Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 7006) making further consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026, and for other purposes.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule.

Let me begin by acknowledging the hard work of our colleagues on the Appropriations Committee who, despite deep divisions and really difficult political conditions, have assembled a bipartisan compromise to fund additional portions of the Federal Government for the current fiscal year.

The bill before us containing the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act and the National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, includes hard-fought Democratic priorities, despite our minority position in the House and Senate. These Democratic priorities will help working families and small businesses safeguard our elections and protect American values and interests abroad.

Democratic appropriators secured funding for vital government programs that the White House sought to cut, including the CDFI fund, which promotes economic development in low-income communities; the Small Business Administration, which provides invaluable financing that allows people to start or grow their businesses; and the Election Assistance Commission, which supports State and Federal election integrity across the country. The package also provides a long overdue increase in funding for the Federal Defender Services, which gives access to justice to those who cannot afford it.

Importantly, the bill restores funding, with meaningful safeguards, for humanitarian and democracy building programs at the Department of State, programs that were illegally shut down earlier this year by the Trump administration.

This bill ensures that the U.S. will continue to provide economic and humanitarian assistance. Specifically, it will support women and women's health in developing countries and will combat HIV and AIDS worldwide.

These are victories, and they matter. They matter for small business owners struggling to secure a loan. They matter for low-income neighborhoods that are essentially red-lined by big banks and that rely upon Community Development Financial Institutions. These victories matter for women and girls around the globe seeking safety, education, and healthcare.

The restoration of State Department funding matters for all of us who still believe in the promise of American leadership in advancing a safe and prosperous global community.

Ultimately, we cannot afford to let funding lapse for those agencies, and given that we are 4 months into the current fiscal year, I commend our appropriators for crafting these bipartisan bills to address fiscal year 2026 so that we can immediately start working on appropriations for next year, fiscal year 2027.

However, Mr. Speaker, commendable as this package is and as much as I respect the work of our colleagues on the Appropriations Committee, I also believe this package reveals the limits of what we can achieve to meet the needs of the American people under Republican control.

Let's be clear: This bill isn't some compromise where both sides get a little of what they want. It is the most Democrats could get from a Republican Party that continues to knuckle under to the whims of the Trump administration and turn a blind eye to its worst abuses. That is why our Republican colleagues have rejected multiple provisions to rein in the unconstitutional power grabs by this President and his administration.

Republicans control the Senate, the House, and the White House. Under unified Republican control, we have seen the Federal Government used not to help the American people but to punish the President's enemies and to enrich and protect the rich and well-connected at the expense of the American people.

We have seen it when the Republican trifecta passed a partisan bill that gave huge tax cuts to big business and billionaires but refused to extend the ACA tax credits that helped millions of Americans afford their health coverage.

In their main legislative accomplishment so far, Trump and congressional Republicans blew a massive hole in the deficit with their tax cuts for the rich and then tried to pay for it with cuts to Medicaid, SNAP, and public health programs that Americans rely upon.

We are seeing it play out after a masked Federal agent shot and killed Renee Good, an American citizen in Minnesota. In the wake of that killing, we learned that Department of Justice leadership blocked the decades-long practice of initiating an investigation of an officer- involved shooting by the Office of Civil Rights. Having blocked that investigation, they instead opened a politically motivated criminal investigation of Ms. Good's widow as it tries to brand protected speech by Americans as domestic terrorism.

The failure to investigate the lawfulness of the officer's use of force and the weaponization of the investigation to attack the widow are so beyond the pale that it has sparked a mass resignation by career prosecutors at the Department of Justice.

It goes on. Last weekend, the Trump White House launched a criminal investigation against Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, not because he broke the law, but apparently because he refused to surrender the independence of the Fed and submit to the President's demand that he lower interest rates. This is an unprecedented attack on the independence of the Federal Reserve, an institution that is critical to the stability of our economy because it is above partisan politics. Yet, under Republican rule, the independence of the Fed and other nonpartisan agencies is being destroyed before our eyes because this President cannot tolerate dissent, and his party will not restrain him.

Just last week, the administration blocked $10 billion in social services funding to States with Democratic leadership. Yesterday, President Trump went even further, announcing his intent to withhold Federal funds from any State that does not embrace his toxic immigration priorities. This is extortion, plain and simple, directed against the American people he was elected to serve, and the House Republican majority is letting him get away with it.

Of course, we cannot forget the continued coverup of the Epstein files. The Department of Justice was mandated by law to release the Epstein files last month, last year now, but the vast majority of the files are still being kept secret, leading us to ask again: Whom is Trump trying to protect, and why is it the Republicans refuse to hold him responsible for this blatant coverup? What possible justification could there be for this secrecy, except to protect the wealthy and powerful men implicated in those documents.

A suggestion of the answers have come from an unlikely source. According to former Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, the President yelled at her in a phone call that he didn't want to release the Epstein files because ``my friends will get hurt.''

The list goes on and on, and the Republican agenda is clear. They abuse the powers of the Federal Government to protect the elite and punish the vulnerable.

While I will support the appropriations minibus this week, I call on my Republican colleagues in the House and the Senate to take seriously their obligations to this institution under Article I of the Constitution. We cannot sit by and watch as the executive branch grabs more and more power at the expense of Congress and at the expense of the Constitution.

Congress' power of the purse is not just a budgetary tool. It is one of the last real checks we have on a President who believes that he is above the law and only constrained by his own morality.

I know my Democratic colleagues fought for everything they could in this bill under deeply constrained circumstances, so the failures in this bill are a reflection of the Republican majority, which continues to look the other way as the President dismantles our Federal institutions and subverts our democracy.

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

Mr. Speaker, just to be clear, I didn't say these were good bills. I said they were the best bills we could get under the circumstances, and certainly we would craft very different bills.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, nobody is questioning that the Federal Government has the duty and authority to arrest and detain and deport these so-called worst of the worst, rapists, drug dealers, people who have been convicted, but that is not what is happening across the country. That is not what ICE is doing.

Eighty percent of the people that they have picked up and that they are detaining have no criminal record. What we are seeing in Minnesota, this door-to-door, stopping people in parking lots, and asking if they are citizens, that is not targeted enforcement. That is putting masked and armed agents on the streets and causing chaos, as we have repeatedly seen.

The Rules chairwoman mentioned one of the people who has been picked up is absolutely someone who probably deserves to be picked up. However, they have had over 2,000 ICE agents in Minneapolis for about 6 weeks, and they have arrested about 20 people who fit that profile.

In addition, of course, they have killed Renee Good. They have arrested American citizens. They have tackled kids outside their high school. They have tackled teenagers working at Target. They have terrorized an entire community. That does appear to be part of the point here is to create propaganda and videos to scare Americans to project this military power in our streets, which, for any student of American history, that is why we left the U.K.

I think that the objection here is to the lawfulness of what has been happening in Minnesota, in Chicago, in L.A., across the country, and the need to really change how things are being done there.

If we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to make in order Mr. Hoyer's amendment to the FSGG appropriations bill, which restricts obligating any remaining unobligated balances for the new FBI consolidated headquarters facility until GSA, in consultation with the FBI, submits the contracted and completed architectural and engineering plan for review.

Mr. Speaker, our colleague, Mr. Hoyer, has served with honor for over four decades and has ushered countless pieces of bipartisan legislation through this House.

Now, in this case, all he is asking for is a vote, that the Members of this body vote on an amendment to make sure that before an extremely consequential and expensive decision is made with respect to the location of the FBI headquarters, we receive the architectural and engineering plan that the General Services Administration is supposed to complete. That seems like the least we could do.

Regardless of one's position on Mr. Hoyer's amendment, it deserves a vote on the House floor.

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 gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the sponsor of the amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland.

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

Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the Rules Committee, Republicans rejected over 70 amendments submitted by Members of both parties. This included a handful of amendments that I have submitted, which if adopted, I obviously think would have improved the bill.

I will highlight those amendments in light of the reporting about the chaos at the Department of Justice after its leadership quashed a transparent investigation into the fatal shooting of Renee Good by an ICE agent and instead insisted on opening a criminal investigation into her widow. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and other Trump officials and conservative commentators have tried to brand Renee Good as a domestic terrorist in gross contradiction to known facts, but that is not the key issue here.

Putting aside the refusal to investigate the lawfulness of the agent's use of deadly force under those circumstances, and the heinous implication that Renee Good somehow deserved to die because she objected to the presence of armed and masked Federal agents in her neighborhood and that she was disrespectful, the President's characterization, this investigation, and these comments from Secretary Noem, are the direct result of an underreported and underappreciated effort by the Trump administration to criminalize constitutionally protected speech.

Earlier this year, President Trump issued a sweeping memo, directing Federal agencies to target Americans with criminal and civil investigations on the explicit basis of constitutionally protected speech.

The memo literally defines specific categories of political opinions and beliefs that law enforcement must now

treat as instances of domestic terrorism.

Following this directive, the Department of Justice then changed its policies to direct Federal law enforcement agents to target Americans with criminal investigations for expressing these sanctioned political views or for participating in protests against the Trump administration.

This is the kind of political oppression you would expect to see from authoritarian states like Russia or China, but no, it is here. It is happening at home.

Our Republican colleagues, who are often so quick to complain about censorship or the weaponization of the Federal Government, have remained silent while President Trump has turned the Department of Justice into a tool of political suppression.

Last night, I proposed an amendment to prohibit the use of any Federal taxpayer dollars to investigate or prosecute Americans on the basis of their lawful and constitutionally protected speech.

Mr. Speaker, every single Republican on the Rules Committee voted against my amendment, blocking it from coming to the House floor so our entire body could vote on it.

The First Amendment protects everyone's speech. There are no carve- outs for those we disagree with. Apparently, as we saw in last night's vote, House Republicans do not agree with that fundamental American value.

While Rules Republicans voted down my amendment to protect Americans' right to free speech, they did make in order a questionable amendment from our Rules colleague, Representative Roy, that would defund the D.C. Federal courts and specifically withdraw the salaries for the staff of two Federal judges.

These two judges have been targeted by President Trump and congressional Republicans because they have done their job. They have not bent to the President's will. They have interpreted the law as written. Therefore, House Republicans are taking the extreme position of zeroing out the salaries of their staff. It is a cruel and un- American attack on the judiciary that completely subverts our constitutional order.

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, underneath this debate about the appropriations minibus is the difficult reality that House Republicans have abdicated their responsibilities to this Chamber, to the Congress, and to the Constitution. We are not just debating a budget bill. We are debating whether Congress will continue to function not just as a coequal branch of government but as the Article I source of the laws that run our country.

Under Republican leadership, we have seen Congress turned into a rubber stamp. Republicans have surrendered to the whims of a President who sees laws as optional and power as personal.

These two appropriations bills, while necessary for the continued operation of essential government functions, are the limit of how far the Republican Party is willing to go in defying the President.

Unfortunately, Republicans are more interested in protecting power than in responsibly governing for the benefit of the American people. Our job isn't to protect the President. Our job is to fund the government responsibly and to serve as a check on executive overreach.

As masked agents roam our streets, terrorizing our communities, as Trump entertains starting another forever war, and as the Epstein files remain covered up, now is the time for Congress to stand up for the American people.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 7006, and that I may include tabular material on the same.

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

Mr. Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 7006, the Financial Services- General Government bill, which institutes fiscal year 2026 funding for the Financial Services and General Government and National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs appropriations measures.

This Congress has a fundamental responsibility to fund the government, and this two-bill package is our next step toward completing the full 12 bills.

When done the right way, funding the government is not a single vote. It is a process that requires steady, deliberative progress. I am proud to say we are doing just that.

Today marks the second time this month that we are bringing bipartisan, bicameral bills to the floor. We promised the American people a responsible Member-driven process, and that is precisely what we are delivering.

This two-bill package reflects Member input, the America-first agenda, and the collaboration across political aisles and Chambers that serves the Nation.

Advancing full-year appropriations matters because it gives the country certainty and direction. It allows vital agencies to plan, make decisions, and do their jobs based on today's realities and not policies from the past. That is how we move from promises to action and carry out the America-first agenda mandated by the people.

Mr. Chair, those priorities are reflected throughout the measure before us. Through the Financial Services-General Government portion of the bill, Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee Chairman David Joyce advanced important provisions that drive economic growth, uphold consumer freedom, and support entrepreneurship and small businesses, reinforcing the foundations of the American Dream for people and job creators nationwide.

It also advances needed government efficiencies by cutting waste, modernizing technology and cybersecurity, and addressing unused Federal space and buildings. Crucially, it also protects Americans from a supercharged IRS by cutting enforcement and redirecting resources to customer service. This is especially important as we approach tax- filing season and implement the working families tax cut, allowing families to keep more of what they earn.

Just as this package strengthens economic security and accountability, it also reinforces America's security and leadership at home and abroad. The National Security-Department of State measures champion an America-first policy agenda. We replaced the weakness of prior administrations by restoring President Trump's Peace Through Strength agenda. National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Subcommittee Chairman Mario Diaz-Balart took decisive action to reprioritize funding in support of our Nation's security. This allowed us to eliminate $9.3 billion in spending while reasserting deterrence and leadership.

To protect the safety, freedom, and prosperity of the American people, we showed that focused strategy, not endless spending, is what delivers results. We make critical investments in high-impact initiatives that combat narcotics and human trafficking, confront the malign influence of the Chinese Communist Party, and counter terrorism.

We reinforce democracy and human rights efforts, and we defend religious liberty. As both a moral duty and vital American interest, we will not tolerate religious persecution and attacks on faith. Upholding those values strengthens American leadership and advances freedom around the world.

We also eliminate wasteful initiatives, implement the necessary accountability at the United Nations, and prohibit any funds for things like UNRWA or the Taliban. The bottom line: We counter our foes, stand with our friends, and ensure investments are focused on security, keeping Americans safe, and enhancing our global edge.

Taken in its entirety, the package serves a clear purpose: safety, strength, and freedom. That is certainly something that we can all support.

I commend the detailed work of our chairmen, Representatives Joyce and

Diaz-Balart. Their leadership and careful stewardship of this package ensured that the substance of the bill matched the responsibility of the task.

I thank their accompanying ranking members, Representative Steny Hoyer and Lois Frankel, for their professionalism and engagement in the process. This work demonstrates what we can accomplish through collaboration and respect.

I also particularly thank my good friend and working partner, the distinguished ranking member of the full committee, Ms. DeLauro, and I also thank the superb staff on both sides of the aisle who worked tirelessly to present us with the product before us today.

As I look ahead, Mr. Chairman, to today's vote, I am grateful for the future that I see, one where President Trump keeps his pen ready because full-year appropriations are advancing and certainty is being restored.

Mr. Chair, I thank my colleagues for their time. I urge all Members to support this bipartisan package, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart), my very good friend and the vice chair of the full committee and chair of the National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. Chair, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Joyce), my very good friend and the distinguished chair of the Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Edwards), my very good friend who is the distinguished vice chairman of the National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Subcommittee.

Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from North Carolina.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. LaLota), who is the distinguished vice chairman of the Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Alford), my very good friend and valued member of the Appropriations Committee.

Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Missouri.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hill), my very good friend, the distinguished chairman of the Financial Services Committee.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Turner), my very good friend and classmate.

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

Mr. Chair, I begin by, number one, thanking my very good friend, the ranking member of the full committee. As I said in my opening statement, this is a process, and we are a long way into the process now, thanks, in large part, to her efforts and certainly the efforts of the ranking members and chairs of the two committees whose legislative work we are considering today.

It is important to recognize that these bills together reduce funding. They actually reduce funding. A CR would actually cost us more. They also update, refine, and change language in some cases that is 2 and 3 years old and is simply out of date with the current circumstances.

If we were to fail to pass these bills in these respective areas, then that language would remain intact. I think it is important to recognize that we were able to come to agreements in this way simply because we have a common commitment to a set of principles and a process that really isn't partisan in nature.

I know my friend, Ms. DeLauro, and I know her colleagues believe very much in the Article I power of Congress. We assert that power by passing appropriations bills. I commend my friends for working with us to do that.

I know my friends also believe very deeply in the importance and the power of the Appropriations Committee. So do I. The fact is, we know that to get our job done, at the end of the day, it is going to have to be bipartisan and bicameral. A lot of people are going to have to move or give up some things that they feel very strongly about for the greater good of making sure that the Government of the United States is appropriately funded. We do it in a way that, again, as my good friend Mr. Hoyer said, it is not the bill any of us would have written individually, but the point is, it is a collaborative effort of give and take that has produced something that the vast majority of us can and will vote for today.

This is eight bills into this process. We have a big job in the few days ahead of us till the end of the month, but I share my friend the ranking member's confidence that we can get that job done and that we can be back here and find a way to put all these bills in front of this Chamber for their consideration and also pass them and make sure the Government of the United States is funded on a bipartisan, bicameral basis through the balance of this fiscal year.

Mr. Chair, I share my friend's pride in the product in front of us. I know if she got to write it all by herself, it would look a little bit different. She knows if I got to write it all by myself, it would look different. The point is, this is one we got to write together with give and take, and I am very proud that this committee got every one of its bills out of committee, sat down and worked with our colleagues in the other Chamber on both sides of the aisle, and has produced a product that we know we have broad consensus on.

Mr. Chair, I will end by commending all those involved. My friend, Ms. DeLauro, always makes a point of how important the staff is in this process, and that is absolutely true. While a lot of people were celebrating the holidays, and appropriately so, that wasn't true if you worked on the Appropriations staff, unless you were one of the lucky three that got their bills done last year. They had a merry Christmas.

Everybody else was working through the Christmas holidays to produce these products. It is enormously complex. There is a lot of work involved, an extraordinary amount of work for the staff. I share my friend's pride in their efforts and gratitude for their success.

Mr. Chair, I urge the passage of H.R. 7006. I will also remind everyone that it is not quite done. We have a lot to do in the next few days ahead of us, but this helps set the precedent, helps move the process along, and gives us a much better chance of success as we deal with these final, critical bills. It will make sure that we both avoid a shutdown and give the American people assurance that the government will be functional, operational, and working in a bipartisan, bicameral process between now and September 30 of this year.

Mr. Chair, I urge the passage of the legislation before us, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 5 minutes.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this package today, which includes the Financial Services-General Government and the National Security- Department of State-Related Programs appropriations bills.

I begin by offering my gratitude to everyone who put in the long hours and late nights to craft this package: Ranking Member Steny Hoyer of Financial Services and Lois Frankel on National Security-Department of State, who led these negotiations and secured important provisions which we could all be proud of.

I thank the Appropriations Committee staff in particular: Matt Smith, Erin Kolodjeski, Philip Tizzani, Ed Etzkorn, and Laurie Mignone, who worked tirelessly to produce this legislation.

I thank our counterparts in the majority, led by my friend, Chairman Cole, and the subcommittee chairs, David Joyce and Mario Diaz-Balart.

These two bills are a continuation of our efforts to reassert Congress' power of the purse, reject $163 billion in cuts proposed by the Trump administration, constrain the White House's abuse of the budget process, and protect Democratic priorities at home and abroad.

This bill supports the small businesses and entrepreneurs that fuel the American economy by providing more than $1 billion for the Small Business Administration and increasing funding for entrepreneurial development programs by $13 million.

Small businesses employ nearly half of the American workforce. At a time when so many families are feeling the weight of the affordability crisis and job prospects feel far and few between, we must do everything in our power to increase economic opportunities in the communities that need it most.

In support of this goal, this bill also provides $324 million for community development financial institutions, rejecting efforts by the Trump administration to fully eliminate large portions of this program.

As we look ahead to an election year, this bill increases funding for election security grants by $30 million, providing States and localities with the resources that they need to shore up our election infrastructure and defend our democracy against any form of interference that could deny us the most basic right.

In addition to our right to vote, this bill protects our right to counsel codified in the Sixth Amendment by increasing funding for Federal public defenders by $315 million. This helps to ensure due process is not just a privilege reserved for the wealthy few, but a protection guaranteed to all of us, regardless of status.

This package not only supports democracy at home but advances it abroad. It protects funding to fully meet our treaty obligations, affirming American leadership at the U.N. and other international organizations.

It supports women around the globe, protecting funding for bilateral family planning and the U.N. Population Fund, and it facilitates American cooperation with international environmental initiatives by blocking policy riders that would have prevented our participation.

In fact, there is not a single poison pill policy rider in these bills. Both we and our Republican colleagues agreed to leave these partisan provisions out of this package and pursue a reasonable compromise. I am glad that we could reach this agreement and move forward with a package that isn't perfect, but it is one that we can all support.

While there are certainly some things that I would change about these measures, they are both vastly superior to yet another continuing resolution or a lapse in funding, either of which would afford the Trump administration greater leeway to abuse the budget process, which they have shown an eagerness to do from the moment they took office.

Mr. Chairman, I am proud of the work that was done in a bipartisan fashion to produce this funding package. I look forward to voting for it, and I encourage my colleagues to vote for it.

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

Mr. Chair, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the distinguished ranking member of the Committee on Financial Services.

Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland.

Mr. Chair, I yield 6 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Lois Frankel), the distinguished ranking member of the National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Subcommittee.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Meng), who is the distinguished ranking member of the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Subcommittee.

Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from New York.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Titus).

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

Mr. Chair, I think it is fair to say that many within this institution and

also outside of the institution thought that we could not get an appropriations process in the U.S. Congress back on track, that we would be unable to pass appropriations bills, that we would face another potential government shutdown, and that we could not make the process work in the way that it has historically worked, which is Democrats and Republicans coming together to hammer out bills that meet the needs of the American people and do this every single year, which it has done historically.

In a negotiation, no one gets everything that they want. You compromise for a greater good, and you need willing partners to participate in that effort.

I believe that what we have done here is to show the naysayers that by entrusting appropriations bills to appropriators, we could get the job done. That is what we are doing with six bills already passed and signed and two bills that we will pass today. That is 8 of the 12 appropriations bills, and I believe we are on track to pass all 12 bills by January 30.

Now, if we do not come to an agreement, there are two options. The first option is a continuing resolution, which we can all conclude is no way to run a government. Quite frankly, for me personally, I don't want to turn over the power of the Appropriations Committee to any executive, Democratic or Republican. I believe that the power of the purse resides within the Congress. The second option is a shutdown, which, as we know, is the worst of all possible outcomes.

It hurts the American people, and it really shortchanges the American people. It puts them at risk. It may satisfy a need or an urge that someone here has, but it doesn't reflect well on what happens to the American people. I think we have shown the naysayers that it can be done.

Mr. Chair, I will compliment the chair of the full committee for understanding the need to reassert the constitutional power of the purse entrusted to the Congress through the Appropriations Committee and that we do have to hammer out the bills in a civil way; not for the purposes of the process but for what the consequences are of these 12 bills and the services that they provide to the American people. Whether it is agriculture in rural America, whether it is education and the ability of children to be able to succeed, or whether it is healthcare or transportation, which, in this case, is our role in the world and how we preserve our national security, what we do with our financial circumstances, what we do with our community development of financial institutions to help local communities be able to thrive economically, that is what is within the bills.

It is not just a process. It is the content of these efforts which make that difference and provide what government is here to do: opportunity for people to be able to succeed, to be able to thrive, and to be able to take care of themselves and their families.

Mr. Chair, the strategy and the strength of the Appropriations Committee and its work on behalf of the American people are the heartbeat of the U.S. Government. I am proud to support the bipartisan, bicameral bill that we have fashioned and, again, give credit to both our Republican chairs and our Democratic ranking members for the great work and their negotiating skills to get it done, and to the staff, above all. I am sorry to other staffs, but the Appropriations staff is second to none. They keep our names on the door. They make it possible for these bills to pass.

Mr. Chair, I will just say it is a good package. It reasserts Congress' power of the purse. It does rein in the administration, and it does, for me, protect key Democratic priorities.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support these bills today and to move forward as we continue to look at the next several bills that we have coming up so that we can, by January 30, pass all the appropriations bills and make a difference for the American people.

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

Chairman, I oppose this amendment. The National Endowment for Democracy supports initiatives for which many of my Republican colleagues proudly proclaimed their support. Advocates in Iran supported by NED have been instrumental in documenting the brutality of the Ayatollah's regime.

Over the last several days, we have seen some of the most egregious acts of violent repression in decades as thousands of Iranian protestors take to the streets. The work of groups backed by the National Endowment for Democracy is more important now than ever.

The only people who benefit when we pull back our support for democracy advocates around the world are the dictators and the despots who oppress them.

Mr. Chair, I encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to oppose this amendment and hold firm on the agreement that we negotiated.

Mr. Chair, I thank the former chair and ranking member for yielding. I thank her for her work. I thank Mr. Cole for his work.

Anybody who knows me knows that I am opposed to CRs, but I am for keeping the government open, if those are the only alternatives.

Mr. Chair, this would not be my bill, but I think probably most of the Members on this floor can say that. It is a bill that cooperatively has been made better, I think, as it has passed through the House and Senate in conference.

It provides increases for several key programs for the American people.

That includes a $13 million increase over the fiscal year 2025 enacted level for entrepreneurial development programs at the Small Business Administration. The ranking member mentioned that program, but it is critically important to our communities and to the small business community.

This bill also increases funding for election security grants by $30 million. I created that program, along with Bob Ney from Ohio, when we passed the Help America Vote Act. We all want to make sure our elections are run well. At that point in time, we distributed to the States over $3 billion. This is $45 million for 50 States, not a lot of money, but it is proper for the Federal Government to help pay for the elections that are run by the locals that include United States Senators and Members of Congress.

The judiciary, Mr. Chairman, receives $584 million or a 6.2 percent increase over the 2025 enacted, which is what they asked for. The reason we wanted to do that is to make sure that the courts can act efficiently, effectively, and justly. We also included $142 million or a 19 percent increase for court security. Unfortunately, as we see on our streets today, we are living in an era in which violence is too often repaired to.

Crucially, the bill fixes the funding hole for Federal Public Defender services, which are constitutionally required, providing an increase of $315 million or 22 percent over the 2025 enacted level to meet constitutional responsibilities.

Other programs for the Department of the Treasury, including the community development financial institutions, so critical for small communities and communities of little means, were flat funded in the fiscal year 2025 enacted level, instead of being eliminated. While it is not everything we would want, it is a vast improvement over what was requested.

Even still, Mr. Chair, some of my colleagues may notice my lack of enthusiasm for this final bill.

This bill's $1 billion or 9 percent cut to the Internal Revenue Service below the fiscal year 2025 enacted is particularly concerning to me. I have made this point I think every time we have considered this bill. I might say that we tried to overcome this deficiency and have not yet done that.

It includes a $438 million or an 8 percent cut to IRS enforcement. Now, what does cutting enforcement mean? It means that we have gone from 9 percent in looking at tax returns over a million dollars to 0.6 percent. What incentive is that to people who make a lot of money and who try to avoid taxation? The little guy has to pick up the tab. Mr. Chair, that cut will cost the American people dearly by making it easier for millionaires, billionaires, and corporations to avoid paying the taxes they owe under existing law.

Nevertheless, this bill is better than it would have otherwise been. IRS data indicates that every $1 produces $7. A Harvard study shows that for the top 10 percent, every dollar invested in enforcement brings us $12 in additional revenue in taxes owed but not paid. Who will have to pick up the tab? As I said, hardworking Americans who dutifully pay their taxes.

If you are serious about fiscal responsibility, as I am and as I think many are----

If you are serious, you have to be serious about collecting revenue that is due and owing. That means funding the IRS, which has been understaffed and underresourced far too long.

Now, I am concerned not only by the IRS but also the FBI. For two decades, I have worked to help the FBI move out of the crumbling, unhealthy J. Edgar Hoover Building and into a new consolidated headquarters that meets its security and operational needs. The administration has decided to move the FBI from an inadequate 51-year- old building to an inadequate 28-year-old building, the Reagan Building. Its exposed location and its design as an accessible public- private facility would greatly undermine the FBI security.

I will continue to work on that throughout the year that I have remaining to me.

There was language in the CJS bill that I wanted the Rules Committee to include the same exact language, saying simply that we would oversee the plans of the GSA and the FBI before we spend money. That was the responsible thing to do. I am sorry, Mr. Chair, that we did not do it, but I am going to support this bill.

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for recognizing me.

Mr. Chair, I presume this is a message amendment. I presume that because I know that the gentleman who offered it is bright, knowledgeable, and knows this amendment is clearly unconstitutional.

I am sure he has read the Constitution. He talks about it from time to time. Of course, the language of the Constitution is very clear for exactly the reason that the Founders did not want us to be able to monetarily penalize them for judgments with which we disagreed.

They wanted an independent judiciary. They wanted a Nation of laws and not of men. They wanted a nation of laws that are not compromised by threats of cutting salaries and changing lifestyles so that the judiciary would be, unlike England, who had a king who made the laws. It would be the parliament and the courts.

Mr. Chair, I suggest we withdraw this amendment, with all due respect to my friend from Texas, because surely he would not want to go against the Constitution of the United States of America.

Mr. Chair, I also want to say that I am honored to serve as the ranking member. I would rather be chairman. I am honored to serve as the ranking member with the distinguished Member of this body, Mr. Joyce.

If he would like me to yield to him now, I will. If not, I want to thank him for his leadership of our committee, which has been collegial and positive. I think it has led to this resolution today.

Mr. Chair, I urge strenuously and by the way, let me mention to the gentleman from Texas he is protected by the Constitution of the United States from having exactly the same thing done to him.

Mr. Chair, I thank the Chairman, Mr. Sessions, from the great State of Texas for his remarks. I want to tell the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy) that the gentleman who offered this amendment is protected by that same Constitution of the United States from having this done to him. Surely he would want to do unto others as he would want done unto him.

Mr. Chair, I urge strenuously the defeat of this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.

Mr. Chairman, the gentleman has raised a point. He has carefully drafted this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, his rhetoric, however, and the other gentleman who spoke has been about an individual, about a judge. Their effort is to indirectly do what the Constitution says they cannot do directly.

This Congress ought to recognize that the Constitution clearly had in mind that you cannot do this, directly or indirectly, when the expressed intent of the outcome of the adoption of this amendment is to cut the salaries of judges with whom they disagree.

That would not be a nation of laws. It would be a nation of men. That, we should hold askew, Mr. Chairman, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I again urge the rejection of this amendment. It is clearly designed to alter opinions based upon the threat of being reduced in monetary ability to proceed.

They disagree with the judge. There is a way to go about that. It is to appeal, not to threaten financial retribution.

Mr. Chair, for the sake of our democracy and the sanctity of something that makes America special, which is a justice system that works unrelated to threats of retribution, I urge the defeat of this amendment.

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

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 992 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), 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 bill and the underlying legislation.

Yesterday, the Rules Committee met and produced a rule, House Resolution 992, providing for the House's consideration of a single measure, H.R. 7006, the Financial Services and General Government and National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2026.

The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 7006 under a structured rule, with two amendments made in order. Further, the rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Appropriations, or their respective designees, and one motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, following last week's progress in advancing three separate appropriations bills through the committee and on the floor, we have returned this week to continue our work. H.R. 7006 was negotiated in good faith on a bipartisan, bicameral basis.

President Trump's priorities, alongside the priorities of the American people, are interwoven within this important package.

Let me make this abundantly clear, Mr. Speaker: Not only does this legislative package contain no poison pills, but it also cuts foreign aid by 16 percent. That is more than $9 billion.

Further, this package is part of an agreement that keeps fiscal year 2026 spending below the level that has been forecasted under the current continuing resolution.

We are enacting targeted funding to accelerate entrepreneurship and economic prosperity, guard our Nation's national security posture and apparatus, and further cement true, unyielding, American leadership on the international stage.

At the very same time, we are slashing incompatible mandates and provisions that were cooked up during the Biden administration that would have weakened America's trajectory to greatness.

With fiscal restraint and an eye toward paving a new and prosperous path for our Nation, anything--yes, anything--can be possible.

As I said in the committee yesterday afternoon, gone are the days of inflated omnibuses that have bogged down and constrained this legislative body. Indeed, we are moving in a better direction and chucking the Biden budget into the grave where it belongs. Good riddance.

The bipartisan and bicameral underpinnings of this legislative package make a compelling case as to why the House must pass it immediately.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, we are here to debate this appropriations package, not every other issue under the Sun. I urge my colleagues not to lose sight of the legislative package at hand: We have a bipartisan, bicameral appropriations package free of poison pill riders that bring us closer to fulfilling our Article I responsibilities.

My colleague says Republicans are in control, but the very bills we have passed and are passing are bipartisan. We are working across the aisle, which we should do. Our friends can't have it both ways. They can't say we are in control, therefore, everything is our fault, and say at the same time that these are good bills built upon bipartisan support.

There will no doubt be time to debate other matters, but today the matter at hand is an appropriations package containing the Financial Services and General Government bill and the National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs bill.

Might I add that national security is the number one issue in our Federal Government. We need to stay focused and complete the task at hand.

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

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

Again, we should be focused on the issue at hand. Mr. Speaker, we never celebrate the loss of life on our side. We don't celebrate the loss of life in the recent shooting, but we cannot absolve people of the actions they are taking to disrupt ICE's operations.

We certainly shouldn't be looking at ICE agents, condemning ICE agents who are showing up to do their jobs. Democrats have been questioning the authority and jurisdiction of ICE's actions in Minnesota.

Let's shed some light on what ICE has been doing. They arrested a criminal illegal alien from Somalia with a record of multiple counts of credit card fraud, drug possession, controlled substance possession, and drug trafficking. This criminal was issued a final order of removal in 2022.

ICE also arrested a criminal illegal alien from Laos with three prior convictions for selling drugs as well as convictions for assault and contributing to a minor's delinquency. This criminal was issued a final order of removal in 2009, Mr. Speaker.

A criminal illegal alien from Mexico previously arrested for child cruelty and battery was also picked up by ICE. This criminal was issued a final order of removal in 2009.

In addition, there was a criminal illegal alien from Mexico previously arrested for cruelty toward a child, and a criminal illegal alien from Somalia previously arrested for dangerous drugs and possession of narcotics.

We are talking about dangerous people, Mr. Speaker. The list goes on and on. Let's be clear, ICE is targeting criminal rings, and the Trump Administration isn't ignoring fraud as Governor Walz had done for years. They are targeting that criminal ring for immigration violations, just as they have done elsewhere.

Not long ago, ICE agents arrested more than 150 illegal alien sex offenders during a major enforcement surge across the State of Florida. ICE is focusing on rings of criminality, and they will pursue them wherever they might be, political correctness be damned. Americans are better off under this approach.

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, this majority continues to roll up its sleeves and advance the core priorities of the American people and President Trump. We are absolutely exercising our Article I responsibilities by passing appropriations bills.

With our unifying vision and some elbow grease, we are making significant headway that benefits the American people and our entire Nation. The legislative package contained under this rule is yet another commitment that we are seeing through to completion. Its provisions and intent confirm this through and through.

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

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