Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 5525) making continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2024, and for other purposes.

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.

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

Madam Speaker, I will just take a moment first to recognize the loss of our dear colleague and historic trailblazer, Dianne Feinstein. The longest serving woman in the United States Senate, Senator Feinstein was a political giant.

She fought hard for her constituents in California, passionately defended American civil liberties, and was a strong voice for national security as chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

She broke more glass ceilings in her career than most thought was possible, and she will be missed. She left behind an incredible legacy. May she rest in peace.

Now, Madam Speaker, I have the unfortunate task of turning to the business before us, a CR that the Republicans have brought forward.

Again, I mentioned legacy with regard to Senator Feinstein. I ask my friends, is this their legacy? Is this what they want people to remember their service by? This bill, that was just dropped on us a few hours ago, really is a piece of garbage, and that is putting it nicely.

Madam Speaker, the clock is ticking; less than 40 hours from a total MAGA Republican government shutdown. Less than 40 hours, and today we are here to consider the Republicans' latest continuing resolution that has absolutely no chance of becoming law. This version of the CR we are considering won't pass the Senate. It just won't. We all know that. Hell, I don't even think it is going to pass the House, it is so bad; and it will not be signed into law by President Biden. We all know that.

We got this text late last night, and thanks to the quick work of Democratic Rules and Appropriations staff, we have some preliminary analysis about what this CR means for the American people. Let me tell you, the cuts in this bill are even worse than what was proposed before. They are going in the wrong direction.

House Republicans' earliest CR slashed essential programs by 8 percent, an 8 percent across-the-board mindless cut. This new version now has across-the-board cuts by 30 percent or more; by 30 percent or more. It is effectively a partial shutdown bill.

They slash investments in cancer research. They eliminate public education by cutting funding for Head Start. They fail to support communities recovering from natural disasters. It cuts money for wildfire suppression by 50 percent. Haven't they been paying attention? The wildfires in Maui and in the western part of the Country. I mean, communities are desperate for help, and my friends propose a bill that would cut money for wildfire suppression by 57 percent. What planet are my friends living on?

They cut loans and grants for farmers in rural communities. They defund law enforcement. Republicans want to talk about fentanyl? They cut money from the DEA.

What are they thinking? You can't make this stuff up, Madam Speaker.

We estimate that if Republicans get their way, if this thing were ever to become law, up to 1 million seniors will be kicked off of Meals on Wheels.

My friend from Pennsylvania talks about, oh, we are upholding our obligation to protect our national security. I will remind the gentleman and my friends on the other side of the aisle that national security means more than the number of bombs we have in our arsenal. It means the quality of life for our people. It means whether or not our senior citizens have security in their retirement years. It means whether they have access to food. It means whether or not people have jobs and whether or not people can have a decent living in this country. That has to be part of the discussion on national security, and this bill just blows all that up.

We expect WIC to get at least a 30 percent cut. Women, infants, and children will go hungry because of Republicans' misplaced priorities. Talk about cruelty.

In the Rules Committee just not too long ago this morning, I asked my friends, who claim that they were well-versed in all the details of this bill, is the 30 percent cut in WIC accurate? Is that correct? There was silence. How many women, infants, and children will be cut off from the benefit if this were to pass? There was silence. No one knows.

We do know, thanks to the work of the staff, that there is a 30 percent cut and a 74 percent cut in LIHEAP, a program that keeps Americans warm during the winter. I come from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. We have cold winters. The gentleman comes from Pennsylvania. It gets cold in Pennsylvania, too. Winter is coming. Everybody represents constituencies that rely on this program to heat their homes, and my friends cut it by 74 percent.

What are my friends thinking? Give me a goddamn break. This is wrong.

What are you doing? When it comes to keeping seniors warm or providing pregnant mothers and their babies food, Republicans have a problem, but the sky is the limit if it is a defense contract--cost overruns be dammed. They have no problem with tax cuts for corporations or for millionaires or billionaires, no problem with heaping more subsidy giveaways to the fossil fuel industry.

Let me just say, we do not share the same values, and this is proof of that, Madam Speaker. This is proof of that.

This majority is a failure. The day Speaker McCarthy handed his gavel over to the MAGA/QAnon fringe, this was the inevitable outcome. The government will shut down tomorrow. Let me repeat that: The government will shut down tomorrow.

Let me say to my Republican friends: You own this. You did this, and this is just plain stupid. Stop wasting time and work with us to get this done in a bipartisan way.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to join us in defeating this rule. I mean, we are wasting time today. This is a total waste of time. Let's defeat this rule and force the Rules Committee to go back up and come up with a rule that will allow a bipartisan bill to come before the floor. Let's end this clown show once and for all.

The American people are watching. They are frustrated by all of this, and I hope that my friends on the other side of the aisle, my moderate friends on the other side of the aisle, will join us in defeating this rule. We appreciate the statements that have been made, calling out the incompetence of the Republican leadership, but now I think it is time to put your votes where your quotes are.

We have to stop this. Now is the time to send that message, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's commentary and his critique of Republican leadership, but what I didn't hear is how he was going to vote on this rule or how he is going to vote on the underlying bill.

The bottom line is, quotes are fine, but votes are better. Votes are more important here.

By the way, this bill that we are talking about guts things like LIHEAP, cuts it by 74 percent, which will impact people in New York, which will impact people in Pennsylvania and all over this country.

The bottom line, Madam Speaker, is that if we want to get rid of the nonsense and get to the business of funding government in a bipartisan way, then we need to stop this now. We need to sit in a room in a bipartisan way and figure this out.

That is what the United States Senate is doing. My Republican friends have never once talked to the Democratic leadership here about trying to come up with a compromise. Republicans never once talked to our ranking members about how we come to a middle ground. It has always been their way or the highway.

By the way, it is not just their way. It is their far-rightwing way, going way, way in the wrong direction.

Madam Speaker, the CR we are considering in this rule is not just shameful. It is a partisan measure. It is also, as I have said, a complete waste of time, time we do not have.

Tomorrow, the government shuts down. This will not keep the government open. It will not keep it functioning for the American people. It does the opposite. It ensures a shutdown will occur, and if anybody is opposed to a shutdown, then stand with

us right now and say no to this nonsense.

Madam Speaker, I am urging that we defeat the previous question, and if we do, I will offer an amendment to the rule for swift consideration of the Senate's bipartisan continuing resolution to fund the government after they send it to the House.

Once we receive the Senate CR, the chair and/or ranking member of the Appropriations Committee can call it up as a privileged question without further action from the Rules Committee.

There will be 1 hour of debate, and the House will have an up or down vote on keeping the government running while full-year funding is being negotiated. We can send the bill straight to the President's desk.

During the 2013 shutdown, a Senate CR was privileged under the House rules until the Republican majority turned that off.

We aren't even at the procedural stage yet because House Republicans have failed to advance any real plan to fund the government.

They would rather fight with one another than negotiate with the Senate.

Some have even openly called for a government shutdown, and we have been through those quotes of Republican after Republican saying they relish a government shutdown.

We can fix this right now. If anything deserves to be privileged for consideration on this floor, it is a bill to keep the government open. That is so vitally important, Madam Speaker.

Clearly, it is time for the adults in the room to step up to the plate. We need to give Congress more time.

Again, I ask my moderate friends on the other side of the aisle not to follow the fringe of their party down this path. It is my hope that some reasonable Republicans who are interested in governing will join with us in this effort.

So reject this insanity of cheering on a government shutdown and abandon the sinking ship that is MAGA extremism. Moderates have a chance to say enough is enough. A bipartisan CR would be temporary, but it is better than nothing. We need the time to work all this stuff out.

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

Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Neguse), to discuss our proposal.

Madam Speaker, I wonder whether the DCCC writes the gentleman's speeches because what the gentleman from Colorado quoted was his words in a speech. Talk is cheap around here. Votes are the currency of the realm in this place.

The choice is clear, and the gentleman has made clear where he stands.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania.

Madam Speaker, I would just say to the gentlewoman, we are not here to support Republicans. We are here to support our constituents.

Madam Speaker, if the President were presented with H.R. 5525, he would veto it, so this is a complete waste of time.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in a Record a Statement of Administration Policy on this underlying bill.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez).

Madam Speaker, I remind the gentleman from Michigan that if the Republicans' shutdown moves forward, he has 5,607 people in his district who are Federal employees who will lose their paycheck.

In the Rules Committee today, Madam Speaker, Democrats offered an amendment saying, yeah, we are happy to talk about how to keep Social Security and Medicare solvent, but we want to guarantee that we are not going to cut people's benefits, and the Republicans rejected that.

We know what this is about. This is about going after Social Security and trying to make it solvent by cutting people's benefits, and Democrats are against that unequivocally.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. Speaker, I will point out to the gentleman who just spoke that the Senate can't even take up the Homeland Security appropriations bill because the way the Republicans wrote the rule was that they are not going to send it over until the Senate passes H.R. 2 without changing a comma and the President signs it into law.

Lots of luck with that.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Neguse), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is an absolute joke that we are here today dealing with this, as I said at the beginning of my remarks, piece of garbage. That is what it is. This is not a serious attempt at legislating. This is a MAGA Republican press release at best, and it is a lousy press release.

All the priorities that are in this bill represent deep cuts to things that matter to Democrats. When we talk about national security, we don't only talk about the size of our military and the number of bombs we have. We talk about whether or not people in this country have access to jobs, whether they have food, whether or not we have good schools, whether or not people have access to healthcare and retirement security. We talk about things like the purity of our environment.

My Republican friends talk about bombs and about tax cuts for the rich and for big corporations. They don't care about the people who are at the heart and soul of our concerns on the Democratic side. If they did, they wouldn't cut and slash programs like WIC, the women, infants, and children program, providing basic nutrition for low-income, pregnant moms and newborn babies. They wouldn't cut LIHEAP, a program that provides vulnerable people with help to be able to heat their homes in winter. They wouldn't cut it by 74 percent.

Who does that? Who thinks like that? Who would come to the floor and defend that kind of garbage?

The bottom line is, we don't share the same values. It is that simple.

I want to tell you, we are going to fight as hard as we can against all the things that you claim you value in this book because this is not what America is about. Basically, this is about turning our back on people. This is essentially a government shutdown in and of itself.

Let me just close with a couple of comments to our moderate friends who go on MSNBC and give all these quotes about how they want a balance and how they want this. They criticize their leadership, and then they come to the floor and vote with the majority. Enough of that. It is votes, not quotes, that matter. It is votes, not quotes.

If you really want to avoid a government shutdown, to the so-called moderates on the other side of the aisle, vote with us. Vote ``no'' on the previous question so we can guarantee that the Senate-passed bill will have a vote here in the House. Vote ``no'' on the rule so we don't have to waste all this time today arguing over this nonsense, this hardline, rightwing garbage that guts the heart and soul of our social safety net. We can do so much better.

At the end of the day, we have to come together, Democrats and Republicans, and come up with a bill. My friends keep on going in the wrong direction. They keep on going further and further to the right. That is a road to nowhere.

The Senate, to their credit, Democrats and Republicans, are talking. You guys can't even talk with yourselves. You are fighting amongst yourselves.

This is a radical idea: Maybe sit down and try to negotiate a bipartisan solution here because you control one-half of one branch of government--and barely. You would never know it when you see this kind of stuff come to the floor.

Enough of the nonsense. People send us here, at a minimum, to keep the lights on. You have to do that. Work with us. Stop this nonsense.

Again, vote ``no'' on the previous question, vote ``no'' on this garbage.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this continuing resolution. If you cannot agree to the funding levels for 2024 in order to keep government open, you must pass a continuing resolution. A 30 percent slashing of the Federal Government only continues the majority's inability and unwillingness to govern responsibly.

I would argue that you cannot call it a conservative resolution, either. There is nothing conservative about the indiscriminate destruction of public investments in America's families.

Regardless of what it is called, this bill inflicts serious consequences on the American people, whether it is signed into law, which it never will be, or because of the costly shutdown it triggers.

We are less than 48 hours from a government shutdown, and what do we have to show for it?

The American people are tired of the doublespeak coming from the majority. There are House Republicans who have repeatedly assured the public that nobody wants a shutdown, and there are others who tell us they think a shutdown would be a good thing for the country. Maybe they are not worried about a shutdown because they know that Members of Congress will not miss a paycheck.

I can speak for every Democrat in the Congress when I say we oppose this Republican shutdown, a shutdown that will be devastating for our country.

What have the Republicans offered as their effort to avoid a government shutdown? What would this bill do? This bill would slash investments in cancer research, leave communities recovering from natural disasters out to dry, and undercut allies with a $1 billion cut to Israel and further cuts to our support of Ukraine. It defunds law enforcement by 30 percent and makes our communities less safe. It takes food out of the mouths of millions.

This bill raises costs for American families at a time when the cost of living is already too high.

It cuts title I education funding, the bedrock of American public education, to the effect of 150,000 teachers being pulled out of classrooms. Mr. Speaker, 275,000 children would lose access to Head Start, undermining early education and making it harder for parents to work.

In an unprecedented move, the House Republican bill cuts the Low- Income Home Energy Assistance Program, LIHEAP, funding by roughly 74 percent. More than 5 million households will lose their home heating or cooling benefits or have their benefits cut by hundreds of dollars, threatening their ability to heat their homes in winter or cool their homes in summer.

House Republicans are threatening public health by cutting the Food Safety and Inspection Service by 30 percent. Without adequate inspection staff in our meat and poultry plants, these plants will be required to close or reduce their hours. It hurts workers' paychecks, reduces the meat and poultry supply, raises the cost of food for American families, and risks the consumption of contaminated food.

With the cuts in this bill, 400,000 fewer small businesses would be assisted by the Small Business Administration's entrepreneurial development programs. This would have a significant impact on small business owners, especially among veterans, women, and Native American entrepreneurs.

This bill has no future. At best, it is dead on arrival in the Senate and would never be signed by the President of the United States.

Everyone in this room knows that keeping the government operating and passing bills to fully fund the next fiscal year will require bipartisan cooperation. You need the House and the Senate, Democrats and Republicans, to pass appropriations bills. Yet, House Republicans are refusing to work with and negotiate with Democrats.

This is a pointless charade with grave consequences for the American people. House Democrats are ready to work. We were ready in the spring. We were ready last week. We are ready this weekend. We are ready today, tomorrow, and every day to work in good faith with our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to meet the needs of the American people.

Let's get to work, serious work.

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

Mr. Speaker, I will just take a second to tell the gentleman from Arkansas that, with this bill, you will cut 1,460 teachers from your district and almost 46,000 households will have their low-income energy assistance benefits terminated.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz), the distinguished ranking member of the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I want to take a few seconds here to let the gentleman from Texas know that the State of Texas will lose almost 14,000 teachers. That is going to be really tough to explain that to families when their children do not have a teacher in the classroom.

In addition to that, almost 77,000 Texans will lose their low-income energy assistance benefits or have those benefits cut. It is going to be a tough time for folks, come the cooler months or the warmer months, to take advantage of this.

I think people need to be mindful of the consequences of a 30 percent cut, or in the case of LIHEAP, a 74 percent cut, that they are proposing today.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Ramirez).

Mr. Speaker, I would take a second to tell the gentleman from Ohio that 232,000 people in Ohio will be without low-income energy assistance benefits.

Further, there will be 5,500 teachers who will be pulled out of classrooms, and the families in both instances will suffer while the gentleman talks about issues that are not truly affecting what is happening in the everyday lives of the people that he represents.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

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

Mr. Speaker, I find it hard to believe that the gentleman from Texas believes that wasteful spending is on teachers who really teach our youngsters, and 14,000 of them will be gone in the State of Texas.

I find it hard to believe that it is wasteful spending to deal with 77,000 people who will lose their LIHEAP benefits. Is that wasteful spending, for people to have heat or be cooled or kids being taught in school?

Let's talk about wasteful spending and the tax cuts my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are willing to give the richest one-tenth of 1 percent of the people in this country and the richest corporations, and tax cheats, I might add, as well.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Espaillat), the distinguished ranking member of the Legislative Branch Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, to both of the gentlemen from Florida, 8,500 teachers, gone. Think about the kids who are going to school and there is no teacher for them. Think about folks who need to heat or cool their homes. We are looking at 36,000 households that will be without those benefits.

Do they really care about those folks? Probably not.

As a Democrat, I took the lead on the infant formula crisis--I don't know where my colleague was during that crisis--and called to attention a company that knowingly sold tainted product and wound up killing three or four people. I don't know where he was during that. I know where I was, and I know where the administration was.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson), the distinguished ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I remind the gentleman from Arizona that there will be 63,000 households in Arizona that will be without the low-income energy assistance benefits. These are not just numbers. These are people, and we are making their lives more difficult at a time when there is serious inflation and when there is, in fact, a high cost of living.

My colleagues on the other side of the aisle are only adding and increasing to that high cost of living.

I might also remind the gentleman from Arizona that we are looking at about 2,800 teachers.

Now, again, these are not just numbers. Children go to school. If there is no teacher to teach them, what is the result? What happens to parents when they find out that their child's teacher is gone? If there was a teaching shortage before, this will make it even worse. That is the result of the cuts that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to make. It is there. It is in black and white. You can't make up the numbers.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib).

Mr. Speaker, I remind the gentleman from Texas that the eyes of the people of Texas are upon you when you are thinking about really 77,000 seniors and kids without any benefits from the low-income energy assistance program and also 14,000 teachers will be gone from Texas schools.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Clarke).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Clarke).

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

It is almost laughable to think about chaos. I think the majority has demonstrated overwhelmingly in the last several days, the last several months, an unwillingness to govern, an inability to govern, and chaos, general chaos, here.

It is interesting. The gentleman is from South Dakota, where, last I understood, a little bit like the Northeast, in New England, it gets cold. It gets cold in the wintertime in South Dakota. The gentleman is happy to see 24,000 individuals not get energy assistance, low-income heating assistance. We may be taking up a collection of hats and coats and gloves, et cetera, because they are not going to get their LIHEAP benefits in a cold climate.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to let the gentleman from Wisconsin know that 195,000 households are beneficiaries of the LIHEAP program. They will be jettisoned from that program. If you think it is cold in this Chamber, head to Wisconsin and you will know how cold it is in the wintertime. Think twice about whether or not you will vote to cut 195,000 people's benefits.

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

Mr. Speaker, I find it unbelievable that the gentlewoman from New York would support a bill that cuts $1 billion from our ally in the Middle East--that is, from Israel.

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

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

What we are looking at here is a piece of legislation that makes a 30 percent cut in programs that have a serious effect on the lives of the people in this country.

Let me just lay out some of them because these have not been talked about so far.

The National Institutes of Health will be cut. There would be a reduction of 7,000 research grants.

I think we have people in this Chamber on both sides of the aisle who have had a loved one with a cancer diagnosis or Alzheimer's or heart disease, but there is a willingness to cut the National Institutes of Health and thereby cut 7,000 research grants.

Let's take a look at our allies. We speak about Israel and Ukraine. Israel will receive a $1 billion cut in the funds that the U.S. provides. We talk about Israel as being our closest ally in the Middle East.

People should understand what is in this bill. We defund--not we--my Republican colleagues defund law enforcement, reduce drug enforcement administration agents, Federal law enforcement officers, eliminate hundreds of State and local law enforcement.

They talk about crime, and they talk about law and order, but there is a willingness to cut the funds in order for us to make our communities safe.

Social Security offices, the field offices, would be forced to close down, reducing access to in-person services.

People applying for disability benefits will wait additional months for the processing of claims. That is what is in store with this bill if you support it.

Wildfire suppression efforts will be hindered, 57 percent cuts, and we know what devastation wildfires have had all over our country. Look at what happened in Maui.

Unbelievable that they would talk about a bill, extol a bill that has such devastating repercussions on the people of this country.

They slashed the resources for the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline. Opioid use disorder. They are worried and talk about an opioid crisis, but let's cut off the avenue where people can get treatment and help and potentially save their lives.

Education. It is an abomination, what they will do to education because they are on a march to eliminate public education in the United States of America; that opportunity that all of our families have said: Go to school, get an education so that you can succeed.

Rural America? Let's care about rural America, not cutting the loans and grants for farmers and rural communities.

They will make it harder for farmers to access loans and grants, making home farm ownership more difficult. They cut rural housing, rural utility,

broadband to keep people in touch, and they eliminate health services for rural and underserved families.

Mr. Speaker, 2 million vulnerable individuals and families will lose access to healthcare services. They take food out of the mouths of children, families, and seniors.

Mr. Speaker, there needs to be a ``no'' vote on this irresponsible continuing resolution. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

were offered, making the rule closed by definition.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 741, I call up the bill (H.R. 5525) making continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2024, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the measure under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to speak on the Spending Reduction and Border Security Act of 2024.

As we all know, the most basic duty that Congress has and must complete every year is that constitutional power of Congress to fund the Federal Government. This bill, Mr. Speaker, will provide funding to keep our government open until October 31. Unless we act now, the government will shut down at midnight on Saturday.

Let's be very clear, Mr. Speaker. The House has already passed four appropriations bills, which constitute the majority of funding for our government. Now, unfortunately, the Senate continues to sit on its hands and has failed to pass any of them, any of them thus far. Unfortunately, it is something that we have seen time and time again from our friends across this building.

Mr. Speaker, the country is nearly $32.9 trillion in debt--that is trillion with a t, Mr. Speaker--and our deficit this year is $1.9 trillion. The Biden administration has gone on a crazy, irresponsible spending binge with money that we do not have to spend, money that is borrowed mostly from Communist China. It is time. It is time. It is time that we slow this out-of-control, unsustainable spending to a level that is sustainable.

Yesterday, Mr. Speaker, I was proud that the House of Representatives passed the State and Foreign Operations appropriations bill, one that I was pleased and honored to lead that cut wasteful spending while making crucial investments in our national security, all while the total cost of that bill passed last night is way below fiscal year 2015 spending levels. That bill that we passed will slow our spending by really taking discretionary spending back to fiscal year 2022 overall.

Now, excluded from those reductions in this bill are any reductions from defense, veterans, homeland security, and disaster relief. It is a very important start and well overdue to fund our priorities, the American people's priorities, but doing so in a responsible way that does not bankrupt the American taxpayer.

Mr. Speaker, in addition, this bill provides flexibility to the Department of Defense for new starts, but this bill does more than just deal with our out-of-control spending, which it must. It will also help the just inhumane tide at our southern border.

Mr. Speaker, our southern border is out of control. The Biden administration has failed to even do the bare minimum to secure our border. As I have

said before, Mr. Speaker, the irresponsible attitude of the Biden administration when it comes to the southern border is beyond negligence and incompetence. It also has fatal consequences.

In just the last few days, we have seen a surge at the border with an average of over 9,000 apprehensions each and every day. This is unsustainable. It is unthinkable, and I would add it is immoral.

Mr. Speaker, our border is out of control. Actually, no, let me correct myself right here on the floor of the House, Mr. Speaker. No, it is controlled now 100 percent by the narco-terrorist cartels on the Mexican side of the border. That is who the administration has ceded control of the southern border to. This crisis is only going to continue to get worse and worse unless we act.

Earlier this year, the House approved the bill that I was honored to lead, H.R. 2, the Border Security Act of 2023. As you know, Mr. Speaker, this bill would make changes to our immigration policies that would help reclaim control of the southern border.

I am proud to say that the Spending Reduction and Border Security Act of 2024, which I am speaking about today, includes the Border Security Act of 2023 already passed by this House.

This bill provides a solution. This bill that we are discussing now provides a solution to keep the government open. This bill keeps the government open and restrains the growth of government while giving us an opportunity to continue negotiations on the appropriations bills.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to do the responsible thing. Support this bill so that we can send it to the Senate and keep the Federal Government open. That is what we are dealing with. That is what the vote is about.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to do the right thing and vote ``yes'' on this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, let's be very clear. We are going to know shortly who wants to shut down the government and who wants to keep it open because we are going to have a vote. In front of us today is this resolution to keep the government open. I know there is going to be a lot of talk, but we are going to have a vote. If you vote for this resolution, it keeps the government open, and if you vote against it, government shuts down Saturday night.

That is not too complicated. The American people are smart. They get that. Out of all the talk we are going to hear, we will know on that vote. If you vote for this resolution, you are voting to keep the government open. If you vote against it, well, you are voting to shut it down.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Natural Resources.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Arrington), the chairman of the Committee on the Budget.

Mr. Speaker, I would remind my colleagues in the House and the American people that last year, 900 immigrants died trying to cross the border. That is not humane. That is insane, and that we are not willing to look away and tolerate in the name of what? No. That is what is intolerable.

I will not be lectured, Mr. Speaker, when 900 migrants died trying to get to the United States, and when there are thousands of children who are now missing that were supposed to be taken care of by the United States Federal Government.

You don't hear about that. That is not humane. This legislation puts an end to that insanity.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Jordan), the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. Speaker, I will remind everyone what we are talking about today.

This keeps the government open. It secures the border, and it, frankly, reduces wasteful spending. That is what we are dealing with here.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Donalds), a friend and neighbor of my district.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Ciscomani), a Member whose life story symbolizes what the American Dream is all about, and a member of the Appropriations Committee.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Pfluger).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Dakota (Mr. Johnson), an author of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Grothman).

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Austin Scott).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Malliotakis).

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Molinaro).

Mr. Speaker, oh, so many words. Allow me, Mr. Speaker, to cut to the chase. We have a choice right now.

Vote ``yes'' to keep the Federal Government open, to control inflation-causing overspending, and to secure the southern border. That is a ``yes'' vote, or vote ``no'' to shut down the Federal Government, to keep the narco cartels in control of the southern border.

This is pretty simple. Government likes to complicate things. As politicians, we like to try to obfuscate reality.

This is very simple. We have a choice. I ask our colleagues to do the responsible thing; secure the border, stop out-of-control, inflation- causing spending, and, yes, keep the government open by voting ``yes.''

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