Directing the Architect of the Capitol to install at a permanent location on the western front of the United States Capitol an honorific plaque listing the names of all of the officers of the United States Capitol Police, the Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia, and other Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies and protective entities who responded to the violence that occurred at the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is a new year in America, but judging by the remarks of the gentlewoman from Indiana, it is the same old Republican Party. Here is where we are at on January 7, 2026. We have a Republican President who promised to put America first. Instead, in just under a year he has bailed out Argentina, bombed Venezuela, gave Qatar an air force base in Idaho, pardoned the former Honduran drug trafficking president, and cozied up to dictators all around the world.

We have a Republican majority that promised to bring down prices. Guess what. Prices are going up. Families across this country are hurting. People are losing health coverage because you guys chose deliberately, Mr. Speaker, to let the Affordable Care Act tax credits expire. Rent keeps going up. Grocery prices keep going up. Paychecks are not keeping pace.

Meanwhile, the President of the United States is openly boasting that America is now running a foreign country. His own advisers can't even answer basic questions about what the hell comes next, what the plan is, how this ends, or when the Venezuelan people can expect democracy.

We have a Speaker of the House who is the weakest and most incompetent Speaker of the House in the history of this body. I mean, honest to God, Mr. Speaker, I don't know whether that is a good thing for the country or a bad thing. On one hand, he is so incompetent he can't get anything done. On the other hand, the things he wants to get done are crazy.

Don't ask him his opinion on anything. He doesn't have one. He doesn't watch the news. I don't even think he goes outside. I don't know what keeps him so busy that he doesn't have an opinion on anything, but he certainly isn't legislating.

With all that is going on--conflict, economic strain, and real crises facing the American people--let us turn to the calendar and see what important issue that this Republican majority has us debating on the floor this week, Mr. Speaker. Do you want to know what it is? It is not housing, not food prices, not rent, not war and peace, foreign policy, or America's future, no, no, no, no. All of us are here on the floor right now at the behest of this Republican majority to debate showerheads. You can't make this stuff up.

As if that weren't bad enough, they are still trying to pass last year's appropriations bills. Let that sink in. These are bills that should have been passed months ago. That is the state of governance under this Republican majority: late, unserious, and completely detached from the lives of the people they claim to represent.

One of these appropriations bills funds the Department of Justice and Federal law enforcement. That brings us to something Republicans would rather forget, but what our country must not: Yesterday marked the 5- year anniversary of the January 6 insurrection.

It has been 5 years since a violent mob, whipped into a frenzy by the lie that Trump won the election even though he lost, stormed into this building to overturn a free and fair election.

Mr. Speaker, it has been 5 years since law enforcement officers, Capitol Police, and others were beaten, crushed, stabbed, pepper sprayed and hunted down by a MAGA mob determined to overturn the election and stop the peaceful transfer of power.

They hunted Members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans alike. I can still remember them chanting ``hang Mike Pence'' because I was here that day, Mr. Speaker, right where you are sitting right now, right in that chair. I was one of the last Members to leave the House floor, and I watched officers barricade the Chamber doors behind me here with furniture, knowing that they were outnumbered but refusing to surrender. I smelled the tear gas. I felt the chaos. I saw the mob outside of the Speaker's lobby.

The officers who were here that day saved lives. They upheld their oath to the Constitution. Many of them were hospitalized. Many were permanently injured. Some died either from injuries sustained that day or by suicide after the trauma that they endured.

Nearly 2,000 people were arrested, tried, and found guilty for their crimes that day. What did Donald Trump do? He pardoned every single one of them. He pardoned the criminals who beat officers bloody, desecrated this building, and tried to tear American democracy apart. In my book those pardons were unforgivable, unforgivable.

Do you know what he did yesterday? He put up a disgusting, disgraceful statement on the official White House website lying about what happened that day, blaming the police, blaming the police and calling everyone who was here that day innocent. There was not a single mention, not a single mention of the 140 officers who were assaulted that day with weapons like bear spray, stun guns, hockey sticks, broken pieces of furniture, and flag poles--not a single mention.

In fact, the White House even put up a statement that ``zero law enforcement officers lost their lives,'' which is

a disgusting lie. It is a disgusting lie and a disgrace to the memory of Officer Brian Sicknick who laid in honor in the rotunda of this Capitol Building after he died in the aftermath of January 6.

After all of that, after all of that, Speaker Johnson still refuses to display a plaque in the Capitol Building to honor the officers who stood up to the mob that day, a memorial he is required by law to put up. I mean, you know, here it is, Mr. Speaker. Here it is right here. That is what the Speaker refuses to put up.

This is what it looks like. It is not the real one because the real one is downstairs in storage somewhere. Speaker Johnson refuses to hang it up.

Why? Why? We all know why. We all know why. He won't hang it up because he is Donald Trump's puppet. That is all this is. If he hangs up the plaque, Trump might get mad at him. What a pathetic and shameful abdication of duty.

I am sure the gentlewoman won't address a single point I made here about January 6. I don't know whether she is afraid of the repercussions, but the bottom line is that I just want to say, for the record: Shame on Republicans for trying to cover up their complicity in what happened that day, and shame on them for wasting the people's time on showerheads while ignoring the economic, democratic, and moral crises staring this country in the face.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, let me just respond to the gentlewoman: A lot of words, a ton of words, but as I predicted, there is not a single word about the brave officers who defended this Chamber and defended every Member of Congress on January 6 who were attacked by a violent mob. I heard not a single word, not a single word.

I just also want to remind the gentlewoman, because maybe she forgot, regrettably, Republicans are in charge. They are in charge of the House, they are in charge of the Senate, and they are in charge of the White House. So they can complain about Joe Biden and they can complain about Democrats, but they are running this show.

I was really fascinated to hear the gentlewoman talk about the shutdown. Again, the Republicans are in charge of everything. They have the votes to do whatever they want to do, but when the government shut down--it was a Republican shutdown, by the way. When it shut down, they could have worked on the appropriations bills, by the way, which were already late by definition. By the time of the shutdown, they were already late. Republicans could have worked on getting the appropriations work done.

What did my Republican friends do?

They decided to go home and take a vacation. They just left. They walked away. They did not do a thing. They went on an extended vacation rather than doing the people's business.

I have to say to the gentlewoman: With all due respect, I do townhalls all the time. I don't know whether the gentlewoman does. I know a lot of Republicans do not, but when I do my townhalls, what I hear from people is about the high cost of living. I hear about the high cost of groceries. I hear about the high cost of healthcare. I hear about the high cost of housing.

Mr. Speaker, do you know what I don't hear people talk about? It is showerheads. When they talk about freedom and liberty, they don't talk about showerheads. I don't know what planet my Republican friends are living on, but I have news for them: The number one issue in America is not showerheads.

It is healthcare. It is affordability. It is housing. It is making sure that they can support their families. People look at life through their kitchen window, and they have to pay bills. They have to make sure that they make ends meet, and right now, under this Republican economy, life is too damn expensive. People can't afford basic needs.

I just gave a 1-minute speech before we got into this debate about the increase in hunger in this country.

Do you know what the Republican response to that is, Mr. Speaker, what the Trump administration is doing to combat hunger?

They are now banning the monthly report, which gives us the data on how many people are hungry in this country. No, we are not investing in programs to help combat hunger. We are not fighting for higher wages. We are not trying to lower healthcare costs. We are just going to hide the information from people so that people don't know how bad the situation is.

So, again, I appreciate all the gentlewoman's words, but, quite frankly, they ring hollow. What people want us to do is to fight to make life more affordable and more reasonable for them.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, again, the gentlewoman said nothing about January 6 or nothing about the brave men and women who protected this Chamber and all of us on that terrible, terrible day.

I have to say that I was more than amused by listening to the gentlewoman spout about how great everything is right now: The Trump economy is perfect. Everybody is doing great. Everything is wonderful. Everything is terrific.

I don't know whether the gentlewoman holds townhalls or not, but I wonder whether the voters of Indiana actually share that point of view. I have got to tell you, I don't think so because I don't think the voters in general in this country, the citizens of this country, share that view.

Every poll that I have seen, every townhall that I have been at--by the way, not only in my district but in other States--people have complained about how expensive things are. They say Trump's economy is making life more expensive, more difficult. The price of health insurance is going through the roof because this Chamber won't extend the ACA tax credits. Groceries are going up. I don't know whether the gentlewoman goes to the supermarket or not, but the price of groceries is going up.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article from Politico titled: ``Poll: Trump's own voters begin blaming him for affordability crisis.''

Mr. Speaker, I don't want to be lectured about wealthy people in this country because the Republicans have done everything they can to help those who were well off get more and those who are struggling get less.

We saw the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that included tax cuts for multimillionaires and multibillionaires, giveaways to billionaires, giveaways to Big Ag, Big Tech, Big Oil, and we see cuts to programs that help average people in this country to get by.

By the way, their big, ugly bill included a trillion dollar cut to Medicaid. They are cutting moneys for SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. That is basically to help people put food on the table. By the way, increasingly, a majority of the people who are on SNAP are working families, and they are cutting that at the same time that groceries are going up. However, if you are a billionaire, don't worry about it.

We are fighting a war of oil right now because we want to make sure Big Oil, that invested so heavily in the last campaign, gets their payback. The bottom line is, when it comes to people who are well off, well connected, and have lots of money, you know, they are doing fine. Everybody else is getting screwed.

If you ask the average person on the street about what they think of Donald Trump's economy, I will tell you what they will say. They will say it sucks.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I will tell everybody a little secret here. The Republicans are really clever, but not really as clever as they think they are. The big, beautiful bill that they passed, the one that includes tax cuts for multimillionaires and multibillionaires and the one that guts Medicaid by a trillion dollars, is incredibly unpopular. It is incredibly unpopular.

In fact, the Kaiser Family Foundation said that 64 percent of American families oppose it, and even FOX News says that 59 percent of the American people oppose it.

Why do they oppose it, and why is it so unpopular? It is because of what is contained in it. Rather than fix that--and we just heard the gentlewoman do this. Rather than fix it, they renamed the bill the Working Families Tax Cut Act. That never passed the House. That is a new title they made up.

They think all they need to do is change the title of a bill, and then the American people won't realize all the garbage that is tucked into the bill. It is like lipstick on a pig. It is ridiculous. This is insane.

The American people are hurting because of the Republican policies. The American people are hurting because they won't extend the ACA tax credits.

By the way, people will see their health insurance costs go down if the ACA tax credits are extended. The gentlewoman is all upset about it, but I will urge her to talk to some of her Republican colleagues, by the way, who have signed on to a discharge petition to force a vote on extending the ACA tax credits. We will begin that debate today and vote on it tomorrow.

It is not just Democrats. There are some Republicans who are hearing from their constituents that they are getting screwed over on their healthcare, and they want us to do something.

The bottom line is, they can change the titles of bills and all that kind of stuff, but if they don't change the substance, if they don't get Donald Trump to back off on his tariffs--which, by the way, are responsible for rising housing costs in this country--if they don't get him to change his views on that, things are going to continue to get worse. They can change the titles of bills all they want, but they are not changing the reality for millions of Americans.

It is hard to believe that in the House of Representatives, which is supposed to be a serious body, this is what we are talking about. We are changing titles of bills so that maybe the American people won't know what we are talking about.

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I am going to offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H. Con. Res. 33, which calls for the plaque honoring the brave police officers that defended this Capitol and our democracy on January 6 to be put up in the Capitol as required by law.

Mr. Speaker, I am sick and tired of Republicans standing up and proclaiming their unwavering support for law enforcement when they won't even honor the law enforcement that saved them, that saved us and our democracy here on January 6.

Yesterday was the fifth anniversary of the January 6 attack on the Capitol by supporters of Donald Trump. Over 140 officers were injured, an officer was killed, and others died by suicide following the trauma of that day.

Do you know how the White House marked this anniversary? They marked it by putting up an Orwellian web page, rewriting history, and claiming it is the officers who were to blame for the violence. How disgusting. How despicable. How disgraceful.

I ask my Republican colleagues: Do you really believe that crap? When you look in the eyes of the Capitol Police who guard this building, do you accuse them of being responsible for the violence of that day?

How dare the President of the United States say such a thing, and how shameful of this Republican majority to stay silent in the face of this depravity and rewriting of history.

Republicans found the time to illegally slap Donald Trump's name onto the Kennedy Center, defacing a memorial to a great President in a single day, within 24 hours, but a legally required honor for the officers who defended this democracy? It is 5 years of excuses, 5 years of delay, 5 years of cowardice and disrespect to law enforcement by Republicans.

When all is said and done, history will not look kindly on these Trump Republicans and this Republican majority, and they all know it.

At this point, let me say to my Republican friends that it is always the right time to do the decent thing, the thing the law requires, which is to hang the plaque honoring these brave men and women who put their lives on the line to defend us, to defend this building, and to defend this democracy.

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 myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, again, no discussion, no comments on what happened on January 6 or about what the White House put on its web page yesterday, blaming police officers for the violence of January 6, saying that no police officer died when we know that is a lie, and no explanation as to why we are having such a difficult time hanging a plaque that, quite frankly, the law requires us to hang.

Again, the gentlewoman voted against an amendment to force the Speaker to hang the plaque. I am happy to yield to the gentlewoman if she wants to explain why she voted that way. Does she have any reaction to the White House's horrific and disgraceful statement yesterday, basically smearing the brave men and women who are in our law enforcement and the Capitol Police officers?

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield to the gentlewoman.

And nothing. And nothing. I mean, really? That is what things have come to? We can't even come together and stand in defense of the Capitol Police who defended us that day? We can't honor them? Somehow that is a no-no because Donald Trump doesn't like it. I mean, that really is shameful.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, let's be honest about what we have seen from this Republican majority. Republicans can't govern. They can't lead. They won't and don't fight for the people who sent them here.

They rush, rush, rush to the floor to redefine what a showerhead is. That is the big issue. They move at lightning speed on tax breaks for billionaires. They bend over backward to enrich Trump and his inner circle, going so far as to invade another country to grease the skids for Big Oil. It is not about democracy. It is not about human rights. It is not even about drugs. It is about Big Oil.

The priorities of Big Tech, Big Oil, Big Pharma, and Big Banks move at lightning speed. Tax cuts for the wealthy pass overnight. Corporate giveaways face no obstacles.

When it comes to protecting healthcare for millions of Americans, suddenly there is hesitation. Suddenly, there are delays. Suddenly, there is no money. Suddenly, they move in slow motion. Suddenly, we can't do anything.

It may be 2026, but it is the status quo for this Republican majority. It is a new year but the same BS for them except when it comes to what is happening in Venezuela. Then they are dragging us back to 2003.

Other than that, it is always the same funding from elite donors with phony talk about helping regular people. It is the same contempt for their own voters. It is the same recklessness abroad. It is the same incompetence at home.

Here is what Republicans always underestimate. The American people are paying attention. They are not stupid. They know when billionaires get everything and everyone else gets excuses. They know when governance is replaced by stunts, distractions, and culture war nonsense. There is always a reckoning for that kind of failure. This year will be no exception. They know all the gimmicks.

We passed this monstrosity of a bill called the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The American people are horrified by what is in it. There are excessive giveaways to the wealthiest in this country. There are cutbacks in healthcare. There are cutbacks in everything that matters to working families. Every poll that is done says that it is incredibly unpopular.

What do they do? Rather than fix the problem, they come up with a counterfeit name for the bill. It is no longer the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Now it is the Working Families Tax Cut Act. I don't know what the hell that is. I don't know who came up with that idea. Maybe some pollster gave it to them, as if changing the name of what they call this big, ugly bill will make a difference.

Mr. Speaker, all I can say is that with all that is going on in this country right now, with all of the concerns that the American people have, and with people desperately pleading with this Republican President and this Republican majority in the House and Senate to do something to make their life better, we have an opportunity to maybe legislate and help people. Instead, we are talking about showerheads. I mean, really? I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I will also again remind people about the vote on the previous question. We have a chance to actually do something positive today, and that is to honor the men and women who protected us on January 6. Unfortunately, Republicans on the Rules Committee all voted ``no'' to require the Speaker again to hang the plaque.

They all voted ``no.'' Not a word has been said. There is no explanation as to why. Not a word about what happened on January 6 has been spoken on this floor by the Republicans today. I don't know how that can be. I don't know how that can be.

Mr. Speaker, I was there that day. I was in the Speaker's chair. I saw what happened. I saw what happened when I walked out to the Speaker's lobby. I saw the people who protected us being beaten by this angry mob, and not a word. We can't get the Speaker of the House to hang up this plaque. That can change with the previous question vote.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 405 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

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

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

Last night, the Rules Committee met and produced a rule providing for consideration of three pieces of legislation--H.R. 2240, H.R. 2243, and H.R. 2255--which will all be considered under a closed rule, each with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective designees. Additionally, the rule provides each with a motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, Republicans are here in Washington this week to continue to work on behalf of the American people. This is, in fact, Police Week, but we have been busy this year, this Congress delivering for the American people.

In this Congress so far, we have passed legislation to secure our elections, H.R. 222, the SAVE Act; hold rogue activist judges accountable, H.R. 1526; bring transparency to institutes of higher education, H.R. 1048; make changes to our border with the Laken Riley Act and the HALT Fentanyl Act; and to repeal the Biden-era harmful environmental regulations by passing what we call Congressional Review Acts to undo the damage of the Biden administration.

As Republicans continue to work on behalf of the American people and finalize the reconciliation products we are working on currently, we are also here to recognize National Police Week and the thousands of law enforcement officers who wake up every day to step on that thin blue line to defend and protect us.

In 1962, President John F. Kennedy signed a proclamation which designated May 15 as Peace Officer Memorial Day, and the week in which that date falls as Police Week.

Yesterday, my staff and I got the opportunity to welcome police officers from New Braunfels, Texas, and hear about the challenges they face every day. I talk to the men and women in blue virtually every day in the district that I represent, as I know many of my colleagues do.

My grandfather was the chief of police of a small west Texas town called Sweetwater. I was blessed to work in the United States Attorney's office and the Office of the Attorney General of the State of Texas, working every day with law enforcement. What they do matters for the peace and security of our country. Our Republic depends on having security on our streets.

There are thousands of stories that I can share about the daily heroism of law enforcement officers across the country, hundreds I could share even in the district I represent.

On February 16, 2024, Austin Police Department officers Dalton Schroeder and Jason Wright responded to 4-year-old William Martinez Romero, who was choking. The officers quickly jumped into action. Body cam footage shows Officer Schroeder run to his cruiser to grab an antichoking device he bought with his own money to be prepared for situations just like this, while Officer Wright started supporting William with back blows. They saved his life that day.

We must also remember that Police Week honors fallen peace officers, including one officer who died in the line of duty, Austin Police Department Senior Officer Jorge Pastore died in action November 11, 2023, responding to a domestic violence call in South Austin. Hostages were held inside a home, and when officers attempted to enter, gunfire started to go off. The SWAT team was called in to help distract the suspect, one being Officer Pastore, who was trying to rescue the victims.

I know I speak for many of my colleagues when I say we couldn't be more excited to welcome tens of thousands of law enforcement officers from around the country to D.C. this week.

Let's be clear: House Republicans and President Trump are mobilized to restore order and sanity in the United States, something that had been lacking for years.

I remember the days, as I know my colleagues do, in 2020 when there were fires and destruction rampant across the country, as our cities were being burned to the ground and law enforcement was being targeted. It was unacceptable.

There are Members of this body, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, who were encouraging it. They were undermining our law enforcement officers, making it more difficult for them to carry out their jobs, who were challenging them. It was important that we stood by them, and it is important now that the President and Republicans are standing by our law enforcement officers.

Americans suffered due to the amplification of that extreme rhetoric against law enforcement. The homicide rates stayed significantly higher through 2022 after massively skyrocketing in the wake of 2020.

The rule before us today is another step in helping law enforcement officers across the Nation which, after 4 years of a Biden-run Department of Justice targeting police departments, should be a welcome relief to our men and women in blue.

This week we will consider three pieces of legislation to support our brothers and sisters in law enforcement. H.R. 2255, the Federal Law Enforcement Officer Service Weapon Purchase Act of 2025, which would allow Federal law enforcement officers the opportunity to purchase the service weapons they used before obtaining a new one; H.R. 2243, the LEOSA Reform Act, which amends the Gun-Free School Zones Act to provide an exemption for law enforcement officers certified under the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act to carry a concealed firearm in a gun- free school zone; and H.R. 2240, Improving Law Enforcement Officer Safety and Wellness Through Data Act, which would require the Attorney General to submit a report to Congress that includes data on attacks on law enforcement.

These bills are widely supported by law enforcement groups. The Association of State Criminal Investigative Agencies, Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, Major Cities Chiefs Association, Major County Sheriffs of America, National Association of Police Organizations, National Narcotics Officers' Associations' Coalition, and Sergeants Benevolent Association of the NYPD sent a letter on March 25, 2025, to the House Judiciary Committee urging support of these bills and advancement to the House floor.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are so concerned about crime in the country that the parting shot of Joe Biden on January 19 was to commute the sentences of 2,500 Federal defendants he claimed were ``convicted of nonviolent drug offenses.''

Let's look at that. We have a situation where he reduced the sentence of a Buffalo man, Lairon Graham, 67. In 2023, he was convicted of organizing and heading a drug conspiracy to sell fentanyl, crack cocaine, and heroin. When police raided his home, they found fentanyl, crack, and cash. He also possessed a firearm. In addition to heading up the drug gang, Graham was also convicted of sex trafficking by force or coercion from 2013 to 2021.

Of course, this is on top of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle wanting to defend a Maryland man for being sent overseas after the guy was clearly moving people illegally, beating his girlfriend and wife, violating our laws, and here illegally. That is who they want to defend.

There are numerous other examples. Jaron Ruth, another Buffalo native, pleaded guilty in 2019 to selling drugs over a period of 3 years and possessing firearms. He had been charged with shooting a man in the chest during a burglary of the victim's home.

These are the kind of folks that Joe Biden was commuting as he exited stage left. We had another situation where he commuted the sentence of a gentleman who left prison after Biden commuted his sentence in the killing of two FBI agents. Is that who my colleagues on the other side of the aisle think they ought to be defending?

Can they answer the question of commuting the sentences of these violent criminals and putting them out on the streets, just as they voted against every measure we put forward to defend our borders and to stop the death and destruction of American citizens like Laken Riley or like Jocelyn Nungaray or those who have died at the hands of dangerous criminal cartels and gangs in our country?

What President Trump is doing is restoring the rule of law. What Republicans are doing is standing up in defense of law enforcement because we stand up in defense of the rule of law.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Fine).

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

What I would notice, Mr. Speaker, is that the gentleman complained about not having the amendment considered, but he offered the amendment about 1 hour before the Rules Committee met. So spare me the concern about whether or not we are considering amendments when we don't have the time to look at the amendment.

I would also note that when we are talking about these kinds of people, I went through a list of folks whom President Biden had commuted.

Here is another one. A Lubbock man, granted clemency by Biden, was arrested. The sheriff was absolutely angry about the former administration's decisions. The sheriff said that he felt angry after he found out a convicted criminal was being released back on the Lubbock streets early, that a convicted criminal is now back in law enforcement custody after violating his supervised release.

These are the kinds of folks whom we are putting back out on the streets, and we are having to arrest again the very people that President Biden put back out.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. McGuire).

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

Mr. Speaker, I would note that as we are considering this Police Week and we are talking about the safety and security of our streets, I would just note that two of our most dangerous States as measured by violent crime and property crime rates are the States of New Mexico and Colorado, which also happen to have Democrats controlling all levels of power.

I would note that last summer, the good people of Aurora, Colorado, were dealing with Tren de Aragua, who were engaging in violent activities in apartment complexes and demonstrating the violence that has led to the death of Americans, and the trafficking of dangerous narcotics and fentanyl. They literally took over their homes. I met with and talked to Cindy Romero from Aurora about what happened to her in her home and that my Democratic colleagues weren't even acknowledging that it was happening. They were just ignoring it.

Then Tren de Aragua moved to San Antonio and other places across the country. I want to give a shout-out to the Texas Department of Public Safety and all the great local law enforcement in Hays County, Texas. That is because just literally last week they converged together with the FBI to go identify and stop 47 individuals. Probably 14 of whom were a part of Tren de Aragua from all over the country. They had come into Austin to coordinate. They had drugs, narcotics, and children in a home near where I live in Dripping Springs, Texas.

Thanks to law enforcement we now have removed at least four of those individuals and are prosecuting others because we now have a law enforcement community who knows that the President of the United States is backing them, and a Republican House and a Republican Senate are backing them.

Local law enforcement are being backed instead of having leftist judges who are dismissing the crimes and putting dangerous criminals on the streets. When Joe Biden commutes sentences and puts dangerous criminals on the streets, the American people know who is actually standing up for law enforcement.

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

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

If we talk about standing up in defense of police, how can my colleagues on the other side of the aisle say with a straight face that that is what they want to do when we had one Democrat from New York who said: I am not in favor of more police; I am actually in favor of defunding the police. We had another Congresswoman from New York who said: Defunding police means defunding police. I can go back, and the Record is replete with examples of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle calling for defunding the police. In fact, one of my colleagues from Texas was literally serving on the Austin City Council when they cut $150 million out of the Austin Police Department's budget, leaving their academy decimated, leaving them unable to field 911 calls, leaving violent crimes skyrocketing in the city of Austin, because my colleagues on the other side of the aisle were patently clear about their desire to defund the police and

side with violent mobs in the summer of 2020, when our cities were burning across the country.

Yes, we are standing up for the men and women in blue. Yes, we will defend them, but, no, we are not going to blindly support grants that are being used by NGOs to undermine the very police they are saying they are trying to support. For example, one grant to an NGO that was promoting prostitution and open borders, this is the kind of stuff that the American people sent us here to stop. This is the kind of stuff that they are proud of the President for using DOGE to identify and stop.

Yes, we are trying to defund those particularly bad grant programs, while we try to make sure that our local jurisdictions can fund police properly and have judges that will actually put bad guys in jail instead of letting them on the streets and a President that won't commute the sentences of 2,500 people, dozens or hundreds of whom were violent criminals and are now back out on the streets.

I reserve the balance of my time.

May I inquire how much time is remaining.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am proud of my Republican colleagues for bringing forward legislation in support of our law enforcement community.

I am proud of the fact that, in fact, this President is trying to focus resources where it will best provide security and safety on our streets and back our law enforcement community to actually target criminals, not fund ridiculous grants, not fund NGOs that are undermining our security, the very NGOs that are perpetuating the open borders; that are putting gangs in our communities, like TDA and MS-13, that lead directly to the death of Americans, death of Americans like Jocelyn Nungaray, like Laken Riley, like Rachel Morin, like Kayla Hamilton; Americans that are no longer with us because of the policies of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, because of wide-open borders, and because of tolerance of violent criminals, because of a Democrat President who has let violent criminals out on the street and commuted their sentences; because of radical leftist judges promoted by those that fund my colleagues on the other side of the aisle; like George Soros who have funded DAs that are letting criminals out on the streets in cities like San Antonio and Austin that I represent; like my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that have defunded the police time and time again and have defended that position.

For example, one of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle said that the defund the police movement is one of reimagining the current police system to build an entity that does not violate us, while relocating funds to invest in community services.

Another colleague said that the defund movement isn't new. Folks are just finally listening.

Defund the police, said a Democrat colleague.

Defunding the police isn't radical. It is real, said a former Democrat colleague and, as I said before, a colleague that literally voted on the Austin City Council to strip $150 million out of the police budget, leaving the Austin Police stranded, unable to do their job and the people of Austin unable to get the services that they deserve and pay taxes for, while their streets are made more violent and while criminals are allowed to roam free under the very aforementioned Soros DAs that refused to prosecute the criminals.

Everybody in America knows what is going on. Everybody in America gets the joke. They saw their cities burning in the summer of 2020. They saw the reality of what happens when you allow these radical Democratic policies to take root, and they want it to end.

They want common sense back. They want a President who will enforce the law and an FBI that will target criminals instead of the American people. They don't want to have a Federal Government that is weaponized against them. They don't want them to be targeted.

They want violent criminals off the streets. They want violent gangs off the streets. They want our borders to be secure. They want TDA out. They want MS-13 out. They want fentanyl off their streets.

The only way you can do that is to actually back up the people trying to enforce the law and actually stand with them in the enforcement of the law, not turn around and let all the criminals back out on the streets. Yet, that is what my colleagues perpetually want to do.

The fact of the matter is, the American people understand that this President, this Republican House, this Republican Senate, and Republican jurisdictions across the country stand for law enforcement. They stand for order. That is what they want. That is what they sent us here for.

We put together some bills this week that are focused on wishes of the people, the men and women in blue, like my grandfather, who served as chief of police in Sweetwater, Texas, and the many law enforcement I was proud to serve with and alongside in the Office of the Attorney General of Texas and in the United States Attorney's Office. We work with them on a regular basis.

When you talk to them, they cannot do their jobs if the radical leftist policies of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are allowed to continue to be perpetuated. You can't combat crime if you put the criminals back on the streets. You can't combat crime if you import criminals from dangerous prisons. You can't combat crime if your law enforcement agencies are targeting American citizens for political retribution rather than taking dangerous, violent criminals off the streets.

I rise in support of these bills. I rise in support of the rule. The legislation that we put forward will provide the value for our men and women in uniform that they have asked for. They have asked for the ability to keep the weapons that they had in service.

Why does that matter? I will tell you why it matters. My grandfather that I mentioned before died in 1949 of cancer. When my dad, a 7-year- old, had polio and my grandmother was a single mom in west Texas raising him and did all the tough things, didn't ask for any handouts, took two jobs, helped my dad go on to be the first to go to college--my dad is 82 years old. He is still alive. He is 82 and still manages to walk, barely.

My dad talks about his dad as a cop, and he pulls out his old .38, the .38 revolver that my grandfather had in service. That means something to the people who serve. It means something for them to be able to carry that with them and take it with them. It is no small thing.

Some of my colleagues dismiss it as not being important. I can tell you it is important to the people who are out there serving because they devote their lives to this cause.

When I take that .38 out of the safe and show it to my son, he is holding the .38 that his great-grandfather held and carried with him when he was policing the streets. I think that is a good thing.

The material previously referred to by Ms. Leger Fernandez is as follows:

An Amendment to H. Res. 405 Offered by Ms. Leger Fernandez of New

Mexico

At the end of the resolution, add the following:

Sec 3. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the

House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the

concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 33) directing the

Architect of the Capitol to install at a permanent location

on the western front of the United States Capitol an

honorific plaque listing the names of all of the officers of

the United States Capitol Police, the Metropolitan Police

Department of the District of Columbia, and other Federal,

State, and local law enforcement agencies and protective

entities who responded to the violence that occurred at the

United States Capitol on January 6, 2021. All points of order

against consideration of the concurrent resolution are

waived. The concurrent resolution shall be considered as

read. All points of order against provisions in the

concurrent resolution are waived. The previous question shall

be considered as ordered on the concurrent resolution to

adoption without intervening motion except one hour of debate

equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking

minority member of the Committee on House Administration or

their respective designees.

Sec 4. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the

consideration of H. Con. Res. 33.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, today, as every day, I stand in honor of our police and our law enforcement. I often say to those who serve that to serve is an act of love. I recognize the love of those who step up to put their lives on the line and to put their lives in a place of danger to protect us. I honor that service and that love.

Today, like last night, I heard an outrageous lie about which party supports law enforcement. Let's look at

the facts. Republican President Donald Trump's proposed budget will slash funding for the ATF and Drug Enforcement Administration, fire FBI employees, wipe out community policing grants, and gut civil rights enforcement.

Trump's budget doesn't support local law enforcement. It hurts them.

In my rural district, local law enforcement actually needs more support. I am outraged when Republicans say Federal help is duplicative, which is what they said last night in the Rules Committee.

I have spoken with the police officers and sheriffs who traverse thousands of miles of bumpy rural roads in my district. Rio Arriba County, for example, is bigger than the State of Connecticut, yet it has fewer than two dozen police officers.

Mr. Speaker, do you know what helps a small, rural police department like Rio Arriba? Do you know what the sheriffs need? They need support from the FBI and Federal law enforcement. FBI comes in and helps them solve crimes.

Tribal law enforcement also relies on the FBI. Tribal leaders frequently describe the long wait times for police to arrive and the countless criminal investigations left unsolved because there aren't enough FBI agents.

Mr. Speaker, when you cut funding for the FBI, as Republican President Trump proposes in his budget, you are not cutting duplicative funding. You are cutting essential investigative services. It is a guarantee that crimes will go unsolved.

The partnership between law enforcement agencies at all levels is critical to keep our communities safe. From the sheriff in Rio Arriba to the Capitol Police officers right outside these doors, each plays an important role. Unfortunately, not everybody respects all of our law enforcement officers.

In this very building, January 6 insurrectionists brutally attacked the Capitol Police and law enforcement officers from multiple jurisdictions. More than 140 police suffered injuries and went to the hospital. Five officers died. Then, President Trump pardoned the violent thugs who battered those police officers. It is a shame.

Every day, we walk by our dedicated Capitol Police, yet very few Republicans have the courage to condemn the pardons of the violent thugs who beat the police. Last night during Rules, we couldn't even get a Republican who is a former prosecutor to condemn the pardons-- more shame. If Republicans truly backed the blue, they would all denounce those pardons.

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if my colleague from Texas condemned those pardons. Is he willing to do so now?

Mr. Speaker, I want to turn to what Americans are focused on right now and what the thousands of callers to congressional offices, Republican and Democratic, are worried about. It is Republican cuts to Medicaid.

This is a big week for Republicans. As reported in Punchbowl, it is their once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to cut Medicaid.

This week in the dead of night while America was sleeping, Republican committees took a sledgehammer to lifesaving programs like Medicaid. Mr. Speaker, let me tell you what is happening. Democrats fought all night to save 8.6 million Americans from losing access to Medicaid. That doesn't include the 4.2 million Americans who will start paying a whole lot more for their healthcare premiums so big corporations can get their tax deductions.

Republicans voted down every single amendment that Democrats offered to protect Medicaid. Let me remind everybody that in more than 25 districts, more than a third of the constituents rely on Medicaid. That includes Republican Nick Begich's and Robert Bresnahan's districts. Not a single Republican had the courage to stand up for their constituents.

The people are showing up in our offices to demand that Republicans listen to them. Some are protesting in their wheelchairs.

Yesterday, I spoke to a disabled woman named Julie outside the committee markup. Thirty-five years ago, Julie crawled up the House steps to demand that Congress pass the Americans with Disabilities Act. She is now back to beg for the bare minimum. She told me that she doesn't trust Republicans to protect her healthcare. Based on their votes, she is right.

Congress listened to her plea 35 years ago. Now, the wealthy interests and Trump's pressure are just too much. Republicans won't listen to a word from Julie or the 80 disabled advocates who came with her. She and other advocates are asking them to protect Medicaid and to protect the services they need. Even though they are in wheelchairs, they are not voiceless and will show up with their power. If that doesn't break our hearts, I don't know what will.

We have a broken system that prioritizes the wealthy, corruption, and loyalty to President Trump over the health and well-being of people like Julie. There are 8.6 million people who will suffer because Republicans took their once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to cut Medicaid.

Republicans may be gleeful, but Americans will be tearful. Remember, congressional Republicans will lie over and over and say this is about rooting out fraud. No, it is not. It is about giving permanent tax cuts to the oligarchs. In fact, the top 20 percent of income earners will get 68 percent of the benefits in their bill.

Make no mistake that people will die as a result of these cuts. Families will suffer. Many will go broke thanks to medical bills, while millionaires get money for more yachts. Do they really need any more yachts?

Mr. Speaker, getting back to law enforcement, do you know the other things that sheriffs in my district need to respond to crime and to keep people alive? They need rural hospitals. When Republicans strip $715 billion from Medicaid, no matter how they try to paint that pig, they will be eliminating rural hospitals and emergency rooms.

When they do that, police officers in rural areas in places like Chama, New Mexico, in my district will have to drive 1\1/2\ to 2 hours to the nearest emergency room. Ask any first responder: The quicker somebody gets to an emergency room, the more likely they are to survive. When life or death is a matter of minutes, what Republicans are doing this week is deadly.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I am really wondering what kind of people they want to defend over there. Let's talk about those pardons. Let's talk about the fact that this isn't something that happened over there. This happened in this Capitol. Those violent offenders were violent before they got there.

Let me talk about a couple of them. Do my colleagues want to defend Steven Cappuccio? He was convicted of six felonies, including assaulting a police officer.

Mr. Speaker, he was together with David Dempsey. David Dempsey was sentenced to 20 years. He stomped on a police officer's head, and he struck an officer in the head with a metal crutch.

This is the kind of person the Republicans want to defend.

Enrique Tarrio, a former national leader of the Proud Boys and a domestic terrorist, was pardoned by Donald Trump.

Guy Reffitt, somebody who brought a gun, zip ties, and body armor, was pardoned by Donald Trump.

Not only that, they have gone after their pardons, and they haven't stopped the criminal spree.

A Houston man was pardoned by Trump and then arrested on sex charges.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article titled: ``Houston man pardoned by Trump arrested on child sex charge.''

This happens over and over again. They seem unwilling to stand up for the Capitol Police whom they walk by every day.

They refuse to put up the plaque that is, by law, honoring them.

I wonder if they ever even say: I am sorry. I am sorry that President Trump pardoned the people who beat you.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H. Con. Res. 33.

This measure will ensure that the plaque honoring the brave police officers who defended us on January 6 is hung in the Capitol as required by law.

Mr. Speaker, you know it is Police Week, but Republicans for some reason refuse to put up the plaque honoring the heroic efforts by U.S. Capitol Police and other local and Federal law officers who defended us and our democracy on January 6.

It is not a scary thing. The plaque looks like this.

Don't you agree, Mr. Speaker?

It is lovely. It recognizes their heroic efforts, and it is the law. It was signed into law by the President that this plaque goes up.

What are they afraid of?

Why don't they want to honor the Capitol Police and other law enforcement officers who were beaten and battered?

Why is their support for police conditional?

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Crow), to speak more to this resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I find it incredibly ironic when my colleague talks about President Trump backing law enforcement.

Last night in the Rules Committee, their Republican colleague, Mr. Knott, noted that Republicans have not increased or passed legislation for law enforcement in the 119th Congress.

When Republicans back law enforcement, they should actually be passing the funding to support State law enforcement, to support that collaboration and coordination. At the same time we are seeing that Republicans are not saying a peep about the fact that President Trump is cutting existing resources.

Not only does he plan to cut the budget for law enforcement, he is cutting resources today. He has terminated $820 million worth of grants for public safety. He has cut $169 million in funding for community safety and violence reduction programs. He has cut $71.7 million in grants to policing and prosecution programs, including longstanding efforts to address violent crimes and acts of targeted violence.

It doesn't terminate there. The Trump administration terminated grants for policing and prosecution, for victim services, for juvenile justice and child protection, for substance abuse and mental health treatment, for correction, and for protecting and serving the women who have been raped and the children who have been abused. He has cut that funding.

I have spoken to the women who are administering those programs and who have called me in tears because the children they serve will not be receiving those Federal grants.

Mr. Speaker, I want to get back to this issue of the pardons that my colleague has referred to.

Once again, let's go back and think about how they have not objected to the pardons of the January 6, nor have they called for putting up the plaque to honor the law enforcement who served us that day.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Espaillat), the chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, to discuss our proposal.

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

Mr. Speaker, a vote on the previous question is a vote to protect the police.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, my colleague has mentioned all kinds of words and ideas, and he is putting all kinds of stuff out there, but he has not once mentioned the plaque.

The previous question is: Will you honor the police who defended us in this Chamber by doing a simple thing? That is putting up this plaque.

Mr. Speaker, what counts on the floor of this House is your vote. Let's look at what those votes have resulted in. Those votes say we should honor the police who suffered when the insurrectionists beat them, that we should honor the police who protected our democracy and indeed protected every single one of us. Whether you are Republican or Democrat, a House Member or a Senator, you were protected by the police.

Are you willing to vote for this? If you vote against the previous question, you are saying we will not do this simple act of respect.

Now, let's get to the idea of what did you actually vote on.

Democrats have the receipts. For fiscal year 2023, the last year that Democrats wrote the appropriations bill, we increased funding for grants to State and local law enforcement by $506 billion. All but nine House Republicans voted against that bill.

Remember, it is not what you say. It is what you do. What did you vote for? Democrats put forward bills to increase funding, and Republicans voted against it.

We also increased funding for the FBI by half a billion dollars. I already went through how important the FBI is for Tribal law enforcement; how much our rural and local officers rely on them to do the investigation. They have access to technology that our sheriffs do not. The FBI supports law enforcement in Indian country.

We need these resources, and I am incredibly insulted when the gentleman, my good friend from Texas, my neighbor, actually says of local law enforcement that these programs are a waste. Go and talk to the people who rely on them. They are not duplicative. They are not a waste. They are essential.

Let me do just one last little fact check on that. When you look at who has the most homicides and some of the highest crime rates, it is indeed Republican States. Yes, it is unfortunate, and it is something we need to work on. Democrats raise this issue all the time, but the highest levels of crime and homicides are--let me go through those States--Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, sadly, New Mexico, Missouri, Arkansas, South Carolina. See a little trend there? It is actually Republicans. Don't come and talk to us about that. It is dangerous to live and work in many Republican-led States.

Let's get back to what we do to honor and respect law enforcement on this Police Week.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

We have heard a lot of claims today, but here is what remains true. Democrats support law enforcement, not just with words, but with action, with our votes. We back them with funding, with resources, and, importantly, with respect.

That is why, under Democratic leadership, we increased funding for local and Federal law enforcement, including the very FBI that solves crimes in our rural and Tribal communities.

We don't just say these things. We show up for law enforcement. We stand with the Capitol Police who defended our democracy and our lives on January 6. We honor their courage. We mourn those who died, and we refuse to excuse the violent criminals who attacked them.

Unfortunately, too many of our Republican colleagues have chosen loyalty to Donald Trump over loyalty to the truth and over loyalty to the officers who keep us safe. You cannot say you support and respect law enforcement and stay silent as Trump pardons the violent criminals who battered the police on January 6. You can't say you support law enforcement when you refuse to do something as simple as hanging a plaque to honor their sacrifices.

While Republicans hold up empty slogans, Democrats fight for the health and dignity of the American people. We fought all night long to protect 8.6 million Americans from losing Medicaid, for the mother caring for a child with disabilities. We fought to protect the senior in rural New Mexico who has to drive hours just to see a doctor and will have to drive hours more when their Medicaid cuts destroy our world healthcare system. Why? So Republicans can hand out tax cuts to billionaires.

Do the millionaires and billionaires you are protecting really need more? They already have so much. They will drown and bury the veteran, the pregnant mother, the disabled worker with paperwork while they will just give away a bigger tax cut to the wealthiest among us. That just doesn't seem fair.

Mr. Speaker, I say that this is about values. This is about who do you value and what will you do when it actually comes down to vote?

Democrats value and choose to protect people like Julie, who crawled up these Capitol steps 35 years ago to demand dignity and now returns to beg us not to be forgotten. We are not forgetting her, and Democrats will not stop fighting for her and for millions more.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 977 and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

General Leave

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

Mr. Speaker, earlier this morning, the Rules Committee met to produce a rule, H. Res. 977, providing for the House's consideration on the following three bills:

First, the rule provides for H.R. 4593, the SHOWER Act, to be considered under a closed rule. It provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, or their respective designees, and provides for one motion to recommit.

Second, the rule provides for H.R. 5184, the Affordable HOMES Act. H.R. 5184 would be considered under a closed rule. It also provides for 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, or their respective designees, and provides for one motion to recommit.

Third, the rule provides for H.R. 6938, Commerce, Justice, Science; Energy and Water Development; and Interior and Environment Appropriations Act, 2026. H.R. 6938 would be considered under a closed rule, and it also provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations, or their designees, and provides for one motion to recommit.

The rule provides for separate votes on division A and divisions B and C.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and in support of the underlying legislation. These bills reflect a simple governing philosophy: freedom of choice, fiscal responsibility, regulatory clarity, and a government that focuses on the American people, not bureaucracy.

Let me begin with the appropriations package. Beginning with H.R. 6938, the Commerce, Justice, Science; Energy and Water Development; and Interior and Environment Appropriations Act of 2026, these bills make targeted, disciplined investments to strengthen American energy dominance, reinforce our nuclear deterrent capabilities, support law enforcement, and expand access to critical minerals. These policy priorities are shared by President Trump, congressional Republicans, and millions of Americans. Importantly, this appropriations package ends Biden-era policies enacting a more conservative vision, all while cutting fiscal year 2026 spending by nearly $2 billion, delivering significant savings for taxpayers. Let me repeat that: Passing full year appropriations ensures we are not defaulting to Biden-era spending levels or radical priorities. It allows Congress to reset funding levels in support of the conservative policies aligned with President Trump's agenda.

The Commerce, Justice, Science; Energy and Water Development; and Interior and Environment Appropriations Act of 2026 provides $78 billion in discretionary funding, including resources to stop the flow of fentanyl, and provides critical funding to support State and local law enforcement. It increases funding for the Drug Enforcement Administration to combat the fentanyl crisis, supports the Department of Justice grant programs that target opioids and child exploitation, and facilitates immigration enforcement. It protects the Second Amendment by keeping long-standing safeguards in place that prevent Federal agencies from restricting lawful firearms, ammunition, and sporting equipment without congressional approval, and decreases funding for the ATF. It also maintains pro-life Hyde protections to ensure taxpayer dollars are not used to fund abortions.

The Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act directs $58 billion towards national security and strengthens America's energy independence. These investments are essential to restoring American leadership in nuclear energy and achieving the administration's goal of dramatically expanding nuclear capacity by mid-century. At the same time, they eliminate wasteful Biden-era offices that prioritize ideology over outcomes.

The Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Act provides $38 billion to expand access to public lands, reverse harmful regulatory overreach, and rein in agency budgets. It increases funding for responsible onshore and offshore energy development in oil and gas, exempts farmers and ranchers from burdensome greenhouse gas emissions reporting schemes, and reduces funding for the EPA.

In addition to these wins for the American people, I am proud that my office was able to secure $8 million in community project funding for Indiana's Ninth Congressional District. This funding will support projects, including a riverbank stabilization plan for the Ohio River shoreline in Clarksville, Indiana, and support booster pump stations that are needed to increase water capacity to serve constituents in Bloomington, Monroe County, and the home of Indiana University football and students at Indiana University.

Funding in this package will also provide residents and businesses in Brown County with long, and greatly needed, sewer services and support for

the city of Madison's stormwater mitigation project to reduce flooding and improve water quality.

These investments will support critical infrastructure and local priorities that communities themselves identified, bringing improvements from shoreline protection, to water systems, to supporting economic development that will directly benefit residents across the Ninth District.

Together, these bills reflect a disciplined approach to governing by investing in community priorities, cutting unnecessary spending, and reducing good governance.

Turning next to H.R. 4593, the SHOWER Act, this is a simple bill with a simple goal: end the regulatory whiplash and return consumer choice and common sense to a basic household product. A showerhead should not require extensive regulation. Yet, under the Obama and Biden administrations, bureaucrats redefined a clear term to advance an ideological agenda creating confusion for manufacturers and frustration for consumers.

This was the status quo under the leadership of Democrats--regulate everything in our lives right down to our showerheads. It is incredible if you think about it. This may seem like a ridiculous bill to be considering by our Democrat counterparts. Believe me, it is ridiculous that their policies would require legislation to prevent this kind of government intrusion, but here we are.

The Biden administration regulated every nozzle in every American home individually, reducing water pressure and frustrating homeowners, all while increasing costs for compliance. Ending this rule will permanently save Americans billions of dollars, reduce regulatory bloat, and restore a workable standard.

The Department of Energy estimates that eliminating this rule, along with dozens of related inflationary standards, will save consumers $11 billion and will cut more than 125,000 words from the Code of Federal Regulations.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I turn to H.R. 5184, the Affordable HOMES Act, which I was proud to author with Congressman Mike Flood. This bill addresses a real problem in the housing market, one that affects our most vulnerable homebuyers. It reduces the upfront costs of buying a home, making it easier for Americans to achieve the dream of homeownership. The Affordable HOMES Act restores clarity by placing manufactured housing standards back under the Office of Housing and Urban Development where they belong and eliminating duplicative regulatory authority by the Department of Energy.

It overturns a 2022 Biden administration rule that increased manufactured housing costs, again, without regard for what consumers want or how the market actually works prioritizing energy efficiency under the Green New Deal and directly contributing to the housing affordability issues we see today.

The objective here is clarity so manufacturers can build more homes and families can afford them.

Mr. Speaker, this rule moves legislation that reflects fiscal discipline, regulatory sanity, consumer choice, and a commitment to affordability and growth. I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bills.

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

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

I am not sure if the gentleman from Massachusetts heard my opening, but this is about housing. We literally have a bill called the Affordable HOMES Act, and it addresses the cost of housing.

He also commented that we are only appropriating and considering our appropriations bills yet today, but we weren't the ones who shut down the government for 41 days, preventing us from doing our appropriations work. They did this. The Democrats shut down the government to fight for taxpayer-funded healthcare subsidies that would go to the wealthiest ObamaCare enrollees across the Nation.

Think about that, Mr. Speaker. They shut down the functioning of the government, preventing us from appropriating on the very good things that we talked about in the opening comments, meaning millionaires would be eligible to receive tens of thousands of dollars of taxpayer- funded subsidies for their ObamaCare plans. This would give $350 billion in taxpayer bailouts not to the American people, but to big health insurance companies, all while they are receiving record profits.

This incentivizes bad actors to manipulate individuals to sign up for coverage through the ACA marketplace, oftentimes without people even realizing that they had been enrolled.

This is government waste, fraud, and abuse at its worst, and I am proud the House Republicans stood up against that.

The gentleman from Massachusetts also referenced the SHOWER Act that we have here today. I would just like to say that I will stand up here every day of every week to restore freedom of choice and freedom of movement back to the American people.

You have to start somewhere, Mr. Speaker, from electric vehicle mandates to prohibitions on gas stoves and heaters. Showerhead efficiency and efficiency standards in affordable homes and manufactured housing will cause the cost of homeownership to go up and void American Dream opportunities for millions of Americans, but that is business as usual with Democrats in Congress. Closing businesses and demanding quarantine is Big Brother knows best, and that is what the Democrats are best at.

House Republicans are going to fight back to restore that personal choice, all while ensuring fiscal responsibility.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I remind my colleague on the other side of the aisle that House Republicans did pass a funding mechanism out of the House of Representatives to the Senate, and because of the 60-vote rule in the Senate we did need the help of Democrats in the Senate to fund the government. They held out, again, for the purpose of funding taxpayer- funded healthcare subsidies to benefit the wealthiest ObamaCare enrollees in the Nation and fat cat insurance companies.

I would also note that much of what the gentleman has been referring to, the deflection is like a magic trick. You can say words, just like he accused me of saying many words, but the facts outweigh the deflection, which is that it took much of 2025 to rid ourselves of the sleepy Joe, America last, Biden economic hangover, but Republicans in Congress and President Trump have delivered. America is now reaching new milestones under Republican leadership, turning the tide back to American greatness.

Let's just look at the economy. Quarter three GDP growth was a roaring 4.3 percent, the fastest growth in years. The deficit is being addressed. The Federal Government's cumulative deficit for fiscal year 2026 at the end of November was 19 percent lower than the same time last year. Core inflation is at 2.6 percent, the lowest we have seen in 4 years.

Rents are falling month after month, and shelter inflation is at a 4- year low. Gas prices are down to their lowest levels in 4 years. Stocks were at near highs by the end of the year, with the S&P climbing by 17 percent in 2025.

All of this occurred before the gains of the Working Families Tax Cut Act are realized, and we are just getting started.

It will take us a while to recover from the years of inflationary policies of the Biden administration, but the facts show that House Republicans under President Trump's leadership are delivering on promises to reduce costs for American families.

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

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

Let's just review some of the wins in the Working Families Tax Cut Act because taxpayers are expected to take home an additional $91 billion in refunds and keep an additional $30 billion in their paychecks from reduced withholdings.

Taxpayers are set to continue to receive support in tax years to come through a double standard deduction and lower tax rates, making the 2017 tax cuts permanent, an increase in the standard deduction by up to $1,500 per family in 2025, no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, no tax on Social Security, a boost to the child tax credit of $2,200 while indexing its value to inflation, expanding access to childcare and paid leave tax credit permanently, expanding the 529 savings accounts to help families choose education that best fits their needs, and expanded health savings accounts so American families can control their own healthcare. That doesn't sound like benefits to millionaires and billionaires. It sounds like benefits to hardworking American families.

Also, I note that the subsidies that the gentleman from Massachusetts so wants to support, the American people would not see a dime of that. It would go directly to insurance companies who, again, are seeing record profits.

The one thing we can do is continue to support health savings accounts, continue the Trump-era tax cuts from 2017, making them permanent, and continue to promote the tax provisions in the Working Families Tax Cut Act that received no Democratic support, by the way, that really will help American families.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Taylor).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Utah (Ms. Maloy).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Alford).

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

Mr. Speaker, this rule is very straightforward. We are here to cut burdensome red tape and regulatory overreach that leads to higher energy costs for Americans. Commonsense reforms like these are simple and long overdue.

We are also here to move an appropriations package that provides critical funding and returns us to more responsible spending levels while delivering for the American people.

One thing we have noted is that there is fraud in government programs, including in Medicaid and SNAP. Republicans have sounded the clarion call to try to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse, while Democrats want to minimize it.

We have known about it for decades, even when we went after some of the waste, fraud, and abuse in ObamaCare, and guess what. After we passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the CBO stated that healthcare premiums would go down as a result of our work.

We went after Medicaid fraud, especially involving illegal immigrants. By the way, a Federal court recently ordered officials to turn over Medicaid information to ICE enforcement. If illegal immigrants weren't accessing Medicaid on Democrats' watch, as they tirelessly asserted, then why would a Federal court provide such an order?

We went after waste, fraud, and abuse through our rescissions package, and once again, Democrats refused to acknowledge that that premise ever existed.

Mr. Speaker, we are cutting out waste, fraud, and abuse. We are becoming fiscally responsible. We are putting the American family first by reducing burdensome regulations that increase costs.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy) for the opportunity to speak today, and I think 4 minutes will turn out to be an appropriate amount of time.

My colleague on the other side talked about the nature of things being deadly. I would like to talk about that.

On April 17, less than 1 month ago, at 11:56 in the morning, a shooter carrying a gun walked onto the campus of Florida State University and began to shoot students and adults. It was a gun crime that we would all agree was horrific.

Mr. Speaker, I am new in this place. I only got elected here a month ago. What I will tell you of my observation of my first 4 weeks of being here is I hear a lot of canned speeches that don't actually address the bills and issues that the American people have sent us here to work on. I think it is why we may be held, to some degree, in such low regard.

During this shooting at 11:56 on April 17, seven people were shot. Fortunately, five were not killed. We only know one of them. She was a graduate student. The other names have not been released. In that shooting, two were killed.

Robert Morales was 57 years old and a dining coordinator at Florida State. Tiru Chabba was a vice president at the food service company at Florida State.

Why do I tell this story? Law enforcement at Florida State did everything right. They rushed to the scene. They subdued the shooter. Mr. Speaker, do you know how long it took them to do that? It took them 4 minutes, the amount of time that I will speak here today. In those 4 minutes, with law enforcement doing everything, seven people were shot, and two were killed.

H.R. 2243 would say that if any one of them were a retired or an off- duty law enforcement officer, they could have protected themselves.

When these horrific things happen, the fact of the matter is that it will take law enforcement time to get there. Mr. Speaker, the only way for you to defend yourself is for you to do it.

I am not saying that, had that bill passed, these seven people wouldn't have been shot. I don't know if there was retired law enforcement there. I don't know that any of these people were that.

I know that when shooters consider the places that they are going to go, one of the things they think about is what might be the response. When we tell people who have spent their entire careers and who are trained--not just anyone but someone who for their entire career gave themselves selflessly to protect us all, when we tell that person because they are off-duty, because they are retired, all of that service is no longer useful, we needlessly put people at risk.

I don't want another shooting like we had at Florida State. God forbid, if there ever is another one, I want people there to respond. I am grateful to the law enforcement officers who took longer to get there than my speech will take, but I worry about what will happen next time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Bacon for bringing this bill forward. I thank Representative Roy for giving me the opportunity to speak. We were told we should stand up for our citizens in this process. When we stand up to keep them safe, that is exactly what we are doing.