as follows:

The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.

So the amendment was rejected.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Mike RogersRepublican, Alabama

Madam Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.

The motion was agreed to.

Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Stutzman) having assumed the chair, Mrs. Cammack, 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. 8800) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

Official Text ↗

Main Street Capital Access Act

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to recommit on the bill (H.R. 6955) to make improvements to the Federal banking laws, and for other purposes, offered by the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Garcia), on which the yeas and nays were ordered.

The Clerk will redesignate the motion.

The Clerk redesignated the motion.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.

This is a 5-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 210, nays 216, not voting 5, as follows:

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Cammack) (during the vote). There are 2 minutes remaining.

So the motion to recommit was rejected.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Stated for:

Hillary J. ScholtenDemocrat, Michigan

Madam Speaker, during Roll Call Vote No. 270 on the motion to recommit H.R. 6955, I mistakenly recorded my vote as NAY when I should have voted YEA.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.

The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.

Maxine WatersDemocrat, California

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 270, nays 155, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 5, as follows:

The SPEAKER pro tempore. There are 2 minutes remaining.

So the bill was passed.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Official Text ↗

Continuing Appropriations Act, 2027

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on passage of the bill (H.R. 9770) making continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2027, and for other purposes, on which the yeas and nays were ordered.

The Clerk read the title of the bill.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.

This is a 5-minute vote.

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 220, nays 205, not voting 6, as follows:

So the bill was passed.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Official Text ↗

Removal of Names of Members as Cosponsors of H.R. 9336

Craig A. GoldmanRepublican, Texas

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to remove the gentleman from California (Mr. Panetta) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Norcross) as cosponsors of H.R. 9336.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas?

There was no objection.

Official Text ↗

Hour of Meeting on Tomorrow

Craig A. GoldmanRepublican, Texas

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 11 a.m. tomorrow.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas?

There was no objection.

Official Text ↗

Celebrating Rose Smith's 102nd Birthday

Glenn ThompsonRepublican, Pennsylvania

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate Rose Smith's 102nd birthday on July 19 of this year.

Rose is a longtime resident of Clearfield, Pennsylvania. She is a valued community member, accomplished veteran, and a devoted mother.

In 1946, 4 years after graduating from high school, Rose enlisted in the United States Naval Reserve as a member of the United States Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Service, more commonly known as WAVES. This program enlisted women to serve in communications, intelligence, and administrative roles.

During this time, Rose worked at a naval hospital in Maryland and later transferred to the United States Naval Hospital in San Diego. After 2 years in San Diego, she achieved the rank of hospital apprentice first class.

Rose returned to Pennsylvania and married the late Edward Smith in 1950, and they welcomed six children. Today, she is a proud grandmother to 12 grandchildren and 16 great-grandchildren.

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Rose on this magnificent milestone, and I pray that God will continue to bless her.

Official Text ↗

Affordable Care Act Healthcare Enrollment Drops

Marcy KapturDemocrat, Ohio

Mr. Speaker, reckless changes to the Affordable Care Act by this administration already have ripped away affordable healthcare coverage for 2 million Americans.

Skyrocketing premiums mean healthcare costs too much. Hardworking families simply cannot absorb higher monthly premium costs. My home State of Ohio has been hit the hardest. Almost one-third of marketplace enrollees, 161,385 Ohioans, have dropped their coverage within the last year. That is three times the national average.

When hardworking Americans are forced to choose between groceries and healthcare, guess what, Mr. Speaker. They choose food.

Between the cuts included in the big bonanza bill for billionaires and its refusal to extend the enhanced premium tax credits, it is clear the GOP's majority is intent on worsening this health insurance crisis for our relatives and neighbors.

Before this administration came into office last year, the number of uninsured Americans was at an all-time low. Now, seniors are struggling to afford prescriptions, parents are skipping doctor visits, and millions have lost healthcare altogether.

Mr. Speaker, Ohioans work hard and so do all Americans. They deserve peace of mind and affordable healthcare.

Official Text ↗

Violence Against Law Enforcement

Rudy Yakym IIIRepublican, Indiana

Mr. Speaker, in the last 2 months northwest Indiana has sadly seen a rash of violence against law enforcement. Three officers in and around

Trooper Benjamin Beers was shot during a traffic stop. Deputy Jon Samuelson was shot three times while helping a stranded driver. Sergeant Justin Helfin was shot during a pursuit.

I want to be clear: If someone targets our officers, they will face justice.

For far too long, we have seen the officers who protect us demonized while excuses are made for the career criminals who terrorize our communities. It is dangerous, and as we have seen recently, it has tragic consequences.

These officers deserve to go home to their spouses, their children, and their parents at the end of every shift. I am grateful that these three survived, but survival is not safety, and three shootings in 2 months cannot be ignored or normalized. It must be a wake-up call.

Law and order does not sustain itself. It is upheld by the men and women who put on the badge, and they are willing to risk everything for strangers. That is what separates us as a functioning society and why I and the thousands of Hoosiers I serve will always back the blue.

Official Text ↗

100th Birthday of Van Buren Anderson, Jr.

Donald G. DavisDemocrat, North Carolina

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Army veteran Van Buren Anderson, Jr., of Tarboro who recently celebrated his 100th birthday.

As a young Army sergeant, Mr. Anderson answered our Nation's call and served in Japan following World War II.

Arriving in Nagasaki in the aftermath of the war, he witnessed firsthand the devastating cost of conflict, a memory that has remained with him throughout his life.

Returning home to Edgecombe County, Mr. Anderson helped establish the Edgecombe County Rescue Squad that would save countless lives and serve generations of eastern North Carolinians.

Whether wearing the uniform of the United States Army or volunteering in his hometown, Mr. Anderson lived by a simple principle: When people needed help, he stepped forward to provide a helping hand, and we will always be grateful.

Official Text ↗

Mr. Downing Recognizes His Daughter on Her Graduation From Nursing School

Troy DowningRepublican, Montana

Mr. Speaker, today I rise as a proud father to recognize my daughter on her graduation from the Montana State University's Mark and Robyn Jones College of Nursing.

I have watched her work for years and dedicate herself to a profession built on service and compassion.

Sarah has worked hard through her undergraduate degree, her master's, and now she has finished her last class in the nursing school all because she wants to care for others. I could not be prouder of her and all of her cohorts as they begin caring for patients and strengthening communities across Montana.

As I travel around the State, we have a huge need for practitioners, for nurses, and for doctors, and we have just strengthened Montana's Second District workforce by one.

Sarah's mother and I are incredibly proud of her. Our granddaughter, Lyla, has an incredible role model to look up to, and Montana is lucky to have her.

Official Text ↗

Fifa 2026 World Cup

Darin LaHoodRepublican, Illinois

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to reflect on the resounding success of the 2026 FIFA World Cup.

Over 39 days, the United States alongside Canada and Mexico, hosted 104 matches, or the equivalent of 104 Super Bowls, making it the largest sporting event in the history of our country.

More than 6.8 million fans attended matches, another 7.7 million visited fan festivals, and the U.S. welcomed visitors from around the globe with open arms. Beyond the elite level of play on the pitch, the tournament generated tens of billions of dollars in economic activity and supported thousands of American jobs.

I was proud to be a part of the White House FIFA task force under the leadership of Executive Director Andrew Giuliani and President Trump, where we worked with more than 50 Federal agencies in an unprecedented effort to ensure a safe, secure, and exciting event for fans and spectators.

I thank our law enforcement officers, first responders, and public servants who worked tirelessly to make sure the tournament was safe, secure, and ensured the World Cup finished without a single major security incident.

During America's 250th anniversary, our Nation's hospitality, its strength, and its ability to bring the world together were on full display. We once again proved that when the world comes to America, we can deliver.

Official Text ↗

Honoring the Life and Service of Army Private Isabella Gonzales

Brandon GillRepublican, Texas

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and service of Army Private Isabella Gonzalez, a 19-year-old soldier from Carrollton, Texas, in the district I am proud to represent.

Private Gonzalez was killed in action last Friday during an Iranian strike on American forces in Jordan where she stood in harm's way to defend this Nation and the troops beside her. She had barely begun her adult life, yet she had already given everything to protect ours.

Carrollton and all of Texas grieves tonight for one of its own. We also give thanks for a young woman who chose service over safety and duty over comfort.

To her family, her fellow soldiers, and all who mourn her, this Congress stands with you, and this Nation will not forget her sacrifice.

Official Text ↗

Removal of Name of Member as Cosponsor of H.R. 9535

Brian JackRepublican, Georgia

Mr. Speaker, I hereby remove my name as cosponsor of H.R. 9535.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's request is granted.

Official Text ↗

Adjournment

Brian JackRepublican, Georgia

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 10 o'clock and 28 minutes p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, July 22, 2026, at 11 a.m.

Official Text ↗