House of Representatives
Page H5365 · Official textThe House met at 11 and was called to order by the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Bost).
Tuesday, September 1, 2026
Vol. 172, No. 138 · 119th Congress, 2nd session
Designation of the Speaker Pro Tempore
Page H5365 · Official textThe SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following communication from the Speaker:
Text printed in the Record (159 characters)
September 1, 2026.
I hereby appoint the Honorable Mike Bost to act as Speaker pro tempore on this day.
Mike Johnson, Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Prayer
Page H5365 · Official textThe Chaplain, the Reverend Margaret Grun Kibben, offered the following prayer: Sovereign Lord, we want to be holy, set apart for You, to glorify You in the work that we do and by the lives we lead. Almighty Lord, we want to be in fellowship with You, faithful to You, to shine forth Your truth in every thought that enters our minds and each word that comes from our mouths throughout this day. In offering our prayers to You, may we realize that to hope for Your answer, we cannot behave as we like, without any regard for Your desire for righteousness. We cannot twist truth and rely on clever deceptions and not give attention to the light of truth to which You hold us each accountable. On this day, may we prove rigorous in holding fast to our honesty, committed to maintaining our integrity, and constant in our moral inventory. Thus, may our lives be a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to You and worthy of Your intentions for this day. In view of Your mercy and in the hope of Your grace, we pray. Amen.
The Journal
Page H5365 · Official textThe SPEAKER pro tempore
The Chair has examined the Journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the House the approval thereof.
Pursuant to clause 1 of rule I, the Journal stands approved.
Pledge of Allegiance
Page H5365 · Official textThe SPEAKER pro tempore
Will the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Strickland) come forward and lead the House in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Ms. STRICKLAND led the Pledge of Allegiance as follows:
Text printed in the Record (174 characters)
I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
Page H5365 · Official textThe SPEAKER pro tempore
The Chair will entertain up to 15 requests for 1-minute speeches on each side of the aisle.
Recognizing Pennsylvania State University
Page H5365 · Official text(Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, today I highlight Penn State University, which delivered its 1-millionth degree earlier this summer.
This historic milestone reflects the university's commitment to excellent innovation and student success.
Since the university's founding more than 170 years ago, graduates have become leaders in their communities. Penn State alumni are dedicated to serving others.
The 1 million degrees is more than just a statistic. This is an achievement that reflects 1 million dreams of attending university, 1 million new opportunities, and 1 million graduates who have impacted the world.
As a graduate of Penn State, I am proud to be a part of the 1 million students who have earned a degree from this remarkable institution.
Penn State, the Commonwealth's only land-grant university, has its eyes on the next goal. Students are always pushing boundaries, and I am excited to see the next milestone that this great university reaches.
Restoring Public Trust
Pages H5365–H5366 · Official text(Mr. LATIMER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, in July, ICE arrested 50,000 people. To put this in perspective, this could fill up Madison Square Garden more than twice over.
The arrests in July are not because ICE is exclusively seeking out dangerous criminals harming our communities. This is because people are being ripped away from their loved ones at traffic stops and medical visits by State and local law enforcement officials who have been enlisted to operate as assistants to ICE's campaign, all while eroding the trust that community members should have in their local law enforcement.
To top it off, ICE is carrying out these raids using taxpayer dollars that could otherwise go to quelling the affordability crisis, strengthening American jobs, and aiding our economy during the President's costly war with Iran.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to rein in this out-of-control agency and work to restore public trust in local law enforcement agencies.
Congratulating Ambassador Christian School Football Team
Page H5366 · Official text(Mr. MOORE of North Carolina asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Ambassador Christian School football team from Huntersville, North Carolina, on an impressive victory in Dublin, Ireland.
These student-athletes traveled across the Atlantic to represent North Carolina in the Global Ireland Football Tournament, where they took on Grapevine Faith Christian School from Texas.
I am pleased to report the Ambassador Christian Lions came away with a 24-point victory, putting their hard work and dedication on full display.
Ambassador Christian School opened its doors in 2024, and this football program is already making its mark.
Mr. Speaker, the players and coaches represented Huntersville, North Carolina, and the United States with great pride. I look forward to seeing what this team accomplishes next. Congratulations and go Lions.
I would be remiss, Mr. Speaker, if I did not point out that they were not the only North Carolina team that dealt a defeat to a Texas school in Ireland. I would just simply say God bless America and go Heels.
Honoring Bruce James
Page H5366 · Official text(Ms. MEJIA asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Passaic County commissioner and my friend Bruce James.
Bruce served as a county commissioner for over 20 years and previously served as a union leader at the Passaic County Board of Social Services.
Bruce was a lifelong champion of working people and was integral to our fight to raise the minimum wage in New Jersey. For two decades, he showed up for our community for stronger parks, safer streets, and a county government that met families on their hardest days. He sat across that desk himself, and he never forgot it.
Bruce did this work because he believed that working people deserved dignity, respect, and a government that fights for them as hard as they fight for themselves.
Mr. Speaker, we carry forward Bruce's fight and his legacy with love.
Recognizing Slovak Republic Constitution Day
Page H5366 · Official text(Mr. HURD of Colorado asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize September 1 as Constitution Day of the Slovak Republic, commemorating the adoption of Slovakia's Constitution in 1992.
A constitution is more than a legal document. It is a people's decision to govern themselves under law and to place limits on the power of government.
That principle has a particular meaning in Slovakia. Following decades of Communist rule, the Slovak people helped build a free, democratic republic grounded in constitutional government and in the rule of law.
Today, Slovakia is a friend and NATO ally of the United States. Our Nations share strong ties in security, trade, energy, and diplomacy. Generations of Slovak Americans have made that friendship deeper still.
Mr. Speaker, on Constitution Day, I congratulate the Slovak people and celebrate the freedom, self-government, and enduring friendship that bind our two nations.
Honoring Ellery Choke
Page H5366 · Official text(Ms. STRICKLAND asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life and legacy of Ellery "Ken" Choke, the chairman of the Nisqually Indian Tribe, who passed away on August 4, 2026.
Chairman Choke was born on February 25, 1964, in Centralia, Washington, and served as chairman of the Nisqually Tribe from 2018 to 2021 and was reelected chairman in 2024.
Chairman Choke was a respected and beloved leader who placed his community at the center of service. He was dedicated to protecting the land, water, salmon, and people of the Nisqually Tribe for generations to come. He will be remembered for his tireless service and commitment to his Tribal nation and to the South Sound community at large.
I was personally pleased to work with him on our efforts to transfer the Clear Creek Hatchery from U.S. Fish and Wildlife to Tribal ownership. I remain committed to honoring his legacy by moving this project forward and making it reality.
I am hopeful that his dedication to ensuring Tribal treaty rights, protecting our natural resources, and boosting salmon species in our region will continue on through those he knew.
He made South Sound, the State of Washington, and the Nation better; and he will be deeply missed. He is survived by his wife, eight children, and six grandchildren.
Mr. Speaker, I now ask my colleagues in Congress to join me in a moment of silence and hold Chairman Choke's family, loved ones, and the entire Nisqually Tribe of Indians in our thoughts and prayers during this difficult time.
Honoring Coach Ed Karpovich
Page H5366 · Official text(Mr. BRESNAHAN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Robert P. Bresnahan, Jr. (R-PA)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Coach Ed Karpovich, who retired last month from the University of Scranton golf team after an extraordinary 44 years as head coach.
He leaves a lasting mark on countless athletes, including myself, who had the privilege of learning from him. Before coaching, Ed was a distinguished golfer for the University of Scranton Royals, and in 1982, he came back to lead the team, transforming the program into a powerhouse.
During his coaching career, he led the team to over 400 wins in dual matches, a MAC title, and two landmark conference titles. Ed used his love of golf to cofound the Glenmaura National Collegiate Invitational, which draws talent from all over the country, including watching Chris Shank land a 40-foot putt.
Most of all, he understood that above being a coach, he was a teacher and a mentor. He not only invested in his student-athletes as players, he developed them as people, instilling excellence on the course and in all facets of life.
I am honored to have played for Coach Karpovich, to have learned from him, and to call him a mentor.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Coach Karpovich on an extraordinary career and thank him for the lasting impact he has had on generations of student-athletes in northeastern Pennsylvania.
Recognizing Ais Radiance Program
Pages H5366–H5367 · Official text(Mr. McGOVERN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, as we approach Labor Day, we should remember that the strength of our workforce can't just be measured by the jobs we create, but also by who we choose to include.
The Radiance Program, established by AIS of Leominster, Massachusetts, is a shining example of how businesses can unlock opportunities for people with physical, intellectual, and developmental challenges.
I thank Nick Haritos, Deanna Zarrella, Richard Marchand, and the entire team at AIS for their dedication to our community.
Mr. Speaker, I especially celebrate the young adults in the Radiance Program. Their hard work, determination, and willingness to learn new skills is truly inspiring. They are building careers, gaining confidence, and strengthening the teams and communities around them.
Programs like this make a huge difference, and I hope others follow the leadership of AIS and recognize the incredible talent that exists in every single community and see what is possible when everyone has the opportunity to succeed.
Victory for Ukraine
Page H5367 · Official text(Mr. WILSON of South Carolina asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, with the insidious invasion of sovereign Ukraine by war criminal Putin on February 24, 2022, over 1 million people have been murdered, with nearly 70,000 Ukrainian civilian casualties.
Putin falsely believed Ukraine would fall quickly, but brave Ukrainians have inspired the world, with America and over 50 other countries supporting Ukraine.
War criminal Putin continues the cowardly bombing of families and infrastructure, including this hospital for children in his failed invasion. In contrast, Ukrainians have achieved 35 years of independence with victory for Ukraine.
Mr. Speaker, I am grateful to cosponsor with Chairman Mike McCaul the bipartisan President Donald Trump-endorsed Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act, introduced by Senator Darline Graham, with a vote in the Senate of 86-11.
In conclusion, God bless our troops. President Donald Trump is reinstituting peace through strength, revealing that dictator Putin lies, insulting Trump and mocking Trump with Trump now supporting stronger sanctions.
Our sympathy to the family of city of Columbia Police Officer Christopher DeLong; his wonderful, devoted widow, Hannah DeLong; Columbia Police Chief Skip Holbrook; Columbia Mayor Daniel Rickenmann; and his colleagues and friends.
Remembering Xavien Harrison
Page H5367 · Official text(Mr. DAVIS of North Carolina asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I honor the life and legacy of Nashville town councilman and pastor, Xavien Harrison.
Xavien was a devoted public servant, pastor, and advocate for young people who believed in the power of community. He truly invested in the next generation, helping young people to see their full potential.
He brought the same spirit of service to the Nashville Town Council, where he worked to build partnerships and make his community stronger. His faith, compassion, and commitment to Nashville left a lasting mark on eastern North Carolina.
Mr. Speaker, we pray for Jacquetta, his family, the Philadelphia Missionary Baptist Church, and the people of Nashville, and we stand with them.
Recognizing City of Homewood, Alabama
Page H5367 · Official text(Mr. PALMER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the city of Homewood, Alabama, as it celebrates its 100th anniversary this year.
Homewood's history began long before its incorporation in 1926. The first settlers arrived in the area in the early 1800s. Union Hill Cemetery, established in the 1870s, serves as the final resting place for many of the early settlers of the area as well as veterans who fought in the Civil War, the Spanish-American War, and both world wars.
In 1926, communities, including Rosedale, Edgewood, and Grove Park developed and eventually came together to form the city of Homewood. The historic Hollywood community joined Homewood in 1929 and remains known today for its distinctive Mission Revival and Spanish Colonial Revival homes.
Over the decades, Homewood's population boomed and the city continued to forge its own identity, including establishing an independent school system in 1970.
Today, Homewood is known for its excellent schools, thriving businesses, beautiful neighborhoods, and strong sense of community.
Mr. Speaker, as we celebrate this remarkable milestone, I congratulate the people of Homewood on a century of growth and success. I look forward to all that the next 100 years will bring.
Elections Clause
Page H5367 · Official text(Ms. HOYLE of Oregon asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 of the Constitution says: The time, place, and manner of elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the legislature thereof, but Congress may at any time by law--by law--make or alter such regulations.
There is a court order saying the administration may not interfere with vote by mail. In Oregon, we only vote by mail and have done so since 1995, and yet, here we are.
Where are my colleagues who took an oath to uphold the Constitution and the rule of law? Where are my colleagues who took an oath to uphold the separation of powers between Congress and the executive branch and representative democracy? Where are my colleagues who took an oath to uphold the peaceful transfer of power, to allow every eligible citizen to vote? Where are my colleagues?
History will not judge this cowardice well. Where the hell are you? Stand up and uphold the Constitution. You took a damn oath.
The SPEAKER pro tempore
Members are reminded to direct their remarks to the Chair.
Recognizing Slovakia's Constitution Day
Page H5367 · Official text(Mr. STUTZMAN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, as co-chair of the Congressional Slovak Caucus, I rise today to recognize Slovakia's Constitution Day, marking 33 years as a sovereign state.
The U.S.-Slovakia relationship rests on shared democratic values and security interests.
Today, Slovakia is a vital U.S. partner and NATO ally, but this friendship began more than a century ago.
During World War I, the United States stood with Slovak's democratic aspirations and later welcomed the creation of an independent Slovakia in 1993.
Today, nearly 1 million Americans proudly claim Slovak ancestry, including many in my district in northeast Indiana. Our relationship carries renewed momentum today in energy security, economic cooperation, and defense partnerships, including the partnership between the Slovak Armed Forces and the Indiana National Guard.
Mr. Speaker, I wish the people of Slovakia a happy Constitution Day, and may the United States and Slovakia continue to stand together for generations to come.
Recognizing Sergeant Claude Rhea Walls
Pages H5367–H5368 · Official text(Mr. ROSE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of Sergeant Claude Rhea Walls of Wilson County, Tennessee, for his extraordinary heroism during the Korean war.
On May 18, 1951, while serving with Company C, 1st Battalion, 38th Infantry Regiment, 2nd Infantry Division in South Korea, Sergeant Walls defended his battalion's forward command post against numerically superior Chinese forces. He delivered devastating automatic rifle fire and grenades, then voluntarily stayed behind with another fellow soldier to cover his platoon's withdrawal.
After his brother-in-arms was severely wounded, Sergeant Walls rendered first aid and evacuated him, repeatedly stopping to suppress the Chinese forces. His selfless actions saved his fellow soldier and preserved his battalion's withdrawal. Walls' valor was recognized with the Distinguished Service Cross.
As we mark the 75th anniversary of his actions, I would like to honor Sergeant Walls' legacy of courage, heroism, and unwavering devotion to our Nation's defense.
Providing for Consideration of H.r. 1501, Protecting Domestic Mining Act of 2025; Providing for Consideration of H.r. 9436, Northeast Lobsterman Protection Act of 2026; Providing for Consideration...
Pages H5368–H5377 · Official textPROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1501, PROTECTING DOMESTIC MINING ACT OF 2025; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 9436, NORTHEAST LOBSTERMAN PROTECTION ACT OF 2026; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H. RES. 1490, PROVIDING FOR THE CONDEMNATION AND DENOUNCEMENT OF SOCIALISM IN ALL ITS FORMS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES; AND H.R. 4795, PROTECT ECONOMIC AND ACADEMIC FREEDOM ACT OF 2026; AND RELATING TO CONSIDERATION OF MOTIONS TO SUSPEND THE RULES
Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1499 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
Text printed in the Record (4,325 characters)
Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 1501) to amend the FAST Act to include certain mineral production activities as a covered project, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Natural Resources now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Natural Resources or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
Sec. 2. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 9436) to amend the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 to extend the time period for which certain regulations concerning the North Atlantic right whale are effective. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Natural Resources now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 119-40 shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Natural Resources or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
Sec. 3. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order without intervention of any point of order to consider in the House the resolution (H. Res. 1490) providing for the condemnation and denouncement of socialism in all its forms, and for other purposes. The resolution shall be considered as read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the resolution and preamble to adoption without intervening motion or demand for division of the question except one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on House Administration or their respective designees.
Sec. 4. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 4795) to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to prohibit an institution that participates in a nonexpressive commercial boycott of Israel from being eligible for certain funds under that Act, to require an institution that participates in certain programs under that Act to certify that students are not unreasonably obstructed from participating in academic programs in Israel, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Education and Workforce now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 119-39 shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Workforce or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
Sec. 5. Debate on motions that the House suspend the rules, under clause 1 of rule XV, relating to the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 1) proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to require that the Supreme Court of the United States be composed of nine justices, shall be extended to one hour.
The SPEAKER pro tempore
The gentlewoman from North Carolina is recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume.
During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 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.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Committee on Rules met and produced the rule, House Resolution 1499, providing for the House's consideration of four measures: H.R. 1501, H.R. 9436, H. Res. 1490, and H.R. 4795.
The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 1501, the Protecting Domestic Mining Act of 2025, and H.R. 9436, the Northeast Lobsterman Protection Act of 2026, under closed rules.
The rule provides 1 hour of general debate on each bill, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Natural Resources or their respective designees and provides each bill one motion to recommit.
The rule further provides for consideration of H. Res. 1490, providing for the condemnation and denouncement of socialism in all its forms, and for other purposes, under a closed rule.
The rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on House Administration or their respective designees.
The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 4795, the Protect Economic and Academic Freedom Act of 2026, under a closed rule.
The rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and the ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Workforce or their respective designees and provides one motion to recommit.
Mr. Speaker, we have a strong slate of bills contained under this rule here today, bills that are as substantive as they are impactful.
H. Res. 1490 makes clear the House's strong disapproval of socialism and reaffirms our ironclad support for free, fair, and secure elections that the American people can trust.
These are issues of monumental importance, Mr. Speaker. We have all seen how socialism continues to encroach upon our society, our constitutional Republic.
It is not some sort of ominous figure on the horizon. It is a threat standing directly upon America's doorstep.
Some will argue that socialism is a good thing and that it is steeped in benevolence, fairness, and righteousness. Tell that to the millions of men, women, and children throughout history who have died because of socialism. Tell that to the people who lost their freedoms under socialism, the people who lost everything.
History reminds us that socialism has always been used as a cudgel against free people, as a cudgel against individual liberty and prosperity. It must be denounced by this body in the strongest terms.
This resolution also makes clear that our system of elections here in America should remain secure, and participation should be limited to only American citizens. Noncitizens have no right whatsoever to cast a vote in our elections. We saw the failures uncovered in New Jersey, where thousands of noncitizens were registered to vote in that State.
Votes cast by noncitizens negate legal votes cast by Americans who exercise their civic duty at the ballot box. Why in the world would we ignore this issue?
This is an issue that the American people care deeply about. They deserve the utmost confidence that their votes count and that our system of elections remains as secure as it could possibly be.
H.R. 1501, the Protecting Domestic Mining Act of 2025, would work to preserve streamlined permitting eligibility for domestic mineral production right here in the United States.
We are blessed to live in a country that is teeming with resources that we can harness and use to our benefit. Energy security and the resilience of our Nation's supply chain will always be issues that we can make good progress on and build upon. We can do so by passing this legislation and adding to the progress that we have made thus far in this Congress.
H.R. 4795, the bipartisan Protect Economic and Academic Freedom Act, prohibits institutions that distribute hardworking taxpayers' dollars to students in colleges and universities from engaging in nonexpressive commercial boycotts of Israel.
To be crystal clear, this legislation does not dictate viewpoints, and it does not prohibit anyone from expressing their opinions. Individuals remain free to advocate, protest, or engage in political speech protected by the First Amendment. Students can still choose to abstain from products made in Israel if they so choose.
This legislation extends deference to the First Amendment by applying a successful model established by the State of Arkansas that has been validated by the Federal Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. What Congress cannot and should not tolerate is taxpayer money being used to marginalize Jewish people and undermine Israel's major strategic partner status enshrined in law.
This bill addresses conduct that is unacceptable to a majority of Americans and sends a simple message: American taxpayers should support institutions that foster academic opportunity and international collaboration and not institutions that erect barriers and engage in discriminatory boycotts.
I am proud to author this legislation and to have worked in a strong spirit of bipartisanship alongside my colleagues to help it come to fruition. Confronting anti-Semitism is an issue of our time, and we cannot afford to place it on the back burner for even a second.
Finally, H.R. 9436 would allow for a more thorough review of protections for one of the most endangered marine mammals in the world. It would allow scientists, fishermen, and government agencies the necessary time to study and refine protections for the North Atlantic right whale that could better protect fishing communities and the vitality of the species. I will note that this is an issue that has received bipartisan support here in the people's House.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
James P. McGovern (D-MA)11:30 a.m.
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, how long should the American people have to wait for our prices to come down? Republicans promised that prices would come down on day one. That was 589 days ago, coming up on 2 years.
Mr. Speaker, I ask my Republican colleagues again: How much longer do we all have to wait? Are they going to tell us, or is it a big surprise? Is it another week, another month, another President?
Mr. Speaker, when are my Republican colleagues going to take responsibility for the fact that they are in charge of everything? Republicans control the House, the Senate, and the executive branch. Hell, Republicans even control the Supreme Court.
Mr. Speaker, because of Republican policies, the affordability crisis in the United States of America is getting worse. It is getting worse, so how long until they acknowledge that their stupid tariffs and their illegal war with Iran are driving up prices and making life harder for people?
Mr. Speaker, how long until the Epstein files are fully released? Some of us still haven't forgotten about that one or the fact that the files remain hidden and that Trump's involvement is being covered up despite congressional laws to the contrary.
How long does America have to wait until Republicans stop blaming everybody else and acknowledge that they have failed? I, for one, am sick of the gaslighting and the projection. I am sick of the broken promises. I am sick of the lies. I am sick of the corruption, the grift, and the greed. The people who I represent are sick of it, too.
Mr. Speaker, I do a farm tour every year. I represent a lot of rural communities and hundreds and hundreds of small- and medium-sized family farms that have been on the same land for generations. I heard a story about one farmer who is being asked to pay an extra $25,000 for a single piece of essential equipment because of Trump's tariffs. On top of that, the price of diesel is ruining their livelihood.
That is what this administration is doing to rural America, to small towns, and to the family farms that I represent. This President and this Republican Congress are destroying them. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle are destroying them.
It is just as bad for consumers because Trump's tariffs, trade wars, and higher gas prices are getting passed along to us, as well. Gas is still over $4 a gallon. Ground beef is up 9 percent. Tomatoes and apples are up over 10 percent. Turkey is up 8 percent. Fish is up almost 8 percent. Cars are more expensive. Clothes are more expensive. Utility bills are more expensive. Everything is more expensive.
Inflation is killing people, and this Republican Congress has a bunch of bills today which will do nothing, nothing, nothing to lower prices.
I am going to talk about those bills in a second, but first let me say: Do you know who is not getting destroyed, Mr. Speaker? It is the rich, the powerful, and the well-connected. Those people who hang out in Mar-a-Lago are not getting destroyed. They are doing better than ever.
The multimillionaires and the billionaires are doing great, thanks to all the tax breaks that they got. Big Oil, Big Ag, and Big Tech get massive giveaways from Republicans. Some of those giveaways are in the bills we are considering today, one of which is a giveaway to the mining industry, and I am sure their lobbyists will get a nice, big bonus for getting that one across the finish line.
It is really gross. It is really gross. The rich and the powerful are doing better than ever while everyone else is seeing double-digit price increases, but don't bother trying to get Republicans to do anything about it. Let's look at their priorities so far this Congress.
Here is what they have been doing while gas is $4 a gallon. Let's see what they have been doing. They have been pretending to rename the Gulf of Mexico, pretending to rename Lake Ontario, pretending to rename The Kennedy Center, introducing a bill to put Donald Trump on Mount Rushmore, introducing a bill to make his birthday a national holiday, introducing a bill to put him on the $100 bill, introducing a bill to name Dulles International Airport after him, and introducing a bill to name the Washington Metro after him. I mean, you can't make this stuff up.
These are actual bills that Republicans have introduced; and let us not forget letting the President pilfer taxpayer money to build a tacky ballroom, a stupid arch, and fix the airplane that Qatar bribed--I am sorry, excuse me, donated to him.
That is the focus of this Republican Congress. That is what this Republican Congress is obsessed with: worshipping Donald Trump, while you stress out about how you are going to pay your mortgage or your kid's tuition or your parents' medical bills.
So, I mean, while they worship Donald Trump, the American people have to struggle with how they are going to make ends meet. And they are not getting any help from anything that is going on in this Chamber.
The big Republican push this week is repassing a nonbinding resolution that condemns socialism. They already passed it, and it already does nothing. So I am not sure why they need to pass it again, but that is their big, important bill this week. You just heard it from the chairwoman of the Rules Committee.
What is their definition of "socialism," you ask? What exactly are they condemning? I actually asked Republicans last time around in the Rules Committee to define what they are condemning. To define socialism if you will. You all might be shocked. Social Security? Republicans condemn that as socialism. Medicare? That is socialism. Medicaid? That is socialism. Public schools? That is socialism. Food safety inspections? That is socialism. National parks? That is socialism. Public transit? You guessed it. You guessed it.
They must really think Americans are stupid. This is the same old Red Scare bs. By their definition, anyone in the United States who supports Medicaid is a socialist sympathizer. I mean, is Joe McCarthy coming back from the dead?
This is insane. It is literally crazy that this is the garbage that we are talking about while people are seeing their costs going through the roof. People can't afford to make ends meet, and this is what this Congress is focused on right now? I mean, come on.
While we are on the topic of condemning political ideology that we disagree with, let me ask: Where is their condemnation of fascism? I mean, the Trump administration weaponizes the government to silence opposition. It attacks the free press, wants to invade our allies, shoots innocent people in the streets, dehumanizes immigrants by saying that they "poison the blood of our country," calls political opponents "the enemy from within," and let's not forget they tried to overturn a free and fair election in 2020. Is that not fascism? Where is their condemnation of that? Silence. Silence. Nothing.
Mr. Speaker, I don't envy the gentlewoman's task today. She has to defend a pretty lousy agenda, and I think she knows it. But I just wish we could get some acknowledgment from the other side that things are not all fine and well in America right now.
Prices are up. Inflation is up. Bills are higher. Life is harder, and it is because of this President's policies. Instead of acknowledging it, it is like Republicans are living in an alternative reality. I mean, it is like what happened to the Republican Party? It doesn't exist anymore. It is like a cult.
We do have an affordability crisis. That is just a fact. Instead of working with us to address it, Republicans are pretending like it doesn't exist. Instead, we get more culture war nonsense and more giveaways to special interests.
But November is coming soon. Mr. Speaker, November is coming very soon, and I think my Republican colleagues are getting desperate. I think they know that the jig is up. I think they know that the American people are about to hold them accountable for all of their broken promises. I think that is why you are seeing this last-ditch attempt to throw the kitchen sink of culture war issues at the wall to see what sticks.
This is a lousy, awful, rotten rule. And by the way, it is totally closed. Nobody can offer any amendments to anything in this rule. It may even fail because we had a bipartisan vote yesterday in the Rules Committee against this rule, so we will see what happens on the floor. But, come on, people are hurting.
I would say to my Republican friends: Your constituents are hurting. They want us to do something to help them. They don't want this. They don't want this. They want something real. So if you can give tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires and you can bail out the Mar-a-Lago class, how about helping the average person, the hardworking men and women who are trying to make ends meet. That is what they want. That is what they expect.
I urge a "no" vote on this, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Virginia Foxx (R-NC)11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, in the 119th Congress, the House has been the most aggressive, successful, and productive since the 80th Congress in 1949. Total measures passed by the House are 899. Tax relief was $82 billion across all filers this tax season with 97 percent of all tax filers receiving a tax cut last year, and the 3 percent who didn't were the highest earners in the country. Regulations lifted by Congress are 23.
When you place these three points within historical context, they reveal that this Congress is the most successful and productive since 1949.
Now, obviously, the House cannot control the actions of the Senate. The statistics demonstrated by the House of Representatives this Congress are truly historic. I would put them up against the abysmal record of sleepy Joe Biden and his enablers every day.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
James P. McGovern (D-MA)11:40 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentlewoman from North Carolina's explanation, and I know that those are the Republican talking points, but I have got news for you. Nobody is buying it.
I mean, I don't know whether my friend was home talking to her constituents over the break, but I was home talking to my constituents. I was in other States talking to voters, as well, and do you know what? Life has gotten harder for them. Prices of everything are through the roof. And to the extent that any working person got a small tax cut while the rich got these big tax cuts, millionaires and billionaires got all these big tax cuts, to the extent that they got that, any little tax break they received has been totally erased by the cost of living and by high gas prices because of this illegal, reckless war.
By the way, wouldn't you think that Congress would want to exercise its constitutional prerogatives and actually debate the war in Iran and actually vote whether to authorize it or not? We have been forced to try to bring privileged resolutions to the floor to try to get any kind of a debate on this. There should be hearings. There should be a full vote on whether to authorize this and whether or not people want to go on record as saying we are going to spend over $100 billion on this stupid, reckless war in Iran. By the way, that resulted in the Strait of Hormuz being closed, which was open before the war began. We are going to spend the money on that, but we are not going to spend it on helping alleviate the high cost of living on people in this country.
This Congress is the least productive Congress in history. This has been a total failure, a total failure.
I would just encourage my Republican colleagues, don't take my word for it. Look at every public opinion poll, including those coming out by FOX News and rightwing influencers. They will tell you: Nobody is buying it.
One of the things that I have heard over and over again during the August work period was that the American people are rightfully outraged that an out-of-control AI data center buildup is wreaking havoc on their communities. Data centers are driving up utility costs and polluting water supplies, all while Big Tech reaps record profits. Yet, now with November on the horizon, some House Republicans are acting as if they did not turbocharge the data center buildup.
I mean, a year ago, Republicans were bragging about giving tax breaks to Big Tech in order to build data centers across rural America. You can check it out yourselves. It is section 70421 of the big, ugly bill.
According to the Republican chairman of the tax writing committee, this provision would: significantly reduce barriers for large-scale, capital-intensive projects in rural areas, most notably, hyperscale data centers. That is the Republicans.
That provision alone cost the American taxpayers $40 billion. That is money that is going to Big Tech to build unpopular data centers instead of lowering the cost of healthcare and housing or groceries.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article titled, "Big, Beautiful Success Story: Rural America Rebound on the Horizon with New Opportunity Zone Incentives."
The SPEAKER pro tempore11:50 a.m.
Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection. Big, Beautiful Success Story: Rural America Rebound on the Horizon With New Opportunity Zone Incentives
Text printed in the Record (4,075 characters)
Washington, D.C.--Newly created Qualified Rural Opportunity Funds (RQOFs) will target rural communities--along with various other pro-growth tax tools--and support a massive wave of private investment in the American heartland. All thanks to The One, Big, Beautiful Bill, the Opportunity Zone program, originally established under the 2017 Trump tax cuts, is renewed and revamped to better incentivize and target investment in rural areas across our country.
As Bloomberg Tax reports, the reimagined program includes an enhanced 30 percent basis step-up after five years and a lower substantial-improvement threshold, which offer strong advantages for rural communities that will help steer capital toward agriculture and water infrastructure, and incentivize on-shoring of manufacturing.
"Thanks to The One, Big, Beautiful Bill, small town America is poised for an economic rebound," said Ways and Means Committee Chair Jason Smith (MO-08). "President Trump has made the American heartland a top priority of his administration, and these new tools will unlock private investment for farms, Main Street businesses, and critical infrastructure that will bring jobs home, strengthen supply chains, and modernize our agriculture sector. For the sixty million Americans who live in rural America, The One, Big, Beautiful Bill is a generational opportunity that gives workers, farmers, and families real incentives to stay, build, and thrive."
Rural Opportunity Zones: "The new tax law also introduces qualified rural opportunity funds, or RQOFs, which offer enhanced benefits--including a 30 percent basis step-up after five years and a reduced 50 percent substantial improvement requirement, meaning fewer dollars must be spent improving assets compared with standard QOFs. These changes reflect a clear policy shift toward encouraging rural investment through the QOZ program."
Attracting New Investment: "The new law's enhancements for RQOFs may significantly lower barriers for large-scale, capital-intensive projects in rural areas--most notably hyperscale data centers. . .With the new 30 percent basis step-up after five years--available only to RQOFs--along with the permanent, rolling five-year deferral of capital gains, the economic case for building data centers in designated rural opportunity zones becomes far more compelling."
Securing Domestic Supply Chains: "These same incentives can drive the onshoring of advanced manufacturing into rural communities. Facilities such as semiconductor fabrication plants, precision-machining centers, and next-generation battery or electric vehicle component factories often require years of planning and billions of dollars in capital."
Modernizing U.S. Agriculture Infrastructure: "Beyond heavy industry, the revised QOZ program also opens new avenues for investment in rural agriculture and critical infrastructure."
Improved Efficiency: "The more favorable tax treatment may now encourage investors to fund modern irrigation systems, large-scale cold-storage distribution hubs, and on-farm renewable energy assets such as solar panels, anaerobic digesters, or small-scale wind turbines. These improvements make agricultural operations more efficient and resilient. . ."
Higher Productivity: "The RQOF framework also supports investments in regenerative farming practices, which promote soil health and long-term sustainability. Examples include cover-crop rotation systems, no-till farming equipment, carbon sequestration protocols, and composting facilities--all of which reduce environmental impact while enhancing yields over time."
Incentivizing Infrastructure Upgrades: "Some rural opportunity zones also may allow for investments in water infrastructure--including irrigation canals, water reuse systems, and stormwater runoff mitigation--which have traditionally fallen outside the purview of private investment. By treating such infrastructure as investable assets under the QOZ rules, the new law could catalyze upgrades to water systems that are vital to both agriculture and rural population centers."
James P. McGovern (D-MA)11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Virginia Foxx (R-NC)11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I will continue to talk about the accomplishments of the 119th Congress. House Republicans, so far in the 119th Congress, have passed the Working Families Tax Cut Act, which delivered the largest middle-and working-class tax cuts in U.S. history. That cannot be refuted, Mr. Speaker. It cannot. Anyone who tries to do that is themselves living in an alternate universe.
We expanded 529 education accounts. We saved American farms by allowing farmers to spread tax payments on sales over 4 years if the land continues to be used for agriculture purposes. We doubled the small business expensing limit. We permanently extended the small business deduction. We delivered a $6,000 bonus deduction to seniors on Social Security. We eliminated the tax on auto loan interest for American-made cars. We permanently increased the child tax credit to $2,200. We eliminated the tax on overtime. We eliminated the tax on tips. We created Trump accounts to help children begin saving for their future. We permanently allowed businesses to immediately deduct domestic R&D expenses. We permanently doubled the death tax exemption. We permanently increased the standard deduction. We ended taxation of suppressors, short-barreled rifles, and short-barreled shotguns. We repealed the green corporate welfare subsidies.
Mr. Speaker, we don't have enough time in the time allotted for this rule debate today to list all of the wonderful things that this House of Representatives and this Congress have done to improve the lives of the American people.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
James P. McGovern (D-MA)11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let me just say to my friend, the chair of the Rules Committee: You can't fool people. You just can't. I mean, people go to the supermarket. They have to pay their utility bills. They have to pay their rent. People are trying to see where they can afford a home.
I mean, they know what the reality is. To somehow say they are being beautiful, I mean, come on. That is ludicrous. That is assuming that people don't believe their real-life experiences every day.
She talks about the most productive Congress. I mean, 104 laws were passed in this Republican Congress. When the Democrats were last in charge, we passed 365 laws.
The issue is what do these laws do. We passed bills to try to expand healthcare for people. We passed bills to try to make sure that children had access to Head Start and to daycare. We passed bills to actually protect our environment. We passed bills to try to keep the world out of war. That is a big contrast to what we are seeing in this Republican Congress.
I would just say this: What Donald Trump has done with the acquiescence of the Republican majority is they have added a new tax on average people, close to $4,000. There is a $4,000 Trump tax on almost every family in this country. The people who don't feel it are the ones who benefited from the trillions of dollars in tax cuts given to millionaires and billionaires and big corporations.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent also to include in the Record an article from Politico titled, "Amazon's tax bill plunges after GOP tax cuts."
The SPEAKER pro tempore11:50 a.m.
Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
Text printed in the Record (2,174 characters)
Republicans' tax cuts shaved billions off Amazon's tax bill, new government filings show. The company says it ran a $1.2 billion tax bill last year, down from $9 billion the previous year, and even as its profits jumped by 45 percent to nearly $90 billion.
That's largely because of the generous new depreciation breaks GOP lawmakers included in their One Big Beautiful Bill, something that's particularly important to Amazon which--in addition to maintaining a vast infrastructure for its ubiquitous delivery business--has been spending billions to build out artificial intelligence data centers.
Also helping, though less important: The law's expanded breaks for businesses research and development expenses.
The company has long been criticized by Democrats for paying little in tax, and it appeared to be bracing for criticism in the wake of the report to the Securities Exchange Commission.
"Last year, Congress made changes to the tax code to encourage greater investment in the American economy, its innovation, and its workers--all areas where Amazon has long been a leader" the company said Friday.
"Our tax bill this year reflects those changes by Congress."
The company estimates it invested $340 billion in the U.S. last year.
Under financial accounting rules, the company says its effective tax rate was actually 19.6 percent in 2025, though that doesn't include the effect of increased depreciation writeoffs because those are essentially timing shifts that allow companies to take more deductions now in exchange for fewer in the future.
"Deducting our costs more quickly provides a short-run benefit but this policy ultimately doesn't change the amount of tax we pay." Amazon said. "It just changes the timing of our tax payments."
In terms of actual cash payments Amazon made to the Treasury Department last year for income taxes, which can include payments for prior year's taxes, the company says it handed over $2.75 billion, down from $7.63 billion in 2024.
The company did not pay the corporate alternative minimum tax, and has never reported paying the levy, though Democrats created it in hopes of forcing companies like Amazon to pay more.
James P. McGovern (D-MA)11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to also urge that we defeat the previous question. If we do, I will offer an amendment to the rule to provide for consideration of H.R. 738, the Universal Right To Vote By Mail Act, which would ensure that all eligible voters in America have the option to vote by mail.
Mr. Speaker, President Trump has issued an executive order to undermine the credibility of our elections and to make it harder or even impossible for millions of Americans to vote by mail. We learned today from a whistleblower that Trump officials are defying court orders and pushing ahead with these unconstitutional plans.
Mr. Speaker, let me remind you, President Trump personally loves voting by mail. He voted by mail in Florida as recently as 2 weeks ago. To everyone listening, Trump wants to vote by mail, but he doesn't want you to be able to do so.
Voting by mail has been proven to increase turnout and reduce barriers to voting, such as bad weather, illness, disability, and long lines. We should expand mail-in voting to make it easier for Americans to participate in our democracy, which is what this bill would do.
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.
I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Salinas) to discuss our proposal.
Andrea Salinas (D-OR)11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, President Trump knows that the only way Republicans can win this midterm election is to lie and cheat. Trump has failed to address the affordability crisis. Now, instead of fighting to lower costs, he is fighting to suppress votes and prevent Americans from holding him and the GOP accountable this November.
Over the past year, the American people have watched as Trump has tried to suppress votes in any way he can. He has pushed for the SAVE America Act, helped undermine the Voting Rights Act, and most recently has urged the courts to restrict mail-in voting, even though the President himself votes by mail.
We all know why. Trump can't stand the fact that he lost the 2020 election. He pushed the big lie, claimed the election was rigged, and without proof, blamed mail-in voting. President Trump can't stand that he lost in 2020. He can't stand the thought of losing again, and that is why he is trying to prevent Americans from voting by mail.
Let me be clear. Our elections are free, fair, and accurate. Take it from my home State of Oregon. We have been an entirely vote-by-mail State for nearly 30 years, and our elections have been safe and secure. Oregon consistently has some of the highest levels of voter turnout in the country, and research has shown that voters from both sides of the aisle vote by mail at similar rates.
The right to vote should not depend on your State, your marital status, your access to a passport, or whether you can make it to a polling place on election day. Every eligible American deserves a fair and accessible way to make their voices heard.
We should be removing barriers to vote, not increasing them. That is why I introduced the Universal Right To Vote by Mail Act.
My bill would give every eligible voter in America the right to vote by mail in Federal elections without requiring a specific excuse. It would also require States to give voters a chance to fix a simple mistake or discrepancy on their ballot before that vote is rejected.
This is not about helping any one party or the other. It is about making sure every eligible American has a fair opportunity to participate in our democracy. President Trump is trying to take that opportunity away. He is attacking vote-by-mail because he is afraid of the results when voters make their voices heard this November.
Congress must reject the attacks on vote-by-mail. I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question and support my Universal Right To Vote by Mail Act so every eligible American can cast their ballot safely, securely, and conveniently.
The answer to Republicans' fears that they will lose the upcoming election is not to make it harder for people to vote, the answer is to earn their votes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore11:50 a.m.
Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President.
Virginia Foxx (R-NC)12:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, in order not to allow Americans to be misled by statements being made here on the floor, I am going to continue to list items among the dozens that were in H.R. 1 that could have been stand-alone bills but for efficiency's sake were included in H.R. 1.
We permanently secured our Nation's borders, funded the construction of the border wall, and provided funding for additional Customs officers and Border Patrol agents. However, in addition to that, we passed the Laken Riley Act as a stand-alone to require detention of illegal aliens who commit theft.
The Working Families Tax Cuts included provisions that make illegal immigrants who are convicted of or who have admitted to sex offenses or domestic violence inadmissible and deportable. The Working Families Tax Cuts creates a new criminal offense for operating a vehicle within 100 miles of the southern border while fleeing Border Patrol agents. The Jeremy and Angel Seay and Sergeant Brandon Mendoza Protect Our Communities from DUIs Act makes driving while intoxicated or impaired grounds for deporting an illegal alien.
The Kayla Hamilton Act requires background checks for criminal history or gang affiliation before unaccompanied alien children are placed in American communities.
Not a single illegal alien has been released into the U.S. in 16 months. Four hundred thousand illegals who were charged with and convicted of a crime have been deported. Emergency rooms have reported significant reductions in illegal immigrant visits, freeing up critical resources to better serve American citizens in need of urgent medical care.
Fentanyl trafficking at the southern border has been reduced by 56 percent in FY 2025. The HALT Fentanyl Act permanently schedules fentanyl and fentanyl analogues as schedule I drugs.
More than 146 migrant children have been rescued from sex trafficking and child labor. We hear about this every week on the news.
Another act, the SUPPORT Act, reauthorizes support and treatment programs for opioid use disorders and other substance abuse disorders.
We lowered costs by cutting waste, fraud, and abuse in our country.
We protected children by passing legislation that would end gender-affirming care--gender-affirming care, what a distortion of the American language--for minors, and we banned biological males from girls' and women's sports.
Mr. Speaker, if we have done nothing else, that is a huge accomplishment, but we have done so many other things.
We passed the KIDS Act that protects children online by holding Big Tech accountable and requiring stronger safeguards to protect kids from predators, exploitation, and harmful online contents. Again, we could go on and on, and I will, to correct the record of what we have done in this Congress.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
James P. McGovern (D-MA)12:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert into the Record an article from the Associated Press titled: "US consumer confidence falls to lowest level in 7 months with gas stuck above $4".
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Haridopolos)12:00 p.m.
Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection. US Consumer Confidence Falls to Lowest Level in 7 Months With Gas Stuck Above $4
Text printed in the Record (2,240 characters)
Washington (AP)--Americans' confidence in the economy declined again this month as the ongoing conflict in Iran continued to push U.S. gasoline prices above $4 per gallon.
The Conference Board said Tuesday that its consumer confidence index dipped to 89.4 in August from 90.2 in July. That was the lowest level in seven months but was essentially within the same lukewarm range it has been in since the beginning of the year. In late 2024 and early 2025, readings were consistently above 100.
Respondents' views of their present situation improved, but their short-term outlook soured.
Americans remain frustrated with the economy after five years of elevated inflation, potentially posing a risk to President Donald Trump and Republicans in the midterm elections, which are less than 70 days away.
Write-in responses to the board's survey, collected from Aug. 3 to Aug. 16, were slightly more pessimistic this month. References to prices in general--and oil and gas prices specifically--remained elevated. Comments about war and geopolitics, food prices, trade and jobs rose in August.
Trump continues to blame high prices on his predecessor, Democrat Joe Biden, yet inflation has risen since Trump's inauguration last year.
The Federal Reserve's preferred inflation gauge--the personal consumption expenditures price index--was up 3.7% in June from a year earlier. That was down from May's 4.1% year-over-year increase but up from 2.8% before the Iran war began on Feb. 28. It was 2.5% when Trump was inaugurated in January 2025.
The government issues its July PCE data Wednesday.
Consumers' views of the current labor market improved in August, with 27% saying jobs were "plentiful," up from 24.4% in July. However, respondents were more negative about the labor market over the next six months, with just 14.6% expecting more jobs to be available, down from 16.4% last month.
The U.S. job market stalled unexpected in July as employers cut 23,000 jobs. To make matters worse, Labor Department revisions erased 103,000 jobs from previously reported May and June payrolls.
The unemployment rate fell to 4.1%, but for the wrong reason: Thousands of people dropped out of the labor market, leaving fewer people competing for work.
James P. McGovern (D-MA)12:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert into the Record an article from NBC titled: "How Trump's economic policies are widening America's wealth gap".
The SPEAKER pro tempore12:00 p.m.
Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
Text printed in the Record (11,897 characters)
How Trump's economic policies are widening America's wealth gap
How's the economy?
Not bad if you're rich.
Demand for luxury yachts and private jets is surging thanks to last year's tax law. Sales of $10 million-plus mansions are booming as stocks hit new highs. And the wealthy and powerful will get to enjoy a new ballroom for galas at the White House.
What if you aren't rich?
The typical American can't afford the median-priced home. A new car is out of reach for many, with the average monthly payment exceeding $700. Food banks are seeing a growing number of people skipping meals because they can't afford groceries, and more middle-class Americans are selling their plasma to make ends meet.
The divide between rich and poor in America is the widest it's been in at least a generation--and growing. The amount of wealth held by the top 1% increased at more than double the rate of the bottom 90% in the first nine months of last year, according to Federal Reserve figures. At the very top, Elon Musk's fortune is approaching that of legendary 19th-century businessman John D. Rockefeller when looked at as a share of the overall U.S. economy.
A variety of factors have shaped the struggles of everyday Americans and fueled the gains of the wealthy: The pandemic disrupted the housing market, making it harder to afford a home. Stocks have surged, driven by enthusiasm over AI. Manufacturing has waned, hiring has slipped and costs continue to rise.
President Donald Trump's policies are amplifying these trends. One year into his second term, his administration has cut programs helping lower-income households while advancing policies benefiting the wealthy and corporations. He's signed legislation to cut food stamps and Medicaid benefits and put new restrictions on low-income housing assistance and student loans. To cope with higher costs from tariffs, he has suggested Americans buy fewer dolls for their children.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration has given billions of dollars in tax cuts to corporations and the wealthy and loosened regulations on banks while easing rules around cryptocurrency, which he's benefited from personally.
"Donald Trump talks a lot about the working class, his MAGA base is primarily working class, but if you look at the data, the working class is doing very badly in the second Trump administration," said Robert Reich, a professor emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley, who led the Labor Department during the Clinton administration. "The real growth in the second Trump administration has been in corporate profits and in the wealth of the people at the top."
Trump has defended his economic record, referring to concerns over affordability as a hoax and blaming weakness in the economy on Democrats. He's dismissed numerous polls showing increasing economic anxiety, saying in his State of the Union address in February that he has ushered in a "golden age of America." As evidence, he cited rising 401(k) balances, a drop in mortgage rates and lower gas prices--though gas prices have since spiked after his attacks on Iran disrupted the global flow of oil. The S&P 500, fueled by an AI boom, grew around 13% during the first year of his second term.
Trump's allies argue that, while it may take time, all Americans will benefit from last summer's tax cuts, with the average refund rising by around $1,000 this year, according to data cited by the White House. They also say that Trump's still-evolving tariffs will eventually boost U.S. manufacturing jobs, which declined last year, noting announcements by foreign governments and corporations about plans to invest in the U.S.
A White House official also pointed to signs of improvement, including a lower rate of inflation than in the past several years and wages that are rising faster than inflation.
Some economists, including those who have served in past Republican administrations, have questioned whether those improvements will be enough to offset pressures elsewhere in the economy, including from a slowing job market, which shed 92,000 jobs in February across a broad range of industries.
For "Unaffordable America," a yearlong series on the causes and effects of rising economic inequality, NBC News asked readers how they were faring and heard from hundreds of people. In interviews and written responses, many described struggling to find a job and afford higher food prices and health care costs, while others said they were benefiting from gains in the stock market and lower interest rates.
In Miami, a man in financial services wrote that his business was growing. "We had the best year ever," he said. In Iowa, a woman who lost her job at the end of last year wrote that she was struggling to find a new one. "The unemployment in the state of Iowa is barely paying my bills as a mom of two," she said.
What's clear is that the divide between the wealthiest Americans and everyone else has been growing for decades--and shows no sign of slowing. The ramifications of Trump's policies widening this divide could go beyond Americans' bank accounts, shaping the political landscape ahead of November's midterm elections, with multiple polls showing a growing number of voters disapproving of Trump's handling of the economy.
For many people, these trends are shaking a core belief that it is possible to get ahead in America.
A widening gap
When asked, "Are you better off than your parents" the answer for many Americans used to be a resounding "yes." Now, the answer is more often unclear.
Americans born in the 1980s were less likely to earn more than their parents, compared with those born in the 1940s, a 2016 study by Stanford University economists found. Today's households are also facing higher costs, including spiking health care premiums and deductibles, as well as child care expenses.
These struggles are not equally felt. As of last October, the top 1% held 32% of America's wealth, up from about 23% in 1990. The wealth held by white households far outstrips that of Black and Hispanic households.
Slowing wage gains have contributed to the widening gap between rich and poor. Since 1979, wages for the bottom 90% of earners have increased 44%, while wages for the top 1% of earners have risen more than 180%, a 2024 report from the Economic Policy Institute found.
That's left many Americans feeling like they are falling behind.
Reid Pinkham, a senior applied scientist working on Al-related projects, is among those doing well. After losing his job at Meta, where his income more than quadrupled over four years, he said he quickly got another job at Amazon for higher pay. The value of his Meta stock options and other investments has climbed.
Now, at 30, Pinkham owns a home in the Seattle area and is planning to build an expensive addition. When he and his wife think about having kids, he said child care costs aren't a major concern, and if he were to lose his job, he'd have enough savings to get by for years.
But he still has a negative view of the economy, based on what he's hearing from friends and family.
"There are a lot of people whose incomes don't go up when the stock market goes up," said Pinkham, who votes for Democrats. "For me personally, I'm doing fine. But then you look at the macro numbers, and I don't think it's in a good place."
The Trump administration's regulatory cuts, along with tax breaks for corporations in last year's tax law, sent stocks to record highs last year. Those heavily invested in technology companies are gaining the most--just seven tech companies, including Amazon and Meta, were responsible for 40% of the gains last year in the S&P 500.
While most Americans have some investment in the stock market, a disproportionate share of gains have gone to the wealthy, with the richest 10% of households owning around 90% of all stocks, according to Federal Reserve data.
Those same households were responsible for around half of all consumer spending in 2025, the highest rate since at least 1989, according to Moody's Analytics. Wealthy households also buoyed the housing market
and new car sales over the past year. Walmart said last month that most of its growth was coming from households making more than $100,000.
Jeremy Kregar, 23, considers himself lucky among his group of college friends. He's making $21 an hour working for an optometrist in Portland, Oregon, where he has relatively affordable rent of $1,000 a month.
But his paycheck barely covers his bills, including payments on his $20,000 student loan. Some days, he said he's skipped meals because he can't afford groceries and earns too much to qualify for food stamps. The idea of owning a home, saving for retirement or building an emergency savings fund seems hopeless, he said.
"Based on my lived reality, and that of my friends, it doesn't seem like anyone's doing better. It seems like everyone's actually doing worse," Kregar said. "It feels like we're being gaslit by the government."
Among the ways Trump has affected Americans' bottom line is through his tariffs, which have driven up retail prices, said Doug Holtz-Eakin, president of the American Action Forum, who worked in the George W. Bush administration. Higher prices disproportionately affect those with less disposable income to absorb price hikes.
The tariffs "are hurting the bottom end much more than the upper end," Holtz-Eakin said. "And they have been responsible for a lot of headwinds to the labor market."
The slowing job market is putting significant pressure on households. Wages aren't rising as quickly as in recent years, and employers have pulled back on hiring. The U.S. added just 584,000 jobs in 2025, the worst year for hiring since Covid. And most of the growth was driven by a handful of industries, like health care and education.
Economists have blamed this on factors including higher costs and uncertainty from tariffs, overhiring by companies after the pandemic, and the increasing use of robotics and AI.
"We've seen essentially no job growth. If you look outside of health and education, we lost jobs in 2025," Holtz-Eakin said. "It's not a strong labor market. People are not getting hired."
Measuring Trump's moves.
The economy was once Trump's strongest selling point: He centered his 2016 campaign on a fight for working-class voters. Once he was in office, wage growth accelerated for the lowest-paid workers and unemployment fell to the lowest level in decades, prior to the disruptions caused by the pandemic.
But in his second term, Trump's approval rating on the economy has been slipping.
A White House official said the administration aims to follow a similar playbook to Trump's first term: using tax cuts and regulatory changes to spur investment, along with a crackdown on immigration, which the administration believes will tighten the labor market and drive up wages.
"Much work remains, but this is just the beginning," White House spokesman Kush Desai said in an email, adding, "Americans can rest assured that the best is yet to come."
Trump has proposed some programs designed to help lower households' costs, such as a cap on credit card interest payments and a 50-year mortgage that would reduce monthly payments. Many of the proposals haven't been enacted.
Other moves, like price cuts on a limited number of prescription drugs, will benefit some people--but could be offset by higher health insurance costs after Congress failed to extend Affordable Care Act subsidies.
Some programs will take years to have an effect, like Trump-branded savings accounts for young children. The federal government will deposit $1,000 into the accounts, which will be invested in the stock market and converted to retirement accounts when children turn 18. Assuming the stock market continues growing at about 10% a year, that $1,000 would become about $5,500 in 18 years.
Text printed in the Record (2,776 characters)
The amount could grow substantially more if families are able to make the maximum contribution of $5,000 a year, which benefits wealthier households.
Trump's most direct impact on Americans' finances may come as they file their taxes; many households will see a bigger refund thanks to Trump's "big, beautiful bill" signed into law last summer. Middle-income households may benefit from a reduction in taxes on overtime pay, and some older adults will get a tax break on their Social Security income.
But the biggest gains in new tax cuts will go to wealthier households, including those who own businesses or expensive homes in states with high property taxes and those who receive multimillion-dollar inheritances. The law also extends tax cuts made during Trump's first term that were set to expire.
"There are things in the bill like no tax on tips, but they are much, much smaller" compared with interventions that help the wealthy, like the estate tax, said Owen Zidar, an economics professor at Princeton University.
He pointed to an analysis by the Tax Policy Center that found households making $460,000 to $1.1 million would get an average tax cut of $21,000 in 2026. Meanwhile, middle-income households making $67,000 to $119,000 would get an average tax cut of about $1,800.
Those breaks come on top of decades of tax cuts, like those for business owners enacted during Trump's first term, that have benefited the richest households and enabled them to continue amassing more wealth, Zidar said.
Meanwhile, those like Liz Doyle in Oklahoma have continued to struggle to afford the basics.
Doyle, 67, who voted for Trump, said rising prices for everything from coffee to insulin are straining her monthly budget, nearly all of which comes from Social Security.
"The grocery prices are absolutely freaking ridiculous," Doyle said. "Coffee prices, what in the world?"
Her property taxes have quadrupled over the past two years, she said. She doesn't have a 401(k) and only owns a small amount of stocks, so she hasn't benefited much from the market's surge. Occasionally, she sells some vegetables, like okra, from her garden at the local farmers market for extra income.
"President Trump has done so much better than Biden," said Doyle, who cited the lower rate of inflation under Trump. "But the question is: Is Trump that good, or was Biden that bad?"
Kregar, who voted for former Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election, said his experience in the economy since graduating from college that year has shifted his views further toward Democrats.
"Every time I go to the grocery store, I'm filled with dread," Kregar said. "Meanwhile, we're going to build a White House ballroom? It feels like, as an American, a slap in the face."
James P. McGovern (D-MA)12:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert into the Record an article from CNN titled: "Trump's tariffs are bigger than his tax cuts for most Americans".
The SPEAKER pro tempore12:00 p.m.
Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
Text printed in the Record (7,464 characters)
Trump's Tariffs are Bigger Than his Tax Cuts for Most Americans
Republicans and President Donald Trump want credit for what he has called "the largest tax cut in the history of our country" for the income tax cuts in his One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
Democrats and free trade advocates have said Trump's tariff policy, which placed levies on most imported goods from around the world, is one of the largest tax hikes in history.
Both claims are debatable, but for most Americans how tariffs and tax cuts will affect their daily lives is a highly relevant question.
The answers are hard to find and nuanced. But the bottom line, according to calculations by the Yale Budget Lab, is that American households could pay $2,300 more, on average, as result of the current tariff policy, nearly three times the average roughly $800 benefit from the OBBBA's new tax provisions.
"For households as a whole, the total tax increase they'll feel from tariffs is larger than the total tax cut they'll feel from the new provisions in the Republican tax package," said John Ricco, the lab's associate director of policy analysis.
There are multiple variables that complicate things.
First, tariffs have not yet sparked inflation on the level that many economists have predicted--although it is ticking up. There's evidence that some of the impact from tariffs could be delayed, and much of the president's tariff policy has only recently kicked in. Plus, the US economy is massive and decentralized and there are many factors beyond tariffs and taxes at play.
Trump and Republicans have said the tax cuts are much larger than the tariffs, an argument that sidesteps the reality that the bulk of the tax cuts may not be noticed by many Americans. Rather than enact entirely new tax cuts, much of what the bill does is make permanent individual tax cuts that were passed as temporary policy during Trump's first term.
Plus, specific measures like a temporary reprieve for taxes on tips will only help slivers of the workforce. The tax bill also includes cuts to the social safety net like food assistance and Medicaid, with the expectation that millions of people will lose these benefits, affecting their quality of life and financial resources.
Even before those cuts, the cost burden of tariffs is expected to push hundreds of thousands of Americans into poverty next year, according to a separate Yale analysis.
Tariffs amount to a national sales tax on imported goods, although the rate of tariffs varies by country and continues to change. Their impact could likewise evolve if, as Trump promises, they kickstart a US manufacturing renaissance. Here's the math
One detailed comparison of how tariffs and tax cuts will affect Americans comes from the Yale Budget Lab, which concluded in a recent analysis that only those highest on the income ladder will come out ahead over the next decade when tariffs are put alongside tax cuts.
The top 10% of households, those who on average are making $518,000 per year, will pay about $13,600 less in taxes, according to Yale's analysis. They'll have to spend nearly $5,450 more, on average, because of tariff-fueled price increases.
That combined effect of tariffs and tax increases will net out to an income boost of about $8,200, or 1.6%, according to Yale. Every other income bracket will be worse off due to tariffs
Middle-income households, who on average are making between about $105,000 to $122,000, will see their average $1,200 tax cut more than offset by a $2,200 cumulative tariff price hike, in the Yale analysis.
Those who make the least will be hurt the most. The bottom 10% will see their average annual income drop by almost $2,600, or 6.6%, the lab found. They'll take an average $1,350 hit to their wallets from tariffs coupled with a roughly $1,200 hit, on average, from the "big, beautiful bill," largely because the Republican package slashed spending on the nation's safety net to pay for part of the tax breaks. These folks have an average income of just under $39,000.
Plus, while the higher cost of goods from tariffs affects every household, it will disproportionately hurt lower-income consumers because they spend a higher share of their income than the wealthy do, Ricco said.
That impact is clear from a separate report Yale issued in early September on Trump's tariff policies. It showed that while the wealthiest Americans will lose nearly $5,250 in disposable income in 2027 because of higher prices, that only amounts to only 1% of their income.
By contrast, tariffs will cut more than $1,300 out of the income of the bottom 10%, but that accounts for 3.5% of their disposable income, Yale found. Many Americans may not feel the tax cuts
The real-world effect of the new tax and spending cut bill will be further muted by the fact that most of the tax cuts are extensions of tax cuts that would have expired rather than new tax cuts.
Looking only at the new measures in the package, including the temporary elimination of taxes on some tips and overtime, the enhanced deduction for senior citizens and the beefed-up child tax credit, Americans will get an $800 break on their taxes in coming years, according to Yale. If extending the expiring cuts is added in, the average tax cut rises to $3,000.
Different research groups and think tanks use different calculations to gauge tax cuts compared to tariffs, but their bottom-line assessments are the same.
"Tax cuts are higher for higher-income people, whereas tariffs have the opposite effects; they are much more evenly distributed," said Joseph Rosenberg, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. That means they will hit lower income Americans harder. But on national debt, a wash
While the tariffs, as currently constructed, will outweigh the tax cuts for most Americans, it's also important to look at how the two contrasting tax policies will affect the country's bottom line.
The beefed-up tariffs are projected to lower the federal deficit by $3.3 trillion over the 2025 to 2035 period and to reduce interest costs by an additional roughly $700 billion, for a total impact of $4 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office's latest estimate, which looked at tariffs imposed as of August 19.
The GOP tax and spending cuts package is expected to increase the federal debt by an estimated $4.1 trillion or so between 2025 and 2034, more than Trump's tariffs are forecast to bring in. It is expected to increase the deficit by $3.4 trillion and add roughly $718 billion in interest costs. Less balance in the system
Adam Michel, director of tax policy studies at the libertarian-leaning CATO Institute, said even if the tariffs end up canceling out the impacts of the tax cuts, the effects of the two policies could make the country more unequal.
The tax cuts are "riddled with special interest carveouts that treat similarly situated Americans with vastly different tax systems." Consider the increased state and local tax deductions for many East Coast homeowners, new deductions for oil and gas companies, whalers in Alaska and rum producers in Louisiana, among others.
The same is true of tariffs, he said, which will hit some industries harder than others.
"Together, these two changes mean we are moving toward a far more unequal and unstable fiscal system that trades durable reform for lumpy, distortionary breaks and levies that undermine long-run stability and fairness," he said.
James P. McGovern (D-MA)12:00 p.m.
I say to the gentlewoman that I appreciate her reciting the RNC's talking points, and I would encourage her to keep on reciting them and bring that message home, to go home and tell the American people that things are great, that things are unbelievably wonderful, and that you should thank the Republicans in Congress and Donald Trump for raising the prices on everything.
Go home and sell that message to the American people. I will tell you, Mr. Speaker, we won't have to do anything.
The bottom line is that things aren't good for people. As I said, there is a Trump tax of $4,000 on average Americans. That is what they have to pay in additional costs for everything, from rent to healthcare to groceries to you name it. That is the Trump tax.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Kamlager-Dove).
Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA)12:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to applaud my Republican colleagues for condemning President Trump's socialist actions, but they won't admit that the President is the biggest socialist in America today.
President Trump has turned the Federal Government into a shareholder in private American companies, taking ownership stakes in companies and putting Washington directly into the business of picking winners and losers.
So let's get into it, Mr. Speaker.
Democrats want to make sure American families can put food on the table. Donald Trump has taken a 10 percent stake in Intel Corporation.
Democrats want clean water. Donald Trump wants his friends to have drilling contracts on public lands.
Democrats want families to pay less for prescription drugs, while Trump wants to give his billionaire friends and family another tax break.
His socialism is about his social circle getting more while the American people get less. Denounce that, but don't lecture the American people about socialism. They are not stupid nor confused about what they are feeling in their pocketbooks. County hospitals, emergency rooms, police, fire, roads, stoplights, public schools, libraries, public pools, and parks are all funded by socialism and are getting squeezed by this administration's cuts and shenanigans.
If my Republican colleagues truly oppose government ownership of private companies and truly condemn socialism, then I invite them to join us in denouncing Trump's own policies. Until then, save the gaslighting for the convention and miss me with this nonsense.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote "no."
Virginia Foxx (R-NC)12:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
James P. McGovern (D-MA)12:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Stansbury).
Melanie A. Stansbury (D-NM)12:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, welcome back.
It has been a wild ride this Congress.
After 5 weeks of being out for the August district work period, a war is raging in the Middle East; the economy is in shambles; working people of this country cannot afford food, housing, and healthcare; the President is raiding the Venezuelan oil reserves and lining his own pockets; and what are we doing on the House floor after 5 weeks of break?
We are hearing bills to basically gut environmental protections, including protections for one of the most endangered species on planet Earth. Just a few years ago before my mother passed away, I had the extraordinary opportunity to visit the Cape Cod National Seashore, and on that day, which was an unusually warm day, we went down to the beach, and there were literally hundreds of right whales right off the shore. Today there are 380 right whales still in existence on planet Earth. Only 70 are considered able to breed.
What is before us today is a decision about whether or not to let one of God's great creatures continue to exist on planet Earth.
With all of the things that are happening in this world and in this country, this body under this Republican majority is choosing to advance a bill on the first day we come back in the middle of global turmoil and economic chaos to decide whether or not a species that has existed on this planet longer than the United States has even been an idea should be able to continue.
It is disgraceful. The American people did not send us here to gut environmental laws. The American people sent us here to save our democracy, to defend our institutions, and to ensure that they can get a fair shake.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this bill, and I will vote it down on the floor today.
Virginia Foxx (R-NC)12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
James P. McGovern (D-MA)12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, can I inquire of the gentlewoman how many more speakers she has on her side? We haven't seen any other than her. I am just curious.
Virginia Foxx (R-NC)12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, we have no more speakers.
James P. McGovern (D-MA)12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore12:10 p.m.
The gentleman from Massachusetts has 5 minutes remaining.
James P. McGovern (D-MA)12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Let me, first of all, respond to something the gentlewoman from North Carolina said about Republicans trying to protect our children. I would just ask, where the hell are the Epstein files? We have forced resolutions on this floor to be passed, to demand a release of these files.
Congressman Massie came to the floor. Again, he has another resolution. Still, we have no compliance with the law. We know that this administration is up to their eyeballs in the Epstein files. When is that going to happen? When is that going to be released? I mean, talk about protecting children.
Mr. Speaker, you know when Republicans send us home this week, what exactly will be cheaper? Will groceries cost less? Will rent go down? Will anybody's electric bill shrink? Will health insurance premiums come down? The answer is no. Not one damn thing on the agenda this week will address the affordability crisis. Nothing.
Congress will have condemned socialism again. Mission accomplished, I guess. You know that tells you everything about the priorities of this Republican majority. Whenever the conversation gets uncomfortable, they change the subject.
Why are groceries so expensive? Socialism. Why are healthcare costs so expensive? They showed socialism. Why did Trump start another new war in the Middle East? You must be a Socialist for asking the question. When are you going to release the Epstein files? When is that going to happen? Socialism, socialism, socialism. It is literally insane. It is Trump derangement syndrome.
Meanwhile, the President's big win this week is pretending to rename Lake Ontario after getting into a trade war with our closest ally and neighbor. This is nuts. This Chamber ceases to be a serious body when we don't call this stuff out and when we don't actually bring bills to the floor that address the real needs of the American people.
The American people are not stupid. They know who is focused on listening to their problems and who is focused on playing political games.
We should be working to lower costs, period. Contrary to what Trump says, affordability is not a made-up word, and it does have a definition. People cannot afford to pay everyday expenses. They can't afford their groceries. They can't afford their rent. They can't afford to fill their gas tank up. They want lower healthcare costs. They want lower housing costs. They want lower energy costs. They want lower grocery bills.
They want an end to the corporate giveaways and tax loopholes that let big companies jack up prices and gouge consumers. You know, they want an end to giving these corporations the ability to cheat on their taxes and to avoid accountability.
That is what people want us to do, not fight absurd culture wars and debate far-right fringe garbage. If our Republican colleagues want to have another debate about socialism, fine, let's have it. Waste more time passing more nonbinding resolutions. At the end of the day, people are going to vote based on their bank accounts, pocketbooks, grocery bills, and gas prices.
People look at life through their kitchen window. They are tired of all of this bs that is being talked about in this Chamber. They are sick of a Congress that debates trivial issues passionately but important ones not at all. They want to know when we are going to care about them. They are sick and tired of a Congress that gives tax breaks to entities, that gives big donations to political parties and political candidates. They want to know when they come first.
My friends, you have failed miserably to deliver on your promise to make life more affordable for people. People are counting on us. They want us to do better. You have a chance. We will work in a bipartisan way to try to deal with some of these high costs the people are faced with right now.
No, we come back after a recess, and this is what we are dealing with. This is garbage. This is a waste of time. This is an insult to this Chamber. It is an insult to the American people. They will remember in November.
Vote "no" on this rule.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Virginia Foxx (R-NC)12:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are saying we are wasting our time here when we talk about all that we have accomplished in this session of Congress. They especially don't like it when we talk about socialism.
I encourage the American people to go online and look at this manifesto from the Democratic Socialists of America. It is out there for all the world to see. This is an expanded version from the first one that I saw that looked like it was written by a seventh grader. This one really fills out what these people want to do, and it is why we are bringing one measure today, under this rule, to condemn what these people want to do.
It is abhorrent to all Americans. Its goals are repugnant to the principles that form the foundation for American constitutional liberties that benefit all Americans. There is simply no way to reconcile what the DSA envisions for America with the Constitution that protects us all.
For example, the DSA's stated long-term goals, to completely replace the Presidency and the Supreme Court, threaten the foundation of separation of powers and the stability of American democracy.
The DSA seeks to centralize State power. We all know that expanding State control crowds out civil society and individual choice. Even under a "Democratic" banner, hyper-centralized authority diminishes opportunities for dissenting views and personal freedoms.
The DSA seeks to abolish national boundaries. Think about that. The chaos we experienced when President Biden allowed millions of illegal immigrants to enter the U.S. will seem like child's play in comparison. We know of the security risks caused by President Biden's open borders. Murderers, child rapists, and other criminals were granted carte blanche to terrorize American communities.
Think about the implications of a permanent absence of borders. We know the financial costs caused by President Biden's open borders. In one sanctuary State alone, emergency housing for illegal immigrants surpassed $1 billion in FY 2025. Providing such services on a permanent, ongoing basis would bankrupt every State.
Let me just quote from a few pages of this manifesto. They want to have "publicly owned energy and transit infrastructure. Phase out the use of fossil fuels. Reclaim and repair our Earth's resources for all."
This sounds like free buses in New York that have been promised.
"Feminism for All: Socialist feminism fights for queer liberation and the freedoms for all working-class women."
"Healthcare for All: Guarantee universal healthcare at no cost to individuals, including complete access to reproductive and gender-affirming care."
What does that mean, Mr. Speaker? That means abortions at any point in the child's life.
They want housing for all: "Build new, publicly owned social housing, strictly regulate investment properties, establish universal rent control, and guarantee right to counsel for all tenants."
Mr. Speaker, this is dangerous. There are people who are going to be in this Congress in the next session who support these programs.
Again, I encourage the American people to look at this manifesto from the DSA. They are called Democratic Socialists of America. That is what they are called. That is what is asked for here, Mr. Speaker.
As I said at the outset of the debate, we have a solid slate of bills contained under this rule. They are substantive, impactful, and address pertinent issues occurring across the Nation like this manifesto.
We can and should pass this rule and each of the underlying bills to continue our work in service to the Nation and to the American people.
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:
An Amendment to H. Res. 1499 Offered by Mr. McGovern of Massachusetts
Text printed in the Record (1,052 characters)
At the end of the resolution, add the following:
Sec. 6. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the bill (H.R. 738) to amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to allow all eligible voters to vote by mail in Federal elections. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The bill shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and on any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on House Administration or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
Sec. 7. Clause 1(c) rule XIX and clause 8 of rule XX shall not apply to the consideration of H.R. 738.
Sec. 8. The Clerk shall transmit to the Senate a message that the House has passed H.R. 738 no later than three calendar days after passage.
Virginia Foxx (R-NC)12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore12:20 p.m.
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. McGovern (D-MA)12:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore12:20 p.m.
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question are postponed.
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
Page H5377 · Official textThe SPEAKER pro tempore
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the Chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered, or votes objected to under clause 6 of rule XX.
The House will resume proceedings on postponed questions at a later time.
Agoa Extension Act
Pages H5377–H5385 · Official textMr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendments to the bill (H.R. 6500) to extend duty-free treatment provided with respect to imports from certain countries in Africa under the African Growth and Opportunity Act, to extend customs user fees, and for other purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill. The text of the Senate amendments is as follows: Senate amendments: Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:
Text printed in the Record (10,623 characters)
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2027".
SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.
The table of contents for this Act is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short Title. Sec. 2. Table of Contents. Sec. 3. References.
DIVISION C--SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EXTENSION ACT OF 2026
SEC. 3. REFERENCES.
Except as expressly provided otherwise, any reference to "this Act" contained in any division of this Act shall be treated as referring only to the provisions of that division.
The following sums are hereby appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, and out of applicable corporate or other revenues, receipts, and funds, for the several departments, agencies, corporations, and other organizational units of Government for fiscal year 2027, and for other purposes, namely:
Sec. 101. Such amounts as may be necessary, at a rate for operations as provided in the applicable appropriations Acts for fiscal year 2026 and under the authority and conditions provided in such Acts, for continuing projects or activities (including the costs of direct loans and loan guarantees) that are not otherwise specifically provided for in this Act, that were conducted in fiscal year 2026, and for which appropriations, funds, or other authority were made available in the following appropriations Acts:
(1) The Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agency Appropriations Act, 2026 (division B of Public Law 119-37).
(2) The Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2026 (division A of Public Law 119-74), except sections 521(c)(2) and 544.
(3) The Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2026 (division A of Public Law 119-75).
(4) The Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2026 (division B of Public Law 119-74).
(5) The Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, 2026 (division E of Public Law 119-75), except the last proviso under the heading "Election Assistance Commission--Election Security Grants", and including section 143 of division A of Public Law 119-37.
(6) The Homeland Security and Further Additional Continuing Appropriations Act, 2026 (Public Law 119-86), except division B, and including sections 5013 through 5016 of division I of Public Law 119-75.
(7) The Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2026 (division C of Public Law 119-74), except section 444.
(8) The Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2026 (division B of Public Law 119-75), except section 528.
(9) The Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2026 (division C of Public Law 119-37).
(10) The Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2026 (division D of Public Law 119-37).
(11) The National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2026 (division F of Public Law 119-75).
(12) The Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2026 (division D of Public Law 119-75), as amended by sections 153(b) and 156(a) of this Act.
Sec. 102. (a) No appropriation or funds made available or authority granted pursuant to section 101 for the Department of Defense shall be used for:
(1) the new production of items not funded for production in fiscal year 2026 or prior years;
(2) the increase in production rates above those sustained with fiscal year 2026 funds; or
(3) the initiation, resumption, or continuation of any project, activity, operation, or organization (defined as any project, subproject, activity, budget activity, program element, and subprogram within a program element, and for any investment items defined as a P-1 line item in a budget activity within an appropriation account and an R-1 line item that includes a program element and subprogram element within an appropriation account) for which appropriations, funds, or other authority were not available during fiscal year 2026.
(b) No appropriation or funds made available or authority granted pursuant to section 101 for the Department of Defense shall be used to initiate multi-year procurements utilizing advance procurement funding for economic order quantity procurement unless specifically appropriated later.
Sec. 103. Appropriations made by section 101 shall be available to the extent and in the manner that would be provided by the pertinent appropriations Act.
Sec. 104. Except as otherwise provided in section 102, no appropriation or funds made available or authority granted pursuant to section 101 shall be used to initiate or resume any project or activity for which appropriations, funds, or other authority were not available during fiscal year 2026.
Sec. 105. Appropriations made and authority granted pursuant to this Act shall cover all obligations or expenditures incurred for any project or activity during the period for which funds or authority for such project or activity are available under this Act.
Sec. 106. Unless otherwise provided for in this Act or in the applicable appropriations Act for fiscal year 2027, appropriations and funds made available and authority granted pursuant to this Act shall be available until whichever of the following first occurs:
(1) The enactment into law of an appropriation for any project or activity provided for in this Act.
(2) The enactment into law of the applicable appropriations Act for fiscal year 2027 without any provision for such project or activity.
(3) December 11, 2026.
Sec. 107. Expenditures made pursuant to this Act shall be charged to the applicable appropriation, fund, or authorization whenever a bill in which such applicable appropriation, fund, or authorization is contained is enacted into law.
Sec. 108. Appropriations made and funds made available by or authority granted pursuant to this Act may be used without regard to the time limitations for submission and approval of apportionments set forth in section 1513 of title 31, United States Code, but nothing in this Act may be construed to waive any other provision of law governing the apportionment of funds.
Sec. 109. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, except section 106, for those programs that would otherwise have high initial rates of operation or complete distribution of appropriations at the beginning of fiscal year 2027 because of distributions of funding to States, foreign countries, grantees, or others, such high initial rates of operation or complete distribution shall not be made, and no grants shall be awarded for such programs funded by this Act that would impinge on final funding prerogatives.
Sec. 110. This Act shall be implemented so that only the most limited funding action of that permitted in the Act shall be taken in order to provide for continuation of projects and activities.
Sec. 111. (a) For entitlements and other mandatory payments whose budget authority was provided in appropriations Acts for fiscal year 2026, and for activities under the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, activities shall be continued
at the rate to maintain program levels under current law, under the authority and conditions provided in the applicable appropriations Act for fiscal year 2026, to be continued through the date specified in section 106(3).
(b) Notwithstanding section 106, obligations for mandatory payments due on or about the first day of any month that begins after October 2026 but not later than 30 days after the date specified in section 106(3) may continue to be made, and funds shall be available for such payments.
Sec. 112. Amounts made available under section 101 for civilian personnel compensation and benefits in each department and agency may be apportioned up to the rate for operations necessary to avoid furloughs within such department or agency, consistent with the applicable appropriations Act for fiscal year 2026, except that such authority provided under this section shall not be used until after the department or agency has taken all necessary actions to reduce or defer non-personnel-related administrative expenses.
Sec. 113. Funds appropriated by this Act may be obligated and expended notwithstanding section 10 of Public Law 91-672 (22 U.S.C. 2412), section 15 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2680), section 313 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 (22 U.S.C. 6212), and section 504(a)(1) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3094(a)(1)).
Sec. 114. (a)(1) For each amount incorporated by reference in this Act that was previously designated by the Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, each provision of law designating each such amount as an emergency requirement pursuant to such section shall not apply.
(2) Each amount incorporated by reference in this Act that was designated by the Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, or pursuant to section 4001(a)(1) of S. Con. Res. 14 (117th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2022, and to legislation establishing fiscal year 2026 budget enforcement in the House of Representatives, and each amount provided, repurposed, or rescinded by sections 125 and 153(a) of this Act, is designated by the Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 4001(a)(1) of S. Con. Res. 14 (117th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2022, and to legislation establishing fiscal year 2026 or 2027 budget enforcement in the House of Representatives, as applicable.
(b) Each amount incorporated by reference in this Act that was previously designated by the Congress as being for disaster relief pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(D) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 is designated by the Congress as being for disaster relief pursuant to a concurrent resolution on the budget.
(c) Each amount incorporated by reference in this Act that was previously designated in division B of Public Law 117-159, division J of Public Law 117-58, or in section 443(b) of division G of Public Law 117-328 by the Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to a concurrent resolution on the budget shall continue to be treated as an amount specified in section 103(b) of division A of Public Law 118-5.
Sec. 115.
Text printed in the Record (11,766 characters)
(a) Rescissions or cancellations of discretionary budget authority that continue pursuant to section 101 in Treasury Appropriations Fund Symbols (TAFS)--
(1) to which other appropriations are not provided by this Act, but for which there is a current applicable TAFS that does receive an appropriation in this Act; or
(2) which are no-year TAFS and receive other appropriations in this Act, may be continued instead by reducing the rate for operations otherwise provided by section 101 for such current applicable TAFS, as long as doing so does not impinge on the final funding prerogatives of the Congress.
(b) Rescissions or cancellations described in subsection (a) shall continue in an amount equal to the lesser of--
(1) the amount specified for rescission or cancellation in the applicable appropriations Act referenced in section 101 of this Act; or
(2) the amount of balances available, as of October 1, 2026, from the funds specified for rescission or cancellation in the applicable appropriations Act referenced in section 101 of this Act.
(c) No later than November 20, 2026, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall provide to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate a comprehensive list of the rescissions or cancellations that will continue pursuant to section 101: Provided, That the information in such comprehensive list shall be periodically updated to reflect any subsequent changes in the amount of balances available, as of October 1, 2026, from the funds specified for rescission or cancellation in the applicable appropriations Act referenced in section 101, and such updates shall be transmitted to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate upon request.
Sec. 116. Amounts made available by section 101 for "Farm Service Agency--Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund Program Account" may be apportioned up to the rate for operations necessary to accommodate approved applications for direct and guaranteed farm ownership loans, as authorized by 7 U.S.C. 1922 et seq.
Sec. 117. Amounts made available by section 101 to the Department of Agriculture for "Domestic Food Programs--Food and Nutrition Service--Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC)" may be apportioned at the rate for operations necessary to maintain participation.
Sec. 118. Amounts made available by section 101 to the Department of Agriculture for "Domestic Food Programs--Food and Nutrition Service--Commodity Assistance Program" may be apportioned up to the rate for operations necessary to maintain current program caseload in the Commodity Supplemental Food Program.
Sec. 119. Section 260 of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1636i) and section 942 of the Livestock Mandatory Reporting Act of 1999 (7 U.S.C. 1635 note; Public Law 106-78) shall be applied by substituting the date specified in section 106(3) of this Act for "September 30, 2026".
Sec. 120. Amounts made available by section 101 for "Department of Commerce--Bureau of the Census--Periodic Censuses and Programs" may be apportioned up to the rate for operations necessary to maintain the buildup and testing of all integrated systems and operations necessary for the 2030 Decennial Census Program.
Sec. 121. Amounts made available by section 101 for "Department of Commerce--National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration--Procurement, Acquisition and Construction" shall be apportioned at the rate for operations necessary to maintain the planned launch schedules for the Geostationary Extended Observations (GeoXO) satellite system.
Sec. 122. Amounts made available by section 101 for "Department of Justice--Legal Activities--Salaries and Expenses, General Legal Activities" may be apportioned up to the rate for operations necessary to support the legal activities of the Department of Justice.
Sec. 123. Amounts made available by section 101 for "Department of Justice--United States Marshals Service--Salaries and Expenses" may be apportioned up to the rate for operations necessary to maintain Federal judicial security programs and protective operations.
Sec. 124. Amounts made available by section 101 for "Department of Justice--Federal Bureau of Investigation--Salaries and Expenses" may be apportioned up to the rate for operations necessary to prepare for the 2028 Olympic Games, and for risk reduction and modification of National Security Systems.
Sec. 125. (a) The remaining unobligated balances, as of September 30, 2026, from amounts made available for "Department of Commerce--National Telecommunications and Information Administration--Middle Mile Deployment" in division J of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law 117-58) are hereby rescinded, and in addition to amounts otherwise provided by section 101, an amount of additional new budget authority equivalent to the amount rescinded pursuant to this subsection is hereby appropriated on September 30, 2026, for an additional amount for fiscal year 2026, to remain available until September 30, 2027, and shall be available for the same purposes for which such funds were originally appropriated, in addition to other funds as may be available for such purposes.
(b)(1) Subject to paragraph (2), this section shall become effective immediately upon enactment of this Act.
(2) If this Act is enacted after September 30, 2026, this section shall be applied as if it were in effect on September 30, 2026.
Sec. 126. Notwithstanding sections 102 and 104, amounts made available by section 101 to the Department of Defense for "Procurement--Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy" may be apportioned up to the rate for operations necessary to fund prior year shipbuilding cost increases for the following programs funded in prior years under such heading:
(1) 2013/2027 Carrier Replacement Program, in an amount not to exceed $324,000,000;
(2) 2017/2027 DDG 51 Program, in an amount not to exceed $24,503,000;
(3) 2017/2027 LHA Replacement Program, in an amount not to exceed $164,300,000;
(4) 2018/2027 Virginia Class Submarine Program, in an amount not to exceed $44,244,000;
(5) 2018/2027 DDG 51 Program, in an amount not to exceed $69,919,000;
(6) 2018/2027 LPD (Flight II) Amphibious Transport Dock Program, in an amount not to exceed $58,800,000;
(7) 2019/2027 Virginia Class Submarine Program, in an amount not to exceed $561,131,000;
(8) 2019/2027 DDG 51 Program, in an amount not to exceed $83,802,000;
(9) 2019/2027 Littoral Combat Ship Program, in an amount not to exceed $9,450,000;
(10) 2020/2027 CVN Refueling Overhauls Program, in an amount not to exceed $379,200,000;
(11) 2020/2027 T-AO Fleet Oiler Program, in an amount not to exceed $16,020,000;
(12) 2021/2027 Columbia Class Submarine Program, in an amount not to exceed $566,542,000;
(13) 2021/2027 LPD (Flight II) Amphibious Transport Dock Program, in an amount not to exceed $44,689,000;
(14) 2022/2027 Expeditionary Sea Base Program, in an amount not to exceed $12,100,000;
(15) 2022/2027 Expeditionary Fast Transport Program, in an amount not to exceed $8,423,000;
(16) 2022/2027 T-AO Fleet Oiler Program, in an amount not to exceed $127,000,000;
(17) 2023/2027 T-AO Fleet Oiler Program, in an amount not to exceed $23,100,000;
(18) 2024/2027 Columbia Class Submarine Program, in an amount not to exceed $19,386,000;
(19) 2024/2027 T-AO Fleet Oiler Program, in an amount not to exceed $1,181,000; and
(20) 2026/2027 T-AO Fleet Oiler Program, in an amount not to exceed $74,200,000.
Sec. 127. Notwithstanding sections 102 and 104, amounts made available by section 101 to the Department of Defense for "Procurement--Procurement, Defense-Wide" may be apportioned up to the rate for operations necessary for National Security Systems in an amount not to exceed $2,853,000,000.
Sec. 128. Notwithstanding section 101, the first proviso in each of sections 8090 and 8094 of
division A of Public Law 119-75 shall be applied by substituting "advances" for "reimbursements".
Sec. 129. During the period covered by this Act, section 103(f)(4)(A) of Public Law 108-361 (the Calfed Bay-Delta Authorization Act) shall be applied by substituting "$40,000,000" for "$32,600,000".
Sec. 130. (a) Notwithstanding section 104, amounts made available by section 101 for "Department of Energy--Atomic Energy Defense Activities--National Nuclear Security Administration--Weapons Activities" shall be available and may be apportioned up to the rate for operations necessary--
(1) to prevent project demobilization and shutdown activities for "17-D-640 U1a Complex Enhancements Project, NNSS" and "24-D-513 ZEUS Test Bed Facilities Improvement (ZTBFI), NNSS";
(2) to prevent termination of the design-build contract for "23-D-517 Electrical Power Capacity Upgrade, LANL"; and
(3) to maintain current level of activities and ongoing studies for "Studies and Assessments".
(b) Section 301(d) of division B of Public Law 119-74, as continued in effect by section 101, shall not apply to amounts used for the purposes specified in subsection (a).
(c) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget and the Secretary of Energy shall notify the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate not later than 3 days after each use of the authority provided in subsection (a).
Sec. 131. (a) Notwithstanding section 104, amounts made available by section 101 for "Department of Energy--Atomic Energy Defense Activities--Environmental and Other Defense Activities--Defense Environmental Cleanup" shall be available and may be apportioned up to the rate for operations necessary to carry out long-lead procurements within the CD-3A authorization for "21-D-401 Hoisting Capability Project" at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.
(b) Section 301(d) of division B of Public Law 119-74, as continued in effect by section 101, shall not apply to amounts used for the purpose specified in subsection (a).
(c) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget and the Secretary of Energy shall notify the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate not later than 3 days after each use of the authority provided in subsection (a).
Sec. 132. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, except section 106, the District of Columbia may expend local funds made available under the heading "District of Columbia--District of Columbia Funds" for such programs and activities under the District of Columbia Appropriations Act, 2026 (title IV of division E of Public Law 119-75) at the rate set forth in the Fiscal Year 2027 Local Budget Act of 2026 (D.C. Act 26-379) as modified, as of the date of enactment of this Act.
Sec. 133. Amounts made available by section 101 for "Small Business Administration--Business Loans Program Account" may be apportioned up to the rate for operations necessary to accommodate increased demand for commitments for general business loans authorized under paragraphs (1) through (35) of section 7(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(a)), for guarantees of trust certificates authorized by section 5(g) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 634(g)), for commitments to guarantee loans under section 503 of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 (15 U.S.C. 697), and for commitments to guarantee loans for debentures under section 303(b) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 (15 U.S.C. 683(b)).
Sec. 134. Section 1(b) of Public Law 117-25 (135 Stat. 297; 136 Stat. 2133; 136 Stat. 5984; 139 Stat. 46, 140 Stat. 629) shall be applied in each of paragraphs (3) and (4) by substituting the date specified in section 106(3) of this Act for "September 30, 2026".
Sec. 135.
Text printed in the Record (11,809 characters)
Notwithstanding section 104, amounts made available by section 101 to "Department of the Treasury--Departmental Offices--Salaries and Expenses" shall be available for operations necessary to host the G7 Financial Summit and other G7 related activities as proposed in the fiscal year 2027 President's Budget, submitted pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, and accompanying justification materials.
Sec. 136. Notwithstanding section 101, section 747 of division E of Public Law 119-75 shall be applied by--
(1) substituting "2026" for "2025" each place it appears;
(2) substituting "2027" for "2026" each place it appears;
(3) substituting "2028" for "2027"; and
(4) substituting "section 747 of division E of Public Law 119-75" for "section 747 of division B of Public Law 118-47, as continued in effect and modified by section 1605 of title VI of division A of Public Law 119-4 (as continued in effect and modified by division A of Public Law 119-37)" each place it appears.
Sec. 137. Amounts made available by section 101 to the Department of Homeland Security under the heading "Federal Emergency Management Agency--Disaster Relief Fund" may be apportioned up to the rate for operations necessary to carry out response and recovery activities under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.).
Sec. 138. During the period covered by this Act, section 225(e) of division A of Public Law 116-6 (49 U.S.C. 44901 note) shall be applied by substituting "fiscal years 2019 through 2027" for "fiscal years 2019 through 2026".
Sec. 139. (a) Sections 1309(a) and 1319 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4016(a) and 4026) shall be applied by substituting the date specified in section 106(3) of this Act for "September 30, 2026".
(b)(1) Subject to paragraph (2), this section shall become effective immediately upon enactment of this Act.
(2) If this Act is enacted after September 30, 2026, this section shall be applied as if it were in effect on September 30, 2026.
Sec. 140. Notwithstanding section 104, amounts made available by section 101 to the Department of the Interior for "Departmental Offices--Office of the Secretary--Departmental Operations" shall be available for the assumption of functions and activities performed by the Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation (ONHIR) as authorized by Public Law 93-531 (commonly known as the "Navajo-Hopi Land Settlement Act of 1974"), to ensure the full and complete discharge of the functions of ONHIR.
Sec. 141. Amounts made available by section 101 for "Department of the Interior--Department-Wide Programs--Wildland Fire Management", "Department of the Interior--Department-Wide Programs--Wildfire Suppression Operations Reserve Fund", "Department of Agriculture--Forest Service--Wildland Fire Management", and "Department of Agriculture--Forest Service--Wildfire Suppression Operations Reserve Fund" may be apportioned up to the rate for operations necessary for wildfire suppression activities.
Sec. 142. During the period covered by this Act, section 1701 of division B of Public Law 117-43 (5 U.S.C. 5547 note) shall be applied by substituting "calendar years 2021 through 2027" for "2021 or 2022 or 2023 or 2024" each place it appears.
Sec. 143. (a) In addition to amounts otherwise provided by section 101, amounts are provided for "Department of Health and Human Services--Indian Health Service--Indian Health Services" at a rate for operations of $75,774,000, for an additional amount for costs of staffing and operating facilities that were opened, renovated, or expanded in fiscal years 2022, 2026, and 2027, and such amounts may be apportioned up to the rate for operations necessary to staff and operate such facilities.
(b) In addition to amounts otherwise provided by section 101, amounts are provided for "Department of Health and Human Services--Indian Health Service--Indian Health Facilities" at a rate for operations of $8,296,000, for an additional amount for costs of staffing and operating facilities that were opened, renovated, or expanded in fiscal years 2022, 2026, and 2027, and such amounts may be apportioned up to the rate for operations necessary to staff and operate such facilities.
Sec. 144. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no adjustment shall be made under section 601(a) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 4501) (relating to cost of living adjustments for Members of Congress) during the period covered by this Act.
Sec. 145. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, there is appropriated--
(1) for payment to Alfredia Scott, widow of David A. Scott, late a Representative from the State of Georgia, $174,000; and
(2) for payment to the heir at law of Lindsey O. Graham, late a Senator from the State of South Carolina, $174,000.
Sec. 146. Notwithstanding sections 102 and 104, amounts made available by section 101 for "Department of Defense--Military Construction, Army" and "Department of Defense--Military Construction, Navy and Marine Corps" and unobligated balances from prior year appropriations under these headings may be used by the Secretary of the Army and Secretary of the Navy to carry out military construction not otherwise authorized by law for Military Unaccompanied Housing facilities at the Medical Education Training Complex at Joint Base San Antonio: Provided, That no amounts may be made available pursuant to the matter preceding this proviso from amounts that were specified in the table referenced in the second proviso under each such heading in division J of Public Law 117-328, division A of Public Law 118-42, or division D of Public Law 119-37, or from amounts that were designated by the Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to a concurrent resolution on the budget or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Sec. 147. Amounts made available by section 101 for "Department of Transportation--Office of the Secretary--Payments to Air Carriers" may be apportioned up to the rate for operations necessary to maintain Essential Air Service program operations.
Sec. 148. Notwithstanding section 101, the following language in title I of division D of Public Law 119-75 shall be applied as if it were struck:
(1) the fourth and fifth provisos in the undesignated paragraph under the second instance of the heading "Federal Aviation Administration--Grants-in-Aid for Airports";
(2) "of which $927,212,591" and ", and of which--" in the matter preceding the first proviso and all that follows through the end of the first paragraph (5) under the heading "Federal Highway Administration--Highway Infrastructure Programs";
(3) the second and third provisos under the heading "Federal Railroad Administration--Federal-State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail";
(4) the second and third provisos in the undesignated paragraph under the heading "Federal Railroad Administration--Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements";
(5) ", of which--" in the second proviso in the undesignated paragraph and all that follows through the end of that proviso under the heading "Federal Transit Administration--Transit Infrastructure Grants", and the subsequent proviso; and
(6) ", and of which $129,000,000" in the matter preceding the first proviso and all that follows through such matter under the first instance of the heading "National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration--Operations and Research", and the subsequent proviso.
Sec. 149. (a) Notwithstanding section 106, amounts made available in division L of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (Public Law 115-141) under the heading "Department of Transportation--Federal Transit Administration--Capital Investment Grants" that were available for obligation through fiscal year 2021 shall remain available through fiscal year 2031 for the liquidation of valid obligations incurred in fiscal years 2018 through 2021.
(b)(1) Subject to paragraph (2), this section shall become effective immediately upon enactment of this Act.
(2) If this Act is enacted after September 30, 2026, this section shall be applied as if it were in effect on September 30, 2026.
Sec. 150. (a) The remaining unobligated balances, as of September 30, 2026, from amounts made available in paragraph (1) of the fourth proviso under the heading "Department of Transportation--Federal Highway Administration--Highway Infrastructure Programs" in division L of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Public Law 117-328) are hereby rescinded, and in addition to amounts otherwise made available by section 101, an amount of additional new budget authority equivalent to the amount rescinded pursuant to this subsection is hereby appropriated on September 30, 2026, for an additional amount for fiscal year 2026, to remain available until September 30, 2027, and shall be available for the same purposes for which such funds were originally appropriated.
(b)(1) Subject to paragraph (2), this section shall become effective immediately upon enactment of this Act.
(2) If this Act is enacted after September 30, 2026, this section shall be applied as if it were in effect on September 30, 2026.
Sec. 151. (a) The remaining unobligated balances, as of September 30, 2026, from amounts made available for "Department of Transportation--Federal Aviation Administration--Research, Engineering, and Development" in division F of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024 (Public Law 118-42) are hereby rescinded, and in addition to amounts otherwise provided by section 101, an amount of additional new budget authority equivalent to the amount rescinded pursuant to this subsection is hereby appropriated on September 30, 2026, for an additional amount for fiscal year 2026, to remain available until September 30, 2027, and shall be available for the same purposes for which such funds were originally appropriated, in addition to other funds as may be available for such purposes.
(b)(1) Subject to paragraph (2), this section shall become effective immediately upon enactment of this Act.
(2) If this Act is enacted after September 30, 2026, this section shall be applied as if it were in effect on September 30, 2026.
Sec. 152. (a) Section 239(b) of division F of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024 (Public Law 118-42) is amended by striking "fiscal year 2026" and inserting "fiscal year 2027".
(b)(1) Subject to paragraph (2), the amendments made by this section shall become effective immediately upon enactment of this Act.
(2) If this Act is enacted after September 30, 2026, the amendments made by this section shall be applied as if they were in effect on September 30, 2026.
Sec. 153. (a) Notwithstanding section 106, during fiscal year 2027, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development may use the unobligated balances of amounts made available in prior fiscal years under the heading "Department of Housing and Urban Development--Public and Indian Housing--Tenant-Based Rental Assistance", except amounts made available in paragraphs (4) and (5) under such heading in division D of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026 (Public Law 119-75), to support additional allocations under subparagraph (D) of paragraph (1) of such heading only as needed to prevent the termination of rental assistance for families as the result of insufficient funding in the calendar year 2026 funding cycle.
(b) Paragraph (2) under the heading "Department of Housing and Urban Development--Public and Indian Housing--Tenant-Based Rental Assistance" in division D of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026 (Public Law 119-75) is amended by--
(1) inserting "emergency housing vouchers (section 3202(b) of Public Law 117-2 (42 U.S.C.
Text printed in the Record (11,610 characters)
1437f)) for all dwelling units under lease as of September 30, 2026 (which shall not be replacement vouchers and shall be provided prior to the end of calendar year 2026)," after "mandatory and voluntary conversions,"; and
(2) striking the last proviso.
Sec. 154. (a) The remaining unobligated balances, as of September 30, 2026, from amounts made available for "Department of Housing and Urban Development--Community Planning and Development--Homeless Assistance Grants" in division F of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024 (Public Law 118-42) are hereby rescinded, and in addition to amounts otherwise provided by section 101, an amount of additional new budget authority equivalent to the amount rescinded pursuant to this subsection is hereby appropriated on September 30, 2026, for an additional amount for fiscal year 2026, to remain available until September 30, 2027, and shall be available for the same purposes for which such funds were originally appropriated, in addition to other funds as may be available for such purposes.
(b)(1) Subject to paragraph (2), this section shall become effective immediately upon enactment of this Act.
(2) If this Act is enacted after September 30, 2026, this section shall be applied as if it were in effect on September 30, 2026.
Sec. 155. (a) The remaining unobligated balances, as of September 30, 2026, from amounts made available for "Department of Housing and Urban Development--Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity--Fair Housing Activities" by the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2025 (division A of Public Law 119-4) are hereby rescinded, and in addition to amounts otherwise made available by section 101, an amount of additional new budget authority equivalent to the amount rescinded pursuant to this subsection is hereby appropriated on September 30, 2026, for an additional amount for fiscal year 2026, to remain available until September 30, 2027, and shall be available for the same purposes for which such funds were originally appropriated, in addition to other funds as may be available for such purposes.
(b)(1) Subject to paragraph (2), this section shall become effective immediately upon enactment of this Act.
(2) If this Act is enacted after September 30, 2026, this section shall be applied as if it were in effect on September 30, 2026.
Sec. 156. (a) Section 239 of division D of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026 (Public Law 119-75) is hereby repealed and the unobligated balance of amounts made available under such section 239(d) is hereby rescinded.
(b) Notwithstanding section 106, for fiscal years 2027 through 2029, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development ("Secretary") may, through competition, including a first-come, first served competition, satisfy the full indebtedness relating to any remaining principal and interest under financial assistance made available under section 201 of the Housing and Community Development Amendments of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 1715z-1a) ("Flex Sub loan").
(1) The Secretary may only satisfy a loan under this subsection for properties with--
(A) at least one, but fewer than 100 assisted units;
(B) a Flex Sub loan with an unpaid principal balance of $1,500,000 or more;
(C) not for profit ownership;
(D) a score of 90 or higher on the most recent REAC inspection from fiscal year 2025 or 2026; and
(E) a most recent management and occupancy review score of "above average" or "superior" from fiscal year 2025 or 2026.
(2) The Secretary may set such terms and conditions as the Secretary determines are appropriate to carry out this subsection, including:
(A) Different maturity dates or interest rate terms;
(B) Extension of affordability use agreements; and
(C) Other measures to ensure the long-term stability of operations at the property.
(3) There is hereby appropriated $6,258,174.91, to remain available until September 30, 2029, to carry out the purposes of this subsection, in addition to amounts otherwise available for such purposes.
(c) Of the unobligated balances in Treasury Appropriations Fund Symbol 86 X 0303 and made available prior to fiscal year 2020, $4,258,174.91 are hereby rescinded.
Sec. 157. (a) Notwithstanding section 106, through December 11, 2026, a rule to revise the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (commonly known as the "Uniform Guidance"), arising out of the notice of proposed rulemaking titled "Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance", which was published in the Federal Register on May 29, 2026, or a substantially similar rule, shall not be issued or finalized.
(b) Notwithstanding section 106, if a rule described in subsection (a) is issued or finalized prior to the enactment of this Act, such rule shall not have force or take effect through December 11, 2026.
(c) This section shall become effective immediately upon enactment of this Act.
This division may be cited as the "Continuing Appropriations Act, 2027".
SEC. 2001. UNITED STATES GRAIN STANDARDS ACT EXTENSION.
(a) In General.--Sections 7(j)(5), 7A(l)(4), and 21(e) of the United States Grain Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 79(j)(5), 79a(l)(4), 87j(e)) shall be applied by substituting "December 11, 2026" for "September 30, 2025" each place it appears.
(b) Certain Limitations and Authorizations.--Sections 7D and 19(a) of the United States Grain Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 79d, 87h(a)) shall be applied by substituting "2027" for "2025" each place it appears.
SEC. 2002. FOREST SERVICE PARTICIPATION IN ACES PROGRAM.
Section 8302(b) of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (16 U.S.C. 3851a(b)) shall be applied by substituting "December 11, 2026" for "October 1, 2023".
SEC. 2003. FOOD FOR PEACE ACT.
Section 408 of the Food for Peace Act (7 U.S.C. 1736b) shall be applied by substituting "December 11, 2026" for "December 31, 2023".
SEC. 2004. EXTENSION OF DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT OF 1950.
Section 717(a) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. 4564(a)) is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 2005. TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT FEE AUTHORITY.
Section 26(b) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2625(b)) is amended by striking paragraph (6) and inserting the following:
"(6) Termination.--The authority provided by this subsection shall terminate on December 11, 2026, unless otherwise reauthorized or modified by Congress.".
SEC. 2006. DISASTER RELIEF FOR THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS.
Section 1108(g) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1308(g)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2), in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking "paragraphs (3), (5), and (14)" and inserting "the succeeding provisions of this subsection"; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
"(15) Temporary disaster relief for the northern mariana islands.--
"(A) In general.--The Secretary shall increase the total amount otherwise determined under this subsection for the Northern Mariana Islands for the period beginning on October 1, 2025, and ending on September 30, 2026, by $21,400,000. The additional amount made available under the preceding sentence shall remain available until expended.
"(B) Special rules.--The increase described in subparagraph (A)--
"(i) shall apply to the total amount certified by the Secretary under title XIX for payment to the Northern Mariana Islands for services attributable to fiscal year 2026, notwithstanding that payments for any such services are made by the Northern Mariana Islands in fiscal year 2027; and
"(ii) shall be in addition to the amount calculated under paragraph (2) for the Northern Mariana Islands for fiscal year 2026 and shall not be taken into account in calculating an amount under paragraph (2) for the Northern Mariana Islands for fiscal year 2027 or a subsequent fiscal year.".
SEC. 2007. MEDICARE IMPROVEMENT FUND.
Section 1898(b)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395iii(b)(1)) is amended by striking "$2,062,000,000" and inserting "$2,041,000,000".
SEC. 2008. EXTENSION OF AFRICAN GROWTH AND OPPORTUNITY ACT.
(a) Trade Act of 1974.--Section 506B of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2466b) is amended by striking "2026" and inserting "2028".
(b) African Growth and Opportunity Act.--
(1) In general.--Section 112(g) of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (19 U.S.C. 3721(g)) is amended by striking "2026" and inserting "2028".
(2) Regional apparel article program.--Section 112(b)(3)(A) of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (19 U.S.C. 3721(b)(3)(A)) is amended--
(A) in clause (i), by striking "each of the 23 succeeding 1-year periods" and inserting "each succeeding 1-year period until December 31, 2028"; and
(B) in clause (ii)(II), by striking "2026" and inserting "2028".
(3) Third-country fabric program.--Section 112(c)(1) of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (19 U.S.C. 3721(c)(1)) is amended--
(A) in the paragraph heading, by striking "2026" and inserting "2028";
(B) in subparagraph (A), by striking "2026" and inserting "2028"; and
(C) in subparagraph (B)(ii), by striking "2026" and inserting "2028".
SEC. 2009. EXTENSION OF HAITI ECONOMIC LIFT PROGRAM.
Section 213A(h) of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (19 U.S.C. 2703a(h)) is amended by striking "2026" and inserting "2028".
SEC. 2010. EXTENSION OF CUSTOMS USER FEES.
(a) In General.--Section 13031(j)(3) of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (19 U.S.C. 58c(j)(3)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A), by striking "December 31, 2031" and inserting "March 31, 2032"; and
(2) in subparagraph (B)(i), by striking "December 31, 2031" and inserting "March 31, 2032".
(b) Rate for Merchandise Processing Fees.--Section 503 of the United States-Korea Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act (Public Law 112-41;19 U.S.C. 3805 note) is amended by striking "December 31, 2031" and inserting "March 31, 2032".
SEC. 2011. CYBERSECURITY INFORMATION SHARING ACT OF 2015.
Section 111(a) of the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015 (6 U.S.C. 1510(a)) is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 2012. FEDERAL CYBERSECURITY ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 2015.
Section 227(a) of the Federal Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2015 (6 U.S.C. 1525(a)) is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 2013. JOINT TASK FORCES.
Section 708(b)(13) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 348(b)(13)) shall be applied by substituting "December 11, 2026" for "September 30, 2026".
SEC. 2014. EXTENSION OF THE TECHNOLOGY MODERNIZATION FUND AND
BOARD.
Section 1078(f)(1) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (40 U.S.C. 11301 note) is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 2015. FEE SETTING AUTHORITY OF THE UNITED STATES PATENT
AND TRADEMARK OFFICE.
Section 10(i)(2) of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (35 U.S.C. 41 note; Public Law 112-29) is amended by striking "upon the expiration of the 15-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act" and inserting "on December 11, 2026".
SEC. 2016. UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM.
Section 209 of the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (22 U.S.C. 6436) is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 2017. WESTERN HEMISPHERE TRAVEL INITIATIVE PASSPORT
FEES.
Section 1(b)(2) of the Passport Act of June 4, 1920 (22 U.S.C. 214(b)(2)) is amended by striking "September 30, 2010" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 2018.
Text printed in the Record (11,957 characters)
BUDGETARY EFFECTS.
(a) Statutory PAYGO Scorecards.--The budgetary effects of this division and each succeeding division shall not be entered on either PAYGO scorecard maintained pursuant to section 4(d) of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010.
(b) Senate PAYGO Scorecards.--The budgetary effects of this division and each succeeding division shall not be entered on any PAYGO scorecard maintained for purposes of section 4106 of H. Con. Res. 71 (115th Congress).
(c) Classification of Budgetary Effects.--Notwithstanding Rule 3 of the Budget Scorekeeping Guidelines set forth in the joint explanatory statement of the committee of conference accompanying Conference Report 105-217 and section 250(c)(8) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, the budgetary effects of this division and each succeeding division shall not be estimated--
(1) for purposes of section 251 of such Act;
(2) for purposes of an allocation to the Committee on Appropriations pursuant to section 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974; and
(3) for purposes of paragraph (4)(C) of section 3 of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 as being included in an appropriation Act.
SEC. 2019. SECTION 781 EXTENSION.
Until December 11, 2026, the amendments made by section 781 of division B of Public Law 119-37 (7 U.S.C. 1639o note) shall only apply with respect to products described in paragraphs (1)(C)(ii)(I) and (1)(C)(iv)(I) of section 297A of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1639o) (as amended by such section 781).
DIVISION C--SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EXTENSION ACT OF 2026
SEC. 3001. SHORT TITLE.
This division may be cited as the "Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2026".
SEC. 3002. DEFINITIONS.
In this division:
(1) Covered law.--The term "covered law" means any of the following:
(A) Division A, division B, and division C of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law 117-58; 135 Stat. 429).
(B) Titles I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, XI, and XXIV of the FAST Act (Public Law 114-94; 129 Stat. 1312).
(C) Division A, division B, subtitle A of title I and title II of division C, and division E of MAP-21 (Public Law 112-141; 126 Stat. 405).
(D) Titles I, II, and III of the SAFETEA-LU Technical Corrections Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-244; 122 Stat. 1572).
(E) Titles I, II, III, IV, V, and VI of SAFETEA-LU (Public Law 109-59; 119 Stat. 1144).
(F) Titles I, II, III, IV, and V of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (Public Law 105-178; 112 Stat. 107).
(G) Titles II, III, and IV of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-59; 109 Stat. 568).
(H) Titles I, II, III, IV, V, and VI of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (Public Law 102-240; 105 Stat. 1914).
(I) Title 23, United States Code.
(J) Sections 116, 117, 330, 5128, 5505, and 24905 and chapters 53, 67, 139, 303, 311, 313, 701, and 702 of title 49, United States Code.
(2) Extension end date.--The term "extension end date" means December 11, 2026.
(3) Extension fraction.--The term "extension fraction" means the quotient, expressed as a fraction, obtained by dividing--
(A) the number of days in the extension period; by
(B) 365.
(4) Extension period.--The term "extension period" means the period that begins on October 1, 2026, and ends on the extension end date.
(5) Highway account.--The term "Highway Account" means the portion of the Highway Trust Fund that is not the Mass Transit Account.
(6) Mass transit account.--The term "Mass Transit Account" means the portion of the Highway Trust Fund established under section 9503(e)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
SEC. 3101. EXTENSION OF FEDERAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION
PROGRAMS.
(a) In General.--Except as otherwise provided in this division, the requirements, authorities, conditions, eligibilities, limitations, and other provisions authorized under the covered laws, which would otherwise expire on or cease to apply after September 30, 2026, are incorporated by reference and shall continue in effect through the extension end date.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) Highway trust fund.--
(A) Highway account.--There is authorized to be appropriated from the Highway Account for fiscal year 2027, for each program with respect to which amounts are authorized to be appropriated from such account for fiscal year 2026, an amount equal to the extension fraction of the amount authorized for appropriation with respect to the program from such account under the covered laws for fiscal year 2026.
(B) Mass transit account.--There is authorized to be appropriated from the Mass Transit Account for fiscal year 2027, for each program with respect to which amounts are authorized to be appropriated from such account for fiscal year 2026, an amount equal to the extension fraction of the amount authorized for appropriation with respect to the program from such account under the covered laws for fiscal year 2026.
(2) General fund.--There is authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2027, for each program under the covered laws with respect to
which amounts are authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2026 from an account other than the Highway Account or the Mass Transit Account, an amount that is not less than the extension fraction of the amount authorized for appropriation with respect to the program under the covered laws for fiscal year 2026.
(c) Use of Funds.--
(1) In general.--Amounts authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2027 with respect to a program under subsection (b) shall be distributed, administered, limited, and made available for obligation in the same manner as amounts authorized to be appropriated with respect to the program for fiscal year 2026 under the covered laws.
(2) Apportionment notice to states.--Section 104(e)(2) of title 23, United States Code, shall not apply for fiscal year 2027.
(d) Obligation Limitation.--A program for which amounts are authorized to be appropriated under subsection (b)(1) shall be subject to a limitation on obligations for fiscal year 2027 in an amount equal to the extension fraction of the limitation on obligations for the program for fiscal year 2026 and in the same manner as the limitation applicable with respect to the program for fiscal year 2026.
SEC. 3102. APPALACHIAN REGIONAL COMMISSION.
(a) In General.--During the extension period, section 14703 of title 40, United States Code, shall be applied--
(1) in subsection (a)(6), by substituting "2027" for "2026";
(2) in subsection (c), by substituting "2027" for "2026"; and
(3) in subsection (d), by substituting "2027" for "2026".
(b) Termination.--During the extension period, section 14704 of title 40, United States Code, shall be applied by substituting "2027" for "2026".
SEC. 3103. SPORT FISHING.
During the extension period, section 4 of the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 777c) shall be applied--
(1) in subsection (a), in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by substituting "2027" for "2026"; and
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1)(A), in the first sentence, by substituting "2027" for "2026"; and
(B) in paragraph (2)(A), in the first sentence, by substituting "2027" for "2026".
SEC. 3104. EXTENSION OF CERTAIN FUNDING.
(a) In General.--Notwithstanding section 118(b) of title 23, United States Code, any funds authorized from the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) under section 11101 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law 117-58; 135 Stat. 443) for a program described in subsection (b) that would otherwise lapse on September 30, 2026, shall be available until September 30, 2027.
(b) Program Described.--A program referred to in subsection (a) is a program other than a program for which funding is apportioned under section 104(b) or section 130(f) of title 23, United States Code.
SEC. 3201. EXTENSION OF EXPENDITURE AUTHORITY FOR HIGHWAY
TRUST FUND, SPORT FISH RESTORATION AND BOATING
TRUST FUND, AND LEAKING UNDERGROUND STORAGE
TANK TRUST FUND.
(a) Highway Trust Fund.--Section 9503 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
(1) by striking "October 1, 2026" in subsections (b)(6)(B), (c)(1), and (e)(3) and inserting "December 12, 2026", and
(2) by striking "Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act" in subsections (c)(1) and (e)(3) and inserting "Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2026".
(b) Sport Fish Restoration And Boating Trust Fund.--Section 9504 of such Code is amended--
(1) by striking "Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act" each place it appears in subsection (b)(2) and inserting "Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2026", and
(2) by striking "October 1, 2026" in subsection (d)(2) and inserting "December 12, 2026".
(c) Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund.--Section 9508(e)(2) of such Code is amended by striking "October 1, 2026" and inserting "December 12, 2026".
SEC. 4101. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR COLLECTION OF
COPAYMENTS FOR HOSPITAL CARE AND NURSING HOME
CARE.
Section 1710(f)(2)(B) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 4102. EXTENSION OF REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE NURSING HOME
CARE TO CERTAIN VETERANS WITH SERVICE-CONNECTED
DISABILITIES.
Section 1710A(d) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 4103. EXTENSION OF FUNDING FOR EXPANSION OF RURAL ACCESS
NETWORK FOR GROWTH ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM.
Section 2(d) of the Sgt. Ketchum Rural Veterans Mental Health Act of 2021 (Public Law 117-21; 38 U.S.C. 1712A note) is amended by striking "$1,200,000 for each of fiscal years 2022 through 2026 to carry out this section." and inserting "to carry out this section, for--
"(1) each of fiscal years 2022 through 2026, $1,200,000; and
"(2) the period beginning on October 1, 2026, and ending on December 11, 2026, $236,713.".
SEC. 4104. EXTENSION OF STAFF SERGEANT PARKER GORDON FOX
SUICIDE PREVENTION GRANT PROGRAM.
Section 201(j) of the Commander John Scott Hannon Veterans Mental Health Care Improvement Act of 2019 (Public Law 116-171; 38 U.S.C. 1720F note) is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 4105. EXTENSION OF FUNDING FOR GRANTS OR CONTRACTS TO
PROVIDE MENTAL HEALTH SUPPORT TO FAMILY
CAREGIVERS OF VETERANS.
Section 1720K(n) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking ", for each of fiscal years 2025 and 2026, $10,000,000 to carry out this section" and inserting "to carry out this section, for--
"(1) each of fiscal years 2025 and 2026, $10,000,000; and
"(2) the period beginning on October 1, 2026, and ending on December 11, 2026, $1,972,603.".
SEC. 4106. EXTENSION OF REQUIREMENT FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR
AMBULANCE COST FOR CARE FOR CERTAIN RURAL
VETERANS.
Section 143(c) of the Senator Elizabeth Dole 21st Century Veterans Healthcare and Benefits Improvement Act (Public Law 118-210; 38 U.S.C. 1728 note) is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 4107. EXTENSION OF INCENTIVE PROGRAM FOR SHARING OF
HEALTH CARE RESOURCES OF DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS AND DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.
Section 8111(d)(3) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 4201. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY TO MAINTAIN REGIONAL OFFICE
IN REPUBLIC OF PHILIPPINES.
Section 315(b) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 4202. EXTENSION OF REQUIREMENT RELATING TO RESTORATION
OF ENTITLEMENT TO EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE IN
CASES OF CLOSURE OR DISAPPROVAL OF EDUCATIONAL
INSTITUTIONS.
Section 3699(c)(2)(C) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 4301.
Text printed in the Record (4,916 characters)
EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR
HOMELESS WOMEN VETERANS AND HOMELESS VETERANS
WITH CHILDREN REINTEGRATION GRANT PROGRAM.
Section 2021A(f)(1) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking "to carry out this section $1,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2011 through 2026." and inserting "to carry out this section--
"(A) $1,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2011 through 2026; and
"(B) $197,261 for the period beginning on October 1, 2026, and ending on December 11, 2026.".
SEC. 4302. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR TREATMENT AND
REHABILITATION FOR SERIOUSLY MENTALLY ILL AND
HOMELESS VETERANS.
(a) General Treatment.--Section 2031(b) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
(b) Additional Services at Certain Locations.--Section 2033(d) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 4303. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR HOUSING ASSISTANCE FOR
HOMELESS VETERANS.
Section 2041(c) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 4304. EXTENSION OF FUNDING FOR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR
SUPPORTIVE SERVICES FOR VERY LOW-INCOME VETERAN
FAMILIES IN PERMANENT HOUSING.
Section 2044(e) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
"(10) $130,191,781 for the period beginning on October 1, 2026, and ending on December 11, 2026.".
SEC. 4305. EXTENSION OF FUNDING FOR GRANT PROGRAM FOR
HOMELESS VETERANS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS.
Section 2061(d)(1) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking "for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2026, $5,000,000 shall be available for each such fiscal year for the purposes of the program under this section." and inserting ", the following shall be available for the purposes of the program under this section:
"(A) For each of fiscal years 2007 through 2026, $5,000,000.
"(B) For the period beginning on October 1, 2026, and ending on December 11, 2026, $986,302.".
SEC. 4306. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON
HOMELESS VETERANS.
Section 2066(d) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 4307. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE FOR
SPECIALLY ADAPTED HOUSING FOR DISABLED VETERANS
RESIDING TEMPORARILY IN HOUSING OWNED BY A
FAMILY MEMBER.
Section 2102A(e) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 4308. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR SPECIALLY ADAPTED
HOUSING ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY GRANT PROGRAM.
Section 2108(g) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 4401. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR SECRETARY OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS TO TRANSPORT INDIVIDUALS TO AND FROM
FACILITIES OF DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS.
Section 111A(a)(2) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 4402. EXTENSION OF SUBPOENA AUTHORITY OF INSPECTOR
GENERAL OF DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS.
Section 312(d)(7)(A) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 4403. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR ADAPTIVE SPORTS
PROGRAMS FOR DISABLED VETERANS AND MEMBERS OF
THE ARMED FORCES.
Section 521A of title 38, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (g)(1), by adding at the end the following:
"(C) $3,156,165 for the period beginning on October 1, 2026, and ending on December 11, 2026."; and
(2) in subsection (l), by striking "fiscal years 2010 through 2026" and inserting "the period beginning on October 1, 2009, and ending on December 11, 2026".
SEC. 4404. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON
MINORITY VETERANS.
Section 544(e) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 4405. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY RELATING TO PLOT
ALLOWANCES.
Section 301(c)(2) of the Senator Elizabeth Dole 21st Century Veterans Healthcare and Benefits Improvement Act (Public Law 118-210; 38 U.S.C. 2303 note) is amended by striking "October 1, 2026" and inserting "December 12, 2026".
SEC. 4406. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY RELATING TO VENDEE LOAN
PROGRAM.
Section 3733(a)(8) of title 38, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026"; and
(2) in subparagraph (C), by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
SEC. 4407. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR TRANSFER OF REAL
PROPERTY.
Section 8118(a)(5) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking "September 30, 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026".
Amend the title so as to read: "An Act making continuing appropriations and extensions for fiscal year 2027, and for other purposes.".
The SPEAKER pro tempore
Pursuant
=========================== NOTE ===========================
On September 1, 2026, page H5383, in the first column, the following appeared: 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026". The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-
The online version has been corrected to read: 2026" and inserting "December 11, 2026". Amend the title so as to read: "An Act making con- tinuing appropriations and extensions for fiscal year 2027, and for other purposes.". The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-
========================= END NOTE ========================= to the rule, the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole) and the gentlewoman
from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) each will control 20 minutes.The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 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.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Senate amendments to H.R. 6500, the Continuing Appropriations Act of 2027.
Mr. Speaker, today is the first day of September. At this time of year, some people think of fall. Some people, like me, think of football, but on the Appropriations Committee, our focus is on the end of the fiscal year.
September 30 marks the end of the fiscal year 2026, and that means both the House and the Senate must act to fund the government for the coming fiscal year.
The Constitution entrusts Congress with a solemn duty to fund the government. This is a responsibility I have never viewed as optional and one I have remained committed to honoring through regular order.
I am extremely pleased that the House Appropriations Committee largely fulfilled its responsibilities earlier this year. By the middle of June, the Appropriations Committee reported out all 12 of our fiscal year 2027 appropriations bills, the earliest we have done so since fiscal year 2020.
The full House has also passed three of these bills. I had hoped that the House's quick actions would lead to sending a series of appropriations measures to the President's desk before the end of the fiscal year.
Unfortunately, time is running short. Though the House acted expeditiously, our colleagues across the rotunda have not approached this problem with the same sense of urgency. Indeed, the Senate has yet to report a single bill out of the Senate Appropriations Committee, much less across the Senate floor.
Like it or not, the Constitution entrusts Congress, both the House and the Senate, with the responsibility of funding the government. The fact remains that this House cannot act solely on its own.
The hard reality before us is straightforward: The fiscal year deadline is outpacing the work that remains. Recognizing that this was a possibility in July, the House proactively passed H.R. 9770, a continuing resolution to fund the government through December 4. I am glad to say the example we set helped paved the way for action in the other Chamber. The Senate built on our plan and before leaving for recess, our colleagues passed an amended version of that bill. We now have an opportunity to take this measure up and send it to the President for his approval.
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. If enacted, the bill before us today will fund the government through December 11. This will allow Congress time to get past the November elections and allow us time to assess and move forward with further appropriations measures in November and December.
Let me be very clear, Mr. Speaker, about what this bill does and does not do: The bill funds the government and keeps it open through December 11, ensuring our constituents will continue to get the services they need. The bill protects our national security, providing funding for our Armed Forces and security agencies as well as crucial authorities for core research and development programs to ensure our military remains the best armed and equipped services in the world.
The bill contains no poison pills and no partisan riders. It doesn't mean I agree with everything in it, but I think the time to act is now.
The bill has the support of the White House and notably the bill preserves the House's progress and the ability to pass full-year funding bills after the November elections.
Over and over, I hear from my constituents that they want Congress to work together and do the right thing for the American people. That is precisely what we are doing in taking up today's bill.
The bill before us is a clean, narrowly tailored continuing resolution that keeps the government open and operating, nothing more, nothing less.
It gives the Nation and our constituents certainty: certainty that the government will remain open, certainty that our servicemembers will be paid, certainty that the TSA will remain operating, certainty that Social Security checks will go out on time, certainty that home buyers will be able to secure mortgages, certainty that the Nation will be protected from foreign threats, certainty that Americans will be able to access nutrition assistance and disaster relief, certainty that roads will be repaired and critical infrastructure projects will continue, and certainty that our elections will be secure.
The choice is clear.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in voting for this responsible measure, and I look forward to continuing the FY 2027 appropriations process in the months ahead.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the measure we are considering today, which would extend government funding through December 11.
This bill, which passed the Senate by a vote of 90-6, is a marked improvement on the measure House Republicans forced to the floor before the district work period. We had three main objectives to that piece of legislation. It did not address a proposed rule from the White House Budget Office that granted unprecedented authority over Federal spending to political appointees in the Trump administration. It did not include spending adjustments known as anomalies that prevent interruptions or reductions of certain services during a temporary funding extension. It created a loophole that would have allowed certain funds within the Department of Homeland Security to be diverted to the Border Patrol in violation of the bipartisan agreement struck earlier this year.
I am pleased that the measure that we are considering today corrects these issues with the House Republican legislation. It prevents cuts to wildfire suppression, election security, economic development, and infrastructure investments. It supports the Commodity Supplemental Food Program, allows the FBI to continue planning for the 2028 Olympics, facilitates preparations for the 2030 census, extends the Commodity Futures Trading Commission's Whistleblower Program, supports the launch schedule for NOAA's weather satellites, and much more.
The bill contains no funding for ICE and prevents the Department of Homeland Security from using any money in this bill for the Border Patrol.
The Trump administration has provided tens of billions of dollars in advance funding for these agencies already. We will not support a single cent in further funding without substantial reforms to protect our communities from abuse.
Additionally, the bill denies the administration's request for vanity projects, like the $1 billion Trump-class battleships.
These are all welcome provisions.
This measure also freezes a White House budget policy that would put President Trump's political appointees in charge of virtually all of Federal funding. This is an important first step, but more must be done to permanently block this policy before it is allowed to take effect.
Federal funding must be awarded as Congress intended based upon genuine need and objective merit. Funding for cancer research should not be blocked because of partisan politics. Whether a community receives disaster relief should not depend on who they voted for in the last election.
Recently, the Department of Energy admitted in court that they had canceled certain grants solely because they were awarded to communities represented by Democrats.
If this proposed policy is allowed to come to fruition, this kind of political weaponization will become the norm. It is an extraordinarily dangerous precedent, one which will harm all of our constituents in the long run.
I know there is bipartisan opposition to this policy, but I am optimistic that we can work together to prevent it from taking effect, to protect Congress' constitutional prerogative over Federal spending, and protect our communities from being starved of sorely needed Federal resources.
To be clear, the continuing resolution we are considering today is in no way a substitute for the full-year funding process. It is merely a means to complete this important work while averting a lapse in government funding.
I remain committed to negotiating bipartisan agreements for all 12 appropriations bills for fiscal year 2027 before the conclusion of this continuing resolution. I believe Chairman Cole, Vice Chair Murray, and Chair Collins share this commitment.
There can be no replacement for the appropriations process, not continuing resolutions, not reconciliation, not empowerments, nor pocket rescissions. The power of the purse resides in the Congress. It is our exclusive responsibility. We do a disservice to this institution and the American people when we forfeit our authority over Federal spending to the executive branch.
The first step in exercising that authority is passing this bill today. The next step is enacting full-year bills that protect our constituents' interests and make sure that Federal investments are delivered to the American people without the interference of unelected political appointees in the White House, at the Office of Management and Budget, or throughout the Trump administration.
I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation while we continue the difficult but necessary work of crafting full-year funding bills that rein in this reckless administration, reassert Congress' power of the purse, and provide relief to the American people struggling with the high cost of living.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Tom Cole (R-OK)12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Alford), my good friend and a distinguished member of the Committee on Appropriations.
Mark Alford (R-MO)12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Cole and Ranking Member DeLauro for their hard work in this endeavor.
Mr. Speaker, here we are again. I rise in strong support of this continuing resolution.
Last year, Senate Democrats manufactured a 42-day shutdown that punished troops, farmers, veterans, and working families. Airports were backed up and paychecks froze. Rural hospitals and local law enforcement felt the hit, and Missouri families paid the price for Washington games. We will not let that happen again.
This clean, short-term continuing resolution keeps the government open through early December. It pays our troops. It funds the Department of Veterans Affairs. It keeps SNAP and WIC operating for Missouri mothers and children. It sustains USDA programs our farmers and ranchers depend on. It funds disaster relief and surface transportation. It does not load the bill with poison pills that invite another crisis right before the American people vote.
House Republicans have already done the hard work. They have moved the appropriations bills. They have restored regular order. They fought for fiscal discipline and for real investments in rural America, including more than $20 million that was secured for Missouri's Fourth Congressional District in infrastructure, rural health, agriculture research, and public safety.
Mr. Speaker, a continuing resolution is not the finish line. Full-year bills are the finish line, but a shutdown is not a strategy. It is an abdication. It is a political stunt dressed up as principle.
The other side had a chance last year to help us fund the government, but they chose leverage instead. They chose chaos instead.
Yes, Mr. Speaker, the American people remember that.
Today, we choose competence and to keep the lights on. We protect the progress already made. We give appropriators the time to finish our full-year bills without holding servicemembers, farmers, and seniors hostage.
You see, Missourians did not send me here to shut the government down for talking points. The American people sent us here to fund the government, to cut the waste, to secure the country, and get results.
That is why, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to pass this resolution to keep the government open and then finish the appropriations work the Constitution actually requires of us here in Congress.
Rosa L. DeLauro (D-CT)12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), the distinguished ranking member of the Subcommittee on Defense.
Betty McCollum (D-MN)12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this continuing resolution, and I thank the chair and the ranking member for bringing it to the floor for us to have a vote on.
Congress knows that CRs are not the way to fund the Federal Government. They are ineffective. They are inefficient in so many ways. Yet, we must keep the Federal Government operating because Americans deserve the certainty that the government services they rely on will be there for them.
I also wish to state that I am very proud that this bill for the CR does not have any funding that the President requested in his supplemental for the war in Iran, which was his war of choice. There is no money in this that the President had been requesting in supplementals.
President Trump's disastrous tariffs on allies like Canada, his unlawful war in Iran, they are all driving up the costs for Americans, and the President fails to address the rising cost of living.
When the President fails to do so, Congress cannot. Congress cannot let a government shutdown happen, too. It puts more burden on our families. Our constituents simply cannot afford it. They deserve so much better.
Senate Republicans also let the American people down by failing to release any of their 12 appropriations bills for next year. I am proud that the House moved forward in its work.
As I said, the House has done its job. It has advanced all 12 appropriations bills through the committee. I might not agree with the bills in their totality, but it was a framework to get to conference and to get the job done on time.
Again, I thank the chair and ranking member for working together to make that happen.
As I urge my Senate colleagues to complete their work, to get it done. Let's get to the negotiation table. I encourage my colleagues to vote for the CR so we can have a bipartisan funding package that truly invests in the needs of the American people.
Tom Cole (R-OK)12:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith), my good friend and the distinguished chairman of the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Jason Smith (R-MO)12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Cole for the opportunity to speak.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation, which not only prevents another government shutdown but also includes legislation passed by the Ways and Means Committee and the House to reauthorize trade policies that are vital to our Nation's economy and national security.
For over two decades, the African Growth and Opportunity Act has been the foundation of America's trade partnership with the nations of sub-Saharan Africa. AGOA promotes greater economic stability and opportunity across Africa while advancing America's strategic and national security interests, including access to critical minerals and more secure supply chains that are not beholden to Communist China.
Africa is home to approximately 30 percent of the world's critical mineral resources. Strengthening our trade relationship with Africa ensures that we do not surrender those critical minerals to China.
China has invested $8 billion to $10 billion in Africa and is seeking to monopolize that entire market to control future technological innovation and achieve military dominance. We cannot let that happen.
This bill also reauthorizes the Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement Act and the Haiti Economic Lift Program Act, known as HOPE and HELP. These programs provide trade preferences for textile and apparel products from Haiti and encourage greater stability in a nation less than 600 miles away from the Florida coast that has long suffered political and economic upheaval.
Greater stability in Haiti means fewer regional security concerns for the United States. Earlier this year, we reauthorized both of these vital agreements for an additional 1 year. Today's legislation ensures that both AGOA and Haiti HOPE/HELP will be in effect through the end of 2028, which will give our committee and stakeholders interested in these vital programs time to consider reforms and update them to ensure that they continue to advance U.S. interests.
Rosa L. DeLauro (D-CT)12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time for the purposes of closing.
Mr. Speaker, I support this measure, as I have indicated. It makes important improvements over the bill that was put forward by House Republicans before the August break.
It received broad bipartisan support in the Senate. It freezes a White House budget policy that would take substantial power over Federal funding away from Congress and claim it for the President, and it allows us to complete our work on the 12 full-year funding bills for fiscal year 2027. The House has completed its work, and now the Senate must complete its work.
Continuing resolutions are imperfect tools. They are not replacements for full-year appropriations, but they can be useful under certain limited circumstances like those we currently find ourselves in.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support this measure, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Tom Cole (R-OK)12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, as always, for working with us in this matter cooperatively.
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased, honestly, with the progress of the House Appropriations Committee this year. Again, all 12 bills were reported out of committee in the fastest time since fiscal year 2020.
I know those bills aren't in their final form, and so does my friend. We still need to sit down and bargain together and bargain with the Senate. Out of that, I believe we will emerge with a bipartisan compromise that both sides can be proud of and that we can send to the President for his approval.
For that to occur, the United States Senate has to begin to act. They have to produce bills. For us to go an entire fiscal year almost--we are about 30 days short of it--without a single Senate bill is just unprecedented. I do not blame that on my Republican colleagues. Frankly, they have the filibuster over there. They have to get to 60. They have not been able to do that, and that is going to mean that we are going to have an extraordinarily short time.
I am pleased, however, that the Senate acted. When we passed our continuing resolution over here, we knew it would change when it got to the Senate. Some of those changes, I actually agree with. Some of them, I don't. They don't really change the substance or the fact that we bought the time that we need to get through the election cycle and, hopefully, the time that we need to get down to serious bargaining on the other side of it.
For that to work, again, every person has to be at the table. Every point of view has to be represented, and we have to find common ground.
We were able to do that last year by working together on almost everything--not quite, but almost--and I think we can do that again this year. It is important for the country that we do.
Mr. Speaker, again, I thank my good friend, the ranking member of the full committee, for always being an honest and direct negotiating partner. I know that is going to continue. I know we have the same goal of trying to get all of these bills done by the end of the calendar year, if not the fiscal year.
Mr. Speaker, I invite the United States Senate, as a body, to join us in that and produce some product, post some numbers, do something so that we have some idea of what they are thinking about in terms of long-term appropriations. Then, we will sit down, appropriately, and we will bargain with them and hopefully come to a common conclusion.
The last thing this country needs is a full-year continuing resolution. We need negotiated, bipartisan bills that achieve the common objectives that, despite the partisan rhetoric of an election year, I know we have together. We have worked together before to defend the country, to advance biomedical research, to take care of early childhood, to help first-time college students, to do all of the things that the United States Government ought to be engaged in and do it in a bipartisan way. I think we can do that again. This bill is a step in that direction.
Again, I thank my friend for supporting the legislation. I hope our Senate colleagues recognize that we are trying to move along. We didn't want to fight over things, even the couple of things that we disagreed with. We wanted to bring this to the floor and begin a bipartisan process. Again, I think that is what we will accomplish today if we pass these bills.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore12:40 p.m.
The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole) that the House suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendments to the bill, H.R. 6500.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore12:40 p.m.
In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Tom Cole (R-OK)12:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore12:40 p.m.
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed.
Recess
Pages H5385–H5386 · Official textThe SPEAKER pro tempore
Pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the Chair declares the House in recess subject to the call of the Chair.
Accordingly (at 12 o'clock and 47 minutes p.m.), the House stood in recess.
After Recess
Page H5386 · Official textThe recess having expired, the House was called to order by the Speaker at 1 o'clock and 31 minutes p.m.
Communication from the Clerk of the House
Page H5386 · Official textThe SPEAKER laid before the House the following communication from the Clerk of the House of Representatives:
Text printed in the Record (1,528 characters)
Washington, DC, August 31, 2026. Hon. Mike Johnson, The Speaker, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Speaker: I have the honor to transmit herewith a copy of a letter received from Mr. J. Blake Evans, Elections Director, with the Georgia Office of the Secretary of State indicating that, according to the unofficial results for the Special Election Runoff held on August 25, 2026, the Honorable Everton "EJ" Blair was elected Representative to Congress for the Thirteenth Congressional District of Georgia.
With best wishes, I am,
Sincerely,
Kevin F. McCumber,
Clerk.
Enclosure.
____
Atlanta, GA, August 26, 2026. Hon. Kevin F. McCumber, Clerk, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. McCumber: This is to advise you that the unofficial results of the Special Election Runoff held on Tuesday, August 25, 2026, for Representative in Congress from the Thirteenth Congressional District of Georgia, show that Everton "EJ" Blair received 9,891 votes or 53.95% of the total number of votes cast for that office.
It would appear from these unofficial results that Everton "EJ" Blair was elected as Representative in Congress from the Thirteenth Congressional District of Georgia. To the best of our knowledge and belief at this time, there is no contest to this election.
As soon as the official results are certified to this office by all jurisdictions involved, an official Certificate of Election will be prepared for transmittal as required by law.
Best,
J. Blake Evans,
Elections Director.
Swearing in of the Honorable Everton Blair, Jr., of Georgia, as a Member of the House
Page H5386 · Official textSWEARING IN OF THE HONORABLE EVERTON BLAIR, JR., OF GEORGIA, AS A MEMBER OF THE HOUSE
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Georgia, the Honorable Everton Blair, Jr., be permitted to take the oath of office today.
His certificate of election has not arrived, but there is no contest and no question has been raised with regard to his election.
The SPEAKER
Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Georgia?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER
Will the Representative-elect and the members of the Georgia delegation present themselves in the well.
All Members will rise and the Representative-elect will please raise his right hand.
Everton Blair, Jr., appeared at the bar of the House and took the oath of office, as follows:
Text printed in the Record (408 characters)
Do you solemnly swear that you will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that you will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that you take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that you will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which you are about to enter, so help you God.
The SPEAKER
Congratulations, you are now a Member of the 119th Congress.
Welcoming the Honorable Everton Blair, Jr., to the House of Representatives
Page H5386 · Official textMr. Speaker, as dean of the Georgia congressional delegation, I am pleased to welcome Dr. Everton Blair, Jr., as the newest member of our delegation, representing Georgia's 13th Congressional District.
Our delegation is diverse, consisting of ordinary citizens with an extraordinary passion for improving lives and representing the great State of Georgia. Most of all, regardless of our differences, we consistently and tirelessly pursue common ground, uplifting our communities and addressing their needs and interests.
Everton is 34 years old, born and raised in Gwinnett County in the metro Atlanta area. His parents are both Jamaican immigrants. His father is a computer scientist and his mother a pediatrician.
Everton earned a B.A. in mathematics from Harvard College; a master's in policy, organization, and leadership from Stanford University; and a doctorate of educational leadership from the Harvard Graduate School as a Presidential Public Service Fellow.
He taught for 2 years in the Atlanta public school system through the Teach America Program, and in 2018, at the young age of 26, he ran for a seat on the Gwinnett County Board of Education, defeating a longtime incumbent and becoming the youngest and first person of color to serve on the board. Moreover, he was unanimously selected to chair that board and led the Gwinnett system through the COVID-19 pandemic.
In April 2025, along with several others, he filed to run for a seat in the 120th Congress for the 13th Congressional District that was represented by our late colleague David Scott.
Sadly, David passed and Everton announced that he would run in the special election for the remainder of David Scott's unexpired term, which he won last month.
We welcome this dynamic, young leader to the Georgia delegation and to this House as he begins his service to the people of Georgia's 13th Congressional District for the remainder of this Congress.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Blair).
Mr. BLAIR
Mr. Speaker, it is such an honor and a privilege to be here.
Mr. Speaker, growing up in Gwinnett County, my parents, who are here, imbued in us a real responsibility.
I know that they are proud of me, but above all, I thank them for how tirelessly they worked to support me, even when I had these crazy ideas to do things that I didn't even ask their permission for. They showed up and made it all possible. I thank them again.
I also acknowledge and thank a colleague, a dear mentor and friend of mine without whom I don't even know if I would have known anything about running for Congress, and that is Congresswoman Lucy McBath.
Lucy McBath sees in young people an ability and a prospect of leadership that I think a lot of us should adopt. I was so fortunate to have had her as my Congresswoman and to now be her colleague. I thank her again for all of the things that she has done.
Mr. Speaker, I will briefly acknowledge that my story is not really that unique. Born and raised in a very American household with immigrant parents, we acclimated.
So many of the things that I have been able to achieve and accomplish, I have just sought to try and do and make sure everybody else can. The reality is that it is getting a lot harder for way too many of us, especially in younger generations, to fulfill that American Dream.
My mandate here is clear: I will do everything in my capacity to make life more affordable for the hardworking Americans in Georgia's 13th Congressional District. I will do everything in my capacity to make sure that district maintains its representation and retains the majority Black representation that it currently has.
There are too many Black Americans who look at the progress that we have had over decades and wonder if their children and grandchildren are going to have as much access to prosperity, economic opportunity, voting rights, and the American systems that we know to be dear and true writ large.
It is up to us now. I didn't get here by accident. I got here by working really, really hard to earn the support of a lot of people and to introduce myself again and again. I will continue to do that as I work to build relationships with all of you and partner in the good work ahead of us. I cannot wait to spend the remainder of this term with all of you. I am thankful for the opportunity.
Announcement by the Speaker
Pages H5386–H5387 · Official textThe SPEAKER
Under clause 5(d) of rule XX, the Chair announces to the House that, in light of the administration of the oath of office to the gentleman from Georgia the whole number of the House is 432.
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
Page H5387 · Official textThe SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Goldman of Texas)
Proceedings will resume on questions previously postponed. Votes will be taken in the following order:
Motion to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendments to H.R. 6500;
Ordering the previous question on House Resolution 1499; and
Adoption of House Resolution 1499, if ordered.
The first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, remaining electronic votes will be conducted as 5-minute votes.
Agoa Extension Act
Page H5387 · Official textThe SPEAKER pro tempore
The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendments to the bill (H.R. 6500) to extend duty-free treatment provided with respect to imports from certain countries in Africa under the African Growth and Opportunity Act, to extend customs user fees, and for other purposes, on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore
The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole) that the House suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendments.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 370, nays 48, not voting 14, as follows:
Text printed in the Record (3,739 characters)
Adams Aderholt Aguilar Alford Allen Amo Amodei (NV) Arrington Auchincloss Babin Bacon Baird Balderson Balint Barr Barragan Barrett Baumgartner Bean (FL) Beatty Begich Bell Bentz Bera Bergman Beyer Bice Bilirakis Bishop Blair Boebert Bonamici Bost Bresnahan Brown Brownley Buchanan Budzinski Burchett Bynum Calvert Cammack Carbajal Carey Carter (GA) Carter (LA) Carter (TX) Case Casten Castor (FL) Chu Ciscomani Cisneros Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Cleaver Cline Clyburn Cohen Cole Collins Comer Conaway Correa Costa Courtney Crank Crawford Crenshaw Crockett Crow Cuellar Davids (KS) Davis (IL) Davis (NC) De La Cruz Dean (PA) DeGette DeLauro DelBene Deluzio DeSaulnier DesJarlais Diaz-Balart Dingell Doggett Downing Edwards Elfreth Ellzey Emmer Escobar Estes Evans (CO) Evans (PA) Ezell Fallon Fedorchak Feenstra Fields Figures Fine Finstad Fischbach Fitzgerald Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Fletcher Flood Fong Foster Foushee Foxx Frankel, Lois Franklin, Scott Friedman Fry Fulcher Fuller Gallagher Garbarino Garcia (TX) Gill (TX) Gillen Gimenez Golden (ME) Goldman (NY) Goldman (TX) Gonzalez, V. Gooden Goodlander Gosar Gottheimer Graves Gray Green, Al (TX) Griffith Grijalva Grothman Guest Guthrie Hageman Hamadeh (AZ) Harder (CA) Haridopolos Harrigan Harris (NC) Harshbarger Hayes Hern (OK) Hill (AR) Himes Hinson Horsford Houchin Houlahan Hoyer Hoyle (OR) Hudson Huffman Huizenga Hunt Hurd (CO) Issa Ivey Jack Jackson (IL) Jackson (TX) Jacobs James Jeffries Johnson (GA) Johnson (LA) Johnson (SD) Johnson (TX) Jordan Joyce (OH) Joyce (PA) Kamlager-Dove Kean Keating Kelly (IL) Kelly (MS) Kelly (PA) Kennedy (NY) Kennedy (UT) Kiggans (VA) Kiley (CA) Kim Knott Krishnamoorthi Kustoff LaHood LaLota Landsman Langworthy Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Latimer Latta Lawler Lee (FL) Lee (NV) Leger Fernandez Letlow Levin Liccardo Lieu Lofgren Loudermilk Lucas Luna Luttrell Mace Mackenzie Malliotakis Maloy Mann Mannion Mast McBath McBride McClain McClain Delaney McClellan McClintock McCollum McCormick McDonald Rivet McDowell McGuire McIver Meeks Mejia Menefee Menendez Meng Messmer Meuser Mfume Miller (OH) Miller (WV) Miller-Meeks Moolenaar Moore (AL) Moore (NC) Moore (UT) Moore (WI) Moore (WV) Moran Morelle Morrison Moskowitz Mrvan Mullin Murphy Nadler Neguse Nehls Newhouse Norcross Nunn (IA) Ogles Olszewski Onder Owens Pallone Palmer Panetta Pappas Patronis Pelosi Perez Peters Pettersen Pfluger Pingree Pocan Pou Quigley Randall Raskin Reschenthaler Riley (NY) Rivas Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Ross Rouzer Ruiz Rulli Rutherford Ryan Salazar Salinas Sanchez Scalise Scanlon Schakowsky Schmidt Schneider Scholten Schrier Scott (VA) Scott, Austin Sewell Sherman Shreve Simpson Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smucker Sorensen Soto Spartz Stansbury Stanton Stauber Stefanik Steil Stevens Strickland Strong Stutzman Subramanyam Suozzi Sykes Takano Taylor Tenney Thompson (MS) Thompson (PA) Tiffany Timmons Titus Tokuda Torres (CA) Torres (NY) Trahan Tran Turner (OH) Valadao Van Drew Van Duyne Van Epps Van Orden Vargas Vasquez Veasey Vindman Wagner Walberg Walkinshaw Wasserman Schultz Waters Watson Coleman Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Westerman Whitesides Wied Williams (GA) Williams (TX) Wilson (FL) Wilson (SC) Wittman Womack Yakym Zinke
Ansari Biggs (AZ) Biggs (SC) Boyle (PA) Brecheen Burlison Carson Casar Castro (TX) Cloud Clyde Crane Davidson Dexter Espaillat Frost Garcia (CA) Garcia (IL) Gomez Harris (MD) Higgins (LA) Jayapal Khanna Lee (PA) Magaziner Massie Matsui McGarvey McGovern Min Norman Ocasio-Cortez Omar Perry Pressley Ramirez Rose Roy Schweikert Self Sessions Simon Steube Thanedar Thompson (CA) Tlaib Tonko Underwood
Craig Donalds Dunn (FL) Garamendi Kaptur Lynch McCaul Miller (IL) Mills Moulton Neal Obernolte Smith (WA) Velazquez
Messrs. SCHWEIKERT, GARCIA of California, MIN, and THANEDAR changed their vote from "yea" to "nay." Mr. MFUME and Mrs. McCLAIN changed their vote from "nay" to "yea." So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the Senate amendments were concurred in. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Providing for Consideration of H.r. 1501, Protecting Domestic Mining Act of 2025; Providing for Consideration of H.r. 9436, Northeast Lobsterman Protection Act of 2026; Providing for Consideration...
Pages H5387–H5389 · Official textPROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1501, PROTECTING DOMESTIC MINING ACT OF 2025; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 9436, NORTHEAST LOBSTERMAN PROTECTION ACT OF 2026; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H. RES. 1490, PROVIDING FOR THE CONDEMNATION AND DENOUNCEMENT OF SOCIALISM IN ALL ITS FORMS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4795, PROTECT ECONOMIC AND ACADEMIC FREEDOM ACT OF 2026; AND RELATING TO CONSIDERATION OF MOTIONS TO SUSPEND THE RULES
The SPEAKER pro tempore
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on ordering the previous question on the resolution (H. Res. 1499) providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1501) to amend the FAST Act to include certain mineral production activities as a covered project, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (9436) to amend the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 to extend the time period for which certain regulations concerning the North Atlantic right whale are effective; providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 1490) providing for the condemnation and denouncement of socialism in all its forms, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4795) to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to prohibit an institution that participates in a nonexpressive commercial boycott of Israel from being eligible for certain funds under that Act, to require an institution that participates in certain programs under that Act to certify that students are not unreasonably obstructed from participating in academic programs in Israel, and for other purposes; and relating to consideration of motions to suspend the rules, on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore
The question is on ordering the previous question.
This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 212, nays 205, not voting 15, as follows:
Text printed in the Record (3,739 characters)
Aderholt Alford Allen Amodei (NV) Arrington Babin Bacon Baird Balderson Barr Barrett Baumgartner Bean (FL) Begich Bentz Bergman Bice Biggs (AZ) Biggs (SC) Bilirakis Boebert Bost Brecheen Bresnahan Buchanan Burchett Burlison Calvert Cammack Carey Carter (GA) Carter (TX) Ciscomani Cline Cloud Clyde Cole Collins Comer Crane Crank Crawford Crenshaw Davidson De La Cruz DesJarlais Diaz-Balart Downing Edwards Ellzey Emmer Estes Evans (CO) Ezell Fallon Fedorchak Feenstra Fine Finstad Fischbach Fitzgerald Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Flood Fong Foxx Franklin, Scott Fry Fulcher Fuller Gallagher Garbarino Gill (TX) Gimenez Goldman (TX) Gooden Gosar Graves Griffith Grothman Guest Guthrie Hageman Hamadeh (AZ) Haridopolos Harrigan Harris (MD) Harris (NC) Harshbarger Hern (OK) Higgins (LA) Hill (AR) Hinson Houchin Hudson Huizenga Hunt Hurd (CO) Issa Jack Jackson (TX) James Johnson (LA) Johnson (SD) Jordan Joyce (OH) Joyce (PA) Kean Kelly (MS) Kelly (PA) Kennedy (UT) Kiggans (VA) Kiley (CA) Kim Knott Kustoff LaHood LaLota Langworthy Latta Lawler Lee (FL) Letlow Loudermilk Lucas Luna Luttrell Mace Mackenzie Malliotakis Maloy Mann Massie Mast McClain McClintock McCormick McDowell McGuire Messmer Meuser Miller (OH) Miller (WV) Miller-Meeks Moolenaar Moore (AL) Moore (NC) Moore (UT) Moore (WV) Moran Murphy Nehls Newhouse Norman Nunn (IA) Ogles Onder Owens Palmer Patronis Perry Pfluger Reschenthaler Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rose Rouzer Rulli Rutherford Salazar Scalise Schmidt Schweikert Scott, Austin Self Sessions Shreve Simpson Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smucker Spartz Stauber Stefanik Steil Steube Strong Stutzman Taylor Tenney Thompson (PA) Tiffany Timmons Turner (OH) Valadao Van Drew Van Duyne Van Epps Van Orden Wagner Walberg Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Westerman Wied Williams (TX) Wilson (SC) Wittman Womack Yakym Zinke
Adams Aguilar Amo Ansari Auchincloss Balint Barragan Beatty Bell Bera Beyer Bishop Blair Bonamici Boyle (PA) Brown Brownley Budzinski Bynum Carbajal Carson Carter (LA) Casar Case Casten Castor (FL) Castro (TX) Chu Cisneros Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Cleaver Clyburn Cohen Conaway Correa Costa Courtney Crockett Crow Cuellar Davids (KS) Davis (IL) Davis (NC) Dean (PA) DeGette DeLauro DelBene Deluzio DeSaulnier Dexter Dingell Doggett Elfreth Escobar Espaillat Evans (PA) Fields Figures Fletcher Foster Foushee Frankel, Lois Friedman Frost Garcia (CA) Garcia (IL) Garcia (TX) Gillen Golden (ME) Goldman (NY) Gomez Gonzalez, V. Goodlander Gottheimer Gray Green, Al (TX) Grijalva Harder (CA) Hayes Himes Horsford Houlahan Hoyer Hoyle (OR) Huffman Ivey Jackson (IL) Jacobs Jayapal Jeffries Johnson (GA) Johnson (TX) Kamlager-Dove Keating Kelly (IL) Kennedy (NY) Khanna Krishnamoorthi Landsman Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Latimer Lee (NV) Lee (PA) Leger Fernandez Levin Liccardo Lieu Lofgren Magaziner Mannion Matsui McBath McBride McClain Delaney McClellan McCollum McDonald Rivet McGarvey McGovern McIver Meeks Mejia Menefee Menendez Meng Mfume Min Moore (WI) Morelle Morrison Moskowitz Mrvan Mullin Nadler Neguse Norcross Ocasio-Cortez Olszewski Omar Pallone Panetta Pappas Pelosi Perez Peters Pettersen Pingree Pocan Pou Pressley Quigley Ramirez Randall Raskin Riley (NY) Rivas Ross Ruiz Ryan Salinas Sanchez Scanlon Schakowsky Schneider Scholten Schrier Scott (VA) Sewell Sherman Simon Sorensen Soto Stansbury Stanton Stevens Strickland Subramanyam Suozzi Sykes Takano Thanedar Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Titus Tlaib Tokuda Tonko Torres (CA) Torres (NY) Trahan Tran Underwood Vargas Vasquez Veasey Vindman Walkinshaw Wasserman Schultz Waters Watson Coleman Whitesides Williams (GA) Wilson (FL)
Craig Donalds Dunn (FL) Garamendi Kaptur Lynch McCaul Miller (IL) Mills Moulton Neal Obernolte Roy Smith (WA) Velazquez
So the previous question was ordered. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Newhouse)2:12 p.m.
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. McGovern (D-MA)2:12 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore2:12 p.m.
This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 210, noes 208, not voting 14, as follows:
Text printed in the Record (3,740 characters)
Aderholt Alford Allen Amodei (NV) Arrington Babin Bacon Baird Balderson Barr Barrett Baumgartner Bean (FL) Begich Bentz Bergman Bice Biggs (AZ) Biggs (SC) Bilirakis Boebert Bost Brecheen Bresnahan Buchanan Burchett Burlison Calvert Cammack Carey Carter (GA) Carter (TX) Ciscomani Cline Cloud Clyde Cole Collins Comer Crane Crank Crawford Crenshaw Davidson De La Cruz DesJarlais Diaz-Balart Downing Edwards Ellzey Emmer Estes Evans (CO) Ezell Fallon Fedorchak Feenstra Fine Finstad Fischbach Fitzgerald Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Flood Fong Foxx Franklin, Scott Fry Fulcher Fuller Gallagher Garbarino Gill (TX) Gimenez Golden (ME) Goldman (TX) Gooden Gosar Graves Griffith Grothman Guest Guthrie Hageman Hamadeh (AZ) Haridopolos Harrigan Harris (NC) Harshbarger Hern (OK) Hill (AR) Hinson Houchin Hudson Huizenga Hunt Hurd (CO) Issa Jack Jackson (TX) James Johnson (LA) Johnson (SD) Jordan Joyce (OH) Joyce (PA) Kean Kelly (MS) Kelly (PA) Kennedy (UT) Kiggans (VA) Kiley (CA) Kim Knott Kustoff LaHood LaLota Langworthy Latta Lawler Lee (FL) Letlow Loudermilk Lucas Luna Luttrell Mace Mackenzie Malliotakis Maloy Mann Massie Mast McClain McClintock McCormick McDowell McGuire Messmer Meuser Miller (OH) Miller (WV) Miller-Meeks Moolenaar Moore (AL) Moore (NC) Moore (UT) Moore (WV) Moran Murphy Nehls Newhouse Nunn (IA) Ogles Onder Owens Palmer Patronis Perez Perry Pfluger Reschenthaler Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rose Rouzer Rulli Rutherford Salazar Scalise Schmidt Schweikert Scott, Austin Self Shreve Simpson Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smucker Spartz Stauber Stefanik Steil Steube Strong Stutzman Taylor Tenney Thompson (PA) Tiffany Timmons Turner (OH) Valadao Van Drew Van Duyne Van Epps Van Orden Wagner Walberg Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Westerman Wied Williams (TX) Wilson (SC) Wittman Womack Yakym Zinke
Adams Aguilar Amo Ansari Auchincloss Balint Barragan Beatty Bell Bera Beyer Bishop Blair Bonamici Boyle (PA) Brown Brownley Budzinski Bynum Carbajal Carson Carter (LA) Casar Case Casten Castor (FL) Castro (TX) Chu Cisneros Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Cleaver Clyburn Cohen Conaway Correa Costa Courtney Crockett Crow Cuellar Davids (KS) Davis (IL) Davis (NC) Dean (PA) DeGette DeLauro DelBene Deluzio DeSaulnier Dexter Dingell Doggett Elfreth Escobar Espaillat Evans (PA) Fields Figures Fletcher Foster Foushee Frankel, Lois Friedman Frost Garcia (CA) Garcia (IL) Garcia (TX) Gillen Goldman (NY) Gomez Gonzalez, V. Goodlander Gottheimer Gray Green, Al (TX) Grijalva Harder (CA) Harris (MD) Hayes Higgins (LA) Himes Horsford Houlahan Hoyer Hoyle (OR) Huffman Ivey Jackson (IL) Jacobs Jayapal Jeffries Johnson (GA) Johnson (TX) Kamlager-Dove Keating Kelly (IL) Kennedy (NY) Khanna Krishnamoorthi Landsman Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Latimer Lee (NV)
Lee (PA) Leger Fernandez Levin Liccardo Lieu Lofgren Magaziner Mannion Matsui McBath McBride McClain Delaney McClellan McCollum McDonald Rivet McGarvey McGovern McIver Meeks Mejia Menefee Menendez Meng Mfume Min Moore (WI) Morelle Morrison Moskowitz Mrvan Mullin Nadler Neguse Norcross Norman Ocasio-Cortez Olszewski Omar Pallone Panetta Pappas Pelosi Peters Pettersen Pingree Pocan Pou Pressley Quigley Ramirez Randall Raskin Riley (NY) Rivas Ross Roy Ruiz Ryan Salinas Sanchez Scanlon Schakowsky Schneider Scholten Schrier Scott (VA) Sessions Sewell Sherman Simon Sorensen Soto Stansbury Stanton Stevens Strickland Subramanyam Suozzi Sykes Takano Thanedar Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Titus Tlaib Tokuda Tonko Torres (CA) Torres (NY) Trahan Tran Underwood Vargas Vasquez Veasey Vindman Walkinshaw Wasserman Schultz Waters Watson Coleman Whitesides Williams (GA) Wilson (FL)
Craig Donalds Dunn (FL) Garamendi Kaptur Lynch McCaul Miller (IL) Mills Moulton Neal Obernolte Smith (WA) Velazquez
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.
Making in Order at Any Time Consideration of H. Res. 1498, in the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Chuck Edwards
Page H5389 · Official textMAKING IN ORDER AT ANY TIME CONSIDERATION OF H. RES. 1498, IN THE MATTER OF ALLEGATIONS RELATING TO REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK EDWARDS
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order at any time to consider H. Res. 1498 in the House without intervention of any point of order if called on by the chair of the Committee on Ethics or his designee; that the resolution be considered as read; and that the previous question be considered as ordered on the resolution to adoption without intervening motion or demand for division of the question except for 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by myself and Representative Edwards of North Carolina, or their designee.
I call up H. Res. 1498 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore
Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Mississippi?
There was no objection.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Chuck Edwards
Pages H5389–H5393 · Official textIN THE MATTER OF ALLEGATIONS RELATING TO REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK EDWARDS
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House of today, I call up the resolution (H. Res. 1498) in the matter of allegations relating to Representative Chuck Edwards, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore
Pursuant to the order of today, the resolution is considered read.
The text of the resolution is as follows:
Text printed in the Record (436 characters)
Resolved, That (1) the House adopt the Report of the Committee on Ethics dated July 22, 2026, In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Chuck Edwards; (2) Representative Edwards of North Carolina be censured; (3) Representative Edwards forthwith present himself in the well of the House for pronouncement of the censure; and (4) Representative Edwards be censured with the public reading of this resolution by the Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore
The resolution shall be debatable for 1 hour, equally divided and controlled by Representative Guest of Mississippi and Representative Edwards of North Carolina, or their respective designees.
The gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Guest) and the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Edwards) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mississippi.
Michael Guest (R-MS)2:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous materials on H. Res. 1498.
The SPEAKER pro tempore2:30 p.m.
Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Mississippi?
There was no objection.
Michael Guest (R-MS)2:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The Committee on Ethics conducted a monthslong investigation into the activity of Mr. Edwards, and the committee released a report on August 3 and made the following findings.
First, the committee found no--and I do repeat the word "no"--evidence that Mr. Edwards engaged in sexual activity or that he explicitly propositioned any individuals under his employment.
The committee did find that Mr. Edwards' conduct toward two young female staffers was inappropriate and violated rules prohibiting sexual harassment.
Mr. Speaker, sexual harassment can be shown generally in one of two ways. The first is unwelcome sexual advances premised on a quid pro quo exchange; i.e., there is a tangible job benefit that is conditioned on the employee engaging in a relationship with his or her employer. The second way sexual harassment can be shown is an abusive work environment that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim's employment.
Mr. Speaker, I ask that the House be in order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore2:30 p.m.
The gentleman is correct.
The gravity of this resolution requires the attention of everybody in the Chamber. If you have to have conversations, would you please take them off the floor.
The gentleman from Mississippi is recognized.
Michael Guest (R-MS)2:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the allegations in this matter do not implicate a quid pro quo sexual harassment but, rather, that Edwards' conduct and behavior create a hostile work environment.
Under Federal law, a hostile work environment must be objectively and subjectively offensive, one that a reasonable person would find hostile or abusive and one that the victim, in fact, did perceive to be so.
Determining whether an employee was subject to such an environment depends on a totality of the circumstances test. That test includes the frequency, severity, and offensiveness of the conduct at issue.
Mr. Speaker, in this case, the committee reviewed Representative Edwards' conduct and determined that he engaged in persistent unprofessional and inappropriate conduct toward two young female staffers.
While Representative Edwards denies that his conduct was intended to be sexual or romantic, his pattern of behavior would lead a reasonable person to interpret it as such.
The behavior includes: providing the young women with lavish and recurrent gifts, making comments regarding their appearance and dress, inviting them to intimate dinners and vacations, sending notes regarding his affection, and inviting them to other activities as a way to spend time together.
Representative Edwards was aware that his excessive attention toward these young ladies led to rumors and innuendos that he was engaged in a romantic relationship with one or both staffers.
Representative Edwards was also aware that the women were uncomfortable with his behavior. The women communicated their feeling of discomfort to senior staff who then spoke with Representative Edwards on their behalf. Representative Edwards did not appreciate the action of senior staff expressing the discomfort felt by the two women and continued his behavior.
The committee found that Representative Edwards was, at a minimum, blind to the reality and, at worst, dismissive of the impact his conduct had on the careers and well-being of the women on his staff.
Representative Edwards' conduct was singling out certain staffers and isolating them from other members of the staff, making frequent comments regarding a person's appearance and weight, sending messages in the middle of the night, texting staff deeply personal and seemingly romantic thoughts, intruding on personal occasions without invitation, paying for personal vacations, and spending thousands of dollars on gifts for staffers.
When taken individually, this conduct is, at a minimum, inappropriate, but these actions, when taken in combination with each other and when viewed under a totality of the circumstances test, led the committee to find that Representative Edwards engaged in unprofessional conduct toward two young female staffers. Said conduct created a hostile work environment that resulted in both staffers leaving the employment of Mr. Edwards' office.
Furthermore, the Committee on Ethics recommends a floor sanction should be imposed, and Representative Edwards should be censured for his conduct.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Chuck Edwards (R-NC)2:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to simply ask my colleagues to vote against a resolution of censure. I rise to ask this House to do something more fundamental: Judge me on the facts, not on the inference, insinuation, or headlines.
First, sincerely, I want to say something directly and publicly to the two women who have been at the center of all of this: I am sorry. I am sorry that my actions, my judgment, or the way that I expressed a friendship ever put either of you in an uncomfortable position. My intentions were only grounded in what I understood our friendship to be and in genuine admiration and respect that I had for each of you, not only as professionals but as people--people who were willing to share so much of your stories and your backgrounds with me.
I recognize now that my understanding of those relationships may not have always matched yours. You didn't ask to have your names, friendships, work, or private lives subjected to public speculation. You deserve better than to be caught in the middle of a controversy involving me.
You are both talented, intelligent, strong women who served the people of western North Carolina with dedication. Nothing about this episode should diminish that service or your accomplishments.
Most importantly, I want to apologize to my wife, Teresa, and to my family. You are the people that I love most in this world, and yet, you are the ones who have had to carry a burden that you did not create and did not deserve.
Teresa, you stood beside me through a lifetime of challenges, sacrifices, successes, and disappointments. You supported my public service and endured the demands that came with it. I am deeply sorry that my judgment and my actions put you in a position where you had to endure embarrassment, hurt, public scrutiny, and questions that no wife should ever have to face.
Mr. Speaker, regret is not an admission of sexual harassment. I can acknowledge poor judgment, regret the discomfort that some of my actions may have caused, and apologize to those who were hurt by this episode, while still disputing a conclusion that the evidence just simply does not support.
I have detailed most of that in a letter to my colleagues. Some will read it, some have, and some will simply cast judgment. I am going to spare this body the time to review all of those details, but a few points bear discussing.
The committee concluded that I engaged in no sexual activity. The committee concluded that I did not explicitly proposition any staff member. The committee concluded that the allegations in this matter do not implicate quid pro quo sexual harassment, and the committee concluded that I did not violate Federal sexual harassment law. That law, by the way, was very specifically defined by Congress.
Those findings matter. Yet, despite those findings, the committee bridged a substantial evidentiary gap, called that gap sexual harassment. My colleagues should ask themselves whether the evidence truly supports that conclusion and whether it justifies one of the most serious punishments that this House can impose on one of its Members.
I provided the committee approximately 186,000 emails, text messages, voicemails, and other documents. That enormous record told the story of a long-standing relationship with those women that began years before we entered Congress. The two coworkers at issue and I worked together in my North Carolina Senate office. We worked on campaigns together. We came to Congress together. We traveled together on official business. We exchanged gifts reciprocally. We helped one another professionally and personally.
These were not one-sided relationships manufactured after the fact as a defense. The committee had evidence of that history, and they ignored it. Even the communications selected by the committee showed reciprocity: staff initiating dinners and activities, expressing affection, complimenting me, making future plans, and maintaining relationships after their employment ended.
That context matters, because selective totality is not totality at all, as the committee itself would have you believe. I am not asking anyone in this Chamber to approve of every interaction that I had, every compliment that I gave, or every gift that I purchased. Looking back, I don't approve of all of them either.
I am asking you to distinguish between conduct that you might personally have handled differently and conduct that warrants the solemn judgment of censure by the United States House of Representatives.
Friendship doesn't excuse misconduct, but neither can friendship be erased from the analysis when the committee asks what conduct meant. Context cannot matter only when it supports an accusation and then disappear when it points the other way.
Generosity is not sexual harassment. Caring deeply about the people with whom you have worked for years is not sexual harassment, and conduct that is otherwise permissible does not automatically become misconduct simply because enough individual moments are assembled together and viewed through the darkest possible lens.
Possibility is not proof. Inference is not evidence, and selective context is not totality.
There is another principle at stake here that extends far beyond me. Censure should not be imposed because Members believe they might have exercised better judgment. It should not be imposed because conduct can be interpreted unfavorably after the fact, and it certainly should not be imposed merely because voting against censure may be politically uncomfortable.
A censure by this House carries the weight of history. Once imposed, the nuance disappears. The qualifications disappear. The committee's findings that there was no sexual activity, no explicit proposition, no quid pro quo harassment, and no violation of Federal sexual harassment law will disappear. What will remain is one word attached permanently to my name: Censured.
This committee's report is loaded with contextual and testimonial omissions, and there are two claims that I find particularly interesting.
First, it claims what a reasonable observer might interpret. If the committee invokes a reasonable observer, then that observer should be given the whole context, not selected episodes stripped from years of relationships, as has been the case here. It should provide all relative context and view the circumstances as a whole, not merely what one particular person felt or what was isolated as a fact that might suggest. This report fails in those requirements.
Then it goes on to say how that same reasonable person could interpret my actions. Mr. Speaker, we spend a lot of time here in D.C. working to eliminate our coulds and shoulds, to avoid the vagueness of our laws and standards. Yet, this report chooses to invoke that same hypothetical that we work so hard to avoid.
So I ask each of you, Republican and Democrat alike, to look beyond the headlines and examine what the committee actually found. I am not asking for special treatment. I am asking for fair treatment. I am asking you to decide whether the punishment before you is supported by the evidence, proportional to the conduct actually established, and consistent with the standards that this House should apply to every Member, regardless of party or circumstance.
I have spent my public life trying to serve the people who entrusted me with this office. I am imperfect. I have made mistakes, but I do not believe I committed sexual harassment. The factual findings of this investigation do not justify branding me as though I did.
Members of this House are not required to agree with every choice I made in order to vote against this censure. You need only conclude that the evidence does not justify the punishment.
I respectfully ask my colleagues to vote "no," not as a favor to me. Vote "no" because censure should require more than inference. Vote "no" because fairness demands that the whole record matter, and vote "no" because the judgment of this House should rest on what was proven, not on what can merely be presumed.
I close by reminding you: The committee concluded that I engaged in no sexual activity. The committee concluded that I did not explicitly proposition any staff member. The committee concluded that the allegations in this matter do not implicate quid pro quo sexual harassment, and the committee concluded that I did not violate Federal sexual harassment law.
Those are not my characterizations of this report. I will say again, those are not my characterizations of this report. Those are the committee's own conclusions.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Michael Guest (R-MS)2:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, before I recognize my next speaker, I would point out that the arguments made by Mr. Edwards are facts that are contained in the report. They are part of the opening statement that I gave, the statement as to which the committee found no evidence that he was involved in a romantic relationship and found that he did not directly proposition any individuals who were in his employment.
And so there has been an attempt by this committee to put forth evidence that we believe supports sexual harassment but also to show evidence in the light that is being portrayed by Mr. Edwards, that some of the innuendos that were circulating at one time were not true and correct.
This committee worked very diligently, Mr. Speaker, to try to gather evidence and to try and present that in a fair format--evidence that both supports the findings of the committee and then at times evidence that supports the findings of those people who are charged or who are under investigation by the Ethics Committee.
Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. DeSaulnier), the ranking member of the House Committee on Ethics.
Mark DeSaulnier (D-CA)2:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I will start by thanking the chairman, whom I have great respect for, and our collegiality is focused on enforcing the rules of this body. I also thank all of the committee members, who were thoughtful and bipartisan on this particular subject matter, and all of the things that come before the Ethics Committee. I also thank our nonpartisan, professional committee staff for their tireless efforts and devoted service to this House and this country.
Our committee's investigation of Representative Edwards' conduct spanned 4 months and included interviews of 16 individuals and a review of nearly 1,500 pages of documents.
Our subsequent censure recommendation reflects our bipartisan and unwavering commitment to a congressional workplace free of sexual harassment and discrimination. Unfortunately, Representative Edwards, in my opinion, failed that standard.
For more than 2 years, Representative Edwards lavished two of his female staffers with gifts of jewelry, designer purses, shoes, flowers, gifts, and vacations, to name just a few examples.
He commented on their appearance and dress in their congressional office, remarking favorably on their weight and telling them they looked pretty and breathtaking in certain clothing.
He invited them on intimate one-on-one outings and trips to restaurants, casinos, and live performances.
He sent them personal texts late at night and wrote them deeply personal letters and poems expressing his affection. He even skipped a vote series to decorate a Christmas tree at one of the staffer's homes.
These are not innocuous, isolated incidences. They are part of sustained, unprofessional, and inappropriate conduct by Representative Edwards toward two young women he employed.
Neither individual felt free to reject Representative Edwards' attention without fear of professional consequences.
Despite attempts to communicate their discomfort, his behavior continued, and both ultimately left their congressional employment.
One woman told the committee that she felt she could not resist Representative Edwards because she "did not think having a Member of Congress against me would benefit my career."
This statement gets to the heart of the matter--the power and balance between Members of Congress and their staff.
Representative Edwards' interpretation of his own conduct does not change how the women experienced it. Whether or not he occasionally gave gifts to, or received them from, other staff is irrelevant to how he treated these two women, who felt his behavior was uncomfortable and unwanted.
Representative Edwards may not have made physical advances or explicit propositions, but sexual harassment does not require either. His conduct was inappropriate, unwelcome, and, most importantly, created a hostile work environment.
As a result, the House of Representatives lost two staffers, and, for that, I believe he should be censured.
In the House, censure is not simply a punishment directed at an individual Member. It is a collective statement by this institution that we will and will not tolerate certain behaviors. Today, with this censure resolution, we can make our standard clear. Professional boundaries must be respected. When congressional employees say that conduct is unwelcome, they will be heard, and that conduct will not be allowed to continue.
There must be zero tolerance for sexual harassment and misconduct in the Halls of Congress, but zero tolerance does not mean zero due process. Representative Edwards was fully informed of the allegations and sat for a voluntary interview. He ultimately waived certain procedural steps so that the committee could recommend a House-level sanction.
In exchange for accepting this recommended censure, he reviewed and was allowed to respond to the committee's report.
For sexual harassment to truly have no place in the congressional workplace, the principle cannot exist only on paper in a committee report. It must be modeled for accountability.
To deliver that accountability, to defend the integrity of this institution, and to affirm that every congressional employee deserves a safe and respectful workplace free from sexual harassment, I would urge my colleagues to support this resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the chair of the committee one more time for his work on this matter.
Michael Guest (R-MS)2:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez).
Teresa Leger Fernandez (D-NM)2:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me time.
Chuck Edwards' behavior over the past 2 years is disgusting and horrible. The sexual harassment of two young women on his staff and his abhorrent abuse of power is outlandish and disturbing.
He not only threatened the careers and safety of his staff with his behavior, but he broke the promise he made to Americans to act with dignity and integrity.
Since he continues to show no remorse, it is obvious that Edwards refuses to understand sexual harassment or his abuse of power. If we don't take action today, there is no opportunity for these women to receive justice.
Mr. Speaker, every Member must vote to censure him.
Over the course of these 2 years, he sent two young women on his staff mountains of expensive gifts, including designer purses, personalized handguns, and jewelry. He took them on intimate dinners, trips, and sent them late-night messages, despite the women making it clear they were uncomfortable. He even skipped votes. He skipped votes to decorate one of the staffer's Christmas tree.
One of the staff, as we heard, essentially said she feared retaliation. When she said: "I worry about having somebody with that power against me," that is fear of retaliation.
Not only did he disrespect these women, he disregarded his duties to his constituents. For him, decorating a Christmas tree was more important than showing up to the vote, as his constituents expected when they sent him to Congress.
Even after this investigation, he continues to deny that this behavior was harassment. I basically do not see any remorse in his 22 pages or what he spoke today. Those 22 pages are basically a rant defending his actions.
He is someone who fails to see how what he has done has negatively impacted the lives and careers of these two young women. Because of Mr. Edwards' harassment, these two women don't work here anymore.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the Committee on Ethics. I thank them for their thorough and efficient investigation. I thank the chair and the ranking member for their work. Without their investigation, we may never have known that Edwards spent years sexually harassing two young women on his staff.
This is textbook sexual harassment, and Congress must take action; but I say that the penalty should match the harassment. The precedent of censure, I believe, is not enough. These women lost their jobs because of Mr. Edwards' behavior. He should lose his.
It is time we reform the rules in Congress so abusers like Edwards are at least stripped of committee assignments or expelled if the offense calls for it--after an investigation and after a vote of the full floor--which is what we are doing today, because serving in Congress is a privilege and not an honor. It is not a right.
The American people continue to expect us to act with dignity, and if that trust is broken, there must be accountability.
We need to protect women in the House from retaliation and make sure that the men who abuse their power face real, substantive consequences. That is exactly why the Democratic Women's Caucus, together with the GOP Women's Caucus, has been working to end the widespread problem of sexual misconduct on the Hill. We are fighting to make Congress a place where our staffers feel safe coming to work.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote for the censure.
Michael Guest (R-MS)3:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Ivey), a fellow member of the House Ethics Committee.
Glenn Ivey (D-MD)3:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I thank the chair, the ranking member, and all of my colleagues, as well, for the hard work and nonpartisan work, I must say, as well, that we put in, but especially the staff, who I thought did an outstanding job, yet again, in this investigation and in the report that they wrote.
I will speak to two different groups of people today. The first is my colleagues. The second is the young women--and I will come back to this in a minute--who I had a chance to speak to a few weeks ago, in the same week that Mr. Swalwell and Mr. Gonzales had resigned from the House. I will come back to that in a moment.
My colleagues, after they found out I was on the Ethics Committee, would frequently come up and ask me on different topics: What is over the line? What can I do to not get in trouble? How do I stay out of trouble, that sort of thing.
On these issues, this is a particular set that we have talked about on a couple of occasions, so I wanted to point out a couple of things here.
I commend Mr. Edwards for the comments that he made and the legal document that he filed, but one of the things it really failed to do was address the specific allegations about the gifts and how inappropriate, frankly, they obviously were on their face.
As the report details on page 4 of the report: "Both women received numerous gifts from Representative Edwards, including jewelry totaling over $1,000, designer purses, guns, shoes, flowers, a laptop and cell phone, KitchenAid mixer, robotic vacuum, vacations, tickets to performances, and one-on-one dinners."
The tickets to performances, that wasn't just any performance. That was "Hamilton" on Broadway.
Mr. Speaker, my anniversary is coming up. I have been married 38 years as of Thursday, and my wife really wanted to go to see "Hamilton." When I took a look at what those prices were, I said: Babe, we are going to have to wait until it comes on the off-Broadway tour.
He put up the money to send them there anyway, and those are the types of things, those are the types of gifts, that kind of jump out at you. This isn't like a birthday card. This isn't congratulations on your wedding or that new baby that was born. These are gifts that people, Members, should not be giving to staffers.
I worked for a Congressman and three Senators as a staffer beginning back in 1987. We didn't pass around gifts like this. We just didn't.
Mr. Speaker, I think it is important for us to make sure we understand that, as Members, we want to mentor and help our young people move on and move up. I have to say that in that 40 years, I have seen people who fell into this situation, frequently women, where there were accusations or sexual harassment taking place or sexual relationships taking place. Some of my personal friends were forced out of their jobs in 1987 and 1988.
We didn't have the types of protections then that we do now. In fact, Congress explicitly exempted itself from these sorts of restrictions. We have to make sure that now that they are in place, we use them to the fullest extent because those people, primarily women, it was damaging to their careers, and it stays with them.
That was before the internet age. These women today, in this instance, that is not good mentoring. This is something that could follow them for the rest of their careers, and it won't be beneficial to them.
Let's make sure, as we work through this with our staff, that we don't do things that actually injure our staffers who are doing good work for us and trying to make a difference.
One other point I want to make, and this is directly to the staffers. I had a chance to speak to a group, just coincidentally, during that week of the Gonzales and Swalwell resignations. It was a group of young people, mainly interns but not solely. Some of them were young people here on the Hill in their late teens and early twenties.
I asked them: How many of you heard about the resignations of Mr. Swalwell and Mr. Gonzales? There were about 40 of them in the room. Every hand went up.
I asked them then: How many of you know that we have an entity here, the Office of Employee Advocacy, that you can turn to and get assistance if you find yourself in that situation? Only two hands went up.
I talked to them and encouraged them about reaching out to this sort of professional assistance. It is a confidential attorney-client relationship. It makes a difference. Instead of them trying to parse out at age 19 or 20 or 22 or 25 the best way to proceed, get the sort of legal guidance to help you make it through there.
We have to do a better job of making sure that when that question is posed, not just 2 hands go up, but all 40 hands go up, so that when young men and women, especially women, find themselves in these kinds of situations, they don't have to try and figure out how to go forward. They don't have to go to the staff director, as what happened here, and get whatever guidance they might get, recognizing that the staff directors were in a precarious situation, too, when you have a Member committing this kind of misconduct. Let's make sure that they have that type of assistance.
Mr. Speaker, the last point I will make on this, and this is in the wake of some of the other--not investigations before the committee right now, but some of the other things we have heard. There are going to come times when we need to go outside of the House of Representatives and refer these cases to law enforcement because some of the sexual misconduct isn't just sexual harassment. It is sexual assault.
To the colleagues listening out there right now, don't do anything to approach these lines. They know that this is over the line. He knows this was over the line, and he knew it when he was doing it. Let's make sure that we stop it in its tracks and give these young people, young women in particular, the type of assistance that they need.
Michael Guest (R-MS)3:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers. I move adoption of H. Res. 1498, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore3:00 p.m.
All time for debate has expired. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the previous question is ordered on the resolution.
The question is on adoption of the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
Chuck Edwards (R-NC)3:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore3:00 p.m.
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question are postponed.
Resolution Recommending That the House of Representatives Find Michael Joseph in Contempt of Congress for Refusal to Comply with Subpoenas Duly Issued by the Committee on Ethics
Pages H5393–H5394 · Official textJOSEPH IN CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS FOR REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH SUBPOENAS DULY ISSUED BY THE COMMITTEE ON ETHICS
Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 1504) which is printed in House Report 119-693, regarding proceedings against Michael Joseph and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution. The text of the resolution is as follows:
Text printed in the Record (1,129 characters)
Resolved, That Michael Joseph shall be found to be in
contempt of Congress for failure to comply with the subpoena
duces tecum issued to him on September 11, 2025.
Resolved, That Michael Joseph shall be found to be in
contempt of Congress for failure to comply with the subpoena
ad testificandum issued to him on September 11, 2025.
Resolved, That pursuant to 2 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 192 and 194,
the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall certify the
Report of the Committee on Ethics, detailing the refusal of
Michael Joseph to produce documents and appear before the
Investigative Subcommittee as directed by these subpoenas, to
the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, to
the end that Mr. Joseph be proceeded against in the manner
and form provided by law.
Resolved, That the Speaker of the House shall otherwise
take all appropriate action to enforce the subpoenas,
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Guest) and the gentleman from California (Mr. DeSaulnier) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mississippi.
Michael Guest (R-MS)3:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the resolution printed in House Report 119-693.
The SPEAKER pro tempore3:10 p.m.
Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Mississippi?
There was no objection.
Michael Guest (R-MS)3:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, as the chair of the Committee on Ethics, I rise in support of the resolutions which call for Michael Joseph and Hector Roos to be held in contempt of Congress for their failure to comply with documentary and testimonial subpoenas issued on September 11, 2025, and August 12, 2026, respectively.
Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution provides that each House may punish its Members for disorderly behavior, and with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member.
The House has charged the Committee on Ethics with the duty of implementing this provision on its behalf. The committee recommends and enforces ethical standards that ensure Members and staff act in a manner befitting the public trust.
Pursuant to that authority, the House has authorized the committee and its subcommittees to require by subpoena or otherwise the attendance and testimony of such witnesses and their production of such books, records, correspondence, memoranda, papers, and documents as it considers necessary to carry out its investigative functions.
House rules do not specify that personal service is the only method of effecting service of its subpoenas. An individual has a legal obligation to comply with a duly issued and valid congressional subpoena, unless a valid privilege or other legal justification excuses compliance. An individual who fails to comply with a House subpoena may be cited for contempt of Congress.
In this case, the committee impaneled an investigative subcommittee to inquire into certain allegations regarding former Representative Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick.
In order to conduct a thorough investigation, the investigative subcommittee authorized, and the committee issued, subpoenas for documents and testimonies to Mr. Joseph and Mr. Roos.
Mr. Roos was a senior campaign staffer who filed inaccurate reports with the Federal Election Commission and made in kind contributions to the campaign.
Mr. Roos was served with documentary and testimonial subpoenas issued on August 12, 2025, by the United States Marshals Service. He did not appear for his deposition on September 25, 2025, nor did he produce the documents at any time. Mr. Roos did not provide a valid legal justification for his noncompliance.
Mr. Joseph was the President of a company that improperly provided corporate funds for the Congresswoman's campaign and influenced her staff to submit community funding project requests for entities that he supported.
Mr. Joseph was served with documentary and testimonial subpoenas issued on March 11, 2025. Mr. Joseph accepted service. Later, he responded he could not comply because as an attorney it would violate attorney-client privilege.
Committee rules provide that the presiding member of the subcommittee may consider objections on the basis of privilege and request his objection be put in writing. Although Mr. Joseph did not do so, the investigative subcommittee nonetheless considered his objection and determined it was not a valid assertion of the attorney-client privilege.
Nonetheless, Mr. Joseph did not appear for his deposition on October 7, 2025, nor did he produce documents at any time. Mr. Joseph did not provide a valid legal justification for his noncompliance.
The investigative subcommittee offered both Mr. Roos and Mr. Joseph a final opportunity to comply with subpoenas, but neither did so.
Therefore, the investigative subcommittee voted on March 18, 2026, to adopt reports recommending the committee submit a resolution recommending the House cite Mr. Roos and Mr. Joseph for contempt of Congress pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 194 and 192.
On May 13, 2026, the committee adopted its own reports incorporating by reference the reports of the investigative subcommittee and concurring with this recommendation. The reports were transmitted to the Clerk of the House and made public on June 22, 2026, and have been made available to Members of the House and the public on the committee's website since Friday.
The committee cannot fulfill its obligations to safeguard the integrity of the House when witnesses ignore its subpoenas, and the House cannot accept such willful disregard of its authority.
Mr. Roos and Mr. Joseph willfully failed to comply with multiple subpoenas issued by the committee. They impeded the investigative subcommittee's investigations into the allegations concerning former Representative Cherfilus-McCormick.
Those allegations were serious and included violations of Federal law to which Mr. Roos and Mr. Joseph were party. Their conduct warrants referrals to the United States Department of Justice for contempt of Congress.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mark DeSaulnier (D-CA)3:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the resolution holding Michael Joseph in contempt of Congress for his failure to comply with duly authorized subpoenas issued by the Committee on Ethics.
At a time when public confidence in Congress is at historic lows and the House's ability to self-police Member conduct is under intense scrutiny, enforcing lawful congressional process is vital to delivering swift transparency and accountability for any misconduct.
A witness who refuses to cooperate with the Ethics Committee hinders the thoroughness and swiftness of an investigation. If the committee must authorize and issue a subpoena for that witness, more delays result.
If after those additional steps the witness decides to flout the subpoena, the committee is ultimately deprived of key evidence needed to resolve the allegations.
A subpoena from the House Ethics Committee is not a suggestion. It is a lawful demand for information needed by the House to fulfill its constitutional responsibilities to enforce the official code of conduct, adjudicate violations, and to impose appropriate discipline.
The investigative subcommittee in the matter of Representative Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick repeatedly sought documents and testimony from Mr. Joseph, yet he failed to comply with voluntary requests for information and multiple subpoenas in the 118th and 119th Congresses.
While other witnesses did not fully cooperate with the committee's investigation, Mr. Joseph's conduct went further. Twice he failed to appear for subpoenaed testimony in the current Congress, and he was made aware numerous times that his failure to comply with the subpoenas could result in contempt proceedings. He had notice of and was properly served all the subpoenas by the investigatory subcommittee, and he never asserted any valid privilege or basis for noncompliance.
The bipartisan investigative subcommittee unanimously found, and the full committee agreed, that his conduct was contemptuous. His noncompliance also unnecessarily and significantly delayed the committee's investigation.
Contempt referrals like these are a rare step because almost all subpoenaed witnesses cooperate with the committee before contempt proceedings need to be initiated.
But the rareness of this step should not obscure its importance. The effectiveness of the committee's oversight hinges on the expectation that subpoenas cannot and will not be ignored.
This contempt resolution is not intended to be a punitive measure. It is a deterrent to future noncompliance and obstructive conduct by witnesses in future investigations.
With this resolution, we can establish a clear and necessary boundary for future witnesses. If you are subpoenaed by the committee, you cannot simply decide that compliance is optional.
By demonstrating that noncompliance has consequences, this resolution will empower the Ethics Committee in its continued efforts to uphold civic confidence and the integrity of this body.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Michael Guest (R-MS)3:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mark DeSaulnier (D-CA)3:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Subramanyam).
Suhas Subramanyam (D-VA)3:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman and the ranking member for bringing this to the floor today.
Whenever I tell people I am on the Ethics Committee in Congress, people tend to ask me the same questions: Why doesn't the Ethics Committee move faster? What is taking so long? Why are these investigations taking so long? Justice delayed is justice denied.
Well, Mr. Speaker, one of the reasons is because a lot of times witnesses and people with information string our committee along. Even their lawyers tell them to ignore our subpoenas, ignore our inquiries, or delay us as much as possible.
This subpoena, in particular, was issued September of last year, and that was after a very long process of trying to get this witness in, going back to before I was even in Congress. That was more than 2 years ago. There have been multiple requests, multiple failures to appear.
If we don't enforce these subpoenas, then everyone will ignore our investigations. They will string us along, and they will draw out these investigations for months or sometimes years, like in this case, and the American people will lose faith in this body's ability to investigate our own.
The Ethics Committee will never be as fast as the news cycle, and we will afford everyone due process. Today's vote is a message that we, as a committee, do intend to move swiftly in these investigations. It is a message that Congress does intend to hold people accountable if they don't comply with our subpoenas, whether it is Members or people with information.
I thank the chair and ranking member for their leadership on this, and I ask the body to support this motion.
Mark DeSaulnier (D-CA)3:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I have no other speakers. I yield back the balance of my time.
Michael Guest (R-MS)3:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, in closing, I move that the rules be suspended and that this body agree to the resolution printed in House Report 119-693 regarding proceedings against Michael Joseph, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore3:20 p.m.
The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Guest) that the House suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 1504.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the resolution was agreed to. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Resolution Recommending That the House of Representatives Find Hector Roos in Contempt of Congress for Refusal to Comply with Subpoenas Duly Issued by the Committee on Ethics
Pages H5394–H5395 · Official textRESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THAT THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FIND HECTOR ROOS IN CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS FOR REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH SUBPOENAS DULY ISSUED BY THE COMMITTEE ON ETHICS
Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 1505) which is printed in House Report 119-694, regarding proceedings against Hector Roos and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution. The text of the resolution is as follows:
Text printed in the Record (1,106 characters)
Resolved, That Hector Roos shall be found to be in contempt
of Congress for failure to comply with the subpoena duces
tecum issued to him August 12, 2025.
Resolved, That Hector Roos shall be found to be in contempt
of Congress for failure to comply with the subpoena ad
testificandum issued to him August 12, 2025.
Resolved, That pursuant to 2 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 192 and 194,
the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall certify the
Report of the Committee on Ethics, detailing the refusal of
Hector Roos to produce documents and appear before the
Investigative Subcommittee as directed by these subpoenas to
the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, to
the end that Mr. Roos be proceeded against in the manner and
form provided by law.
Resolved, That the Speaker of the House shall otherwise
take all appropriate action to enforce the subpoenas.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Guest) and the gentleman from California (Mr. DeSaulnier) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mississippi.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution printed in House Report 119-694.
The SPEAKER pro tempore
Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Mississippi?
There was no objection.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I reemphasize my comments made earlier regarding these matters and would urge adoption. At this time, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the resolution holding Hector Roos in contempt of Congress for his failure to comply with duly authorized subpoenas issued by the Committee on Ethics.
The investigative subcommittee, in the matter of Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, repeatedly sought documents and testimony from Mr. Roos, who was a key witness in the matter. Yet Mr. Roos failed to comply with voluntary requests for information and multiple subpoenas in the 118th and 119th Congresses.
While other witnesses did not fully cooperate with the committee's investigation, Mr. Roos' conduct went further. He simply ignored multiple subpoenas without asserting any valid legal privilege or basis for noncompliance.
Despite his later claims that he affirmatively reached out to the committee after he was contacted about his noncompliance, Mr. Roos never communicated to an email address belonging to any staff, and he failed to respond to numerous emails and phone calls at the points of contact where he claims to have been reachable.
The bipartisan subcommittee unanimously found, and the full committee agreed, that his conduct unnecessarily and significantly delayed the committee's investigation and was thus worthy of a referral for criminal contempt proceedings.
Compliance with the Ethics Committee subpoenas is not optional, as I have said before. This contempt resolution is meant to demonstrate to witnesses before the committee that obstructive conduct has consequences, and the committee will vigorously use all the tools at its disposal to thoroughly and swiftly investigate allegations of misconduct.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I have no additional witnesses and am prepared to close.
Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules to agree to the resolution printed in House Report 119-694 regarding proceedings against Hector Roos. I urge its adoption, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore
The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Guest) that the House suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 1505.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the resolution was agreed to. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Northeast Lobsterman Protection Act of 2026
Pages H5395–H5401 · Official textMr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1499, I call up the bill (H.R. 9436) to amend the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 to extend the time period for which certain regulations concerning the North Atlantic right whale are effective, 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 1499, in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Natural Resources, printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 119-40 is adopted and the bill, as amended, is considered read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:
Text printed in the Record (480 characters)
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Northeast Lobsterman Protection Act of 2026".
SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF EFFECTIVENESS OF CERTAIN REGULATIONS
CONCERING NORTH ATLANTIC RIGHT WHALE.
Section 101 of division JJ of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (16 U.S.C. 1387 note) is amended by striking "2028" each place it appears and inserting "2035".
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bost)
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 Natural Resources, or their respective designees.
The gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Huffman) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman).
Bruce Westerman (R-AR)3:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 9436.
The SPEAKER pro tempore3:30 p.m.
Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Arkansas?
There was no objection.
Bruce Westerman (R-AR)3:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 9436, the Northeast Lobsterman Protection Act, which will protect one of the world's most iconic fisheries and the American jobs, communities, and families that depend on it.
In Maine, lobster accounts for 75 percent of the total value of the State's commercial fisheries, supporting an estimated $2 billion in economic activity and 17,500 jobs.
While critical to the State's economy, a robust lobster industry isn't just about dollars and cents. It is about individuals, families, and communities whose stories and traditions are directly tied to this industry that has operated for more than 70 years.
However, Maine lobstermen have faced tremendous adversity over the past several decades. The American lobster fishery has been under attack from radical groups determined to end this way of life. These serial litigants have pushed for a regulatory regime that could shut down the entire fishery.
For nearly 30 years, the Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Team has overseen the Maine lobster and Jonah crab fisheries. They have implemented and updated a take reduction plan with extensive regulatory requirements designed to minimize the fishery's impact on North Atlantic right whales. What they are doing is working. For decades, the industry has led conservation efforts to reduce right whale entanglements in their gear.
Despite the American lobster fishery virtually eliminating its impact on right whales, the take reduction plan has faced repeated litigation, leaving the industry subject to regulatory whiplash. The American lobster fishery has been subject to four different biological opinions between 2010 and 2021, with ever more draconian restrictions.
When the National Marine Fisheries Service issued its most recent biological opinion in 2021, unsurprisingly, the radical groups remained dissatisfied and continued to litigate. At the same time, Maine's Democratic Governor, Janet Mills, and the lobster industry argued that NOAA failed to utilize the best available science.
Facing new regulations that threatened to shut down the entire fishery, the Maine delegation worked on a bipartisan basis in December 2022 to enact a regulatory pause for the American lobster and Jonah crab fisheries. This pause provided ESA and MMPA coverage for the American lobster and Jonah crab fisheries through 2028, providing the State and the industry more time to develop new gear innovations, prudent conservation measures, and conduct more research on the fishery's interactions with right whales.
Since then, the State of Maine, the industry, and other scientific and research bodies have made progress, investing more than $90 million in research. However, it is clear that more time is needed to gather the necessary data and incorporate it into final regulations. Representative Lawler's bill would provide MMPA and ESA coverage for these fisheries through 2035, providing the necessary time to get these regulations right without the threat of more frivolous litigation.
I thank Representative Lawler for carrying this legislation, and also I recognize the gentleman from Maine, Representative Jared Golden, for his tireless leadership on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Jared Huffman (D-CA)3:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the Congress returned yesterday from a long district work period where most of us heard a lot of things from our constituents. They told us about the grinding cost of groceries, gas, and healthcare and the instability their small businesses face thanks to President Trump's trade war with Canada.
What is the House majority prioritizing this week?
It is a bill that will push a critically endangered whale closer to extinction. I don't think many of us heard this as a priority from our constituents.
H.R. 9436 would extend the regulatory pause on North Atlantic right whale protections from fishing gear entanglements through 2035. This bill sells our fishing communities a false promise. We may hear that kicking the can down the road saves the Maine lobster fleet. In reality, this bill would lock in a broken status quo that guarantees disaster for both our historic coastal industry and the critically endangered right whale.
Right now, fewer than 380 North Atlantic right whales remain on Earth, with only 70 breeding females. Over 85 percent have experienced at least one fishing gear entanglement, and since 2022, at least 31 whales have suffered severe injuries or death because of entanglements.
In late 2022, Congress inappropriately paused all additional measures to protect these whales from fishing gear entanglements until 2029. This pause was advertised as a stakeholders' window of opportunity to give NOAA time to partner with fishermen, States, and technology companies to gather data to test and deploy safer fishing gear, namely, ropeless gear.
Instead, that pause becomes a license for complacency.
NOAA is lying down on the job, dragging its feet, firing staff, axing science, and deprioritizing ropeless gear, perhaps because they think Congress will bail them out and kick the can a little further down the road. All of this is illegal, and all of it is causing massive uncertainty for the lobster fishery.
Now, 2 years ahead of the deadline, this bill would add another 7-year delay.
Instead of holding NOAA accountable, House Republicans want to freeze action until 2035, abandoning accountability and setting up our fishermen for failure. The solution already exists. On-demand ropeless gear reduces deadly entanglements of whales without sacrificing catch. We can have this fishing industry. We can protect it for the long haul with this win-win solution. Fishermen are actively testing and using ropeless gear right now. They have landed over 1 million pounds of seafood using these methods.
This bill, though, would destroy the market incentives to deploy these safer and innovative technologies, damaging consumer confidence in the environmental sustainability of American seafood. It would unfairly place greater conservation burdens on the other Atlantic coast communities, from Florida to Maine, who are actively trying to do their part to save this whale from extinction.
Mr. Speaker, let's stop pretending that House Republicans and this administration care about the fishermen, coastal communities, or these iconic whales. If Congress can arbitrarily grant a decade-plus statutory exemption to bypass protections for a critically endangered species, then the Endangered Species Act is reduced to a hollow success.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to fight for strong, sustainable fisheries and to defend Federal wildlife protection laws, reject this dangerous precedent, and vote "no" on H.R. 9436.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Bruce Westerman (R-AR)3:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Lawler), who is the lead sponsor of this legislation.
Michael Lawler (R-NY)3:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 9436, the Northeast Lobsterman Protection Act.
I want to thank Chairman Westerman for working with me to bring this bill to the floor, as well as my colleague from Maine who has fought tirelessly on behalf of his constituents, Jared Golden.
In Maine alone, the lobster industry generates approximately $2 billion in economic activity each year and supports more than 17,500 jobs. Local industries like this one are a lifeline for families and communities that have been in business for generations. In New York, the fishing industry generates more than $2 billion in economic activity and supports over 10,000 jobs.
For decades, the Northeast lobster and commercial fishing industries have faced growing regulatory pressure as Federal efforts to protect the endangered North Atlantic right whale have unintentionally impacted fisheries. In 2022, this important industry faced the prospect of even more regulations that would have had devastating consequences on fishermen's livelihoods and their local communities that depend on them.
Congress responded by temporarily pausing the regulations and providing funding to improve North Atlantic whale research. That research is already producing better data, but more work remains.
My bill would simply extend the current regulatory pause through 2035, giving the scientific community more than enough additional time to develop durable science-driven solutions that protect the North Atlantic right whale while ensuring American fishermen can continue to do their jobs.
The Northeast lobster fishery is an important part of our coastal economy, supporting not only fishermen but also the processors, restaurants, and local businesses.
Fishermen have spent years adapting to changing conservation requirements and implementing measures to reduce the risk of whale entanglements. They deserve regulatory stability and certainty rather than constantly shifting requirements that threaten their ability to operate and plan for the future.
This legislation is about giving American fishermen the certainty they need to keep their businesses operating while also giving scientists and the industry the time to create innovative solutions to protect both the North Atlantic right whale and the future of Northeast fisheries.
We all have industries back home that shape our communities. I am not from Maine, but I know the importance of local economies and the individual people who work hard for their families. I will always fight for small businesses and for the New Yorkers back home who show up every day to keep them going.
This is a perfect example of bipartisanship and the willingness to work together for our constituents, for our communities, and to support commonsense legislation that protects the very people we were sent here to represent.
I will also say that I refuse to be intimidated by the activists and organizations, like the NRDC, which is threatening to spend millions of dollars in political spending right now--
The SPEAKER pro tempore3:40 p.m.
The time of the gentleman has expired.
Bruce Westerman (R-AR)3:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from New York.
Mr. LAWLER.--attacking me for standing up and working to protect jobs and support commonsense, bipartisan legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation.
Jared Huffman (D-CA)3:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from more than 30 community environmental and civic leaders in New York and New Jersey urging Congress to defend science-based management of the North Atlantic right whale and opposing this legislation. August 31, 2026. Dear Members of Congress: As community, environmental, and civic leaders based in New York and New Jersey, we write to express our strong opposition to H.R. 9436. This legislation would delay urgently needed protections for the North Atlantic right whale for seven years, freezing management progress until 2035. North Atlantic right whales are regularly seen in waters off of Long Island, New York and the Coast of New Jersey. Migrating over 1,000 miles from their northeast feeding grounds to their southern calving grounds, they have already been recorded in the New York Bight and southeast of Atlantic City, New Jersey this year. In 2024, scientists from the New England Aquarium recorded 82 Right whales--including 56 in one day--forty miles south of Long Island. This represents nearly a quarter of the total population. Extinction is permanent, and the crisis facing the North Atlantic right whale demands immediate, courageous leadership. With fewer than 400 individuals remaining--and a critically low count of roughly 70 breeding females--every single year of delayed action brings this species closer to disappearing forever. The science is undisputed: accidental entanglement in vertical fishing lines is one of the primary drivers of serious injury and death for these whales, with over 86 percent of living right whales carrying scars from past entanglements. These injuries and deaths are preventable, but only if
Text printed in the Record (3,905 characters)
our national policy allows science-based solutions to move forward.
H.R. 9436 sets a dangerous precedent by locking our ocean management into outdated status quo practices for nearly a decade. Specifically, the bill would prevent NOAA Fisheries from developing and implementing science-based management measures that could reduce the risk of entanglements, such as modifying fishing practices in areas and at times of highest risk, and expanding new technologies that both protect whales and maintain fishing opportunities. Protecting endangered wildlife and fostering resilient coastal economies are not opposing goals. Pushing safety measures off to 2035 stalls the momentum behind collaborative ocean stewardship, science-based dynamic management, and crucial federal resources that help both whales and coastal communities thrive.
Communities in New York and New Jersey have consistently supported forward-thinking, science-based approaches that safeguard our shared marine heritage while ensuring our coastal economies can adapt and flourish. Halting progress for another seven years undermines the work our region has done to promote a healthy ocean ecosystem.
The North Atlantic right whale cannot afford to wait until 2035, and neither can the communities that care about the future of our oceans. We urge you to reject H.R. 9436 and stand up for the recovery of one of the most endangered species on Earth.
Sincerely,
Candis Whitney, Executive Director, Amelia Island Whale Ambassadors.
John Balet, MS, SUNY Master Science Teacher, Ballston Spa High School, Ballston Spa, New York.
Diana Hernandez, Managing Director, Beyond Plastics, Albany, New York.
Carolina Korth, Co-President, Beyond Plastics Queens, Queens, New York.
Nancy Tudor, Climate Steward, Beyond Plastics Schenectady, Clifton Park. New York.
Michael Rosenthal, President, Capital Region Vegan Network, Albany, New York.
Adrienne Esposito, Executive Director, Citizens Campaign for the Environment, Farmindale, New York.
Barbara Heinzen, Member, Clean Air Coalition of Ravena-Coeymans, New Baltimore, New York.
Christina Rupp, Ecological Artist, Ulster County, New York.
Jean Citarella, Leadership Team, Forest Hills Indivisible, Forest Hills, New York.
Catherine M. Filloux, Playwright, New York City, New York.
Sara Gronim, Co-leader, 350Brooklyn, Brooklyn, New York.
Jennifer Vogt, Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter, East Northport, New York.
Carl Safina, Endowed Professor in Marine Science, University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, New York.
Brody Eggert, Eastern Long Island Chapter Manager, Surfrider Foundation, East Hampton, New York.
Natalya Khorover, Founder/Educator, Repurposer Collective, Mamaroneck, New York.
Jessica Welshans, Volunteer Member, Rensselaer Enviro. Coalition, Rensselaer, New York.
Chris Allieri, Executive Director, NYC Plover Project, Rockaway Beach, New York.
Barry Pendergrass, Volunteer, Religious Action Center for Reform Judaism, Albany, New York.
Mindy Block, President, Quality Parks, Port Jefferson, New York.
Megan Wolff, Executive Director, P-SNAP Network, New Paltz, New York.
Rob Weltner, President, Operation SPLASH, Freeport, New York.
Gail Tierney, New York Field Representative, Oceana, Brooklyn, New York.
Saman Mahmood, Director of Advocacy, NYC Bird Alliance, New York City, New York.
Joseph Butera, President, NE Ecological Recovery Society, New York.
Susan Schwarz, Board member, LWV Riverowns, Tarrytown, New York.
Casey Deacon, President, Alliance for a Living Ocean Surf City, New Jersey.
Allison McLeod, Interim Executive Director, New Jersey League of Conservation Voters, New Jersey.
Gregory A. Remaud, Executive Director, NY/NJ Baykeeper, Trenton, New Jersey.
Doug O'Malley, Director, Environment New Jersey, Trenton, New Jersey.
John Turner, Conservation Policy Advocate, Seatuck Environmental Association, Setauket, New Jersey.
Jared Huffman (D-CA)3:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Bruce Westerman (R-AR)3:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a link to letters of support from the State of Maine Department of Marine Resources, the National Fisheries Institute, the National Marine Manufacturers Association, New England Fishermen's Stewardship Association, Maine Lobstermen's Association, Massachusetts Lobstermen's Association, Atlantic Offshore Lobstermen's Association, New Hampshire Commercial Fishermen's Association, and the Lobster Advisory Council: Https:// naturalresources.house.gov/uploadedfiles/binder1. pdf
Mr. Speaker, I will say that what is happening in Maine is working. We should be celebrating this. We have seen a slight 2.1-percent increase in the population of right whales over the past 4 years. There has been one right whale death in the last, I think, 20 to 25 years attributed to Maine fishing gear. This is an example of how government and industry can work together to protect the fishery, plus continue this economic activity.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wyoming (Ms. Hageman), the chair for the Water, Wildlife and Fisheries Subcommittee.
Harriet M. Hageman (R-WY)3:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 9436, the Northeast Lobsterman Protection Act. This legislation will help to safeguard some of the United States' most iconic fisheries, American lobster and Jonah crab.
In Maine, the lobster industry has been subject to regulatory whiplash and operational uncertainty due to pending burdensome regulations and activist litigation.
In 2022, NOAA was poised to finalize regulations to protect the North Atlantic right whale, a move that risked shutting down this fishery entirely. Leaders in the industry argue that those regulations were developed with flawed, inaccurate data.
To combat this, in 2022 Congress enacted a 6-year pause on the enactment of new regulations, which gave the State regulators and the industry more time to gather more up-to-date science and data to inform new regulations.
While that work is ongoing and has been productive, it has been made clear that more time is needed to incorporate the latest data into final regulations.
H.R. 9436 does just that, ensuring that final regulatory decisions are made in a thoughtful, deliberate manner.
Most importantly, this bill advances the goals and objectives laid out in President Trump's executive order, "Restoring American Seafood Competitiveness."
By allowing adequate time to incorporate the latest science and data into regulations, we can ensure that one of the country's most vital fisheries can continue to operate while safeguarding endangered species like the North Atlantic right whale.
This bill also allows for the ability to further study the impact of offshore wind farms on our aquatic resources, including the North Atlantic right whale. Anyone who claims to care about our whale and fishery populations would surely support such investigations to ensure data-driven and science-based decisionmaking.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Lawler for his leadership on this bill and his work to protect our fishermen, and I urge my colleagues to vote "yes" on this important bill.
Jared Huffman (D-CA)3:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, for the benefit of the chairman and others here, the facts are these: Since 2022, 31 whales have died or been seriously injured by entanglements.
Entanglements are a huge problem. It is not even in serious dispute. Eighty-five percent of living whales have been entangled at least once, and 60 percent at least twice.
In terms of the alleged progress in the past year or so for this whale, they are not reproducing nearly fast enough to avoid an extinction trajectory. There are right now more Members of the House of Representatives than there are North Atlantic right whales living in our ocean.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Bruce Westerman (R-AR)3:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, NOAA is in the process of building out an acoustic network that can provide near real-time whale locations along the entire East Coast. Meanwhile, NOAA has contracted with a private company to evaluate 11 technologies that have real potential to reduce threats to whales and identify their locations in real time. While several of these are fully mature, many promising technologies are close but need more time.
My colleagues across the aisle would have you believe that the only solution is immediate deployment of ropeless gear, which creates unnecessary safety risks for lobstermen.
We can protect America's lobstermen and the right whale. This bill strikes the right balance.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Stauber).
Pete Stauber (R-MN)3:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 9436, the Northeast Lobsterman Protection Act, introduced by my good friends, Representative Lawler and Representative Golden of Maine.
Each and every day, onerous regulations negatively impact our constituents along with the local economies and local communities that we represent. Too often, here in Washington, these onerous regulations are put in place without a full understanding of the impact that they will have on the ground. These regulations often set unreasonable standards or are set to go into effect on unreasonable timelines.
The regulations on the North Atlantic right whale, which are currently mandated to be implemented by the end of 2028, are an example of these unreasonable timelines that will have a negative impact on local and regional economies across New England and will have an outsized impact on the Maine lobstermen.
This bipartisan legislation before us today does not weaken protections for the North Atlantic right whale. The legislation simply delays implementation of these new regulations so we can get it right. This legislation will allow adequate time to seek input from affected industries and communities, ensuring we have fit-for-purpose regulations that will protect the North Atlantic right whale.
Failure to do this the right way and allow time for the right regulations to be developed could devastate the local economy and our fisheries across New England.
Mr. Speaker, I commend my good friend Representative Golden for standing up for his constituents and for working with Representative Lawler to bring this legislation forward.
Representative Golden is from Maine. He wants this for his constituents and the lobster fishermen from Maine. I think that we ought to listen to Representative Golden, who, in my humble opinion, has been one of the most effective Democrats on the Natural Resources Committee.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 9436.
Jared Huffman (D-CA)3:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Beyer).
Donald S. Beyer, Jr. (D-VA)3:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill. We must protect the North Atlantic right whale, which, as you heard, is already at risk of extinction. This bill threatens to put them right over the edge.
With only 70 reproductively active females left, the North Atlantic right whale can't afford to wait another 7 years for protection. They realistically could be extinct right now. We can and must act now.
Entanglement in fishing gear is a leading cause, maybe the leading cause, of North Atlantic right whale deaths. In 2023, a provision delayed critical protections intended to reduce these deadly entanglements.
As a result, the earliest measures to protect these North American right whales could be implemented in 2029. That is 3 years from now. This bill would further delay the implementation until 2035. That is a 13-year waiver from the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act requirements. I am wondering why 6 years has not already been enough.
Delaying these protections doesn't ultimately serve the fishing industry's best interests. It will only delay changes that the industry ultimately needs to make any way, leaving them less time to adapt. If they haven't done it in the last 6 years, why do we think they will do it in the next 13? Now is the time we should be working with them and in partnership with the industry to effectively support them.
Mr. Speaker, I don't minimize that the lobster industry is facing uncertainty and economic hardship, but that is a roller coaster of tariff implementations and rollbacks, rising inflation increasing the cost of fuel and bait, and warming waters that reduce larval lobster survival and encourage survivors to migrate northwards to Canadian waters.
Mr. Speaker, if my colleagues across the aisle truly care about protecting lobstermen and fishermen, they would join me in opposing Trump's tariffs, his antagonism of our Canadian neighbors, his war of choice in Iran, his degradation of our environment, and his denial of climate change.
We could do better by our lobstermen by working with them to ensure they have the support they need without sacrificing an entire species.
Mr. Speaker, I hope all my colleagues will join me in opposing this bill and instead work on a solution that would be a win-win for everybody.
Bruce Westerman (R-AR)3:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Begich), who represents our country's largest and most productive fishery.
Nicholas J. Begich III (R-AK)3:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 9436, the Northeast Lobsterman Protection Act.
This bill is fundamentally about getting the science right. It gives the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association, or NOAA, the State of Maine, and the lobster industry until 2035 to incorporate the most current, complete data available before implementing sweeping new gear, closure, and speed restrictions under the MMPA, restrictions that, based on outdated information, could devastate a $2 billion industry and 17,500 jobs.
Mr. Speaker, Alaska knows the cost of regulating with stale data. As the State with America's largest and most valuable commercial fishing industry, we have seen Federal agencies default to rigid one-size-fits-all mandates instead of investing in the modern surveys, monitoring, and technology needed to actually understand what is happening on the water.
That approach does not serve the resource and it doesn't serve the people who depend on it, whether they are lobstermen in Maine or fishermen in Alaska Native communities back home. Good regulation has to keep pace with good science.
H.R. 9436 does not weaken the MMPA or abandon right whale conservation. It gives regulators the runway to use better science and better tools to protect both the whales and the fishery. This committee endorsed that approach on a bipartisan 22-13 vote, and the Trump administration has backed it, as well.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense, bipartisan bill.
Jared Huffman (D-CA)3:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I was confused a moment ago because the chairman suggested that the effort to develop all this data and perfect ropeless gear is going really well. These investments are rolling out and this is all being taken very seriously, but here we have a bill that would shut all of that down 2 years early.
This is about running out the clock, Mr. Speaker. We were told that the 6-year pause granted in 2022 was for all these same things, for data collection and to allow time for collaboration and open rulemaking process, and more.
Congress invested $20 million in ropeless gear development, testing, and deployment. The States and the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission ran programs for fishermen to test the gear, but under the Trump administration, NOAA has shut this down. They have been telling the New England Fishery Management Council to deprioritize ropeless gear.
This is not a process that is being taken seriously or that is going well and, therefore, needs more time. This is a stalling tactic that has already begun and is about to receive 7 more years by virtue of the Republican Congress.
This administration has not provided Congress, by the way, with the annual reports on progress toward 2029. That is required in the law. They are ignoring it. They have 2 more years to do their job. States need to finalize that data collection. We don't need another 7-year extension. We especially don't need this to happen 2 years earlier.
Let's allow this process to run its course and see what it produces. Then, if there is a compelling reason for a further extension, we could talk about it.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Bruce Westerman (R-AR)3:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I am confused by arguments coming from the left. They started off today talking about high prices and the cost of food. What is their solution? They want to shut down another U.S. industry. They want to shut down seafood production.
We are already 80 percent dependent on foreign imports. Their solution is to reduce penalties on Canada and other countries that are our seafood suppliers, shut down 17,500 American jobs, shut down a $2 billion industry in the State of Maine, and ship more of our money overseas to other countries and let them supply our seafood. They don't have near the protections that we have for our other species. There is a lot of flawed logic in the argument that they are trying to make.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Golden), who understands Maine lobster fisheries more than anybody else probably in this town.
Jared F. Golden (D-ME)3:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, first, I will offer a bit of a rebuttal to my colleague across the aisle. Of course, I am in his party, but I am standing over here today supporting this legislation.
There has been some talk about timeline. This is 2 years down the road, but, in fact, everyone here knows that a lot of work goes into developing new regulations, guidelines, and other things before we just deploy them out into the world. Even though that deadline is 2 years out, NOAA is already working on those regulations. Something that NOAA and the Maine Department of Marine Resources agree about is that, yes, we are collecting more data with the money that they are thankful Congress gave to get better data points for how we can protect these whales, but since they are already working on what might follow that deadline in 2 years, they are unable to incorporate it into the work that is ongoing right now, hence the necessity of making some movement here in Congress on this issue today.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Westerman for the time to speak today and Congressman Lawler for partnering with me on this bill. This effort is critical for Maine, but its benefits will be shared by fishermen all along the Eastern Seaboard.
This bill is about the future of a heritage industry and the working men and women who risk their lives on the ocean to put nutritious seafood on our plates. It is also about protecting the working-class communities those men and women support.
In my district, lobster fishing is the backbone of towns up and down the coast. In some towns, 20 to 40 percent of the residents hold a lobster license. In those towns, life as they know it would end without fishing. You can liken it--if you don't live on the coast--to what happens when a major mill shuts down and a town is decimated. For them what is at stake is the continuation of a way of life that is generations deep or the loss of it.
Without it, they know what to expect. All they have to do is cast their eye elsewhere, southward on the East Coast to former fishing communities that have been turned into investment opportunities for people looking for some prime coastal front property to buy and some locals that they would love to employ to work for pennies on the dollar in service to them, in service to people from away.
The Maine lobster industry currently supports roughly 18,000 jobs and it generates hundreds of millions in tax revenue to support schools, infrastructure investments, and State and local services for Mainers.
It is already getting harder and harder to make a living on the water without adding onerous new regulations to satisfy the nearly insatiable appetite of environmental law firms. It is a sad state of affairs that these firms treat every whale death as an opportunity to bring a lawsuit against fishermen that lines their own pockets, provides for their own living, no matter what the cause of that whale death was. It could have nothing to do with fishermen. You can bet they are going to bring a lawsuit. They are doing it backed by money from people who love to eat seafood but apparently think they can have it without fishermen.
Now, there are some who want to say this bill presents us with a false choice between our fishermen and protecting an endangered species, the North Atlantic right whale. The truth is we can do both, and here is how I know that. Maine fishermen are already doing it. They have been good stewards of marine resources and marine life and leaders in the conservation and protection of the North Atlantic right whale.
Over the past 20 years, Maine lobstermen have made effective and costly changes to fishing practices to reduce the risk of entanglements. They have removed many vertical lines from the water by putting more traps on each trawl, despite the fact that it makes fishing less safe for themselves.
They have added breakaways at surface buoys and along inlines to ensure that if a whale or any other marine animal is caught in those traps that the line will break. They have made the switch to sinking ground lines and limited the diameter of vertical lines. This is just a few highlights because they have done much more. These practices already exist under the status quo regulatory framework, and they work.
From 2009 to 2018, the number of annual serious injuries or deaths to North Atlantic right whales attributed to entanglements from American fishing gear was 0.2. I will repeat that: 0.2.
Our efforts are already working. Yet, somehow, these fishermen face the threat of crushing new regulations over and over and over again.
When we enacted this moratorium in 2022, Maine fishermen were at risk of being put out of business by these new regulations and closures that would have spelled doom for Maine's coastal communities.
Maine's lobster fishery is unique. Unlike other fisheries that are dominated by bigger types of fisheries and fishing operations, Maine fisheries, Maine fishermen, is a fleet made up of owner-operated vessels, holding licenses that are passed down through generations.
Had the proposed requirements been implemented back then, many, if not most of them, would not have been able to keep going. Congress wisely put a pause on that and devoted Federal funds to monitor, collect data, and to come up with new best practices to protect fishermen and whales alike.
This year, Maine's Department of Marine Resources told Congress, in no uncertain terms, that the data it collected cannot be incorporated into NOAA's rulemaking on the 2028 timeline and current law. Congress funded this science. Why would we not give State and Federal agencies the time necessary to make good use of it?
This bill does not weaken protections for the North Atlantic right whale. It preserves the current effective regulatory framework until 2035.
With that in mind, I urge you to see this legislation for what it is. It is an opportunity to protect hardworking people and our marine resources' economy, pure and simple. To do so without taking away any existing regulations whatsoever, you have an opportunity to have your lobster and eat it too.
Bruce Westerman (R-AR)4:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I am prepared to close. I reserve the balance of my time.
Jared Huffman (D-CA)4:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I am not sure why my friend from Maine just cited data from 2009 through 2018 to suggest there has been virtually no mortality. The numbers I gave are a little more relevant. From 2022 until now, we know that 31 North Atlantic right whales have either died or been seriously injured by the very type of entanglements we are talking about here--entanglements that would, if this legislation passes, somehow secure a total pass from the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act regulations for a period of 13 full years. That is not honoring these environmental protection laws. That is not upholding them. That is gutting them.
Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Dingell).
Debbie Dingell (D-MI)4:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 9436 pushes the North Atlantic right whale closer to extinction.
I respect my colleague from Maine a great deal, and I agree with him that we can protect the right whale and protect the Maine fishermen as well. A 13-year waiver from complying with the Endangered Species Act does nothing for the lobster industry, which was on a path to sensible rules that keep fishermen on the water and protect these critically endangered whales. They still have 2 more years to get the rules right, and we don't need to cut off a process that was moving in the right direction.
Let's be clear. The gentleman and I actually share something in common, and that is the immediate threat to fishing communities across this country with President Trump's chaotic trade policies and the war of choice in Iran. If we are serious about American competitiveness, we need to get our priorities straight. We should not be picking unnecessary fights with our closest friend and neighbor. Canada is our ally and our largest trading partner. This foolish trade war we are now in with Canada will tangibly raise costs for American families and create uncertainty for American businesses, workers, and communities.
Fisheries across our country are being decimated by the high price of diesel fuel.
As we have heard from the majority, the lobster industry is a $2 billion industry that supports about 1,700 jobs. These fishermen are changing how they work and rethinking how many fishing trips they can take given rising costs. They are often opting for longer, more dangerous trips rather than taking multiple trips to try and pull in the same amount of seafood using less oil.
According to the New England's Fishermen's Stewardship Association, this means more fatigued workers and a higher risk of accidents.
Great Lakes fisheries, which include commercial, recreational, and Tribal fisheries, are a $5.1 billion industry supporting 75,000 jobs. Fishermen are opting to stop fishing because they can't make the math work with diesel as high as it is, and fish prices to consumers are being raised to compensate.
Across the country, marine fisheries generate $319 billion in sales and support 1.7 million jobs. A U.S. shrimper recently reported spending an additional $20,000 on a single trip because of diesel costs. These fishermen are already operating on razor-thin margins, and fuel costs are near or exceeding the shrimp prices. This isn't sustainable. Just as we have seen in the Great Lakes, fishermen are going to start walking away from their small businesses.
Not only are our fishing communities struggling to stay afloat, they also need to pass along these additional costs to American families purchasing their seafood.
Back in the Great Lakes region, our manufacturing sector is facing alarming tariffs from Canada because of President Trump's and Secretary Lutnick's inability to seriously and diplomatically negotiate a strong and fair trade deal. As if we needed yet another reminder of the pain inflicted on our States by these policies, the President decided to get back at Canada by changing the name of one of our Great Lakes. By the way, it is not going over well at home.
Unfortunately, the majority is doing nothing this week to bring down costs and fight for American families and businesses. That is why, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to recommit this bill back to the committee. If the House rules permitted, I would have offered the motion with an important amendment to this bill.
My amendment would direct the Secretary of Commerce to publish a report on the high costs of fuel, fishing gear, and retaliatory tariffs on U.S. fishing businesses and the price of healthy seafood for American families.
I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of this amendment into the Record immediately prior to the vote on the motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore4:00 p.m.
Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from Michigan?
There was no objection.
Debbie Dingell (D-MI)4:00 p.m.
I hope my colleagues will join me in voting for the motion to recommit.
Jared Huffman (D-CA)4:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Bruce Westerman (R-AR)4:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the argument for the motion to recommit reminds me of what President Reagan said--this is the Democrat philosophy--if it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. If it stops, then subsidize it.
Unfortunately, if it stops, who we are going to be subsidizing are foreign countries that we are importing seafood from.
To correct the record, it is not 1,700 jobs in Maine; it is 17,000 jobs in Maine--over 17,000 jobs.
We are talking about a serious economic impact, and we are also talking about the fact that what is happening right now is working. Why continue to regulate it? Why put more burdens on Maine lobstermen who are in a tough situation, as fishermen are, around the world?
So the solution is to regulate them more? It is like, hey, we see you are having a hard time, so let's put some more regulations on you. That doesn't work. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Golden).
Jared F. Golden (D-ME)4:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, just a few quick rebuttals. One of my colleagues talked about 30-plus right whale deaths attributed to fisheries in America. I don't know where those numbers come from. All I can tell you is a simple fact, which is that in my 8 years in Congress, there has been one attributed death of a whale to the Maine lobster fishery. That is in 8 years, one, not 30-plus, a single one. In the 20 or 30 years preceding that, there were zero, so I am not quite sure where his numbers are coming from.
In regard to ropeless gear, it has been said that a million pounds of lobster was caught with ropeless gear in the last 4 years. Well, we are talking about a fishery that lands over 70 million pounds per year. Do the math. That is over 300 million pounds of lobster provided to the American people.
The fact of the matter is that ropeless fishing gear may be a viable alternative some day in the future, but it ain't there yet. It is a long way from being there. A requirement to move to ropeless gear would represent one thing: Shutting down the fishery.
Jared Huffman (D-CA)4:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, the data--31 deaths or serious injuries from entanglements since 2022--comes from NOAA. It is available to Democrats and Republicans alike.
Mr. Speaker, I urge this body to reject H.R. 9436. This bill moves the goalposts and risks the extinction of an iconic whale that calls our Nation's Atlantic waters home.
Instead of taking the next 2 years to address the progress that has been made and additional policy levers that may be necessary to support a thriving lobster fishery and recover the right whale, this bill legislates blindly. It throws away momentum amongst the States, tech companies, and many fishery participants, kicking the can down the road. This is a shame.
I recognize that fishing communities around this country are facing extreme levels of uncertainty, and this administration is doing nothing to help. In the lobster fishery, families who have fished these waters for generations are asking questions about what comes next. H.R. 9436 presents a false choice between saving a native species and protecting their livelihoods.
This delay would undermine massive public investment. Since 2022, Congress has devoted an estimated $280 million to right whale recovery. We are beginning to see results from these investments. Advancing monitoring technologies have improved mapping of right whale patterns. Vessels are using trackers to avoid conflicts and, most importantly for this debate, ropeless gear now has a near-perfect retrieval success record and a critical safety feature. The man overboard system is now open source technology for ropeless gear developers.
By removing the 2029 regulatory backstop, this bill creates a permission structure that discourages fishery participants from engaging in cooperative research to obtain the answers they say are needed. Worse, it punishes the forward-thinking fishermen who have spent money and time transitioning their gear in good faith.
Lastly, the bill would extend that waiver without authorizing additional money. By delaying action until 2035 without any new funding, NOAA would need to write rules using obsolete data from the early 2020s.
Democrats offered improvements to this bill to ensure that lobstermen and their families would get the support needed to confidently transition to this new gear, but Republicans rejected these improvements.
Our suggestions would have authorized additional Federal investments for on-demand ropeless fishing technology to ensure fishermen can keep working, while removing the deadly vertical lines that entangle, injure, and kill these endangered whales.
True leadership invests in modernizing our fisheries, not freezing our conservation laws in place while marine life pays the ultimate price. Allowing a species to go extinct on our watch is a moral failure that we cannot erase.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject this dangerous precedent, stand with science, and vote "no" on H.R. 9436. I yield back the balance of my time.
Bruce Westerman (R-AR)4:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, the legislation before us today would provide much-needed certainty to one of the United States' most important and iconic commercial fisheries, Maine lobster.
When I visited that beautiful State, I loved what they call it there, lobstah. When you think of lobster, you think of something that is woven into the fabric of the history, the ambiance, the beauty of Maine. When people from other States think of Maine, a lot of times what comes to their mind is lobster.
Passing this legislation will give NOAA more time to craft regulations to protect the North Atlantic right whale and will ensure that these regulations are based on the best available science and ensure long-term operational certainty for the American lobster and Jonah crab fisheries.
The legislation before us helps to advance the goals laid out in President Trump's executive order, "Restoring American Seafood Competitiveness." The Trump administration has issued a Statement of Administration Policy expressing support for identical legislation, which I include in the Record. H.R. 8509--Amending the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 to Extend
the Time Period for which Certain Regulations Concerning the North Atlantic Right Whale are Effective, Rep. Golden, D-ME
Text printed in the Record (1,841 characters)
The Administration strongly supports passage of H.R. 8509,
which would extend the time period, from 2028 until 2035, for
which the Department of Commerce's National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS) Final Rule amending the regulations
implementing the Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Plan (86
Fed. Reg. 51970) is deemed sufficient to ensure the continued
authorizations of the American lobster and Jonah crab
fisheries are in full compliance with the Marine Mammal
Protection Act of 1972 and the Endangered Species Act of
1973. It would also extend the requirements for the NMFS to
promote the innovation and adoption of gear technologies in
the American lobster and Jonah crab fisheries and promulgate
new regulations for the American lobster and Jonah crab
fisheries using existing and innovative gear technologies
until 2035. This bill aligns with the Administration's
priorities in Executive Order 14276, Restoring American
Seafood Competitiveness, to promote the adoption of new
technology and the productive harvest of our seafood
resources.
If H.R. 8509 were presented to the President, his senior
advisors would recommend that he sign it into law.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Lawler for his leadership on this issue and recognize Representative Golden of Maine for his tireless advocacy for this critical industry on behalf of his constituents and his State that he loves.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 1499, 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.
Debbie Dingell (D-MI)4:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore4:10 p.m.
The Clerk will report the motion to recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Text printed in the Record (88 characters)
Mrs. Dingell moves to recommit the bill H.R. 9436 to the Committee on Natural Resources.
The material previously referred to by Mrs. Dingell is as follows: Mrs. Dingell moves to recommit the bill H.R. 9436 to the Committee on Natural Resources with instructions to report the same back to the House forthwith, with the following amendment: Add at the end the following:
Text printed in the Record (373 characters)
SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Act shall take effect on the date on which the Secretary of Commerce publishes a report on the regional economic effects of the trade wars with Canada and China and the war in Iran, including increased fuel costs, retaliatory tariffs, and costs of fishing gear, and on the effects of such policies on the cost of seafood for American families.
The SPEAKER pro tempore4:10 p.m.
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.
Debbie Dingell (D-MI)4:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore4:10 p.m.
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.
Providing for the Condemnation and Denouncement of Socialism in All Its Forms, and for Other Purposes
Pages H5401–H5408 · Official textMr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1499, I call up the resolution (H. Res. 1490) providing for the condemnation and denouncement of socialism in all its forms, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore
Pursuant to House Resolution 1499, the resolution is considered read.
The text of the resolution is as follows:
Text printed in the Record (3,521 characters)
Whereas socialist ideology necessitates a concentration of power that has, time and time again, collapsed into communist regimes, totalitarian rule, and repressive dictatorships;
Whereas socialism has repeatedly led to famine and mass murders, and the killing of over 100,000,000 people worldwide;
Whereas, since the November 2025 New York City mayoral election of a Democratic Socialist, candidates for public office affiliated with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) have run in over one hundred elections in at least half the states;
Whereas the DSA's ideological tenet labeled "Democracy for All" calls for noncitizens and incarcerated criminals to vote in American elections;
Whereas the DSA's ideological tenet labeled "A Democratic Congress" calls for abolishing the U.S. Senate, implementing ranked choice voting in all elections, and replacing the two-party system;
Whereas, on February 19, 2026, the DSA stated "[t]he United States of America has never been a democracy";
Whereas the DSA's ideology and socialism, in any form, are incompatible with American values and the United States Constitution;
Whereas the State of New Jersey registered nearly 6,600 noncitizens to vote, with reportedly hundreds successfully voting in elections;
Whereas the Trump Administration's Department of Homeland Security engaged in a joint investigation with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), which charged four noncitizens with crimes connected to illegally voting in Federal elections and making false statements while applying for American citizenship;
Whereas, under the leadership of President Donald J. Trump, the Department of Homeland Security has made the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) service accessible to all states to find and remove ineligible noncitizens from state voter rolls;
Whereas multiple States have found documented instances of noncitizens illegally registered to vote as a result of access to the SAVE service;
Whereas, under Democrat leadership, several local jurisdictions in the United States of America allow noncitizens to vote in elections, diluting the votes of American citizens;
Whereas the United States House of Representatives has passed several bills, including the SAVE Act and the SAVE America Act, to require common-sense election integrity measures, including proof of citizenship, photo identification, and database checks;
Whereas the American people deserve to be confident that American elections are free, fair, and secure;
Whereas common-sense measures like providing photo identification to vote ensure that American elections are secure; and
Whereas only Americans should decide American elections: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
(1) condemns and denounces socialism in all its forms, including the Democratic Socialists of America, and opposes the implementation of socialist policies in the United States;
(2) reaffirms its support for free, fair, and secure elections;
(3) reiterates the notion that American elections are for American citizens only;
(4) recommits itself to upholding the Constitution of the United States; and
(5) calls for enactment of the SAVE America Act to ensure election security, increase public confidence in America's voting system, and close loopholes in order to prevent noncitizens from voting in elections.
The SPEAKER pro tempore
The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Steil) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Morelle) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Steil).
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore
Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Wisconsin?
There was no objection.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to start by thanking the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Crank) for authoring this very timely resolution.
Mr. Speaker, let's set the stage. Socialism has no place in the United States of America. Hard work and merit are the backbone of American Dreams, not socialism in government outcome and government control.
Our Nation is at a crossroads. Across the country, socialist policies are increasingly dominating democratic politics. Members of this body openly support key elements of the Democratic Socialists of America's platform.
The mayor of our largest city is a socialist. The U.S. Senator who was a leading candidate for the 2020 Democratic nomination for President is a socialist.
America has a choice. We can go down the path of Big Government socialism, or we can keep fighting to shrink government and help the American people keep more of their hard-earned money.
The resolution condemns socialism, and it exposes the radical policies of the Democratic Socialists of America's platform.
Let's quickly look through the platform. It supports giving the right to vote to 12 million noncitizens and criminals who are currently incarcerated. It supports ranked-choice voting for all elections. It calls for abolishing the electoral college and the United States Senate. These are radical policies, and they would undermine the integrity of the American election and destroy our democratic system.
Now, contrast this radical agenda with what Republicans support. We believe that American elections are for American citizens only. We are focused on making it easy to vote and hard to cheat. Our goal is to strengthen election integrity. That is why we are pushing commonsense reforms like requiring photo ID and citizenship verification when individuals register to vote.
Socialists are opposing these commonsense ideas because they fundamentally oppose securing our elections. Mr. Speaker, socialism is easy to elect, but it is nearly impossible to remove. That is because socialist ideology concentrates power in a way that has led to totalitarian rule, time and time again.
Here at home, DSA leaders have repeatedly described our bicameral Federal Republic as inherently undemocratic. Make no mistake, if socialists are given the chance, socialists will abolish our democratic system.
Mr. Speaker, socialist policies are responsible for the death of 100 million people worldwide. This resolution rejects and condemns this dangerous ideology.
I urge my colleagues to support this resolution, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, as if we didn't waste enough time participating in yesterday's purely performative exercise at the Rules Committee, here we are again.
After zero floor activity for the last 5 weeks, House Republicans have brought to the floor a nonbinding resolution calling for enactment of the SAVE America Act.
I was recently asked by a constituent: "What is a nonbinding resolution?" And I effectively said: A nonbinding resolution is a statement of how Congress feels, but it does nothing.
So here we are taking up a nonbinding resolution of how we feel. And in an ironic twist that would be comical if it weren't so sinister, this resolution, this nonbinding feeling of Congress, stokes fears of a repressive totalitarian dictatorship while in the same breath affirms House Republicans' obsession with subverting Americans' right to vote--the same House Republicans that have ceded entirely Congress' constitutional authority to one single person.
Absurd doesn't begin to describe this.
This resolution, this nonbinding resolution, asks the House to condemn government ownership of private industry, yet under Donald Trump's administration, the Federal Government has spent almost $28 billion of American money acquiring stakes in dozens of private companies--$28 billion.
Now, personally, I believe in capitalism, but if my Republican friends want to debate socialism, they should start with the shareholder in chief who sits in the Oval Office.
Mr. Speaker, after hearing from their own constituents about the affordability crisis in America and the corruption in this administration for the past 5 weeks, House Republicans are wasting time on a vote for a resolution condemning a political philosophy, a resolution which has already passed the House, and calling for the enactment of a bill aimed at making it harder for Americans to vote--a bill which I also note has already passed this House. This bill would make it harder for married women and veterans to vote, a bill that would essentially gut mail and online voter registration, a bill that would force States to hand out voter rolls to President Trump's Department of Homeland Security.
Perhaps I shouldn't be surprised we are here today because one thing is clear: As costs are skyrocketing for American consumers, Republicans are afraid to face their constituents at the ballot box. The White House and congressional Republicans have failed the American people, and the only remaining option is to try to keep Americans from voting at all.
They want bills like the SAVE America Act to disrupt election administration and keep millions of eligible voters away from the polls. The President has issued illegal executive orders to block ballot access for millions of Americans, including an unlawful attempt to weaponize the United States Postal Service and eviscerate vote-by-mail regimes in States across this country because the President says mail-in voting is fraudulent, even though the President himself voted twice in the last few weeks by mail.
This administration has defunded and gutted the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, CISA, and its support for election administrators. And of course, the President and his allies continue to actively spread mis- and disinformation about the integrity of our elections.
Maybe that is the point: to cause a lack of confidence in our election writ large and get people to question the very legitimacy of our long tradition of self-governance.
House Democrats will continue to fight back because, despite continued efforts by the President and his allies, our elections are safe and secure. State and local election administrators, both Democrats and Republicans, not the President, will continue to run elections in this country. States will do it. Local and State election administrators will do it, not the President of the United States.
The courts will continue to reject unlawful attempts by the Department of Justice to force States to turn over their voter rolls.
As of earlier this month, the Department of Justice's record in these cases now is 0 for 23. There were 23 cases brought in Federal court, and the Department of Justice has lost every single one of them in their effort to force States to turn over voter rolls.
House Democrats' objectives are straightforward. Every eligible American must have a meaningful opportunity to cast a ballot, and those ballots must be counted fairly and accurately. There is nothing more important in this moment than our collective efforts to ensure Americans are given every opportunity to render their verdict in November, and despite the best efforts of House Republicans, we are going to make sure that happens.
Mr. Speaker, in a recent poll, Congress was found to have a 15 percent approval rating. Mr. Speaker, 15 percent of the American people approve of the job Congress is doing today. Some might understandably think that number is low, but frankly, after participating in this absurd exercise, I am surprised it is that high.
With all due respect to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, would this entirely symbolic resolution Republicans are seeking to advance today do anything to lower gas prices? Would this pure messaging bill do anything to make your groceries less expensive? Would this resolution do anything to hold all the crooks in the White House accountable? The answer is simple. It would not.
Promises were made to the American people, but they have not been kept. The American people deserve better than this. I strongly urge my colleagues to reject this resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Bryan Steil (R-WI)4:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I note my colleague said this resolution allows Members to state how they feel, where they stand. I think that is actually reasonably true.
You can pull out the Democratic Socialists of America program, and you can flip to page 15 and read through some of the highlights: defund the Pentagon, free Palestine with Jerusalem as the capital, grant amnesty for all immigrants regardless of legal status.
This is a chance, as my colleague says, to show how we feel and where Members stand. The American people will get to see. Do they stand with the Democratic Socialists of America or do they stand with democracy and freedom and oppose the socialist policies that we are seeing from the radical left?
Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Crank), the author of this resolution, to speak.
Jeff Crank (R-CO)4:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, this resolution simply condemns socialism and anti-American ideas of the DSA. It is a simple up-or-down vote: Where do you stand on the anti-American platform of the DSA?
Mr. Speaker, 10 to 15 years ago, we wouldn't even have to ask this question. A resolution like this would have passed 10 or 15 years ago 435-0.
The Rules debate from yesterday showed that some of my friends think that this is pointless. Now, these are the same people who shut down government and didn't want to pay soldiers and employees for months on end, and we are being lectured about this being pointless? What was that?
However, what we are seeing in elections across the country paint a different picture. The Democratic Socialists of America was a fringe movement a decade ago. Now, they are growing within the Democratic ranks, winning primaries, and threatening the foundation of what makes this country the greatest on Earth.
Mr. Speaker, I can help my friends if they aren't sure how to vote on something as simple as this. Let me remind every Member of this Chamber: You took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. The DSA uses intimidation to shut down free speech.
This is unconstitutional, and it is anti-American. The DSA's candidates' platforms stand in direct contrast to our Republic. They are in favor of getting rid of the United States Senate, open borders, defunding the police, and allowing noncitizens to vote in Federal elections. Those aren't consistent with our Constitution.
DSA is an insidious movement within the Democratic Party. Let's be clear. They aren't running as Republicans. They are Democrats. There is no Republican Socialists of America.
Mr. Speaker, we know where these ideas lead to: Less freedom, less liberty, less money in your pockets, more government, more taxes, and more control. These are ideas in governments that many have fled to come to the United States of America. They came here to seek freedom, opportunity, and self-government. These are things that we have sworn to protect in this body.
This is no longer a fringe movement. They want to take over this country and upend our democracy and our voting laws. DSA-affiliated candidates are increasingly running for office across this country, and we are seeing what happens when they win.
Democrats and DSA don't want Americans to show their IDs at the polls, so noncitizens can vote them into power. However, as soon as they are elected, they turn around and ask for your ID to enter a government-run grocery store.
If we believe American elections belong to Americans and the American people, then we should have no problem saying so clearly. We should say so by adopting this resolution as a unified body because if we don't, we let this fester uncondemned.
If we fail to pass this resolution and we continue to not pass the SAVE America Act to ensure secure and fair elections, they will exploit our democracy. They will mislead the public into putting them into positions of power and erode all sense of individual liberty.
Freedom-loving Americans can escape New York City, but if DSA continues to run candidates and beat Democrats in Federal primaries, Americans will be the ones fleeing from their own country to escape socialist and communist ideologies.
Where can they go if they can't be here in America?
I encourage my colleagues to stand firm against the ideas coming out of the Democratic Socialists of America.
Families are worried about the cost of living. I understand that. However, like doctors, who take the Hippocratic oath, above all else, do no harm. Socialism is harm. Socialism doesn't lower costs. It doesn't bring prosperity.
Free markets and capitalism lift people out of poverty. Embracing freedom and liberty brings prosperity for people. These are the values that have guided this country for 250 years, and this body needs to ensure that it remains our guiding light.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my friends to support this resolution and vote "yes." It is really not that hard.
Joseph D. Morelle (D-NY)4:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
When the gentleman began to speak and said this was a simple resolution on socialism, I thought perhaps he hadn't read his own resolution because it also creates incredible barriers to people registering to vote in America and engaging in self-government, which has been the whole point of this Republic for 250 years.
I am glad he did indicate, though, that this is also including efforts to make it harder for Americans to vote.
However, I would say this: I know this is so important that we pass this resolution, except I would also remind the body that we passed this resolution a year ago condemning socialism, so we are doing here just the same thing. I guess next week we will do it again and again and again, but we have already done this, and we have also passed the awful SAVE America Act several times here as well.
Rather than focusing on gas prices and the ill-advised illegal war in Iran, which has raised the price of groceries and gas, which has spent hundreds of billions of dollars not authorized by the Congress, we stand here talking about a resolution that has two parts, both of which have already passed. That is what we consider a critical measure to consider, a nonbinding resolution today on two things we have already done in the House, but I guess that passes for progress in some people's minds.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib).
Rashida Tlaib (D-MI)4:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, corporate greed is hurting Americans. It is not Democratic Socialists who are fighting for universal healthcare, childcare, and clean water.
The sponsor of this resolution took $10,000 from Phillips 66, a gas company, and that is a fact. I wonder how many residents in Colorado's Fifth pulled into a Phillips 66 and couldn't afford gas because today residents of Colorado's Fifth are paying $4.26 per gallon for gas. That is higher than the national average.
Colorado's Fifth District is paying the cost of Trump's reckless war. Since the start of the war, the average family in the Fifth District has paid an extra $412 for gas, and they have spent $3,700 more for basic living expenses. Yet, we are not talking about the fact that warmongering hurts our families, not Democratic Socialists.
Republicans fuel corporate greed as they allow, again, the tax cuts, again allow the highest paid CEOs to give pennies to their workers. The average CEO of the largest corporation earned $17.7 million last year, yet here we go. We are not blaming the corporate donors. Instead, we are blaming the Democratic Socialists.
Workers rely on Medicaid, Mr. Speaker, and SNAP because of corporate greed, yet Republicans in this Chamber are literally cutting those programs to give, what, their corporate donors $4.5 trillion in tax breaks. Yet, here we are, blaming, again, Democratic Socialists, who are trying to make life easier for our families, not the billionaire class.
I proudly say, as a DSA member: Tax the rich.
Bryan Steil (R-WI)4:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Malliotakis) to speak on the resolution.
Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY)4:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, first, let's be clear that socialism is communism light. Socialism is the first step to communism. If anybody doubts what I am saying, just listen to Vladimir Lenin, the first leader of the Soviet Union, who proclaimed the goal of socialism is communism.
It begins with promises of free programs, government-controlled prices, and punishment of the supposedly wealthy, redistribution of wealth to help everyone. However, it ends with shortages, economic collapse, and a government powerful enough to take away citizens' rights, their property, and livelihoods, end the freedom of the press, and a complete takeover of the courts and judicial system.
Communism and socialism destroy. It steals from the people while those who run the regime live as kings. That is the reality. It is about consolidating power for a select few.
Now, since the last century, we have had Democrats and Republicans in Congress come together to condemn socialism, to stop the rise of communism in this country. Go back and read it in history: In the thirties and forties and fifties, and afterwards, they stood up against it, and they fought together, and that is why freedom always prevailed.
However, now we have one side standing up for freedom, for prosperity, and for the American way of life, and we have the other side that is actually rolling out the red carpet for socialism. I believe it is because they are trying to preserve their positions here in Congress and they care more about the primary elections than they do about protecting this country. They are rolling out the red carpet and nominating people who want to bring this dangerous ideology here to the Halls of Congress.
My mayor in New York City ran on an agenda of government-run supermarkets, abolishing private property rights, and seizing the means of production. Those were his words. That was his platform.
Guess what, Mr. Speaker. That is straight out of the playbook of Karl Marx.
That is exactly what they did to my mother's homeland of Communist Cuba. It is what destroyed her family, what took her home, what took my grandfather's small business, and what caused my family to break up and never see each other again.
That is what they are refusing to condemn today.
Republicans will stand on the side of freedom, of prosperity, of free markets, and of the American way of life. I hope my colleagues, at least some of them, have the guts to do what the Democrats did in the thirties, forties, and fifties, and join us on what should be a bipartisan position condemning socialism and communism in the United States of America.
Joseph D. Morelle (D-NY)4:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I will just note that in the text of the resolution it talks about how socialist ideology necessitates the concentration of power, but the whereas is essentially any form of socialism. I am just sort of curious, as I read it, it denounces socialism in all of its forms.
I just ask the question of my colleagues. The current administration has entered into 39 announced deals, has invested $28 billion of American taxpayer money, and $8.9 billion of that was to purchase 433 million shares of Intel. We now have a 9.9 percent stake in Intel--which sounds like socialism to me, the government control or ownership of the means of production--15 percent of MP Materials, 5 percent of Lithium Americas, and another 5 percent of its joint venture with General Motors.
Frankly, if it comes to government ownership of private industry, which it does, as a capitalist I said this, I actually voted on the resolution when it came before the House before, but I wonder: If the United States Government gets into the habit of purchasing shares and ownership of a chip manufacturer, Intel, does that mean when it comes to procurement that we are somehow compromised?
Can we choose another chip manufacturer to the disadvantage of American taxpayers because we are part-owners of the company that is competing for our business?
How will we regulate companies now where we have a vested interest in the profitability because the American taxpayers are part owners of that company?
I would have taken a little more care with the resolution because you would have to argue that perhaps the most socialist President in recent memory is Donald Trump because he is having American taxpayers own shares of private companies. I would think there would be a number of Members on my friends' side of the aisle that would have distress about such a measure taken by an American President.
I can imagine if Joe Biden was taking ownership of Intel how we would have heard people screaming about it, but they are oddly silent because the would-be dictator of America, the would-be king, has decided that he is going to invest American money in private companies.
I just would be curious to see what people's response is to that.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Pocan).
Mark Pocan (D-WI)4:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, this is a stupid resolution.
This stupid resolution completely ignores the reality of what Americans are worried about today: the rising cost of living caused by the hapless GOP leadership in Congress and an inept White House.
Forget about this resolution being stupid for a second. What about communism? We are against socialism but okay with communism? That is stupid.
Forget about that under the U.S. with Donald Trump, we have been more socialist than many actual socialist countries by claiming U.S. Government partial ownership in over 30 companies, which is clearly ignored in this resolution.
That is stupid.
Forget that somehow, for some reason, the save America voter suppression act is thrown in here, an act perhaps even more stupid than this resolution itself. This is just stupid, and it is insulting to Americans trying to get by while this Congress lets tariffs increase the cost of groceries and other goods, lets an illegal war in Iran raise gas prices, and the big, beautiful bill raise the cost of healthcare and utilities.
However, here today in the U.S. Congress we are dealing with none of that, not one thing to make Americans' lives easier. Instead, we are dealing with this stupid resolution, and that is just plain stupid.
Bryan Steil (R-WI)4:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, per the comments that this calls out socialism and not communism, it calls out socialism in all its forms. So if the gentleman who just spoke dislikes communism, he has a great opportunity to vote for this resolution.
Per the commentary about election law, this is a direct contrast between the platform of the Democratic Socialists of America who want to dramatically change the election process in the United States of America. The Democratic Socialists of America want to change how we elect the President of the United States. They want to abolish the Senate. They want to dramatically transform the democracy of the United States of America.
Why?
It is because socialism concentrates power. What they want to do is establish socialism, which is easy to elect but very difficult to remove.
That is why this resolution is so important. It is so the American people will know where their Member stands.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg) to speak on the resolution.
Tim Walberg (R-MI)4:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 1490 to condemn socialism and the dangerous policies being pushed by the Democratic Socialists of America, and, sadly, by my Democrat colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
The United States, including my home State of Michigan, has seen a troubling rise in support for socialism's destructive policies and leaders who seek to expand bureaucratic control in every sector of Michiganders' lives.
From defunding the police to letting noncitizens vote and seizing private small businesses, the DSA is promoting radical policies, Mr. Speaker, that undermine the values that have carried our Nation through 250 years and blessed the world.
There is nothing democratic about socialism. All it is is a soft word for communism. I agree. It has never produced prosperity. It has only led to fewer choices, more poverty, and more government control, with the cruel loss of freedom and liberty.
I am proud to be a cosponsor of this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to listen to what we are talking about, to ultimately get past the idea of stupid and get on the idea of genius in favor of this resolution, to reject this radical ideology and protect the rights and freedoms of hardworking Michigan and American families.
Joseph D. Morelle (D-NY)4:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I share with Chairman Steil many things we agree on. He is a good friend, but his suggestion that this is about the concentration of power--concentration of power? What we have seen in the last 2 years is the concentration of power at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue and a Congress that has done little to nothing about establishing our Article I prerogatives. When it comes to appropriations, when it comes to the impoundment of money, when it comes to the illegal activities in Iran, which has put hundreds of billions of dollars of American money spent over there, which has made us less secure, cost the lives of 18 Americans, that is a concentration of power.
We ought to talk about that. We should be having that conversation about Article I powers and reestablishing Congress' rightful role.
Mr. Speaker, if you want to talk about concentration of power, Republican Members, including my friend, have made clear the SAVE America Act would take effect immediately upon passage. With just 63 days before this election, this bill would upend elections in every State across this country.
Regarding concentration of power, Members of this body know that States begin mailing millions of ballots just 3 weeks from now, and yet, we would pass this concentration of power to put further power concentrated in the hands of one individual at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. How are these election administrators supposed to comply with this new Federal law should it take effect?
It is election malpractice, frankly. The committee heard months ago from an election director on the ground who called this effective date unworkable.
The purpose of this change, which is in this resolution, is clearly to throw election administration into disarray, because elections in chaos are easier to disrupt and subvert.
That is why President Trump unleashed an angry mob on the building on January 6, 2021, to create chaos, undermine confidence in our election system, and literally create a dangerous situation, all in service of overturning an election that he lost.
This change is irresponsible. It is the ultimate move to concentrate power in the hands of one individual.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Ramirez), my friend.
Delia C. Ramirez (D-IL)4:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, whether socialism, a Twitch streamer, working-class candidates, or immigrants, my colleagues believe that there is always a bogeyman to condemn.
Let's get into it. What are the actual positions they feel that we must denounce today? Is it every family having access to affordable, quality healthcare, housing, or education; or is it maybe working people retiring with dignity; families earning enough from just one job so they can put food on their table, a roof over their head, and keep the lights on; or our dollars staying in our communities and not being used to bomb children and destabilize countries across the world?
Today, my colleagues thought it was a good use of people's time to come back after the August work period to come after a working people's platform and the people working to make that platform a reality.
Do you know why? They are afraid to get honest about who they really work for here. Spoiler alert: It is not working people. That is okay because we have their vote records to tell us who they represent.
They cut your Medicaid because they work for Big Pharma and for-profit insurance providers. They won't pass the stock trading bill because they work for Wall Street and the venture capitalists. They won't end mass detention or take on the criminal legal system reform because they work for for-profit prisons. They won't end wars and genocide because they work for defense contractors. They won't assert their authority because they work for authoritarians and fascists.
As long as they and their bosses profit from the policies of racism, colonialism, capitalism, imperialism, white supremacy, and patriarchy, they don't care if you are sick, starving, deported, detained, or even dead.
I bet that they take issue with those of us who are standing in their way. Bottom line, my colleagues are afraid of the American people seeing through their cowardice, greed, and lust for power.
Every day, more Americans are courageously sharing their truth. The truth is that the current system we have right now doesn't work for them. It doesn't reflect our values, and it does not serve working people. It is why it is more important than ever that we don't just fight back. We are not actually lowering the cost of living right now. We are denouncing a resolution that, frankly, you have because you are so afraid of working-class people coming to the next Congress.
Let me be clear: Not only do I call on my colleagues to vote against this stupid resolution, as I just heard a moment ago, but also to put this much energy into creating a world, a system, that actually works for working people.
Bryan Steil (R-WI)4:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman asked what we oppose. You can actually just pull out the platform of the Democratic Socialists of America, and it is like shooting fish in a barrel of what we oppose: defund the Department of Defense; free Palestine, with their capital in Jerusalem; provide amnesty to all immigrants, regardless of legal status. The list goes on. We oppose a lot of it. That is why this resolution is actually very relevant.
The radical left is taking over portions of the Democratic Party. This isn't your grandfather's Democratic Party anymore. This is a new radicalized Democratic Party that wants to install socialism right here in the United States of America.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Kim).
Young Kim (R-CA)4:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I grew up in the shadow of war in South Korea. My family fled poverty and a bitter lack of opportunity, and my mother-in-law crossed the DMZ multiple times to rescue loved ones who were trapped under tyranny in North Korea. For me, it is unimaginable to see socialist ideas gaining traction in America today, but then I remember that socialism never advertises its track record: starvation, oppression, the loss of freedom and opportunity, and more than 100 million lives lost worldwide.
Today's proponents of socialism have made their goals clear. Read them for yourself on the DSA website: abolish the U.S. Senate, replace the Presidency, dismantle the Supreme Court, and rewrite our Constitution.
These radicals want to tear down everything America stands on and everything it stands for. I refuse to watch that happen.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H. Res. 1490 so that this generation of Americans is not fooled by the empty promises of socialism and future generations never pay the price that families like mine already have. As Ronald Reagan said: We must preserve America as the world's last best hope for mankind.
Joseph D. Morelle (D-NY)4:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Bryan Steil (R-WI)4:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McDowell), no friend of socialism, to speak on the resolution.
Addison P. McDowell (R-NC)4:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the so-called Democrat Socialists want you to believe three things: one, that their ideas are somehow new and innovative; two, that everyone gets a participation trophy; and, three, that we can pay for all their false promises by simply taxing other people.
Folks back home in my district know that this is absurd, and it is the antithesis of the principles that our country was founded on. The socialist wing is gaining steam in the Democratic Party. It is important that we defeat this ideology before it is too late.
What I find ironic, Mr. Speaker, is that many of the leading voices for socialism happen to be quite wealthy. I find this ironic because they advocate for policies that will prevent others from attaining the same financial position that they are in. They want to pull up the ladder of opportunity. These socialists want to take more of your hard-earned money, gut the private sector, and bring permanent malaise.
Socialists talk like they are champions of the people, but they live like country club members. They demand control over your work, family, and future while they lock the gates and leave you outside.
We are better than this, Mr. Speaker. This resolution before us today simply condemns socialism. This is just a small step for my colleagues on the other side to join us in clearly rejecting this anti-American project.
Let's be a country that continues to embrace hard work, self-determination, innovation, and liberty and rejects a culture of dependence and total government control.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote in favor of this resolution.
Joseph D. Morelle (D-NY)4:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Bryan Steil (R-WI)4:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, as we all know, socialism is a promise that is going to make everyone equal, equally poor. This is why it is so important to stand up and vote "yes" on this resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Mann) to speak on the resolution.
Tracey Mann (R-KS)4:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 1490 condemning socialism in all its forms.
For years, we were told that socialism was a fringe movement on the left that posed no threat to our country. That is simply no longer true.
Today, socialist candidates are building political machines and pushing their party further and further left in New York, Colorado, Michigan, California, and across the country.
Since the election of a Democrat Socialist as mayor of New York City, DSA-affiliated candidates have run in more than 100 elections across at least half of our States.
The message inside today's Democratic Party is becoming increasingly clear: Embrace the socialist agenda or step aside for someone who will.
We should remember what socialism really means. It means concentrating power in government, weakening private property rights and free enterprise, and replacing individual liberty with government control.
History is not ambiguous about the consequences. Socialist and Communist regimes have produced famine, repression, mass murder, and more than 100 million deaths worldwide.
America became the greatest country on Earth because we rejected that model. This House should do the same today.
Mr. Speaker, I urge every Member of Congress to vote "yes" and condemn socialism in all its forms.
Bryan Steil (R-WI)5:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Smith of Nebraska)5:00 p.m.
The gentleman from Wisconsin has 11 minutes remaining. The gentleman from New York has 12\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Joseph D. Morelle (D-NY)5:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Bryan Steil (R-WI)5:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock) to speak on the resolution.
Tom McClintock (R-CA)5:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, when Tim Walz said that one man's socialism is another man's neighborliness, he got it completely backward. There is only one way to prosper in a capitalist society. You have to figure out what somebody else needs and get it for them better than they can get it for themselves. That might mean mowing their lawn. It might mean doing brain surgery on their child, but whatever it is, you have to help your neighbor.
Socialism is the opposite. It is taking by force what one person has earned by helping others and giving it to someone who has not. If I take a dollar from Peter and give it to Paul, I have helped Paul in the amount of one dollar and I have hurt Peter by that very same amount.
What I have really done is to rob both of them of one dollar's incentive of helping each other. Paul no longer needs to help Peter for his dollar and Peter no longer profits from helping Paul.
Freedom requires very little force because people are free to act according to their own needs and judgment and to prosper for their own talents and labor.
Socialism requires crushing government force because it must compel people to act against their own interests.
In a free society, every person gets to vote every day with every dollar they spend on what the society will produce, who will produce it, and how much they are willing to pay, all voluntarily.
In a socialist society, elites make those decisions for the people and then impose them on the people by force.
In a free society, every transaction benefits both parties by definition. In a socialist society, every transaction benefits one party while it hurts the other.
The lesson of history comes down to four words: Freedom rocks. Socialism sucks.
Joseph D. Morelle (D-NY)5:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, on this floor this afternoon, we should be debating legislation to lower gas prices. We should be debating legislation to lower the cost of groceries. We should be debating legislation to rein in the most corrupt administration in the history of this country.
That is what I heard when I went back home in Rochester and spent the last several weeks talking to people who are fearing for the futures of their families, who are fearing not being able to pay their medical bills, who fear not being able to pay their mortgage, who fear having to make tough decisions about childcare and putting food on the table.
Instead, we are debating a nonbinding resolution. It is a nonbinding resolution which they said gives the sense of Congress. We have already given the sense about socialism less than a year ago. It has already passed this body, but we keep doing it. I guess we will keep saying it because we have nothing else to do and because we are not prepared to address the rising costs of gas and groceries and the challenges that families are facing.
We are also calling for the enactment of a bill that has already passed the House. This is the important work this Congress is taking up today, passing a resolution that calls for the passing of a bill we have already passed and calling for the enactment of a resolution which we have already enacted.
By the way, that bill, the SAVE America Act, would restrict access to the ballot box for millions of Americans, in particular, women, rural voters, students, and people of color. The SAVE America Act would effectively end vote by mail in the United States. It would force States to surrender private voter information to the Department of Homeland Security. If enacted today, the SAVE America Act would instantly throw the upcoming midterm elections into chaos.
Mr. Speaker, House Democrats will continue to fight back because, despite the continued efforts by the President and his allies, our elections are safe. They are secure, and there is nothing more important in this moment than our collective efforts to ensure Americans are given every opportunity to render their verdict in November. House Democrats will make sure that happens, and I strongly urge my colleagues to oppose this resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Bryan Steil (R-WI)5:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to vote for this important resolution. A lot has been said here on the floor, so let's try to re-encapsulate what has been discussed.
It was just referenced about the importance of the price of groceries and the importance of the price of gas, and I couldn't agree more with the importance. If we look at the contrast between the policies of those of us on the right and how we want to reduce those with those on the left, I think the contrast becomes quite clear.
My colleagues on the left and the Democratic Socialists of America want government-owned grocery stores. That will not lower the price of groceries. My friends on the left want a Green New Deal, and it is right here in the platform. They want to end the use of fossil fuels. That will drive up the cost of energy for hardworking American families.
Instead, we should be continuing our work to unleash American energy, to lower the costs for American families. It is a clear contrast between those that support the socialist ideals and the socialist ideas and the Democratic Socialists of America's platform with those of our platform.
We talked about election law. The Democratic Socialists of America start with the premise that America has never been a democracy. Mr. Speaker, America is the world's greatest democracy. The Democratic Socialists of America want to replace the popular vote for President with an executive chosen by Congress. That might be one of the scariest parts of the entire DSA platform.
They want this body to choose the President of the United States of America, not the people. They want to strip that power away from American citizens and instill that power here in Washington, D.C.
They want to allow noncitizens to vote. In their platform, they would allow all permanent noncitizens of the United States of America to vote. I believe, and my colleagues believe, that U.S. elections should be for U.S. citizens only.
If we want to see how this plays out, I can look right here in our Nation's Capital in Washington, D.C., where under current law noncitizens residing in Washington, D.C., can vote in municipal elections.
Let's just set this clear as to how extreme this is. An individual working in the Russian Embassy could walk out with a passport in their pocket, not need to show up because they don't require photo ID in our Nation's Capital, walk to the polls, and in 9 weeks from today cast their ballot for Mayor in Washington, D.C.
That is the current law. Noncitizens are allowed to vote in municipal elections in Washington, D.C., and the DSA platform lays out what their plan is to allow noncitizens, millions of noncitizens, to vote in American elections, but they want them all to vote.
How do we know that? You can turn the page to other sections of their platform where they want to provide amnesty for every illegal alien in the United States of America. They want to allow them to be a U.S. citizen then they can all vote.
We can see exactly what the playbook is of the Democratic Socialists of America.
The list goes on. They want aggressive taxes on successful individuals. They want to abolish the Senate. The list goes on as to where the Democrat ideas are, and they call it Democratic socialism, probably because stealing doesn't poll terribly well, Mr. Speaker.
This is a stark contrast between where the radical left and the Democratic Socialists of America want to take this country and where we believe and know this country needs to go. In particular, I am making sure that we have election integrity. We can see in the platform of the DSA exactly how they would gut the election integrity provisions that we rely on.
They want to allow noncitizens to vote. They want to drive forward a socialist agenda. As I remind everyone, it is very easy to vote socialism in. It is very difficult to remove socialism. It is why this resolution is so important so the American people know exactly where their Member stands.
Shortly here today, we will be able to vote on this resolution and everyone in the United States of America will know where their Member in the United States House of Representatives stands.
Do they stand with the Democratic Socialists of America who want socialism to drive forward in the United States of America, or do they stand with the freedoms and liberties that we know and cherish here in the United States of America?
Mr. Speaker, I encourage all of my colleagues to vote for this resolution, to stand up against the evils of socialism, and to stand in support of the greatest country in the world, the United States of America.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore5:10 p.m.
All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 1499, the previous question is ordered on the resolution and preamble.
The question is on adoption of the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
Bryan Steil (R-WI)5:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore5:10 p.m.
Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, this 15-minute vote on the adoption of H. Res. 1490 will be followed by 5-minute votes on:
Motion to recommit H.R. 9436;
Passage of H.R. 9436, if ordered; and
Adoption of H. Res. 1498.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 220, nays 192, answered "present" 2, not voting 18, as follows:
Text printed in the Record (3,741 characters)
Aderholt Alford Allen Amodei (NV) Arrington Babin Bacon Baird Balderson Barr Barrett Baumgartner Bean (FL) Begich Bentz Bergman Bice Biggs (AZ) Biggs (SC) Bilirakis Boebert Bost Brecheen Bresnahan Buchanan Burchett Burlison Calvert Cammack Carey Carter (GA) Carter (TX) Castor (FL) Ciscomani Cline Cloud Clyde Cole Collins Comer Crane Crank Crawford Crenshaw Cuellar Davidson Davis (NC) De La Cruz DesJarlais Diaz-Balart Downing Edwards Ellzey Emmer Estes Evans (CO) Ezell Fallon Fedorchak Feenstra Fine Finstad Fischbach Fitzgerald Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Flood Fong Foxx Franklin, Scott Fry Fulcher Fuller Gallagher Garbarino Gill (TX) Gimenez Golden (ME) Goldman (TX) Gonzalez, V. Gooden Gosar Graves Griffith Grothman Guest Guthrie Hageman Hamadeh (AZ) Haridopolos Harrigan Harris (MD) Harris (NC) Harshbarger Hern (OK) Higgins (LA) Hill (AR) Hinson Houchin Hudson Huizenga Hunt Hurd (CO) Issa Jack Jackson (TX) James Johnson (LA) Johnson (SD) Jordan Joyce (OH) Joyce (PA) Kean Kelly (MS) Kelly (PA) Kennedy (UT) Kiggans (VA) Kiley (CA) Kim Knott Kustoff LaHood LaLota Langworthy Latta Lawler Lee (FL) Letlow Loudermilk Lucas Luna Luttrell Mace Mackenzie Malliotakis Maloy Mann Massie Mast McClain McClintock McCormick McDowell McGuire Messmer Meuser Miller (OH) Miller (WV) Miller-Meeks Moolenaar Moore (AL) Moore (NC) Moore (UT) Moore (WV) Moran Murphy Nehls Newhouse Norman Nunn (IA) Onder Owens Palmer Patronis Perez Perry Pfluger Reschenthaler Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rose Rouzer Roy Rulli Rutherford Salazar Scalise Schmidt Schweikert Scott, Austin
Self Sessions Shreve Simpson Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smucker Soto Spartz Stauber Stefanik Steil Steube Strong Stutzman Taylor Tenney Thompson (PA) Tiffany Timmons Turner (OH) Valadao Van Drew Van Duyne Van Epps Van Orden Vasquez Wagner Walberg Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Westerman Wied Williams (TX) Wilson (SC) Wittman Womack Yakym Zinke
Adams Aguilar Amo Ansari Auchincloss Balint Barragan Beatty Bell Bera Beyer Bishop Blair Bonamici Boyle (PA) Brown Brownley Budzinski Bynum Carbajal Carson Carter (LA) Casar Case Casten Castro (TX) Chu Cisneros Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Cleaver Clyburn Cohen Conaway Correa Costa Courtney Crockett Crow Davids (KS) Davis (IL) Dean (PA) DeGette DeLauro DelBene Deluzio DeSaulnier Dexter Dingell Doggett Elfreth Escobar Espaillat Evans (PA) Fields Fletcher Foster Foushee Friedman Frost Garcia (CA) Garcia (IL) Garcia (TX) Gillen Goldman (NY) Gomez Gottheimer Gray Green, Al (TX) Grijalva Harder (CA) Hayes Himes Horsford Hoyer Hoyle (OR) Huffman Ivey Jackson (IL) Jacobs Jayapal Jeffries Johnson (GA) Johnson (TX) Kamlager-Dove Keating Kelly (IL) Kennedy (NY) Khanna Krishnamoorthi Landsman Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Latimer Lee (NV) Lee (PA) Leger Fernandez Levin Liccardo Lieu Lofgren Magaziner Mannion Matsui McBath McBride McClain Delaney McClellan McCollum McDonald Rivet McGarvey McGovern McIver Meeks Mejia Menefee Menendez Meng Mfume Min Moore (WI) Morelle Morrison Mrvan Mullin Nadler Neguse Norcross Ocasio-Cortez Olszewski Omar Pallone Panetta Pappas Pelosi Peters Pettersen Pingree Pocan Pou Pressley Quigley Ramirez Randall Raskin Riley (NY) Rivas Ross Ruiz Ryan Salinas Sanchez Scanlon Schakowsky Schneider Scholten Schrier Scott (VA) Sewell Sherman Simon Sorensen Stansbury Stanton Stevens Strickland Subramanyam Suozzi Sykes Takano Thanedar Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Titus Tlaib Tokuda Tonko Torres (CA) Torres (NY) Trahan Tran Underwood Vargas Veasey Vindman Walkinshaw Wasserman Schultz Waters Watson Coleman Whitesides Williams (GA) Wilson (FL)
Goodlander Houlahan
Craig Donalds Dunn (FL) Figures Frankel, Lois Garamendi Kaptur Lynch McCaul Miller (IL) Mills Moskowitz Moulton Neal Obernolte Ogles Smith (WA) Velazquez
Ms. PRESSLEY changed her vote from "yea" to "nay." 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.
Northeast Lobsterman Protection Act of 2026
Pages H5408–H5409 · Official textThe SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ellzey)
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to recommit on the bill (H.R. 9436) to amend the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 to extend the time period for which certain regulations concerning the North Atlantic right whale are effective, offered by the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Dingell), 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 will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 202, nays 212, not voting 18, as follows:
Text printed in the Record (3,739 characters)
Adams Aguilar Amo Ansari Auchincloss Balint Barragan Beatty Bell Bera Beyer Bishop Blair Bonamici Boyle (PA) Brown Brownley Budzinski Bynum Carbajal Carson Carter (LA) Casar Case Casten Castor (FL) Castro (TX) Chu Cisneros Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Cleaver Clyburn Cohen Conaway Correa Costa Courtney Crockett Crow Cuellar Davids (KS) Davis (IL) Davis (NC) Dean (PA) DeGette DeLauro DelBene Deluzio DeSaulnier Dexter Dingell Doggett Elfreth Escobar Espaillat Evans (PA) Fields Figures Fletcher Foster Foushee Frankel, Lois Friedman Frost Garcia (CA) Garcia (IL) Garcia (TX) Gillen Goldman (NY) Gomez Gonzalez, V. Goodlander Gottheimer Gray Green, Al (TX) Grijalva Harder (CA) Hayes Himes Horsford Houlahan Hoyer Hoyle (OR) Huffman Ivey Jackson (IL) Jacobs Jayapal Jeffries Johnson (GA) Johnson (TX) Kamlager-Dove Keating Kelly (IL) Kennedy (NY) Khanna Krishnamoorthi Landsman Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Latimer Lee (NV) Lee (PA) Leger Fernandez Levin Liccardo Lieu Lofgren Magaziner Mannion Matsui McBath McBride McClain Delaney McClellan McCollum McDonald Rivet McGarvey McGovern McIver Meeks Mejia Menefee Menendez Meng Mfume Min Moore (WI) Morelle Morrison Mrvan Mullin Nadler Neguse Norcross Ocasio-Cortez Olszewski Omar Pallone Panetta Pappas Pelosi Peters Pettersen Pingree Pocan Pou Pressley Quigley Ramirez Randall Raskin Riley (NY) Rivas Ross Ruiz Ryan Salinas Sanchez Scanlon Schakowsky Schneider Scholten Schrier Scott (VA) Sewell Sherman Simon Sorensen Soto Stansbury Stanton Stevens Strickland Subramanyam Suozzi Sykes Takano Thanedar Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Titus Tlaib Tokuda Tonko Torres (CA) Torres (NY) Trahan Tran Underwood Vargas Vasquez Veasey Vindman Walkinshaw Wasserman Schultz Waters Watson Coleman Whitesides Williams (GA) Wilson (FL)
Aderholt Allen Amodei (NV) Arrington Babin Bacon Baird Balderson Barr Barrett Baumgartner Bean (FL) Begich Bentz Bergman Bice Biggs (AZ) Biggs (SC) Bilirakis Boebert Bost Brecheen Bresnahan Buchanan Burchett Burlison Calvert Cammack Carey Carter (GA) Carter (TX) Ciscomani Cline Cloud Clyde Cole Collins Comer Crane Crank Crawford Crenshaw Davidson De La Cruz DesJarlais Diaz-Balart Downing Edwards Ellzey Emmer Estes Evans (CO) Ezell Fallon Fedorchak Feenstra Fine Finstad Fischbach Fitzgerald Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Flood Fong Foxx Franklin, Scott Fry Fulcher Fuller Garbarino Gill (TX) Gimenez Golden (ME) Goldman (TX) Gooden Gosar Graves Griffith Grothman Guest Guthrie Hageman Hamadeh (AZ) Haridopolos Harrigan Harris (MD) Harris (NC) Harshbarger Hern (OK) Higgins (LA) Hill (AR) Hinson Houchin Hudson Huizenga Hunt Hurd (CO) Issa Jack Jackson (TX) James Johnson (LA) Johnson (SD) Jordan Joyce (OH) Joyce (PA) Kean Kelly (MS) Kelly (PA) Kennedy (UT) Kiggans (VA) Kiley (CA) Kim Knott Kustoff LaHood LaLota Langworthy Latta Lawler Lee (FL) Letlow Loudermilk Lucas Luna Luttrell Mace Mackenzie Malliotakis Maloy Mann Massie Mast McClain McClintock McCormick McDowell McGuire Messmer Meuser Miller (OH) Miller (WV) Miller-Meeks Moolenaar Moore (AL) Moore (NC) Moore (UT) Moore (WV) Moran Murphy Nehls Newhouse Norman Nunn (IA) Onder Owens Palmer Patronis Perez Perry Pfluger Reschenthaler Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rose Rouzer Roy Rulli Rutherford Salazar Scalise Schmidt Schweikert Scott, Austin Self Sessions Shreve Simpson Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smucker Spartz Stauber Stefanik Steil Steube Strong Stutzman Taylor Tenney Thompson (PA) Tiffany Timmons Turner (OH) Valadao Van Drew Van Duyne Van Epps Van Orden Wagner Walberg Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Westerman Wied Williams (TX) Wilson (SC) Wittman Womack Yakym Zinke
Alford Craig Donalds Dunn (FL) Gallagher Garamendi Kaptur Lynch McCaul Miller (IL) Mills Moskowitz Moulton Neal Obernolte Ogles Smith (WA) Velazquez
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes remaining. Mr. COLE changed his vote from "yea" to "nay." So the motion to recommit was rejected. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore5:55 p.m.
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.
Jared Huffman (D-CA)5:55 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore5:55 p.m.
This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 219, nays 196, not voting 17, as follows:
Text printed in the Record (3,739 characters)
Aderholt Alford Allen Amodei (NV) Arrington Babin Bacon Baird Balderson Barr Barrett Baumgartner Begich Bentz Bergman Bice Biggs (AZ) Biggs (SC) Bilirakis Boebert Bost Brecheen Bresnahan Buchanan Burchett Burlison Calvert Cammack Carey Carter (GA) Carter (TX) Ciscomani Cline Cloud Clyde Cole Collins Comer Costa Crane Crank Crawford Crenshaw Cuellar Davidson Davis (NC) De La Cruz DesJarlais Diaz-Balart Downing Edwards Ellzey Emmer Estes Evans (CO) Ezell Fallon Fedorchak Feenstra Fine Finstad Fischbach Fitzgerald Fleischmann Flood Fong Foxx Franklin, Scott Fry Fulcher Fuller Gallagher Garbarino Gill (TX) Gimenez Golden (ME) Goldman (TX) Gonzalez, V. Gooden Goodlander Gosar Graves Gray Griffith Grothman Guest Guthrie Hageman Hamadeh (AZ) Haridopolos Harrigan Harris (MD) Harris (NC) Harshbarger Hern (OK) Higgins (LA) Hill (AR) Hinson Houchin Hudson Huizenga Hunt Hurd (CO) Issa Jack Jackson (TX) James Johnson (LA) Johnson (SD) Jordan Joyce (OH) Joyce (PA) Kean Kelly (MS) Kelly (PA) Kennedy (UT) Kiggans (VA) Kim Knott Kustoff LaHood LaLota Langworthy Latta Lawler Lee (FL) Letlow Loudermilk Lucas Luna Luttrell Mace Mackenzie Malliotakis Maloy Mann Massie Mast McClain McClintock McCormick McDowell McGuire Messmer Meuser Miller (OH) Miller (WV) Miller-Meeks Moolenaar Moore (AL) Moore (NC) Moore (UT) Moore (WV) Moran Murphy Nehls Newhouse Norman Nunn (IA) Onder Owens Palmer Pappas Patronis Perez Perry Pfluger Pingree Reschenthaler Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rose Rouzer Roy Rulli Rutherford Salazar Scalise Schmidt Schweikert Scott, Austin Self Sessions Shreve Simpson Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smucker Spartz Stauber Stefanik Steil Steube Strong Stutzman Taylor Tenney Thompson (PA) Tiffany Timmons Turner (OH) Valadao Van Drew Van Duyne Van Epps Van Orden Wagner Walberg Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Westerman Wied Williams (TX) Wilson (SC) Wittman Womack Yakym Zinke
Adams Aguilar Amo Ansari Auchincloss Balint Barragan Bean (FL) Beatty Bell Bera Beyer Bishop Blair Bonamici Boyle (PA) Brown Brownley Budzinski Bynum Carbajal Carson Carter (LA) Casar Case Casten Castor (FL) Castro (TX) Chu Cisneros Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Cleaver Clyburn Cohen Conaway Correa Courtney Crockett Crow Davids (KS) Davis (IL) Dean (PA) DeGette DeLauro DelBene Deluzio DeSaulnier Dexter Dingell Doggett Elfreth Escobar Espaillat Evans (PA) Fields Figures Fitzpatrick Fletcher Foushee Frankel, Lois Friedman Frost Garcia (CA) Garcia (IL) Garcia (TX) Gillen Goldman (NY) Gomez Gottheimer Green, Al (TX) Grijalva Harder (CA) Hayes Himes Horsford Houlahan Hoyer Hoyle (OR) Huffman Ivey Jackson (IL) Jacobs Jayapal Jeffries Johnson (GA) Johnson (TX) Kamlager-Dove Keating Kelly (IL) Kennedy (NY) Khanna Kiley (CA) Krishnamoorthi Landsman Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Latimer Lee (NV) Lee (PA) Leger Fernandez Levin Liccardo Lieu Lofgren Magaziner Mannion Matsui McBath McBride McClain Delaney McClellan McCollum McDonald Rivet McGarvey McGovern McIver Meeks Mejia Menefee Menendez Meng Mfume Min Moore (WI) Morelle Morrison Mrvan Mullin Nadler Neguse Norcross Ocasio-Cortez Olszewski Omar Pallone Panetta Pelosi Peters Pettersen Pocan Pou Pressley Quigley Ramirez Randall Raskin Riley (NY) Rivas Ross Ruiz Ryan Salinas Sanchez Scanlon Schakowsky Schneider Scholten Schrier Scott (VA) Sewell Sherman Simon Sorensen Soto Stansbury Stanton Stevens Strickland Subramanyam Suozzi Sykes Takano Thanedar Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Titus Tlaib Tokuda Tonko Torres (CA) Torres (NY) Trahan Tran Underwood Vargas Vasquez Veasey Vindman Walkinshaw Wasserman Schultz Waters Watson Coleman Whitesides Williams (GA) Wilson (FL)
Craig Donalds Dunn (FL) Foster Garamendi Kaptur Lynch McCaul Miller (IL) Mills Moskowitz Moulton Neal Obernolte Ogles Smith (WA) Velazquez
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). 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.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Chuck Edwards
Pages H5409–H5410 · Official textIN THE MATTER OF ALLEGATIONS RELATING TO REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK EDWARDS
The SPEAKER pro tempore
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on adoption of the resolution (H. Res. 1498) in the matter of allegations relating to Representative Chuck Edwards, on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore
The question is on adoption of the resolution.
This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 413, nays 2, not voting 17, as follows:
Text printed in the Record (3,740 characters)
Adams Aderholt Aguilar Alford Allen Amo Amodei (NV) Ansari Arrington Auchincloss Babin Bacon Baird Balderson Balint Barr Barragan Barrett Baumgartner Bean (FL) Beatty Begich Bell Bentz Bera Bergman Beyer Bice Biggs (AZ) Biggs (SC) Bilirakis Bishop Blair Boebert Bonamici Bost Boyle (PA) Brecheen Bresnahan Brown Brownley Buchanan Budzinski Burchett Burlison Bynum Calvert Cammack Carbajal Carey Carson Carter (GA) Carter (LA) Carter (TX) Casar Case Casten Castor (FL) Castro (TX) Chu Ciscomani Cisneros Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Cleaver Cline Cloud Clyburn Clyde Cohen Cole Collins Comer Conaway Correa Costa Courtney Crane Crank Crawford Crenshaw Crockett Crow Cuellar Davids (KS) Davidson Davis (IL) Davis (NC) De La Cruz Dean (PA) DeGette DeLauro DelBene Deluzio DeSaulnier DesJarlais Dexter Diaz-Balart Dingell Doggett Downing Elfreth Ellzey Emmer Escobar Espaillat Estes Evans (CO) Evans (PA) Ezell Fallon Fedorchak Feenstra Fields Figures Fine Finstad Fischbach Fitzgerald Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Fletcher Flood Fong Foster Foushee Foxx Frankel, Lois Franklin, Scott Friedman Frost Fry Fulcher Fuller Gallagher Garbarino Garcia (CA) Garcia (IL) Garcia (TX) Gill (TX) Gillen Gimenez Golden (ME) Goldman (NY) Goldman (TX) Gomez Gonzalez, V. Gooden Goodlander Gosar Gottheimer Graves Gray Green, Al (TX) Griffith Grijalva Grothman Guest Guthrie Hageman Hamadeh (AZ) Harder (CA) Haridopolos Harrigan Harris (NC) Harshbarger Hayes Hern (OK) Higgins (LA) Hill (AR) Himes Hinson Horsford Houchin Houlahan Hoyer Hoyle (OR) Hudson Huffman Huizenga Hunt Hurd (CO) Issa Ivey Jack Jackson (IL) Jackson (TX) Jacobs James Jayapal Jeffries Johnson (GA) Johnson (LA) Johnson (SD) Johnson (TX) Jordan Joyce (OH) Joyce (PA) Kamlager-Dove Kean Keating Kelly (IL) Kelly (MS) Kelly (PA) Kennedy (NY) Kennedy (UT) Khanna Kiggans (VA) Kiley (CA) Kim Knott Krishnamoorthi Kustoff
LaHood LaLota Landsman Langworthy Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Latimer Latta Lawler Lee (FL) Lee (NV) Lee (PA) Leger Fernandez Letlow Levin Liccardo Lieu Lofgren Loudermilk Lucas Luna Luttrell Mace Mackenzie Magaziner Malliotakis Maloy Mann Mannion Massie Mast Matsui McBath McBride McClain McClain Delaney McClellan McClintock McCollum McCormick McDonald Rivet McDowell McGarvey McGovern McGuire McIver Meeks Mejia Menefee Menendez Meng Messmer Meuser Mfume Miller (OH) Miller (WV) Miller-Meeks Min Moolenaar Moore (AL) Moore (NC) Moore (UT) Moore (WI) Moore (WV) Moran Morelle Morrison Moskowitz Mrvan Mullin Murphy Nadler Neguse Newhouse Norcross Nunn (IA) Ocasio-Cortez Olszewski Omar Onder Owens Pallone Palmer Panetta Pappas Patronis Pelosi Perez Perry Peters Pettersen Pfluger Pingree Pocan Pou Pressley Quigley Ramirez Randall Raskin Reschenthaler Riley (NY) Rivas Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rose Ross Rouzer Roy Ruiz Rulli Rutherford Ryan Salazar Salinas Sanchez Scalise Scanlon Schakowsky Schmidt Schneider Scholten Schrier Schweikert Scott (VA) Scott, Austin Self Sessions Sewell Sherman Shreve Simon Simpson Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smucker Sorensen Soto Spartz Stansbury Stanton Stauber Stefanik Steil Steube Stevens Strickland Strong Stutzman Subramanyam Suozzi Sykes Takano Taylor Tenney Thanedar Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Thompson (PA) Tiffany Timmons Titus Tlaib Tokuda Tonko Torres (CA) Torres (NY) Trahan Tran Turner (OH) Underwood Valadao Van Drew Van Duyne Van Epps Van Orden Vargas Vasquez Veasey Vindman Wagner Walberg Walkinshaw Wasserman Schultz Waters Watson Coleman Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Westerman Whitesides Wied Williams (GA) Williams (TX) Wilson (FL) Wilson (SC) Wittman Womack Yakym Zinke
Edwards Norman
Craig Donalds Dunn (FL) Garamendi Harris (MD) Kaptur Lynch McCaul Miller (IL) Mills Moulton Neal Nehls Obernolte Ogles Smith (WA) Velazquez
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes remaining. 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.
The SPEAKER6:09 p.m.
Will the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Edwards) kindly appear in the well.
By its adoption of H. Res. 1498, the House has resolved that the House adopt the report of the Committee on Ethics dated July 22, 2026, in the matter of allegations relating to Representative Chuck Edwards; that Representative Edwards of North Carolina be censured; that Representative Edwards forthwith present himself in the well of the House for pronouncement of the censure; and that Representative Edwards be censured with the public reading of this resolution by the Speaker.
Moment of Silence to Honor Victims of Devastating Floods in Nepal and Tibet
Page H5410 · Official textMOMENT OF SILENCE TO HONOR VICTIMS OF DEVASTATING FLOODS IN NEPAL AND TIBET (Ms. MENG asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the victims of the devastating floods in Nepal and Tibet.
The scale of destruction is heartbreaking. This horrific tragedy has taken the lives of nearly 1,000 people, destroyed homes and livelihoods, and left families grieving the loss of their loved ones.
As search and rescue operations continue across the region, we pray for safe recovery of the more than 4,000 people still missing in the wake of this disaster, including an estimated 90 Americans.
We are committed to supporting our Asian-American communities across the United States, and especially those who live in my district in Queens, New York, as we navigate this profound tragedy. We stand with all those affected, both at home and abroad.
Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in a moment of silence to remember the victims, support the survivors, and honor those working tirelessly on recovery and rescue efforts.
Removal of Name of Member as Cosponsor of H.r. 10193
Page H5410 · Official textMr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Lee) be removed from H.R. 10193.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hurd of Colorado)
Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from West Virginia?
There was no objection.
Pray for Those Affected by the Ross Fire in Palo Pinto and Jack Counties
Page H5410 · Official text(Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and pray for those affected by the Ross fire in Palo Pinto and Jack Counties.
More than 85,000 acres have burned across north Texas impacting families, ranchers, and communities in my district. For many of these families, this fire has meant losing their livelihoods, livestock, and land that their families have owned for generations. Please join me in praying for those affected. My heart goes out to every Texan who is hurting during this difficult time.
I thank the firefighters, the first responders, the Forest Service, and everyone who has traveled from across Texas to help contain this wildfire. My office will continue to closely monitor the fires and stand ready to help.
Mr. Speaker, in the face of adversity, we have seen how great America is and how great Texas is.
In God we trust.
Remembering Joel Ireland
Page H5410 · Official text(Mrs. GRIJALVA asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a figurehead in Tucson and southern Arizona and a true Renaissance man, Joel Ireland.
Joel lived a consequential life, and Tucson is better off because he lived it there. He dedicated much of his life to public service, especially to the students, families, and educators of Tucson Unified School District. He served on the TUSD Governing Board for two decades, including as board president, and he was a tireless advocate for public education.
Joel's service went far beyond the school board. He was an attorney, an Episcopal priest, an advocate for historic and cultural preservation, and someone who believed deeply in standing up for people who needed a voice. He and his church even opened their doors to refugees from Central America during the 1980s.
I am proud that Joel and I shared the distinction of being the longest serving TUSD board members, a record that we both agreed would be pretty hard to break.
What I will remember most about Joel is the friend. He could always make me smile, gave great advice, and was always supportive. The last time we saw each other, we talked for hours, catching up on family, politics, and, of course, a little bit of gossip.
Mr. Speaker, to his amazing sons and his entire family, I send all my love. May Joel rest in power. I thank him for his life of service, friendship, and community. I am really going to miss him.
Recognizing Retirement of Darren Solomon
Pages H5410–H5411 · Official text(Mr. HARRIS of North Carolina asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Nothing is more noble and patriotic than serving our great company, and Darren Solomon exemplifies this spirit. After 33 years of public service, including 26 years as a Federal agent, he is officially retired.
As a certified fire investigator, Darren spent years uncovering the truth behind how fires occurred and helping provide answers to families during some of their most difficult moments. Beyond his own investigations, he dedicated himself to training fellow investigators and passing along his knowledge and expertise to the next generation.
Throughout his remarkable career, Darren has demonstrated unwavering patriotism, a deep love for his family, and a strong commitment to his community.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Darren for his service. It will never go unnoticed, and I am proud to have him as part of the great Eighth District of North Carolina and wish him a well-earned retirement.
Humanity Matters
Page H5411 · Official text(Ms. STEVENS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today after returning this morning from Israel convinced of something simple: We do not have to choose whose humanity matters.
I stood at the Nova Festival site where young people went to dance and 364 never came home.
I walked through Kibbutz Kfar Aza and saw the remains of bloodshed and attacks on peaceful people.
I sat across from people who survived captivity and somehow found the courage to tell us what it means to come home.
Their humanity matters.
I also met World Central Kitchen workers feeding Palestinian families in Gaza, and at Kerem Shalom, I saw the urgent work of getting food and medicine to innocent people trapped in a war they did not choose.
Their humanity matters too.
At Hadassah Medical Center, I saw perhaps the clearest reminder of all: Jewish and Arab doctors and nurses working side by side to save whoever comes through the door, because medicine does not ask who you choose whose life is worth saving. Every life is worth saving and neither should humanity.
We can mourn the victims of October 7 and demand dignity for innocent Palestinians. We can demand security for Israelis and humanitarian relief for Gaza.
When the world asks us to choose whose humanity matters, America should have the answer: Everyone's.
The SPEAKER pro tempore
The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Honoring Donna Besler-Tatem
Page H5411 · Official text(Ms. TENNEY asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in loving memory of Donna Besler-Tatem of Canandaigua, New York, a woman defined by faith, family, compassion, and service.
She led the Care Net Pregnancy Center of Canandaigua, helped to establish a Nowhere to Go program for people experiencing homelessness, supported suicide prevention efforts, and counseled individuals in the Ontario County Jail.
Donna lived with deep faith, love for her family, and compassion for others. She was always warm and welcoming, with a special gift of making people feel seen, heard, and valued.
After losing her beloved son Brennan to suicide, Donna transformed her grief into a mission of hope and compassion.
Family was precious to Donna. She was the loving mother of Ashley, Grant, Luke, and the late Brennan. She cherished her father; her sisters, including Diana, her sister and best friend; and her precious therapy dog, Piper.
In recent years, Donna devoted herself to caring for her beloved mother, who passed away just months ago.
Donna's life reminds us to be kinder, listen longer, judge less, and see the person first. Our Finger Lakes community is better because Donna was a part of it.
May God bless Donna, her family, and all who loved her.
Celebrating 901 Day
Page H5411 · Official text(Mr. COHEN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.)
Today, we celebrate 901 Day--a day to celebrate Memphis, Tennessee, and the people who make the city the great city that it is.
Mr. Speaker, 901 is more than an area code. It represents people who have never been afraid to stand up and demand better.
In 1968, AFSCME sanitation workers in Memphis marched for dignity, fair wages, and the basic right to be treated with respect. Dr. King came to Memphis to stand with those workers and tragically lost his life at that time.
This history reminds us that progress has never simply been given to Memphis. We have fought for it.
Now with the gerrymandered redistricting effort that took away the votes of Black voters and the large-scale ICE raid that was carried out this past weekend, we must fight harder.
Yes, today we celebrate the history, music, culture, and barbecue; but, most importantly, we celebrate the people, the generation of Memphians who refused to accept that things had to stay the way they were. We carry that spirit forward.
Happy 901 Day, Memphis.
Celebrating Constitution Day
Page H5411 · Official text(Mr. BIGGS of Arizona asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate Constitution Day coming up, commemorating the day our Constitution was signed in Philadelphia.
The Constitution was debated, written, and signed at a fragile moment in our Nation's history. Yet, through the wisdom of our Founders and their unwavering determination to secure liberty for future generations, they produced a document that has stood the test of time.
For nearly two-and-a-half centuries, the Constitution has safeguarded our freedoms, restrained the power of government, and served as an enduring example to people around the world who aspire to liberty and self-government.
This year, we celebrated the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. That remarkable milestone was only possible because generations of Americans have preserved the principles our Founders enshrined in the Constitution.
Mr. Speaker, I am profoundly grateful for those who went before, framed this extraordinary document, and for the liberty it has secured for generations of Americans. I hope it endures another 250 years.
Vermont Avenue Bus Rapid Transit
Page H5411 · Official text(Mr. GOMEZ asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, for far too many Angelenos, a bus ride to work, school, or home takes far too long.
Today, we are changing that. I am proud to announce $149 million in new Federal funding for L.A.'s busiest bus corridor, through the Vermont Avenue Bus Rapid Transit project.
This investment will serve over 20 million riders a year, cut travel time by 24 percent, and create thousands of good-paying jobs.
Angelenos deserve transit that gets them where they need to go, faster, safer, and on time. This investment is a major step forward to a more connected, affordable, and livable Los Angeles.
Celebrating the Retirement of Jason Lynn Potter
Pages H5411–H5412 · Official text(Mr. LaLOTA asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Jason Lynn Potter for 25 years of outstanding service to our Nation, both in uniform and as a civilian defense leader, and to congratulate him on retirement.
As a distinguished Navy veteran, Jason served aboard USS Cape St. George and USS Rushmore, and on a Joint Special Operations task force in the Philippines.
Following his military service, he served 10 years as a Senate professional staff member on the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Appropriations, providing oversight of naval shipbuilding and procurement.
Most recently, Jason served as Deputy Assistant Secretary for ship programs and Acting Assistant Secretary of the Navy for research, development, and acquisition, where he drove our fleet's modernization.
Mr. Speaker, I ask the House join me in congratulating Mr. Potter as he retires from Federal service. His profound patriotism, excellent leadership, and tireless work ethic leave an enduring legacy that has strengthened our national defense.
Failing Economic Policies
Page H5412 · Official text(Ms. MORRISON asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of Minnesotans who continue to be forced to pay for the President's failing economic policies.
President Trump's tariffs have cost Minnesotans alone $4.8 billion, and for what? For a debunked policy that is raising costs, damaging our economy, and alienating our allies? For taking the American people's money during a cost-of-living crisis to bankroll his corrupt, inexplicable war? Now he is escalating with Canada, of all places, one of our Nation's strongest allies and Minnesota's number one trade partner.
Why would we ever pick a fight with Canada? This will be a disaster for our small businesses, farmers, and every Minnesotan who is going to have to pay higher prices because of tariffs on everything from steel to kitchen appliances to hockey sticks.
We are not powerless, and it begs the question yet again: When will the Republican majority stand up to this President and represent the American people? If Trump won't end this trade war, Congress has to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore
Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President.
Recognizing Joe Cooper
Page H5412 · Official text(Mr. BURLISON asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Joe Cooper of Springfield, better known to a lot of folks as "Joe the Barber."
Joe has been cutting hair in Springfield since 1970 and has owned Cooper's Clippers since 1983. For five decades, Joe has cut hair. He has cut my hair. He has cut my father's hair. He has cut the hair of nearly everyone I know.
Joe has told jokes. He has told stories. They solve the problems of the world right there in the barber shop, and he has gotten to know generations of Springfield families.
He is also a huge Cardinals fan. Joe has accurately called the Dodgers the best team that money could buy. So if you are a Dodgers fan sitting in his chair, you may want to keep that to yourself until the haircut is finished.
Ask Joe what he will miss most, and his answer is simple: The people.
I congratulate Joe on 56 years behind the chair, and I thank him for being such a memorable part of the Springfield community. I wish him a joyous retirement, and go Cardinals.
Congratulating John Avila
Page H5412 · Official text(Mr. ESPAILLAT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate a young constituent, John Avila.
I first met John when he was working toward his bachelor's degree in the prelaw track of New York University. I met him outside of Our Lady of Angels Roman Catholic Church in my district, in the Bronx part of the district.
As a son of Luis and Ivonne Avila, two Ecuadorian immigrants who settled in the Bronx in the 1990s, he said that he noticed disparities around him and believed that a just legal system could help bridge the opportunity gap.
After graduating from NYU, he became a paralegal during COVID and enrolled in New York Law School. Through his hard work, he was able to graduate with his law degree in 2022. He now works at a personal injury firm.
He says that he looks forward to mentoring other aspiring lawyers, especially children of immigrants.
I congratulate John on all of his accomplishments. I know that his family is very proud of him.
Reverse the Tire Ban in California
Page H5412 · Official text(Mr. KILEY of California asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, today I am calling on Governor Newsom and the California Legislature to reverse the tire ban.
Yes, that is right. In case you didn't hear, California has banned tires, or at least 70 percent of them that don't meet performance standards, under a new mandate, the likes of which exists nowhere else in the country.
So what does this mean? Californians will now be forced to pay hundreds of dollars more by some estimates. Also, these tires are likely to wear out quicker, which means they are going to have to buy more expensive tires, and they are going to have to buy them more often. By the way, there is going to be more waste with the tires that get used, so it is probably bad for the environment, as well.
Mr. Speaker, Californians simply cannot afford this when the cost of living in our State is already higher than anywhere else in the country.
When the State tried to ban gas cars without any sort of vote of an elected representative or the voters, we got that reversed through bipartisan legislation here. I am hoping that we can find a way to reverse this, as well.
California needs to stop doing things to make life unaffordable and needs to stop banning things without the vote of any elected representative.
Recognizing Averill Park Golden Knights
Page H5412 · Official text(Mr. RILEY of New York asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, when the stakes are highest, that is when upstate New Yorkers' grit and toughness shows the most. Just look at our Averill Park Golden Knights, who brought home both the baseball and softball State championships this year.
The baseball team went into the championship game as underdogs facing an undefeated opponent on a 28-game winning streak, but Coach George Brooks told his team to keep it simple, stay focused, stay disciplined, and that is what they did.
Fred Bornn locked in and threw a complete game shutout, and Jeg Sansone drove in two runs to bring home the title.
Speaking of great coaching, Maria Roberts led the Averill Park softball team to the championship in her very first year on the job. The Golden Knights built an early lead off of Emily Aiossa's three-run homer, but the game was on the line at the top of the sixth with the bases loaded and nobody out and the opponent's top of the order coming up to bat.
Pitcher Abigail Colwill and the Golden Knights defense did what upstate New Yorkers do under pressure: they dug in and got to work. They retired three straight, the last of which was an amazing catch by center fielder Mady Charron.
I congratulate the Averill Park Golden Knights. We are so proud of them, and I am honored to enter their roster into the Congressional Record.
Recognizing Community Housing Improvement Program
Pages H5412–H5413 · Official text(Mr. GALLAGHER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Community Housing Improvement Program, or CHIP for short, a nonprofit that is helping working families achieve the American Dream of homeownership across the north State.
I recently visited the community of Orland Park Estates housing project in Glenn County, where eight families received keys to homes they helped build with their own hands.
These families put in the work. Sacramento should try doing the same. Instead, Governor Gavin Newsom and Democratic politicians have passed costly mandates and excessive fees that keep driving up the price of building a home. It is now a median price of $900,000. California has an affordability crisis because Sacramento keeps making everything less affordable.
As a member of the Congressional Real Estate Caucus and a member of the majority, I have been able to support the More Homes on the Market Act, the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, and the Uplifting First-Time Homebuyers Act.
Together, these bills tackle the housing crisis and make homeownership more affordable for working families, just like those eight families in Orland who now have keys to a new home.
CHIP proves that the American Dream is still alive in the north State. These families worked hard for their homes. They earned their keys. The least Sacramento can do is stop making those dreams more expensive.
Honoring Humberto Oriel Cardenas
Page H5413 · Official text(Ms. TLAIB asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.)
Mr. Speaker, Humberto Oriel Cardenas was a southwest Detroit icon, and it is with a heavy heart that we say good-bye.
Beto, as we lovingly called him, dedicated his life to our community in southwest Detroit. He loved our neighborhood and created a lasting legacy.
Beto started a long-running tradition of showing up to the Cinco de Mayo parade, which I remember attending as a young girl growing up in southwest Detroit.
To this day, the parade that he helped found celebrates Mexican community and heritage. Beto showed us the beauty in our diversity through his love for culture and community.
He helped found La Vida magazine that amplified stories about Detroit's Hispanic community. He also founded the Mexican-American Association of Detroit, which brought together several Mexican musical and dance groups.
He was a proud Army veteran, involved in our church, and loved by his family and our community. We will continue to honor his legacy by remembering that our strength is in our diversity.
Liberty and Justice for All
Pages H5413–H5418 · Official text(Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 3, 2025, Mrs. Torres of California was recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.)
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all speakers have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous materials on the subject of this Special Order hour.
The SPEAKER pro tempore
Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to shine the light on a growing problem in Federal detention facilities, federally owned and privately supervised. Every single day, we stand in this Chamber, look at that flag, and pledge "with liberty and justice for all."
Right now, those words are a hollow lie. Today, we learned that Edwin Jovanny Lopez-Cornejo, a 41-year-old Salvadoran man, died after a medical emergency at Delaney Hall in New Jersey. His family says he had complained about not receiving his medications. The day before he died, he told his mother he had lost feeling in his face and arm. Now, his family is left demanding answers.
Edwin is not alone. Under this administration, immigration enforcement isn't just broken. It is lethal. We are witnessing a systematic deadly abuse of power by DHS, ICE, and Border Patrol. It is happening with complete arrogant impunity. The American public sees exactly what is happening, and they have rejected it so strongly that some have even lost their lives standing up against it: Renee Good and Alex Pretti, to name just two.
This chaos is not accidental. It is a direct result of a policy that prioritizes arbitrary numbers over public safety. Under an aggressive quota demanding 2,000 arrests a day, raids have surged by 600 percent. In a single month, Federal agents swept up 800 people every single day who have had zero criminal records, relying on broad profiling, street roundups, and community checkpoints.
To hold this wave of arrests, detention populations have surged by 140 percent, cramming over 60,000 human beings into overcrowded facilities, where basic standards of health, safety, and human dignity have broken down.
In my home State of California, at the Adelanto facility, Carlitos Ricardo Parias, a man from Los Angeles held for months, filmed the filthy water detainees were forced to drink. It was crawling with live wormlike parasites in their potable water, just weeks after a Federal judge ordered the facility to fix those conditions. That isn't negligence. That is cruelty by design.
When you treat human beings in an intentionally dangerous manner and deprive them of food that is not rotten and potable water, they die. Mr. Speaker, 76 lives have ended in ICE custody or immediately after release since January 2025. That is the highest death toll of any administration in its first 2 years in more than two decades. The mortality rate in ICE detention has exploded fourfold.
What is the administration's response? To limit their own oversight visits, cutting them in half, from twice a year to once a year, and in some cases to once every 2 years.
They have purchased privately contracted facilities to prevent State and local oversight. They think that changing the paperwork will wipe the blood off their hands. We all know that it will not.
I am the mother of a law enforcement officer. I know what it means to wear a badge. I know the sacrifice required to protect a community. Let me be crystal clear: Protect the badge. Do not protect the bad behavior.
When you excuse abuse, when you shield rogue agents, when you fail to hold Federal officers to the same basic standards as a basic peace officer in any city across the country, you destroy public trust and disgrace every honest officer trying to do his or her best to protect their community.
I know the terror of this abuse personally. When we tried to conduct oversight, ICE responded by shooting CS gas and then lied about it. A vehicle matching an ICE van once tried to run me off the freeway, right in my district. So when I ask what an innocent family is supposed to do when an unmarked vehicle chases them down a highway; I am not asking simply to ask a question. I am exposing a dangerous, lawless reality.
We cannot look away. Congress cannot remain silent while the executive branch operates a deadly machine of abuse, intimidation, military grade weapons, and imprisonment.
When Members of Congress or Senators try to reduce deaths in custody and conduct oversight, they should never be met with lethal force. Liberty and justice for all does not end at the gates of a detention center. It does not disappear on a dark highway.
These 76 people mean something. They are our neighbors. They are our friends. They are our relatives.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Espaillat), chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.
Adriano Espaillat (D-NY)6:40 p.m.
Thank you, Congresswoman Torres, for your leadership on this issue and convening us here tonight.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to forcefully speak against the Trump administration's horrific ICE abuses and to demand accountability for the deaths of 76 individuals that have died at the hands of DHS since the start of 2025. Whether in ICE detention or due to violence in our street, DHS is responsible for the deaths of 35 individuals--and one more today--this year.
The American public is outraged at the brutality of ICE, and they demand accountability. We demand accountability. For that reason, Members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus went to court in order to access those detention centers so that we could exercise our oversight duties and make sure that the conditions are right and humane.
According to polls, 63 percent of Americans, both Democrats and Republicans, disapprove of the way ICE is enforcing immigration laws.
We all know "ICE is out of control"; "ICE estan fuera de control."
In July, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Congresswoman Sylvia Garcia, and Homeland Security Democrats held an oversight forum in Houston after the killing of Lorenzo Salgado Araujo.
Like Lorenzo's family, dozens of families across the country continue to mourn the unjust death of their loved ones. We know these deaths could have been prevented. That is why the Hispanic Caucus has continued to push for guardrails in all ICE funding, requiring for ICE agents to identify themselves, no masks during enforcement, body cameras recording all enforcement actions, limits on firearms used in civil immigration operations, and protections of sensitive locations, and many more.
In less than a year, Republicans have given nearly a quarter of a trillion dollars to immigration enforcement without any guardrails. Not one. The CHC will continue to demand reforms and accountability.
Norma J. Torres (D-CA)6:40 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Garcia).
Sylvia R. Garcia (D-TX)6:40 p.m.
Thank you to the gentlewoman from California for the time.
Mr. Speaker, I am here to speak about a killing in my district. On July 7, an ICE agent shot and killed Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, an unarmed man with no criminal record, who was not even the target of their investigation.
He was headed to a construction job when ICE aggressively pursued his van in an unmarked vehicle. No sirens, no body cameras, no dash cameras, just two unmarked cars following him.
Then, an ICE agent fired through the open passenger's side window where Mr. Lorenzo's brother was sitting and killed him.
Afterward came the same disgraceful playbook we saw after the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis. They claim Lorenzo, who was the driver, had weaponized his vehicle and that an agent had acted in self-defense.
I spoke directly with two of the men inside that van. They told me ICE never identified themselves, never gave commands, and no agent was ever in front of the van.
Then, in an added layer of cruelty, DHS, the Department of Homeland Security, released Mr. Salgado's name publicly before notifying his family.
I was at the hospital when his son had to learn, through Facebook, that his father was dead. It was sickening. It was disheartening. It was despicable.
Days later, DHS tried to smear Lorenzo even further by suggesting that drugs had been found in the van. It was not drugs. It was a homemade electrolyte mix workers use to survive the Texas heat.
This is an outrageous abuse of government power. ICE pursued the wrong van and killed an unarmed man who wasn't their target and had no criminal record, and now we are expected to trust DHS to investigate itself. That is laughable. Absolutely not. No way. We need a real, independent investigation. We need all evidence released, and we need real accountability.
We also need the truth about what happened to Mr. Salgado. His family deserves the truth. The public deserves accountability. We need justice for Mr. Salgado, and we need justice for all those killed at the hands of ICE or those in the custody of ICE.
We demand accountability, and as the gentlewoman has said, we need real justice for all.
Norma J. Torres (D-CA)6:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Castro).
Joaquin Castro (D-TX)6:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today because we have all witnessed the brutality of ICE on the streets of America, and Members of Congress have witnessed that brutality behind the closed walls of detention centers across our Nation.
ICE has become a rogue, abusive agency that should be disbanded. ICE agents are roving across our communities with impunity, killing people in cold blood, including U.S. citizens, while Donald Trump's cronies profit.
These ICE agents have not gone rogue alone. The entire agency has gone rogue under the direction of Donald Trump and Stephen Miller. Masked ICE agents in unmarked cars are working with Trump allies, like Texas Governor Greg Abbott, to meet quotas that fuel the President's mass deportation campaign.
Every single day they are stopping, profiling hardworking Brown men on their way to construction jobs in the early morning, families on their way to school, going to pick up their kids, and H-E-B workers, grocery store workers in Texas getting off their shifts at warehouses and stores at night.
Let us remember the names of those whom ICE has murdered. The first one was a San Antonian, Ruben Ray Martinez. There was another Texan, Lorenzo Salgado Araujo of Houston. Renee Good, Alex Pretti, and Johan Sebastian Duran Guerrero--these folks were victims of the ICE murders.
In Texas alone, over a dozen people have died in ICE detention. These deaths are not accidents of an overwhelmed system. They are the results of this administration engineering a rogue agency to profit at the expense of vulnerable people. We must shut down places like the Dilley detention center, a trailer prison, where children as young as 2 months old are in prison.
For each child who is thrown in there, for each pregnant woman thrown into Dilley, there is an American company, CoreCivic, with American investors who make more money for each child, each woman, and each person who is in prison.
We have allowed for the commodification of child imprisonment in our United States of America under President Donald Trump. This must change. ICE should be disbanded. It has gone rogue, and we must shut down the Dilley detention center.
Norma J. Torres (D-CA)6:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Imagine being a 16-year-old boy and knowing that you will only get 10 minutes to talk to your father every 2 weeks. That is the reality for one teenager detained at the ICE facility in Dilley, Texas. He has been detained for more than 4 months and has lost 10 pounds. He has described living in rooms with cockroaches, spiders, and mosquitoes. This is a 16-year-old child.
What gets me most is what those 10 minutes with his father must be like. Instead of calling his dad to talk about school, his friends, or what he wants to do with his life, he is watching the clock, knowing that when those 10 minutes are over, he will have to wait another 2 weeks just to hear his father's voice.
He is not alone. At least 60 children at this facility have been held for more than 100 days despite a court order limiting their detention to 20 days. These are children in prison. Think about what those months mean to a child. They are months away from their parents, months away from their classrooms, and months of their childhood stolen by this administration.
That is why these detention facilities matter when we talk about death in ICE and CBP custody. The harm does not begin when someone dies. It begins when we decide that being in government custody means that you can be separated from your family, denied basic dignity, and treated as though your life does not matter.
These are children. Our government has a responsibility to protect them, and it should never be the reason that they lose their childhood.
I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez).
Robert Menendez (D-NJ)6:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, last year, I stood outside Delaney Hall in Newark, New Jersey, and made the dire observation that no one is safe in Trump's America. Since then, three people that we know of have died after medical emergencies at Delaney Hall, including Edwin Lopez-Cornejo, who leaves behind his 12-year-old U.S. citizen daughter.
In private detention centers across the country, ICE and their private partners, like The GEO Group, are continuing down this dangerous path without any regard to the human cost of their actions.
In my over 20 visits to Delaney Hall, I have seen a man with a debilitating condition refused a wheelchair for weeks, and when finally given one, was forced to stay in medical isolation for months; a woman who suffered a miscarriage and was told she had a psychological pregnancy; requests for medication and post-op care that go unanswered. These are not mistakes or oversights. This is a deliberate choice by this administration to inflict pain and suffering because their cruelty knows no bounds.
This is happening across the country. Thirty-one people died in ICE detention last year, the most in more than 20 years. This year, 24 more people have lost their lives.
However, ICE isn't just killing people in detention. They are shooting American citizens like Renee Good and Alex Pretti in broad daylight. This should outrage every American.
Yet here, in this Chamber, what has been the response of our Republican colleagues? It has been silence.
While they carry their Bibles to church on Sunday, they carry the word of Donald Trump and Stephen Miller every other day of the week, and they are responsible for what is happening across our country.
Instead of finding their voice to speak out against this administration, they are trying to suppress and silence the voices of Americans, whether by limiting their ability to vote by mail or limiting the number of polling locations in Texas, because Republicans know they have failed. They have failed their constituents. They have failed their country, and they know Americans are angry, as I am angry.
We will end this national nightmare with or without them. We will protect our communities. We will hold accountable everyone who is responsible for the lawlessness, pain, and terror that this administration has inflicted on all of our communities, and we will remember everyone here who stayed silent in this moment.
Norma J. Torres (D-CA)7:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Clarke).
Yvette D. Clarke (D-NY)7:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on this day in righteous indignation and vehement opposition to the barbaric policing, detention, and, indeed, even murder of immigrants at the hands of the Department of Homeland Security, ICE, and CBP, on the orders of Donald Trump.
With immunity granted not by the law, but by lawlessness, President Trump's untrained, unrestrained, and utterly amoral agents within ICE and CBP are perpetrating a crusade of cruelty with very few parallels in our history.
It has struck our neighbors, taken our loved ones from their homes, and left dozens of decent people on our streets and those illegally detained dead with no crimes committed, but a belief in an American Dream that no longer exists and has become a living nightmare.
To my GOP colleagues, tell me this: In what moral, God-fearing nation would the penalty for seeking a better life be a brutal death? In what modern country would people fleeing injustice and inhumanity find nothing but more injustice and more inhumanity?
The Statue of Liberty begs to give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free. Those words call out to the world's most vulnerable people so America might be their survival and not their death.
It is time for this terrible experiment in Trumpism to end and, in turn, to secure a new immigration system centered on compassion, not cruelty, not dehumanization, and not death; entrusted to competent officers, not kidnapping, not killer thugs; and bent toward justice, not broken by Donald Trump.
Norma J. Torres (D-CA)7:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I want you to think about what it means to dial 911. You call 911 when you are scared, when you are in danger, or when you need help and you need that help immediately. I know this because for 17\1/2\ years I was that voice on the other side, answering 911 calls, people's calls for help.
Imagine, Mr. Speaker, having to make that call from inside a Federal detention center. That is what happened at Camp East Montana in El Paso, Texas, where ProPublica reviewed more than 160 emergency calls from inside the facility. People were calling 911 because they were sick, in pain, or desperately needed medical help from a place where the United States Government was responsible for keeping them safe but was denying them the help that they needed.
Three men died in just 6 weeks. That is why we are here today. People like Geraldo Lunas Campos told the staff at this location that he needed help, and his cries were ignored. He is not just another statistic, and neither are the other people who have died in ICE and CBP custody. They are fathers, sons, brothers, friends, and people with families waiting for them to come home.
When the government takes away someone else's freedom, it takes on the responsibility for that person's life. Mr. Speaker, you cannot lock someone behind a government door, ignore their cries for help, feed them rotten food and bad water, and then act surprised when someone dies.
These deaths deserve answers. They deserve accountability. The families who lost someone in government custody deserve to know why their loved one died and why they did not come home.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), who is soon to be Chairman Pallone.
Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ)7:00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to thank Congresswoman Norma Torres for leading this important Special Order here tonight.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to condemn a dangerous and unaccountable immigration enforcement system that is harming the very communities our government is supposed to protect.
I want to focus particularly on the problems that we have and the failure of these facilities to provide basic medical services. I have seen the consequences firsthand during my visit to Delaney Hall, or my several visits, I should say, to Delaney Hall in Newark, New Jersey. The facility has inadequate medical facilities. The medical clinic is too small and lacks adequate staff.
The times I visited, there were maybe 600 or 700 people. The capacity is 1,200. There was no way that clinic could take care of and do the proper thing for the people who were detained.
Detainees there told me that often they waited 1 week or more to access the medical clinic. They were unable to get necessary care and medications. Some required surgery that was long delayed.
In my opinion, detention should never be a death sentence, but that is what we are seeing at Delaney Hall and the other detention facilities around the country.
Three people connected to Delaney Hall have now died in less than 1 year: Jean Wilson Brutus, Edwin Lopez-Cornejo, and Jose Chajon-Raxon. We have to remember their names. Their deaths demand answers about the conditions at Delaney Hall and whether ICE and its contractors protected people in their custody.
Delaney Hall is a privately run detention facility. The operator profits from the denial of medical care. I led 87 House Democrats in demanding answers from DHS and ICE about these deaths and failures of medical care throughout the detention system in the United States.
Mr. Speaker, these detention facilities are required by Federal law to provide certain medical services, and I assure you they are not doing so. DHS, ICE, and CBP must be subject to meaningful oversight and held accountable when people suffer or die under their care. The Trump administration in June canceled a rule that required reporting of deaths even after a detainee was released from a detention facility and an investigation within 30 days.
There are probably a lot more deaths than those we have been talking about tonight that are not reported by ICE since this rule was eliminated. Enforcing our immigration laws is no excuse for violating constitutional rights, putting human lives at risk, or essentially killing people. Those who have died in government custody deserve more than silence. Their lives matter, and their families deserve answers and accountability.
Norma J. Torres (D-CA)7:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Sanchez).
Linda T. Sanchez (D-CA)7:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, the Trump administration has been terrorizing our communities with ICE for nearly 2 years, and people are dying because of it.
We all watched in horror when two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis were shot and killed in the street in broad daylight, then more shootings happened in Maine and Texas. People were shot and killed who weren't even the target of the enforcement action. Everyone who claims to support civil liberties should be alarmed by these shootings.
These deaths are only part of this administration's cruelty. Since Trump took office, more than 50 people have died while in DHS custody, and that number is probably even higher. That rate is double the rate of previous years. The death toll keeps rising because this administration refuses to recognize the humanity of those in its custody.
I have traveled to the Adelanto ICE facility in California, which has been linked to at least two of those deaths. Detained immigrants there lacked basic necessities, like clean drinking water and medical care. It was so bad that a Federal judge had to order the Department of Homeland Security to provide the basic human necessities. That is how depraved this has become. This is what happens when an administration demonizes immigrants and treats them as though they are less than human.
Congress must say enough is enough, stop the mass deportation, and stop the mass detention. Everyone deserves dignity, and everyone, regardless of their immigration status, deserves basic care and the due process that is required by our Constitution.
Mr. Speaker, we must all raise our voices to tell this administration enough is enough.
Norma J. Torres (D-CA)7:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Chu).
Judy Chu (D-CA)7:10 p.m.
Under Donald Trump's watch, 56 people have died in ICE custody since January, roughly one person every 11 days. Countless more individuals have suffered inside U.S. detention, denied medical care, served rotten food and dirty water, and held in filthy conditions that breed illness.
For the past 10 years, I have witnessed conditions firsthand at Adelanto ICE Processing Center, one of the deadliest immigration detention facilities in the country. During Trump's second term alone, five people have died, four while in custody and one shortly after being released: Gabriel Garcia-Aviles, Ismael Ayala-Uribe, Alberto Gutierrez-Reyes, Irvin Cruz Nape, and Jose Ramos-Solano. These were fathers, grandfathers, and community members whose lives were needlessly and painfully cut short.
In June, I met directly with Adelanto detainees on a hunger strike. They told me how they use their own underwear to filter worms out of their drinking water, how the food they have been given is rotten or raw, and how they have watched fellow detainees suffer and ultimately die from medical emergencies when all ICE offered them was ibuprofen.
These conditions are so severe that, in July, a Federal judge ruled that ICE must immediately overhaul the living conditions in Adelanto.
This is not an accident. It is a result of a system that Republicans in Congress continue to fund without demanding a single reform. They have handed ICE billions of dollars with no accountability for the deaths, abuse, or suffering happening on their watch.
Americans don't want this. They want ICE out of their communities. They want Congress to hold this agency accountable for the lives lost and the lives still at risk inside facilities like Adelanto.
Norma J. Torres (D-CA)7:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Jayapal).
Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)7:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Congresswoman Torres and the CHC, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, for their leadership on this issue.
As ICE detains record numbers of people in overcrowded, unsanitary immigration prisons, 56 people have died under Donald Trump's administration, a 22-year high.
Let's be very clear: It is all about the money. Two for-profit corporations, GEO Group and CoreCivic, operate the majority of detention beds. Together, they raked in $1.4 billion in quarterly revenue last spring. Every single night, U.S. taxpayers are paying $150 to $350 per person, per night to detain over 65,000 people.
The Trump administration has rolled back detention standards and gutted oversight, allowing corporations to cut corners and maximize profits.
GEO and CoreCivic donated nearly $2.8 million to Donald Trump's 2024 election. They are paying the administration to boost their profits at taxpayer expense.
Meanwhile, who is Trump detaining? By ICE's own statistics, 70 percent have no criminal record. Increasingly, these are people that ICE would never have detained before: pregnant women, people with serious medical conditions, parents, people with green cards, and people showing up to their immigration appointments.
As ranking member of the Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement Subcommittee, I am notified of every single death that happens in detention. Behind every single one is a name.
Edwin Lopez-Cornejo died at GEO Group's Delaney Hall. He was a 41-year-old father of a 12-year-old U.S. citizen. ICE refused to give him his diabetes medication. His brother said he couldn't get Tylenol, let alone proper care.
Nenko Gantchev died under similar circumstances at another GEO facility. His health seriously deteriorated in detention as ICE reportedly provided no accommodation for his diabetes.
The coroner declared one death a homicide--Geraldo Lunas Campos, a 55-year-old father of four.
Two weeks ago, I led a congressional delegation to inspect CoreCivic's Stewart Detention Center. We met a young man who fled the war in Yemen and has been detained for 24 months. He has no criminal record. Just that morning, ICE pulled his tooth. Blood was still pooling in his mouth as he met with us.
We met a 72-year-old man whose U.S.-citizen wife is in end-stage renal failure. ICE picked him up at his green card appointment. He has no criminal record and just wants to care for his wife.
We met a woman who can no longer conceive because she was subjected to a medical procedure without her consent in ICE custody. She is having healthcare issues, but she is terrified to seek care again from ICE. Meanwhile, her teenage daughter is suffering alone. We are creating generational trauma.
In my district, ICE arrests are at an all-time high. GEO refuses to obey Washington State law or even allow health inspectors in.
This has never been about the so-called worst of the worst. It has always been about the right wing's racist, fascist vision of ridding America of immigrants.
Mr. Speaker, Americans are rejecting this. When I am chair of the Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement Subcommittee come January, I intend to hold these people accountable for the cruelty and corruption and pass comprehensive, humane immigration reform.
Norma J. Torres (D-CA)7:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Vermont (Ms. Balint).
Becca Balint (D-VT)7:10 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Representatives Torres and Jayapal for their leadership. I am very happy to speak here tonight on an issue that is so important to so many Americans.
I want to talk about power tonight, Mr. Speaker. Before I came to Congress, I was a public school teacher. I can tell you, when you are a teacher, you have a lot of power over the young people in your classroom. You set the rules. You decide when to speak and when to listen. You can make students feel seen or feel small. I learned very quickly that the more power that you have over someone, the greater responsibility you have to them.
This is the lesson that this administration hasn't learned. Right now, we are watching our government exercise enormous power over people who have almost none, and they are doing it carelessly, with deadly consequences. Since President Trump took office, 56 people have died in ICE custody.
This is a failure beyond measure. Every one of those people was a human being: someone's mother, someone's father, someone's child, someone who others had been waiting to come home, our friends, our neighbors, our family.
When a government, our government, takes someone into custody, it is making a commitment. It is a commitment that while you are in our care, we are responsible for you. If you are sick, we have a responsibility to give you access to healthcare. If something goes terribly wrong, we have a responsibility to tell your family the truth about what happened quickly and transparently.
There is no immigration status that changes that or makes a human being disposable or expendable. In a democracy, dignity and due process are not optional. There is a lot of talk in this Chamber all the time about who belongs in this country, but tonight I will ask you this: What do we owe the people whose lives we have put in our hands?
We owe them due process. We owe them care. We owe them dignity. We owe their families the truth. When we fail them, we owe them accountability.
In this room, we have a responsibility, too. We must stop funding a lawless and chaotic immigration enforcement system that has treated human lives as expendable. We have to use our power.
Every government official who has abused their power and contributed to this horrific death toll must be held accountable.
Norma J. Torres (D-CA)7:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Kennedy).
Timothy M. Kennedy (D-NY)7:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and Congresswoman Norma Torres for convening today's critically important Special Order hour.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remember those whose lives have been cut short at the hands of Trump's out-of-control Department of Homeland Security and to demand accountability for the families who have been left shattered.
In January of this year, the killing of Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretti by DHS personnel forever changed how Americans view this department.
A month later, the DHS culture of cruelty rocked our community in Buffalo, New York, the City of Good Neighbors. Nurul Amin Shah Alam was a 56-year-old Rohingya refugee who came to our country legally after fleeing persecution and violence, seeking safety for himself and his family. He was nearly blind and spoke very little English. He couldn't read, write, or navigate on his own.
On February 19, DHS personnel abandoned him, alone, miles from his home outside of a closed coffee shop in the cold, dead of winter. Neither his family nor his attorney were notified of his release. There was no coordinated hand off and no plan to protect a vulnerable man. Five days later, he was found dead. His death was ruled a homicide.
Mr. Shah Alam should be alive today, which is why I introduced the DHS Release Transparency Act to prevent tragedies like this. No family should ever have to wonder if their loved one is safe after being released from government custody.
DHS was created in the aftermath of 9/11 for one fundamental purpose: to keep the American people safe. Under President Trump, DHS has become synonymous with fear, deadly force, cruelty, and utter disregard for human decency.
Our government has a moral obligation to protect human rights, to live up to our unique role as a beacon of democracy. The Constitution does not permit government officials to act with impunity, to use violence without accountability, or to treat human life as disposable. Trump has turned government into a weapon, incited violence in our communities, and made fear and dehumanization the defining features of his immigration policy. When those in power normalize brutality, they denigrate the sacrifices that have been made for our freedom. When they abuse people in their custody, they shatter the bonds of the social contract that ties us together. When they refuse to answer for the harm they cause, they erode the core promise at the heart of the American experiment, that every person is entitled to dignity, due process, and equal justice under the law.
Under Democratic leadership, this body will hold DHS accountable and uphold the oath that we all take to the Nation and to the Constitution.
Norma J. Torres (D-CA)7:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Liccardo).
Sam T. Liccardo (D-CA)7:20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Torres for her leadership.
Mr. Speaker, a graveyard of living people, is how Lorenzo described Camp East Montana, the ICE detention facility where guards denied him sunlight and fresh air for a full month.
Lorenzo persevered. Mr. Speaker, 52 others would never feel the sun upon their face again. Fifty-two people have died in ICE custody since Donald Trump took office. They were mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters, daughters and sons, every one someone's child. Every one a child of God. Someone loves us. Someone mourns us. When we die, grief takes part of them with us.
My heart aches for the families who never got the chance to say good-bye, who never held their loved one's hand before they died alone behind barbed wire and concrete.
I have undocumented neighbors in San Jose who have lived there for more than two decades. They have built lives there. They have built families there. Some coach for youth sports teams and others volunteer at their church. Several have built businesses, employing U.S. citizens. All have built our community.
This is not the first time our country has put the most ambitious of our Dreamers and doers behind bars. In 1942, my father came home telling my grandfather that his friend was missing from their weekly pick-up baseball game. It turned out his friend, Norm, had been taken with his family from their home on 5th Street in San Jose and incarcerated in Heart Mountain, Wyoming. Norm was Japanese American. That young boy returned to San Jose and grew up.
Decades later, I had the honor of working for him as his intern. His name is Norm Mineta, and he served in this Congress for two decades.
The incarceration of 120,000 Japanese Americans left an indelible stain on our country. The last of those who endured it still walk among us, and the ghosts of those who did not endure it still haunt our national conscience.
History will harshly judge us also for the abusive and inhuman treatment of our undocumented neighbors. Too many of us have declined to speak out, or perhaps only when ICE's chaotic cruelty takes the life of an American citizen as in Minneapolis. Yet the deaths in our DHS detention centers continue unabated, accompanied only by the incriminating silence of the quietly complicit.
I am proud that in my own Bay Area region: San Mateo County, the city of San Jose, Santa Clara County, and Napa County have all taken steps to obstruct the construction of new detention centers in our communities. We are helping them and others with a toolkit that includes a model ordinance, but local leaders should never have to fight this battle alone.
Congress must act. We must defend human dignity. We must uphold our Constitution, and we must stop digging graveyards for the living.
Norma J. Torres (D-CA)7:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Mrs. Grijalva).
Adelita S. Grijalva (D-AZ)7:30 p.m.
I thank Representative Torres and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus for hosting this Special Order hour.
In Arizona, we have seen firsthand why congressional oversight of our immigration detention systems matter. We have also been witness to inhumane conditions and violent attacks by ICE when trying to detain people on our streets and rip people from their cars or their homes.
Earlier this year, Emmanuel Damas, a Haitian asylum seeker, died after being held in ICE custody at the Florence detention facility in Arizona.
The Maricopa County Medical Examiner found that Mr. Damas' death stemmed from a severe infection connected to a serious dental disease. A toothache should never become a death sentence, not in Federal custody, not in Arizona, not anywhere in the United States, especially when someone is in the custody of the United States Government and completely dependent on that government for access to medical care.
Mr. Damas' death raises serious concerns that remain unanswered. Why did he not have timely medical treatment? Why were his requests for care ignored? How did a treatable condition progress into a fatal medical emergency while he was in Federal custody?
In March, my colleagues and I formally requested Mr. Damas' medical records and information about his request for treatment and a full accounting of the circumstances leading to his death.
ICE responded in May, but once again failed to provide any real answers. ICE's response said doctors believed Mr. Damas was suffering from septic shock caused by pneumonia; but the medical examiner found his death stemmed from severe infection connected to a serious dental infection.
When the Federal Government detains someone, it assumes responsibility for that person's health, safety, and well-being. Congress has a responsibility to make sure our government is meeting that obligation.
Unfortunately, what happened to Mr. Damas is not isolated. There have been 56 people who have died in ICE detention since Trump took office last year.
In Arizona and across the country, we continue to see reports of delayed medical treatment, inadequate care, deaths in custody, due process failures, and serious questions about conditions inside ICE and CBP facilities.
Families deserve answers. Congress deserves the information necessary to conduct meaningful oversight. When failures occur, there must be accountability.
Mr. Damas came to this country seeking asylum. While in Federal custody, he deserved humane treatment and appropriate medical care. His family deserves answers.
We need to continue demanding that DHS and ICE provide records and information necessary to fully understand what happened in Florence to Mr. Damas and what they are doing to make sure it never happens again.
We demand accountability. We demand justice for the individuals who have died and answers for the families and communities mourning their loss.
Every day that passes, more people will die, more people will forever be scarred from their time in detention, and more families will be ripped apart.
Remembrance is important, but remembrance without accountability is not enough.
Norma J. Torres (D-CA)7:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, inside an ICE detention center in Los Fresnos, Texas, people detained by our government went on hunger strikes to protest the conditions that they are being held in. Instead of asking why people in their custody were desperate enough to stop eating, ICE went to court for permission to force feed them.
Guards restrain hunger strikers while medical staff inserted feeding tubes through their noses and into their stomachs. One asylum seeker was subject to forced feeding for nearly 8 months.
Think about that. A person is saying: I am so desperate about the conditions you are holding me in that I am willing to stop eating. The government's response is: We are not going to address why you are protesting. We are going to physically stop you from protesting.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Dean).
Madeleine Dean (D-PA)7:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the Representative holding this Special Order hour.
Mr. Speaker, I rise with my colleagues to mark a grim milestone: 35 people died in ICE detention custody last year, the deadliest year in more than two decades. This year, there have been 24, with one more death reported just this afternoon.
Ordinarily, this should spark some form of reckoning or investigation. Not under this administration. The President continues to flood American cities with thuggish ICE and CBP agents, acting as though the law does not apply to them, arresting more and more people who have committed few or no crimes.
Since President Trump returned to office, ICE has arrested more than half a million people, 40 percent of whom do not have a criminal record.
I have seen this firsthand, how this administration treats people in custody. I have seen the overcrowded holding facilities at Dilley, Texas--99 children without a toy or anything to play with. I have spoken to people who have been denied critical medications and have been denied legal aid. I saw a precious child whose mouth was so infected, it had turned green.
Texas is not alone. In New York, The Washington Post detailed dozens of detainees held for days in rooms that usually hold no more than 12 for hours and hours.
People are forced to sleep sitting up, to use bathrooms without any privacy, and others with serious health conditions, including tuberculosis, an ovarian cyst, and kidney failure, lacking proper care.
In my home State of Pennsylvania, Mr. Speaker, at the Moshannon Valley Processing Center, a 32-year-old detainee died allegedly of suicide just 5 days after entering the ICE facility. His name is Chaofeng Ge, a Chinese national. His family wants answers.
In February of last year, Daphy Michel, a 31-year-old woman suffering from untreated severe mental illness, with a significant language barrier, was dropped off by ICE at a bus stop in freezing winter temperatures. She was wearing summer clothes, and she froze to death.
This is under this administration.
Most recently, in the Philadelphia detention camp, Parady La, a 46-year-old citizen of Cambodia, died in ICE custody on January 9 while suffering from withdrawal, which he and his family detailed.
In these conditions, conditions of deliberate neglect, deaths are not accidental. They are inevitable.
Martin Luther King warned, and others too, that justice delayed is justice denied.
For those who have died in ICE custody, waiting for their day in court, there can never be justice. For their families, there can never be peace. For our Nation, it is a failure for which we can never overcome.
This is not a matter of just humanity and ethics. It is about who we are as Americans. Not here. Not in this America.
I urge the administration to stop this illegal set of detentions and not let people pay with their liberty and their lives.
Norma J. Torres (D-CA)7:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, I close by bringing this back to my communities, the Inland Empire, because this is not happening somewhere far away.
Since September of last year, four people have died while detained at Adelanto facility.
On February 23 of this year, Jose Guadalupe Ramos-Solano died in ICE custody. He was a 52-year-old man. He had lived in this country for 28 years. He was a husband, a father, and his family is from Los Angeles. ICE arrested him and took him to the Adelanto facility, a facility run by the GEO Group, a private prison company. One month later, on March 25, he was dead.
ICE says staff found him unconscious and unresponsive in his bunk and that they responded immediately. The men detained alongside him tell a much different story. They said he had been overheating. They said that he could not breathe. They said he pulled off his shirt because he felt like he was suffocating, and they said they tried to get help and that no one came until he was unconscious.
Mr. Speaker, when ICE announced his death, the headline on the press release read: "Criminal illegal alien passes away in ICE custody." That is how our government announced the death of a man who had built a life here for nearly three decades, not his name, not his age, not his family. The agency that had him in its care could not even bring themselves to call him by his name.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Reality of the Math
Pages H5418–H5423 · Official text(Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 3, 2025, Mr. Schweikert of Arizona was recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.)
Mr. Speaker, I wish I had the magic ability to find the powerful words to try to explain the difficulty of the finances, the reality of the math, and the threat to the Republic, but we are going to try again.
How do I get my fellow Members, the public, the administration, and the people around me to basically look each other in the eyes and say: Here is the reality of what is going on.
Think of this: In the last 5 years, U.S. debt has gone up by one-third. As of, I think it is the last day or so, the 30-year bond is at the highest interest rate in 25 years. We will borrow $1 trillion every 130 days. So every 130 days, we are clicking off another $1 trillion.
Mr. Speaker, think about this: This coming January, we are going to hit the debt ceiling again. It was only a couple of years ago that we actually raised the debt ceiling by $5 trillion, and we have already almost burned through it. I think as of yesterday, we were borrowing $89,980 every second.
We are going to walk through some of the charts and some of the math, and I beg of anyone who is crazy enough to watch this, is detailed enough, is actually caring enough to watch this, I need you to open up your mind and bathe in the math with me, not the folklore.
Let's actually start to walk through some of this. I have used this chart over and over to sort of open up the discussion.
The numbers are actually already out of date because we are this far into the 2026 fiscal year, and the math is actually uglier than we expected it to be, but the reason you should see this: See the blue area here? That is all your Member of Congress gets to vote on unless we have a reconciliation budget. We have been using the reconciliation budgets, functionally, to spend more money because of the dysfunction in the U.S. Senate.
When you start to look over here, Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, other things that are in the formulas, and interest, I need everyone to understand something: Social Security is the number one spend in our government and probably will come in about $1.6 trillion.
Interest may come in as high as $1.3 trillion this year, becoming the second biggest expenditure in our government.
Medicare will be about $1.1 trillion.
Medicaid will come in at about $1 trillion, Medicaid and ObamaCare subsidies.
Defense, the thing that is in the Constitution, will come in at number five. Your government is an insurance company with an army.
I beg of you to think about the math. If you are one of the people saying that it is all waste and fraud, yes, there is a bunch of that, but it is a fraction of this total. The primary driver, if you just listen to those numbers, when interest will be $1.3 trillion this year--and I am going to show you a couple of charts--in a decade, 9 budget years, interest will be the majority of the borrowing. We will be borrowing money to have enough cash to pay the interest.
I have done speech after speech behind these microphones talking about interest fragility, and it seems no one knows what the hell I am talking about.
Have you paid attention to what is happening in the bond markets over the last couple of weeks? It is happening all over the industrialized world because we are all on a borrowing binge. Interest rates are starting to move up to points where it is absolutely uncomfortable.
About 1\1/2\ months ago, I did a presentation here and showed you how you want to deal with affordability on housing, and I showed you the academic paper that basically said that interest rates are a full percent higher in the United States than they need to be because of the borrowing from the Federal Government.
If we don't figure out a way to start to convince the bond market--I am going to say this multiple times. If we don't start to convince the bond market that we are going to start being fiscally responsible, the future starts to look really ugly.
Let's actually walk through a couple of these things. Have you ever heard someone start to talk about the death spiral? Look, it is not that hard. You borrow lots of money. You basically have to refinance it, so you are constantly subject to whatever the new interest rates are, and I am going to show you some charts that show much of the refinancing--because we have to refinance $10 trillion to $11 trillion this year, and a lot of that was originally borrowed at much lower interest rates. It is not only the borrowing of today.
You are going to borrow $2.2 trillion to $2.3 trillion publicly to raise some $100 billion internally. That is where you borrow money from the trust fund, Social Security, Medicare, which those trust funds are gone, functionally, in 6 years. The $10 trillion that has to be refinanced is now subject to the higher interest rates of today.
That is interest fragility because you start hitting an expectation where those interest rates drive you up, so you have to borrow more money and borrow more money. You basically end up in the death spiral because now you are borrowing money, and this even happened last year. We had a couple of months where we had to borrow money to have enough cash to pay for our borrowing.
Does anyone care? Are we actually allowed to talk about it? Is it just because around the hallways around this place, there are armies of lobbyists, armies of people showing up in our offices, and they functionally want one of two things: Give me more money or regulate, control, push my competition so I have sort of no one to compete with.
Washington, D.C., is a protection racket. It is a protection racket for business models and bureaucracies that don't want to reform, don't want to compete, don't want to deal with that economic model we all learned in high school, creative destruction, where someone does something better.
Do you remember Blockbuster Video? If they had shown up here, maybe if they had hired enough lobbyists, we would have slowed down the internet so that Netflix wouldn't have put them out of business. That is how perverse this place has become. Where are my free market brothers and sisters?
Look, some of these are going to be really thick, but it is important to understand. The interest rate movements, do you see these spikes out here? These are all the different countries--U.S., this one is Germany, Japan, U.K.
Understand that the industrialized countries, we all have a demographic problem. We don't have enough young people, and we have borrowed stunning amounts of money to maintain the benefits. All over the world--and the reason I am showing this chart is that if one of these countries, like Japan, was having trouble a couple of weeks ago and starts to hit a cascade event--I know there is probably no one out there who actually paid attention and remembers things like the Tequila Crisis of the 1990s. Cascade events start to shoot up those interest rates, and when you are carrying a total of $40 trillion in debt, $32 trillion to $33 trillion of that we have sold, $10 trillion of it we have to refinance every year, do you understand the danger you have put this country in?
We come behind these microphones all day long. We talk about the things we are angry about, worried about, this and that, what is really good politically, you know, set off some dopamine hits. I know this isn't what we like to talk about in our elections.
It is also the thing that will bring this Republic down if we don't get our act together. Let's actually have some real fun here.
An increase in dependency on the market-based--the reason I am showing you this chart is one of the things that is happening around the world and been happening to U.S. debt for the last couple of years is a lot of the Federal Reserve banks of different countries have been sort of holding their amount of U.S. debt steady as we are still borrowing more money, meaning more and more of our debt is being purchased by bond houses, trading houses.
If you actually are someone who is crazy enough to watch bond futures and how many basis points they move, this is one of the things that should scare you. The debt is being purchased by those who trade it, pledge it, buy options on it, sell it.
There is an argument that we have much more fragility. When the central Bank of Japan or Germany or someone else buys U.S. debt, they are holding it basically as an offset to their own currency, and it is stable. We don't have to worry about them throwing it into the market.
A whole portion of our debt today is in play, so those of you who used to say: I don't want other countries buying our debt--I can show you chart after chart. We buy their stuff. If they are willing to buy our debt, it pushes down our interest rates, and if it is their central banks buying it, it actually makes our debt more stable.
Let's actually start to understand how dangerous what is going on is. U.S. 10-year yields are among the highest in the G10. I will tell you, today Greece can sell a 10-year bond cheaper than the United States. Start to understand this: The only country right now in our 10-year bond as a peak of the G10 is Great Britain. They pay a higher interest rate. We hit 4.8 today. We are the red chart here. When you start to realize Canada, Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands, Switzerland, Japan--but Spain and Greece also are selling 10-year bonds cheaper than the United States. I believe we are like 13 or 14 in the debt stack of industrialized countries. Meaning, the market has decided they are more creditworthy than the United States even though we are the reserve currency of the world.
Doesn't that set off some alarm bells to anyone with an intellect?
So, more charts. Let's see if I am making a point yet. U.S. 10-year yields are among the highest in the G10. You start to take a look at what is going on, and we are up here. You must understand it is not only the bonds we can sell, but the interest rates carry. There is a risk premium. In the bond market we call it a term premium on U.S. debt. Shouldn't this actually drive us crazy?
If you actually look at the compounding piling of new debt being sold--remember, in the United States this year--and we have a fairly decent economy--for every dollar we are taking in in tax collection, we are spending $1.40. It is actually better than last year. Last year for every $1 we took in, we spent $1.43. Mr. Speaker, $1 in, $1.40 out? Come on, people.
Yet, I see polling. None of this is an election issue because we have a public that wants things. I am sorry. I have done all these budget presentations in my own State. I love my State. I represent one of the greatest districts on Earth, but I have even done some in other places around the country. The number of times I will spend 45 minutes with these slides showing what is going on, showing data that a child born today--so I have a 4-year-old we have adopted. It is the greatest joy. My wife and I, I cannot express how blessed we are. My little boy who just turned 4 about 3 weeks ago, we need 104 percent of his lifetime earnings just to pay the pensions of the Federal Government.
Is that moral? Is that what our country has become is basically screw the next generation? I want every dime I can get my hands on? This is the morality of what this country is. There are dozens and dozens and dozens of things we could be doing, but this game of sitting here and saying, well, I am going to save a million dollars here, because I am going to be speaking here for almost an hour. During that hour we are going to borrow about $320 million.
We will often have debates here where during the time of the debate we will have borrowed substantially more than everything we debated trying to save. We are borrowing about $7.5 billion a day--$7.5 billion a day. We have had some days where we are borrowing $8 billion. Some days we are borrowing $7 billion. It is close to $90,000 every second.
And yet, time after time after time when I do those presentations around the country, the first hand that goes up is someone that says: I want more money. I want more benefits; I want more this.
A few years ago I did a presentation on the debt and deficit and demographics. Remember, the primary driver of our debt is our demographics. I would love to blame the Democrats. The things they did in the Inflation Reduction Act now we are still paying the price for because there was a report a couple days ago about what is happening in Medicare part D and the explosion of some of the costs there. It is great. And we have done things also. But it is demographics.
We as a country basically, and the entire industrialized world, we haven't had enough children. We have functionally gone 30, 40 years without having enough children.
So think of this: In the next year or two we will have fewer people under 18 than we had 20, 25 years ago but double the number of people 65 and up. God knows, I will be one of them. In some of the reports, I think--one I got from Manhattan Institute a couple years ago--was basically saying for every dollar I will have put into Medicare I am going to get about $6, $7 back in spending. And most of Medicare is borrowed--excuse me, most of Medicare comes from the general fund.
This is the reality.
Are we allowed to tell the truth about math or at this moment is there someone on a blog saying: I am going make crap up about math because it hurts my feelings. It is not about feelings. It is what comes off of a calculator.
So let's actually walk through a little bit more there. Estimated annualized cost of refinancing. This is something that is really important. If you can't convince the debt markets that we are creditworthy, that we belong having lower interest rates--all this has to be refinanced, and we are refinancing it now at higher interest rates. This is what we were borrowing before. Remember back in 2021 during parts of COVID or even a bit after the 2008 financial debacle, interest rates stayed very low and we spent and borrowed and borrowed and borrowed.
Guess what. We have to refinance it now.
Now, often we are refinancing things that were coming in at half of a percent, 1 percent, and now we are coming in at 5 percent, 4.5 percent. Remember, today's 10-year bond hit 4.8 today. The bond futures, if you actually go and look at it right now, are predicted to be over 5 percent by the end of the year, on the 10-year.
You do realize what that means? That means over 7 percent mortgage rates on a 30-year debt.
Does anyone care?
I know these types of charts are almost impossible to read and impossible to see, so come back over here. Do you see the light purple compared to the darker purple? All I am trying to show you there is that most of the future financing is driven by interest, not the actual debt.
The CBO number for 2036, 9 budget years from now--and I am going to show you the number that CBO gave us back in February is wrong because of interest rates moving up. But back then in February, the number was, in 2036, 9 budget years from now, you will have a $3.1 trillion debt. Mr. Speaker, $2.1 trillion of it was just interest. Mr. Speaker, $1 trillion was actual structural deficit.
What happens in a world where the primary driver of your debt is actually paying the interest on previous spending? The moral question I want you to think about is: Is borrowing a tax hike? I am serious. We have spent money. We are obligated now to pay interest on it. We are pulling that cash out of the economy so it doesn't go into the investment of you buying a house or a new business or those things. Is it a tax hike? I would argue it is a tax hike with interest.
Now back to reality. The primary driver of U.S. debt and the debt from the entire industrialized world is our demographics.
Here is where the numbers need to start sinking in of how difficult this math actually is. At current interest rates, the deficit grows to $3.8 trillion in 9 years. Remember a moment ago, I told you the CBO from February said 3.1 in 2036, which is 9 budget years from now? Now it is 3.8.
David, where did $700 billion come from? It came from just the changes in interest rates.
Do you somehow think magically the interest rates are about to go down? It is not in the futures market. It is not happening in any of the other countries. Look at what is happening in Japan. I believe Japan today hit interest rates they hadn't seen in decades and decades and decades. Maybe the entire world is tired of giving those who are bingeing on debt a free ride.
Understand, these numbers should scare the hell out of you because you are looking at a world where, in 2036--so 9 budget years--we take in $8.3 trillion. Hey, yea. However, we spend $12.17 trillion, and that is based on today's models.
Will there be a war? Will there be another pandemic? Will there be another disaster?
Think about what is going on at this moment. I was in the Grand Canyon this last weekend and watched the floods. Is the super El Nino going to require spending? The last big one like this, we spent $1 trillion around the world in damage.
Are we going to ever have anything like that? Are we going to have another earthquake? Are we going to have any fires?
There is this concept of fragility both in interest rates and when you run, pretending that everything is going to be fine--we are just going to follow the law as it is. When you see CBO numbers, remember, Congressional Budget Office is required to follow certain rules. That is one of the great scams here.
Do you follow what we expect to happen or do we say, hey, remember the paygo? The rule is: Hey, if the spending stops in 5 years, you don't have to count it against future deficits, so we do that with things. Hey, we are going to just do this, and then, boom, it is going to go away. You notice that it never happens.
Please, I have one or two more boards here that I want you to memorize if you care. If you actually look at current interest rates, debt to GDP grows to 162 percent in 10 years. If you do total debt--remember, this is total debt--so you are over 100 percent of debt to GDP.
Remember, the U.S. economy is basically estimated to be about $32 to $33 trillion. Right now, we are close to $33 trillion in publicly sold debt. That is when we sell it to your pension plans, sell it to your retirement account, sell it to a nice family on the other side of the world, sell it to another sovereign reserve bank.
However, if you do also the internal borrowing--when we borrow money from the trust funds, we have to pay it back with interest. The rest of the world actually calculates their debt that way.
When you hear us say, well, we are only at 101 or 102 percent of debt, that is publicly sold debt, not debt we owe. We are at 127 percent right now. In 9 budget years, we will be at 162 percent.
Now, here is why that should set off alarm bells. I am going to give this to you in two ways. Understand, when you pay your taxes on your income, here is what we call the FICA tax, this is your payroll tax, this is the Social Security tax, this is your Medicare tax, this is the unemployment tax, this is disability. Those are designated for certain uses. The other part of your income tax, the corporate income tax, tariffs, excise taxes, those things are over here.
If I say I segregate the things that are going functionally to your retirement and your unemployment, segregate those, of the other types of taxes this year, 29 percent will just pay interest. This year. In 9 budget years, 10 years from now, 2036, almost half of nonpayroll taxes--once again, your Social Security, your Medicare, unemployment, those things--almost half of the taxes this country will collect will be just interest.
Is anyone starting to see the problem? This is what you call interest fragility. This is where you start to burn down. This is where you are chasing your tail, where you are actually having to raise taxes or dramatically cut spending just to be able to cover your bonded indebtedness.
How many care? Well, the bond market finally has woken up and is starting to care.
Let's actually walk through--this next one, if this doesn't scare you half to death, you aren't listening.
We took a look. AEI did a model, Columbia, University of Minnesota, the Penn Wharton Budget Model basically built models saying, hey, when you hit this level of debt to the size of your economy, the interest you are producing makes it so you hit a death spiral. Basically, their models crash.
We have models crashing at 154 percent. Do you remember the last chart I just showed you? It was maybe two charts ago. It said in 9 budget years, in 2036, you actually have over 160 percent of debt to GDP. You already have models saying we have crashed, the economy no longer works.
I hope it is wrong, but I need you to understand, this isn't decades from now. This isn't your great-grandkids who are going to figure out how you screwed--excuse me--what you handed them. This is now. This is in the next decade. What the hell is wrong with us?
Let's save that here because this is the point I am trying to make. This is here safe, we basically have enough cash flow to cover our interest and our obligations and still be a decent credit risk. However, when you start to hit 2035, you have enough models--how long is 2035 from now?
In 2035, you are basically walking into what is technically referred to as a crisis zone. That is when any damn thing, something goes wrong on the other side of the world--we have a hurricane, we have an earthquake, this and that, the credit markets, the debt markets start to get nervous, start to raise our costs.
Remember that joke you have heard over and over? How did you go bankrupt? Slowly at first, and then suddenly very fast.
Understand how bad these numbers are. In 2050, we are basically what we refer to as the default zone. You have such a debt and interest obligation that you have functionally no capacity. This number isn't even 2036, it is 2035 the models say we start to step into the danger zone.
This is somewhat assuming that today's interest rates don't continue to go up on us.
Those of us who are children of the 1970s and 1980s, today's interest rates are still low compared to that. My first house, I had a 12 percent mortgage on it. Yet, I try and try and try to do things. Let's have a deficit commission, let's deal with it.
David, we can't talk about that, voters will get cranky. The voters want free stuff.
Really? You are willing to burn down the Republic? Does anyone do math?
For my liberal friends here who say: Why don't we just raise taxes? Go onto the internet, there is this amazing thing called the internet. Go look up the Manhattan Institute. Look up Riedl, an economist, who did a great paper about a year and a half ago, basically took every tax hike that the Bernie Sanders and the Warrens of the world and shows it basically will raise about 1.5 to 1.78 percent of GDP.
I am going to say this multiple times, Mr. Speaker. Just to cover the deficit, you need 7.7 percent of GDP. If you don't have a 7.7 percent growth in GDP right now, you cannot keep up with how fast the debt is growing.
Interest this year, interest this year just will be 3.2, maybe 3.3 percent of the entire economy, so that interest is growing faster than this economy is.
However, Mr. Speaker, we are really not supposed to tell people the truth about that, so I beg of you, everyone who just heard that, please wipe it out of your memory.
Mr. Speaker, if this doesn't terrify you, then you are not paying attention or you don't do basic math.
I beg of you, Mr. Speaker, net interest is a share of revenue and GDP in 2056.
Now, why is Schweikert saying: Hey, that is 30 years from now?
I would love to sell bonds that are long into the curve. Mr.
Speaker, you buy a 30-year bond today, did you notice over the last couple weeks we have had a little bit of a problem?
We have had the Treasury basically offering to do a twist. Twist is where you borrow short term and spend it over here by buying longer term bonds to try to create a shortage there so the interest rate goes down. When there is demand for a bond, then the price goes down. When there is not enough demand, Mr. Speaker, then you have to pay a higher interest rate.
In 2056, that is 30 years from now, the calculations from the Treasury itself, so the Treasury is trying to sell you a 30-year bond, the Treasury itself says that we are over 250 percent of debt to GDP.
I am going to go out and buy a 30-year bond today because I trust this place that we are going to get our fiscal act together.
When we get down to the last couple of boards here, we are going to start to talk about what fiscal consolidation is. That is because people keep throwing out these fancy words and don't explain what it means.
I beg of you, Mr. Speaker, take a look at this chart. In 30 years, my 4-year-old son will be how old?
Thirty-four. It is not hard math.
Hopefully, he will just really be getting his life and his economics going. Hopefully, starting to consider having a family, the things that I dream of for him.
Mr. Speaker, 11.3 percent of the entire economy will be just interest from the Federal Government. Noninterest will be another 22 percent of Federal spending. Add that up in your head, Mr. Speaker. We are basically saying: Hey, we are going to have to have 35-some percent of the entire economy, 34 percent of the entire economy will just be Federal spending.
However, every model we have basically says that we are only going to be about 18, 19 percent of the entire economy taking in taxes.
Does anyone see a math problem?
Time after time after time I have been here, and we play tough. We negotiate for a deal. In 2011, we were going to actually do sequestration. Then the very next day, I cannot tell you how many Senators said: David, we need to break the sequestration. I need more spending on something. I want a new aircraft carrier. I want this. I want that.
Take a look at the number of times we have done debt deals, Mr. Speaker. Do you notice the curve still goes up?
It is because spending is an addiction, and it buys us votes. It buys us love, and we screw our kids and our own retirement. Remember, how I showed you a little while ago, Mr. Speaker, how some of this is now hitting in the next 10 years?
How many of you intend to still be alive and maybe in your own retirement in the next 10 years?
This isn't generations away from now. This is us.
There was a comment the other day that, well, we are just going to start taking the general account. That is basically, right now the Treasury is holding almost $1 trillion in cash. I assume they are building up cash from everything, from having to pay tariff refunds to the fact that this coming January we are back up against the debt ceiling. If we don't raise the debt ceiling, we will do what is called extraordinary measures where you basically are spending some of your cash reserves and reaching into all sorts of other accounts and spending them. And you do owe that money back.
I was told: David, we are going to just cover things off of the general fund accounts.
Mr. Speaker, you need 41 of them.
Really?
We say things and we hear things like this. They are told this on cable television, on the internet. We will get people who will call us and say: David, if you just took care of waste and fraud, then we would be fine.
Then you send them the paper saying: Hey, there may be a couple hundred billion dollars of waste and fraud.
Let's talk about that for a moment. We are borrowing about $2.5 trillion this year. Understand, Mr. Speaker, when we say waste and fraud, fraud over here is criminal. Waste is much more uncomfortable to talk about. I can show you paper after paper after paper, Mr. Speaker. Let's talk about Medicaid. It is the Federal-State program with which we are supposed to be helping indigents and poor people.
It is perverse to say this, Mr. Speaker, but do you know States actually have an economic incentive to look the other way with things that you and I would consider almost criminal or waste?
That is because it is Federal cash coming into their State stimulating their economy. So when they do things like a bed tax, which is basically a three-legged stool on a disproportionate share where you will actually look the other way. But David, it is cash coming into our State. But we are borrowing it.
My State of Arizona, 45 percent of the entire State's budget--when you look at the total spend, Mr. Speaker, not what is appropriated from the legislature, total spend--45 percent comes from the Federal Government. We borrow most of that money.
We are borrowing money over here. You don't see a problem, Mr. Speaker?
Now let's talk about the fancy term that is being thrown around: We need to do fiscal consolidation. Yay.
How many of you know what the hell that is?
We have countries like, I think I actually put a couple of them on my charts, New Zealand, Canada, Australia, but there have been others that did what is called fiscal consolidation. Basically they cleaned up their finances.
Greece has been doing it now for one decade, and remember, once again, Greece can sell a 10-year bond cheaper than the United States because its future creditworthiness is better than ours.
The average of these countries is about 85/15, that means 15 percent new taxes, 85 percent cuts in spending. What we learned is we always have to do the cuts in spending first. That is because when we think about our President George H. Bush, he made a deal saying: All right. We are going to do some fiscal consolidation. We will allow these taxes here to go up, but we are going to cut all this spending.
They did the taxes. They never got a dime of the cuts. Mr. Speaker, you always have to do the cuts first. The cuts don't have to--there is so much of our government we could revolutionize: The cost of healthcare, if we legalized technology, if we do things better, faster, and cheaper.
Yet here today we had some of my brothers and sisters here introduce a piece of legislation that basically made adopting technology to reduce the price of healthcare illegal, because that is what the lobbyists want.
Why don't they care about the future?
Do they not see the math?
Every single workday I have been texting out something we call the daily debt. I have been doing this for years. I am blessed to chair the Joint Economic Committee. I am number four on Ways and Means. I have been doing the investigations of the fraud. We send this out. I have had more Members of Congress cancel it than subscribe to it. The excuse is: I don't want the negativity, David.
It is not negativity. It is called math.
My reason--and this is almost hard to understand--is these different countries, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand that did fiscal consolidations, the underlying message in here is they cut spending. Once they had met those goals, they did changes in their tax system to get rid of leakage, but they did the cuts first.
Debt reduction in the United States has been and will be possible with fiscal consolidation. We can do it. There are ways to do it, but you have to see what is happening over here. That spike in spending and borrowing isn't a new bridge or new military spending. It is demographics. Our brothers and sisters have earned benefits. We owe them, and we are not willing to do the things to do it better, faster, and cheaper.
I have done presentation after presentation over the years of the unified theory: How do you maximize economic growth? How do you maximize fairness? How do you maximize the future to be stable?
There are a lot of inputs. You have to have really uncomfortable conversations, Mr. Speaker, talent-based immigration, the adoption of technology, the redesign of smart regulations, instead of bureaucratic regulations. Stop the leakage where States basically are scamming parts of our expense sharing. We have laid out all these steps as a unified theory because it turns out one of them doesn't get you well.
We introduced a piece of legislation over 1 year ago: MedPAC. It is this big binder that is on every Congressman's--actually it is probably in their trash can. We get it a couple of times a year. This was the organization that was designed to keep an eye on Medicare, particularly Medicare Advantage.
These are the experts. We pay them. They will tell you there is a trillion to almost $2 trillion of leakage just from Medicare Advantage. I like Medicare Advantage. I have some simple suggestions: Stop the risk scoring and make it a true capitated model; get rid of the ObamaCare-type of star ratings, where you basically make it a true capitated model where you are paid to help people stay healthier.
What if it is a trillion dollars over 10 years? What if it is $1.5 trillion? We had a preliminary score on a piece of legislation. We came in at $1.84 trillion, making it the single biggest savings bill in U.S. history, and I can't get another Member of Congress to sponsor the bill because you have to get your head kicked in by the lobbyists from the insurance companies.
I would argue it is free market. When we use the term "waste and fraud," you have to understand the waste is how we design programs.
I guess we would rather borrow $90,000 a second, put your retirement at risk, and basically live in a world where every dataset says our children will be the first American children to be poorer than their parents.
Yes, you have technology, AI, synthetic biology, all the things, automation, but remember, you also have a country that is at basically zero population growth. We can make the math work, but once again, unless you are ready to deal with the reality of the math, just to cover the current growth of debt, you need a GDP that grows 7.7--not 3--7.7 percent a year.
How do I get our brothers and sisters who are in positions of power--whether it be us here in Congress, the administration, the think tanks, the groups out there that just want more money--to bathe in the truth?
I guess for many of them, saving this Republic isn't worth it. I am going to go down fighting for this. This is an amazing country. We have done more good for the world than any country in human history. If we don't get our act together, we are going to bring down the world economy with us.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back.
Enrolled Bill Signed
Page H5423 · Official textKevin F. McCumber, Clerk of the House, reported and found truly enrolled a bill of the House of the following title, which was thereupon signed by the Speaker:
Text printed in the Record (111 characters)
H.R. 6500. An act making continuing appropriations and extensions for fiscal year 2027, and for other purposes.
Senate Enrolled Bills Signed
Page H5423 · Official textThe Speaker announced his signature to enrolled bills of the Senate of the following titles:
Text printed in the Record (469 characters)
S. 32.--An act to clarify where court may be held for certain district courts in Texas and California.
S. 307.--An act to address sexual harassment and sexual assault of Bureau of Prisons staff in prisons, and for other purposes.
S. 858.--An act to authorize the National Medal of Museum Foundation to establish a commemorative work on the National Mall to honor the extraordinary acts of valor, selfless service, and sacrifice displayed by Medal of Honor recipients.
Adjournment
Page H5423 · Official textMr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.
The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 8 o'clock and 23 minutes p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, September 2, 2026, at 10 a.m. for morning-hour debate.
Oath of Office Members, Resident Commissioner, and Delegates
Page H5423 · Official textThe oath of office required by the sixth article of the Constitution of the United States, and as provided by section 2 of the act of May 13, 1884 (23 Stat. 22), to be administered to Members, Resident Commissioner, and Delegates of the House of Representatives, the text of which is carried in 5 U.S.C. 3331: "I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God." has been subscribed to in person and filed in duplicate with the Clerk of the House of Representatives by the following Member of the 119th Congress, pursuant to the provisions of 2 U.S.C. 25: Everton Blair, Jr., Thirteenth District of Georgia.
Executive Communications, Etc.
Pages H5423–H5424 · Official textUnder clause 2 of rule XIV, executive communications were taken from the Speaker's table and referred as follows:
Text printed in the Record (8,817 characters)
EC-4472. A letter from the Congressional and Public Affairs Specialist, Bureau of Industry and Security, Department of Commerce, transmitting the Department's Temporary final rule -- DPAS Directive Allocation Order and Additional Requirements for Recoverable Critical Minerals and Materials [Docket No.: 260804-0143] (RIN: 0694-AK51) received August 14, 2026, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Financial Services.
EC-4473. A letter from the General Counsel, National Credit Union Administration, transmitting the Administration's final rule -- Purchase, Sale, and Pledge Of Eligible Obligations (RIN: 3133-AF95) received August 25, 2026, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Financial Services.
EC-4474. A letter from the Senior Bureau Official, Bureau of Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting Department Notification Number: DDTC 26-073, pursuant to the reporting requirements of Section 36(c) of the Arms Export Control Act; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
EC-4475. A letter from the Senior Bureau Official, Bureau of Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting Department Notification Number: DDTC 26-070, pursuant to Section 36(c) of the Arms Export Control Act; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
EC-4476. A letter from the Senior Bureau Official, Bureau of Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting Document Notification Number: DDTC 26-062 pursuant to Section 36(c) of the Arms Export Control Act; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
EC-4477. A letter from the Senior Bureau Official, Bureau of Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting Department Notification Number: DDTC 26-054 pursuant to Section 36(c) of the Arms Export Control Act; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
EC-4478. A letter from the Senior Bureau Official, Bureau of Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting Department Notification Number: DDTC 26-049 pursuant to Section 36(c) and 36(d) of the Arms Export Control Act; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
EC-4479. A letter from the Senior Bureau Official, Bureau of Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting Department Notification Number: DDTC 26-038 pursuant to Section 36(c) of the Arms Export Control Act; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
EC-4480. A letter from the Manager, Legal Litigation and Support, AGC-010, FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters [Docket No.: FAA-2026-4638; Project Identifier MCAI-2023-00794-R; Amendment 39-23431; AD 2026-16-01] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received August 14, 2026, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
EC-4481. A letter from the Manager, Legal Litigation and Support, AGC-010, FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2025-3985; Project Identifier AD-2025-00493-T; Amendment 39-23423; AD 2026-15-11] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received August 14, 2026, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
EC-4482. A letter from the Manager, Legal Litigation and Support, AGC-010, FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Bell Textron Canada Limited Helicopters [Docket No.: FAA-2026-3866; Project Identifier MCAI-2025-01200-R; Amendment 39-23423; AD 2026-16-02] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received August 14, 2026, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
EC-4483. A letter from the Manager, Legal Litigation and Support, AGC-010, FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Various Helicopters [Docket No.: FAA-2026-3488; Project Identifier AD-2024-00583-R; Amendment 39-23429; AD 2026-15-17] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received August 14, 2026, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
EC-4484. A letter from the Manager, Legal Litigation and Support, AGC-010, FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Amendment of United States Area Navigation Route Q-10 and Revocation of Alaska Area Navigation Routes J-804R and J-889R in Alaska [Docket No.: FAA-2025-3585; Airspace Docket No.: 25-AAL-143] (RIN: 2120-AA66) received August 14, 2026, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
EC-4485. A letter from the Manager, Legal Litigation and Support, AGC-010, FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments [Docket No.: 31676; Amdt. No.: 4229] received August 14, 2026, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
EC-4486. A letter from the Manager, Legal Litigation and Support, AGC-010, FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments [Docket
No.: 31677; Amdt. No.: 4230] received August 14, 2026, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
EC-4487. A letter from the Manager, Legal Litigation and Support, AGC-010, FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Requirements for Interference-Tolerant Radio Altimeter Systems [Docket No.: FAA-2025-5666; Amdt. Nos. 91-384, 121-396 and 129-56] (RIN: 2120-AM21) received August 14, 2026, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
EC-4488. A letter from the Manager, Legal Litigation and Support, AGC-010, FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Amendment of Very High Frequency Omnidirectional Range Federal Airways V-108 in the Vicinity of Concord, California [Docket No.: FAA-2026-1621; Airspace Docket No.: 25-AWP-149] (RIN: 2120-AA66) received August 14, 2026, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
EC-4489. A letter from the Manager, Legal Litigation and Support, AGC-010, FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Establishment of United States Area Navigation Route T-581 in the Vicinity of Missoula, Montana [Docket No.: FAA-2025-3288; Airspace Docket No.: 25-ANM-158] (RIN: 2120-AA66) received August 14, 2026, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
EC-4490. A letter from the Manager, Legal Litigation and Support, AGC-010, FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Amendment of Class D Airspace and Class E Airspace Over Groton, CT [Docket No.: FAA-2026-5644; Airspace Docket No.: 26-ANE-4] (RIN: 2120-AA66) received August 14, 2026, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
EC-4491. A letter from the Manager, Legal Litigation and Support, AGC-010, FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Amendment of United States Area Navigation Route T-388 in the Vicinity of Kodiak, Alaska [Docket No.: FAA-2026-0826; Airspace Docket No.: 25-AAL-162] (RIN: 2120-AA66) received August 14, 2026, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
EC-4492. A letter from the President, transmitting notification that the national emergency with respect to the threat of foreign interference in or undermining public confidence in United States elections declared in Executive Order 13848 of September 12, 2018, is to continue in effect beyond September 12, 2026, pursuant to 50 U.S.C. 1622(d); Public Law 94-412, Sec. 202(d); (90 Stat. 1255) (H. Doc. No. 119--192); jointly to the Committees on Foreign Affairs, House Administration, Intelligence (Permanent Select), and the Judiciary and ordered to be printed.
Reports of Committees on Public Bills and Resolutions
Page H5424 · Official textUnder clause 2 of rule XIII, reports of committees were delivered to the Clerk for printing and reference to the proper calendar, as follows:
Text printed in the Record (3,111 characters)
Mr. HILL of Arkansas: Committee on Financial Services. H.R. 4646. A bill to clarify that whistleblower protections described in section 4712 of title 41, United States Code, apply to any contract funded from amounts appropriated to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 119-786, Pt. 1). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
Mr. HILL of Arkansas: Committee on Financial Services. H.R. 1483. A bill to prohibit the Securities and Exchange Commission from requiring that personally identifiable information be collected under consolidated audit trail reporting requirements, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 119-787). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
Mr. HILL of Arkansas: Committee on Financial Services. H.R. 5402. A bill to amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act to clarify Federal law with respect to reporting certain full-file consumer credit information to consumer reporting agencies, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 119-788). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
Mr. HILL of Arkansas: Committee on Financial Services. H.R. 8141. A bill to amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act to require resellers of information contained in consumer reports to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of such information before transmitting such information, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 119-789). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
Mr. HILL of Arkansas: Committee on Financial Services. H.R. 9330. A bill to regulate the business of offering and providing earned wage access services to consumers, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 119-790). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
Mr. HILL of Arkansas: Committee on Financial Services. H.R. 7187. A bill to amend the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to provide an exemption from the definition of a broker for a certain registered representative-owned personal services entity, and for other purposes; with amendments (Rept. 119-791). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
Mr. HILL of Arkansas: Committee on Financial Services. H.R. 9331. A bill to amend the Expedited Funds Availability Act to provide exceptions in the case of fraudulent checks or wire transfers, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 119-792). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
Mr. HILL of Arkansas: Committee on Financial Services. H.R. 1640. A bill to establish a grant program for States that adopt the Uniform Partition of Heirs Property Act, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 119-793). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
Pursuant to clause 2 of rule XIII, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform discharged from further consideration. H.R. 4646 referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
Public Bills and Resolutions
Pages H5424–H5425 · Official textUnder clause 2 of rule XII, public bills and resolutions of the following titles were introduced and severally referred, as follows:
Text printed in the Record (7,051 characters)
By Mr. DeSAULNIER:
H.R. 10203. A bill to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to improve accessibility to, and completion of, postsecondary education for students, including students with disabilities, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Education and Workforce.
By Mr. GRIFFITH:
H.R. 10204. A bill to modify the appointment and removal process for certain legislative branch officers, and for other purposes; to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, and Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Ms. DAVIDS of Kansas (for herself and Mr.
Langworthy):
H.R. 10205. A bill to amend the Federal Crop Insurance Reform and Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 to establish a budgetary Tribal Government consultation process at the Department of Agriculture, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committees on Transportation and Infrastructure, and Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. FIGURES:
H.R. 10206. A bill to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to terminate Federal student loan limits and restore the availability of Federal Direct PLUS Loans for graduate and professional students; to the Committee on Education and Workforce.
By Mrs. HOUCHIN:
H.R. 10207. A bill to prohibit covered platforms from processing personal data with respect to covered minors without obtaining the verifiable consent of a parent of the covered minor, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
By Mr. ISSA:
H.R. 10208. A bill to provide for the continued use of certain trust land in San Diego County for healthcare purposes; to the Committee on Natural Resources.
By Ms. JAYAPAL:
H.R. 10209. A bill to provide for green and resilient health care infrastructure, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
By Mr. LANDSMAN (for himself, Mr. Carter of Georgia,
Ms. Schrier, and Mr. Barrett):
H.R. 10210. A bill to amend title XXVII of the Public Health Service Act, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to regulate the use of artificial intelligence in the review of claims by group health plans and health insurance issuers offering group or individual health insurance coverage; to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mrs. LUNA (for herself and Mr. Gill of Texas):
H.R. 10211. A bill to codify Executive Order 14418 (relating to continuing to protect the meaning and value of American citizenship); to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Ms. MACE:
H.R. 10212. A bill to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to study the potential benefits of peptide-based therapies for veterans receiving care through the Department of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
By Mr. MILLER of Ohio:
H.R. 10213. A bill to name the community-based outpatient clinic of the Department of Veterans Affairs in Medina County, Ohio, as the "Leland John Codding VA Clinic"; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
By Mr. NEGUSE:
H.R. 10214. A bill to amend the Public Lands Corps Act of 1993 to modify the cost-sharing requirement for conservation projects carried out by a qualified youth or conservation corps, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committees on Agriculture, and Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. PETERS (for himself and Mr. Kean):
H.R. 10215. A bill to prohibit certain noncompete agreements, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Ms. PETTERSEN (for herself, Mr. Lawler, Mrs. Watson
Coleman, Mr. Moulton, Ms. Dean of Pennsylvania, Ms.
Stansbury, Ms. Scanlon, Ms. Norton, Mr. Johnson of
Georgia, Mr. Davis of Illinois, Ms. Tlaib, and Ms.
Ross):
H.R. 10216. A bill to amend title 49, United States Code, to require recipients of assistance under chapter 53 of such title to display information regarding the suicide prevention hotline on public transportation owned or operated by the recipient; to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
By Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky:
H.R. 10217. A bill to amend the John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act to designate as a component of the National Heritage Area System the Kentucky Wildlands National Heritage Area in the State of Kentucky, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Natural Resources.
By Mr. SCHWEIKERT (for himself and Mr. Beyer):
H.R. 10218. A bill to amend section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 to ensure that the resources of the United States International Trade Commission are focused on protecting genuine domestic industries, to safeguard the public health and welfare and the United States economy, and to improve the transparency of third party litigation funding, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Ways and Means.
By Mr. TIMMONS:
H.R. 10219. A bill to amend the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to lower the threshold for which criminal penalties apply to a violation of that Act; to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. GUEST:
H. Res. 1504. A resolution resolution recommending that the House of Representatives find Michael Joseph in contempt of Congress for refusal to comply with subpoenas duly issued by the Committee on Ethics; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. GUEST:
H. Res. 1505. A resolution resolution recommending that the House of Representatives find Hector Roos in contempt of Congress for refusal to comply with subpoenas duly issued by the Committee on Ethics; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. CARTER of Louisiana (for himself, Mr. McCormick,
Mr. Dunn of Florida, Mr. Menendez, and Mr. Lieu):
H. Res. 1506. A resolution expressing support for the designation of September 2026 as "National Prostate Cancer Awareness Month"; to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Constitutional Authority Statement
Page H5425 · Official textPursuant to clause 7 of rule XII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the following statements are submitted regarding the specific powers granted to Congress in the Constitution to enact the accompanying bill or joint resolution.
Additional Sponsors
Pages H5425–H5426 · Official textUnder clause 7 of rule XII, sponsors were added to public bills and resolutions, as follows:
Text printed in the Record (8,887 characters)
H.R. 7: Ms. Boebert, Mr. Estes, and Mr. Babin.
H.R. 383: Ms. Lofgren.
H.R. 404: Mr. Goldman of Texas.
H.R. 407: Mr. Mannion.
H.R. 632: Mr. Clyde.
H.R. 650: Mr. Grothman.
H.R. 685: Mr. Bilirakis, Mr. Bergman, Mr. Babin, Mr. Gosar, Mr. Estes, Mr. Simpson, Mr. Goldman of Texas, Mr. McDowell, and Mr. Fine.
H.R. 768: Mr. Thompson of California.
H.R. 987: Mr. Babin.
H.R. 995: Ms. Lofgren.
H.R. 999: Ms. Mejia.
H.R. 1094: Mr. Williams of Texas.
H.R. 1242: Mr. Steube.
H.R. 1317: Mr. Downing.
H.R. 1394: Mr. Simpson.
H.R. 1502: Mr. Evans of Colorado, Mr. McDowell, Mr. Walberg, Mr. Pocan, Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. Rulli, Mr. Thompson of California, Mr. Moore of West Virginia, Mr. Estes, Mr. Guthrie, Ms. Salazar, Mr. Norman, Ms. De La Cruz, and Ms. Maloy.
H.R. 1548: Mr. Goldman of Texas.
H.R. 1616: Mrs. Hayes.
H.R. 1623: Mr. Gill of Texas.
H.R. 1628: Mr. Moran, Mr. Simpson, and Ms. Schakowsky.
H.R. 1698: Mr. Steube.
H.R. 1742: Mrs. Fletcher.
H.R. 1881: Mr. Joyce of Pennsylvania.
H.R. 2103: Mr. Landsman.
H.R. 2120: Mr. Babin.
H.R. 2253: Ms. Jacobs and Mr. Mfume.
H.R. 2352: Mr. Amo, Mr. Pocan, and Ms. Chu.
H.R. 2411: Mrs. Grijalva.
H.R. 2442: Mr. Kustoff, Mr. Timmons, Mr. Babin, Mr. Bergman, and Mr. Steube.
H.R. 2486: Ms. Randall.
H.R. 2531: Mr. Vargas.
H.R. 2592: Mr. Riley of New York and Ms. Bynum.
H.R. 2598: Mr. Gallagher.
H.R. 2662: Mr. Bost.
H.R. 2700: Mr. Gottheimer.
H.R. 2743: Mrs. Fletcher.
H.R. 2901: Mrs. Fletcher.
H.R. 2902: Mrs. Kim and Mr. Kean.
H.R. 3036: Ms. Ross, Ms. Salinas, Mr. Thompson of Mississippi, and Mr. Davis of Illinois.
H.R. 3045: Mr. Latimer.
H.R. 3104: Mr. Kelly of Pennsylvania.
H.R. 3112: Ms. Jacobs and Ms. Mejia.
H.R. 3243: Mr. Vindman.
H.R. 3261: Ms. Stansbury, Mr. Deluzio, and Mr. Cleaver.
H.R. 3277: Mr. Torres of New York, Mr. Latimer, and Mr. Alford.
H.R. 3513: Ms. Randall.
H.R. 3562: Mr. Joyce of Ohio and Ms. DelBene.
H.R. 3573: Mr. McGovern, Mr. Davis of Illinois, Ms. Ansari, Ms. Dexter, Mr. Johnson of Georgia, Mrs. Torres of California, and Ms. Salinas.
H.R. 3593: Mr. Downing.
H.R. 3639: Mr. Carter of Louisiana and Ms. Budzinski.
H.R. 3701: Mr. Lieu.
H.R. 3954: Ms. Dean of Pennsylvania.
H.R. 4104: Mr. Smith of Washington, Ms. Mejia, and Mr. Torres of New York.
H.R. 4153: Mr. Bera.
H.R. 4168: Ms. Lofgren.
H.R. 4318: Mr. Moolenaar.
H.R. 4365: Mr. Pocan.
H.R. 4382: Mr. Haridopolos, Mr. Newhouse, Ms. Wilson of Florida, Ms. Garcia of Texas, Ms. Fedorchak, Mr. Vicente Gonzalez of Texas, Ms. Van Duyne, Mrs. Dingell, Mr. Moore of West Virginia, Mr. Horsford, Mr. Moran, Ms. De La Cruz, Ms. Pou, Ms. Randall, Mr. Moore of Alabama, Mr. Bishop, Mr. Aderholt, Ms. Stansbury, Mr. Fuller, Ms. Salinas, Mr. Guthrie, Ms. Simon, Ms. McClellan, Mr. McClintock, Mr. Cleaver, Mrs. McIver, Mr. Murphy, Mr. Hurd of Colorado, Mr. Stutzman, Mrs. Miller-Meeks, Ms. Rivas, Mr. Harris of Maryland, Mr. Boyle of Pennsylvania, Mr. Reschenthaler, Mr. Rogers of Kentucky, Mr. Allen, Mr. Moolenaar, Mr. Fry, Mr. Fleischmann, Mr. Kennedy of New York, Ms. Clarke of New York, Mrs. Sykes, Mr. Tonko, Ms. Jacobs, Mr. Womack, Mr. Scott Franklin of Florida, Mr. Taylor, Mr. Cuellar, Ms. DelBene, and Mr. Vindman.
H.R. 4443: Mr. Crow.
H.R. 4486: Mr. Van Orden and Ms. Morrison.
H.R. 4487: Ms. Brown.
H.R. 4504: Mr. Levin.
H.R. 4509: Mr. Begich.
H.R. 4528: Ms. Davids of Kansas and Ms. Chu.
H.R. 4611: Mr. Liccardo and Ms. Houlahan.
H.R. 4669: Mr. Wied.
H.R. 4696: Mr. Neguse, Mr. Boyle of Pennsylvania, Mr. Bera, Ms. Ansari, Ms. Brownley, Ms. Mejia, Ms. Bonamici, Mr. Frost, and Mrs. Watson Coleman.
H.R. 4771: Mr. Riley of New York.
H.R. 4792: Mr. Joyce of Pennsylvania.
H.R. 4806: Mr. Lawler and Mr. Lynch.
H.R. 4863: Mr. Baird and Mr. Gooden.
H.R. 4901: Mr. Quigley.
H.R. 4950: Mr. Griffith.
H.R. 4966: Ms. Chu.
H.R. 5168: Ms. Budzinski.
H.R. 5271: Mr. Kiley of California.
H.R. 5350: Ms. Randall.
H.R. 5364: Mr. Kennedy of Utah.
H.R. 5434: Ms. Schrier.
H.R. 5486: Mr. Mannion.
H.R. 5509: Mr. Dunn of Florida, Ms. Clarke of New York, and Mr. Ryan.
H.R. 5511: Ms. Castor of Florida.
H.R. 5688: Mr. Brecheen and Mr. Clyburn.
H.R. 5740: Mrs. Fletcher.
H.R. 5828: Mr. Mackenzie.
H.R. 5874: Mr. Timmons, Mr. Bergman, Mr. Kustoff, Mr. Steube, and Mr. Goldman of Texas.
H.R. 5940: Mr. Vicente Gonzalez of Texas and Ms. Wilson of Florida.
H.R. 6053: Mr. Quigley.
H.R. 6055: Mr. Langworthy.
H.R. 6124: Ms. Chu.
H.R. 6151: Ms. Schrier.
H.R. 6152: Mr. James and Mrs. Beatty.
H.R. 6170: Ms. Chu.
H.R. 6181: Mrs. McClain Delaney and Ms. Schrier.
H.R. 6280: Mr. Rutherford.
H.R. 6389: Mrs. Fletcher.
H.R. 6397: Mr. Foster.
H.R. 6466: Mr. Babin, Mr. Simpson, Mr. Goldman of Texas, Mr. McDowell, and Mr. Fine.
H.R. 6518: Mr. Newhouse.
H.R. 6542: Ms. Davids of Kansas.
H.R. 6830: Ms. Chu.
H.R. 6864: Mr. Moulton.
H.R. 6888: Mr. Cisneros.
H.R. 6924: Mr. Horsford.
H.R. 6958: Ms. Ross.
H.R. 6990: Ms. Chu.
H.R. 7016: Mrs. Grijalva.
H.R. 7173: Mrs. Fletcher.
H.R. 7520: Mr. Edwards and Mr. Thanedar.
H.R. 7601: Ms. Randall.
H.R. 7853: Mr. Cisneros and Mrs. Sykes.
H.R. 7902: Mr. Clyde.
H.R. 7944: Mr. Carey.
H.R. 7945: Mr. Kean.
H.R. 7976: Mr. Kean.
H.R. 8018: Mr. Bresnahan.
H.R. 8101: Mr. Sessions.
H.R. 8137: Mr. Nunn of Iowa.
H.R. 8207: Mr. Suozzi.
H.R. 8241: Ms. Pettersen.
H.R. 8254: Ms. Randall.
H.R. 8421: Mr. Riley of New York.
H.R. 8422: Mr. Fitzpatrick.
H.R. 8496: Mr. Lieu.
H.R. 8548: Ms. Chu.
H.R. 8549: Mrs. Watson Coleman.
H.R. 8582: Mr. Garcia of California, Ms. Tokuda, Mrs. Sykes, Ms. Matsui, and Ms. DeLauro.
H.R. 8596: Mr. Smith of Nebraska.
H.R. 8662: Mr. Joyce of Ohio.
H.R. 8690: Mrs. Watson Coleman.
H.R. 8691: Mr. Downing.
H.R. 8700: Mr. Flood.
H.R. 8730: Mrs. Sykes.
H.R. 8742: Ms. Lofgren and Ms. Chu.
H.R. 8898: Mrs. Kim.
H.R. 8921: Mr. Smith of Nebraska and Mr. Yakym.
H.R. 8941: Mr. Clyde.
H.R. 8952: Ms. Lofgren.
H.R. 8964: Mr. Cisneros.
H.R. 9000: Mr. Keating.
H.R. 9009: Mrs. Biggs of South Carolina.
H.R. 9021: Ms. Chu.
H.R. 9043: Mr. Owens, Mrs. Biggs of South Carolina, Ms. Ross, and Mrs. Kim.
H.R. 9110: Mr. Moore of Alabama.
H.R. 9133: Mr. Steube.
H.R. 9152: Mr. Gottheimer.
H.R. 9211: Mr. Timmons, Ms. Bynum, Mr. Babin, Ms. Lee of Nevada, Mr. Langworthy, and Mr. Panetta.
H.R. 9216: Mr. Green of Texas.
H.R. 9231: Ms. Lofgren.
H.R. 9250: Mr. Barrett, Mr. Cisneros, Mr. LaLota, and Ms. Omar.
H.R. 9268: Mr. Fitzpatrick.
H.R. 9289: Mrs. McClain Delaney.
H.R. 9298: Mr. Patronis, Mr. McDowell, Mr. Bost, Mr. Rutherford, Mr. Bergman, Mr. Steube, and Mr. Goldman of Texas.
H.R. 9304: Ms. Tenney.
H.R. 9305: Ms. Tenney.
H.R. 9340: Mr. Jordan and Mrs. Kiggans of Virginia.
H.R. 9350: Mr. Van Drew.
H.R. 9432: Mrs. McIver.
H.R. 9458: Mr. Jackson of Illinois.
H.R. 9537: Ms. Salazar.
H.R. 9553: Mr. Cisneros and Ms. Scholten.
H.R. 9594: Ms. Randall.
H.R. 9608: Mr. Rulli.
H.R. 9612: Mr. Kennedy of Utah.
H.R. 9615: Mr. Menendez.
H.R. 9640: Ms. Lee of Nevada.
H.R. 9641: Ms. Bonamici and Ms. Stansbury.
H.R. 9681: Mr. Pocan and Ms. Randall.
H.R. 9693: Mr. Keating.
H.R. 9694: Ms. Mace.
H.R. 9701: Mr. Smith of Nebraska, Mr. Rutherford, Mr. Barr, and Mr. Rose.
H.R. 9716: Mr. Begich and Mr. Cloud.
H.R. 9718: Mr. James.
H.R. 9719: Ms. Boebert.
H.R. 9736: Ms. Scholten.
H.R. 9745: Mr. Raskin.
H.R. 9748: Mrs. Grijalva.
H.R. 9788: Mrs. Kim.
H.R. 9795: Mr. Langworthy.
H.R. 9800: Mr. Barrett and Mr. Cloud.
H.R. 9809: Ms. Norton.
H.R. 9818: Mr. Cisneros.
H.R. 9826: Mr. Neguse.
H.R. 9827: Mr. Rutherford.
H.R. 9845: Mr. Deluzio.
H.R. 9868: Mr. Bost and Mr. Johnson of South Dakota.
H.R. 9874: Ms. Meng.
H.R. 9892: Mr. Lawler.
H.R. 9915: Mr. Fulcher.
H.R. 9937: Mr. Valadao.
H.R. 9944: Mrs. Fletcher.
H.R. 9959: Ms. Omar.
H.R. 9970: Mr. Bergman.
H.R. 10016: Mr. Lawler.
H.R. 10027: Mr. Cisneros.
H.R. 10040: Mr. Cisneros and Ms. Omar.
H.R. 10052: Ms. Gillen.
H.R. 10057: Mr. Cisneros.
H.R. 10083: Ms. Goodlander.
H.R. 10090: Mr. Harrigan.
H.R. 10094: Ms. DeLauro.
H.R. 10095: Mr. Fitzpatrick and Mr. Lynch.
H.R. 10111: Mr. Goldman of New York.
H.R. 10114: Mr. Correa.
H.R. 10119: Mr. Shreve.
H.R. 10131: Ms. Simon, Ms. Pelosi, Ms. Waters, and Mr. Vindman.
H.R. 10146: Ms. Chu.
H.R. 10157: Mr. Newhouse.
H.R. 10159: Mr. Rouzer.
H.R. 10178: Mr. McDowell.
H.R. 10186: Mr. Krishnamoorthi, Mr. McGovern, and Ms. Schakowsky.
H.J. Res. 122: Ms. Ross.
H.J. Res. 144: Mr. Landsman and Mr. Menendez.
H.J. Res. 189: Ms. Scholten and Ms. Omar.
H.J. Res. 210: Mr. Weber of Texas and Mr. Hunt.
H. Con. Res. 4: Mr. Goldman of Texas.
H. Con. Res. 37: Mr. Boyle of Pennsylvania and Mr. Norcross.
H. Res. 1219: Mr. Kean.
H. Res. 1285: Mrs. Fletcher.
H. Res. 1286: Ms. Clarke of New York and Mr. Johnson of Georgia.
H. Res. 1385: Ms. Scanlon, Ms. Tlaib, Ms. Stansbury, and Ms. Clarke of New York.
H. Res. 1430: Ms. Mace.
H. Res. 1497: Mr. Goldman of Texas.
Deletions of Sponsors from Public Bills and Resolutions
Page H5426 · Official textUnder clause 7 of rule XII, sponsors were deleted from public bills and resolutions, as follows:
Text printed in the Record (30 characters)
H.R. 10193: Ms. Lee of Nevada.