Impeaching Joseph R. Biden, Jr., President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend, the distinguished majority leader, Mr. Scalise, for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), my good friend, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time is yielded 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 include in the Record the section-by-section analysis of the resolution.

H. Res. 5

Adopting the Rules for the 118th Congress

Section-by-Section Analysis

Section 1. Adoption of the Rules of the One Hundred

Seventeenth Congress.

This section provides that the Rules of the 117th Congress

are the Rules of the 118th Congress, except for the

amendments contained in section 2 of the resolution and

orders contained in the resolution.

Section 2. Changes to the Standing Rules.

Initiatives to Reduce Spending and Improve Accountability.

Subsection (a)(l) replaces current ``pay-as-you-go''

requirements with ``cut-as-you-go'' requirements. The

provision prohibits consideration of a bill, joint

resolution, conference report, or amendment that has the net

effect of increasing mandatory spending within a five-year or

ten-year budget window. This provision continues the current

practice of counting multiple measures considered pursuant to

a special order of business which directs the Clerk to

engross the measures together after passage for purposes of

compliance with the rule and provides a mechanism for

addressing ``emergency'' designations.

Subsection (a)(2) strikes the ``Gephardt rule'' that

provides for the automatic engrossment and transmittal to the

Senate of a joint resolution changing the public debt limit,

upon the adoption by the House of a concurrent resolution on

the budget resolution, thereby avoiding a separate vote in

the House on the public debt limit legislation.

Subsection (a)(3) restores a point of order against net

increase in budget authority for amendments to general

appropriations bills.

Subsection (a)(4) restores a point of order against budget

reconciliation directives that increase net direct spending.

Increased Threshold for Tax Rate Increases. Subsection (b)

restores a requirement for a three-fifths supermajority vote

on tax rate increases.

Two Minute Votes. Subsection (c) provides that the Speaker

can reduce vote times in the House to not less than two

minutes on any question that follows another electronic vote.

The subsection also states that to the maximum extent

practicable, advance notice will be given when reduced voting

times are expected in a voting series.

Modifications to Calendar Wednesday. Subsection (d)

modifies the notice requirement to use Calendar Wednesday to

conform with the 72-hour notice requirement prior to

consideration of legislation.

Committee Authorization and Oversight Plans. Subsection (e)

restores the requirement that each standing committee (except

the Committees on Appropriations, Ethics, and Rules) vote to

adopt an authorization and oversight plan, which must be

submitted to the Committees on Oversight and Accountability

and House Administration no later than March 1 of the first

session of a Congress. The plan must include a list of

unauthorized programs and agencies within the committee's

jurisdiction that have received funding in the prior fiscal

year, or in the case of a permanent authorization, have not

received a comprehensive review by the committee in the prior

three Congresses. The subsection requires committees to

describe each program or agency that is intended to be

authorized in the current Congress or next Congress, and a

description of oversight to support reauthorization in the

current Congress. The subsection also requires the

plan include any recommendations for moving such programs or

agencies from mandatory to discretionary funding. When

developing these plans, committee chairs must coordinate with

other committees of jurisdiction to ensure that programs and

agencies are subject to routine authorization efforts.

The subsection also provides that committee authorization

and oversight plans may make recommendations to consolidate

or terminate duplicative or unnecessary programs and

agencies. Committees may make recommendations for changes to

existing law to address Federal rules, regulations, statutes,

and court decisions related to programs that are inconsistent

with Congress' Article I authorities, as well as provide a

description of other oversight activities that may be

necessary.

The subsection also requires the Committee on Oversight and

Accountability to report to the House no later than April 15

the authorization and oversight plans submitted by committees

together with any recommendations it may make to ensure

effective coordination of the plans.

Cost Estimates for Major Legislation to Include

Macroeconomic Effects. Subsection (f) restores the

requirement that the Congressional Budget Office and Joint

Committee on Taxation, to the extent practicable, incorporate

the macroeconomic effects of major legislation into the

official cost estimates used for enforcing the budget

resolution and other rules of the House. The subsection

requires, to the extent practicable, a qualitative assessment

of the long-term budgetary and macroeconomic effects of major

legislation, which is defined to cover legislation that

causes a gross budgetary effect in any fiscal year covered by

the budget resolution that is equal to or greater than 0.25

percent of the projected GDP for that year. This subsection

also allows the chair of the Committee on the Budget, or in

the case of revenue legislation the House member serving

as the Chair or Vice Chair of the Joint Committee on

Taxation, to designate major legislation for purposes of

this rule.

Ethics Reform. Subsection (g) directs the Committee on

Ethics to adopt rules which provide for a process to receive

complaints directly from the public.

Empaneling Investigative Subcommittee of the Committee on

Ethics. Subsection (h) codifies House Resolution 451, 110th

Congress, directing the Committee on Ethics to empanel an

investigative subcommittee or issue a report within 30 days

of the date a Member, Delegate, or the Resident Commissioner

is indicted, or criminal charges are filed.

Treatment of Evidence in Committee and Subcommittee

Investigations. Subsection (i) eliminates a requirement that

the Committee on Ethics adopt a rule allowing the use during

an ethics investigation of evidence presented in a related

criminal case where the respondent was convicted because this

is already contained in the committee rules of the Committee

on Ethics.

Designating Committee on Oversight and Accountability.

Subsection (j) redesignates the Committee on Oversight and

Reform as the Committee on Oversight and Accountability.

Designating Committee on Education and the Workforce.

Subsection (k) redesignates the Committee on Education and

Labor as the Committee on Education and the Workforce.

Subcommittees of Committee on Agriculture. Subsection (1)

permits the Committee on Agriculture to have six

subcommittees, codifying a separate order in effect since the

114th Congress.

Cybersecurity. Subsection (m) modifies the jurisdiction of

the Committee on Homeland Security to include functions of

the Department of Homeland Security related to cybersecurity.

Committees currently holding jurisdiction over cybersecurity

functions of DHS will retain a shared jurisdictional interest

in such functions.

Scope of Authority to Act in Continuing Litigation Matters.

Subsection (n) eliminates ``including, but not limited to,

the issuance of subpoenas'' in the description of authority

to act as successor-in-interest in continuing litigation

matters, such language being superfluous.

Record Votes on Measures Reported by the Committee on

Rules. Subsection (o) requires reports from the Committee on

Rules to include a depiction of recorded votes.

Access to the Hall of the House. Subsection (p) strikes

language providing Governors of Territories and the Mayor of

the District of Columbia access to the Hall of the House.

Resolution Declaring the Office of Speaker Vacant.

Subsection (q) strikes language from rule IX to allow any

member to offer a privileged resolution declaring the Office

of Speaker vacant.

Section 3. Separate Orders.

Holman Rule. Subsection (a) reinstates the ``Holman Rule''

which allows amendments to appropriations legislation that

would reduce the salary of or fire specific federal

employees, or cut a specific program.

Restoring Legislative Branch Accountability. Subsection (b)

states regulations adopted pursuant to House Resolution 1096,

117th Congress will have no force or effect in the 118th

Congress.

Requirement with Respect to Single Subject Bill. Subsection

(c) provides that, effective February 1, 2023, a bill or

joint resolution may not be introduced unless the sponsor

submits a statement setting forth the single subject of the

bill or joint resolution. This statement must be included

with the statement required by clause 7(c) of rule XII

(Constitutional Authority Statements). A statement for any

bill or joint resolution introduced prior to the effective

date shall, to the extent practicable, be submitted by the

sponsor prior to committee or House consideration.

Question of Consideration for Germanenes. Subsection (d)

establishes a question of consideration on a special rule

that waives germaneness for an amendment. The question of

consideration is debatable for 20 minutes and is not subject

to any intervening motion.

Budget Matter. Subsection (e)(l)(A) provides the authority

for the chair of the Committee on the Budget to file

allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate budgetary

levels for the purpose of enforcing provisions of the

Congressional Budget Act of 1974. Additionally, this

subsection states that the provisions of S. Con. Res. 14,

117th Congress shall have no force or effect.

Subsection (e)(l)(B) provides adjustment authority to the

chair of the Committee on the Budget for a bill, joint

resolution, amendment thereto, or conference report thereon

if the measure does not increase direct spending over five

or ten years. It additionally provides adjustment

authority to the chair of the Committee on the Budget to

take into account the most recent baseline published by

the Congressional Budget Office.

Subsection (e)(1)(C) allows the Majority Leader or his

designee, should the chair of the Committee on the Budget not

yet be elected, to file statements permitted under

subsections (f)(1)(A) and (f)(1)(B).

Subsection (e)(1)(D) allows the chair of the Committee on

the Budget (or the Majority Leader or his designee, should

the chair not yet be elected) to adjust an estimate under

clause 4 of rule XXIX to exempt the budgetary effects of

measures to protect taxpayers with taxable incomes below

$400,000 from an increase in audits above the most recent tax

year from the Internal Revenue Service.

Subsection (e)(2) establishes a point of order against

consideration of a bill or joint resolution reported by a

committee (other than the Committee on Appropriations) or an

amendment thereto, or a conference report thereon, which has

the net effect of increasing direct spending in excess of

$2,500,000,000 for any of the four consecutive 10 fiscal year

periods beginning with the first fiscal year that is 10

fiscal years after the current fiscal year. The levels of net

increases in direct spending shall be determined based on

estimates provided by the chair of the Committee on the

Budget.

Subsection (e)(3) requires the Congressional Budget Office

on any legislation that shows changes in mandatory spending

which cause a gross budgetary effect in any fiscal year

covered by the budget resolution that is equal to or greater

than 0.25 percent of the projected GDP for the current fiscal

year, to the extent practicable, to provide an estimate of

the inflationary impacts of that legislation. This subsection

also allows the chair of the Committee on the Budget to

designate major legislation for purposes of this order.

Subsection (e)(4) requires the Congressional Budget Office

on any legislation impacting either the Medicare Part A trust

fund or OASDI trust fund that causes a gross budgetary effect

in any fiscal year covered by the budget resolution that is

equal to or greater than 0.25 percent of the projected GDP

for the current fiscal year, to the extent practicable, to

display: (1) the impact of legislation on the Medicare Part A

trust fund's unfunded liabilities over a 25-year projection,

solvency projections, and the net present value of those

liabilities; and (2) the impact on the OASDI trust fund's

unfunded liabilities over a 75-year projection, solvency

projections, and the net present value of those liabilities.

This subsection also allows the chair of the Committee on the

Budget to designate major legislation for purposes of this

order.

Spending Reduction Amendments in Appropriations Bills.

Subsection (f) provides for spending reduction account

transfer amendments and requires a spending reduction account

section to be included in all general appropriations bills.

Scoring Conveyances of Federal Land. Subsection (g)

reinstates the separate order from the 115th Congress

providing that any provision in a bill, joint resolution,

amendment, or conference report requiring or authorizing a

conveyance of federal land to a State, local government, or

tribal entity, shall not be considered as providing new

budget authority, decreasing revenues, increasing mandatory

spending, or increasing outlays.

Member Day Hearing Requirement. Subsection (h) modifies the

Member Day hearing requirement to only occur at the full

committee level. Each standing committee (other than the

Committee on Ethics) must hold a Member Day Hearing during

the first session of the 118th Congress to receive testimony

from Members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner on

proposed legislation within its jurisdiction. The subsection

permits the Committee on Rules to hold its Member Day Hearing

during the second session to receive testimony on proposed

changes to the standing rules for the next Congress.

Information to Committees of Congress on Request.

Subsection (i) requires that the chair of the Committee on

Oversight and Accountability be included as one of the seven

members of the committee making any request of an Executive

agency pursuant to section 2954 of title 5, United States

Code.

Remote Appearance of Witnesses. Subsection (j) provides

limited authorization to a chair

of a committee to allow witnesses to appear remotely at

committee and subcommittee proceedings. This subsection

applies only to witnesses appearing in a non-governmental

capacity and in accordance with regulations issued by the

chair of the Committee on Rules and printed in the

Congressional Record.

Deposition Authority. Subsection (k) provides the Permanent

Select Committee on Intelligence and each standing committee

of the 118th Congress (except for the Committee on Rules) the

authority to order the taking of a deposition by a member or

counsel of such committee and limits persons who can attend

depositions to members, committee staff, an official

reporter, the witness, and up to two, personal,

nongovernmental attorneys. Depositions taken under this

authority are subject to regulations issued by the chair of

the Committee on Rules and printed in the Congressional

Record.

Broadening Availability and Utility of Legislative

Documents in Machine-Readable Formats. Subsection (l)

instructs the Committee on House Administration, the Clerk,

an other officers and officials to advance

government transparency by continuing efforts to publish

documents of the House in machinereadable formats and

broaden their utility by enabling all House staff to

create comparative prints.

Improving the Committee Electronic Document Repository.

Subsection (m) directs the Clerk, the Committee on House

Administration, and other officers and officials to continue

to improve the existing electronic document repository

operated by the Clerk for use by committees. Such

improvements are intended to increase public availability and

identification of legislative information produced by House

committees, including votes, amendments, and witness

disclosure forms.

Providing for Transparency with Respect to Memorials

Submitted Pursuant to Article V of the Constitution of the

United States. Subsection (n) carries forward provisions that

clarify the procedures of the House regarding the receipt of

Article V memorials from the States by directing the Clerk to

make each memorial, designated by the chair of the Committee

on the Judiciary, electronically available, organized by

State of origin and year of receipt, and indicate whether the

memorial was designated as an application or rescission.

In carrying out this subsection, it is expected that the

chair of the Committee on the Judiciary will be solely

charged with determining whether a memorial purports to be an

application of the legislature of a state calling for a

constitutional convention or rescission of prior

applications. The Clerk's role will be entirely

administrative. The chair of the Committee on the Judiciary

will only designate memorials from state legislatures (and

not petitions from individuals or other parties), as it is

only state legislatures that are contemplated under Article V

of the Constitution.

In submitting each memorial to the Clerk, the chair of the

Committee on the Judiciary will include a transmission letter

that indicates it has been designated under this subsection.

The Clerk will make publicly available the memorial and the

transmission letter from the chair. Ancillary documentation

from the state or other parties is not expected to be

publicized.

War Powers Resolution. Subsection (o) continues a separate

order from the 117th Congress expressly providing that any

motion to discharge a measure introduced pursuant to section

6 or section 7 of the War Powers Resolution is not subject to

a motion to table.

Further Expenses for Resolving Contested Elections.

Subsection (p) authorizes such sums as may be necessary for

the Committee on House Administration to resolve contested

elections. Funds shall be available for expenses incurred

between January 3, 2023, and January 3, 2024. Amounts made

available under this subsection shall be expended in

accordance with regulations prescribed by the Committee on

House Administration.

Ethics Reform. Subsection (q) directs the Speaker to

establish a bipartisan task force to conduct a comprehensive

review of House ethics rules and regulations. The task force

is directed to submit a report to the Speaker, Majority

Leader, Minority Leader, and chair and ranking minority

members of the Committees on Ethics and Rules.

Exercise Facilities for Former Members. Subsection (r)

continues the prohibition on access to any exercise facility

that is made available exclusively to Members, Delegates, the

Resident Commissioner, former Members, former Delegates,

former Resident Commissioners, officers, and former officers

of the House and their spouses to any former Member, former

Delegate, former Resident Commissioner, former officer, or

spouse who is a lobbyist registered under the Lobbying

Disclosure Act of 1995 or any successor statute, or who is an

agent of a foreign principal as defined in clause 5 of rule

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise), my good friend and the majority leader.

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

I begin by thanking my good friend from Massachusetts for his leadership of the Rules Committee over the last 4 years. While we certainly haven't always agreed, we have tried to always be agreeable while working with one another. I certainly associate myself with his remarks about the terrific work of the staff on both sides of the aisle for helping us facilitate the operation of the House over that 4-year period. I look forward again to working with my friend in the years ahead.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer the rules resolution that will govern the House during the 118th Congress.

Determining the rules we will follow is one of the first and most consequential decisions we must make as a body at the beginning of each Congress. In many ways, the Rules of the House of Representatives serve to demonstrate where our priorities and values lie as an institution.

Make no mistake, the priorities of the new Republican majority are fully on display in this resolution.

First and foremost, Mr. Speaker, we are taking action to reopen the people's House and ensure that we, the people's elected servants, are here in Washington, D.C., doing our jobs.

For far too long, the House allowed Members to do their jobs from home without ever setting foot in Washington. What started out as a pandemic accommodation lasted far longer than necessary, but today, even President Biden admits that the pandemic is over.

It is time for the House of Representatives to return to our normal operating procedures, and it is time for the Members of Congress to actually show up to work. Today's rules package eliminates proxy voting and puts an end to remote committee proceedings.

We restore the requirement for committees to establish plans for how they will conduct much-needed oversight. Republicans have robust plans to ensure that we will hold the Biden administration accountable for its actions, but being a counterbalance to the administration will not stop there. With today's rules package, we will also establish a new select subcommittee, modeled on the Church Committee, to investigate the radical left's weaponization of the Federal Government in recent years.

We will also modify the jurisdiction of the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic to ensure we investigate the origins of the virus and finally look into the financial and societal impacts of shutdowns.

We will establish a Select Committee on Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party to respond to threats posed by the CCP, ensure economic competitiveness for America, and protect human rights.

Other important changes in this resolution are those that are designed to address our out-of-control spending problem, which the former majority made vastly worse last Congress. In fact, when Democrats were in control of this Chamber, they spent so much money through partisan bills that they managed to drive this country into an inflationary crisis. Those aren't my words; those are the words of former Clinton Treasury Secretary Larry Summers.

The American people elected Republicans to get our fiscal house in order, and get our fiscal house in order we will. That starts with making key changes to House rules to ensure we will instill some fiscal sanity in Congress. These changes reflect a return to budgetary rules that were in place for over a decade before Democrats removed them.

We will restore the CutGo rule, which requires us to offset any increase in mandatory spending with a corresponding cut in mandatory spending. No more will the House be able to use budget gimmicks and tricks to pretend increases in mandatory spending are paid for when they actually are not.

We will restore a requirement for a three-fifths majority to approve any tax rate increase. If this rule had been in place, the House would not have passed the massive tax increases the Democrats included in last year's reconciliation bill.

We will eliminate the so-called Gephardt rule, which allows the House to automatically suspend the debt ceiling upon passage of a budget resolution. Just as the American people have to live within their means, so, too, should the Federal Government.

Automatically suspending the debt limit may be the easy and expedient way, but on a matter as important as the national debt limit, what is easy and expedient is hardly appropriate. The American people expect us to make a decision on the national debt limit only after full and fair consideration and debate in the House. That starts with ensuring it will receive a separate, standalone vote on the floor.

Finally, we will remove the rule that allowed Democrats to simply ignore budget estimates for bills dealing with the COVID pandemic or climate change. Although it may sound controversial to my friends on the other side of the aisle, Republicans cannot and will not thrust our heads in the sand and ignore the effects of out-of-control Federal spending.

Mr. Speaker, I could go on and on, but on the whole, I am very proud of today's rule package. It reflects Republican priorities and the priorities of the voters who elected us. It reopens this institution and ensures that all Members will be in Washington to do their work, as our constituents expect. It ensures that we will hold the Biden administration and the Chinese Communist Party accountable. It ensures that we will get our fiscal house in order.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support the rules package, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), my very good friend, a member of both the Rules Committee and the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Fischbach), my colleague on the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Griffith), my very good friend who had so much to do with some of the extraordinary changes in this rules package.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from South Dakota (Mr. Johnson), my good friend.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Duncan).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Cammack).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Clyde).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Norman).

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Speaker be authorized to postpone the vote on ordering the previous question on House Resolution 5 to a designated time later today.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Chair may reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for electronic voting on any question relating to House Resolution 5 that follows a 15-minute vote.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hill), my good friend.

Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close whenever my friend is.

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

In closing, I urge all my colleagues to support this resolution establishing the rules of the 118th Congress. The changes we are proposing today will ensure that the institution is set on a path of success for the new Congress.

They will ensure that Members return to Washington and do their work here.

They will set up an institution to hold the Biden administration accountable.

They will put in place budgetary rules designed to prevent the kind of reckless spending spree Democrats recently engaged in.

I urge all Members to vote ``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 thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Oh my God, Mr. Speaker. Let's get real here. Nothing about this is serious, not the process, not the intentions of the resolution's sponsor, not the impeachment case, not a single damn thing.

Yesterday, Republicans dishonored this House and dishonored themselves by bringing to the floor a ridiculous censure resolution against Adam Schiff because Donald Trump told them to.

Today, they are dishonoring this House and dishonoring themselves by bringing to the floor a ridiculous impeachment referral resolution against Joe Biden because Donald Trump told them to.

This body has become a place where extreme, outlandish, and nutty issues get debated passionately and important ones not at all.

In short, Mr. Speaker, the Republican Party is a joke. They talk about law and order when their frontrunner for President has been indicted on Federal charges.

They talk about respecting law enforcement. Then, they come in here and downplay the rioters who came in here on January 6 and beat up cops with fire extinguishers. I don't even know how they look the Capitol Police officers in the eye when they walk into this place.

They talk about how important it is that we follow a good process. Yet, the Rules Committee was called in late last night, literally at a moment's notice, where they deployed emergency procedures so we could refer this measure to a committee--what a spectacular emergency, truly something that needed to be done immediately.

We all know the truth. The real emergency here was that the Georgia wing and the Colorado wing of the MAGA caucus got into a fight right over there on the House floor about who gets to impeach the President first.

The truth is that Speaker McCarthy has lost control of this House, and it is being run by the MAGA fringe. This is nuts.

Kids get shot in their classrooms. Nothing.

Environmental disasters destroy entire communities. Nothing.

Our air is clogged with smoke because half the Northern Hemisphere is on fire due to climate change. Nothing.

But when the MAGA wing nuts say to jump, Speaker McCarthy says: How high?

According to news reports, it sounds like this resolution's sponsor is dictating to the Speaker which committees bills should be referred to, when he should put legislation on the floor, and how he should run this House.

That is who is in charge here, the MAGA extremists.

Frankly, they can try to impeach Joe Biden all they want, but all they are doing is impeaching themselves and making a mockery of this place while they are at it.

I get it. They don't like that their cult leader, Donald Trump, will go down in history as one of the worst Presidents we have ever had. They don't like that he was impeached twice and had a bipartisan conviction vote in the Senate. They don't like that Democrats tried to hold him accountable for trying to extort President Zelenskyy, who is now trying to defend himself from Putin.

They don't like that Congress tried to hold him accountable again, this time for trying to overthrow the government on January 6.

They don't like that he had nuclear secrets in his bathroom and in his desk, and God knows where else, and waved them around like it was nothing.

You know what? They don't like themselves for having to stand by him time after time and defend his lies. I know many of my Republican colleagues say in private what they are not willing to say here in public, which is that they think this is an embarrassment.

Still, they are here on the floor defending a three-time loser, sexual abuser, ex-President that has been indicted more times than he has been elected. It is pathetic.

Instead of dealing with their own issues, Republicans are going after Joe Biden to try to distract and deflect.

H. Res. 503 claims President Biden is intentionally facilitating a complete and total invasion of the southern border. This resolution claims that foreign cartels have complete control of our border. Seriously? It is insulting to the

Border Patrol agents that they claim to support, the ones that put their lives on the line every single day.

By the way, just to talk facts for a second--which I know my Republican friends hate to do--since the end of title 42 on May 11, unlawful entries along the southern border have plummeted.

As of June 6, Customs and Border Protection has reported over 70 percent fewer encounters between points of entry or unscheduled encounters per day.

Fentanyl seizures have increased under the Biden Presidency. To make that clearer for my friends across the aisle, that means that more fentanyl is getting picked up at the border before it makes it onto our streets. They are attacking Joe Biden for stopping more fentanyl. It makes no sense.

No, they would rather talk about building a stupid wall along our southern border that they know won't work or about the nonbinding resolution they put on the floor this week that demonizes migrants but does nothing to fix our immigration system.

They have a policy disagreement with President Biden and their first impulse isn't to pass an immigration bill. Their first impulse is to impeach him. Our Founding Fathers must be rolling over in their graves.

They are doing this all so they can distract from the fact that Donald Trump stole top-secret information and stored it in his bathroom and showed highly classified Iran attack plans to people and bragged about stealing classified government documents on live TV.

Trump is the legitimate national security risk. Don't come to us with this phony BS about how President Biden is the reason we have a crisis at our southern border.

Republicans can yell and scream all they want. They can rant and rave so that they get on FOX News tonight. It doesn't make them right. It is doing untold damage to this institution. They have no respect for the traditions of this House. It is grotesque. It is embarrassing. It is shameful.

We aren't debating matters that help or uplift people, rather we are debating garbage to make Trump happy. It is cowardly, and it is sickening.

What we have here is a joke, just like this Republican majority-- which is clearly going to be a temporary majority.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, that was an awful lot. I don't have enough time to respond to all the inaccuracies that were just stated.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert in the Record an article from Newsweek titled ``Fentanyl Surge

Started and Peaked Under Trump Despite GOP Blaming Biden.''

Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about this accusation about open borders. I don't know how many times we need to say it, but the United States does not have open borders. We didn't have open borders under Trump, and we don't have open borders under Biden.

Even the conservative CATO Institute knows that. Please stop incorrectly saying that our country has open borders. We do not.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert into the Record an article published by the CATO Institute titled ``Biden's Border Policy is Not `Open Borders'.''

Mr. Speaker, let me read an excerpt from the article-- this is from CATO.

``Practically since his first week in office, President Joe Biden has faced repeated criticisms from Republicans and some Democrats that his border policy amounts to `open borders.' This

criticism is not simply inaccurate: it is unhinged from reality in a way that distinguishes itself from normal political hyperbole. Indeed, U.S. immigration policy is effectively closed borders, and Biden's immigration policies and goals are largely the same as those of President Donald Trump.

``President Biden has not suddenly ended America's immigration prohibition and opened up U.S. borders to almost anyone who wants to come (as was largely America's immigration policy from 1776 to 1924). Instead, he has far more vigorously enforced immigration prohibition than the law requires, narrowing the few exceptions to the universal ban on legal immigration.''

Mr. Speaker, I point this out because this is crazy what is being talked about here on the House floor. This is not about a policy disagreement; if it was, maybe my friends would actually pass a bill that had an alternative policy.

The bill that they brought up on immigration this week was a bill that was a nonbinding resolution. It did nothing. It was just their opinion that expresses the sense of Congress. It was a ``nothingburger''. If they wanted to, they would legislate in a way that would change a policy, but that is not what they want to do.

This is about protecting Donald Trump. Donald Trump says to them, you know: Jump. And they ask: How high? That is what this is about. This is about covering up for the former President. It is about deflecting from the former President's criminality, the 37 felony counts that he has been indicted on, and they don't like it. Unfortunately, that is who he is.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article from Politifact titled: ``Are Biden's border policies to blame for fentanyl deaths? Experts say no.''

Fentanyl deaths in the U.S. were rising before Biden took office, and, in fact, he is intercepting more fentanyl than the previous administration did. I think we need the Republicans to get their facts straight.

The other thing I want to point out to my friends--and maybe they need to read their history books or read the Constitution--impeachment is about high crimes and misdemeanors. It is not about policy disagreements.

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that Republicans would rather the American public pay attention to anything--literally anything--other than the latest charges that their leader has been slapped with.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article from The Washington Post titled: ``Here are the 37 charges against Trump and what they mean.''

Mr. Speaker, I would love to insert in the Record the entirety of the charges, but, apparently, I am told it is too long to be able to be put into the Congressional Record.

Let me say a couple of things. Trump is charged with 31 counts of violating a part of the Espionage Act that bars willful retention of national defense information by someone not authorized to have it.

He is basically charged with, among other things, conspiracy to obstruct justice, tampering with grand jury evidence, concealing evidence in a Federal investigation, and false statements.

Mr. Speaker, I get it. If I were they, I would want to talk about anything other than that, but those are the facts. No matter how you want to distract and deflect, Mr. Speaker, the American people are not going to ignore what I believe will ultimately prove to be criminality of the former President.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson).

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

Mr. Speaker, let me say to the gentleman who just spoke that I know exactly why he is here. I don't think this is--and the American people know--this is not a serious effort. I know my friends don't want to talk about Trump. They want to talk about Biden. So let's talk about Joe Biden.

I want to make something clear: Not only is any talk of impeaching President Biden completely absurd--as many House Republicans know--but President Biden has been a historic success over the first 2\1/2\ years in office.

He took office in the throes of the pandemic and in the midst of the chaos caused by his predecessor trying to illegally hold on to power, but that hasn't stopped Democrats from making huge strides to improve the lives of every American.

Democrats jumped into action by enacting the American Rescue Plan in the President's first months in office. That law changed the course of the pandemic and set the course of our economic recovery to be the envy of the rest of the world. It lifted more than 5 million children out of poverty, it safely reopened our schools, and it put money back in the pockets of middle-class Americans.

Every Republican voted against those things.

President Biden signed the bipartisan infrastructure law which makes historic investments in our roads, our bridges, and our transportation networks while improving public safety and creating jobs all across the country.

We passed into law the biggest piece of gun safety legislation in decades, and we enacted the Inflation Reduction Act less than a year ago.

President Biden is now busy implementing that law which will cut prescription drug costs for our senior citizens, lower the cost of healthcare for millions of Americans, make historic investments in clean energy, and make American-made solutions to our climate crisis.

It will do all of that while lowering our deficit, unlike so many of the bills this Republican majority has brought to the floor which would do the opposite.

This isn't just me saying how great all of this is. During the Financial Services Committee hearing yesterday, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell was asked about inflation.

He said: ``Everybody has very high inflation, the E.U., the United Kingdom, and many countries within Europe.''

He made one more important point: ``Our recovery is by far the strongest of any country.''

Just look at the results more broadly. More Americans have jobs right now than at any point in American history. Over the past 2 years, more small businesses have been created than at any other period on record. More Americans have health insurance right now than ever before in our history.

I could go on and on, but let me be clear. No one is saying things are perfect. There is a lot that we need to do.

We need to do more to keep our children fed. We need to do more to ensure every child gets the education they deserve. We need to do more to make sure the richest Americans pay their fair share. We need to do more to get guns off the streets.

I would love to see this Republican majority do anything at all to reach those goals or do anything that means anything to anybody.

Instead, we are here today debating this latest attempt by the Speaker to keep the most radical members of his party behind him. Quite frankly, it is embarrassing, and it is pathetic.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I will say to the gentleman that we are well aware that the previous President was impeached twice and justifiably so.

The first impeachment dealt with his effort to try to extort Zelenskyy into getting dirt on Joe Biden in exchange for assistance so that they could defend themselves against Putin. I guess no one should be surprised because the President seems to have this--the former President seems to have this obsession with Putin.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record a 2020 Roll Call article titled: ``Senate report outlines `grave' Russian threat in 2016 election interference probe.''

Mr. Speaker, despite the former President's repeated claims that Russian interference in our 2016 election was a Democratic hoax, a bipartisan Senate investigation and report released in 2020 made clear that there were extensive communications between senior Trump officials and people with strong ties to the Kremlin.

Senator Marco Rubio--the last time I checked, he was still a Republican--said: ``We found irrefutable evidence of Russian meddling.''

The report is damning. The facts are clear. Russia interfered in an election.

The second impeachment was really in response to what happened here, and everybody saw what happened here: A violent mob broke into this Capitol.

Mr. Speaker, 140 Capitol Police officers were injured. The mob destroyed sacred property in this building. They tried to overturn a legitimate election. They attempted an insurrection.

I was in the chair, one of the last people off the House floor. I saw some of my Republican colleagues here, hiding, cowering behind Capitol Police because they were afraid of what was going on that day.

Now, they come to the floor and say nothing happened, that it was a perfectly wonderful day, a typical day of tourism at the Capitol. It is disgusting, the revisionism that we see here.

So you are damn right that he got impeached a second time. He deserved to be impeached. If that is not an impeachable offense, I don't know what is.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman said something that I agree with: The election cannot come soon enough.

I think people are just sick and tired of my Republican friends defending a three-time loser, sexual abuser, ex-President that has been indicted more times than he has been elected. It is pathetic.

We should be working on matters that actually help people. That is why Democrats have been fighting not only for commonsense gun safety legislation and investments in job creation and environmental protection, but we have also been insisting that we get a guarantee from the majority here that they don't go after Social Security and Medicare.

Mr. Speaker, I urge that we defeat the previous question, and I will offer an amendment to the rule to provide for consideration of a resolution assuring our constituents that the people's House will protect and preserve Social Security and Medicare for our future generations and reject any cuts to these essential programs.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the Record along with any extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

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

Mr. Speaker, I will say to my friends that while you want to distract and deflect from all of Donald Trump's legal problems, they continue to mount.

I think there will be probably more charges, I expect, in the coming weeks and the coming months. While my colleagues do not want to talk about things like Social Security and Medicare because they are the party of privatization, the party of trying to undercut Medicare, we are going to fight them on those things.

We are going to continue to be a voice for the people of this country, for our senior citizens, for those who believe that Social Security and Medicare are important. We will not be deflected or deterred by whatever this circus is that is going on here today.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I have to say that my friends on the other side of the aisle look small and pathetic and like losers. When they lose this House, this is going to be a reason why.

Mr. Speaker, my friends keep talking about open borders. That is an insult to the men and women in our Border Patrol who are risking their lives to protect our borders. It is just not true.

I entered in the Record an article by the conservative think tank, the Cato Institute, but facts don't matter. It is what plays on FOX News and how we can distract and how people can make up things.

I will also say, Mr. Speaker, that try as they might to deflect from the former President, we can't turn our back on what he has done.

Look, Trump literally can't help himself. He has admitted multiple times on air, during interviews, and to

others that he stole and shared top-secret government information. Talk about a national security threat. The call is coming from inside the house.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article from Rolling Stone titled: ``Trump All But Confesses to Mishandling Classified Docs on FOX News.''

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

Mr. Speaker, I want the record to reflect that the previous President of the United States supported an insurrection to basically steal the election.

My friends think it is funny, but I will tell you this: Laugh in the face of the Capitol Police.

Mr. Speaker, 140 of them were injured. People lost their lives, and the best you can do is laugh--is laugh--about what happened that day? I mean, that is disgusting.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, first, let me congratulate our incredible new House Democratic leadership team: Hakeem Jeffries, Katherine Clark, and Pete Aguilar. It is a dawn of a new day here in Congress, as a new generation takes on the solemn responsibility of leadership.

Leader Jeffries has been tireless in his work to put people over politics. His steady leadership as chair of our Democratic Caucus, uniting our Members, harnessing their talent and diversity, and fighting tirelessly to make life better for American people is a source of inspiration for me and so many others.

It is also a privilege to be here with my good friend Tom Cole, someone who I respect greatly and who I know greatly respects this institution. We sit on opposite ends of the dais, but I admire Mr. Cole's leadership and the example he sets. Even when we don't see eye to eye, I am proud of our work to build an atmosphere of respectful dialogue on the Rules Committee.

We have done so not just among our Members but among our hardworking staff, and I thank our minority and majority staff, led by Don Sisson and Kelly Dixon, for all of their hard work.

I look forward to working with Mr. Cole and his team this Congress to continue our collaboration on issues of shared concern.

Mr. Speaker, as Leader Jeffries put it so succinctly this weekend, our Republican friends campaigned on the claim that they would fight against inflation and fight for the American people. Instead, all they have done is come to Washington and fight with each other.

In fact, what has become crystal clear over the past few days is the extent to which the Republican Party has been hijacked by an extremist MAGA faction, a faction not interested in governing but in their own egos, a faction not interested in compromise but in their own power, a faction not interested in putting people over politics but instead interested in putting their own political ambition over the people we serve.

Now here we are, nearly a week later, considering their deeply flawed rules package, the first legislation on the floor by this new majority, and they are using it to gut the Office of Congressional Ethics, attack women's access to abortion, make it easier for big oil companies to pollute, and interfere in ongoing criminal investigations into President Trump.

They are making it easier for billionaires and big corporations to avoid paying their taxes. Is that part of their contract with America? Is that their big plan to help everyday people? Because most people who read this package would think it must be a joke.

What I am concerned about is not just what is written down here. I am concerned by the backroom deals that Speaker McCarthy made with the Freedom Caucus in exchange for their votes. Like Republican Congresswoman Nancy Mace said just this weekend: ``We don't have any idea what promises were made.''

This is unconscionable. We are only 1 week into this, and this is how they are running this place.

There is a report out by Punchbowl News, and let me read it. It said: ``There is also a secret 3-page addendum that McCarthy and his allies hashed out during several days of grueling negotiations with the House Freedom Caucus. This pact includes the most controversial concessions McCarthy made in order to become Speaker--three seats on the Rules Committee for conservatives, freezing spending at FY 2022 levels, a debt ceiling strategy, coveted committee assignments, and more.'' Is that what the Majority Leader meant when he talked about a new day and transparency?

These rules are not a serious attempt at governing. They are essentially a ransom note to America from the extreme right. The same Members of Congress who held this body hostage last week are the ones who ran interference for the January 6 insurrectionists, who tried to overturn a free and fair election.

Even the new Speaker of the House voted to overturn the 2020 elections. We couldn't even get a public acknowledgment from him on the 2-year anniversary of that horrific day, not even a tweet.

It is clear that Republicans welcomed the election deniers into their ranks with open arms, and now they are reaping what they have sown. The insurrectionists are in charge.

I am reminded of the words of President Kennedy: ``In the past, those who foolishly sought power by riding the back of the tiger ended up inside.''

The American people get it. They rejected extremism in the last two elections. That is why they picked Joe Biden, and that is why the red wave turned into a pink splash.

My Republican friends still aren't listening, and in fact, they are still empowering the extremists. Don't take my word for it. Let's go through their rules package.

They are giving a single Member the ability to remove the Speaker at any time, letting a small, far-right faction hold their leadership hostage.

They are trying to shut down criminal investigations into the former President's wrongdoing.

They are making it easier to slash taxes on billionaire corporations while dismantling the social safety net.

They are giving committee chairs unbalanced discretion over which witnesses can testify; rejecting pandemic safety procedures like remote voting; trying to force an end to congressional staff unionization; and the icing on the cake, a new subcommittee to push QAnon conspiracies and launch fake investigations into nonexistent scandals. What is next, a rule requiring we all wear tinfoil hats?

This package is disrespectful, not just to this institution, but to the people who sent us here to govern.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a Congressional Budget Office report from today titled: ``Estimated Budgetary Effects of H.R. 23, the Family and Small Business Taxpayer Protection Act.'' This nonpartisan report says that the GOP's IRS funding bill will add $114 billion to the national debt, so when people talk about taking steps to reduce the national debt, I am not sure what they are talking about.

[From the Congressional Budget Office, January 9, 2023]

Estimated Budgetary Effects of H.R. 23, the Family and Small Business

Taxpayer Protection Act

Summary: The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010

establishes budget-reporting and enforcement procedures for

legislation affecting direct spending or revenues. The net

changes in outlays and revenues that are subject to those

procedures are shown above.

The Congressional Budget Office adheres to laws and

Congressional rules concerning the federal budget and to a

set of principles (called the Scorekeeping Guidelines)

created by the Congress. Those principles guide how the House

and Senate Budget Committees, the Congressional Budget

Office, and the Office of Management and Budget attribute

budgetary effects to legislation, with the goal of promoting

consistent treatment of estimated effects among those

agencies. (For more information on those guidelines, see

Congressional Budget Office, CBO Explains Budgetary

Scorekeeping Guidelines, January 2021, www.cbo.gov/ publication/56507.)

When a provision in an authorization bill provides funding

for administrative or program management activities, such as

when the IRS receives additional funding for administrative

activities, spending of those amounts can result in increases

in receipts. Guideline 14, however, directs scorekeepers to

exclude those increases when estimating the budgetary effects

of proposals that would provide additional mandatory funding

for such activities.

Guideline 14 was adopted in part to avert cases in which

possible, but uncertain, receipts were used to offset near-

term increases in spending resulting from the same bill. That

guideline is asymmetrical, however. That is, even though

increased receipts cannot be credited to a bill that would

increase administrative funding, estimated receipt losses

that might result from a decrease in such funding are

included in the estimated budgetary effects.

H.R. 23 would rescind unobligated funds provided by

paragraphs (1)(A)(ii), (1)(A)(iii), (1)(B), (2), (3), (4),

and (5) of section 10301 of Public Law 117-169. CBO estimates

that the bill would decrease outlays by $71 billion and

decrease receipts by $186 billion over the 2023-2032 period.

Both of those effects are included in accordance with

Guideline 14.

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up the Women's Health Protection Act.

I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the Record immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Chu) to discuss our proposal.

We heard a lot about inflation, but none of the first 12 bills that my Republican friends are bringing up have anything to do with inflation or mention inflation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette).

Mr. Speaker, let me just remind my friends that over a million Americans died of COVID, including a Member-elect who was supposed to be sworn in in the last Congress. These remote procedures undoubtedly saved lives of Members and staff here in this Chamber. So, please, let's not diminish what the point of all that was about.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Jayapal).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman is taking credit for the 72- hour rule, which we created in our rules package, but thank you very much.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Ms. Clark), the Democrat whip.

Mr. Speaker, I remind my friend that the first bill they are doing is going to add $114 billion to the deficit. Enough.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Aguilar), who is the chairman of the Democratic Caucus.

Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman mentioned the 72-hour rule. Once again, I will say: You are welcome. Then she talked about this being the most open and transparent rule ever. Maybe the gentlewoman can share with us the secret 3-page addendum that we are reading about, because none of us have seen it. So much for transparency. I guess she is not going to share that with us.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, again, for mentioning the 72-hour rule which has been mentioned many times. But I wrote it, and I thank the gentleman for keeping it.

But when I hear people talking about balanced budgets, give me a break. The first bill that my friends are bringing to the floor, according to CBO, adds $114 billion to the debt. We don't need any lectures from anybody on that side about balancing the budget. Give me a break.

Maybe the gentleman can, again, share with us the secret addendum that apparently was negotiated behind closed doors, so we actually know what agreements were made.

Four days and 15 votes, and there is only one change in the rules package going from five to be able to vacate the Chair to one. Well, there is a lot more to it. We all know that, but that is a big secret. So much for transparency.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Torres).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal).

Mr. Speaker, I would just say to the gentleman that in the vast majority of cases we did comply with the 72-hour rule.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Horsford).

Mr. Speaker, following the vote on the previous question, Representative DeLauro will offer a motion to commit.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) to discuss that proposal.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. DelBene).

Mr. Speaker, again, let me just ask, will anybody on the other side share with us the secret 3-page addendum that Speaker McCarthy negotiated with the Freedom Caucus so we can know what else was decided on, given away? I guess not.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Barragan).

Mr. Speaker, I have great respect for my friend, but really? I mean, come on.

What were the last 4 days about? I mean, again, days and days, and 15 roll call votes, and reporting by multiple sources tell us that there is this signed agreement with the House Freedom Caucus that deals with some of the most controversial concessions.

So, you know, I know it exists. It will come out sooner or later. Everybody is talking about transparency and openness. It would be nice if there was a little bit more transparency and openness from the other side.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. Speaker, let me continue what I was beginning in the last exchange.

At least one GOP office apparently has the much-fabled 3-page House rules addendum. ``We are taking a look at it . . . we're just going through it,'' Rep. Ken Calvert, a Steering Committee member, tells Axios. Asked if Members have received a copy: ``I don't know if everybody has.''

Again, don't come to the floor and talk about transparency and openness and a new day. This is backroom politics. That is what this is about, secret deals that no one is going to know anything about until it is too late.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire of the gentleman from Oklahoma how many more speakers he has?

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

Mr. Speaker, the last time House Republicans were in charge, they ended their time in power with a government shutdown. They controlled the House, the Senate, and the White House, and they shut the government down and walked away.

Upon taking power once again, they began with a legislative shutdown, a shutdown where a far-right fringe held the incoming Republican leadership hostage and got them to give away everything, including their own dignity.

What is clear from all of this is that the Republican Party no longer cares about governing. This rules package is exhibit number one.

The American people sent us here because they want us to put people over politics. Sadly, this rules package puts politics first, empowering the extremists who are only interested in their own power.

As I have said again and again, if this new majority wants to work together in good faith, my door is open. If this is their plan, they have clearly chosen to become a party that embraces election deniers and extremists, and Democrats will not go along to get along.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, let me say that I have had some harsh words for this rules package. Call it ``tough love.'' I care very deeply about this institution, about the work we do here, and the awesome responsibility of the decisions we make. I am glad that my friends kept the McGovern rule on the 72-hour and the McGovern rule that committees have to do hearings and markups before they come to the Rules Committee.

We weren't perfect, but overwhelmingly we kept our word.

This legislation does a great disservice to the people we represent, and it does not live up to the high standards that we should have for this institution. I believe that calling this House to a higher standard is the right thing to do.

But let me be clear that my criticism is reserved for the resolution we are considering and not for the distinguished gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), whom I respect and admire as a person even when we strongly disagree, as we do today.

These rules are a giveaway to the far right, but this Congress need not be. If my Republican colleagues want to get anything done, it is clear that they are going to have to work together with Democrats to get things done.

Let's end the extremism and put people over politics to get stuff done.

People do not want government shutdowns.

People do not want to see us default on our financial obligations.

People want us to get stuff done and to keep the lights on.

The last two elections were a rejection of extremism. My friends predicted an overwhelmingly Republican majority in the last election, and instead, they got a pink splash because the American people, Democrats, Independents, and a lot of Republicans said: You are too extreme.

So put the extremism behind you. I urge the Speaker to work with Democrats and not just work with the small fringe group in the Republican Conference, but to work in a way to move the people's agenda forward.

I urge a ``no'' vote on this resolution, a ``no'' on the previous question, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rules and the rules package.

In particular, I support the Women's Health Protection Act so women seeking reproductive rights will not be hunted down by bounty hunters.

As well, I am opposed to this rule because of the creation of a potential committee that, in fact, threatens our safety, security, and freedom. It is an unprecedented attack on our Nation's law enforcement agencies, our justice system, and our intelligence community, all for the extreme MAGA Republican political activities.

This does nothing to solve the actual problems facing the American people and even includes a possibility of defunding police.

Finally, I am glad that the last Congress indicated that when a million Americans died, for continuity of government, we had proxy voting. They wanted to save lives.

Mr. Speaker, I oppose the underlying rules and the rules package. I ask my colleagues to join me in voting ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H. Res. 5, Adopting the Rules of the 118th Congress. Instead of building on the extraordinary work done by House Democrats in the 117th Congress, Republicans are choosing to lead off this term with legislation that attacks women's health freedoms, make it easier for companies to pollute without consequence, and hand out tax breaks to the wealthy and well connected.

This problematic Rules package is the product of non-transparent negotiations, backroom deals and promises that were made to appease the demands made by extremist members of the Republican Party to get them to vote or in some cases vote present for Speaker of the House.

Last week's catastrophic Speaker's election showed Americans how disorganized, chaotic, and inefficient the Republican leadership and Caucus can be.

Last week's chaos showed the American people how Republicans plan to govern for the next two years. This body will be ill managed, less transparent, slow moving, and will put forth legislation that will attack our freedoms and undermine our Nation's values.

Concessions made by Republican leadership last week will have devastating effects on this institution. The passage of this Rules package will pave the way for:

Any member to file a ``motion to vacate the chair,'' effectively holding the Speaker hostage;

Extreme right-wing members on key committees;

Putting an end to the possibility of Congressional staff unionization;

Reinstating the Holman Rules so Republicans can target civil servants who challenge them; and

Shut down criminal investigations into the previous president.

This problematic rule is creating more turmoil in the Republican ranks as members wrestle with the image of witnessing the Speaker being coerced into agreeing to give a small faction of the Republican Conference treats to appease them--including concessions to individual members for votes he needed to become Speaker.

It is not inconceivable that Republican members of the conference must show they are not being bullied into voting for this Rules bill.

The most problematic aspect of the rule is that it does not spell out what the Speaker agreed to give to his opponents so that the Congress and the American people know what the Speakership actually cost them.

This is the People's House--not the Republican or Democratic House-- any bargaining should be focused on the needs of the American people-- they must come first.

Throughout the last election cycle, Republicans campaigned on addressing inflation and lowering the cost of living for millions of Americans.

Ironically, the first bill they are introducing repays the wealthy donors that got them their majority through dark money contributions by making it easier for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans to cheat on their taxes.

We all may have varying beliefs about taxes, but we as Americans know that nothing in this life is free and that in order for our Nation to be a beacon of freedom we must have a strong defense, public assistance programs to help those in need, an education system that prepares young minds to lead, retirement programs that provided for our elder and disabled, and a healthcare system that cares for all in need of healthcare.

Passage of the rule will pave the way for Republicans to continue their assault on a woman's bodily autonomy and impede on medical decisions that should remain between medical professionals and their patient.

Although the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act does not criminalize abortion nationwide, make no mistake, that is their end goal, and the passage of this bill will get them one step closer to their sick idea of stripping all women of their rights.

There are concerns that language in the House Rules package would eliminate rules requiring spending offsets for bills that sell or transfer federal public lands and waters.

This will result in a loss of public access enjoyed by the 70 million American hunters and anglers that help support the $862 billion outdoor recreation economy in the United States. Additionally, giving away public assets with no return would be a loss for American taxpayers.

As a result, hunters and anglers are strongly opposed to this rule change, which would eliminate the necessity of spending offsets to sell or transfer public lands.

I urge all my colleagues to oppose this bill and see it for what it truly is:

An effort by Republicans to give tax breaks to the ultra-rich and the corporations who fund their campaigns, and

An effort to continue carrying out their distorted notion of America by decimating the programs set in place to help the Americans who depend on government assistance the most.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H. Res. 5, Adopting the Rules of the 118th Congress. Instead of building on the extraordinary work done by House Democrats in the 117th Congress, Republicans are choosing to lead off this term with legislation that attacks women's health freedoms, make it easier for companies to pollute without consequence, and hand out tax breaks to the wealthy and well connected.

This problematic Rules package is the product of non-transparent negotiations, backroom deals and promises that were made to appease the demands made by extremist members of the Republican Party to get them to vote or in some cases vote present for Speaker of the House.

Last week's catastrophic Speaker's election showed Americans how disorganized, chaotic, and inefficient the Republican leadership and Caucus can be.

Last week's chaos showed the American people how Republicans plan to govern for the next two years. This body will be ill managed, less transparent, slow moving, and will put forth legislation that will attack our freedoms and undermine our Nation's values.

Concessions made by Republican leadership last week will have devastating effects on this institution. The passage of this Rules package will pave the way for:

Any member to file a ``motion to vacate the chair,'' effectively holding the Speaker hostage;

Extreme right-wing members on key committees;

Putting an end to the possibility of Congressional staff unionization;

Reinstating the Holman Rules so Republicans can target civil servants who challenge them; and

Shut down criminal investigations into the previous president.

This problematic Rule is creating more turmoil in the Republican ranks as members wrestle with the image of witnessing the Speaker being coerced into agreeing to give a small faction of the Republican Caucus treats to appease them--including concessions to individual members for votes he needed to become Speaker.

It is not inconceivable that Republican members of the delegation must show they are not being bullied into voting for this Rules Bill.

The most problematic aspect of the Rule is that it does not spell out what the Speaker agreed to give to his opponents so that the Congress and the American people know what the Speakership actually cost them.

This is the People's House--not the Republican or Democratic House any bargaining should be focused on the needs of the American people-- they must come first.

Throughout the last election cycle, Republicans campaigned on addressing inflation and lowering the cost of living for millions of Americans.

Ironically, the first bill they are introducing repays the wealthy donors that got them their majority through dark money contributions by making it easier for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans to cheat on their taxes.

We all may have varying beliefs about taxes, but we as Americans know that nothing in this life is free and that in order for our Nation to be a beacon of freedom we must have a strong defense, public assistance programs to help those in need, an education system that prepares young minds to lead, retirement programs that provided for our elder and disabled, and a healthcare system that cares for all in need of healthcare.

Passage of the rule will pave the way for Republicans to continue their assault on a woman's bodily autonomy and impede on medical decisions that should remain between medical professionals and their patient.

Although the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act does not criminalize abortion nationwide, make no mistake, that is their end goal, and the passage of this bill will get them one step closer to their sick idea of stripping all women of their rights.

There are concerns that language in the House Rules Package would eliminate rules requiring spending offsets for bills that sell or transfer federal public lands and waters.

This will result in a loss of public access enjoyed by the 70 million American hunters and anglers that help support the $862 billion outdoor recreation economy in the United States. Additionally, giving away public assets with no return would be a loss for American taxpayers.

As a result, hunters and anglers are strongly opposed to this rule change, which would eliminate the necessity of spending offsets to sell or transfer public lands.

I urge all my colleagues to oppose this bill and see it for what it truly is:

an effort by Republicans to give tax breaks to the ultra-rich and the corporations who fund their campaigns, and

an effort to continue carrying out their distorted notion of America by decimating the programs set in place to help the Americans who depend on government assistance the most.

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

At the end of the resolution, add the following new

section:

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 529 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), 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 reported a rule to refer H. Res. 503 to the Committees on Homeland Security and the Judiciary. H. Res. 503 lays out articles of impeachment against President Joe Biden for his failure to secure the southern border of the United States.

We do a lot of things in this body, and we say a lot of things--I certainly do--about our beliefs and about what we think is happening to our country. What we are talking about here is, indeed, solemn. We are, in fact, talking about the mechanism provided by the Founders in the Constitution of the United States to check and hold the executive branch responsible.

The border crisis that we are experiencing today is extremely significant for the people in my home State of Texas. It is significant not just for Texas, of course, but for the entire country--but, in particular, for the people in my home State of Texas.

Since President Biden took office, there have been well over 5 million illegal migrant encounters along the southwest border. More than 204,000 illegal immigrants were encountered at the border in May alone. Those numbers are changing post-relaxing enforcement of title 42.

Mr. Speaker, 2 million aliens have been released into the interior of the United States, and 1.5 million, probably 1.7 million, maybe 2 million now, got-aways have successfully evaded border agents, by relatively conservative accounting.

Most concerning right now is the data we have shows that 125 individuals from the terrorist watch list have been encountered this fiscal year alone, and that compares to about 98 in all of last fiscal year and about 10 in the last year of the Trump administration.

The fact is, the people I represent are sick and tired of a Federal Government that is abdicating its fundamental duty to defend the border of the United States. That is what is happening.

The Federal Government exists primarily, borderline entirely, but certainly primarily, to defend the United States. That is why it exists. It is failing to do so not through maladministration, not through incompetence, but through dereliction of duty and a refusal to actually follow the laws of the United States.

The laws of the United States are there, expressly and specifically laid out, to ensure that our border will be protected, that our Nation will be secure. That is the fundamental question before us. When the executive branch fails to follow the law, when the executive branch fails to adhere to its duty to defend the Constitution and the laws of the United States, then what is it that the Congress, the people's House, is supposed to do in response?

The Founders gave us a mechanism. Here today, we are talking about putting forward and referring these articles to the Homeland Security Committee for determination of the extent to which the homeland is, in fact, not secure as a direct consequence of the refusal of the administration, well beyond maladministration but very specifically the refusal to follow the laws of the United States that is resulting in the direct consequence of the death and damage to the American people.

That is the truth. That is what we are experiencing. That is what we are experiencing in real time in Texas. My colleagues in Arizona, my colleagues throughout this entire country, are experiencing that in real time.

Just a few weeks ago, a Federal judge in the Northern District of Texas, Judge Reed O'Connor, issued an opinion, an order, and in it, he lays out: ``Defendants, illegal aliens, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to transport and harbor illegal aliens. The sentencing information shows that on behalf of the Juarez cartel, defendants participated in an alien smuggling conspiracy. . . . The smuggling organization charged $10,000 to smuggle an adult illegal alien into the United States and between $12,000 to $14,000 to smuggle a child illegal alien.''

It goes on to lay out how they discovered that there was an illegal alien in Baltimore who was being held for ransom so that his family wouldn't be abused by the Juarez cartel in a stash house in Fort Worth.

The members told the husband that they would do things to his daughter he would not like if he did not make this payment of $23,000, which he had not bargained for.

This is the state of affairs in our country. This is the consequence to those migrants who are seeking to come here, when my colleagues in the false name of compassion state that open borders are somehow good for them. This is causing crime to extend into our communities. This is causing us to experience the dangerous hand of cartels.

Just this morning, we had more news about cartels and their reach into Texas, into the United States. It is an everyday occurrence: bailouts, damage to ranches, harm to Texans, death to Texans, fentanyl. How many more fentanyl moms, how many more angel moms, how many more Americans need suffer because this President refuses to follow the laws of the United States that he raised his hand and swore an oath to defend?

That is why we are here, and that is why I support the resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I just note that this morning Texas DPS troopers arrested a Gulf cartel operative in the Rio Grande Valley smuggling people across the river. After having been paid thousands of dollars, they were moving five illegal immigrants into the United States.

This is somebody that had been affiliated with a dangerous cartel. It is happening every day in the State of Texas because this administration refuses to do its job.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs. Boebert).

Mr. Speaker, I am moved by the references to solemnity after the chanting on the floor of the House yesterday for 5 minutes disrupting the Speaker of the House from carrying out his duties. I find it extremely moving.

I am also moved by the references to how we have not passed legislation, despite the fact that we passed H.R. 2, the most impactful border security legislation that has been moved off the floor of the House, without a single Democrat vote because they are ignoring what the administration is doing to the State of Texas, to migrants, and to the security of our country.

I am moved by the concerns for climate change which I am sure will assuage the angel moms and the fentanyl moms who have lost loved ones and the 72,000 Americans dead from fentanyl because my colleagues on the other side of the aisle and the President of the United States refuse to secure the border.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Crane).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentleman from Arizona.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Good), my good friend.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs), my good friend.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Norman), my good friend.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ogles), my good friend.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mills), my friend and an Army veteran.