Further Additional Continuing Appropriations and Other Extensions Act, 2025

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I thank the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Fischbach) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, as we speak, prices are going up, inflation is up, groceries are up. I saw eggs for $10 recently. Used car prices are up, other than Teslas. Those seem much cheaper these days for some reason.

Energy prices are up 25 percent in the gentlewoman's home State of Minnesota. Energy prices have increased 25 percent for her constituents thanks to Trump's tariffs that she is supporting by bringing this rule to the floor. Boy, I am just glad she is not my Representative.

Meanwhile, Elon Musk was on Fox Business this morning. He is not talking about food prices or energy prices. He is talking about how he wants to eliminate entitlements. This is the guy that called Social Security a Ponzi scheme and the guy that is laying off people at Social Security offices already. Maybe Elon doesn't know this, but Social Security is not an entitlement. It is a program that people have spent their entire life paying into. Shame on him.

Mr. Speaker, maybe Elon needs to watch the news instead of going on it because what else is going down is consumer confidence. People are waking up to the fact that Trump's trade war is going to hurt them in their pocketbooks. The stock market is going down. People in this country are starting to panic because their retirement accounts are dropping.

Planes are going down. We have had several major accidents and several close calls. We just learned that Elon Musk, the guy whose rocket just exploded in midair this weekend, wants to fire air traffic controllers. Make that make sense.

Republicans are doing nothing about any of it. Trump spent 2 minutes in his 2-hour lecture last week talking about lowering prices. Republicans now bring to the floor this CR, basically a blank check to Trump and Musk, that says keep doing what the President and Musk are doing. We are all fine with it. No way.

My Republican friends want to pretend like this is a clean CR. It is 99 pages, for God's sake. A CR is pretty simple. The government gets funded at the same levels. Calling this CR clean is laughable. This bill cuts healthcare for veterans. Mr. Speaker, $23 billion is ripped away from veterans exposed to burn pits and Agent Orange.

This bill defunds the police. I guess my Republican friends only care about the police when they need their votes because this CR takes money away from the police. What is another word for taking money away? It is defunding.

This CR helps fire thousands of Social Security workers, forcing seniors to wait longer for their benefits that they have earned. That is what House Republicans are trying to jam through on the floor right now. The brazenness that Musk and Trump have when going after Social Security takes my breath away.

They tried to close down a Social Security office in Chairman Tom Cole's district in Oklahoma. That is nuts. He is one of the most senior Republicans in Congress, a Republican, the chairman of the House Committee on Appropriations, and Elon went after his constituents. Chairman Cole was able to stop it.

What about the rest of the country? God help them if their Congressman doesn't run a powerful committee because that means there is nothing to stop Elon Musk from coming after their Social Security.

Republicans are really, really hoping I don't bring up this last part. Guess what they tucked into this rule, hoping nobody would notice? They did this after everyone went home. They slipped in a little clause, letting them escape from ever having to debate or vote on Trump's tariffs. Isn't that clever?

Trump's trade war will result in one of the largest, if not the largest, tax increase on American families ever. This rule gives him the ability to do it without a vote in Congress.

I get it. They are already hiding from their voters, running away from their own townhalls, slipping out the back doors because they are afraid of being held accountable for their own's actions.

Guess what, Mr. Speaker. People don't send us here to hide. They send us here to fight for them, and they send us here to vote.

Democrats are not going to be complicit in voting to screw over America's veterans. We are not going

to be complicit in voting to screw over our senior citizens on Social Security. We are not going to be complicit in taking money away from first responders. We are sure as hell not going to be silent when it comes to this administration's BS and their corruption.

What we are going to do is we are going to show up in our communities. We going to stand up for veterans. We are going to speak up for people on Medicaid and Social Security. We are going to put up one hell of a fight when it comes to the middle-class families who are counting on us to fight for them. I urge a ``no'' vote on this disgraceful rule and a ``no'' vote on the underlying legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman wants to talk about grocery prices? Read the room, man, or better yet, visit a grocery store. Give me a break.

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 1974, a short-term continuing resolution that keeps the government funded through April 11.

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, to discuss our proposal, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum).

Mr. Speaker, that was an awful lot of words from the gentleman to announce that is he is caving and changing his position and finally supporting a CR.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks).

Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman just conceded that this rule would prevent the House from voting on Trump's tariffs, thereby resulting in the biggest tax increase on middle-class families that we have ever seen.

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

Mr. Speaker, this rule contains tariffs, and I don't understand why the gentlewoman supports these tariffs. She represents a district with over 50,000 farmers, the second most of any Member of Congress.

During the last trade war started by Trump, American farmers lost $27 billion in agricultural exports. It is farmers in the gentlewoman's district who are being harmed by these tariffs, so I don't understand why she supports them.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Ramirez).

Mr. Speaker, we are opposed to the tariffs and the tax increase on American families.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Goldman).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez), who is a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), who is the Speaker emerita.

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

Mr. Speaker, if you vote for this rule, then you own the tariffs.

Republicans snuck in a provision that blocks this House from voting on resolutions that could end the tariffs. They know these tariffs will cost families an extra $1,200 a year, and they are scared to vote for them. So instead of letting Congress do its job, they are shutting down debate. They are hiding, and they are shielding themselves from any accountability.

Do you know who is going to feel the pain, Mr. Speaker?

It is working families and small businesses who are already struggling with high costs. It is farmers who are already the victim of retaliatory tariffs.

Meanwhile, the stock market was in a free fall yesterday, and today it is going down again. Retirement accounts have taken a huge hit. Ontario is already hitting us with a 25 percent electricity surcharge hurting families in Minnesota.

In fact, I saw a breaking news story this morning that Trump is now escalating his trade war by doubling tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum. He and his enablers are pushing forward full steam ahead into a possible recession with no regard for the chaos he is causing in this country. That is why House Democrats, led by Representative Meeks, introduced resolutions to end Trump's devastating tariffs.

According to the National Emergencies Act, these resolutions should be fast-tracked for a vote on the House floor. Republicans are using this rule to shut them down. I would love to hear them explain to their constituents why they are standing by while prices are skyrocketing, but Republicans are scared of their constituents too, hiding in their offices instead of holding townhalls.

Let me be perfectly clear. If your Representative votes for this rule, they are voting to ratify the Trump tariffs. They are hoping you won't notice while they let our economy burn.

That is not leadership. That is cowardice. A vote against this CR is not a vote to shut down the government. We have offered a 1-month CR to fund the government while appropriators finish the budget process instead of giving up on everything and handing the reins back to Trump and Musk.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 211 and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members

may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

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

Mr. Speaker, we are here to debate the rule providing for consideration for H.J. Res. 25, H.R. 1156, and the continuing resolution.

The rule provides for H.J. Res. 25 and H.R. 1156 to be considered under a closed rule. One hour of debate for each bill shall be equally divided and controlled by the chair and the ranking member of the Ways and Means Committee, or their designees. The rule provides for a motion to recommit for both bills.

The rule also provides for H.R. 1968 to be considered under a closed rule. One hour of debate shall be equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Appropriations Committee or their designees. The rule provides for one motion to recommit for this bill.

Mr. Speaker, House Republicans want to keep America open for business. I would like to believe nobody in this Chamber wants a government shutdown, and the bill we are considering today would keep the government fully funded through September 30. This will ensure that there are no disruptions to veterans' healthcare services and benefits or to Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid.

It invests in defense personnel with the largest pay raise for junior enlisted troops in over 40 years. It includes funding for the Toxic Exposures Fund to treat veterans who have experienced service-related exposure to toxic substances. This bill fully funds the program that provides key nutrition assistance for mothers, infants, and children and increases funding for the WIC program. It increases funding for the

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

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to take a minute to address one thing out of that entire rant because it is categorically false.

The Community Oriented Policing Services, COPS, program maintains a consistent level under this CR. The only variation in levels reflects the removal of previously enacted FY24 community project funding allocations which are separate from the main programming.

Claims that the COPS program has been defunded to zero are categorically false. Unlike the Democrats, Republicans remain committed to supporting law enforcement and ensuring public safety. I wanted to address that one thing.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Norman), my Rules Committee colleague.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy), my colleague from the Rules Committee.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to remind everyone that the people have spoken. They spoke in November. The Republicans are the majority in the House. The Republicans are the majority in the Senate. They elected President Trump. The people have spoken.

I would like to bring it back to what we are actually talking about today, and that is the rule in front of us. We are discussing the rule and the continuing resolution.

As my colleague from Texas mentioned, there was not a single ``no'' vote from Democrats for the continuing resolution in December. They are standing here today willing to shut down the government not because of anything substantive in the bill but because they believe that as long as they are acting against the Trump administration, against the elected President's and Republicans' agenda, then they must be doing the right thing.

Motivation by blind hatred, that is the Democratic Party that we have before us today.

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

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

This is just another example of how talking points are written before they actually read the bill because this is about a government shutdown, plain and simple. We have to have the rule to pass the CR so that we can avoid a government shutdown.

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

Mr. Speaker, the House Appropriations Committee worked in good faith throughout the FY25 process, and it was the Democrats who weaponized this process, holding up negotiations on demands that were completely unrelated to funding. If my colleagues choose a Democrat shutdown simply because they hate Donald Trump and his administration, then they are showing they have still learned nothing from the results of last year's elections.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, now that we have finished listening to the Democrats' talking points, the same talking points that they use over and over to mislead the American people and demonize Republicans and demonize President Trump, I will actually focus on what we are talking about today and what is actually in front of the body. That is the rule to deal with the CR and two other bills.

Even with the additional funding for veterans and the FAA and families in this bill, it will cost less than last year. It won't be by gutting programs, as my Democratic colleagues have so wrongfully claimed, but by removing projects from the fiscal year 2024 bill so that they are not double funding projects that have already received funds in fiscal year 2024.

My Democratic colleagues must be confused because I certainly would not want to be accused of calling them liars. This bill upholds the responsibility of our veterans and ensures full funding for healthcare services and benefits. It includes the largest pay raise for junior enlisted troops in over 40 years. It supports Federal wildland firefighters. It increases funding for air traffic controller priorities.

It does not cut grants for law enforcement. It does not cut spending on family assistance programs. In fact, it increases spending for WIC by more than $500 million, and it includes an additional $6 billion for the Toxic Exposures Fund to treat veterans who have experienced service-related exposure to toxic substances.

This bill can increase spending on these critical needs by making sure that we are not double funding existing programs. It is really that simple.

Avoiding government shutdowns ensures that the administration can continue to identify waste, fraud, and abuse. It also allows ICE to continue deporting criminal migrants. This clean CR will allow us to focus on one big, beautiful reconciliation bill.

Furthermore, this rule provides a way for us to continue to remove waste, fraud, and abuse right now by extending the time to prosecute those who committed unemployment insurance fraud during the COVID CARES programming.

I would ask my Democratic colleagues to spare us the speeches about President Trump and the Department of Government Efficiency trimming some of the bloated bureaucracy from our Federal departments. They are about to vote against a continuing resolution in the hopes of shutting our

government down and sending every single Federal employee home without a paycheck. Maybe my Democratic colleagues just don't think DOGE is going far enough.

The truth is that there are more than 25,000 Federal employees in the State of Massachusetts whose paycheck will be put on an indefinite hold if the government shuts down. That is what my Democratic colleagues are going to vote for.

My Democratic colleagues keep complaining about how unfair this CR is to the D.C. residents, but there are over 160,000 Federal employees in the District of Columbia. Quite frankly, there are more than there should be. Yet, Democrats are going to make every one of their paychecks go away if my colleagues on the other side of the aisle succeed in shutting the government down.

I thank my colleagues, Mr. Carey, Mr. Cole, and Mr. Smith from Missouri, for introducing these thoughtful pieces of legislation, and I encourage every single one of my colleagues to vote for this nonpartisan continuing resolution to keep our government fully funded and hold fraudsters accountable.

Mr. Speaker, I will make it very clear: A ``no'' vote on this rule is actually a vote to shut down government.

Mr. Speaker, I support the rule and the underlying legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.

So here we are again. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle, who constantly always talk about the need to support a CR to ``keep the lights on'' now find themselves in the curious position of not wanting to have the lights on because they don't like what is happening. So they don't want the lights to be on because you have got people in the executive branch who have taken seriously the election mandate that was given to the President of the United States to end the absurdity of nonstop wasteful spending and the ridiculousness of expenditures like $32,000 for a transgender comic book in Peru.

That is the kind of stuff that makes the American people's heads explode. There are hundreds of these examples. I can sit here and list them. The fact is this stuff is getting exposed in real time. The American people are seeing it, and now my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are trying to run from it.

That is why they don't like this bill. That is why they want to have a shutdown. After all of these years of decrying the possibility of a shutdown, you are seeing all over the news today talk about the possibility of a Schumer shutdown. What you are talking about there are news article after news article such as The Hill, February 11, ``Democrats step up talk about using shutdown as leverage against Donald Trump'': ``A Democratic Senator who requested anonymity . . . said . . . the March 14 deadline may be the best `leverage' they have,'' and The Guardian, February 15, ``Democrats in Congress see potential shutdown as leverage to counter Trump.''

I can insert into the Record dozens of these stories because the fact of the matter is the gig is up. It is much like how the American people were able to see the absolute and rampant corruption of our education system during COVID. When everything was shut down, they were watching their kids and they saw these screens, and they said what on Earth are they being taught? Suddenly the American people saw the reality of our broken education system. They saw the fraud that was perpetrated by Anthony Fauci on the American people in shutting down their way of life.

Now, you have got Democrats who are being exposed for having continuously funded this largess and this bureaucracy that is completely indefensible. The American people are tired of having their tax dollars taken and dollars being borrowed by an endless stream of borrowing by this Congress. Now, you have got a Congress that is willing to work with the President to stop it, to stand up and say this is enough.

What are we putting in place? We are putting in place, oh, the horror, a spending freeze. Oh, can you believe that the Federal Government might need to tighten its belt and have a spending freeze? My colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to bring out these parades of horribles, that somehow this is a massive number of cuts because only in Washington is that a cut. You have got a spending freeze and holding basically spending in check for 2024. We have a bill that, by the way, pulls out earmarks, which are often replete with special wish lists. By the way, that is both sides of the aisle. We have got a bill here that is going to hold spending in check to allow us to do our job for the fiscal year '26 appropriations cycle between now and September.

By the way, it was Republicans who passed 5 appropriations bills off of the House floor last year and 12 appropriations bills out of committee last year. The previous year it was Republicans who passed 7 appropriations bills off the floor and all 12 out of committee. The Democrat-led Senate passed zero.

Do you want to know why we are where we are right now? It is because our Democratic colleagues in the Senate passed zero appropriations bills, not one.

So we came in here, and now Republicans have control of the House, the Senate, and the White House, and now we are trying to get things moving in the right direction, and our Democratic colleagues don't want to have any part of it. We are putting forward a commonsense measure. I understand why some of my conservative flank fiscal conservatives have concerns about a CR. I don't love CRs, but when you can have a CR that extends spending at 2024 levels for the next 6 months and empowers the President to be able to continue to do what they are doing, shining the light on spending restraint, shining the light on waste so that we can do our job and implement that--and, by the way, I will say that to both sides of the aisle. Both sides of the aisle need to take in that information and implement it when we do appropriations this year. We will move spending down, eliminate the waste. We will try to do something about the fact that in 2019 our entire budget was $4.5 trillion, and today it is $7 trillion.

My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have no answer to that besides, oh, magic tax cuts. You could literally confiscate the wealth of the wealthiest 1 percent of America and not dent what we have got in terms of $36 trillion in debt. You would kill jobs and destroy the economy in the process.

That is the only answer my colleagues have to $7 trillion in spending.

The fact of the matter is, this CR is responsible. It is fiscally appropriate. It will leave the lights on so the President and DOGE and Elon and Russ Vought of OMB can do their job, and I hope that my colleagues on this side of the aisle will support the rule.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the sudden religion my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have found on spending restraint and the need to cut spending. I look forward to all the proposals that my colleagues will put forward on reducing significant amounts of spending and waste, fraud, and abuse. I will look for that press conference they will no doubt have some time this week.

I would also note that when we talk about continuing resolutions, what my colleague just failed to mention was the fact that literally every single Democrat voted for the CR that we just had in December, like literally every single Democrat except for one who I think maybe took a ``present'' vote.

The fact of the matter is it has nothing to do with that. The fact of the matter is for those of us who do not like CRs as a general principle, the fact is because Democrats literally wouldn't pass an appropriations bill out of the Senate, we are left doing the cleanup work of trying to figure out how to move forward while we have an administration that isn't at war with its own people when the previous administration was blatantly disregarding the well-being of the American people to have wide-open borders letting fentanyl and letting all manners of evil come into our country leading to the death and destruction of the people that I represent, people like Jocelyn Nungaray who lost her life to the hands of the Tren de Aragua because Joe Biden decided it was more important to let millions of people into this country in violation of our laws endangering the people.

That is why our bill has additional funding for ICE to make sure that we have got the beds to undo the damage that the Biden regime has carried out on the American people. Those are the actual facts. The fact of the matter is, no, you don't want to have a CR to continue the funding under Joe Biden because Joe Biden was at war with the American people.

Now, we have a present administration that is trying to do the job that they sent him there to do: secure the border of the United States; hold back spending; eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse; get this economy going again; get the regulations out of the way of the American people; and do the job they want us to do.

Mr. Speaker, it is really laughable for the listening audience and those watching on TV to hear my good friend, Mr. McGovern, talk about defunding the police. They are the party that wanted to defund the police. Their Vice Presidential candidate put up money to pay the rioters to get out of jail.

Mr. McGovern talked about the military. We have had 4 years of a Biden administration that ran the military off with the wokeness in DEI. Enrollments are up at record levels. President Trump has been in office now for 49 days. Look what he has done.

My friend mentioned cutting Social Security. There is nothing about Social Security that is in this bill. My friend mentioned or I guess will mention cutting Medicaid. There is nothing about cutting Medicaid in here.

What they are doing is using scare tactics, but the American people aren't buying it. The Democrats had 4 years to have their way with the government and look what it brought. It brought high taxes, high gas prices, and high egg prices.

Why did 77 million people vote them out of office? It was because of their policies. President Trump in 49 days is bringing it back.

If the Democrats get back in control, the main thing they will try to get a concession on is to defund--they keep saying ``billionaire Elon Musk.'' I am sorry. Elon Musk didn't make it from government. He made it from producing a product.

Guess what he has had the mind and the genius to find. The Democrats support these things that he found in the different agencies, mainly leading off with USAID.

Mr. Speaker, I want everybody to listen to see if they agree with this. For the taxpayers, what Elon Musk found was $2 billion, which was part of a greenhouse gas emission fund. Guess where it went. It went to Stacey Abrams. Is that where the taxpayers want their money spent?

There was $1 million to the Social Security Administration's Gender X initiative marker. Is that where the taxpayers want their money to go?

There was $45 million for a diversity, equity, and inclusion scholarship in Burma. How does that work?

There was $182 million in Health and Human Services contracts including $168,000 for an Anthony Fauci exhibit at the NIH.

Folks, this would be funny if it wasn't so serious, $2.5 million to promote inclusion in Vietnam.

I am not going to waste the time, but this is just a short list of how this President under Elon Musk is identifying waste, fraud, and abuse.

All the things that you are saying are just not true. I sat through this. You mentioned this was like needles in your eyes. Hearing you say these things is worse than that because it is just untrue.

What this bill does is it extends funding--and I am typically not for CRs; it is no way to do business--but it extends funding with fixed spending at 2024 levels. It includes anomalies requested by the Trump administration to support immigration enforcement efforts to deport criminals.

Their party was the one that opened the gates to America. How is that working out? How about the deaths occurring? We had the mothers and fathers of victims in this audience for the joint session, and guess who didn't stand. Nobody in your party stood. No one had the decency to stand up for the little boy with cancer who wanted to be a police officer.

These anomalies increase defense discretionary spending by $6 billion. It cuts nondefense discretionary spending by $13 billion. It reduces the overall Federal spending for fiscal year `25 below the `24 levels. Guess what. Do you remember the 87,000 IRS agents that were going to harass the taxpayers? This bill cuts $20 billion out of it. It does away with it.

This President is just getting started.

I doubt we will have any support from the Democratic side, which I don't expect. This bill is going to pass, and the country is in better shape. You had your time 4 years ago, and how did that work out for the American people? It didn't work out too good. I fully support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that Donald Trump's policies are collapsing our economy. Unemployment is rising. The NASDAQ had its worst day since the COVID crash. Millions of dollars in retirement savings have been wiped out in just weeks. The reason is clear: the Trump administration's reckless tariffs on our allies.

To impose these tariffs, Trump declared a made-up national emergency under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, but the law has a safeguard. Any Member can force a vote to terminate the emergency.

What happened? Speaker Johnson doesn't want a vote. Why? It would force Republicans to go on the record about Trump's tariffs. Instead, Speaker Johnson has rewritten the law in real time.

Here is what the rule says: ``Each day for the remainder of the first session of the 119th Congress shall not constitute a calendar day.'' What? If you don't think that makes any sense, neither do I.

House Republicans are declaring that the days are no longer days and that time has literally stopped.

The Speaker is petrified that Members of this House will actually have to take a vote on lowering costs for the American people.

This is what the American people elected us to do, but now, because of Donald Trump's tariffs and because Republicans would have to take a tough vote, Speaker Johnson is stopping us from voting.

If Congress can't act to lower prices, protect retirement savings, and hold the President accountable, why are we even here? What are we doing here?

A ``yes'' vote on this rule is a vote for Trump's tariffs. A ``yes'' vote on this rule is a vote to keep prices high for American families. A ``yes'' vote is a vote to block Congress from doing its job to lower costs.

If you actually care about lowering costs, you should vote ``no'' on this rule.

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

Mr. Speaker, I just want to point out that Democrats love to claim foul on Republicans for shutting off national emergencies, but they are cherry-picking the facts.

Let's take a look back at when we were in charge in the 117th Congress. They never allowed a vote on terminating the COVID national emergency. Mr. Gosar introduced two separate national emergency disapproval resolutions, and Democrats, who were in control at the time, not only shut off consideration of those resolutions without a single vote, but they shut them off for the remaining 18 months of the Congress. Even 2 years after the COVID emergency was declared, Democrats still silenced the voices of Republicans who wanted to take a vote.

What is that saying again? Rules for thee but not for me.

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