Protecting Domestic Mining Act of 2025

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

Mr. Speaker, how long should the American people have to wait for our prices to come down? Republicans promised that prices would come down on day one. That was 589 days ago, coming up on 2 years.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my Republican colleagues again: How much longer do we all have to wait? Are they going to tell us, or is it a big surprise? Is it another week, another month, another President?

Mr. Speaker, when are my Republican colleagues going to take responsibility for the fact that they are in charge of everything? Republicans control the House, the Senate, and the executive branch. Hell, Republicans even control the Supreme Court.

Mr. Speaker, because of Republican policies, the affordability crisis in the United States of America is getting worse. It is getting worse, so how long until they acknowledge that their stupid tariffs and their illegal war with Iran are driving up prices and making life harder for people?

Mr. Speaker, how long until the Epstein files are fully released? Some of us still haven't forgotten about that one or the fact that the files remain hidden and that Trump's involvement is being covered up despite congressional laws to the contrary.

How long does America have to wait until Republicans stop blaming everybody else and acknowledge that they have failed? I, for one, am sick of the gaslighting and the projection. I am sick of the broken promises. I am sick of the lies. I am sick of the corruption, the grift, and the greed. The people who I represent are sick of it, too.

Mr. Speaker, I do a farm tour every year. I represent a lot of rural communities and hundreds and hundreds of small- and medium-sized family farms that have been on the same land for generations. I heard a story about one farmer who is being asked to pay an extra $25,000 for a single piece of essential equipment because of Trump's tariffs. On top of that, the price of diesel is ruining their livelihood.

That is what this administration is doing to rural America, to small towns, and to the family farms that I represent. This President and this Republican Congress are destroying them. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle are destroying them.

It is just as bad for consumers because Trump's tariffs, trade wars, and higher gas prices are getting passed along to us, as well. Gas is still over $4 a gallon. Ground beef is up 9 percent. Tomatoes and apples are up over 10 percent. Turkey is up 8 percent. Fish is up almost 8 percent. Cars are more expensive. Clothes are more expensive. Utility bills are more expensive. Everything is more expensive.

Inflation is killing people, and this Republican Congress has a bunch of bills today which will do nothing, nothing, nothing to lower prices.

I am going to talk about those bills in a second, but first let me say: Do you know who is not getting destroyed, Mr. Speaker? It is the rich, the powerful, and the well-connected. Those people who hang out in Mar-a-Lago are not getting destroyed. They are doing better than ever.

The multimillionaires and the billionaires are doing great, thanks to all the tax breaks that they got. Big Oil, Big Ag, and Big Tech get massive giveaways from Republicans. Some of those giveaways are in the bills we are considering today, one of which is a giveaway to the mining industry, and I am sure their lobbyists will get a nice, big bonus for getting that one across the finish line.

It is really gross. It is really gross. The rich and the powerful are doing better than ever while everyone else is seeing double-digit price increases, but don't bother trying to get Republicans to do anything about it. Let's look at their priorities so far this Congress.

Here is what they have been doing while gas is $4 a gallon. Let's see what they have been doing. They have been pretending to rename the Gulf of Mexico, pretending to rename Lake Ontario, pretending to rename The Kennedy Center, introducing a bill to put Donald Trump on Mount Rushmore, introducing a bill to make his birthday a national holiday, introducing a bill to put him on the $100 bill, introducing a bill to name Dulles International Airport after him, and introducing a bill to name the Washington Metro after him. I mean, you can't make this stuff up.

These are actual bills that Republicans have introduced; and let us not forget letting the President pilfer taxpayer money to build a tacky ballroom, a stupid arch, and fix the airplane that Qatar bribed--I am sorry, excuse me, donated to him.

That is the focus of this Republican Congress. That is what this Republican Congress is obsessed with: worshipping Donald Trump, while you stress out about how you are going to pay your mortgage or your kid's tuition or your parents' medical bills.

So, I mean, while they worship Donald Trump, the American people have to struggle with how they are going to make ends meet. And they are not getting any help from anything that is going on in this Chamber.

The big Republican push this week is repassing a nonbinding resolution that condemns socialism. They already passed it, and it already does nothing. So I am not sure why they need to pass it again, but that is their big, important bill this week. You just heard it from the chairwoman of the Rules Committee.

What is their definition of ``socialism,'' you ask? What exactly are they condemning? I actually asked Republicans last time around in the Rules

Committee to define what they are condemning. To define socialism if you will. You all might be shocked. Social Security? Republicans condemn that as socialism. Medicare? That is socialism. Medicaid? That is socialism. Public schools? That is socialism. Food safety inspections? That is socialism. National parks? That is socialism. Public transit? You guessed it. You guessed it.

They must really think Americans are stupid. This is the same old Red Scare bs. By their definition, anyone in the United States who supports Medicaid is a socialist sympathizer. I mean, is Joe McCarthy coming back from the dead?

This is insane. It is literally crazy that this is the garbage that we are talking about while people are seeing their costs going through the roof. People can't afford to make ends meet, and this is what this Congress is focused on right now? I mean, come on.

While we are on the topic of condemning political ideology that we disagree with, let me ask: Where is their condemnation of fascism? I mean, the Trump administration weaponizes the government to silence opposition. It attacks the free press, wants to invade our allies, shoots innocent people in the streets, dehumanizes immigrants by saying that they ``poison the blood of our country,'' calls political opponents ``the enemy from within,'' and let's not forget they tried to overturn a free and fair election in 2020. Is that not fascism? Where is their condemnation of that? Silence. Silence. Nothing.

Mr. Speaker, I don't envy the gentlewoman's task today. She has to defend a pretty lousy agenda, and I think she knows it. But I just wish we could get some acknowledgment from the other side that things are not all fine and well in America right now.

Prices are up. Inflation is up. Bills are higher. Life is harder, and it is because of this President's policies. Instead of acknowledging it, it is like Republicans are living in an alternative reality. I mean, it is like what happened to the Republican Party? It doesn't exist anymore. It is like a cult.

We do have an affordability crisis. That is just a fact. Instead of working with us to address it, Republicans are pretending like it doesn't exist. Instead, we get more culture war nonsense and more giveaways to special interests.

But November is coming soon. Mr. Speaker, November is coming very soon, and I think my Republican colleagues are getting desperate. I think they know that the jig is up. I think they know that the American people are about to hold them accountable for all of their broken promises. I think that is why you are seeing this last-ditch attempt to throw the kitchen sink of culture war issues at the wall to see what sticks.

This is a lousy, awful, rotten rule. And by the way, it is totally closed. Nobody can offer any amendments to anything in this rule. It may even fail because we had a bipartisan vote yesterday in the Rules Committee against this rule, so we will see what happens on the floor. But, come on, people are hurting.

I would say to my Republican friends: Your constituents are hurting. They want us to do something to help them. They don't want this. They don't want this. They want something real. So if you can give tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires and you can bail out the Mar-a- Lago class, how about helping the average person, the hardworking men and women who are trying to make ends meet. That is what they want. That is what they expect.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentlewoman from North Carolina's explanation, and I know that those are the Republican talking points, but I have got news for you. Nobody is buying it.

I mean, I don't know whether my friend was home talking to her constituents over the break, but I was home talking to my constituents. I was in other States talking to voters, as well, and do you know what? Life has gotten harder for them. Prices of everything are through the roof. And to the extent that any working person got a small tax cut while the rich got these big tax cuts, millionaires and billionaires got all these big tax cuts, to the extent that they got that, any little tax break they received has been totally erased by the cost of living and by high gas prices because of this illegal, reckless war.

By the way, wouldn't you think that Congress would want to exercise its constitutional prerogatives and actually debate the war in Iran and actually vote whether to authorize it or not? We have been forced to try to bring privileged resolutions to the floor to try to get any kind of a debate on this. There should be hearings. There should be a full vote on whether to authorize this and whether or not people want to go on record as saying we are going to spend over $100 billion on this stupid, reckless war in Iran. By the way, that resulted in the Strait of Hormuz being closed, which was open before the war began. We are going to spend the money on that, but we are not going to spend it on helping alleviate the high cost of living on people in this country.

This Congress is the least productive Congress in history. This has been a total failure, a total failure.

I would just encourage my Republican colleagues, don't take my word for it. Look at every public opinion poll, including those coming out by FOX News and rightwing influencers. They will tell you: Nobody is buying it.

One of the things that I have heard over and over again during the August work period was that the American people are rightfully outraged that an out-of-control AI data center buildup is wreaking havoc on their communities. Data centers are driving up utility costs and polluting water supplies, all while Big Tech reaps record profits. Yet, now with November on the horizon, some House Republicans are acting as if they did not turbocharge the data center buildup.

I mean, a year ago, Republicans were bragging about giving tax breaks to Big Tech in order to build data centers across rural America. You can check it out yourselves. It is section 70421 of the big, ugly bill.

According to the Republican chairman of the tax writing committee, this provision would: significantly reduce barriers for large-scale, capital-intensive projects in rural areas, most notably, hyperscale data centers. That is the Republicans.

That provision alone cost the American taxpayers $40 billion. That is money that is going to Big Tech to build unpopular data centers instead of lowering the cost of healthcare and housing or groceries.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article titled, ``Big, Beautiful Success Story: Rural America Rebound on the Horizon with New Opportunity Zone Incentives.''

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

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

Let me just say to my friend, the chair of the Rules Committee: You can't fool people. You just can't. I mean, people go to the supermarket. They have to pay their utility bills. They have to pay their rent. People are trying to see where they can afford a home.

I mean, they know what the reality is. To somehow say they are being beautiful, I mean, come on. That is ludicrous. That is assuming that people don't believe their real-life experiences every day.

She talks about the most productive Congress. I mean, 104 laws were passed in this Republican Congress. When the Democrats were last in charge, we passed 365 laws.

The issue is what do these laws do. We passed bills to try to expand healthcare for people. We passed bills to try to make sure that children had access to Head Start and to daycare. We passed bills to actually protect our environment. We passed bills to try to keep the world out of war. That is a big contrast to what we are seeing in this Republican Congress.

I would just say this: What Donald Trump has done with the acquiescence of the Republican majority is they have added a new tax on average people, close to $4,000. There is a $4,000 Trump tax on almost every family in this country. The people who don't feel it are the ones who benefited from the trillions of dollars in tax cuts given to millionaires and billionaires and big corporations.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent also to include in the Record an article from Politico titled, ``Amazon's tax bill plunges after GOP tax cuts.''

Mr. Speaker, I am going to also urge that we defeat the previous question. If we do, I will offer an amendment to the rule to provide for consideration of H.R. 738, the Universal Right To Vote By Mail Act, which would ensure that all eligible voters in America have the option to vote by mail.

Mr. Speaker, President Trump has issued an executive order to undermine the credibility of our elections and to make it harder or even impossible for millions of Americans to vote by mail. We learned today from a whistleblower that Trump officials are defying court orders and pushing ahead with these unconstitutional plans.

Mr. Speaker, let me remind you, President Trump personally loves voting by mail. He voted by mail in Florida as recently as 2 weeks ago. To everyone listening, Trump wants to vote by mail, but he doesn't want you to be able to do so.

Voting by mail has been proven to increase turnout and reduce barriers to voting, such as bad weather, illness, disability, and long lines. We should expand mail-in voting to make it easier for Americans to participate in our democracy, which is what this bill would do.

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.

I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Salinas) to discuss our proposal.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert into the Record an article from the Associated Press titled: ``US consumer confidence falls to lowest level in 7 months with gas stuck above $4''.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert into the Record an article from NBC titled: ``How Trump's economic policies are widening America's wealth gap''.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert into the Record an article from CNN titled: ``Trump's tariffs are bigger than his tax cuts for most Americans''.

I say to the gentlewoman that I appreciate her reciting the RNC's talking points, and I would encourage her to keep on reciting them and bring that message home, to go home and tell the American people that things are great, that things are unbelievably wonderful, and that you should thank the Republicans in Congress and Donald Trump for raising the prices on everything.

Go home and sell that message to the American people. I will tell you, Mr. Speaker, we won't have to do anything.

The bottom line is that things aren't good for people. As I said, there is a Trump tax of $4,000 on average Americans. That is what they have to pay in additional costs for everything, from rent to healthcare to groceries to you name it. That is the Trump tax.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Kamlager-Dove).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Stansbury).

Mr. Speaker, can I inquire of the gentlewoman how many more speakers she has on her side? We haven't seen any other than her. I am just curious.

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

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

Let me, first of all, respond to something the gentlewoman from North Carolina said about Republicans trying to protect our children. I would just ask, where the hell are the Epstein files? We have forced resolutions on this floor to be passed, to demand a release of these files.

Congressman Massie came to the floor. Again, he has another resolution. Still, we have no compliance with the law. We know that this administration is up to their eyeballs in the Epstein files. When is that going to happen? When is that going to be released? I mean, talk about protecting children.

Mr. Speaker, you know when Republicans send us home this week, what exactly will be cheaper? Will groceries cost less? Will rent go down? Will anybody's electric bill shrink? Will health insurance premiums come down? The answer is no. Not one damn thing on the agenda this week will address the affordability crisis. Nothing.

Congress will have condemned socialism again. Mission accomplished, I guess. You know that tells you everything about the priorities of this Republican majority. Whenever the conversation gets uncomfortable, they change the subject.

Why are groceries so expensive? Socialism. Why are healthcare costs so expensive? They showed socialism. Why did Trump start another new war in the Middle East? You must be a Socialist for asking the question. When are you going to release the Epstein files? When is that going to happen? Socialism, socialism, socialism. It is literally insane. It is Trump derangement syndrome.

Meanwhile, the President's big win this week is pretending to rename Lake Ontario after getting into a trade war with our closest ally and neighbor. This is nuts. This Chamber ceases to be a serious body when we don't call this stuff out and when we don't actually bring bills to the floor that address the real needs of the American people.

The American people are not stupid. They know who is focused on listening to their problems and who is focused on playing political games.

We should be working to lower costs, period. Contrary to what Trump says, affordability is not a made-up word, and it does have a definition. People cannot afford to pay everyday expenses. They can't afford their groceries. They can't afford their rent. They can't afford to fill their gas tank up. They want lower healthcare costs. They want lower housing costs. They want lower energy costs. They want lower grocery bills.

They want an end to the corporate giveaways and tax loopholes that let big companies jack up prices and gouge consumers. You know, they want an end to giving these corporations the ability to cheat on their taxes and to avoid accountability.

That is what people want us to do, not fight absurd culture wars and debate far-right fringe garbage. If our Republican colleagues want to have another debate about socialism, fine, let's have it. Waste more time passing more nonbinding resolutions. At the end of the day, people are going to vote based on their bank accounts, pocketbooks, grocery bills, and gas prices.

People look at life through their kitchen window. They are tired of all of this bs that is being talked about in this Chamber. They are sick of a Congress that debates trivial issues passionately but important ones not at all. They want to know when we are going to care about them. They are sick and tired of a Congress that gives tax breaks to entities, that gives big donations to political parties and political candidates. They want to know when they come first.

My friends, you have failed miserably to deliver on your promise to make life more affordable for people. People are counting on us. They want us to do better. You have a chance. We will work in a bipartisan way to try to deal with some of these high costs the people are faced with right now.

No, we come back after a recess, and this is what we are dealing with. This is garbage. This is a waste of time. This is an insult to this Chamber. It is an insult to the American people. They will remember in November.

Vote ``no'' on this rule.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1499, I call up the bill (H.R. 1501) to amend the FAST Act to include certain mineral production activities as a covered project, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 1501.

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

I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1501, the Protecting Domestic Mining Act of 2025, which extends FAST-41 eligibility to mining and mineral processing projects.

I thank my colleague Representative Jefferson Shreve for introducing this important piece of legislation, which will bring much-needed efficiency and transparency to our domestic mining permitting process.

On average, it takes 19 years to bring a new mine into operation in the United States. Permitting delays drive up costs, halt economic growth, stifle innovation, and increase our reliance on foreign adversaries.

Since taking office, President Trump has moved swiftly to set America on a path to mineral dominance. President Trump's March 2025 Executive Order 14241 entitled: ``Immediate Measures to Increase American Mineral Production'' identified mining as a priority for national security and directed the Permitting Council to publish additional mining projects to its FAST-41 dashboard.

Under this administration, the Permitting Council has published 60 additional mining projects on the FAST-41 dashboard. Mr. Speaker, 22 mining projects and counting have completed the Federal permitting process under the dashboard. I will say, yesterday that was 21. They just completed another project this morning.

This impressive record stands in stark contrast to the Biden administration, which over 4 years, did not complete a single Federal permitting process for a mining project through FAST-41.

Permitting efficiency is crucial to building critical infrastructure projects. Extending FAST-41 eligibility to mining projects would help meet our Nation's increased demand for energy and mineral resources, and it would provide greater certainty for the domestic mining industry.

It is not enough to just mine here at home. Our country also needs mineral processing capabilities to secure our domestic mineral supply chain. Crucially, this bill extends FAST-41 eligibility to both mining and mineral processing projects. We must have a comprehensive mineral strategy that engages and bolsters the entire supply chain. Developing domestic processing capabilities encourages the onshoring of industrial sectors and strengthens domestic supply chains from mining to manufacturing.

H.R. 1501 would also prohibit any future administration from finalizing or implementing the Biden-era proposed rule to narrow FAST- 41 coverage to only critical mineral mining projects. Narrowing FAST-41 eligibility in this manner would further increase our country's dependence on foreign nations and adversaries for mineral production.

The U.S. Geological Survey annually publishes the ``Mineral Commodity Summaries'' that provide astonishing data on our net import reliance of certain minerals. The report, which is illustrated behind me, highlights our Nation's overwhelming reliance on foreign sources of minerals, including from adversarial nations. If you look at this list, and I know the print is small, the major supplier for most of these critical minerals is China.

Mr. Speaker, we need these minerals to build a better future. We have the safest, most sophisticated, efficient, and environmentally friendly mining technology in the world, and we also have the workforce to match it. The United States should be leading the world's mineral supply chain.

Representative Shreve's legislation is an important step in strengthening domestic production, securing supply chains, and ensuring that America leads the way.

I thank Representative Shreve again for his work on this legislation. I urge all my colleagues to support the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

I would say that my colleague just made the case for why we need this bill. As I have testified, the Trump administration has 60 projects on the dashboard. They have completed 22 projects. The previous administration completed zero projects under FAST-41. Both administrations had access to use the FAST-41 process, but some administrations choose not to use the process.

These mining projects now take an average of 19 years to permit. That is down from 29 to 30 years just a few years ago because we have seen projects permitted more quickly under this administration.

Our need for critical minerals and mining spans administrations. We need certainty in the process so that we can access the supplies of ore that we have here in the United States to meet our own demands. If we start playing political permitting ping-pong from one administration to the next, that gives no certainty to investors in America to use our own materials. That is exactly why we need to codify this, so that it gives everybody a fair shot to use the process.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Shreve), the lead sponsor of this legislation.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I will, again, point out no Tribal consultation and no environmental laws are waived. This is just a process to fast-track permitting.

Also, I point out that when the ranking member talked about any old sand or gravel mine, that sand and gravel--gravel and then sand are the two main ingredients in concrete with Portland cement being the third, which is another product that we rely on about 20 percent of imports.

Concrete is the main ingredient in housing and in public infrastructure. The cost of concrete affects the cost of housing and public infrastructure projects. It affects Americans. If we want to address high costs, we should be opening more of these sand and gravel mines and producing more Portland cement here so that we can have more supply and lower the costs here at home.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Stauber), who is the chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg).

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the following letters of support from the American Exploration & Mining Association, Essential Minerals Association, National Association of Manufacturers, and National Mining Association.

American Exploration &

Mining Association,

Spokane Valley, WA, August 31, 2026.

Re Support for the Protecting Domestic Mining Act (H.R.

1501).

Hon. Mike Johnson,

Speaker, House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Hon. Hakeem Jeffries,

Minority Leader, House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Speaker Johnson and Leader Jeffries: The American

Exploration & Mining Association (AEMA) very much appreciated

the opportunity to testify on February 24, 2026, before the

House Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources in support

of H.R. 1501, the Protecting Domestic Mining Act, which

codifies mining as a covered sector under Title 41 of the

Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act. We

reiterate our strong support for the legislation and

encourage House passage of H.R. 1501.

AEMA is a 131-year-old, 1,800-member national trade

association representing the minerals industry with members

residing in 46 U.S. states. AEMA is the recognized national

voice for exploration, the junior mining sector, and

maintaining access to public lands, and represents the entire

mining life cycle, from exploration to reclamation and

closure. More than 80 percent of our members are small

businesses or individuals who work for small businesses.

AEMA members experience the challenges associated with the

federal permitting process every day, and they are

significantly impacted by permitting decisions from an array

of federal agencies. They also live and play in the

communities where they work. Mining in America is the most

environmentally responsible mining industry in the world.

Miner safety and workers' rights are the top priority, and

our members take great pride in responsibly producing the

minerals and metals America needs.

A mantra that is often repeated for many sectors of our

economy, including mining, is the need for certainty. It is

the uncertainty created by policies and debates over the past

several decades that has caused mining investment to flee

this country. To attract that investment, companies need to

know what the rules are, that they can have the security of

tenure needed to explore for and develop mining deposits, and

that they can get through the permitting process in a

reasonable timeframe.

As a Nation, we have acknowledged the urgency of increasing

domestic mineral production, strengthening our supply chains,

and reducing our reliance on foreign minerals. Because it

often takes two or three decades to get from exploration to

production, minimizing the land access and permitting

obstacles that impede domestic exploration and mining is

imperative.

Congress and the administration have been very clear that

they want to see all types of mineral projects move more

efficiently through the Federal permitting process so that

they can be developed to meet our essential economic, energy,

and national security needs. The predictability, transparency

and certainty of the FAST-41 process encourages more mines to

move through the process.

According to the U.S. Geological Survey's Mineral Commodity

Summaries 2026, our country's import dependence for key

mineral commodities has skyrocketed over the past three

decades, with the United States now 100 percent import

reliant for 16 mineral commodities and greater than 50

percent import reliant for another 38 commodities. That

import reliance exists even though we

have significant mineral deposits of many of these

commodities within our borders.

This mineral dependency comes with serious consequences.

Most recently, the COVID-19 pandemic, the Russian invasion of

Ukraine, and Chinese dominance of minerals markets have laid

bare the vulnerabilities that exist in critical U.S. supply

chains, including our reliance on imported minerals.

While the United States was pursuing policies over the past

several decades that discouraged mineral exploration and mine

development, China was methodically making strategic global

investments in mining, mineral processing, manufacturing

products like battery components and batteries made from

minerals, and educating mining professionals. Today, China

dominates the world's mineral supplies and products, and the

human resources required to mine and process minerals.

Consequently, the United States now faces a minerals

emergency that poses serious economic and national security

threats.

FAST-41 was enacted to improve the timeliness,

predictability, transparency, and accountability of the

Federal environmental review and authorization processes for

covered infrastructure projects. The Federal Permitting

Improvement Steering Council (FPISC) voted to include mining

as a covered sector in January 2020 and finalized a

rulemaking confirming that decision in January 2021.

It is important to note that the streamlining of the mine-

permitting process does not equate to reducing environmental

protections. In fact, FAST-41 coverage does not predetermine

or affect the outcome of any Federal decision-making process

with respect to a covered project, nor modify any required

environmental review or public or tribal consultation

process.

Beyond mining, current FAST-41 sectors include renewable

and conventional energy production, electricity transmission,

surface transportation, aviation, ports and waterways, water

resource projects, broadband, pipelines, and manufacturing.

It is important to remember that mining stands at the front

of the supply chain for these and nearly every sector of our

economy.

In fact, in its July 2024 critical minerals report, the

Government Accountability Office (GAO) illustrated that

critical minerals are essential to five key sectors:

aerospace, defense, energy, telecommunications and

electronics, and transportation.

The Permitting Council's 2020 vote to include mining as a

covered sector clearly recognized that mining projects almost

always involve the complex permitting processes that FAST-41

was designed to facilitate. It is great that the Permitting

Council voted to include mining in FAST-41 and followed that

vote with a rule. However, that decision can easily be

rescinded by a subsequent rule, as we saw with a proposal

from the prior administration to limit mining's eligibility

for FAST-41.

Enacting H.R. 1501 and codifying mining as a covered sector

under FAST-41 will send a positive signal to the investment

community that the United States is serious about increasing

domestic mineral production. FAST-41 provides a pathway to

reduce permitting inefficiencies while retaining our world-

class environmental protections, and it must be available to

the entire mineral mining sector.

We look forward to working constructively with Congress to

ensure that Made in America includes ``mined in America,''

and sourcing minerals from U.S. mines that use state-of-the-

art environmental protection measures, put a premium on

worker health and safety, and are committed to the

communities in which they operate.

Sincerely,

Mark Compton,

Executive Director.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Begich).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Kennedy).

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

Mr. Speaker, I would note that Congress has already addressed this issue of foreign ownership through previous legislation, and it has passed well-considered restrictions on Chinese ownership.

The amendment that was offered would create an ambiguous standard that could inadvertently prevent non-Chinese publicly traded companies from mining domestically.

The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, already reviews foreign investments in American businesses to assess any national security risks.

Mr. Speaker, if you support our domestic supply of critical minerals, this bill provides the regulatory certainty necessary to strengthen domestic mineral supply chains. If you support weakening China's global control over minerals, then I would say join us in voting for the Protecting Domestic Mining Act.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Moore).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Owens).

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

Mr. Speaker, in closing, this administration has sent a clear message that we must support our domestic miners and processors.

This legislation isn't about our current administration. There is a bit of illogic in the minority's argument. On one hand, they say: Why do we need this legislation, because the administration already has the authority to do projects under FAST-41. They are exactly right, just as the Biden administration had authority to do projects under FAST-41.

Anything this administration has been doing to permit mining projects, they can still do, whether we pass this bill today or not. This is about the future of mining in our country. This is about giving people certainty that if they go through the process to build a project, they will be able to invest and get a return on that project to supply those critical minerals and other mined products that are important to our country.

It has also been said that the Permitting Council doesn't have the bandwidth to do more projects. The Permitting Council has testified that they are: ``well situated to bring in additional projects and continue to show that FAST-41 works for projects of all shapes and sizes.''

The bottom line is that supporting our mining industry is foundational to our economic and our national security. For the United States to reestablish American leadership in the mining sector, it is crucial that we pass this legislation to secure our mineral supply chains.

I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1501, the Protecting Domestic Mining Act, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

It is our third day back from a 5-week recess. We have 15 days left here in Washington before the election. It should be a time that we are trying to get some real work done, but instead of doing that, instead of doing a single thing to help our constituents who are struggling under skyrocketing costs of groceries, gas, and electricity bills, Republicans are scraping the bottom of the barrel to come up with any bill that their chaotic Conference can find a way to pass, and one of the surest ways, it seems, is to find a way to do another favor for the President's friends and for foreign-owned mining conglomerates.

We could actually use some responsible, balanced mineral policy in this country to meet our needs, but, of course, that is not what we are here to do today.

We could all agree that we have been overreliant on adversaries for critical minerals for too long. As demand for these minerals grows, we should also want to strengthen our domestic and allied supply chains strategically with American security, sustainability, and human rights at the center of those efforts.

Unfortunately, this administration seems to have a different approach. They are throwing billions of taxpayers' dollars at the projects that only seem to benefit themselves. There is a lot of money flying right now in the name of strengthening the mineral supply chain, but when you look beneath the surface, it is going to projects that will not actually help the American people.

We have seen this administration make major investments and backroom deals with mining projects with no transparency about who benefits, about what the national security rationale is, or how these decisions actually reduce our dependence on foreign adversaries.

Who is actually benefiting? The President's sons, Secretary Lutnick's sons, and campaign donors are all profiting off their personal investments and business ventures.

Democrats are asking questions. Unfortunately, we are not getting any help from our friends across the aisle. We are getting stonewalled.

Handing out favors to industry and boosting your children's stock portfolios is not a mineral strategy that helps the American people.

Now this brings us to H.R. 1501. This bill would codify mining and mineral processing as covered sectors under FAST-41. FAST-41, of course, creates an alternative permitting pathway for covered infrastructure projects. It covers 18 specific sectors, including energy production, surface transportation, semiconductors, and more.

The FAST-41 permitting process includes some positive transparency provisions like a centralized public platform that tracks Federal permitting timelines and milestones. Covered projects can also receive additional coordination and resources to help agencies move them through the process more efficiently.

It also places some limits on public input, including for Tribes. It also limits judicial review, and it includes limits on court-ordered protections.

Here is the thing, Mr. Speaker: We have just heard the main rationale for this bill, that we have to make sure critical minerals mining projects and the processing projects for those critical minerals are eligible for FAST-41. They made it sound as if today's bill would finally make that possible.

Well, I have a news flash for everyone. Mining is already a covered sector under a regulation adopted during the first Trump administration. Mineral processing projects are also allowed on FAST-41 as manufacturing, so we have an advertised solution here to a problem that does not exist.

What is this bill all about? That is the other half of the bill, the part that would potentially tie the hands of this and future administrations from using FAST-41 in a smart and targeted way that would focus on actual critical minerals projects that were in our national interest, that were all about our national competitiveness.

I will explain. The Permitting Council, which implements FAST-41, has limited resources. Its job is to provide additional coordination and attention to projects that meet the statutory requirements of FAST-41 coverage. Under this bill, every single mining project could be eligible for that treatment, regardless of whether it advances our national interests, our strategic mineral needs, et cetera. FAST-41 Permitting Council is required to put all eligible projects forward even though they have limited resources.

The Biden administration began considering a regulatory change to limit coverage to just critical minerals. That is what this bill is all about. H.R. 1501 would block that change from ever taking effect. That regulation was not finalized. It is not being implemented, but this bill would preemptively block anything like that from ever taking effect.

Under this bill, a gold mine with no connection to our national security could receive FAST-41 treatment. The same would apply to a mine controlled by a foreign adversary or a mine that plans to ship its minerals straight to China for processing, with no benefit to the American supply chain.

Under this bill, the Permitting Council would be required to devote precious time and resources to expedite these projects, to the detriment of real critical minerals projects, and it may prevent a future administration from ever narrowing the scope. How does that make America more secure? The answer is it doesn't.

Democrats have offered straightforward solutions. We have proposed targeted FAST-41 coverage for projects involving critical minerals, projects that actually strengthen key supply chains essential to our national security and our economic resilience.

We also proposed preventing companies owned or controlled by our foreign adversaries from receiving this fast-track status. These amendments were rejected by Republicans in committee and blocked from consideration on the floor here today.

This should not be a partisan issue. We have the opportunity to build a mineral supply chain that is secure, resilient, and independent of our foreign adversaries. To achieve that, we should be making strategic investments, not handing out blanket favors.

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

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

The chairman has touted the number of projects added to FAST-41 under the Trump administration. Therein lies the problem. Many of those projects are not critical minerals.

The Permitting Council only has so much budget, only so many resources

in order to administer this FAST-41 process. When you throw the door wide open to any old sand, gravel, gold mining project, when you invite in projects that might just have investments from the President's sons or Secretary Lutnick's family or your Mar-a-Lago oligarch pals, when the door is widened in that way and there is no new resources for the Permitting Council, then actual critical minerals projects and projects that are actually important to our competitiveness and our national security suffer. They go more slowly. They get less attention.

The Chair is actually making our point. We need to allow prioritization and focus so that this FAST-41 process can actually work as it was intended to work.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Mrs. Grijalva).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Arizona.

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

Mr. Speaker, a little blinding flash of the obvious: When it comes to sand and gravel, we are not dependent on China

or any other foreign adversary or any other foreign country. We have a lot of sand and gravel in this country. This is not about critical minerals. This is not about our competitiveness.

It is about sand and gravel which we can mine, as we always have. It is not what FAST-41 was intended to do or intended to benefit. But you just heard it right here on the floor in this debate, Mr. Speaker, that my colleagues on the one hand are selling this bill as urgent to meet our competitive situation with China. On the other hand, they are opening FAST-41 wide open to anything that can be pulled from the ground including sand and gravel. It just makes no sense whatsoever.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hoyle).

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

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

Mr. Speaker, we agree with the gentleman from Utah that we need to be taking seriously our dependence on foreign adversaries when it comes to critical minerals and processing. That is why time and again my Democratic colleagues and I have offered amendments to make sure that when it comes to opening up our public lands--and, in this case, when it comes to opening up the benefits of this fast-tracked FAST-41 process--we are not handing it over to our foreign adversaries.

We have proposed amendments time and again, and those amendments have been opposed by our Republican colleagues. We have yet to hear a good reason why they keep opposing this, nor is there one. The language we have proposed time and again comes from one of their own Republican colleagues, the Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party chairman, Mr. Moolenaar. We have proposed his exact language time and again as a commonsense guardrail to make sure that our public resources and the benefits of this fast-tracking are not simply used to hand a gift to the very foreign adversary we say we are so terribly concerned about.

It keeps getting rejected time and time again, which makes you wonder what this bill is really about. It is definitely not the competitive rivalry with China.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, this argument that we need this legislation to address our dangerous dependency on foreign adversaries for critical minerals continues to ring very hollow. One of the ways that we can avoid being too dependent on foreign adversaries is to develop trading relationships with our allies, none closer to us than Canada.

Canada, for example, is one of our largest mineral trading partners. They exported about $76 billion in minerals to the United States in 2025. If making sure that we are not dependent on adversaries like China was really important to us, I should certainly hear a lot of alarm from my friends across the aisle about the fact that President Trump is starting a trade war with Canada, our neighbor, one of our closest allies and a critical minerals trading partner that makes us less dependent on foreign adversaries. Instead we hear crickets.

He is even trying to rename Lake Ontario to further antagonize this trading partner, and we hear nothing from the other side.

This bill is about many things, but it is certainly not about reducing our dependence on minerals from foreign adversaries.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, this administration has demonstrated that it is all too willing to abuse the tools at its disposal to promote projects that simply line the pockets of members of this administration, their family, and their oligarch pals.

I will give you a few examples. Not too long ago, the Trump administration announced that it would invest over a billion dollars and take an equity stake in USA Rare Earth, a mining and manufacturing company. Reporting uncovered that USA Rare Earth hired Cantor Fitzgerald, a firm chaired by Brandon Lutnick, the son of Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. How about that coincidence?

Last October, the Trump administration announced equity investments in the mining company Trilogy Metals while simultaneously directing agencies to fast-track permitting for Ambler Road, the controversial project needed to access Trilogy Metals' proposed mine site.

Trilogy Metals' third-largest shareholder is John Alfred Paulson, a Trump MAGA donor and economic adviser. His Trilogy shares increased by $70 million in value after that announcement.

The administration is making a pattern out of picking winners and losers in the mining industry and a suspicious number of those winners have close ties to Donald Trump.

These deals tie taxpayer dollars to corporate balance sheets and incentivize administration officials to prioritize individual corporate interests over the broader public good. To date, there has been no public disclosure of safeguards or procedures to ensure that these ownership stakes do not influence permitting, regulatory enforcement, contracting, and other agency decisions relating to these mining and minerals projects.

Before we give this administration yet additional power to enrich themselves at the expense of everyday Americans, let's get some answers to some of these questions we have been asking about all this corruption and self-dealing.

We have been talking about whether the administration should prioritize when it comes to doling out the limited capacity of the FAST-41 Permitting Council. If everything is a priority, nothing is.

H.R. 1501 ties this and any future administration's hands from doing any prioritization to make sure that FAST-41 permitting is limited to critical minerals projects.

This does nothing to help lower prices for Americans. It just gives gold mines or even mines owned by our foreign adversaries the same access to FAST-41 streamlining as minerals projects needed for our national or economic security interests.

This ties up limited staff and resources meant to get nationally important projects built faster. It gives this corrupt administration another tool to abuse, to help their buddies get ahead. Let's be clear, even though the Permitting Council is supposed to work with any eligible project that is put forward by a sponsor, we know that that won't stop this administration from pushing to prioritize their favorite projects, which seems to be determined more and more by the President's profits than by the public interest.

This is an administration that has repeatedly put pressure on agencies to do favors for their buddies, whether that is pushing the National Park Service to give part of Yosemite to a private developer or making a call to the Department of Defense to speed up a funding deal for a mining company with ties to the President's son.

Why would this permitting be any different?

To rein in possible abuses, we did offer commonsense amendments to limit fast-track eligibility to critical minerals projects, projects that are by definition actually critical to our national and economic security, but Republicans voted it down in committee and then blocked it from even being considered here on the House floor.

Let's be clear: This legislation is not about what is best for our country. It is about giving one more of the President's favorite industries carte blanche for special treatment.

Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to this bill, and 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 1499 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 have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Committee on Rules met and produced the rule, House Resolution 1499, providing for the House's consideration of four measures: H.R. 1501, H.R. 9436, H. Res. 1490, and

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

Mr. Speaker, in the 119th Congress, the House has been the most aggressive, successful, and productive since the 80th Congress in 1949. Total measures passed by the House are 899. Tax relief was $82 billion across all filers this tax season with 97 percent of all tax filers receiving a tax cut last year, and the 3 percent who didn't were the highest earners in the country. Regulations lifted by Congress are 23.

When you place these three points within historical context, they reveal that this Congress is the most successful and productive since 1949.

Now, obviously, the House cannot control the actions of the Senate. The statistics demonstrated by the House of Representatives this Congress are truly historic. I would put them up against the abysmal record of sleepy Joe Biden and his enablers every day.

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

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

I will continue to talk about the accomplishments of the 119th Congress. House Republicans, so far in the 119th Congress, have passed the Working Families Tax Cut Act, which delivered the largest middle- and working-class tax cuts in U.S. history. That cannot be refuted, Mr. Speaker. It cannot. Anyone who tries to do that is themselves living in an alternate universe.

We expanded 529 education accounts. We saved American farms by allowing farmers to spread tax payments on sales over 4 years if the land continues to be used for agriculture purposes. We doubled the small business expensing limit. We permanently extended the small business deduction. We delivered a $6,000 bonus deduction to seniors on Social Security. We eliminated the tax on auto loan interest for American-made cars. We permanently increased the child tax credit to $2,200. We eliminated the tax on overtime. We eliminated the tax on tips. We created Trump accounts to help children begin saving for their future. We permanently allowed businesses to immediately deduct domestic R&D expenses. We permanently doubled the death tax exemption. We permanently increased the standard deduction. We ended taxation of suppressors, short-barreled rifles, and short-barreled shotguns. We repealed the green corporate welfare subsidies.

Mr. Speaker, we don't have enough time in the time allotted for this rule debate today to list all of the wonderful things that this House of Representatives and this Congress have done to improve the lives of the American people.

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

Mr. Speaker, in order not to allow Americans to be misled by statements being made here on the floor, I am going to continue to list items among the dozens that were in H.R. 1 that could have been stand-alone bills but for efficiency's sake were included in H.R. 1.

We permanently secured our Nation's borders, funded the construction of the border wall, and provided funding for additional Customs officers and Border Patrol agents. However, in addition to that, we passed the Laken Riley Act as a stand-alone to require detention of illegal aliens who commit theft.

The Working Families Tax Cuts included provisions that make illegal immigrants who are convicted of or who have admitted to sex offenses or domestic violence inadmissible and deportable. The Working Families Tax Cuts creates a new criminal offense for operating a vehicle within 100 miles of the southern border while fleeing Border Patrol agents. The Jeremy and Angel Seay and Sergeant Brandon Mendoza Protect Our Communities from DUIs Act makes driving while intoxicated or impaired grounds for deporting an illegal alien.

The Kayla Hamilton Act requires background checks for criminal history or gang affiliation before unaccompanied alien children are placed in American communities.

Not a single illegal alien has been released into the U.S. in 16 months. Four hundred thousand illegals who were charged with and convicted of a crime have been deported. Emergency rooms have reported significant reductions in illegal immigrant visits, freeing up critical resources to better serve American citizens in need of urgent medical care.

Fentanyl trafficking at the southern border has been reduced by 56 percent in FY 2025. The HALT Fentanyl Act permanently schedules fentanyl and fentanyl analogues as schedule I drugs.

More than 146 migrant children have been rescued from sex trafficking and child labor. We hear about this every week on the news.

Another act, the SUPPORT Act, reauthorizes support and treatment programs for opioid use disorders and other substance abuse disorders.

We lowered costs by cutting waste, fraud, and abuse in our country.

We protected children by passing legislation that would end gender- affirming care--gender-affirming care, what a distortion of the American language--for minors, and we banned biological males from girls' and women's sports.

Mr. Speaker, if we have done nothing else, that is a huge accomplishment, but we have done so many other things.

We passed the KIDS Act that protects children online by holding Big Tech accountable and requiring stronger safeguards to protect kids from predators, exploitation, and harmful online contents. Again, we could go on and on, and I will, to correct the record of what we have done in this Congress.

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

Mr. Speaker, we have no more speakers.

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

Mr. Speaker, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are saying we are wasting our time here when we talk about all that we have accomplished in this session of Congress. They especially don't like it when we talk about socialism.

I encourage the American people to go online and look at this manifesto from the Democratic Socialists of America. It is out there for all the world to see. This is an expanded version from the first one that I saw that looked like it was written by a seventh grader. This one really fills out what these people want to do, and it is why we are bringing one measure today, under this rule, to condemn what these people want to do.

It is abhorrent to all Americans. Its goals are repugnant to the principles that form the foundation for American constitutional liberties that benefit all Americans. There is simply no way to reconcile what the DSA envisions for America with the Constitution that protects us all.

For example, the DSA's stated long-term goals, to completely replace the Presidency and the Supreme Court, threaten the foundation of separation of powers and the stability of American democracy.

The DSA seeks to centralize State power. We all know that expanding State control crowds out civil society and individual choice. Even under a ``Democratic'' banner, hyper-centralized authority diminishes opportunities for dissenting views and personal freedoms.

The DSA seeks to abolish national boundaries. Think about that. The chaos we experienced when President Biden allowed millions of illegal immigrants to enter the U.S. will seem like child's play in comparison. We know of the security risks caused by President Biden's open borders. Murderers, child rapists, and other criminals were granted carte blanche to terrorize American communities.

Think about the implications of a permanent absence of borders. We know the financial costs caused by President Biden's open borders. In one sanctuary State alone, emergency housing for illegal immigrants surpassed $1 billion in FY 2025. Providing such services on a permanent, ongoing basis would bankrupt every State.

Let me just quote from a few pages of this manifesto. They want to have ``publicly owned energy and transit infrastructure. Phase out the use of fossil fuels. Reclaim and repair our Earth's resources for all.''

This sounds like free buses in New York that have been promised.

``Feminism for All: Socialist feminism fights for queer liberation and the freedoms for all working-class women.''

``Healthcare for All: Guarantee universal healthcare at no cost to individuals, including complete access to reproductive and gender- affirming care.''

What does that mean, Mr. Speaker? That means abortions at any point in the child's life.

They want housing for all: ``Build new, publicly owned social housing, strictly regulate investment properties, establish universal rent control, and guarantee right to counsel for all tenants.''

Mr. Speaker, this is dangerous. There are people who are going to be in this Congress in the next session who support these programs.

Again, I encourage the American people to look at this manifesto from the DSA. They are called Democratic Socialists of America. That is what they are called. That is what is asked for here, Mr. Speaker.

As I said at the outset of the debate, we have a solid slate of bills contained under this rule. They are substantive, impactful, and address pertinent issues occurring across the Nation like this manifesto.

We can and should pass this rule and each of the underlying bills to continue our work in service to the Nation and to the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the previous question and ``yes'' on the rule.

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

Mr. Speaker, President Trump knows that the only way Republicans can win this midterm election is to lie and cheat. Trump has failed to address the affordability crisis. Now, instead of fighting to lower costs, he is fighting to suppress votes and prevent Americans from holding him and the GOP accountable this November.

Over the past year, the American people have watched as Trump has tried to suppress votes in any way he can. He has pushed for the SAVE America Act, helped undermine the Voting Rights Act, and most recently has urged the courts to restrict mail-in voting, even though the President himself votes by mail.

We all know why. Trump can't stand the fact that he lost the 2020 election. He pushed the big lie, claimed the election was rigged, and without proof, blamed mail-in voting. President Trump can't stand that he lost in 2020. He can't stand the thought of losing again, and that is why he is trying to prevent Americans from voting by mail.

Let me be clear. Our elections are free, fair, and accurate. Take it from my home State of Oregon. We have been an entirely vote-by-mail State for nearly 30 years, and our elections have been safe and secure. Oregon consistently has some of the highest levels of voter turnout in the country, and research has shown that voters from both sides of the aisle vote by mail at similar rates.

The right to vote should not depend on your State, your marital status, your access to a passport, or whether you can make it to a polling place on election day. Every eligible American deserves a fair and accessible way to make their voices heard.

We should be removing barriers to vote, not increasing them. That is why I introduced the Universal Right To Vote by Mail Act.

My bill would give every eligible voter in America the right to vote by mail in Federal elections without requiring a specific excuse. It would also require States to give voters a chance to fix a simple mistake or discrepancy on their ballot before that vote is rejected.

This is not about helping any one party or the other. It is about making sure every eligible American has a fair opportunity to participate in our democracy. President Trump is trying to take that opportunity away. He is attacking vote-by-mail because he is afraid of the results when voters make their voices heard this November.

Congress must reject the attacks on vote-by-mail. I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question and support my Universal Right To Vote by Mail Act so every eligible American can cast their ballot safely, securely, and conveniently.

The answer to Republicans' fears that they will lose the upcoming election is not to make it harder for people to vote, the answer is to earn their votes.