H.Res. 1149

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, 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 join the gentleman from Pennsylvania in condemning Iran's attack on Israel, and I also express my growing concern at this situation. I hope that President Biden continues working to de-escalate tensions. I don't think that any of us want this to turn into a broader conflict that puts even more civilians at risk.

Mr. Speaker, I also thank President Biden because, as Commander in Chief, he ordered our military to shoot down more than 70 drones and 3 ballistic missiles that Iran launched. Because of his actions and his work to unite our allies in the region, Israeli airspace was defended, and 99 percent of the projectiles fired by Iran were intercepted.

That is real. That is concrete. That is tangible.

Listening to my friends on the other side. I think they blame Joe Biden for everything. I mean, they blame him for Iran's attack more than they blame Iran. I think they have people on their side who blame Joe Biden for the earthquake, and I think one of my friends on the other side of the aisle blamed Joe Biden for the eclipse. This is crazy.

At some point they need to stop playing the blame game and work with Democrats to address these global challenges in a thoughtful and bipartisan way. Instead of doing that, instead of bringing everybody together, what we have from Republicans is a fake response to a real crisis.

The majority dusted off a bunch of old bills, some of which have never had a hearing and have never been marked up by committee, and they are bringing them to the floor. I guess they decided the original schedule for the week would have looked bad because they originally planned to bring up bills dealing with household appliances.

You heard that right, Mr. Speaker. With all the crises going on in the world, the majority's plan this week was to bring up a bill about refrigerator freedom. Not just one bill or two bills; they had a whole week, six bills, dedicated to appliances. They wanted us to debate the Liberty in Laundry Act this week. It took an actual international emergency to get them to notice how out of touch and absurd their policy agenda is.

Meanwhile, Democrats have been saying for months and months that we need Republicans to get serious about helping our allies, and for months we have heard excuse after excuse from Republicans.

First, they said we had to wait until H.R. 2, their extreme MAGA border bill, became law. Then they changed their tune because they tanked their

own border bill. Next, they told us to wait until the Federal Government was fully funded. We did that, and the MAGA caucus moved the goalposts yet again. Then Democrats were told aid for Ukraine had to wait until the House reauthorized FISA.

Guess what, Mr. Speaker? Republicans are out of excuses and our allies are out of time. Speaker Johnson's inaction has consequences. He has emboldened our adversaries and left our allies wondering: Where is America? I hear reports that he is in backroom discussions with Members to find a way forward on Ukraine funding, and I hope that we see the aid our allies need on the floor this week and that there is no partisan B.S. attached to it.

What our allies need right now aren't more empty, do-nothing exercises and political messaging like we are doing today. They need our help immediately.

These bills we are debating do not meet this moment at all. The very first thing we should have done this week is come back and debate a bipartisan bill that can provide real, tangible help to our allies. Instead, we get more wasted time, more broken promises, more useless rhetoric from this Republican majority.

Has anyone even asked the Senate if these bills are going anywhere over there, Mr. Speaker?

They passed the sanctions bill on Iran 6 months ago and haven't sent it to the Senate yet. Are they going to send any of these bills to the Senate or is this all for show, so they can send out a press release to say they did something?

Meanwhile, the world is wondering when America will get our act together and when this Republican majority is going to get their act together, stop playing politics, and start doing their job.

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

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

Let me just say I have never heard so much B.S. in my life, to be honest with you. Let me just remind my colleagues that Donald Trump, the guy they apologize for constantly, is the one who let Iran attack U.S. troops.

Donald Trump is the one who allowed not one but dozens of Chinese spy balloons to fly overhead without telling us.

Donald Trump is the one who gave classified Israeli intelligence to the Russians, intelligence they could have given to Iran.

Donald Trump is the one who went to North Korea--remember that--and tried to get a brutal dictator to love him. He said, hey, Kim Jong-un and I are in love.

Donald Trump is the one who tried to extort Ukraine by withholding our aid, and he was impeached over it.

Donald Trump praises Putin, he fawns over Xi Jinping and Victor Orban, and he sends Kim Jong-un love letters.

It is pathetic. It is pathetic.

Donald Trump is the one who praised an angry mob who attacked the United States Capitol and injured people. That is all good for my friends on the other side.

At every step of the way, Trump stood with America's adversaries and those who oppose democracy. I am sorry that is an inconvenient truth for my Republican friends, but it is the truth.

Contrast that with Joe Biden. Joe Biden rallied the world to Ukraine's defense. He defended our ally Israel in their air space, and he has rebuilt our image on the world stage and has stood up for democracy.

My friends on the other side said nothing when the previous President was apologizing and praising every tin horn dictator in the world who had no regard for human rights.

Democrats are the party of democracy. Republicans can use whatever rhetoric they want about the far-left this and the far-left that. Their party has been radicalized by MAGA extremists.

Here we are at this late date debating legislation that is going nowhere when, in fact, our allies, specifically Ukraine, is out of money and out of equipment to defend themselves against Russia, and my friends just sit there and twiddle their thumbs.

This is pathetic. This is pathetic.

I urge my colleagues to understand what is going on here. We are doing this exercise that is going nowhere. I do not know who it is designed to please--maybe to show that we are doing work when we are not doing work.

We actually passed a bill on Iran--6 months ago to be exact--that is still here. They never even sent it over to the Senate. This is all for show. Meanwhile, we have a real crisis on our hands.

I hope my friends will get serious. Let's waste this time doing these bills that are problematic and that are

going nowhere, but don't come and lecture us about democracy or about protecting Israel, about protecting democracy in Ukraine.

It is because of House Republicans that the world right now is on the brink, and I hope that hopefully in the next couple of days you come to your senses and allow us to provide relief to our ally Ukraine. I hope that we do that because if not, it will be too late. You have waited so long, constantly giving in to the most extreme rightwing elements of your party, people who have nothing but contempt for Ukraine, for democratic movements who couldn't give damn about human rights.

It is pathetic that at this late date we are here doing this and not doing what we should have done a long time ago--and that is provide Ukraine the assistance it needs to push back on Russia.

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

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

Oh, my goodness, Mr. Speaker, listen to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Langworthy). He got up, and he blamed the President of the United States more for Iran's attack on Israel than he blamed the supreme leader of Iran.

It is pathetic. It is pathetic.

I say to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Reschenthaler), yes, we are emotional when we talk about this stuff. We are emotional when we talk about this stuff because the bottom line is people are dying, and we have Members on the other side of the aisle who continue to use Putin's talking points in defending why we are not giving aid to Ukraine. That is not me saying that. That is the Republican chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

So, I mean, this is a really important moment here, whether we are going to stand with our friends in Ukraine, whether we are going to help them stand up to Russia, or whether following the example of Trump we are going to turn a blind eye. I mean, Putin is hoping that maybe Trump wins and the Republicans win because then he knows he can take over Ukraine.

Yes, we are emotional because people are dying. Russia has launched a vicious war against Ukraine, and we are emotional when we talk about not only protecting Israel but protecting innocent people in Gaza as well because we actually think human rights matter.

Human rights knows no political party, knows no country's boundaries. Everyone's human rights ought to be upheld. We are emotional because we are sick and tired of the rhetoric coming from my Republican friends. We are sick and tired of them apologizing for Putin all the time or turning a blind eye on human rights abuses in the Middle East or anywhere else in the world.

Coming to the floor with bills that my friends know are going nowhere--I mean, we have done similar bills before that are still being held at the desk and have not been sent to the Senate. This is all about show business.

Enough. Enough.

We have an opportunity to come together, put politics aside, and do the right thing. I hope my friends will join us in that effort.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, I think I have heard everything. The gentleman from Florida just talked about regular order, saying to vote for this rule because it represents regular order. I mean, he and I have a different opinion of what regular order is.

There are six bills. Five of them are completely closed rules. Is that regular order?

Two of these bills that are closed never went through committee or never had a markup in committee. Is that regular order?

Boy, I need to send the gentleman a textbook on what regular order is. This is not what it is.

The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Reschenthaler) is giving us lectures about Biden and leadership. I should remind the gentleman that the Republicans are on their second Speaker of this Congress right now. If reports are to be believed that were in the newspapers this morning, you have Republicans wanting to get rid of this Speaker and go on to a third Speaker.

I mean, please, oh my goodness, lecturing us on leadership?

You are upset that Joe Biden used the U.S. military to help intercept Iranian missiles into Israel. You say that is a lack of leadership by President Biden. On the contrary, that is leadership. It is protecting our ally from missiles from an adversary.

When Donald Trump was President and 109 U.S. troops suffered brain injuries in a strike by Iran, what was the leadership that the former President demonstrated? He did nothing, no response. Iran just did it, and he did nothing. He downplayed it like it was no big deal.

I am sorry, we have a different opinion of what leadership is all about. The fact of the matter is that we are looking for some leadership on the other side of the aisle to support Ukraine in their fight against Russia. I mean, the Senate acted a long time ago, and my Republican friends continue to do nothing but sit back and scream about Joe Biden and cover up all of Donald Trump's misdeeds and ignore all of his weaknesses. Meanwhile, Ukraine is literally at the edge right now.

I mean, this is a strange way of defining leadership. Do you want to show some leadership? Let's help our ally Ukraine. Let's stop Russia in its tracks rather than giving comfort to Vladimir Putin.

Now, I know when the former President was in office, he had a lot of nice words to say about Vladimir Putin, praised him as this great friend and this great leader. Then again, the former President also said he and Kim Jong-un, one of the most notorious dictators in the world, were in love. How pathetic. How disgusting.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, not one, not one of the bills under this rule, would prevent Iran from carrying on future attacks, not a single one.

What are we doing here? The answer is simple. Republican leadership can't organize their clown show of a conference. MAGA members are playing politics with a global crisis, blaming Joe Biden instead of Iran, and to top it all off, many of them continue siding with Putin, an ally of Iran, in his war of aggression against Ukraine.

The people of Ukraine have been bombarded by Iranian drones for months and months and months, and Republicans have refused to do anything about it, not a single thing.

Republicans had an emergency Rules Committee meeting. They scrapped their whole agenda this week to debate these useless bills that we are talking about right now. There has been nothing for months and months while the people of Ukraine beg for our help, nothing. In fact, not only has this Republican majority done nothing, they have Members who echo Putin's propaganda and mimic Kremlin talking points. You can't make this stuff up.

What do our allies see when they look at us now? When the Speaker even mentions potential action to support our allies, extreme MAGA Republicans threaten to remove the Speaker and shut down Congress again.

Mr. Speaker, is this the message we want to send our allies when they need us most? This is shameful. We are at a turning point right now, an inflection point in human history. Are Iran, Russia, and their allies going to write the next chapter of the story, or are people around the world going to stand up and say democracy is worth fighting for? Is America going to fulfill our obligations and lead the free world as we have always done and as Democrats want to do, or are we not?

We can't only do it sometimes or when it is politically convenient for one party or the other. We need to do it all the time. We need to do it in Ukraine, where people are fighting and dying for their freedom and begging us for support. It is beyond time we pass something real to help them.

The bills that we are talking about right now are messaging bills. We don't even know whether, if they pass, they will even be sent to the Senate because we have passed bills on Iran before, and they are still being held up by the House. We haven't sent them to the United States Senate.

I think people are sick and tired of my Republican friends going through the motions or making believe like they care about human rights or making believe that they care about ending the conflict in Israel or ending the fighting in Ukraine. I think people see through what my Republican friends are doing. They come to the floor and yell and scream and blame Biden for every single thing, yet they continue to do nothing.

This is the last week before we have another break, and it remains to be seen whether or not there will be a package that comes to the floor that will actually help Ukraine stand up against Russia.

I get it. There are a lot of Republicans who apologize for Putin and apologize for Russia; think Russia can do no wrong. The former President, in all of his meetings with Vladimir Putin, praised him and praised him and praised him and said they are really good friends. He doesn't really want us to help Ukraine at all and is imposing all of these new conditions.

We are running out of time. We either do something now or it is too late. What a tragedy to basically hand

Ukraine over to Vladimir Putin, as if that is where he will stop.

This is about human rights. This is about doing what is right. This is about standing up for the principles that this country is supposed to be all about. I just hope we do it.

I say to my colleagues: Vote ``no'' on this rule. We are wasting the time of this Congress. What we need to do is do something concrete before the end of the week to help Ukraine.

I know it is uncomfortable for my friend from Pennsylvania to hear that. I know he doesn't want to have to scold some of his Republican colleagues who would like nothing better than to turn a blind eye while Vladimir Putin invades Ukraine.

I was in Ukraine. I met with not only Mr. Zelenskyy, but I met with a lot of average citizens in Ukraine. They are counting on us and the world community to help them protect their country from invasion. I hope that we do that. This, what we are doing today, is a colossal waste of time. That is what we do on a regular basis in this Chamber.

The Republican majority has done a horrific job, and we are now out of time. Let's hope after we get this rule done and get whatever we are going to vote on done here, that before the end of the week we can actually bring a package to the floor that will help save Ukraine from a Russian invasion.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1149 and ask for its immediate consideration.

For the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), the ranking member of the Rules Committee and 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 may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.

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

House Resolution 1149 provides for consideration of six measures: H.R. 6323, H. Res. 1143, H.R. 4691, H.R. 5947, H.R. 6046, and H.R. 4639.

The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 6323, the Iran Counterterrorism Act of 2023, under a closed rule, with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Financial Services or their respective designees and provides one motion to recommit.

Additionally, the rule provides for consideration of H. Res. 1143, a resolution condemning Iran's unprecedented attack on Israel, under a closed rule with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs or their respective designees.

Further, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 4691, the Iran Sanctions Relief Review Act of 2023, under a closed rule with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs or their respective designees and provides one motion to recommit.

The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 5947, which provides for the rescission of certain waivers and licenses relating to Iran, under a closed rule with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs or their respective designees and provides for one motion to recommit.

The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 6046, the Standing Against Houthi Aggression Act, under a closed rule with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs or their respective designees and provides one motion to recommit.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 4639, the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act, under a structured rule with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective designees and provides one motion to recommit. The rule makes in order three amendments.

Mr. Speaker, President Joe Biden's foreign policy decisions have been a complete disaster on the world stage and have emboldened our adversaries and empowered foreign terrorist organizations.

Sadly, we were forewarned about all of this. Former President Obama's Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, stated nearly a decade ago regarding President Biden: ``I think he has been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.''

He is right. Let's look at the facts.

In the first year alone, the President green-lit Nord Stream 2 to provide Russian gas to Europe while simultaneously blocking the Keystone XL pipeline here at home. He issued 94 executive orders on immigration, which has led to an unprecedented invasion at our southern border. To appease his far-left radical base, he delisted the Houthis as a foreign terrorist organization, which directly led to this conflict in the Red Sea. He is responsible for the complete surrender of Afghanistan, which killed 13 American servicemembers, stranded thousands of Americans, returned the Taliban to power, and expanded ISIS-K and al-Qaida.

In 2022, his policies of appeasement led to the largest invasion of Europe since World War II. To help his party in the mid-terms, he depleted the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to its lowest levels since I was born, 1983, and he sent millions of barrels of oil to Communist China.

In the first days of 2023, he allowed a Chinese spy balloon to cross the entire country, which collected intelligence on innocent Americans. On the 22nd anniversary of 9/11, on the very anniversary, in an insult to the people who suffered those terrorist attacks, Joe Biden unfroze $6 billion in oil sanctions to Iran just days before an Iranian proxy group killed over a thousand people in Israel.

How does Iran thank us? Our troops in the Middle East faced over 100 attacks from proxy networks, which led to the death of three servicemembers in Jordan.

Just this year, Biden waived billions of dollars in sanctions to allow Iranian energy exports into Iraq--and I kid you not--while also announcing an indefinite pause to new approvals of U.S. liquefied natural gas exports from here.

Guess who benefits from that? It is not the United States. It is not the American worker. It is Russia, China, and Iran who benefit from Joe Biden's reckless foreign policy.

This administration's policies truly embody the slogan: America last. That is why House Republicans are bringing to the floor this week legislation to condemn Iran's recent attack on Israel, block Biden's ransom payments to Iran, redesignate the Houthis as a foreign terrorist organization, and apply maximum pressure on the Iranian regime.

We cannot stand idly by as the Biden administration hands over the keys to the Ayatollah; the dictator in Communist China, Chairman Xi; and the dictator Vladimir Putin.

This week's votes will be very clear: Do you stand with our ally and strategic partner Israel, or do you stand with the authoritarian regime in Tehran?

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

Mr. Speaker, in recent days, far-left activists have chanted ``Death to America'' and ``Death to Israel.''

In Chicago, cheers broke out over the weekend when Iran started attacking Israel during a meeting about the upcoming DNC convention. Just think about that for a moment. This isn't your grandfather's Democratic Party.

In the 3 months following the October 7 attack, there has been an increase of 360 percent in anti-Semitic incidents in this country. It was reported earlier this year that there was an exodus of Jewish families leaving Oakland, California, because of the anti-Semitic radicalization of the teachers union in that city. This isn't 1930s Nazi Germany. This is 21st century California where we are seeing this happen.

If you doubt me, just listen to the leaders of the Democratic Party. Here is Representative Rashida Tlaib, who said: ``From the river to the sea is an aspirational call for freedom, human rights, and peaceful coexistence, not death, destruction, or hate.'' This is an absolute lie. ``From the river to the sea'' is a call for genocide of the Jewish people and the destruction of the State of Israel. There is Representative Tlaib condoning a call for genocide.

Let's not forget about Representative Ilhan Omar, who said: ``We have seen unthinkable atrocities committed by the U.S., Hamas, Israel, Afghanistan, and the Taliban.'' Equating the United States, the U.S. military, and the Israeli Defense Forces to terrorist organizations is not only disgusting, it is absolutely disgraceful. She also said: ``Israel has hypnotized the world,'' alluding to an anti-Semitic trope that we have seen for absolutely centuries.

Now, here is Representative Jayapal, as well, who said: ``Well, we condemn Hamas' firing of those rockets, but I think you have to look at what prompted even that behavior.''

It is very clear, far-left activists look to their leaders for direction. The Democratic thought leaders in that party sympathize with terrorists.

I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), my good friend and the chairman of the Rules Committee.

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

You know, there is a lot of emotion coming from the other side of the aisle, but as a really good friend has told me before, facts don't care about your feelings. If you look at the facts it is pretty clear the difference between the Democrats, Obama and Biden, and President Trump.

Let's just look at Russia. It is not a coincidence that Vladimir Putin moved into Crimea and parts of Georgia when President Obama was in office, and then for the 4 years President Trump was in office, there were zero military incursions. Then as soon as Joe Biden took office, he moves into Ukraine. Actions speak louder than words. Again, those facts don't care about your feelings.

Let's look at Ukraine. You want to talk about conditioning aid? Joe Biden conditioned lethal aid on Ukraine, forcing the Ukrainians to fire a prosecutor that was investigating a corrupt oil and gas company that Hunter Biden just happened to be on the board of. I will let you draw your own conclusions on that, but it is very clear that Joe Biden actually did what President Trump was wrongfully impeached for, and then he actually bragged about it on TV.

He also had many missteps. Remember at the beginning of the lead-up to the war, Joe Biden said that we would tolerate a ``minor incursion'' in Ukrainian territory, just whetting the appetite of Vladimir Putin. Then when the Russians did invade, and Joe Biden slow-walked lethal aid. Where were the MiGs that were sent? Why didn't we get the Ukrainians antiaircraft air batteries? Why didn't we jam the electronic abilities of the Russians to make sure that they didn't have air superiority?

The Ukrainians still don't have the lethal aid because Joe Biden and his far-left radical administration slow-walked the aid from the beginning of this war. It has been an absolute disaster because of Joe Biden's incompetence and the incompetence of those he surrounds himself with.

I find it very rich to then attack President Trump's record on Israel. Who was the first U.S. President to move the Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem? It was Donald Trump, making him the most pro-Israeli President we have ever had. Who was it that had the Abraham Accords? It wasn't Joe Biden. That was President Trump who had the Abraham Accords. If he was a Democrat, he would have won two Nobel Peace Prizes for that.

Let's not forget about Joe Biden, who still up to today, is calling for a ceasefire when our number one ally in the world, Israel, is fighting for its life against a terrorist organization in Hamas. The people across the aisle and people in the White House are calling for a ceasefire on that. I think that is absolutely unacceptable.

For all the talk about supporting our fellow democracies, let me remind you that there is one thriving democratic state in the Middle East. There is only one democracy in the Middle East, and that is Israel. It would be nice if my friends across the aisle would support that democracy.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I guess I should congratulate my friends from across the aisle for finally realizing there is a link between Russia, China, and Iran. This has been U.S. foreign policy since at least the early 2000s, but better late than never, I guess.

I am taken aback by the fact that there is an allegation that Joe Biden is a strong President because he shot down the drones that Iran sent into Israel. If the President was strong, drones would not have been sent to Israel in the first place.

Again, let's not forget that under President Trump, Russia was not attacking Ukraine and Iran was not attacking Israel. It is the President's weakness and his policies of incompetence and American weakness that have invited this aggression.

For the talk about Ukraine, we on this side of the aisle have intellectual honesty and consistency on this because you can be for defeating Russia and also for Israel defeating Hamas. You can also be for holding Iran in check.

It is weird that the same people on the other side of the aisle who say if you talk about a peace settlement between Russia and Ukraine, that we are somehow using Russian talking points. Those same people will be the same ones who say we need to have a cease-fire in Gaza before the IDF is afforded their God-given right to destroy their enemy, Hamas. It sounds to me like the talking points of Hamas, but I will let others draw their own conclusion on that.

Talking about more failures in the Biden administration, let's talk about the southern border and about how many terrorists have crossed that southern border.

Since President Biden took office, there have been over 340 encounters at the southern border from individuals who are actually on the terrorist watch list. Just this month, news broke that a terrorist from Afghanistan, whose organization is responsible for the deaths of numerous Americans, was released twice--not once, but twice--into the interior of the United States after crossing our southern border. He then roamed around unrestricted for almost a year before he was captured.

Then earlier this year, a member of Al-Shabaab, which is an al-Qaida affiliate in Somalia, one of their members was able to live in the U.S. freely for almost a year, as well.

It is absolutely crystal clear: Biden and radical, extreme leftist Democrats cannot be trusted to protect our communities and secure the southern border. The numbers speak for themselves.

Mr. Speaker, talking about incompetence, let's go back and talk about the surrender of Afghanistan.

Remember, under President Trump, there were zero fatalities for the last 18 months before Joe Biden took office. Yet, the President, Joe Biden, felt the need to surrender Afghanistan to the Taliban.

In 2021, the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan was absolutely the worst military blunder in my lifetime. The Biden administration abandoned the Bagram Air Base and released terrorist fighters from prison, including one that killed 13 servicemembers at Abbey Gate. It has led to a rise in al-Qaida and ISIS-K. The CENTCOM Commander testified just last month that ISIS-K will have the capability within 6 months to do external operations against the West.

We know through our OIG reports that President Biden and his failed bureaucrats in the State Department are funding the Taliban and al- Qaida through international assistance, but it didn't impact just the Middle East. This has also emboldened China, Russia, and Iran, the three countries that Democrats apparently just discovered there is a connection between in their anti-Western positions.

Reports indicate that the withdrawal helped Putin justify his invasion of Ukraine. It is just another blunder in a long list of Biden foreign policy failures.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Rutherford), my good friend and a sheriff.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Davidson), my good friend and the author of the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act.

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

Under President Trump's leadership, our Nation was safe and our adversaries were put on notice. He truly embodied the slogan: Peace Through Strength.

As President, President Trump destroyed the ISIS caliphate and took Iranian General Qasem Soleimani and the founder of ISIS, Al-Baghdadi, off the battlefield.

President Trump refocused our Nation on the Indo-Pacific and the growing threat of the Chinese Communist Party. He enacted a maximum pressure campaign on Iran by pulling out of the disastrous Iran deal, placing significant sanctions on the regime, and used military deterrence against their proxy networks.

In stark difference to President Biden, the Trump administration designated the IRGC and the Houthis as foreign terrorist organizations.

When former President Obama failed to enforce his own red line and allowed chemical weapons to be used against the Syrian people, it was President Trump who targeted the Assad regime through force.

He also helped bring peace and stability throughout the globe by negotiating the Abraham Accords, pushed our NATO partners to do their fair share, and moved our Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. He stood up for the American worker, not the global elite, when he renegotiated NAFTA, placed tariffs on China, made America energy independent, and secured our southern border.

In comparison, the Biden administration's foreign policy agenda is worse than simply a nightmare because it is reality. That is why House Republicans this week will stand up for our ally Israel and block some of the disastrous decisions that have helped fund Iran's terrorist network.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the previous question and ``yes'' on the rule. I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

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. 5947. This legislation may be short, but it is equally shortsighted with considerable long-term consequences.

Let's start with the impact this would have on Iraq. This bill would rescind a waiver that currently allows Iraq to pay for electricity from Iran.

This waiver is what allows the Iraqi Government to keep the lights on. Without it, massive blackouts would leave millions without electricity and cause precipitous chaos. It would hamper the fragile stability that Iraq has achieved over the past several years.

I don't believe anyone in this body wants to see a return to Iraq of the past, where Iraqis from previous decades suffered from never-ending wars and repression like that of the Saddam Hussein era.

Mr. Speaker, the impact of this bill goes even further than that. It would harm and cause the Iraqi people terrible consequences. An Iraq without electricity serves no American interest and would do nothing to promote our, the United States', national security.

Let's not forget, ISIS emerged from a chaotic Iraq. ISIS, I will repeat, emerged from a chaotic Iraq--long-term consequences, shortsighted bill.

When ISIS emerged, the result was not just widespread disorder, destruction, and violence in the Middle East but the growth of a global terrorist movement that struck my home city and State of New York, Orlando, San Bernardino, as well as Paris, Brussels, and Barcelona.

I agree that we absolutely need to help Iraq find alternative sources of energy besides Iran, but it is simply not true that Iran is filling its coffers with payments from Iraq. There is roughly $10 billion in Iraqi payments for Iranian electricity being held in escrow. Only very small portions of the money have been transferred to an account in Oman, into which the United States has oversight. Iran can only access that account to purchase humanitarian goods, like food or medicine. None of the funds--zero, nada--are going to nefarious purposes.

Maybe we have a difference and some don't care about humanitarian causes, humanitarian aid, and things of that nature. I know my side of the aisle does.

Human life, innocent human life, is very important, and it is also how we show what our values are.

This bill would risk our ability to have oversight and control of the $6 billion in Iranian funds we are monitoring in Qatar, and much more. This measure would have the opposite effect of what it intends to do, leading to less control of Iranian assets.

I am deeply concerned that this bill removes all flexibility from our current Iran sanctions program. The point of sanctions, again, is to bring Iran back to--as I have said over and over on the various bills we have seen today--the negotiating table.

Sanctions are not an end but a means to an end. A diplomatic path, I say again, is the best path, and this measure removes the flexibility necessary for that strategic objective and the utilization of diplomacy.

Let me also say a quick word about process. Yes, we need to respond to global events, and that is why I supported seven Iran-related measures on the floor just yesterday. While I disagree with some of the other bills on the floor today, at least those pieces of legislation received proper committee consideration.

Yes, we do, on the Committee on Foreign Affairs, practice what I believe is some diplomacy. My friend and chairman, Michael McCaul, and I talk. We give a chance to trying to work it out first. Sometimes we do; sometimes we don't. These bills never gave us a chance to do that.

This bill did not follow that process. It has not been marked up by the Committee on Foreign Affairs or, for that matter, the Committee on Financial Services or, for that matter, the Committee on Ways and Means or, for that matter, the Committee on Oversight and Accountability, even though every single one received a referral on this bill--process.

Mr. Speaker, in my tenure as the former chair of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, now the ranking member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, this week is the first time ever that we are considering a bill under a rule that

had not gone through the committee process--not only in my time as a chair or ranking member, but almost an entire 25 years that I have been on the committee.

This is, I believe, a very unfortunate precedent that we are setting here. If we actually want to support--I know I do fully--our ally, Israel, what we should be doing is passing a bipartisan Senate national security aid bill that would send important funds to Israel so that they could defend themselves against Iranian aggression, as well as, of course, supporting our friends in Ukraine and Taiwan, and providing necessary humanitarian assistance.

I know we have been negotiating, which is okay. We know that, and we are going to try to figure out some of the things, from what I am hearing. What we should be doing, what really is necessary right now, given the needs of our allies, is just pass a bipartisan bill. Seventy Members of the Senate in a bipartisan way passed it. It is waiting for us to vote on it.

Many of us, I think at least over 300 of us, will agree that if that bill just had the light of day on the floor, because our Ukrainian friends are at a desperate end--they need assistance right now. What took place in the Middle East, the strikes against Israel, they need the money right now. Our Taiwanese friends need the money right now. The innocent individuals in Gaza, in Sudan, and around the world need the assistance right now.

If today, we put that bill on the floor and let Congress do its will, it would be on the desk of the President of the United States either later this evening or first thing tomorrow, signed into law, and our allies that we claim we care for would get the aid and assistance that they need now.

That is the bill we should have been debating in February. That is the bill we should have been debating in March. That is the bill we should be debating today, really, not this bill, which will have a far greater impact on innocent Iraqi civilians than any minuscule impact on Iran.

Mr. Speaker, I guess you know that I oppose this legislation, and I urge all of my colleagues to oppose this legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Khanna).

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

I strongly oppose this measure, which would remove all flexibility from our Iran sanctions program and thereby strike a fatal blow to our ability to conduct nuclear diplomacy with Iran.

Now, I have heard several times during the course of this debate about the failure of the JCPOA, of which at the time the IAEA had oversight, individuals were knowing what and where the nuclear material was. Most of it, as it has been said now, was moved out of the country.

The fact of the matter is, if I recall correctly, General Mattis, who was initially an opponent of the JCPOA, after seeing what it was doing and how it was functioning, became a proponent of the JCPOA. He said it publicly, that it was a way through diplomacy to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon.

My colleagues on the other side of the aisle say with joy that the former President pulled us out of the JCPOA.

I ask: What was accomplished by pulling us out? Are we safer? Is that what it did? If we are safer by being pulled out, what are we talking about now? Are we in more danger?

Does Iran now have a greater opportunity to get a nuclear weapon? Do we know where the materials are now, since it was a good thing to pull out of the JCPOA, or do we know less? Do we have more access now, since we pulled out of the JCPOA, or do we have less? Why was this thing about pulling out of the JCPOA such a great thing?

I am more worried today about Iran getting a nuclear weapon than I was when we were in the JCPOA. I ask my colleagues: Were you more worried when we were in the JCPOA than you are right now?

I hear that you are worried right now about where Iran is with a nuclear weapon. Back then what we were talking about was diplomacy to try to prevent them from having a nuclear weapon. Are you telling me now, because we don't know, that we should just go to war?

There are choices to be made here. I think we were much better off using diplomacy, getting access to what was going on, watching them move nuclear material outside of the country, than just saying we are going to blow you up.

No oversight, nothing; no contact; no one looking in; no information other than that and they are free to do whatever the heck they want to do now. They are free to do it because they no longer have to be at the negotiating table.

Are we safer now or were we safer under the JCPOA?

Additionally, let me say this bill would have greater consequences across the entire Middle East, particularly in Iraq, which this bill would restrict from purchasing Iranian energy.

I will remind us again, let's not be shortsighted. With no energy, there is chaos in Iraq. What happened before? ISIS was created. Blackouts across Iraq would sow societal chaos in Iraq.

Does that help serve our national security objectives in the region? I don't think so.

If implemented, this bill would undermine the tenuous stability Iraq has worked to establish after decades of war. Are they perfect now? No. Four years is a short period of time when we are trying to do some major accomplishments here.

Importantly, this measure may also cost us our ability to do what we say we want to do, to monitor and control the Iranian funds in Qatar and elsewhere. Do we want to lose control, not have oversight of that either? Then you want this bill.

A smart sanctions policy has a purpose. It is not a blunt tool to wield in an effort to induce regime change. That does not work. It has never worked when it was used just to try to have regime change.

Our sanctions policies must be flexible and allow for United States national security objectives to be realized through thoughtful--and I will use this word one more time--thoughtful diplomacy.

A waiver is always necessary for that purpose.

Our Middle East national security objectives should be about providing Israel aid as part of our national security supplemental and providing humanitarian aid to starving individuals. That is what it should be about. That is what we should be voting on. That is what we should be debating on, not just today. We should have done it months ago.

It shouldn't be about cutting off Iraqis from electricity and creating chaos and the possible rise again of another terrorist group similar to ISIS that killed Americans and allies abroad.

This bill should be opposed. This bill is shortsighted. This bill doesn't accomplish what we needed to do and what we need to do. Let's vote it down.

Mr. Speaker, I oppose this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.