Removing Barriers to Work for Disabled Americans Act

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1398 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, last night the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 1398, providing for consideration of four measures:

H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027, under a structured rule.

The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Armed Services or their respective designees, provides for one motion to recommit, and makes 312 amendments in order.

H.R. 8595, the National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2027, under a structured rule.

The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective designees, provides for one motion to recommit, and makes 29 amendments in order.

H.R. 8884, Removing Barriers to Work for Disabled Americans Act, under a closed rule.

The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Ways and Means or their respective designees and provides for one motion to recommit.

H. Res. 1383, Commemorating the One-Year Anniversary of the Enactment of the Working Families Tax Cuts.

The rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Ways and Means or their respective designees.

Additionally, the rule provides that H. Res. 1377 is laid on the table and, once the NDAA is passed, the Clerk shall add the text of S. 1383, the SAVE America Act, to the bill and transmit it, once again, to the United States Senate.

Mr. Speaker, we are here today to debate a rule on four measures.

First, H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027.

Under the leadership of Chairman Mike Rogers and Ranking Member Adam Smith, one of the top priorities of the bipartisan fiscal year 2027 NDAA is to rebuild our arsenal of freedom.

As President Reagan reminded the Nation more than four decades ago: ``It is not just immoral but unforgivable to ask the sons and daughters of America to protect this country with aging equipment and bargain- basement weapons.'' That conviction remains as true now as it was then.

This year's NDAA continues our commitment to ensuring the United States maintains the most capable, lethal, and ready fighting force in the world. This is made possible through a top-line that supports an investment consistent with rebuilding the American arsenal and revitalizing our defense industrial base.

Since the 1990s, we have seen a lack of competition in the defense sector that has reduced resiliency in supply chains, stifled innovation, and, ultimately, has increased costs for the taxpayers while decreasing readiness. This bill aims to change that.

The fiscal year 2027 NDAA strengthens America's security by expanding domestic production capacity, mobilizing private-sector investment, accelerating innovative defense entrants, cutting unnecessary regulatory barriers, and creating thousands of high-skill American jobs.

To reduce costs, this bill expands the multiyear procurement authority for critical platforms such as the F-35, F-15EX, Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, and many other weapon systems.

This enables the defense industrial base to expand and accelerate domestic production, leading to decreased costs, increased capacity, and increased jobs.

A country that cannot make its own ammunition and weapons cannot deter a war, Mr. Speaker.

In addition, the fiscal year 2027 NDAA makes another major stride in strengthening servicemembers' quality of life and revitalizing our recruitment efforts. It authorizes a 5 to 7 percent pay raise; improves military housing, education, and childcare options for military families; and invests in support systems that keep our force resilient.

The bill also tackles the Nation's pilot shortage head-on by issuing targeted aviation bonuses, expanding the training pipeline capacity, and accelerating pathways to produce and retain the next generation of military aviators.

Implementing the Peace Through Strength agenda, the fiscal year 2027 NDAA rebuilds depleted stockpiles and accelerates game-changing technologies, like quantum computing, hypersonics, and autonomous systems, while sustaining legacy platforms until future replacements become operational.

Platforms such as the F-22, F-18, A-10, and MQ-9 have been instrumental in the operations against Venezuela and the Iranian regime. Sustaining these platforms will eliminate the capability gaps created by prematurely divesting legacy platforms without a replacement platform being operational.

Peace Through Strength starts with a factory floor at Scranton, a shipyard in Newport News, a welder in Pascagoula, and our skilled workforce at Robins Air Force Base.

A stronger, more resilient defense industrial base is what turns American manufacturing capacity into credible military power. This credible military power is what convinces our adversaries that today is not the day to test the United States of America.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleagues and the House Armed Services Committee staff for all of the work that went into creating this strong, bipartisan legislation that should pass with overwhelming support.

Second, Mr. Speaker, the rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 8595, the National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2027.

H.R. 8595 advances the America First policy agenda and restores accountability to how taxpayer dollars are spent abroad.

This year's legislation provides $47.32 billion, 6 percent below the fiscal year 2026 enacted level, while still supporting a foreign policy agenda that supports our allies and counters our adversaries.

This bill restores fiscal sanity by reducing duplication, streamlining operations, and prioritizing core diplomatic functions.

Additionally it codifies President Trump's executive orders to eliminate wasteful programs in spending, strengthen oversight of foreign assistance, and ensure no funds flow to organizations that refuse to cooperate with the United States.

Further, this legislation funds efforts to counter malign influence from the People's Republic of China, denying the CCP access to U.S. factory sources and prohibiting countries from using U.S. aid to repay debts owed to Communist China. It deserves bipartisan support, and I look forward to its passage.

Third, Mr. Speaker, the rule also provides for the consideration of H.R. 8884, the Removing Barriers to Work for Disabled Americans Act.

This is a simple bill with an important goal: to make sure Americans with disabilities are not punished for wanting to go to work.

For too long our disability policies have been built around outdated assumptions, assumptions that treat work as a risk rather than an opportunity.

H.R. 8884 gives the Social Security Administration the tools it needs to test new approaches, gather real data, and design policies that support work instead of discouraging it.

This bill extends the Social Security Administration demonstration authority through 2030. Participation is voluntary and will not result in a decreased overall income for any member that elects to participate in the program.

This demonstration authority will be a gateway for the Social Security Administration to run scoped test programs which could help disabled Americans work, earn, and maintain stability without risking harm to beneficiaries.

This is commonsense legislation that everyone should support. I look forward to passing it in the House and sending it over to the Senate.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, the rule provides for consideration of H. Res. 1383, Commemorating the One-Year Anniversary of the Enactment of the Working Families Tax Cuts Act.

Nearly 1 year ago today, House and Senate Republicans delivered on President Trump's promise to cut taxes, deliver affordability, and strengthen our economy for everyday hardworking Americans.

The Working Families Tax Cuts Act is the largest tax reform passed by Congress in decades, making permanent the tax cuts passed under the first Trump administration and ensuring a tax cut for over 140 million Americans.

We saw over $324 billion in tax refunds for both individuals and families in 2025 and approximately 96 percent of the filers receiving a refund earn less than $200,000 in annual income.

Further, crucial provisions in this legislation provided numerous deductions for overtime pay, service industry workers who rely on tips, as well as deductions for car loan interest and expansion of the enhanced child tax credit.

American families and workers overwhelmingly benefited from the Working Families Tax Cuts Act, and President Trump and congressional Republicans delivered for the American people by making these tax cuts permanent.

Mr. Speaker, I look forward to consideration of these measures and urge passage of this rule. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, no doubt the Democrat socialists of America believe everything that the gentleman from Massachusetts just said, but the majority of Americans are smart enough to know that those things are simply not true.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, one of the key provisions of this rule is the National Defense Authorization Act. This is a bipartisan piece of legislation that has passed every year for the last several decades and passed out of committee with a strong bipartisan vote.

I encourage the American citizens to understand this with regard to our national security and our national defense and how important this piece of legislation is. Up until 2022, in order to launch a satellite, the United States was buying rockets from Russia.

Mr. Speaker, 2022 is the last time we purchased rockets from Russia to launch satellites, and 2024 is the last time we actually used a Russian rocket to launch a satellite.

We have to invest in our defense industrial base so that we are not dependent on the enemies of the United States of America to provide for the security of the American citizens. The National Defense Authorization Act, in a very bipartisan manner, does exactly that.

Mr. Speaker, this rule needs to pass. We need to ensure that we are not dependent on our adversaries for our national security, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

A couple of things, Mr. Speaker: One is that Federal tax revenues are actually up this fiscal year over last fiscal year, and that is because the economy is doing pretty good under President Donald Trump. Again, tax revenues are up 5 percent over the last year.

I want to mention one other thing. People under the age of 18 were exempt from the changes we made in the SNAP benefits. Under 18, they were exempt. Yet, they still stand up and say we kicked children off of SNAP. Read the law. If you are under 18, you are exempt from the changes we made.

I will speak, Mr. Speaker, about one thing that is in this piece of legislation, in this rule, that is wrong that I have tried to correct for many years. If we get the chance to vote on it, I hope we will get it corrected.

I will tell you, several years ago, I went to Bethesda, and a young man I represented had stepped on a pressure plate and lost both legs in Afghanistan. I stayed in touch with the young man. A couple of years later, I was taking him hunting. I remember exactly where I was on 475 in central Georgia. He told me: I work at O'Reilly Auto Parts, but I have to be careful--at the time, it was $1,100 a month--to make sure that I don't make more than $1,100 a month or my family loses the Social Security benefits.

We talked a little while about this. I told him: When I get back to DC, I am going to meet with the lawyers because that just doesn't sound right.

When I came to D.C., I scheduled a meeting with the attorneys up here who deal with Social Security. I met with them, and I had the discussion with them. They told me that that is actually the law, that that is correct.

Here we have this young man who is combat wounded, totally and permanently disabled, who wants to go back to work. I am a firm believer that the number one thing we can do for our veterans, especially when it comes to veteran suicide and their mental health, is to get them back to work as soon as possible.

So, I wrote a piece of legislation that has had multiple cosponsors from both parties, from all spectrums of the political divide, conservative, liberal, Democrat, Republican, moderate. We haven't been able to get it through because of some of the budget rules that plague this place on good ideas.

Now, we have H.R. 8884. If it is passed, I am confident that the concept of the Purple Heart Freedom to Work Act will be put in place as a pilot project. What it would allow people to do is, for people who are combat wounded, totally and permanently disabled, it will allow them to go back to work and keep their Social Security benefits.

It shouldn't take as long as it has taken to do this and to get this passed. If this rule passes, I am confident that H.R. 8884 will pass. If we can get it through the Senate--and that is a big ``if'' with getting anything through the Senate--then, hopefully, our combat- wounded, totally and permanently disabled veterans can go back to work and not be afraid of going back to work because they would lose their Social Security benefits.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I don't have any additional speakers, am prepared to close.

I have listened a lot today, and I want to get back to the heart of this matter, which is the National Defense Authorization Act. That is what this rule is about. It is about H.R. 8884 and allowing--in the case of the legislation that I had--Purple Heart recipients, people who are wounded in combat totally and permanently having the ability to go back to work and not worrying about losing their Social Security benefits, at least for a period of time. It is about the appropriations act for our State Department and things that we do around the world.

There is a lot in this rule, Mr. Speaker, and this rule needs to pass. Yes, the SAVE America Act will be attached to the legislation when it goes across because, yes, we do think you all are letting noncitizens vote in elections. We know you are doing it at the local level, and we think that places like California ought to get their ballots counted before the end of the night, not before the end of the week.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time until the gentleman is prepared to close.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to address a couple of issues. One is he said healthcare providers can't afford their benefits. Well, that is because you turned the whole system over to a select few extremely large health insurance companies that are accountable to nobody, and they are not paying their claims. They are not.

My father was a surgeon. A lot of my friends are in the healthcare business. Let me tell you something: When you gave UnitedHealthcare and the other multibillion dollar corporations control over all aspects of our lives, you did a lot of damage, and you did that in your so-called Affordable Care Act.

If the Affordable Care Act had worked, we wouldn't be having this discussion. You want to talk about the problems in the healthcare system, you need to look in the mirror because you all wrote the bill, and now those big insurance companies aren't accountable to anybody. They own the PBMs. They own the pharmacies. They own the doctors' offices. They own the hospitals. They are huge, huge oligopolies that cater to nobody other than their shareholders.

Look at the share price of the large health insurance companies. Look who you made rich with the Affordable Care Act. It was the shareholders and the executives of all of those major health insurance companies.

When I talk about the economy, yes, I realize that the American citizens are

paying more. Inflation, which started because of the so-called American Rescue Plan--I think that is what you all called it--and your so-called Inflation Reduction Act--why did you name a bill the Inflation Reduction Act? It was because you started the inflation with the American Rescue Plan, and then you turned around and passed the so- called Inflation Reduction Act that just exponentially escalated the amount of inflation that the American citizens were having to deal with on a regular basis.

My point with the economy is this: Real GDP grew. Real GDP grew at a 2.2 percent annual rate for the full year of 2025. That beat the baseline expectations.

Yes, American citizens are having challenges. One of the reasons they are having challenges is the cost of energy.

Do you know what? I will admit, after Donald Trump tried to end the Iranian jihadist control over what was happening around the world--and he has done a pretty good job with it--and let me tell you this: Donald Trump, the President of the United States, knows exactly what he is doing with Iran. He knows exactly what he is doing with Iran, and if you would get the briefings, you would understand why.

In fact, I would point out that a U.S. Senator who doesn't like the President had a few things to say, and as soon as he went and got the briefing, he turned around and reversed his position. Instead of blaming everything on Donald Trump, you should get the facts.

However, the cost of energy is embedded in every single thing that we do and that we buy. When the Democratic Party does things like canceling the Keystone pipeline, like stopping the development of nuclear power plants, like stopping oil and gas developments inside the United States of America, it hurts the American citizens. It hurts the American citizens, and it leads to inflation.

I am sorry that we are having to deal with the inflation that the Democrats started with the American Rescue Plan and the Inflation Reduction Act and the pain that has come from that, and I am sorry the American citizens are dealing with the pain of the Affordable Care Act. I wish we could repeal that horrible bill, but we didn't get it done. We didn't get it done.

Healthcare providers who can't afford their benefits, they can't afford their benefits because the insurance companies that you turned the system over to aren't paying the claims.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, the Affordable Care Act created a system where the major insurance carriers are not answerable to anybody. You did this to the American citizens. It is your responsibility. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I know that you were talking about the President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, who has done something that will probably never be done again in the history of the country.

He has been elected in 2016 and 2024.

I want to say this as we talk about healthcare and health insurance and the other things.

This side of the aisle recognizes there are problems, and this side of the aisle recognizes that the only way to fix those problems is to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. Now, the other side of the aisle thinks that they did a perfect job.

Now, let me tell you something, Mr. Speaker. Before the Affordable Care Act went into place, UnitedHealth Group was trending at $28 a share. Today it is $415 a share, and that is after about a $140-a-share drop.

The only thing the Affordable Care Act did was make a bunch of health insurance executives rich. They are not paying their claims today.

One thing we could do, and I wish we would do, is to give the State insurance commissioners the authority to step in and make them pay their claims.

I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, my local hospital has about $15 million outstanding with the UnitedHealth Group. It is a small hospital, $15 million; a big company, a small hospital. I don't know if my hospital will ever get paid.

That is not what this one is about, Mr. Speaker. This week the House can advance four pieces of legislation under this rule. It is about H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2027. It authorizes a historic $1.15 trillion to rebuild the American defense industrial base and arsenal.

This act implements the Peace Through Strength agenda and restores lethality to our armed forces by investing in modernization and multiyear procurement for weapons systems production to deter our adversaries.

It also makes a significant investment in the quality of life of our servicemembers and retention opportunities.

The fiscal year 2027 NDAA reforms key programs and saves taxpayer dollars resulting in a ready, capable, and lethal fighting force.

This legislation will deter China and counter Russia, North Korea, Iran, and foreign terrorist organizations while leveraging our alliances across Europe, the Middle East, and Asia.

Finally, this act strengthens our nuclear deterrence, prioritizes the Golden Dome, and grows our Nation's strategic space capabilities.

This is bipartisan, must-pass legislation that every one of my colleagues should support.

Additionally, H.R. 8595, the National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2027 delivers on an America First foreign policy agenda.

This protects our allies, confronts our adversaries, cuts waste, and puts American national interests first. It strengthens embassy security, fights fentanyl, defunds radical programs, and ensures every dollar advances American security and prosperity.

Further, H.R. 8884, the Removing Barriers to Work for Disabled American Act, allows the Social Security Administration to test new approaches on a voluntary basis and without impacting the participants' overall income to ensure Americans with disabilities are not punished for returning to the workforce.

Finally, H. Res. 1383, Commemorating the One-Year Anniversary of the Enactment of the Working Families Tax Cuts, highlights the largest tax reform passed by Congress in decades, making permanent the tax cuts passed under the first Trump administration, and ensuring a tax cut for over 140 million Americans.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in voting ``yes'' on the previous question and ``yes'' on the rule.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, let me begin by asking: Do Republicans even have the votes to pass this rule? Because, if not, what on Earth are we doing here? Wasting more time?

Even your own Members are fed up, Mr. Speaker--every week wondering if someone is going to throw a fit; if Donald Trump is going to post something crazy and blow everything up; if Mike Johnson is going to bring something to the floor when he doesn't have the votes. The chaos and the dysfunction around here is unhinged.

We wasted hours and hours at the Rules Committee last week debating

and voting on a rule that never came to the floor. And for what? Because Congress passed a bipartisan housing affordability bill, and the President had a temper tantrum, refused to sign it, and derailed everything? I mean, really? And why? Because he is still busy trying to fraudulently claim that the 2020 election was stolen, and now he wants to use that as an excuse to try to rig the midterms.

Let me remind my colleagues: This is the United States of America. It is still the United States of America. We are not China, or Russia, or some two-bit dictatorship.

This is insane what is going on here. Families cannot afford rent. Folks are priced out of buying a house. Donald Trump is asked about the bipartisan housing bill yesterday, and he says: `` . . . it's so unimportant . . . `' he says: `` . . . it's so unimportant . . . `' then he says: ``I made a lot of money with housing.''

The American people are not asking whether Donald Trump made a lot of money in housing. They are asking why they cannot afford it. They are asking why his economy sucks, why their prices are going up, and nobody in this Republican administration seems to give a damn.

So, now, we are back with another rule. Maybe it passes. Maybe it doesn't. Who knows anymore. This rule includes a National Defense Authorization bill with a trillion--that is with a t--dollar price tag.

I should tell my colleagues that we already spend more on our military than the next six countries combined. It is an astronomical amount. Over another trillion dollars on our military budget? Boy, that is so wild and extravagant, even Dr. Strangelove would be impressed.

Now, Mr. Speaker, let me get this straight: Republicans want to give Donald Trump over a trillion dollars for the Pentagon? Donald Trump who started an illegal war? Donald Trump who got 13 American servicemembers killed because he started a war to distract from the Epstein files? That is who they want to give a trillion dollars to? I mean, get real.

The State and Foreign Operations bill is a mess, too. It guts all the programs that actually prevent crises before they explode. When the next war, famine, pandemic, or global breakdown knocks on our door, just remember it was Republicans who set the stage, just like they did when they cut funding for screwworm protection.

There is the Social Security disability bill that hands more authority to an administration already targeting programs that working people rely on.

Then, we get to this Republican self-esteem exercise, yet another nonbinding resolution, praising Republicans for the big, ugly bill.

Mr. Speaker, I have a secret for you. I checked with my staff. Not a single person has called my office saying: Congressman, I think Republicans should spend time congratulating themselves on a bill they passed last year that took away my healthcare and is directly responsible for raising my bills. I haven't got a single call about that.

What exactly is it that my Republican friends are congratulating themselves for anyway? You passed the big, ugly bill a year ago. Since then, gas prices have gone up. Grocery prices have gone up. There is a new war in the Middle East. Healthcare is more expensive, and fewer people have it. Child hunger has gone up. The tariffs are crushing farmers and driving up costs.

That is what you guys are doing a victory lap over? Really? I mean, really? Never have we seen so much inequality between the rich and the poor in this country. Regular people are getting screwed while the top 0.001 percent saw their incomes go up by--get this--$20 million last year.

You guys could not be more out of touch if you tried, Mr. Speaker.

There might be hours of floor debate on these crummy bills this week, but right now we are here to talk about the Republicans' agenda, their plan for the week. The truth is that their bills are just more of the same old status quo nonsense that people back home are sick and tired of.

The Republican agenda is a nightmare for this country. The American people are in an economic crisis right now. They are getting screwed by the policies of this administration. Their wallets and their pocketbooks are getting cleaned out by this President and this majority's billionaire-forced agenda.

Then, they turn on C-SPAN today--and God help them if they do--and what do they see Republicans bringing to the floor? Not a bill to help deal with rising inflation and economic uncertainty--no, no, no. Their focus this week is a resolution to congratulate themselves on a bill that they already passed last year. In case they haven't noticed, for most people, things have gotten worse since then, not better.

People are looking to this place and wondering whether anybody at all on the Republican side has any idea what their life is actually like. They believe that this Republican majority is just out of touch, out of sync with where regular people are. If people look at these awful, lousy bills, the answer is obviously no.

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

Boy, that was a good retort.

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

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to strike the section adding the SAVE America Act to the NDAA during engrossment.

Mr. Speaker, let me be clear. I think the SAVE Act is an awful bill. It is not about election security. It is about relitigating Donald Trump's loss in 2020--and he did lose. He lost big. It will make it harder for American citizens to vote if this SAVE Act ever becomes law.

Here is another thing that is clear to everyone, or should be. This little maneuver by the Speaker is a nothing burger. It is a shell game. It is the Wizard of Oz behind the curtain pretending to do magic. Here is the truth: The SAVE Act will not become law. Even if this rule manages to pass, the Senate will not pass an NDAA with the SAVE Act included. They have already said that, and Leader Thune, 5 days ago, already filed cloture on the Senate's own version of the NDAA without the SAVE Act.

At the end of the day, it is very simple. Republicans are using procedural tricks to try to make it harder for people to vote because they can't win elections the old-fashioned way. They can't win them fair and square. It is offensive. In the case of this MIRV scheme, it is downright stupid.

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 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Alabama (Ms. Sewell), the sponsor of this amendment.

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

Mr. Speaker, I remind the gentleman and others that we already spend more than six of our nearest competitors in terms of military spending combined. We are talking about $1.5 trillion--trillion with a t--going to the defense budget this year.

I have to tell you that I really think we ought to have a debate in this Congress about the definition of national security, and I think it ought to include things like healthcare. My Republican friends cut $1 trillion from healthcare. People are losing their healthcare left and right, but if you don't have healthcare, you don't feel very secure.

The definition of national security also ought to include the quality of education we provide our young people.

It ought to include things like ending hunger in this country. We are the richest country in the history of the world, and we have 48 million Americans who don't know where their next meal is going to come from.

It ought to include housing and whether people can afford housing. We have an affordability crisis right now that we tried to address in a bipartisan way, but Donald Trump had a meltdown.

It ought to include supporting our veterans and cleaning up our environment.

It ought to include things like investing in our workforce.

All of those things are sources of our national strength that are getting shortchanged here, so forgive us if we are not getting excited about this massive increase in military spending at a time when the average American is getting screwed.

Enough. Enough.

When you go back to your districts and you talk to people in coffee shops, they are not worried about whether we are spending $900 billion or $1.5 trillion on our military spending, most of which goes to defense contractors. What they are worried about is whether they can afford their groceries, whether they can afford their rent, and whether they can afford the gas for their car.

Those are things that are real. Whether they can send their kids to college, all of those things matter.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Magaziner).

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

Mr. Speaker, I have to admit I was taken a little bit aback by the gentleman's statement earlier when he said the economy is doing ``pretty good.'' I think those are his exact words.

I am kind of stunned by that because inflation is up. The price of groceries is up. The price of gas is up. The price of housing is up. The price of everything is up. People, by every poll that has been conducted, whether it is on the left, on the right, or in the center, say the same thing: People are not satisfied with this economy. They do not think it is pretty good, no matter what their party affiliation is. They do not think it is good.

Now, maybe if you are Republican in the House of Representatives and you hang around with the Mar-a-Lago class, maybe they think it is pretty good. I mean, Elon Musk is now the first trillionaire. I guess he thinks it is pretty good.

If you are the average worker, whether it is in Massachusetts or Georgia or California or South Dakota, you don't share that view because it isn't. Things are actually pretty bad. Things are pretty bad.

The gentleman said that poor kids are not losing their SNAP benefits. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article titled: ``Over 700,000 Poor Kids Across 12 States Have Lost Food Aid Under Trump-GOP Budget Law.''

Mr. Speaker, this article appeared in May 2026. That number is now estimated not at 700,000 but at 800,000 in this country.

Think about it. The economy is doing pretty good, and in this country that we live in right now, the United States of America, we have close to 50 million Americans who don't know where their next meal is going to come from, who are hungry. I don't think they think the economy is pretty good. In fact, the majority of these people are working families. They are working harder than ever, but because everything is going up, they can't afford groceries.

Go to any grocery store in this country, and you will see people actually putting groceries back on the shelves because their paychecks don't stretch as far as they used to because prices are going up.

By the way, it is not just the big, ugly bill. It is the President's stupid tariff policy, which is raising prices all across this country, and the war in Iran that--I don't even know if he knows what the hell he is doing. It just goes on and on and on. Again, we are spending countless dollars on this war, again, which is resulting in energy prices going through the roof.

No, people do not think the economy is pretty good. They do not. I suspect that that is what is behind this effort by Republicans to try to rig the midterm elections, because they know that the American people are not happy with where things are.

It is not just Democrats, not just independents, but a whole bunch of Republicans. A whole bunch of Republicans are also dissatisfied.

I urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to go to coffee shops, to go to diners, to go to grocery stores, and to go to VFW halls in their districts and listen to what people are saying. They are not happy. They are very concerned about the state of the economy. They are not confident that things are going to get better.

They do not think that the person running this country right now has any clue about what the reality is for working families. He lives in a different sphere altogether. He is worried about reflecting pools, building monuments in his honor, and redoing the East Wing that he said would cost nothing but is going to cost us billions when it is all said and done--cost the taxpayers billions. That is what he is consumed about.

They want a Congress and a government that cares about them.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I am not yet prepared to close, but I do want to remind the gentleman that it was the Republicans that put into this rule a bill to congratulate yourselves on the big, ugly bill, and it was the gentleman who said that people think this economy is doing pretty good, and I take issue with that.

There are people who are losing their healthcare. Republicans like to pretend that their big, ugly bill, which cut Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act by more than $1 trillion, didn't actually hurt anyone. I mean, there are lots of real stories of people being hurt.

Kathy and Jeffrey Many, who live in Brandon, Vermont, are owners of a garage door installation repair business. They said that their premium was jumping up from $625 a month to nearly $2,670 per month, and the cheapest alternative they could find was still nearly $2,000. Kathy and Jeffrey ended up dropping their coverage. The economy is not working good for them.

Eric and Lisa Frankenfeld, a chiropractor and his wife, who live in Point Pleasant, New Jersey, said their premium was set to skyrocket to $1,928 per month, up from $340 per month, so they decided to go without coverage this year. Lisa said: We are healthcare providers who cannot afford benefits. Oh, the irony.

Katelin Provost, a 37-year-old single mom and social worker from Henderson, Nevada, saw her premium jump from $85 to $750 a month. She said she would likely drop her own coverage in order to keep insurance for her 4-year-old daughter.

I mean, these are real-life stories. I can go on and on and on and read them here. The economy is not pretty good for them. The economy is lousy for them, and there is nothing that is in this rule that we will consider that will help any of them.

In fact, there is nothing that this Republican Congress has done to help any of them. Instead, you have made their lives worse. The economy is not doing pretty good. The idea that you are going to congratulate yourselves on the passage of the big, ugly bill, well, I just have a difference of opinion.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, it is rich to be lectured about healthcare from my Republican friends. Let me tell you what Democrats did with the Affordable Care Act. By passing it, it stopped health insurance companies from charging sick people more premiums than healthy people. It kept health insurance companies from denying coverage to pregnant women and people with preexisting conditions. It demanded insurance companies cover more preventive services. It allows young adults to stay on their parents' insurance until they are age 26. I could go on and on and on.

What did my Republican friends do? They cut $1 trillion from healthcare. By the way, I should remind the gentleman that Republicans control the House, Republicans control the Senate, Republicans control the White House, and healthcare prices are going through the roof under your watch.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I could go on and on about healthcare all day. I just urge those who are in the gallery and those who are watching, I mean, look at your own healthcare bills, look at your own healthcare coverage now after nearly 2 years of Republican control of the government. The bottom line is: People are losing their healthcare benefits. In this country, that is unconscionable.

Mr. Speaker, I have served here a long time, and I have seen majorities struggle before. I have seen close votes. I have seen disagreements. This is something else entirely. This is a majority that cannot function unless Donald Trump is lucid and in a good mood, and even then it is a coin flip.

I mean, Americans need cheaper housing. They need a raise. They need healthcare that doesn't break the bank. They need a government that lowers prices and brings down inflation and protects them. Instead, what they are getting is a Republican administration that raises prices, increases inflation, and protects the Epstein pedophiles.

Republicans promised they would lower prices on day one. It is now year two. They have been in complete and total control for almost 18 months. They run Washington.

If you go home and ask people in small towns, in big cities, in suburbs, in rural communities, and in States across this country how things are going with Trump and Republicans in charge, they will tell you the truth, which is that things are getting worse because Trump's economy sucks.

He swore he would end inflation--end it. Those are his words, not mine. He said he would end wars. He is starting them. He promised gas would be cheap. The national average is nearly $4 a gallon.

The only people who are doing great right now are the billionaires, and now a trillionaire, and the greedy corporations that helped Republicans get elected because that is whom they work for.

I think people are sick and tired of it. They are sick of watching Congress lurch from crisis to crisis. They are sick of Republicans spending more time managing their own egos than lowering anybody's bills.

Let me just end with this. As we celebrate our country's 250th birthday this weekend, we have so, so much to be proud of as Americans. We have so much to celebrate and be thankful for. Each new generation that has fought to expand the circle of our democracy and make real the promise of our founding has brought us closer to the dream of a more perfect Union. That is what makes America great.

I am looking forward to spending this Fourth of July with families and friends back up in Massachusetts, the birthplace of America, where our citizens came together to overthrow the most powerful army in the world and establish a government of, by, and for the people.

However, the truth is that right now too many people feel as if this country is run by, of, and for the powerful, the wealthy, and the well- connected.

Do you know what, Mr. Speaker?

They are right. People see the corruption, the greed, the self- dealing, and the self-enrichment of this President's family and his crooked administration, and they are fed up with it. I believe that patriotism means calling your country to a higher standard. Patriotism means telling the truth, Mr. Speaker, and the truth is that Americans are hurting, costs are too high, and our democracy and freedoms are under assault by an out-of-control, lawless administration run by a President who thinks he is a king.

Republicans are either too busy pledging allegiance to Trump to notice or too distracted fighting with each other to care.

We can do better than this, we should do better than this, and we must do better than this. Reject this rule. Stop acting like a cult. Let's bring back bills that actually help people, and, for God's sake, let's start acting like America.

Again, Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on this rule, a ``no'' vote on the underlying bills, 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, 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, this Congress is an absolute mess. The gentlewoman from North Carolina says that our rhetoric doesn't carry a bit of substance.

But let me begin by asking a question of the American people, a very simple question: Are you better off today than you were 1\1/2\ years ago?

It has been 18 months since Donald Trump returned to the White House. Republicans have controlled every lever of power in Washington for over 1\1/2\ years. They control the House. They control the Senate. They control the White House. They even control the Supreme Court.

That is the one simple question to me that matters more than anything else that we will debate today. In fact, it is the only thing that matters, really. Is it easier to fill up your gas tank? Are your rent bills more affordable? Are your groceries cheaper? Have your prescription medicine costs gone down? Does your paycheck go further?

In short, Mr. Speaker, has life gotten easier for anybody over these last 18 months, or has it gotten harder? I think most people, including most Republicans, if they are being honest with themselves, know the answer.

They don't need a politician or a fancy economics degree to say that things are not better. They are not better. In fact, they will tell you that things are worse--much, much worse.

They see it every time they tap their credit card at the gas station. They see it every time they check out at a grocery store. They see it every month when their rent is due, when their electric bill comes in, and when the pharmacist says that their kids' medicine is more expensive. They see it when their paycheck just doesn't go as far as it used to.

This is the Republican economy. These are their prices, and it is their policies that have failed America miserably.

Donald Trump and Republicans promised they would use their power to lower costs on day one. Well, it is year two, and costs are not lower, which by any definition would make that a broken promise.

Mr. Speaker, why are prices up? Why is life harder? Why are things worse off now? The reason is simple: It is because instead of working with Democrats to fight for everyday people, Republicans have made one decision after another to help the rich and the powerful and, basically, hurt everybody else.

I have example after example. Are things better off because of Trump's tariffs, Mr. Speaker? The tariffs the New York Federal Reserve says are almost exclusively paid by American consumers, American farmers, American manufacturers, and American companies, does that make anybody better off?

I don't think most people would say that tariffs have made their lives better. I would say that the tariffs have made their lives worse, more expensive, more difficult.

What about the war in Iran--a new, endless, illegal war, another one of Donald Trump's broken promises? Does anyone think that has made life better for the American people?

Maybe it has made life better for defense contractors. Maybe it has for the crazy neocon warmongers who get a kick out of another war, but not for everyday people.

We have spent probably well over $100 billion on this illegal and reckless war. That is $100 billion. That is not helping make sure that Americans don't go hungry. That is not lowering healthcare costs, lowering people's rents, or lowering gas prices. It is on this crazy war, a war of choice that the President had no plan for.

He doesn't know what the hell he is going to do next. This is nuts. In fact, we are now 5 months into a war that these guys said would only last a couple of weeks. They have declared victory like six times, yet the Strait of Hormuz is still closed. More American troops, sadly, were killed this weekend. Gas prices are back above $4 a gallon. Inflation continues to skyrocket.

Does anybody think that has made life better for most Americans? There has been 5 months of war in the Middle East. I can go right down the line.

Republicans promised better healthcare. Instead, they passed a law that takes hundreds of billions of dollars out of Medicaid and leaves millions more people uninsured. How the hell does that make anybody's life better?

Republicans promised lower taxes, except they chose another tax giveaway for those at the very top, and they pat themselves on the back for the pennies they gave to everyone else. Has that made life better for people?

After 18 months of higher costs, more inflation, new wars, costly tariffs, and stunning, stunning corruption, now they are bringing us a continuing resolution that kicks the can down the road.

They are bringing us a pathetic excuse of a stock trading ban that fails to address the much larger culture of corruption and self-dealing coming out of the White House, and they are bringing us a budget framework authorizing $73 billion for Trump's illegal Iran war, $12 billion as a Band-Aid to help farmers that their policies continue to hurt, and another $10 billion to rig the November elections.

That is nearly $100 billion in new spending with no offsets, meaning this bill could very well increase the debt by over $100 billion. Whatever happened to the old-fashioned Republicans who wanted to pay for things, who didn't want to increase the deficit or the debt? I guess that is a thing of the past.

Not one thing in this reconciliation bill, by the way--not a single damned thing--will be about affordability. Not one thing will lower prices. That is called being out of touch, Mr. Speaker.

There will be time to debate their crummy bills on the floor this week, but this hour is about priorities, and Republicans have their priorities all out of whack. Their agenda has only made things better for those at the top, for the Mar-a-Lago members and CEOs with private jets, the donor class and the corporate special interests. Things are better for them, but for the rest of America, their agenda has been a disaster.

The policies of this Republican Congress are a dumpster fire for everyday people, a total disaster. Their tariffs are crushing people. Their war is driving up costs. Their toxic environmental policies are filling our air with smoke and our food with parasites, and Americans are dying in the Middle East for their war.

Again, Mr. Speaker, when I go back home and I ask people if they are better off than they were 18 months ago, they don't even answer. They laugh because it is such a ridiculous question. It is so obvious that all of us are worse off because of this Republican majority and because of this administration,

which cares only about not hurting the President's fragile feelings and delicate ego.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am a little confused. The gentleman who just spoke maybe doesn't know this, but the government funding deadline isn't for months away, and he is scolding us as if it is now.

I am going to tell you what the crisis is right now. It is that people can't afford to live.

The gentlewoman from North Carolina said that our priority is about national security and national defense. I have news for her. National security means more than the number of bombs we have.

It also means healthcare for people. It means whether people can afford food, whether they can afford rent, whether they can afford to put gas in the tank of their car or pay their everyday bills, and whether they have a good job that allows them to support their family. Those are all sources of our national defense and our national security.

I will just say one other thing. I don't know how the hell our national defense and national security are served when the President takes us into an illegal, risky war in the Middle East, a war of choice, that he has no plan for.

Our troops are being put into harm's way, and this President has no plan about how to conduct this war or what the heck he is doing there. That is not national security.

Mr. Speaker, I urge that we defeat the previous question. If we do that, I will offer an amendment to the rule to make in order an amendment to H.R. 7008 consisting of the text of H.R. 6731, the Restore Trust in Government Act.

This bill is the Democratic proposal for a more comprehensive and robust stock trading ban than is found in the Republican plan. It is one which also includes the President of the United States and the Vice President.

There is a level of corruption that we have never ever seen in the White House. What is the response from our Republican colleagues? Silence. They are scared of the guy in the White House. They won't challenge this corruption, so he makes billions and billions of dollars while hardworking Americans struggle.

Mr. Speaker, in the first year of his term, President Trump cashed in to the tune of more than $2 billion--billion with a b.

In 2025 alone, the President completed over 21,000 stock trades. His investment accounts grew by over $850 million. He tweets out glowing endorsements of companies after he buys their stocks. Now, he is considering having people pay to get early access to his social media posts so they can cash in, too.

We need to ensure that people can trust their government to work for them and not enrich himself. This means banning stock ownership by Members and by this President.

That is what the Democratic proposal will do. Let the House decide and make this amendment in order. That is all we are asking, is to allow us to have this debate. You can vote however you want.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Jayapal) to discuss our proposal.

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

Mr. Speaker, I just want to respond to the gentlewoman. I am just a little confused. I thought I heard her say that we already have laws to deal with stock insider trading. If that is the case, then why are we doing a bill to ban stock insider trading?

I mean, the bottom line is we are doing it because it is a problem, and our objection is the fact that they are basically excluding somebody who is violating the law in our face right now, blatantly, who is in the White House, who is making countless millions, if not billions, of dollars on some really shady deals. Quite frankly, it makes Richard Nixon look like a Boy Scout.

I mean, the deal is the American people are sick of it. They want us to clean up Washington. That includes Congress, and that includes the executive branch.

I just also would like to kind of highlight kind of the absurdity of all the stuff. We have six different bills that we are talking about here today, but I want to read a tweet from a Republican, Tom Massie.

He says: ``The House will pass a $12 billion bailout for farmers suffering from high fuel & fertilizer prices caused by the Iran war, expensive equipment & parts caused by tariffs, and lower sales prices for commodities due to trade disputes with China. But the GOP is fighting communism!''

The Republican leadership had a big press conference earlier today. It was all about communism, but I have to say to Mr. Massie, I don't think I have heard truer words spoken by a Republican Member of Congress. I really appreciate that, the truth, the accuracy of what the situation is.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Olszewski).

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

Mr. Speaker, you know, one of the frustrating things about kind of where we are in terms of political debate in this country is that issues that really matter to regular people are being ignored or being shoved aside because, quite frankly, Republicans don't want to do anything about it.

They know that their agenda is unpopular. They know that people are struggling with the issue of affordability. They know that people are having a tough time paying their rent, filling up their gas tanks, affording healthcare costs--I can go on and on and on--buying food, and they don't want to talk about that. They know that the American people kind of are sick and tired of what they are doing here, and so they are trying to divert attention.

I just want to address something that happened this morning, and that is the Republican leadership in this House held this wackadoodle press conference. I have never quite seen anything like it, trying to divert attention away from issues of affordability and get people to look someplace else.

Basically, the Republican Party's new favorite talking point is calling Democrats Communists. I mean, oh, my God, Mr. Speaker, I mean, really? Really? Communists? Did we accidentally step into a time machine?

I get it. I get it. They don't want to talk about the real issues, the bread-and-butter issues. They don't want to talk about affordability. I guess my question is, is Joe McCarthy back from the dead? It sounds like that is who wrote all the garbage coming from Republicans about communism. These guys dust off the same, tired, old talking points every time they are backed into a corner.

Every time a new poll comes out saying that their economic agenda sucks, what they do is they change the subject. They try to divert attention. It is pathetic. But, fine, if they want to play that game, let's play that game.

Let's talk about the Republican Party, a party that worships one man above the Constitution in a cult of personality, a party that demonizes immigrants and says they poison the blood of our country, a party that calls the free press the enemy of the people and sics the Justice Department on journalists they don't like.

It is a party that says their political opponents are internal enemies and calls them ``the enemy within.'' It is a party that is okay with invading our allies, including other democracies, and it is a party that punishes their political opponents.

It is a party that has deployed troops on our own streets, that wants to use the American military on the American people. It is a party that believes any unhinged lie, fantasy, and conspiracy theory as long as it comes from one man.

It is a party that tries to lock up Members of Congress for exercising their free speech rights. It is a party that has tried to violently overthrow the results of a free and fair election in the United States of America.

It is a party that, in fact, pardoned everyone who invaded this building on January 6, 2021, and tried to throw out the votes of millions of Americans because the President couldn't accept a loss.

How dare that party lecture anyone.

How dare they talk about communism when their own party has totally lost touch not just with the founding ideals of this country but lost touch with reality itself?

If we are going to start assigning political labels based on conduct, then let's call things by their proper names. The Republican Party has become the party of fascism, full stop. They have become a party of far-right fascists who are hell-bent on destroying our country and our way of life. Every single time they call us Communists, it is nothing more than a projection of their own radicalization. They don't want to talk about that, and they definitely don't want to talk about their higher grocery prices or skyrocketing gas prices or higher inflation or the cost of healthcare or their new endless illegal war that has now cost over $100 billion.

Instead, they scream and they yell because they have nothing else left to offer.

This would be funny, Mr. Speaker, if it weren't so pathetic and so unhinged.

Mr. Speaker, Democrats are patriots who love this country enough to fight for it. We are fighting to make it easier for people to afford groceries. We are fighting to try to make it easier for people to afford rent, prescription drugs, and healthcare. We will not be lectured by a fascist Republican Party that offers the American people nothing but lies, fear, endless culture wars, and tax breaks for billionaires.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to return to the question I asked at the start of this debate: Are Americans better off than they were 18 months ago?

Think about the family sitting at the kitchen table tonight. The rent is due. The electric bill is higher, and groceries cost more. The gas tank is on empty. A prescription is waiting at the pharmacy. Somebody is trying to figure out which bill they can put off for 1 more week.

That family does not need a lecture about how great Donald Trump is. They know what life costs, and they know it costs more--much, much more--than it did 18 months ago.

Eighteen months is long enough to judge a majority by its choices. There is a lot packed into this rule, a budget resolution, a continuing resolution, a Defense bill, a disability bill, a banking bill, a bill on Congressional stock trading, and a bill to rig the elections. I could go on and on and on.

Republicans could not--could not--find a single provision for us to consider today about lowering the cost of housing, or lowering the cost of food, or lowering the cost of medicine or healthcare or electricity.

There is nothing--nothing in anything we are going to be considering does any of that or focuses on any of those issues. They have time to weaken bank oversight. They have time to combine a watered-down stock trading bill with new restrictions on voting. They have time to bring back bills that failed weeks ago. They have time to protect the President, bail out powerful special interests, and finance another endless war.

However, helping working people somehow never makes the cut. It never makes the cut.

Mr. Speaker, these bills are not just stacks of paper. They are statements on our values. They tell people who matter, who gets hurt, who gets helped, and who are expected to fend for themselves.

The answer from MAGA has been painfully clear, Mr. Speaker: The greedy get protected. The well-connected get rewarded, and everyone else gets told: Sorry, maybe next time.

Again, I ask: Are Americans better off?

The answer is ``no.''

Do the measures in this rule lower their costs, improve their healthcare, make them safer, or give them greater peace of mind?

The answer is absolutely ``no.'' Nothing does that.

We will hear talks about socialism and communism and all this other stuff to get people to not focus in on the fact that they are getting screwed over.

The American people deserve more than excuses. They deserve more than distractions. They deserve more than another blank check for the people on top from this failed Republican majority. They deserve a government that is on their side. They deserve a government that is on their side, and that is not what they are getting here.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on this rule.

We have to do better. We have to do better. The American people are hurting, and my friends on the other side of the aisle behave like everything is just fine and nobody is noticing.

Go and do in-person townhalls in your districts, I would say to all my colleagues who are listening, and you will get an earful. People have had it. They are fed up with the corruption in Washington. They are fed up with the policies that reward the well-off and well- connected. They are tired of getting screwed over.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1438 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, 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 rise in support of the rule and the underlying legislation.

Yesterday, the Committee on Rules met and produced the rule, H. Res. 1438, providing for the House's consideration of H. Con. Res. 113, H.R. 9770, H.R. 8800, H.R. 8884, H.R. 7008, and H.R. 6955.

This rule provides for consideration of H.R. 8800, the Fiscal Year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act, under a structured rule and makes in order 320 amendments.

The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and the ranking member of the Committee on Armed Services or their respective designees, and one motion to recommit.

Additionally, the rule provides that upon House passage of H.R. 8800, the Clerk shall add the text of S. 1383, the SAVE America Act, to the bill and transmit it to the Senate as one bill.

The bill further provides for consideration of H.R. 8884, the Removing Barriers to Work for Disabled Americans Act, under a closed rule.

The rule provides for 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Armed Services or their respective designees and one motion to recommit.

The rule further provides for consideration of H. Con. Res. 113, establishing the congressional budget for fiscal year 2027, under a closed rule. The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on the Budget or their respective designees.

Additionally, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 7008, the Stop Insider Trading Act, under a closed rule.

The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on House Administration or their respective designees and one motion to recommit.

The rule further provides for consideration of H.R. 6955, the Main Street Capital Access Act, under a closed rule.

The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Financial Services or their respective designees and one motion to recommit.

Finally, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 9770, the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2027, under a closed rule.

The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on House Administration or their respective designees and one motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, the rule and its six underlying measures are a direct reflection of our Republican majority's expressed commitments on multiple fronts.

Contrary to the predictable and entirely incoherent hubbub that will reverberate from the other side of the Chamber during today's debate, Republicans remain at the helm, like we always have, and remain focused, as we always have.

It is okay to tune out those on the other side of the aisle while they are blathering on, Mr. Speaker. Their fevered, political rhetoric does not carry an iota of substance.

There is a great deal of business to attend to this week, Mr. Speaker. All of us understand that time indeed is of the essence here.

Let's talk for a moment about that business.

H. Con. Res. 113 begins the process to provide urgent, necessary resources for our Nation's firefighters, reinforce election integrity measures, and support the hardworking men and women of our agricultural community so that our Nation's food supply and food security remain as strong as they possibly can be.

H.R. 9770 upholds Congress' explicit Article I duties to fund the Federal Government so that its operational continuity does not lapse or is subjected to the same disgraceful political subterfuge that our colleagues across the aisle engaged in last year.

H.R. 8800, the keystone of Congress' mandate to provide for the common defense of the Nation, delivers for our Nation's servicemembers, allocates the resources necessary to maintain a strong posture of defense and deterrence, and confronts waste, fraud, and abuse head-on.

H.R. 8884 allows disabled Americans, who want to join the workforce to better their own lives, to do so without having to worry about whether their disability benefits will disappear abruptly.

H.R. 7008 prohibits Members of Congress, their spouses, or dependent children from purchasing publicly traded stocks, while also implementing the requirement--that the American people overwhelmingly support--of requiring a photo ID to vote in Federal elections.

It is entirely disingenuous for the other side to use fear-mongering tactics to scare people into believing that Republicans are trying to take away anyone's right to vote. That is downright false.

Finally, H.R. 6955 makes life more affordable for Americans, while also empowering Main Street, by ensuring that community lenders are no longer burdened by ill-advised mandates that make it harder for them to serve families, small businesses, and local economies.

That is the business at hand, Mr. Speaker.

We are not here to entertain the ever-so-tired ranting and raving from our colleagues across the aisle that the sky is falling, the world is ending, or any kind of absurd political musings they may want to spout off.

We are here to do the people's business, the business that makes America stronger, more secure, and more prosperous.

As we celebrate the 250th year of the greatest country in the world, Republicans are working hard to strengthen America and help it endure.

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

Mr. Speaker, I will just note that our priorities are not out of whack. The number one role of the Federal Government is the defense of this Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Fuller).

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

Our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are skirting very closely to having their words taken down when they call out individual Members.

Mr. Speaker, our colleagues sometimes ask who is to blame for the lack of trust of Members of Congress. It is Members of Congress and the press who call into question acts that are done by Members of Congress that are totally legal.

We already have laws in place against insider trading. There have been a couple of Members of Congress who have been prosecuted for that, and that is appropriate, but the Stop Insider Trading Act will prevent that.

I believe, and Republicans believe, that no lawmaker should profit off of insider information. I frankly don't know how people get the insider information, but the top line of the legislation we are bringing here, the Stop Insider Trading Act, led by Committee on House Administration Chairman Bryan Steil, will ensure that lawmakers cannot use their positions to profit off insider information, if there is insider information.

The Stop Insider Trading Act has a prohibition on stock purchasing. It bans Members, their spouses, and their dependent children from purchasing securities issued by publicly traded companies. It requires Members to file a public notice at least 7 days but no more than 14 days in advance for any intended stock sale with the Clerk of the House of Representatives or the Secretary of the Senate. Then, if a Member of Congress, spouse, or dependent child decides not to sell a covered investment, the Member must publicly withdraw the notice prior to its expiration.

There are penalties, Mr. Speaker, for violators. They will be assessed a fine equal to $2,000 or 10 percent of the value of the transaction, whichever is greater, and then any net gain realized from a transaction. This is designed to make sure that Members do not take advantage of any potential information or advantage that the Member has.

Mr. Speaker, we want to restore public trust in this institution. Members are doing their jobs diligently. They do not want to be under a cloud. News outlets and social media accounts have garnered significant attention for aggregating the stock trades of Members of Congress.

Under the STOCK Act of 2012, lawmakers are prohibited from using nonpublic information for their own financial benefit, but many Americans have become concerned that the STOCK Act is insufficient and stronger measures must be implemented.

The Stop Insider Trading Act will increase transparency and reinforce to the American people that Members are working for them, not themselves.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, the voter ID provisions in this bill amend the Help America Vote Act to require States to obtain a photo ID from an individual to vote in person in a Federal election or to require a copy of the photo ID to be submitted with a ballot cast other than in person.

These requirements do not apply to an absent uniformed services voter or an individual provided the right to vote other than in person by the Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act.

The bill permits voters to use several different forms of photo ID: a valid State-issued motor vehicle driver's license that includes a photo of the individual and an expiration date, a valid State-issued identification card that includes a photo of the individual and an expiration date issued by a State motor vehicle authority, a valid United States passport for the individual, a valid photo identification card for the individual issued by the Department of Defense or the Department of Veterans Affairs, or a valid identification document issued by a Tribal government that includes a photo of the individual and an expiration date.

While my friends across the aisle claim the bill will prevent individuals who cannot afford a photo ID from voting, this is nothing but false alarmism. The Supreme Court has held photo ID laws are constitutional only where the State provides a photo ID to those who do not have them. In other words, a photo ID requirement in the bill is not a barrier to voting for someone who cannot afford to pay the typical photo ID fee.

The data supports that Democrats are being disingenuous when they claim this bill would suppress voting. The nonpartisan National Bureau of Economic Research tracked 1.6 billion data points over an 8-year period. This massive amount of data confirms strict voter ID laws have no statistically measurable negative impact on voter participation.

This comprehensive, multiyear study found zero negative impact on overall registration or turnout, no drops in participation among minority or young voters, and an increase in Hispanic participation in some ID law States.

Photo ID as a form of verification is a part of American life. Americans must show an ID to participate in a wide range of everyday activities, including boarding a plane, entering government buildings, cashing their checks, buying a gun, and enjoying Olive Garden's Never Ending Pasta Bowl.

Politico just announced that more than 6,000 noncitizens were registered to vote in New Jersey and have been voting since 2023. This is clearly an issue which must be addressed.

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

Mr. Speaker, I think after that, I will reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, we live in the greatest country in the world. We just celebrated the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. We have a lot more to be talking about, about the founding of this country, and I hope people will pay close attention to that.

We do have a government that is on the side of the American people. We believe in capitalism. Our friends across the aisle constantly talk about how much people need to be paying more in taxes. We believe on the Republican side that the people have a right to what they have earned and not that the government should take their money and spend it the way the government wants to spend it.

Let me remind our colleagues that just 1 year ago H.R. 1 delivered the largest middle- and working-class tax cut in U.S. history. Low- income workers realized the largest percentage reduction in their tax liability.

Yes, we indeed care about the American people and the fruits of their labor. Nearly 40 percent of taxpayers have claimed one of President Donald Trump's signature cuts this year.

This tax season over 7.5 million filers claimed no tax on tips, with an average deduction of over $7,000. Over 29 million filers claimed no tax on overtime with an average deduction of over $3,100, and over 35 million seniors have claimed the enhanced deduction for seniors with an average deduction of over $7,500.

We do, indeed, care for the American people in allowing them to keep the fruits of their labor.

More than 5.5 million Trump Accounts have been opened with 1.4 million eligible for the $1,000 pilot program contribution. Nearly 40 million families have claimed the enhanced child tax credit, and over 127 million filers, or 90 percent of all tax filers, have claimed the permanently doubled standard deduction.

We do, indeed, care for American taxpayers.

I am not at all surprised by the recent rant from our colleague when one-half of the Democrats could not vote for a resolution against socialism.

Mr. Speaker, it is really no secret that this is a week of monumental importance in the people's House. The rule and six underlying measures carry with them a commitment to deliver upon the priorities of the President, the Nation, and the American people.

Some are quick to write off the progress that this Republican majority has made thus far, and they are dead wrong in doing so.

This week, Mr. Speaker, we will continue to build upon that progress in just the one issue I discussed, H.R. 1.

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, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, at a time when Americans are dealing with skyrocketing prices and vulnerable populations like seniors and people with disabilities are struggling to get help with their Social Security benefits because this administration has created a customer service crisis through reckless staffing cuts, it is shameful that Republicans have chosen to bring H.R. 8884 to the floor. This bill won't lower costs, won't improve customer service, and won't make it easier for people with disabilities to access the benefits they have earned. Instead, it opens the door to cutting those benefits while making SSA's customer service crisis even worse.

H.R. 8884, the Removing Barriers to Work for Disabled Americans Act, aims to remove barriers to employment faced by individuals receiving Social Security Disability Insurance, or SSDI, benefits. It tries to do this by authorizing the Social Security Administration to conduct demonstration projects designed to test program changes that may encourage work.

Let me be clear that Democrats strongly support the goal of reducing unnecessary barriers for disabled Americans who want to explore returning to work. Over the years, Democrats many times have supported giving SSA this demonstration authority. However, the bill before us today tries to accomplish this worthwhile goal in the worst possible way.

Instead of protecting beneficiaries, it hands the Trump administration broad new authority to experiment with Social Security disability benefits with virtually no meaningful guardrails.

First, let me be clear about what Social Security disability benefits are for. SSDI supports some of the most vulnerable Americans who have severe and long-lasting medical impairments that prevent them from being able to work at a level needed to financially support themselves.

SSDI is an earned benefit, with the average beneficiary having worked and paid into the system for 22 years before becoming disabled. It also has stringent eligibility criteria. To qualify, applicants must provide extensive medical evidence and undergo a rigorous eligibility determination process. Many applicants are initially denied and must appeal a process that often takes a year or more. Even after all levels of appeal, SSA typically finds only about one in three applicants eligible. SSDI benefits are extremely low, at an average of about $20,000 a year.

Most SSDI beneficiaries could not survive without these monthly payments, and that is why we must ensure that any potential change to the program does not put those benefits at risk. Yet, this bill explicitly leaves that possibility on the table. Rather than protecting earned disability benefits, it gives the administration broad discretion to test policies that could reduce them.

This isn't some abstract policy debate. Here is what this could look like in the real world.

Picture this: You have been on Social Security disability for the past 10 years after a devastating car accident rendered you unable to work and support yourself. Your monthly SSDI check isn't much, but it is the reason you can pay your bills and keep food on the table. Then, one day, the Social Security Administration contacts you about an opportunity that sounds promising--a demonstration program that will make it easier for you to get a part-time job while remaining on SSDI.

This sounds great to you because it could mean some extra income for you and your family. You sign up and start working only to realize that you are no better off financially because for every dollar you make at your new job, you lose a dollar in SSDI benefits.

After a few months, the demands of the new job start taking a toll on your health, and it becomes clear that it isn't sustainable. You contact SSA to revoke your participation in the demonstration so that you can start receiving your full SSDI benefit amount

again, but SSA doesn't reinstate your benefits right away.

Two weeks later, you still have to call SSA's 1-800 number every day, trying to get your benefits back. Every time, you are on hold for more than an hour. Even when you do get through to a staff member, they say there is a backlog. No one can tell you when you will get your check. Rent is due in a few days. You don't have the money. You feel desperate.

That is exactly the kind of outcome this bill fails to protect. Here is why. The problem is simple. This bill only guarantees that an individual's total income will not be reduced due to participation in a demonstration project. That deceptive phrasing does not guarantee that your Social Security disability benefits won't be cut or reduced because you are earning money at a part-time job.

These are two very different things. The empty promise of no reduction in total income leaves the administration with enormous discretion over people's earned benefits.

This isn't a hypothetical concern. The Trump administration has repeatedly tried to cut disability benefits and make it harder for disabled Americans to qualify. They have shown us exactly what they want to do given the opportunity.

During the first Trump administration, President Trump repeatedly tried to throw disabled people off their benefits by making it harder to qualify and subjecting them to more frequent continuing disability reviews. He proposed a budget plan that tried to slash disability benefits by $50 billion over 10 years, and a key part of that plan was to push beneficiaries into demonstration programs.

No past demonstrations had indicated that savings of any level, let alone $50 billion, could be possible without punitive measures to cut beneficiaries who can't return to work.

Just last year, the Trump administration was reportedly considering a plan to eliminate age as a factor in deciding whether someone is unable to work and eligible for SSDI, which could have blocked an estimated 750,000 people from receiving benefits. Thankfully, this plan was dropped after enormous public outcry, but that shouldn't be enough to convince us that this administration isn't still gunning to slash benefits.

An administration that has a track record of trying to cut Americans' earned disability benefits should not be given any new authority to conduct open-ended experiments that could reduce benefits.

This couldn't come at a worse time. Thanks to the administration cutting over 7,000 staff at Social Security, our constituents are waiting for hours on the phone and facing extremely long backlogs when trying to get their issues resolved.

SSDI beneficiaries rely on their benefits every month to make ends meet. They can't afford delays or roadblocks to getting the full amount of the benefits they have earned.

To make matters worse, this bill would require any new demonstration programs to be funded by SSA's operating budget, the same budget that supports the agency's customer service. In other words, this bill asks SSA to take money away from serving the public to run experiments that could jeopardize people's disability benefits.

When the Ways and Means Committee marked up this bill last month, Ranking Member John Larson offered a commonsense amendment that would have addressed these concerns by requiring demonstration projects to be funded not by SSA's customer service budget but by the SSDI trust funds, and by adding guardrails to what the Trump administration might do with the demonstration authority.

Those guardrails included ensuring that no one would see their benefits, not just total income but actual benefits, reduced due to participation in a demonstration.

The amendment would also have ensured that no demonstration could be used to deny eligibility for new SSDI applicants and would have required the SSA to provide notice and public comments on the details of any planned demonstrations.

These were basic protections to ensure that people with disabilities couldn't lose their earned benefits simply for participating in a demonstration project, yet every Republican voted this down.

If Republicans truly cared about making life better for people on Social Security disability benefits, we would be discussing bills to increase monthly benefits, fix the appeals process so people with disabilities aren't waiting years to get approved for benefits, and fix customer service at SSA by undoing this administration's disastrous staffing cuts.

Instead, Republicans have brought us a bill that gives the Trump administration new authority to experiment with Social Security disability benefits while failing to protect the very people it claims to help. People with disabilities deserve certainty, not experiments with the benefits they have earned.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no,'' and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Helping Purple Heart recipients find employment is wonderful and laudable. There is nothing in H.R. 8884 that requires SSA to test the Purple Heart Freedom to Work Act. It is not mentioned in the underlying bill at all.

At a Ways and Means Committee markup, Ranking Member Larson asked the majority if SSA had shared information on what demonstration projects it had planned. They said: No. Trust us.

In fact, when the bill was considered at the Rules Committee a few weeks ago, Ranking Member McGovern made a motion to add a new section to the rule that would have provided for immediate consideration of Representative Scott's Purple Heart bill on the House floor. Republicans all voted ``no'' on this motion, including Representative Scott himself.

If Republicans want to do the Purple Heart bill, let's vote on that bill, not on H.R. 8884, which doesn't even mention Purple Heart recipients.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).

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

Mr. Speaker, the risk that this bill poses to vulnerable Social Security disability benefits cannot be overstated. President Trump has tried time and time again to kick people with disabilities off of their benefits, including by pushing people into demonstration programs. This bill would give this administration open-ended authority to do that.

Congress has authorized this kind of SSDI demonstration authority in the past but only after working with SSA to closely review its intended projects and their impacts.

In contrast, the current SSA has not disclosed any information on how it plans to use the SSDI demonstration authority, and Ways and Means Republicans rejected a Democratic amendment that would have required a notice and public comment period for any demonstration before it gets enacted.

The bottom line is that this administration cannot be trusted to not cut people's benefits. These are earned benefits that people with disabilities rely on to make ends meet. This bill puts that lifeline in jeopardy, and that is why this House should reject this bill.

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

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