Unlocking our Domestic LNG Potential Act of 2024

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1009 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), who is my good friend, 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.

General Leave

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

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

House Resolution 1009 provides for consideration of H.R. 7176, which is the Unlocking our Domestic LNG Potential Act of 2024, under a closed rule with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective designees. It provides one motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, since President Biden took office, he has waged a war on American energy independence while supporting policies that have emboldened Vladimir Putin, the Ayatollah of Iran, and the dictator in Communist China, Chairman Xi.

Mr. Speaker, if you don't believe me, then let's go through some of the facts.

President Biden green-lit the Nord Stream 2 pipeline to provide Russian gas to Europe at the same time that he blocked the Keystone XL pipeline here at home. He has proposed and enacted rules that have devastated clean, coal-fired power plants while China approves two coal power plants a week.

He has deleted the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to its lowest levels since 1983 and sent millions of barrels of oil to where? Communist China.

Mr. Speaker, on the 22nd anniversary of 9/11, almost as if he was trolling patriotic Americans and the families of victims of 9/11, on that same day, he turned around and unfroze $6 billion in oil sanctions to Iran. Just days later, the Iranians turned around and helped fund a horrific, medieval, barbaric attack on our number one ally, the State of Israel.

The Biden administration's policies have truly embodied the slogan, America last. That is not all. You might be thinking there can't be more that he has done to devastate energy production and harm ourselves and our allies, but wait, there is more. We are going to talk about it right now.

Last month, this administration announced an indefinite pause in new approvals of liquefied natural gas exports. This deeply concerning decision puts American family-sustaining jobs and the security of not only ourselves but our allies and other partners around the globe at risk.

In the wake of Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine, our European allies have nearly tripled their import of U.S. LNG while significantly reducing their reliance on Russian natural gas.

Studies have shown that LNG exports can provide upward of $73 billion to the U.S. economy by 2040, create an additional 450,000 jobs, and help reduce global greenhouse gas emissions. Yet, Biden and his administration have tried to put a stop to all that.

This administration's actions will undoubtedly cause significant disruptions to the United States and global economies.

Let me be clear about one thing. The only people who stand to benefit from this decision are people based in Beijing, Tehran, and Moscow, and maybe White, affluent suburbs that vote for Joe Biden and want to feel good about themselves. Other than that, no one else benefits from this decision.

That is why House Republicans are bringing to the floor this week the bipartisan Unlocking our Domestic LNG Potential Act of 2024, which ends the Biden administration's ban on LNG exports and streamlines the permitting process by removing the Department of Energy from the approval process.

This week's vote will be very clear. Do you support American workers and American energy, or do you support authoritarian and Communist regimes abroad?

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

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

Mr. Speaker, there is a lot to rebut there, but let's start with the notion that we are here passing the same bill over and over again. That is simply not true. We are here for one reason and one reason only. Last month, Biden and the far-left radical Democrats catered to their base and put an indefinite ban on LNG exports.

Again, as I said in my opening, this is going to hurt American workers. This is going to hurt our allies and partners around the world. If you are worried about carbon emissions, it is going to be bad for the environment. Who benefits from this?

The people who benefit from this are Putin; the dictator in Communist China, Xi; and the Ayatollah in Iran. They are the only three that benefit from this. The loser, again, is the American worker and our allies abroad.

If you support dirty Russian and Iranian oil and gas, then go ahead and vote against this bill, but know that your vote supports them. If you support American energy and the American worker, then vote for this bill. That is why we are here today.

To talk about this being a handout to Wall Street and big corporations, I tell my colleague across the aisle that the early 2000s want their Democratic Party back because, the last time I checked, we are now the party that supports the people who shower after work, not before. They are the party of Wall Street, and we are the party of Main Street.

When President Biden took office, you can look at what he did. What he did was detrimental to Main Street, detrimental to the American workers, very beneficial to corporate America, and very beneficial to Wall Street.

When President Biden took office, inflation was at 1.4 percent. Since then, prices have risen 17.9 percent. That includes a 28.6 percent increase in electricity, a 20 percent increase in food prices, and an 18 percent increase in rent prices.

If you factor in inflation, wages have actually fallen 4 percent since Biden took office. For 26 straight months, inflation has outpaced wage growth. Last October, mortgage rates hit a 23-year high.

Today, Americans are spending just about $12,000 more per year just to buy the basics. That is like coming and saying we are going to take $1,000 out of your paycheck every month just to keep up with Bidenomics.

Who does that hurt? It doesn't hurt the executive working at BlackRock that sends money to the Democratic Party. It doesn't hurt the fat cats running corporations. It hurts the supporters and the American workers. The base of the Republican Party is who pays the price for this.

Mr. Speaker, for the Democrats to say that we are somehow concerned with Wall Street, that is their party. We are worried about Main Street on this side of the aisle.

Now, talking about Republicans not wanting to support our allies abroad, maybe I was asleep last week when the Democrats voted down a clean Israel aid package, because that aid package would have helped our allies abroad. I am not sure who my friend is talking about when he is saying we don't want to help our allies abroad.

It is very clear that we are the party who wants to support democracy abroad because the LNG issue is one of the most beneficial things we can do for our allies in Europe, in particular. Despite disaster after disaster on the foreign stage, this could actually help alleviate it.

Let's talk about Biden's disasters on the international stage. Biden's foreign policy has led to--and I will list it: a disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan that killed 13 Americans.

By the way, my friends across the aisle claim they care about women and children, but do you know who is paying the price for Biden's disaster in Afghanistan right now? It is all the women who had rights when we were there, and all the children that now have to grow up under the medieval-style rule of the Taliban.

Biden's disaster just didn't stop with Afghanistan. He also emboldened Iran to unleash a proxy network that killed American troops in the Middle East, along with three brave servicemembers lost in Jordan from Iran's aggression. Also, the Biden administration has had a failure to protect commercial shipping in the Red Sea from ragtag Houthi

rebels, which Biden delisted from the terrorist organization list.

This shouldn't be surprising, though. Former President Obama's own Defense Secretary commented that Joe Biden has been wrong on every single foreign policy decision he has ever made. I would submit to you that this LNG export ban is in that list of decisions that Biden has made for foreign policy that is simply wrong.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, again, there is a lot to rebut there.

If the gentleman wants to talk about Trump and foreign policy, let's talk about it.

It is not a coincidence that under the Obama administration, you had an aggressive Russia moving into Crimea. Then you have 4 years where Russia does not invade any of their neighbors. Then enter Joe Biden and the radical Democrats, and Vladimir Putin senses the weakness of Joe Biden and invades Ukraine.

I will take President Trump's record on the foreign stage over Joe Biden's record any day of the week. Furthermore, to suggest that President Trump doesn't care about the military and about advancing American interests abroad, I would remind the gentleman--maybe he forgot--that it was President Trump who took out Soleimani. It was President Trump who took out al-Baghdadi. It was President Trump that debilitated and destroyed ISIS. It was President Trump who brought forward the Abraham Accords that actually brought the promise of peace and stability to the Middle East.

I will take President Trump's foreign policy any day of the week, as would probably the Ukrainians, the Israelis, and the Taiwanese people.

Now, the comment about this bill benefiting authoritarian regimes, it is completely the opposite. If we limit our export of LNGs, the demand for LNGs abroad is not going to go away. That is fantasy land.

Our allies will still need liquefied natural gas, but instead of having the benefit of buying it from places like Pennsylvania and Oklahoma, our allies will have to buy it from places like Russia, Tehran, and Venezuela, for example.

So who are you supporting when you ban the export of LNG? I would submit to you that you are supporting the authoritarian regimes that you proclaim to despise.

Now, my friend and colleague--and I do consider him a friend--from Massachusetts made a comment that we are operating under a different set of facts. It is like we are looking at two different fact patterns. That might be right, but I think we are looking at two different decades.

Again, this is no longer 2006. This is a new Democratic Party. This is a Democratic Party made up of radical extremists, leftists, and the Republican Party has also shifted.

There was a comment about union jobs. It is pretty clear where the Democrats stand on union jobs when literally on day one of the Biden administration, right out of the gate, he cancels the Keystone XL Pipeline.

Do you know how many union jobs were lost? There were over 60,000 union jobs lost.

So the guy that is driving the EV to the yoga class, he might be happy that the Keystone XL Pipeline went down, but that is the guy that has the ``Ridin' with Biden'' bumper sticker on his car.

The guy that is actually driving to work in a truck, that is the guy who is voting Republican, so a different set of facts. I suggest a different decade. It is a new Republican Party, and it is a new Democratic Party, for sure. Those union workers are voting Republican.

Let's talk about what we have done in Congress so far. It is hard to prove a negative, but in some ways we can talk about the rush to the Green New Deal and us preventing a rush to the Green New Deal. If the Democrats were in power right now, we would be all in on the disastrous policies of the Green New Deal, which does nothing but benefit China. However, because we are in the majority, we have been able to stop extreme left positions and ideas.

Again, let's go back to the Green New Deal. The path forward for the Green New Deal has been propped up by adversaries like China. Why is that? It is because we rely on China for critical minerals. We need those critical minerals to build everything from an electric vehicle to a solar panel to windmills.

Biden's administration, by the way, openly admits this. According to his own Secretary of the Interior, the administration's rush to green policies has furthered our dependence on China. She said that in a hearing, by the way, in the Appropriations Committee's Subcommittee on the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies. She is right about that. China accounts for 63 percent of the world's rare earth mining, 85 percent of rare earth processing, and 92 percent of rare earth magnet production.

While Democrats hamper our domestic energy production, China is busy emitting more greenhouse gases than the U.S., the entire EU and Japan combined. China is the one that is bringing two coal-fired power plants online every week, two a week.

It is clear when the White House and congressional Democrats push for the Green New Deal, they are actually absolutely colorblind. What they really are pushing for is a red new deal that benefits our number one adversary, China.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I remind my friend across the aisle that when President Trump was naming those world leaders, those world leaders were actually alive.

Let's talk about Ukraine aid. I don't know if my friend knows my record, but it is pretty hard to find someone who is more hawkish on Russia than me. The difference with my position is I am consistent. My friends across the aisle are not.

It is amazing. The same people who are calling for a blank check for Zelenskyy, saying it will take as long as it takes, those are the same people who are telling our allies in Israel who are under attack every single day from the north, south, and west that they need an off-ramp, that they need to

turn it down. They are the ones who voted against a clean Israel aid package just last week.

I am very proud to be consistent. I don't like Russians in Ukraine, and I also don't like Hamas attacking Israel. I wish that consistency were across the aisle. I think my friends, though, are too beholden to their radical, anti-Israel, far-left base.

If we want to talk about Biden failures, there is more than just foreign policy. Let's talk about the border crisis. Joe Biden and Secretary Mayorkas, I would submit to you, have intentionally left the southern border open. Under President Trump's leadership, America never had a single month of over 150,000 illegal border crossings. It never crossed that threshold. Do you know what that number is under Joe Biden? Thirty-four. It is as if he is intentionally leaving the border open. This is an absolute dereliction of duty by Mayorkas and Joe Biden, and it is because they are beholden to their far-left radical extremist base.

Just how bad is this? Let's be clear. On day number one, this administration put in motion a border agenda that endangers our national security, exacerbates our fentanyl crisis, and puts our communities at risk.

Do you want to talk about more numbers? Every single day, roughly 300 Americans die of fentanyl overdoses. It happens every day. That would be like a commercial airliner once a day going down and my friends across the aisle not caring or saying anything about it. It is amazing the silence on the fentanyl issue.

It didn't have to be this way. Joe Biden could have had remain in Mexico. He could have had catch and release. He could have done numerous executive orders that President Trump did, but Joe Biden, Mayorkas, and, again, the extreme radical Democrats have refused to do anything to secure the border.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Langworthy), my good friend, to add more.

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

Mr. Speaker, let's refocus this debate on what we are here to discuss, and that is LNG exports, making sure that we are exporting clean liquefied natural gas to our allies abroad.

Let's talk about LNG export stats. In 2021, Russian gas accounted for more than 40 percent of the European Union's gas supply. Today, roughly 10 percent of the EU's natural gas supply still comes from Russia, a share that could be lowered further with U.S. LNG.

In 2022, the U.S. surged more than 800 LNG cargoes to Europe, a 141 percent increase from 2021.

In December 2023, more than 87 percent of the U.S. LNG exports went to the European Union, the United Kingdom, or Asian markets. U.S. LNG has helped reduce natural gas prices in Europe by over 83 percent from 2022 levels, following Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

American LNG has 41 percent lower lifecycle emissions than compressed natural gas from Russia. The Department of Energy estimates that LNG exports could add between $50 billion to $73 billion--that is ``billion''--to the U.S. economy by 2040 and create between 200,000 and 500,000 jobs as well as increase downstream industries like manufacturing. The top five importers of U.S. LNG are South Korea, Japan, France, the United Kingdom, and Spain.

By standing against LNG exports, you are reversing all this good that is coming from it. You are making our allies more dependent on Russia. You are hurting the environment because you are having our allies burn Russian gas that is 40 percent dirtier than any LNG that is coming from the United States. You are standing in the way of American jobs and the American economy by the devastating impact of stopping our LNG exports.

However, don't just take my word for it. Let's go through some quotes on LNG exports. Let's look at our European allies and what they say. Here is what Eurogas said: ``If additional U.S. LNG export capacities don't materialize, it would risk increasing and prolonging the global supply imbalance. This would inevitably prolong the period of price volatility in Europe and could lead to price increases with the consequent implications that would have for economic turmoil and social impact.''

Again, that is Eurogas. That is our European allies. That is not the Republican Party saying this.

Let's talk about the Directorate-General for Energy for the European Union. The director said:

We do not have the abundance of energy sources in Europe.

We need to rely on partners in the United States, and we need

to become as resilient as possible within that reality.

Again, what the director of the EU is saying is if they don't have LNG from the United States, they are going to go elsewhere.

Where is that elsewhere? That elsewhere is Russia.

Let's look at industry. My good friend Toby Rice, the CEO of EQT has said: ``These types of executive orders send a chilling effect through the industries and the investors.'' Again, that is Toby Rice, the CEO of EQT, the largest LNG exporter in the United States.

The American Petroleum Institute, American Exploration & Production Council, and other industry leaders have said: ``Any action to halt U.S. LNG export approvals would be a major mistake that puts American jobs and allies at risk while undermining''--wait for it--``global climate goals.''

Let's end with our friends from across the aisle. What are Democrats saying about LNG exports?

Well, Secretary of State Antony Blinken says: The U.S. is ``. . . now the leading supplier of LNG to Europe to help compensate for any gas or oil that it's losing as a result of Russia's aggression against Ukraine.''

It stands to reason that if you want to help Russia and do exactly the opposite of what Blinken is saying, you would stop LNG exports from the United States.

Let's look at what Secretary Granholm has said. ``I believe U.S. LNG exports can have an important role to play in reducing international consumption of fuels that have greater contribution to greenhouse gas emissions.'' That was Secretary Granholm, not exactly a right-winger.

Again, if you are against this bill, you are against all these individuals that are speaking up for U.S. LNG exports.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Alford), my good friend, to add more to the conversation.

Madam Speaker, two quick things.

Let me correct myself. I said EQT is the largest exporter. They are the largest producer in the United States.

Madam Speaker, I inform my friend across the aisle that I have no more speakers. I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I yield myself the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, this administration's decision will have long-lasting impacts on the workforce, including union jobs that my Democrat friends across the aisle claim to care about.

It will also have long-term lasting impacts on our country's long- term economic growth. That is why House Republicans will pass this legislation, which removes Biden's export regulations that add uncertainty to the market and that curtail production and decrease global price volatility prices at home and abroad.

The underlying legislation lowers global emissions, strengthens energy security, and creates thousands of family-sustaining jobs.

For those reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the previous question and ``yes'' on the rule.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I would say to my Republican friends, enough with the lectures. I just spent the last hour listening to the debate on the previous rule where the Republicans basically were saying the Democrats had an obligation to fix what the Republicans screwed up to begin with, that we basically have to clean up their mess.

I just heard the gentleman talk about our obligation to our allies as the basis for this crummy piece of legislation that we are now talking about. Really, to get a lecture from Republicans about our obligation to our allies while they are blocking aid to Ukraine as we speak? The Senate, with a 70-vote margin, passed in a bipartisan way aid, to provide essential aid to Ukraine so that Putin will not have a victory, will not invade Ukraine.

When I hear my friend talk about an obligation to our allies, I urge him to ask his Speaker to please let the House work its will to bring this bill to the floor. Let us have a vote. What we are talking about here today is ridiculous.

Mr. Speaker, this will be the fourth time this Congress that language either identical or nearly identical to this bill has been reported out of the Rules Committee. First, it passed as part of Republicans' destructive H.R. 1 energy package. Then, Republicans tried to pass it as a standalone bill but had to pull the rule for the bill from the floor because they didn't have the votes. The third time, the bill was put on the floor, but it failed to pass because the MAGA clown show threw a fit after not getting what they wanted. Here we are again, for the fourth time.

I don't know if my Republican friends have looked at the calendar recently, but Groundhog Day was actually last week. Maybe they think this is Nick at Nite, and they want to start airing more reruns.

This is Congress. This is Congress--Congress. The American people vote for us and pay us because they expect us to work together to get things done.

The only real difference this fourth time around is that Republicans--and you really can't make this stuff up--Republicans blocked Democratic amendments that were made in order the last two times. The last two times this bill came through the committee, they made two Democratic amendments in order. Now, they have been blocked because this is a completely closed rule.

Last night, I asked my colleagues across the aisle why. Why did you block two Democratic amendments that were germane and made in order the previous times we looked at this bill? Nobody could answer. My Republican friends kind of just looked at each other and shrugged.

I am assuming it must have been a directive of the Speaker. Maybe Speaker Johnson decided that he doesn't even want to pretend to care about bipartisanship anymore, and that is why he told Republicans to block Democratic amendments that were made in order in previous rules. We are dealing with a completely closed rule. The worst part is that this whole circus is for a garbage LNG bill.

Mr. Speaker, do you know who is happy about this Republican LNG bill? Big Oil CEOs, and fossil fuel tycoons. China is thrilled with what my Republican friends are doing today. Wall Street is applauding them.

This bill is awful for hardworking families. It is awful for people who are worried about high energy prices. It is awful for our climate.

The American people are worried about climate change. They say we need action. I don't know if my Republican colleagues got the memo, but climate change is real. Thankfully, President Biden is doing something about it.

Republicans still can't answer another simple question from us. Why do they want to turn LNG into a Wild West that mimics the oil market? For people who are sick of OPEC and Russia fixing the prices that we pay at the pump every day like I am, just know that this bill makes it easier for that to happen with LNG.

Republicans talk a big game on China. Their bill helps China and other

adversaries who rely on American LNG imports.

The truth is this is just another handout to the GOP's best friends. They want to make sure that Big Energy CEOs and corporations can pad their pockets while raising prices on all of us. Follow the money. Look who contributes to them. That tells you all you need to know about why we are dealing with this bill today.

This entire week is just a master class in Republican incompetence. My friend across the aisle tells us routinely how crucial their bills are and how important they are, and then the bills are defeated not by Democrats but by Republicans.

Republicans just wasted time debating a rule that would bring to the floor a 1-year, limited fix to the SALT problem that they created with their Trump tax scam. They caused the problem. Now, we are debating a rule that they didn't have the votes for last week, and it is likely to fail on the floor today.

Last night, they impeached Secretary Mayorkas by one vote. They had to rush and redo that one before Tom Suozzi was sworn in.

The Rules Committee is supposed to meet on a new FISA bill later today, our third attempt this Congress. Maybe this one will pass. Who knows?

Everything we are doing this week is a rerun: another impeachment vote, the FISA bill, the SALT bill, and this LNG bill. This is all because Republican leadership keeps bringing half-baked ideas to the floor without knowing where their own Conference stands. It didn't work the first time or even the second or third time. I guess we have to do it again.

Look at what is going on in this country. My Republican friends are barely hanging on to this majority by their fingernails.

Mr. Speaker, you would think that Republicans would look at the results of last night's election and have a come to Jesus moment. The American people are rejecting Republican extremism. They are voting against Republicans' cynical move to tank the bipartisan border deal.

I don't know if you looked at some of the exit polls and some of the commentary about people who were voting yesterday. People are puzzled why my Republican friends made such a big deal about the border crisis. Then, you have a bipartisan border deal that is negotiated in the Senate, and then the Speaker of the House says it will never see the light of day and that we don't need any legislation. People are seeing through this cynicism.

People are against the sham impeachment of Secretary Mayorkas. What an offensive waste of time that was yesterday. I don't know, maybe MAGA-based donors are impressed by that kind of behavior, but it does nothing about anything at the border. It is more grandstanding. People are sick of that.

Here is the deal. People actually want Republicans to work with Democrats to get stuff done. What a radical idea that, in Congress, people would try to work together to pass legislation to help improve the lives of the people we represent.

That is not what this is today. That is not what we have been seeing the last several months.

Mr. Speaker, I pointed this out the other day, but I think it is worth repeating. The Rules Committee is kind of the traffic cop of Congress. Almost every major piece of legislation that comes to the floor goes to the Rules Committee, certainly legislation of consequence.

The last time the Rules Committee brought a bill to the House floor that actually became law, that passed the Senate and was signed by the President, was 9 months ago. All this time, bringing these messaging bills to the floor, the impeachment of Mayorkas, all this garbage that is being brought to the floor, none of it becomes law.

Why are you here? Mr. Speaker, we are here today considering the same old bills over and over again because the Republican Party has nothing to offer but chaos, confusion, and disarray.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Pennsylvania just kind of regurgitated a whole bunch of statistics. I am not going to rebut every single one of them. He went through a whole litany of things that are wrong with our country.

Here is a novel idea for Republicans: rather than just complain, maybe actually try and find some solutions. If all the things the gentleman says are problems that we need to deal with, then my suggestion is to get about the business of passing legislation in a divided Congress to fix them.

This is the least productive Congress, I think, in decades or maybe even since the Great Depression. My friends have done nothing. They have done nothing.

They come to the floor and they complain. This is not just a do- nothing Congress, this is a do-nothing Congress over and over and over again. We are doing reruns this week. We have dealt with this legislation. This is the fourth time we are dealing with it, and I predict we will probably deal with it a fifth, a sixth, a seventh, and an eighth time before the end of the year when, hopefully, your majority comes to an end.

I don't want to be lectured about jobs from somebody who supported Donald Trump, who when he was President, had the worst jobs record since the Great Depression. I don't want to be lectured about blue- collar workers. I come from an area in Massachusetts where we actually stand proudly with our unions, something that my Republican colleagues fight against every single day in this Chamber.

I will just give some friendly advice to the gentleman based on the results of last night's election, which my Republican friends were predicting a victory, but I am saying that the reason why you did not win last night is because people think that what you are doing is not the right thing.

Your ideas are unpopular, and they are sick of the incompetence and the inaction. They are sick of the complaining and no solutions. You complain about the border. Democrats and Republicans work together in the Senate to come up with a bill. Maybe it is not everything you want, but it was negotiated by some pretty conservative, rightwing Republicans. Rather than bring it to the House floor so we can have a debate and a vote, the Speaker and Republican leadership says it is not allowed to be considered on the House floor.

Again, the gentleman talks about national security. None of us can understand the game the Republicans are playing with Ukraine. How can you do this to the Ukrainian people, playing into the hands of Vladimir Putin? Are Republicans cheering a Putin victory against Ukraine? If so, that is sick.

The Senate passed this in an overwhelmingly bipartisan manner, and the Speaker said it is dead on arrival. We can't even consider it here. I just want to also say, because I think it is important for the record, that last night in the Rules Committee, Ms. Scanlon of Pennsylvania offered an amendment to the rule to make in order amendment No. 2 to H.R. 7176, offered by Representative Houlahan, which requires the commission to deny applications with regard to covered foreign countries including China, North Korea, Russia, and Iran, as well as foreign entities owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of the government of those countries.

Do you know what happened, Mr. Speaker? It was defeated 4-9. Mr. Burgess, Mr. Reschenthaler, Mrs. Fischbach, Mr. Massie, Mr. Norman, Mr. Roy, Mrs. Houchin, Mr. Langworthy, and Chairman Cole all voted ``no.'' They all voted against making that amendment in order, which would have made sure that none of these countries that I just mentioned would benefit in any way, shape, or form.

Sometimes we come to the floor to debate these issues, and I am not quite sure whether we are dealing in reality or an alternate universe. The bottom line is, if the gentleman cared about the things he just said, why couldn't we make this amendment in order and have an up-or- down vote on it? Why was this such a radical idea? Why was this such a bad thing to do?

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Ryan), a great colleague.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York.

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

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

Boy, that is a lot to try to wrap my head around, listening to the gentleman from Pennsylvania. This is not just reruns week in terms of legislation. It is reruns week in terms of talking points.

The previous President, Mr. Trump, who my Republican friends are so enamored with, let me just remind you of some of what he was all about.

He called President Xi brilliant. He said he got love letters from Kim Jong-un of North Korea, and then he said: ``We fell in love.'' Who says that?

He says Prime Minister Orban is one of the strongest leaders in the world.

He can't say enough nice things about Vladimir Putin. While he was President, Vladimir Putin was planning his invasion of Ukraine.

The other day, Donald Trump said, do you know what? If NATO doesn't do what I want, then I don't care whether or not Putin invades them. Who says that?

Biden has united the world against Putin's aggression in Ukraine. Rather than helping Ukraine stand up to Vladimir Putin, my friends on the other side of the aisle are basically giving him a gift. They are denying essential aid to help the Ukrainian people repel a violent and vicious attack by Vladimir Putin.

What is wrong with this place, Mr. Speaker, that this is where we are?

I don't know whether my friend from Pennsylvania supports the Ukrainian people in their struggle to prevent Russia from invading them or not. If he does, then he should join with us and say let's have a vote. I mean, they are literally down to bullets.

Putin is ecstatic. Putin is thrilled that the Republican leadership in this Congress is holding up aid that will prevent Ukraine from being able to repel a Russian invasion. Putin is thrilled.

Please, give me a break.

Putin is a thug. He is a dictator. He is trying to re-create an old empire. The idea that people in this Chamber are sitting by and saying, okay, do whatever you want, I never ever thought we would ever get to this point, but here we are.

We are debating a bill for the fourth time that is going nowhere, and my friends are pretending like it is some big deal. It is a nothing burger, yet we can't bring legislation to the floor to help the Ukrainian people.

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

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

What the American people are sick of is all of this. I mean, the disingenuousness of what is being said here takes my breath away.

The gentleman talks about the border. When conservative Republicans negotiated a bipartisan border deal, and Donald Trump said we would rather have it as an election issue than actually do anything, the Speaker decided to pull it.

The same with our allies. The idea is that Vladimir Putin has viciously attacked Ukraine, and my Republican friends are standing by and cheering Putin on. I can't believe we are at the point we are at in this Congress.

What the American people are sick of is this do-nothing Republican majority, and they can't wait, quite frankly, to replace this current regime, as evidenced by the election last night.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article from Newsweek titled: ``Chip Roy Furiously Tears Into Fellow Republicans.''

Mr. Roy took to the floor and said: ``One thing. I want my Republican colleagues to give me one thing--one--that I can go campaign on and say we did. One. Anybody sitting in the complex, if you want to come down to the floor and come explain to me one material, meaningful, significant thing the Republican majority has done.''

Frankly, it seems like my fellow colleague on the Rules Committee and I agree on something: The Republican majority has been useless. It has done nothing unless you enjoy lurching from crisis to crisis or peddling sham impeachments.

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

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

Madam Speaker, my friend from Pennsylvania talked about his good friend, some CEO of some LNG corporation that he is worried about.

You know what? I am more worried about the consumers in this country who will see their energy costs rise, potentially, if this bill were ever to become law.

I will make two quick points. This bill is going nowhere because it is written in such a way that it will not get bipartisan support in the House or in the Senate, and it certainly will not make it to the President's desk and will not be signed into law. For the fourth time, I will say that this bill is going nowhere, and this is a colossal waste of time.

The second point I make is this Congress is doing nothing not only on energy, but it is doing nothing on everything that matters to the American people.

My Republican friends have spent more time electing a Speaker and then replacing a Speaker and on useless, baseless impeachments than they have on actually legislating.

Here is a radical idea. We get elected to Congress. We should work together to try to pass legislation that becomes law, that will improve the quality of life for the people we represent. That is something that is foreign to my friends on the other side of the aisle.

Madam Speaker, it has become a familiar pattern by now. We have a looming government shutdown. We have urgent issues at home that require congressional action. We have pressing national security challenges and wars abroad, and Republicans are wasting time on impeachment stunts, silly censures, and MAGA messaging bills.

I mean, look. They have us here debating the same bill for the fourth time. We can pass it 4 times or 400 times. It doesn't matter because it is not written in a way that can become law in a divided government. My friends won't admit that on the floor, but we all know it is true.

Meanwhile, the Senate is sending us bipartisan bills that Speaker Johnson refuses to bring to the floor. The Speaker doesn't seem to think that his job is to solve problems, but rather, he thinks his job is to block bipartisan solutions.

We had a bipartisan immigration solution. It was blocked.

Well, guess what? My Republican friends now own the issue. You are responsible, solely now, for what is going on at the border. You are responsible for the fentanyl crisis in this country.

We had a bipartisan bill that was passed in the Senate to help aid our allies in Ukraine and in Israel. The Republican leadership is blocking it, can't even get a vote. You are responsible.

Madam Speaker, my friends on the other side are responsible for basically setting the world afire right now, creating all this insecurity and potentially giving Vladimir Putin a free pass to go in and invade Ukraine. I never thought we would be at this point.

The bottom line is this: Democrats want to work together with Republicans to get things done. They seem to be able to do that in the Senate.

I never thought I would ever say anything nice about the Senate, but they are working in a bipartisan way. That is why President Biden had us sit down and negotiate a bipartisan border deal.

That is why Democrats work with Republicans in the Senate to come up with a bipartisan deal to address our national security challenges.

The Speaker of the House says: The House should work its will. Then the Republicans refuse to bring bipartisan bills up for a vote on the floor because they are afraid of MAGA, they are afraid of Trump, and they are afraid that these bills will pass.

Having a campaign issue seems more important than solving a problem. It didn't work for my friends last night. This idea that my friends have about not solving problems, that somehow that is good for their election chances didn't seem to pan out last night.

What Republicans need to realize is that they control one-half of one branch of government and only barely.

They are not dictators--at least not yet. They have a two-seat majority in the House--two seats--because the American people voted against extremism last night.

This bill that we are talking about here today, the infomercials that are being delivered on the floor, they are going nowhere.

The reason why my friends keep losing is they keep following the most extreme Members of their Conference. People don't want the solutions that Marjorie Taylor Greene brings before Congress.

They don't want a deranged former President who has been indicted more times than he has been elected to be calling the shots here. They want leaders that have vision, not petulant children that have nothing to offer but division.

Madam Speaker, my Republican friends lost last night for the same reason I believe you will lose in November. You have nothing to offer, nothing at all, but division, chaos, and incompetence. This is just a continuation of that.

What is happening here is we are debating trivial issues passionately, but important ones, not at all. There are important issues that we need to deal with and to debate and to legislate on right now that affect the people of this country, that affect people all over the world, and we are doing this--bringing back a bill for the fourth time, a bill that we all know is going nowhere because it has been written so poorly and in such a partisan fashion.

If my friends want to be serious about governing, you are going to have to learn to work with us. It is that simple. Take ``yes'' for an answer and work with us for the good of the American people.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, it is good to be back on the House floor with the gentlewoman from Indiana. It is great to be with her, and so far, she is allowing me to actually speak and hasn't called for me to be silenced.

The last time we debated, I stated an uncomfortable fact about he who shall not be named and the gentlewoman had me silenced, had my words stricken from the Congressional Record.

You just have to love that, Mr. Speaker. The party of free speech that rails against woke this and cancel culture that, and calls us snowflakes, can't handle it when someone comes down here and tells the truth. They try to silence the people they disagree with. It is really quite stunning.

Here is more of the truth, and let's see if I am allowed to talk this time.

Mr. Speaker, under Republican control, the House of Representatives has become a place where trivial issues get debated passionately and important ones not at all. What we are dealing with today is a bunch of weird, whacky, poorly drafted culture war nonsense.

This is all just a waste of time. These bills aren't going anywhere. It is not even political theater. It is theater of the absurd.

The government shuts down in a few days, and instead of actually working with Democrats to keep the lights on, instead of actually doing something to fix the problems that the American people want us to fix, my Republican friends are doing nothing.

The roof is on fire, and instead of calling 911, they are sweeping the floors. I mean, it is beyond nuts.

Last night in the Rules Committee, during our hearing on this rule, I had some Republican Members telling me they didn't like my tone. They didn't like the fact that I said we don't share the same values.

I am sorry I hurt people's feelings, Mr. Speaker, but the truth is the truth. We don't all believe in the same things. When it comes to my friends on the other side of the aisle in this Chamber, we really don't share the same values. I know many of my friends on the Republican side are nice and good people, but their ideas are not nice and are not good.

Let me just give you a couple of examples.

Democrats want to make sure that our kids go to college and get a good education that prepares them for the workforce, and instead of working with us, Republicans go on and on about woke this and woke that in our schools.

Apparently, anyone who wants to teach facts is woke nowadays. They want colleges to stop being ``woke,'' even though they can't quite define what that even means. It is all political BS, Mr. Speaker.

Here is another example. Democrats actually want an economy that works for everyone, and thanks to the Biden-Harris administration, we are fighting to grow the economy from the bottom up and the middle out, but not Republicans. They are talking about woke economic policies.

I don't even know what they are talking about or what they mean, but do you want to know what people back home talk to me about? They are asking me: Why are Republicans trying to cut taxes for millionaires and billionaires? Why are Republicans trying to go after Social Security and Medicare?

Another example, Mr. Speaker, is that Democrats actually care about strengthening and protecting the Violence Against Women Act, but not Republicans. A majority of their Conference voted against extending the Violence Against Women Act. Let me say that again: A majority of their Conference voted against extending the Violence Against Women Act.

Now, they have the nerve to come down here and talk about violence against women and use it as part of their sick ploy to go after immigrants. Give me a break. Their bill is so poorly written that it could hurt survivors of domestic violence.

I could go right down the list. It is obvious to me that, at some point, the RNC talking points went out to everybody, and those talking points said woke, woke, woke. Now, we have to waste time on this trash.

It is just another week of the GOP circus. As I have said before, calling this a clown show is an insult to actual working clowns.

Most of all, it is an insult to the American people for Republicans to use these hallowed Halls and to spend hours and hours of time this week on these absurd, awful bills. Again, none of them are going anywhere.

The reason to be in Congress is to help people. That means putting people over politics. It means not caving in to the most extreme members of your party. It means getting stuff done, which is a radical idea.

None of these bills, as I said, are going anywhere. Yet, here we are, playing these absurd, ridiculous games.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I enjoyed listening to the chairman of the Rules Committee, but let me just state for the record that nothing he talked about will be at all impacted by any of the stuff that we are talking about here today. None of these bills are going anywhere.

If you want to pass legislation to address some of the issues that were raised, maybe we ought to work in a bipartisan way. Maybe it ought not to be ``my way or the highway.''

These aren't serious pieces of legislation. These are press releases. Let's all be honest with the American people about that. This is not serious legislating. We haven't done serious legislating here in a long time.

Mr. Speaker, I will zoom in a little bit on this Congress in general. I just mentioned that this is the most dysfunctional Congress in history. If anyone wants proof, look no further than this resolution: five more closed rules that allow zero amendments to come to the floor.

Mr. Speaker, for folks who don't know, a closed rule means no amendments. It means: Take it or leave it. If you have a good idea and want to improve a bill, too bad.

This is how they govern in Russia and China, and that is what the Republicans are turning this place into.

With these five closed rules they are bringing to the floor today, Republicans are breaking their own record for shutting down debate. With today's vote, there will be 106 closed rules in this Congress-- 106. This is now officially the most closed Congress in the history of the United States of America.

Mr. Speaker, what gets me is that my friends on the other side have been totally fooled. They were tricked by their own leadership, first by Speaker McCarthy and now Speaker Johnson.

The gentlewoman from Indiana and her colleagues on the Rules Committee were promised a more open process. They were told the Rules Committee was going to be different, more open, would have more regular order and more amendments, and more debate.

Speaker McCarthy was even blackmailed into putting members of the Freedom Caucus on the Rules Committee to guarantee a more open process, but apparently, it didn't matter because he totally broke his promise, and now Speaker Johnson is shredding it.

During the first 9 months under Speaker Johnson, we saw 64 closed rules, even more than the 42 closed rules we saw under Speaker McCarthy. They traded a bad Speaker for an even worse one. Republican leaders have blocked 5,799 amendments from even coming to the floor. Mr. Speaker, 5,799 amendments have been blocked from coming to the floor by the Republican majority.

By the way, they are not just Democratic amendments. They blocked Republican, bipartisan, and Democratic amendments. They blocked an amendment to disrupt the smuggling of U.S. firearms across the Mexican border. They blocked an amendment to combat fentanyl trafficking at ports of entry.

Holy hell, Mr. Speaker, they even blocked my amendment to protect food for seniors who participate in the Meals on Wheels program. They have even blocked over half of their own Republican Members' amendments.

Let me say that again. Most Republican amendments have been blocked by this Congress. These amendments have been prevented from even seeing the light of day or getting a debate on the House floor. There have been 98 amendments that Rules Committee Republicans had either authored or supported that have been blocked by their own majority.

When you are on the Rules Committee, you like to have a little juice, but 98 of your amendments, Republican amendments, have been blocked by your own party. That is almost 100 amendments, and that is just Rules Republicans.

I am sure they would have loved to have had the opportunity to debate their amendments on the floor. If Rules Committee Republicans can't get amendments, how the hell do you think the rest of us are doing?

Republicans said they wanted an open process in this Congress. They want an open process, my foot, Mr. Speaker.

Under this majority, the Rules Committee has become a place where democracy goes to die. Their Members should be outraged with the Speaker and this leadership just as much as Democrats should be. Again, 106 completely closed rules blocked all amendments--a shameful statistic, an all-time authoritarian high set under this Republican majority.

Let's look at the results. Look at what they have to show for it. Republicans had the most unproductive Congress in the history of the United States of America.

Mr. Speaker, 26 days we went without a Speaker because they were fighting with each other. Weeks were wasted with failed rule votes while they argued among themselves instead of negotiating with Democrats.

There were broken promises on the appropriation process where they kicked the can down the road with another failed CR, bringing us to the brink of catastrophic debt default and then asking Democrats to bail them out. Mr. Speaker, 10 months of passing no legislation through the Rules Committee that ever became law.

I congratulate my friends. In addition to being the most incompetent, dysfunctional, unproductive Congress in American history, they now have also presided over the most closed Congress in American history. Well done, well done, and they are not done yet. We have to live through 3 more months of this. God help us.

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

Mr. Speaker, again, I reiterate what the gentleman from South Carolina just said. We have different viewpoints and different values.

I am sorry that he feels he lives in a wrecked country. I don't believe that. I think the United States of America is the greatest country on this planet, and I am proud to serve in Congress to try to help the people of this country. I would never refer to this country as a ``wrecked country.''

Again, the gentleman who just spoke, I thought when he was appointed to the Rules Committee, he was appointed to make sure that we had a more open process.

I regret to inform the gentleman that 106 closed rules slipped by him this Congress. I appreciate him standing in the breach.

By the way, when he refers to all the amendments that were rejected as being dumb, 50 percent of them were Republican amendments.

I think 27 of your amendments were denied. I wouldn't classify them as dumb, even though I may disagree with the intent.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record a list of the 106 closed rules issued by the Republican majority in the 118th Congress.

Mr. Speaker, beneath all these statistics about closed rules are actual ideas that are being blocked from being debated on the House floor.

These are thoughtful proposals that Members have worked hard to develop, ideas to help actual people, and they deserved a debate in an up-or-down vote.

They are proposals like this: An amendment to disrupt the smuggling of U.S. guns across the Mexico border to help cartels, an amendment authorizing funding for DHS to combat fentanyl trafficking at our ports of entry, and an amendment to prevent cuts to Meals on Wheels.

Those are home-delivered meals to seniors, Mr. Speaker, and that was my amendment, by the way, so I can assure you that it was a very, very good idea.

They even blocked an amendment to provide postpartum mental health information to pregnant students, and that was a Republican amendment.

Mr. Speaker, Republicans haven't just blocked amendments by reporting out closed rules. Their structured rules, the rules that allowed a few amendments, have also continually blocked thoughtful, rule-complied amendments.

They seem especially focused on blocking Democratic ideas from a debate in an up-or-down vote on the floor. A quarter of their structured rules--get this--blocked all Democratic amendments.

Now, let me quickly just list a few ideas that Republicans were either too afraid to debate or couldn't spare 10 minutes for consideration on the House floor: An amendment to protect children from getting asthma; amendments to ensure the regulation of dark money in politics, and to prevent corrupt pay-to-play political donation deals with Federal contractors; and an amendment to provide cancer screenings to Federal firefighters as part of their DOD annual physicals, when we know they are exposed to cancer-causing chemicals as part of their jobs. There is simply no excuse for this, Mr. Speaker.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, after listening to the gentlewoman from Minnesota, I was confused when she said, you don't offer alternatives. That is what amendments are. They are alternative ideas.

I just went through a list of some of the alternatives we wanted to offer dealing with firefighters and cancer screening, dealing with children with asthma, and dealing with making sure senior citizens have adequate access to nutrition. Those are alternatives. Those are ideas.

My friends, unfortunately, are in control of this place, so they get to bring the bills to the Rules Committee.

We try to present alternatives through the amendment process, but here is another alternative. If we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 16, the American Dream and Promise Act of 2023.

Mr. Speaker, the bigoted hatred that we are seeing directed at immigrants in Ohio and across the country is sickening. According to research done by the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism, there has been a rise in conspiracy theories that stigmatize minorities and promote hatred of ethnically diverse communities.

Get this. Politicians' use of bigoted rhetoric can also play a role in hate crime incidents. It is sad, but to be frank, we didn't need researchers to tell us this.

We can see and we can hear it from the Republican Party every single day, and it does a grave disservice to the Dreamers, to TPS holders, and to DACA recipients in this country who only know America as their home.

These are taxpayers, small business owners, educators, and critical parts of our communities. Dreamers were brought to the United States as children through no fault of their own, and it is past time to grant them the pathway to citizenship that they rightly deserve.

Mr. Speaker, let me be clear. There is a lot of work that needs to be done to fix our broken immigration system and secure our border, but unlike the messaging bills before us this week, this is a bill that actually does something, and it is actually bipartisan. It sends the message that we are sick of the vitriol and hate crimes against this community and that we value their many contributions that make this country a better place.

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.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Escobar), a great leader, to discuss our proposal.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Garcia), who will also speak on the importance of defeating the previous question.

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

You have got to love when Republicans try to talk tough about immigration reform. I just want to remind my colleagues that one of the most conservative Senators in the United States Senate is from Oklahoma. He wrote a comprehensive immigration reform bill that has some very tough provisions in it. Their standard-bearer, the man who I cannot name on the floor for fear that my words will be taken down, told Republicans to not allow it to come to the floor for debate or a vote.

They would rather have a campaign issue than to solve a problem. I mean, let that sink in. Let that sink in.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article from the National Institute of Justice titled: ``Undocumented Immigrant Offending Rate Lower Than U.S.-born Citizen Rate.''

Mr. Speaker, all day long, Republicans spout hateful rhetoric about undocumented immigration and crime because they want us to be scared and they want to divide us, but their claims are simply not rooted in truth. In fact, undocumented immigrants are less likely, not more, than U.S.-born citizens to commit crimes, including violent crime.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article by the CATO Institute titled: ``Sanctuary Jurisdictions in Florida Do Not Have Higher Crime Rates.''

Mr. Speaker, there is no evidence, none, either in Florida or in the rest of the country that sanctuary cities result in more crime. There is none, zero. However, that won't matter to Republicans because they are unmoved by the facts.

Mr. Speaker, earlier I listed some examples of ideas that Republicans blocked from even being considered on the floor. Here are a few more. I just want people to appreciate this.

An amendment that would protect access to IVF for Federal employees, they blocked it.

They blocked an amendment to require a study for Tribal consultations before enactment of an oil and gas bill that could affect their subsistence resources.

An amendment to make critical targeted investments in small-town police departments for the recruitment, retention, mental health support, and training they need to protect themselves and their communities, they blocked that, too.

They blocked an amendment to ensure continued access to emergency care for pregnant servicewomen at military treatment facilities.

Maybe Republicans don't believe in IVF or any of these other ideas, but they can just vote ``no.'' Why block these ideas from even being debated unless they are afraid they would pass?

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

Mr. Speaker, I am not prepared to close yet. There may be someone else.

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

I want to get back to this extraordinary closed House. I just want everybody to appreciate how awful this process is.

Here are yet more examples of ideas that were too scary, too revolutionary, too controversial to even be debated on the House floor, according to this Republican majority:

An amendment to provide grants to organizations that are helping to transition servicemembers to civilian life, including job recruitment training, they blocked that. I mean, what are they thinking? Who does that?

They blocked an amendment to ensure that students with dietary restrictions like lactose intolerance can have an alternative to whole milk at lunch. Is lactose intolerance now woke? I mean, I don't get it. That was blocked.

They blocked an amendment to ensure that a bill wouldn't cause our domestic energy prices to increase.

I ask, again, what is the majority afraid of? I mean, we have our differences. We ought to have substantive debate on the floor and then have votes. I am willing to bet there are some thoughtful Republicans who would support some of these amendments that I mentioned here.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time I have remaining.

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

We have heard a lot about wokeness here today, but I want to focus on the woke Democratic ideas that Republicans have blocked in this record- breaking closed Congress. I mean, ideas like protecting IVF, fighting fentanyl trafficking, and making sure lactose-intolerant students have something nutritious to drink at lunch. Wow. I mean, that those ideas are woke is crazy.

There have been 106 closed rules. That is a big number, a record- breaking number, but much more important is what that number represents. These ideas and all the other blocked amendments I highlighted would have helped everyday Americans. Is that woke? Is it woke to try and keep kids from getting asthma, to provide job training to veterans? To provide cancer screenings to firefighters, is that woke?

Mr. Speaker, I don't know what my Republican colleagues are afraid of. Maybe they are afraid to vote ``no.'' Maybe they are afraid to vote ``yes.'' This is Congress, Mr. Speaker. We are here to take hard votes. This record-breaking number of closed rules is a disservice to the people the Republicans represent.

Mr. Speaker, while Republicans want to talk about being woke, I wish instead that they would wake the hell up and do the people's business. For example, I don't know, maybe pass a bill to prevent a government shutdown. What we are doing today is merely a political exercise. Their obsession with trying to inject politics and culture wars into everything is getting really old, almost as old as the Presidential nominee.

Let me just say I love this place, and I love all the different things that we have been called on to do. I will just say this, Mr. Speaker: I want everybody to join with me and let's end this. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

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.

General Leave

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

Mr. Speaker, last night, the Rules Committee met and produced a rule, H. Res. 1455, providing for the House's consideration of seven pieces of legislation.

First, the rule provides for H.R. 3724, the End Woke Higher Education Act, to be considered under a structured rule.

Second, the rule provides for H.R. 4790, the Prioritizing Economic Growth Over Woke Policies Act, under a closed rule.

Third, the rule provides for H.R. 5339, the Protecting Americans' Investments from Woke Policies Act, under a closed rule.

Fourth, the rule provides for H.R. 5179, the Anti-BDS Labeling Act, under a closed rule.

The rule provides for H.R. 7909, the Violence Against Women by Illegal Aliens Act, and H.R. 5717, the No Bailouts for Sanctuary Cities Act.

Mr. Speaker, I support this rule and the underlying legislation, beginning with H.R. 3724, the End Woke Higher Education Act.

As a Member of the Education and the Workforce Committee, we have spent countless hours addressing the serious issues within higher education under the Biden administration, where activism is often prioritized and differing viewpoints are silenced.

These conversations have become increasingly necessary, as we have seen waves of anti-Semitic protests where students are supporting terrorist organizations, and these protests are sweeping the Nation.

Too many institutions of higher education have cowered to the mob of protesters, often compromising the safety and well-being of their students. Freedom of speech is under attack on our campuses nationwide, and it is our students who are paying the price.

This mindset weakens what has historically been the strength of America: free-flowing and open debate at our institutions of learning. We must not let campus activists, woke faculty, and partisan administrators turn post-secondary education into DEI indoctrination camps. Denying speech undermines the very fabric of the Nation and is against everything our Founders intended.

Mr. Speaker, I am glad this legislation includes my Students Bill of Rights Act of 2024, which aims to address the erosion of First Amendment rights faced by students, and provides protections for academic freedom and expression.

Our students should never feel afraid to express their point of view or fear retribution or negative consequences for their future.

This woke mind virus doesn't stop there, which brings me to H.R. 5339, the Protecting American Investments from Woke Policies Act. It protects the retirement savings of workers, retirees, and their families by rolling back woke ESG requirements that have nothing to do with the bottom line.

The bill ensures that financial institutions are focused on maximizing returns in retirement plans rather than advancing the Biden- Harris administration's radical agenda at the expense of American workers. Forcing often underperforming and relatively high-risk investments on our seniors is not what they are asking us to do in this Chamber.

In this spirit, I am glad the bill includes one of my pieces of legislation, the Retirement Proxy Protection Act. The bill ensures that fiduciaries prioritize economic interests of plan beneficiaries when voting on shareholder proposals.

Finally, the rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 4790, a comprehensive bill package targeting unelected bureaucrats.

Time and time again, this administration has prioritized, again, an ESG agenda and initiatives that are against the well-being of workers and American businesses.

Democrat-appointed bureaucrats are attempting to use regulation to create climate and social policy in our financial markets, ultimately raising costs and limiting growth.

This legislation aims to stop unnecessary political reporting requirements for companies, make Federal regulators more transparent, and reduce the SEC's power over shareholders.

I am proud that another one of my bills, the No Expensive, Stifling Governance Act, or No ESG Act, is included as part of this package.

I will also touch on a bill brought forward by the gentleman from New York (Mr. LaLota), my friend, H.R. 5717, the No Bailout for Sanctuary Cities Act.

I am proud to be a cosponsor of this bill. Despite the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 clearly stating that no restrictions can be placed on communication between local or State authorities and Federal immigration officials about someone's immigration status, many cities still choose not to comply.

We have known for years that sanctuary cities create incredible challenges for Federal law enforcement, and in doing so, public safety is endangered.

Let's take Aurora, Colorado, for example. They are experiencing unprecedented gang violence due to a neighboring sanctuary city.

We also know that the Biden-Harris administration has been a master class in how to not handle border security. This administration has totally failed, alongside the sanctuary cities, in enforcing our immigration laws because the crime that finds a home in a sanctuary city spreads to other jurisdictions.

If sanctuary cities choose to operate this way and endanger their own communities, neighboring communities, and, ultimately, the entire Nation, then they must be forced to balance their irresponsible choices with the loss of other Federal support. It is pretty simple: If you fail to comply with the law, you should not expect support.

Our constituents understand and also demand that their tax dollars not support sanctuary cities that actively undermine their public safety and our immigration law.

The rule also provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 136 to push back on EPA overregulation, H.R. 5179 to end anti-Israel boycotts, and H.R. 7909, the Violence Against Women Act, which would crack down on crime caused by the Biden-Harris administration's open-border policies.

Mr. Speaker, I look forward to consideration of these important bills, and I urge the passage of this rule.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), my colleague and the chair of the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I note that what my colleague, the ranking member, does not note is that this House has passed under Republican leadership more than 300 bills out of the House of Representatives with 92 percent bipartisan support. Many of these bills go to the Democrat- controlled Senate where they die.

The ranking member also likes to criticize this majority when he knows full well just last Congress when he was chair, the Rules Committee was no bastion of an open process.

For the record, here are some statistics that might help paint a better picture and provide context for the cherry-picked numbers the Member rattled off.

It is true there have been more closed rules, but this majority has reported nearly twice the amount of bills in the last Congress. Considered as a percentage, this majority has reported fewer closed rules than when he had the gavel.

Even more, over a third of the closed rules were because no amendments

were offered, making the rule closed by definition.

Not considering those closed rules brings us still at roughly the same rate as a percentage of closed rules from the last Congress but with significantly more bills offered.

I also remind this body that the previous Congress saw the use and abuse of partisan en bloc amendment votes, which created omnibus-style amendments designed to defeat Republican, or tough amendments, and had the practical effect of stifling the Republican minority.

Even with this procedural atrocity, the ranking member still can't claim a higher ground on making minority amendments in order.

We also needed to keep up with the onslaught of regulations from the Biden-Harris administration that they have unleashed on the American people from unelected bureaucrats.

We have considered numerous disapproval resolutions, which traditionally are carried closed because of how they are written. The ranking member carried on this tradition when he had the gavel.

While the ranking member wants to talk about how we are stifling Democrat amendments, this majority has actually made more minority amendments in order as a percentage than the previous Congress when he was calling the shots.

While the ranking member shakes his finger at the majority for the way this Congress has gone, I point out that he understands the unique difficulties and the tough decisions the Rules Committee is tasked with in moving the majority's agenda.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my colleague from South Carolina (Mr. Norman).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Fischbach).

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

The other side of the aisle won't even deport violent criminals. That is against the very safety of American citizens. In New York City, under Bill de Blasio, they passed a series of sanctuary city policies between 2014 and 2018 that prohibit the New York Police Department and correction and probation departments from cooperating with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents except under very limited circumstances.

However, now, more than 100,000 migrants have passed through New York City since the spring of 2022, and 58,000 still remain in the city's care. Current Mayor Eric Adams and the Governor of New York, Kathy Hochul, have said: ``We don't have capacity.''

For years, ICE has warned that sanctuary cities create a public safety threat, and they are one of the biggest impediments to public safety efforts. However, under the Biden and Harris administration, the crisis at the southern border has only worsened the consequences of sanctuary policies and made enforcing current immigration laws even more difficult.

H.R. 5717, despite mischaracterizations from my friends on the other side of the aisle, creates an incentive for local jurisdictions to cooperate with Federal immigration officials by prohibiting Federal funds from being used to provide sanctuary for illegal aliens going to sanctuary jurisdictions. Under current law, it creates a perverse incentive for sanctuary cities to willingly flout the law.

H.R. 5717 holds sanctuary cities accountable for exacerbating the Biden-Harris border crisis and flouting Federal immigration law by prohibiting the use of taxpayer dollars to fund housing, healthcare costs, and other benefits for illegal immigrants in such municipalities.

Taxpayers who are at risk due to the border crisis should not be funding local governments not interested in upholding the rule of law. No Bailout for Sanctuary Cities corrects these perverse incentives and ensures that taxpayers are not on the hook for this lawlessness.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire if the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) is prepared to close.

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

Despite what my colleagues on the left have to say, the American people know that the Biden-Harris administration has been a relentless, woke assault on the American economy, the education system, and even Americans' retirement accounts.

The American people know the Biden-Harris administration has resulted in crippling inflation, a wide-open border, decreasing public safety, and increasing drug overdose deaths.

With the bills before us today, we continue to deliver for the American people. House Republicans are fighting at every turn to secure our borders, restore our economy, and protect free speech and free markets.

The Violence Against Women by Illegal Aliens Act and the No Bailout for Sanctuary Cities Act are commonsense bills that would immediately make our communities safer, something the Biden-Harris administration has repeatedly failed to do. I would hope that our colleagues on both sides of the aisle would support these important bills.

I look forward to moving these bills out of the House this week, and I ask my colleagues to join me in voting ``yes'' on the previous question and ``yes'' on the rule.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 7176. This bill is nothing more than a handout to Big Oil and Gas that will enrich our adversaries, including China, and force American families to pay the price with higher energy bills.

It removes a requirement that the Department of Energy first determine liquefied natural gas exports should be in the public interest before approving export applications.

This defies logic. The Republican bill assumes that all LNG exports are automatically in the public interest. This is utterly absurd considering there is widespread consensus among researchers and economists that increasing LNG exports directly leads to higher natural gas prices here at home.

Americans know this reality all too well because they have felt it firsthand. Our LNG exports quadrupled over the last 5 years. During that same time, in 2022, natural gas prices more than tripled.

Make no mistake: If this bill ever becomes law, Americans will pay more for the gas that heats their homes and keeps their lights on.

It is an affront to middle-class families who can't afford to deal with more fossil fuel price volatility. They are tired of our energy prices being manipulated by our adversaries simply because Republicans are in a mad rush to send it all abroad.

Now Republicans also claim to be tough on China. I hear this every day in the Energy and Commerce Committee. We have to be tough on China.

This bill is a gift to China. In 2021, China was the second-largest recipient of American LNG, and Chinese LNG purchasers have continued to snap up any long-term deal they can from American exporters.

By removing the requirement that our exports be in America's best interests, this bill would allow China and other adversaries to purchase even more of our energy to use against us.

Thankfully, the Biden administration is taking a different approach, one that prioritizes the needs of the American people rather than Big Oil and Gas.

Last month, the administration announced a temporary pause on new LNG export authorizations while the Department of Energy confirms that they are in Americans' interests.

This is just common sense. Before we send our energy resources abroad, it is only right that we first confirm that doing so will benefit Americans.

Anyone who says this pause is a ban on LNG exports is also peddling in blatant disinformation. The temporary pause does not affect current exports and does not affect exports from facilities that are under construction. It doesn't even affect exports from facilities that haven't begun construction but are fully permitted.

If the Department of Energy never approved another permit, our LNG exports are still on track to triple from now until the end of the decade, more than enough to ensure Europe gets all the gas that it needs.

I note how ridiculous it is to have the same Republicans who refuse to support aid for Ukraine lecture us on being good allies.

House Democrats are demanding that the House vote on legislation that has now passed the Senate that would provide funding to ensure Ukraine can continue to protect its democracy from Russia's unprovoked war of aggression.

In stark contrast, House Speaker Johnson is shamefully blocking this urgent national security funding, siding with pro-Putin extreme Republicans.

If House Republicans want to be good allies, they should join us in demanding a vote on that critical national security funding.

Mr. Speaker, ensuring that LNG exports are in the American people's best interest is something we should all want. Instead, we are here considering a bill that does the opposite for a third time because Republicans are fresh out of ideas and resorting to bringing up old, tired bills that stand no chance of ever becoming law.

Time and again they have proven completely dysfunctional and incapable of governing, and, in fact, they are making us vote on this same bill for a third time. Certainly, that is a testament to their inability to get things done. With nothing else to bring to the floor, they want to distract from reality that they have achieved nothing to improve the lives of the American people.

This is just another Republican bill that puts polluters over people, and I, therefore, encourage my colleagues to oppose it.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Huffman).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Jersey (Mrs. Watson Coleman), my wonderful colleague.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor), the ranking member of our Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Casten).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Energy, Climate, and Grid Security.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Barragan), who is a member of our committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Frost).

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the amount of time that remains.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have to correct the record, not only about my colleague, Mr. Scalise, who I very much respect, but also some of the other comments that have been made.

There was a reference to President Joe Biden. The bottom line is that President Biden, like myself, believes in an all-of-the-above energy policy. In fact, there has been record production of oil during President Biden's administration. More oil has been produced domestically here in the United States during his administration than any other President that we have had.

The point is that we would like to move toward clean energy. Yes, we would like to have cleaner oil production, as well, but it doesn't mean that we are not in favor of more production. In fact, there is more production.

Now, many of my Republican colleagues have referred to President Biden's recent action to pause LNG exports as a ban, and that is simply not true. The Natural Gas Act requires the President to determine whether or not new LNG exports are in the public interest. If the President and his administration feel like they do not have sufficient information to make that determination, then it is their responsibility and duty under the law to take time and gather that information.

Even Politico highlighted the Republican misinformation machine in an article this week. They said:

Other Republicans have settled on a more blunt strategy,

falsely portraying the pause on new permits as a ban on

exports. Thanks to already issued permits, exports are

expected to increase rapidly in the coming years.

Once again, the Republicans are peddling in misinformation to prop up their polluters-over-people agenda.

The Biden administration pause makes sense. It is common sense. The last time the economic impacts of LNG exports were examined was in 2018, when LNG export volumes were one-quarter of what they currently are.

The last time the greenhouse gas impacts of LNG exports were examined was in 2019. We know so much more now about emissions from gas leakage in the transportation, liquefaction, and regasification process.

It would be foolish to review 2024 LNG exports now without looking at 2024 analysis and data, which we do not have. Therefore, frankly, it would have been massively irresponsible for President Biden to approve further exports without reexamining how the Department of Energy was making its determination. I thank the President for taking the action he did, and I look forward to the results of this review.

I want to correct one more thing. Many of my colleagues have referred to radical environmentalists. I don't think it is radical to ask what is going on in people's ability to breathe.

When the Clean Air Act was passed, it basically was passed because we wanted to make sure that people would be able to breathe clean air. It is not radical for me to try to correct air quality and, if there is pollution out there, to try to correct it so people can breathe when the list of all the health impacts of not being able to breathe clean air is so long.

Again, all we are asking--all that this administration has asked and all the Democrats have asked--is that we continue to clean up our air so that we can breathe. That is it. That is all we are asking for here today.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Illinois.

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

Mr. Speaker, again, this bill is a massive valentine to the Communist Party of China. It would send untold amounts of American LNG to China to help continue to fuel its industrial rise, without ever allowing for a review as to whether these exports are actually in the public interest.

Now, what is going on here? Why on Earth are Republicans eager to sell LNG to China when they know that LNG exports increase domestic natural gas prices for Americans? I will tell you why: Because the cost to American families means nothing as long as oil and gas companies profit.

Numerous studies show that LNG exports result in increased costs to Americans. If we pass this bill, already volatile natural gas prices will be shaped by forces completely out of our control.

It doesn't make any sense to me. Republicans are acting against American interests here. I wish my colleagues across the aisle would focus on what is important and not just on stalling tactics that pad the pockets of polluters.

Mr. Speaker, Republicans claim that this bill helps our European allies.

What a joke that is. The reality is that they don't care about our European allies who are currently going to the mat for democracy and facing down Vladimir Putin in Ukraine.

On Tuesday evening in the Rules Committee, we heard over and over again from our Republican colleagues that LNG is crucial for our allies in Europe. Unfortunately, these same Republicans have made it clear they have no interest in actually providing aid to Ukraine. They use the war on Ukraine to argue for LNG exports and push the arguments of their oil and gas friends. But when it comes down to actually helping allies, they are at best silent, and at worst vocally against it.

Last year, 21 radical House Republicans signed on to a letter opposing all supplemental funding requests for Ukraine in its struggle against Russian oppression.

Weeks later, a majority of House Republicans voted against a bill offering a paltry amount of aid to Ukraine. Now, after the Senate has done its part, they totally refuse to bring a bill to the floor that would easily command a majority in the House.

The behavior is unbelievable. I want to be clear: It will lead to the unnecessary deaths of Ukrainian soldiers and civilians.

Mr. Speaker, I would simply ask my Republican colleagues: Which is it? Do they actually care about assisting Europe? Do they think current LNG volumes in Europe are insufficient? Do they think tripling LNG volumes to Europe without issuing another permit is insufficient, or do they really just want to protect the ability of Big Oil and Gas to price gouge Americans here at home?

If they were serious about supporting our European allies, they would be supporting a bill on the floor that would spend money to do just that, not wasting time on this bill for the third time this Congress.

If Republicans were serious about supporting our European allies, they would push back on Donald Trump's dangerous invitation to Russia to ``do whatever the hell they want'' if Europe doesn't spend more on its own defense.

Is this what helping our democratic allies looks like? Are Republicans unable to see what is wrong here? How their inaction threatens European peace and security, and our own national security?

House Republicans are unwilling to spend a single dollar to defend democracy in Europe but are happy to sit here and argue again and again about a bill that will drive up costs for everyday Americans while lining the pockets of their Big Oil and Gas friends. It is just unbelievable to me, Mr. Speaker, even for Washington.

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