Denouncing the Biden administration's open-borders policies, condemning the national security and public safety crisis along the southwest border, and urging President Biden to end his administration's open-borders policies.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Let me just give you a couple of examples.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Minnesota for yielding the customary 30 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, here we are, a little more than 48 hours from a devastating government shutdown. The deadline to pass a Federal budget is already 3 months overdue, and the clock keeps ticking.

Unable to get control of their majority and act responsibly, Republicans keep kicking the can down the road. They have struggled to pass any legislation because they choose again and again to appease an extremist minority rather than to advance policies supported by the majority of Americans and their Representatives here in the House.

Moreover, now, as we face pressing challenges at home and around the world, they have brought us to the brink of disaster once more, all because they chose to renege on a bipartisan deal to fund the government.

So, with these serious problems we are facing, what are House Republicans' priorities for today? They are to attack the President and pass more anti-abortion bills. It is a new year, but for House Republicans, it is the same old story.

Distracted by their own chaos and infighting, they have repeatedly failed to deliver for the American people. They have wasted time and tax dollars on baseless investigations and divisive culture wars, dragging the American people with them down rabbit holes of conspiracies and untruths.

They throw tantrums when they can't get their way, ousting their last Speaker and, just last week, bringing all work in the House to a halt because their new Speaker had dared to try to

strike a deal to keep the government open.

They put on dramatic acts of political theater, hoping to hide the fact that they are unable to complete the most basic tasks of governing. In 2023, they led the least productive session of Congress since the Great Depression.

We think the American people deserve better.

With that in mind, Mr. Speaker, let's look at the three bills that the House leadership has chosen to spend Congress' time on this week, and it is more of the same.

The first bill in this rule is the grotesquely misleading H. Res. 957, a resolution that repeats lies and distortions about the migration challenges at our southern border, starting with the title of the resolution and its false claim that this administration is promoting an open border. This is MAGA fiction, and it is an effort to keep campaigning on the fear of immigrants rather than any serious attempt to address the complex issues created by global migration forces and decades of congressional inaction.

It has become obvious that our Republican colleagues don't really want to fix our broken immigration system. They just want to campaign on it.

They have rejected--before even reading--the bipartisan solutions proposed by Senate Republicans, Democrats, and the administration.

They have refused to consider supplemental border funding requests from the President because the truth is they don't want solutions. They want political stunts. They want to rant, complain, blame, and campaign.

Immigration and border issues are complex. That is why they have remained on the table for so many years. They require comprehensive and nuanced policies, not acts of cruelty and dehumanization marked by barbed wire, family separation, or needless tragedies.

As we have seen over and over again, our Republican colleagues would rather use this issue to sow anger, division, and fear. They will use meaningless resolutions that do nothing to change the status quo, like this one, to distract from their failed Congress and their do-nothing agenda.

Mr. Speaker, if you want to see just how House Republicans view immigration and the border as a purely political issue, look no further than House leadership. After saying for months that border security is a crisis and just last month taking a field trip with over 60 House Republicans to the border, this week House leadership refused to even consider a bipartisan deal negotiated by the Senate before they have read it.

Mr. Speaker, you can't say that the border is in a state of emergency yet reject a bipartisan deal to address the crisis.

We can and must do better than this. Moreover, we owe it to our constituents and our country to work toward real, thoughtful solutions rather than partisan talking points like H. Res. 957.

Now, let's turn to H.R. 6914 and H.R. 6918. Supporting the health and well-being of mothers and babies should be something we can all agree upon, and we would welcome some real collaboration in that area.

Nonetheless, that is not what the majority has brought to the floor today. The fact is that both of these bills are designed to advance an extremist agenda to limit Americans' fundamental freedoms, particularly with respect to reproductive healthcare.

It is nothing but a political exercise that our Republican colleagues undertake every year on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade. It is designed to cater to the most extreme supporters as they descend on Washington, D.C., for an anti-abortion rally.

The fact is that the MAGA majority's anti-abortion agenda is wildly unpopular in this country. The vast majority of Americans do not support it, and they have proven that at the polls repeatedly in the last couple of years.

Americans do not want politicians and rightwing extremists undermining their freedom to make their own medical and reproductive healthcare choices based on their own individual circumstances.

In the face of the overwhelming and repeated rejection of these extremist attempts to interfere in private medical decisions, Republicans are now cloaking their efforts in family-friendly rhetoric and misleading talking points. So, it is important to dig a little deeper and see what these bills are and are not.

If my colleagues on the other side of the aisle really wanted to support pregnant women, children, and families, then they would work with us to address the shameful fact that maternal mortality in our country far exceeds that of our peers. Childbirth is dangerous here in the United States, particularly for Black women and their babies, not because we don't know how to support healthy outcomes but because of a lack of will or interest from Congress.

It is a full-blown crisis, but it doesn't have to be. When it comes to giving our kids brighter futures, we should be talking about powerful tools like the expanded child tax credit, which lifted millions of children out of poverty. We should be strengthening WIC and SNAP, nutrition programs that serve as lifelines for pregnant women, mothers, infants, and families. Instead, this MAGA majority has proposed deep cuts to these nutrition programs.

We should pass policies to improve access to high-quality childcare and early education services, nutritious food, comprehensive maternal and infant healthcare, stable housing, and family-sustaining jobs because those are the things that would really help our kids and families.

The policies that our Republican colleagues have brought before us today in these two bills do none of that.

In fact, they would actually divert money away from vulnerable families and ultimately endanger women's lives.

H.R. 6914 purports to be concerned with providing information to pregnant college students.

Of course, there are obvious and unique challenges to balancing school and parenting, although students and their families can thrive with the right support. Unfortunately, this bill doesn't actually provide such support.

Instead, it requires that colleges inform students only about the rights and resources for carrying a pregnancy to term--resources, I will add, for which this House majority has sought to dramatically slash funding.

The bill purposely leaves out any requirement for schools to distribute medically accurate information regarding all of the healthcare options available to pregnant women. If this bill were truly about ensuring that pregnant college students have the necessary information to make informed decisions to meet their unique reproductive healthcare needs, it would include information about contraception, abortion, miscarriages, and the services that might be available to them during their pregnancy and after.

If the underlying intent of this bill were not clear enough in its one-sided substance, we need only look to the alleged funding section of the bill, which would write into law completely unproven and even false anti-abortion talking points.

These are findings that the bill's author could provide no evidence to support when it was marked up in committee. However, don't take my word for it. Advocates dedicated to advancing civil rights and resources for pregnant and parenting students have expressed deep concerns about this bill, including groups that are experts on this issue like The Coalition For Pregnant and Parenting Students Advocacy.

It is obvious that this MAGA majority doesn't really care about educating and supporting pregnant and parenting students. Instead, they would rather leave them in the dark and attempt to deny women the freedom to make informed decisions about their own bodies and futures.

Lastly, I will talk about H.R. 6918, which is another example of House Republicans doubling down on an extreme and unpopular agenda to try to ban abortion care nationwide. This bill is cloaked in a title that most Americans would agree with, the Supporting Pregnant and Parenting Women and Families Act.

In fact, Congress has passed bipartisan legislation to do just that, including through TANF funding, the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families.

However, in recent years, there has been growing evidence and a raft of studies showing that critical TANF aid for families is being diverted to purposes not authorized by Congress.

One of the greatest causes of concern is the siphoning of Federal TANF taxpayer dollars to support so-called crisis pregnancy centers, most of which are part of a well-funded arm of the global anti-abortion movement.

There is a growing body of evidence that these crisis pregnancy centers use deceptive and coercive tactics to target vulnerable people facing unplanned pregnancies, and they often prevent them from accessing a full range of appropriate reproductive healthcare, including safe abortion care and contraceptives.

Just as this bill is cloaked in benign pro-family rhetoric, these pregnancy centers distribute diapers and formula in order to disguise their underlying anti-abortion mission.

One of the great dangers of these crisis pregnancy centers is that they present themselves as legitimate healthcare facilities, but the reality is that most are unlicensed, understaffed by medical professionals, and unbound by the privacy laws that govern medical providers.

This has led to women being misled and given inaccurate or even dangerous information about their pregnancies and the options for care that are available to them, including women who have suffered life- threatening undiagnosed complications in their pregnancies, women who have been denied the information and opportunity to access appropriate reproductive healthcare for them, and women who have been encouraged to undertake dangerous and medically contraindicated procedures.

There is strong evidence that many pregnancy centers are using the public money that States allocate to them through TANF for purposes that are not authorized by Congress. That is why last year, the Department of Health and Human Services issued a proposed regulation to better guide the States in what services were eligible for TANF funding, and that is why this bill, H.R. 6918, is so dangerous and dishonest.

When we have a growing mountain of evidence of misuse and even fraudulent use of TANF dollars by crisis pregnancy centers, this bill by its term would prevent the Department of Health and Human Services from any regulation of pregnancy crisis centers.

House Republicans would green light the unregulated use of public money to fund these anti-abortion facilities, many of which have been proven to promote false medical claims and misinformation; misrepresent their services as providing a full range of reproductive healthcare, despite having only anti-abortion services and usually lacking any medical personnel. Horrifyingly, they are unbound by HIPAA privacy restrictions, and some of these centers collect and distribute women's sensitive personal information to organizations within the larger anti- abortion movement.

This is what Republicans are trying to push upon American women with these bills, and I wholeheartedly disagree.

Thus, here we are. It is another week, and the House GOP still can't get their act together. Their majority is on track to become one of the most ineffective in modern history.

Again, we are just hours from a government shutdown, but instead of dealing with that or any of the real problems Americans are facing today, this House majority is desperately trying to mask its own failure with misleading rhetoric and bills that will never become law. It would be a joke if it weren't so serious.

Led by their most extreme Members, it is clear our Republican colleagues don't want to make Congress work better for the American people. They want to break it, and they want to campaign on it. They want to bring chaos to this Chamber and pass legislation that feeds the flames of their desperate culture wars.

It is irresponsible, it is reckless, and it is not what the American people want.

Mr. Speaker, I deeply oppose this rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

We have heard from our colleagues over the course of debate on this bill that they think that they need more discretion to spend TANF dollars, but if this bill were to pass, a pregnancy center would be unregulated. That is what the bill literally says, We cannot regulate pregnancy crisis centers. So if they wanted to use TANF dollars to stage a Taylor Swift concert, they could because there is to be no regulation.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record the executive summary of a report titled, ``Designed to Deceive: A Study of the Crisis Pregnancy Center Industry in Nine States,'' written by the Alliance: State Advocates for Women's Rights and Gender Equity.

Mr. Speaker, this report studies crisis pregnancy centers in Alaska, California, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota. Overall, its findings show that crisis pregnancy centers provided virtually no medical care, promoted false medical claims, and used deceptive practices; State-funded crisis pregnancy centers are more harmful than privately-funded centers; and crisis pregnancy centers appear to be local, but are actually part of a global anti-abortion network.

It is clear that these sorts of manipulative and unregulated centers are not what is best for women and children's health, and actually have been proven to misuse Federal taxpayer dollars. We absolutely shouldn't be allowing Federal dollars to flow to them without any scrutiny.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), the distinguished ranking member of the Committee on Rules.

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

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record a letter from the Coalition for Pregnant and Parenting Students Advocacy and other organizations dedicated to advancing civil rights protections and resources for pregnant and parenting students in opposition to H.R. 6914.

Mr. Speaker, this letter expresses concern that this bill is

based upon unproven anti-abortion rhetoric and seeks to limit students' ability to make reproductive healthcare decisions with a full range of information.

It goes on to say that the bill does not contain any meaningful support to help pregnant and parenting students meet their educational goals, and it notes how the bill leaves out policies we know would actually make a difference, like strengthen Title IX protections, accessible childcare and early education, basic needs security, and accountability measures for institutions that fail to protect pregnant and parenting students.

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

Mr. Speaker, could you please advise how much time is remaining?

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 12, a bill that would ensure every American has full access to essential reproductive healthcare services, including abortion care.

Since the Dobbs decision, every State in the Union has taken action on abortion in some way. Many States have used it as an opportunity to enact laws that ban specific instances of abortion or abortion care entirely. Republicans have reiterated time and again that that is their goal, to ban abortion nationwide.

The abortion access landscape is deeply fractured, and Americans continue to face the devastating consequences of abortion bans and restrictions on both patients' health and the greater healthcare ecosystem.

H.R. 12 ensures every American has full access to vital reproductive healthcare and will stop the devastating health consequences for women when abortion access is banned or limited.

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, to discuss our proposal, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Ms. Pressley).

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

This MAGA majority has a bleak and nihilistic vision of our government. It is a vision where congressional power is wielded to take down political rivals; to force extremist beliefs on every American, particularly women; and to shamelessly sow division and fear, not to actually serve all Americans.

It is a vision where the idea of working together across party lines on behalf of all Americans is so anathema to the Republican Party that it can cause a Speaker to lose his gavel or rank-and-file Members of Congress to lose their primaries. It is where standing up against lies and for the Constitution results in death threats and where the integrity and core values of our country's institutions are continually chipped away.

This is an unacceptable way to govern. It is not governance at all. Americans deserve so much better. Let's stop playing these ridiculous games and get to work on the work that the people sent us to do.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose the previous question and the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman for yielding, and I am very glad that my colleagues, and some from Texas, want to have the real truth discussed on this floor.

The real truth is that President Biden has not fostered nor encouraged open borders. In fact, the United States does not have open borders.

It would be truly an act of real leadership if Republicans would work with Democrats and the present administration to do as was done during the Reagan administration when, yes, whether you agreed or disagreed, immigration laws were passed. If this Republican contingent of Members, House and Senate, would work, we would find a resolution to some of the concerns that we have.

It is very clear that the impeachment of Secretary Mayorkas is not a solution. The present resolution that we have is not a solution.

Today, there are approximately 38,000 people in immigration detention, which is 4,000 more than what DHS is funded for. People without facts don't realize, somewhat similar to Trump, many of us are concerned about due process rights, but when accusations are made about one party is better than another, that is not true. Of course, there were those removed under title 42, and the Biden administration did that when that law was in place. The total is nearly equivalent to the number of people removed in all of fiscal 2019 in the past administration.

However, this administration wants to put forward reasonable and effective legislation so that we will get an additional 1,300 Border Patrol agents, 375 immigration judges, 1,600 asylum officers to speed up processing of asylum claims, 1,000 CBP officers, new detection technology for ports of entry, additional investigative capabilities to combat fentanyl trafficking, and $1.4 billion more to help communities receiving migrants.

Mr. Speaker, quickly, fentanyl is not an immigration issue. It is a criminal issue, a crime issue. It is where we have to come together with our law enforcement across America.

What I will say, the utilization of State laws that effectively are not governed by the Constitution, States do not have immigration authority, and blocking the Border Patrol is not an effective immigration tool. Causing a mother and two of her children to die is not an immigration tool. I don't want to be a part of it.

I want to be a part of the work that the President is doing. I thank the President and Vice President. I want this House to be helping in this work so that we can, in fact, have border solutions that work, where visas are able to be given to the appropriate people.

Limiting or removing parole does not work.

Additionally, 8.3 million relatives of U.S. citizens and legal residents are awaiting a green card. That does not work.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record an article written by David J. Bier titled: ``8.3 Million Relatives of U.S. Citizens & Legal Residents Awaited Green Cards in 2022.''

[May 17, 2023]

8.3 Million Relatives of U.S. Citizens & Legal Residents Awaited Green

Cards in 2022

(By David J. Bier)

The United States hit a new record of about 8.3 million

immigrants at various stages in its family-sponsored

permanent residence process in 2022--an increase of nearly 1

million since 2019. The staggering number of pending cases is

primarily the result of outdated caps on green cards, but

processing delays are also affecting a substantial number of

applicants.

The U.S. immigration system's current caps came into effect

in fiscal year 1992. Figure 1 breaks down the family-based

backlog into its two main categories: immediate relatives

(``uncapped'') and family preference immigrants (``capped'')

from 1992 to 2022. Immediate relatives--spouses, minor

children, and parents of adult U.S. citizens--have no direct

cap (though their admissions reduce the cap for the family

preference (or capped) immigrants from 480,000 to 226,000).

The immediate relative backlog has increased from about

73,000 in 1992 to over 1 million in 2022.

Family preference immigrants are spouses and children of

legal permanent residents, adult children of U.S. citizens,

and siblings of adult U.S. citizens, as well as any spouses

and minor children of those relatives. Immigrants who need a

cap number available to apply for a green card made up about

86 percent of the family-based backlog in 2022. From 1992 to

2022, the number of capped family-sponsored immigrants stuck

in the backlog increased from about 3.3 million to about 7.1

million. The cap is set at 226,000 annually.

These estimates differ significantly from the most commonly

referenced source for information on the family-sponsored

green card backlog: the State Department's annual immigrant

visa waiting list report. The numbers from that report are

shown in orange (Petition Approved-Wait Listed (Abroad)), but

that report does not include several groups of applicants. It

excludes the ``immediate relative'' or uncapped categories,

anyone waiting to apply inside the United States, and--most

importantly--anyone whose petition is yet to be adjudicated.

As Figure 2 shows, 3.6 million had a sponsor's petition

pending. This massive backlog in pending petitions is largely

because of the government's correct view that it shouldn't

waste resources adjudicating applications that will not

result in a green card being issued thanks to the cap.

The overall cap is set at 226,000, but it is divided into 5

categories based on the immigrant's marital status and

relationship to the U.S. sponsor:

1. F-1--Married adult children of U.S. citizens: 23,400

2. F-2A--Spouses and minor children of legal permanent

residents: 687,900

3. F-2B--Unmarried adult children of legal permanent

residents: 626,300

4. F-3--Unmarried adult children of U.S. citizens: 23,400

5. F-4--Siblings of U.S. citizens: 65,000

In addition, immigrants from each country have a separate

limit. No single birthplace can receive more than 7 percent

of the green cards, though 75 percent of the F-2A category

aren't counted against the cap.

As a result of the country caps and category caps,

applicants face wildly different potential wait times:

anywhere from 6 years to 233 years (effectively infinite). As

seen in Table 1, the odds of a new family-sponsor surviving

to be able to act as a sponsor when

a green card is available under the cap is low in many

category-country combinations. Virtually all new sponsors

from Mexico in 2022--outside the F-2A category--will die

before their family member receives a green card. In fact,

nearly 40 percent of all new sponsors in 2022 and 58 percent

of sponsors in non-F-2A categories will die before their

relatives get to immigrate. Even if the sponsor survives for

eternity, about 1.6 million immigrants currently in the

backlog will die before receiving a green card.

Even the shortest wait for F-2A category--for spouses and

minor children of green card holders--is unconscionable. 6 to

10 years to wait to be with your nuclear family? This would

be unimaginable in nearly all developed democracies. The

United States stands apart in having some of the most

restrictive immigration laws among wealthy countries.

Restricting immigration and parole is a lose-lose situation, as is rejecting DACA young people who are, in fact, ready to be paramedics, lawyers, doctors, teachers.

The White House calls on Congress to advance critical national security.

All of this is what President Biden is doing, and I would make the argument that this is what we should be doing in order to have real immigration reform. I ask that we do not support the underlying bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H. Res. 957-- denouncing the Biden administration's open-borders policies, condemning the national security and public safety crisis along the southwest border, and urging President Biden to end his administration's open- borders policies.

This resolution is yet another shameful effort to distract the American people with unviable solutions for immigration and border control--all in the face of inaction to prevent our government from shutting down once again.

This resolution does nothing to address legitimate issues at the southern border--instead, it repeats an old list of hyperbolic Republican talking points on immigration.

Rather than working constructively to address these issues, House Republicans continue to make the evidence-free argument that President Biden, Vice President Harris, and Secretary Mayorkas have intentionally created a ``national security and public safety crisis'' at the southern border.

This bill peddles the false narrative that President Biden has an open-borders policy and vi11ainizes immigrants fleeing dangerous situations.

And it does nothing to advance common sense solutions to improve our immigration system like creating better legal pathways, increasing processing capacity at ports of entry, or funding more immigration judges to reduce the asylum backlog.

It is truly shameful that just days until a government shutdown, my Republican colleagues continue to waste time with a resolution that repeats the same, tired, inaccurate talking points on immigration and the border.

Once again, Republicans talk a big game when it comes to immigration and border security--but instead of trying to pass thoughtful and bipartisan legislation that might fix the problems in our immigration system, their resolution accomplishes nothing.

Let's look at the facts.

Today, there are approximately 38,000 people in immigration detention, which is 4,000 more than what DHS is funded for and roughly what the Trump administration averaged in Fiscal Year 2018.

The Biden administration has also significantly increased removals (in ways that many in our caucus worry violates due process).

Since the end of Title 42 last year, the Biden administration has removed or returned to Mexico over 470,000 individuals, including over 78,000 individual members of family units, including children.

The total is nearly equivalent to the number of people removed in ALL of fiscal year 2019 under the Trump administration.

This is hardly an open border.

Time and again, my colleagues across the aisle have refused to support additional resources and personnel for the border.

In 2021, all but six current House Republicans voted against the Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal, which provided additional funding to ports of entry to combat smuggling of people and drugs, and for modernization.

All but two current House Republicans voted against providing robust funding for Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and border security operations in the Fiscal Year 2023 appropriations omnibus legislation.

That bill provided more than $17 billion to CBP, including funding for an additional 300 U.S. Border Patrol agents--the first increase since 2011.

The omnibus also included $60 million to hire 125 CBP officers and $70 million for nonintrusive inspection technology to detect narcotics and firearms at ports of entry.

In October of 2023, the Biden administration sent Congress a supplemental funding request, which included an additional $13.6 billion for border security.

Yet House Republicans refuse to schedule a vote on this funding request, which would provide the Biden administration the resources it needs to secure the border and provide additional support for communities receiving migrants.

More specifically, this supplemental funding would pay for the following:

an additional 1,300 Border Patrol agents;

375 immigration judges and 1,600 asylum officers to speed up processing of asylum claims;

1,000 CBP officers with a focus on countering fentanyl;

new detection technology for ports of entry;

additional investigative capabilities to combat fentanyl trafficking; and

$1.4 billion more in grants to help communities receiving migrants, among other investments.

Democrats have put forward good faith bipartisan solutions to actually secure the border by expanding lawful pathways to relieve pressure on the border and adequately fund government agencies.

By forcing a vote on a meaningless resolution filled with empty rhetoric, Republicans are showing they have no real solutions to address the border. Members should not take the bait.

In sum, this resolution is a pitiful attempt to continue the politicization of our government's ability to function.

All a vote would do is put every Republican who supports it on record pushing this extreme agenda.

This is not what Congress should be focused on. Democrats and President Biden will stay focused on putting people over politics and keeping our government funded and functioning for the American people.

As such, I ask my colleagues to vote NO on this shameful resolution providing for debate on these highly politicized and dangerous bills.

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 969, I call up the resolution (H. Res. 957) denouncing the Biden administration's open-borders policies, condemning the national security and public safety crisis along the southwest border, and urging President Biden to end his administration's open-borders policies, 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 to include extraneous material on H. Res. 957.

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

Mr. Speaker, I stand today in support of H. Res. 957, denouncing the Biden administration's open-borders policies, condemning the national security and public safety crisis along the southwestern border, and urging President Biden to end his administration's open- borders policies.

Mr. Speaker, we have a problem at our southern border. I represent the First District of Texas, which is a rural district located in northeast Texas comprised of 17 counties. It borders Louisiana and Arkansas, and although it is not physically adjacent to the southern border, my district is directly impacted by the open-border policies of the Biden administration, as is every corner of America today.

The text of my proposed House resolution is simple, straightforward, and to the point. It denounces the Biden administration's open-border policies, condemns the national security and public safety crisis caused by these policies, and urges President Biden to end them immediately.

Mr. Speaker, why do we need to actually have this resolution in the House today? I will tell you, Mr. Speaker. It is for two primary reasons. One is because we need to admit that there is a problem. This House needs to admit that there is a problem on the border. Number two, we need to identify the source of the problem itself. Why do we have open borders? It is because of the policies of this administration.

Those two things today, to admit and to identify, will help lead us to a solution from this House body and across the three branches of government.

The border numbers do not lie. In fact, they tell a clear story about the depth of the crisis and the proximate cause rooted in the Biden administration policies.

Consider that the total number of illegal aliens encountered along the southern border since President Biden took office exceeds 7 million. At the same time, the Biden administration has released at least 3.3 million of those illegal aliens into the interior of the United States. This number is larger than the entire population of States like Nevada, Arkansas, and Kansas. In fact, it exceeds the combined populations of Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska, and North Dakota together.

Additionally, more than 1.7 million got-aways and an untold number of unknown illegal got-aways have successfully evaded capture by the U.S. Border Patrol along the southwestern border.

Mr. Speaker, 312 illegal aliens on the Terrorist Screening Dataset were encountered along the southwestern border since President Biden took office. By contrast, consider that during the 4 years of the prior administration, only 11 illegal aliens on that same list were encountered by Border Patrol.

If we look just at the last quarter, we see how depraved the situation is on the southwestern border. More than 785,000 migrant encounters have been reported just since the beginning of this fiscal year, and last month's record high, the first time ever in American history, was 300,000-plus encounters along the southwestern border.

In fiscal year 2023, 27,000 pounds of fentanyl were seized at the southern border. This is almost double what fiscal year 2022 brought at 14,700 pounds, and it is six times higher than in fiscal year 2020.

We have seen more than 150,000 unaccompanied minors cross over the U.S.-Mexico border, and reports indicate that we have lost contact with over 85,000 of those unaccompanied children.

It used to be that most of the migrants who were coming up to our southern border were from Mexico, but now the landscape has changed. In fiscal year 2022, migrants from Mexico crossing illegally made up just 33 percent. Now, individuals are coming from across the world, more than 150 countries, and many of those countries have direct ties with terrorism.

When I was down at Eagle Pass on the border several months ago, we were told that there were at least 27 countries with ties to terrorism that had immigrants come across that southern border who were encountered in the last couple of years. How astounding and how problematic for this country.

Despite the authority that the President has to fix these issues, he simply will not do it. What policies are we talking about? The current administration has ended the Migrant Protection Protocols and the remain in Mexico policy. We are told by border security people that if we reinstate just remain in Mexico, that could end up to 70 percent of the encounters that we see coming across the border.

The administration also has reinstated catch-and-release policies. They have suspended asylum cooperative agreements with other nations, such as El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. They have ignored existing restraints on the abuse of parole. They have halted necessary border wall construction. They have undermined the Immigration and Customs Enforcement's core mission by preventing them from deporting certain aliens who violate U.S. law. They have enabled use of smartphone apps to facilitate the release of border crossers into the United States. Moreover, they have redirected Customs and Border Patrol agents to do ICE paperwork processing instead of focusing on law enforcement work.

In short, the current administration's policies have led to the numbers that we are seeing today, numbers like 2.5 million just in the last fiscal year, 2.3 million in the year before, and 1.74 million in the year before compared to numbers like 400,000 or 500,000 per year under the prior administration.

One is too many, but 2.5 million is egregious. It has led to situations like overcrowded classrooms and children trafficked to do work in industries unsuited for children--unsuited for anybody; millions of dollars in unpaid medical bills in hospitals across the U.S., which overwhelm first responders in border communities; homeless veterans who are getting kicked out of shelters in favor of illegal aliens; and even the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans by fentanyl.

Because of the increased fentanyl crisis, these effects are being felt in rural and metropolitan communities in both blue and red States.

As of the beginning of December, the city of Denver had spent over $33 million to house, feed, and educate around 30,000 illegal aliens. Chicago residents are up in arms, as well, as are New York City residents. Their mayor says that this crisis will destroy the city.

In 2022, here is the number I was citing for you just a second ago-- 73,654 people died from fentanyl overdose in the U.S. This is more than double the amount of deaths in 2019 and the highest in American history.

Assaults on Border Patrol agents doubled just last year. Nevertheless, the Biden administration is doubling down on these open- border policies.

What will it take for them to wake up?

What will it take for us to find a solution for the border crisis?

There is a lot to be done. There are lots that can be done by this body and the Senate and across this government, but it starts with leadership in the White House, policy leadership in the White House to undo the current open-border policies and to return to the policies that were preventing this crisis before.

Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 957 denounces these open-border policies, condemns the national security and public crisis that we are seeing today because of that, and urges the President to end those policies immediately. The people of America deserve better. They deserve to have the sovereignty and the geographic borders of this Nation protected.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Van Drew).

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

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wyoming (Ms. Hageman).

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

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

Mr. Speaker, these are some of the things that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have said today.

The border is not open. Mr. Correa, Ms. Jackson Lee, and Mr. Nadler all said that.

Ms. Jayapal said: ``They don't want a solution.''

Mr. Correa also said that we need more resources.

In fact, that was one of the mantras throughout the debate today from the other side of the aisle: more resources, more resources, more resources.

Let me just tell you, funding is not the issue. Funding is at an all- time high for our border protection. Despite border protection funding being at an all-time high, we are seeing record-high encounters at the border.

Why is that? There is one reason for that. It is the administration's current policies.

I have provided this analogy several times to individuals over the months leading up to this debate: When I was being elected, I had a flood at my house. I came home one night, and there was water all over the floor in my house.

My first reaction was not to stand there and say that I needed to go get a bunch of moppers to come in and mop up the water that is there. My first reaction was to find where the water leak was and turn off the valve to shut off the flood.

Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we need to do. That is what this resolution re-sounds the alarm about. We have been talking about this for years on this side of the aisle. Apparently, both sides of the aisle are not getting the message.

This resolution helps us to admit that there is a problem. It helps us identify the cause and solve it.

Mr. Speaker, if the other side of the aisle was in charge of the flood at my house, they would say: Well, let's just let the flood continue and hire a bunch more moppers to come in to try to clean it up.

That is simply not the solution. You have to turn that valve off first. You have to stop the incursion of water. In this case, you have to stop the incursion of migrants coming across our border illegally.

It is a matter of the rule of law. It is a matter of the sovereignty of the United States. It is a matter of enforcing those laws that are on the books today and, frankly, a matter of the will of the administration to put back in place those policies that were working before 2021 began.

Mr. Speaker, I am astounded by the fact that even today we are hearing over and over again from the other side of the aisle that the border is not open. I urge my colleagues to go visit. Having been in Eagle Pass and El Paso, I can tell you that it is casual. That is the word I would use for it. Watching people, myself, coming across the border casually and then taken right to a processing center, and before you know it, out into the interior of the United States to who knows where and who knows when to be found again and who knows what they are going to do in our midst.

Mr. Speaker, we are seeing a rise of terrorism across this world. To allow our southern border to have the porous nature it does presently puts our Nation at risk. It is a national security issue that must be solved. We must have the will to do it.

Frankly, the Republicans have already proposed the right solution:

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