Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I proudly support the legislation to name the Lynchburg, Virginia, VA Clinic after Private First Class Desmond T. Doss, a World War II hero and Medal of Honor recipient.

This bill, S. 3938, is the Senate companion following and complementing my original legislation, and I thank Senator Warner for joining me in championing this cause.

Desmond Doss is greatly admired in my district, and in May of 2023 at the request of some of my constituents, I introduced a bill to rename the Lynchburg VA Clinic after him in honor of his outstanding legacy.

It is fitting for the building that provides healthcare services to our Nation's heroes to be named after one who dedicated his military career to saving as many lives as possible.

A devout Seventh-day Adventist, Doss believed that killing in all circumstances was wrong, nevertheless, he still chose to serve his country as a medic in the United States Army when called upon during World War II.

Doss proved his heroism in battle and under fire and became the first conscientious objector to be awarded the Medal of Honor after fearlessly saving 75 wounded men in the Battle of Okinawa.

As the Medal of Honor citation describes: ``Doss refused to seek cover and remained in the fire-swept area with the many stricken, carrying them one by one to the edge of the escarpment and there lowering them on a rope-supported litter down the face of a cliff to friendly hands.''

The citation describes many more instances where Doss disregarded his own personal safety to protect others.

Many Americans saw his story depicted in the popular 2016 movie ``Hacksaw Ridge.''

His extraordinary bravery was true faith in action. Although he didn't have to pay the ultimate price in battle, he lived the words of Jesus in the Gospel of John: Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one's life for one's friends.

Doss' humble beginnings were in my district, in Lynchburg, Virginia, and Lynchburg has always loved him. In 1945, the city threw a parade in his honor, but it has been nearly 80 years since then, and Lynchburg wants another opportunity to celebrate one of our most heroic citizens.

Today, if the House passes this bill, it will be sent to the President's desk, and this Congress will have done a small thing to honor a great man. I trust my colleagues will join me in voting ``yes.''

In conclusion, I thank the entire Virginia delegation for uniting behind this bill. I would especially like to thank Steve Bozeman, my veteran constituent, who came to me with this idea. Steve Bozeman leads a weekly gathering to support the troops in Lynchburg, Virginia, and this group of mostly veterans has met without fail every Friday for more than 20 years, so well over 1,000 consecutive Fridays to honor our veterans and our military servicemembers.

Finally, I express my gratitude for the sacrifices made by all veterans and servicemembers who fought to keep our Nation safe. Mr. Speaker, it has been a privilege to represent them in Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend, Mr. Alex Mooney; and my other good friend, Morgan Griffith, from Virginia. These were two of the guys who helped me with some of the logistics and things that you need to know when you come to Congress. I appreciate the investment you made in me.

I am from central Virginia, so our districts don't touch, but Alex Mooney came to my district when very few wanted to when I had defeated an establishment incumbent, moderate RINO, shall we say, for the nomination in the summer of 2020. I was being outspent nearly 10 to 1 in the general. Not many people were coming to my district and helping me out.

While we are border States, it is a good 5 hours or so for you to get to my district, and you showed up. You helped me with an event. You helped me more than only one other Member of Congress with fundraising and financial support. You directed many of your supporters to help me during a time when I really needed that.

I certainly also consider you a lifelong friend. As someone who was never in danger of going to an Ivy League school, you are one of the few Ivy League conservatives whom I know from your time at Dartmouth.

I am stretching to think of others, but I think of one who just got nominated for Defense Secretary. He is an Ivy Leaguer. I don't know him personally.

However, the job you have done in your family, to have your son come behind you who is a conservative leader at Princeton, to have your daughter who is a freshman at an Ivy League-like SEC school in Vanderbilt shows the example that you have had for your children and the way your children have wanted to be involved in what you are doing here. I have met them on several occasions along with your lovely wife.

Thank you for standing on principle. When I came to Congress 4 years ago with the life issue being one of the most important, if not the most important issue, to me, to know when I got here that you were the sponsor of the Life and Conception Act, and I was quick to sign on and let you know I wanted to be a cosigner of that and to stand alongside you. The issue that is the ultimate issue, it is literally life and death, it is the number one killer in this country.

I often refer to what happened 2\1/2\ years ago with the Dobbs decision politically in this body is the great departure as some in our Conference and in our party don't want to talk about the issue now that the responsibility or opportunity is there for us to lead on this issue. I thank you that you have led on that issue.

You have never been one of the guys who is the loudest voice in the room and who is doing all the talking. A lot of people in this body and in this Chamber like the sound of their own voice. When you do take the mike, you always were strong, compassionate, and effective in making your case in what you were trying to persuade the rest of us to do. I have admired that.

I admired your courage where you could have stayed in this seat for as long as you wanted to. One of the great problems here in this body is it is full of people whose goal is just to be here so they can stay here. They can be here for as long as they can be here, hopefully to die here, I guess, is what so many of their priority is, while you risked a very safe seat and gave it up to run statewide.

While many of us supported you, as my colleague from Virginia just spoke about, Mr. Griffith, we fell short of that objective. We can only hope that

the person who was elected to that Senate seat in West Virginia will give them the conservative representation they deserve and that you would have given them if you had prevailed in that race.

I thank you for the example you set, I thank you for your friendship to me, and thank you for how you represented West Virginia. You have been a passionate and unashamed conservative. It has been a privilege to serve alongside you.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my deep appreciation to the people of Virginia's Fifth District for the privilege of representing them these past 4 years. Being their Congressman has been the greatest honor of my professional life. When I answered the call 5 years ago to run for Congress, I identified as a Biblical and a constitutional conservative.

I wanted the voters and my future constituents to know how I would make decisions, how I would represent them, and how I would vote on their behalf in Washington.

I wanted them to know that my values and principles come from my Christian faith and my Biblical world view. I wanted them to know that my guiding political philosophy comes from the Constitution and its stated limits on Federal power.

My allegiance as a Congressman has been to my creator, my Savior, the institution, the promises I made to my constituents, and to doing what I know is right regardless of the cost.

My main priorities have been to cut spending, to shrink the Federal Government, to fight for America first border and immigration policies, and to protect our constitutional freedoms.

As my time serving in this body on behalf of the citizens of Virginia's Fifth District comes to a close, I leave with no regrets because I have done as I told them I would do when I asked them to trust me with their vote and their support.

My ultimate desire, however, has been to please the Lord, to be more concerned about offending Him by what I don't say than I am about offending others by what I do say.

I didn't run for Congress promising to bring the money back home, to deliver the earmarks or the pork projects. I didn't run promising to work across the aisle, to compromise, or to find common ground, or to get things done. In fact, most of what we do here in Washington is bad, certainly unconstitutional, unjustified, and often downright harmful, not to mention we don't have the money, so the less we do, the better.

In fact, we should be proud of the accusation that over the past 2 years this Congress has done less than most Congresses.

As Republicans, what should we have done more of that Biden and Schumer would agree to do?

When I first ran for Congress in 2020, I presumed I would have the opportunity to serve with President Trump, help him build on the successes of his first term, and help him enact his second term agenda.

Unfortunately, that has not been the case, and like most Republicans, my efforts have been by extreme necessity directed at fighting the Democratic agenda which has caused so much pain and suffering for the American people these past 4 years.

That is because when Democrats seize power, they wield it without apology, and they ram through the radical agenda as they did in the first 2 years of the Biden administration with a narrow House majority and far less than 60 votes in the Senate.

It is always about the money in Washington, and Democrats spent it lavishly and recklessly in 2021 and 2022 on their trillions for their ill-conceived and harmful COVID response, their inflation increase act, their phony infrastructure bill, and their radical climate agenda, all the while infusing every policy, department, and agency with their extreme pro-abortion, pro-transgender, pro-DEI, pro-CRT, and climate objectives.

Democrats are willing to lose elections to push and pull the Nation to the left, understanding that Republicans don't have the same political courage or willingness to risk their own elective futures to undo the harm, overturn the policies, or defund the programs.

Thankfully, however, the American people responded to the extreme Democratic agenda by entrusting Republicans with the House majority 2 years ago in the 2022 midterms. Unfortunately, this Republican House majority has been squandered by a lack of courage, a lack of principle, and a lack of steely resolve by Republican leadership and too many Republican Members these past 2 years.

Again, it is all about the money, and House Republicans could have blocked, stopped, and defunded anything and everything that we wanted to these past 2 years. We could have just turned off the spigot and refused to give them the money. Instead, we have funded and perpetuated the Biden-Pelosi-Schumer policies and spending levels that we inherited and campaigned against that are bankrupting and destroying the country.

The Constitution entrusts the House to manage the Nation's finances, the Nation's debt, the Nation's credit, and our ability to borrow money if and when necessary and to make the payments on that debt.

However, our national debt has grown by some $5 trillion in the 2 years that Republicans have controlled the purse strings. We are failing miserably. Every dollar we vote on is borrowed. Every dollar borrowed and spent steals from Americans through higher taxes, more inflation, and/or a greater debt burden for our kids and our grandkids.

Over the past 2 years, House Republicans have given more money to Mayorkas for the border invasion. As a matter of fact, back in the spring, we gave him $3 billion more to bring more illegals in quicker.

We have given more money to Attorney General Garland and FBI Director Wray to abuse their power and weaponize Federal law enforcement against their political opponents.

House Republicans have continued funding Democrats' radical climate extremism, their pro-abortion agenda, their pro-LGBTQ policies, and their racist DEI-CRT agenda.

Why has our party leadership been more afraid to do nothing than to do something bad? As the medical folks like to say: First, do no harm.

However, with predominantly Democratic votes, typically 90 to even 100 percent of Democratic votes in a Chamber with a Republican majority, our report card shows that, since electing our current Speaker 14 months ago, we have failed to cut $1 of spending and have instead continued a $200 billion monthly deficit.

We have passed four CRs, or continuing resolutions, and two minibuses maintaining Democratic policies and spending levels from the Biden- Pelosi-Schumer regime when they had full control.

We reduced our majority by kicking out George Santos, who had a solid conservative voting record and had not been convicted of any crime.

We passed an NDAA maintaining abortion funding, LGBTQ policies, climate priorities, DEI policies, and CRT training. We reauthorized FISA twice without a warrant amendment prohibiting illegal and unconstitutional surveillance of U.S. citizens without their knowledge, due process, or probable cause.

We have borrowed and funded tens of billions of dollars for Ukraine and even Hamas. We borrowed and funded thousands of earmarks for tens of billions of dollars more to provide Members with political cover back home for the bad votes they take here.

We passed a tax bill that gave more benefits to illegal aliens. We failed to use any leverage that we had with the House majority to secure our borders.

Just last month, we increased mandatory or, really, automatic spending by $200 billion more.

All of this has been done over the past 14 months with significantly more Democratic than Republican votes when we have the House majority.

What if we had instead shocked the American people and summoned the courage and the resolve to just say,

``Heck no, not on our watch,'' and walked away and refused to fund the very destruction of the country, destruction that we campaigned against.

What if we had told Biden and Schumer: You aren't getting the money unless you cut some spending and reverse some of these harmful, dangerous policies.

Instead, we are today contemplating borrowing $115 billion more for a disaster supplemental--that is what we are calling it, anyway--on top of other inevitable year-end lameduck spending increases.

Setting aside the lack of constitutional justification for the Federal Government being in the disaster relief or insurance business anyway, and why we would force middle America to fund relief for the coastal elites in these high-cost areas, setting aside the constitutionality or lack thereof of doing that, why would we even think about borrowing and giving $1 more to the Biden administration in the remaining weeks of their regime? Why would we give the politicized and weaponized FEMA any more money before the end of this year?

On November 5, the American people, thankfully, rejected the radical Democratic policies under which they have suffered these past 4 years. It wasn't a question of a Democratic Presidential candidate or the messaging or voter turnout. The fact is, Americans don't want the extreme Democratic agenda. They have had enough. The only alternative was the Republicans.

Thankfully, at least for us politically, Democrats still don't grasp that, but we must not squander this reprieve and this tremendous opportunity that we were given by the American people on November 5. Americans desperately need our help. They desperately need us to rise to the occasion and to meet the moment.

It can't be business as usual or how it has been for the past few decades. The American people are counting on us. They must count on us. There is no plan B. It is on this body.

We are in the position that Democrats were in 4 years ago. After the 2020 election, they were in control of the White House with a narrow House and Senate majority. We are in the same position.

Mr. Speaker, as my colleagues know, we have talked a lot today, and we heard a lot of talk today about unity in our party, but unity for what purpose? Is it just to have the majority, so we can be in the majority, so we can stay in the majority? Is that the purpose?

Unity is impossible without a unifying mission. What is ours? The Democrats are clearly united in their agenda, the direction they want to take the country, and they will risk anything and everything to advance that.

Why do we want the majority? Why do we want to have power? For what purpose? What are our nonnegotiables to keep that power? What, if anything, are we not willing to give up or surrender in the name of obtaining or retaining power?

I have often told the Republican Conference that we will never change Washington or save our country until it becomes more important for us to leave here having made a difference than it is to see how long we can stay. For far too many, the primary goal is to be here and to stay here as long as we can, even to die here of natural causes, it seems, and everything else is subordinate to that objective.

We cannot be unified if we are willing to fund the very things we claim to oppose because some in our party believe it will help them get elected. Our party cannot be the goal or the objective unto itself, and our purpose cannot simply be to win elections to have the majority.

What are our sacred principles, values, and convictions that cannot and must not be surrendered in order to obtain or retain power? Mr. Speaker, are there any? For what, if anything, are we willing to risk losing power to fight for? Is there any issue that transcends politics and elections for us? What is our foundation upon which everything else rests?

Many people across the country will express their knowledge of the First Amendment, which as my friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy), has stated, the Founders should have stopped with ``Congress shall make no law.'' Just stop right there. Again, less is more.

Whenever you ask somebody what the First Amendment protects or what the first right protected in the Constitution is, they will invariably say freedom of speech. I have almost never had anyone answer that question any differently when you ask them what the First Amendment protects or what the first right protected in the Constitution is. They will say freedom of speech. Of course, that is incorrect.

The first right specifically protected in the Constitution, the first one enumerated in the Bill of Rights intended to protect the people from an oppressive Federal Government, is the freedom of religion. The Founders knew that the most basic, most fundamental, and most precious of rights is the freedom to worship or not to worship and the freedom to practice or not to practice our faith as we choose.

You cannot separate America from our founding Judeo-Christian principles and a recognition of our supernatural creator, by whom and for whom we have our existence, our lives, our breath, and our very being. It is He, as our founding Declaration expresses, who has endowed us with the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

How can a party continue to call itself conservative if it no longer fights for absolute truth and natural law flowing from our creator?

How can a party call itself conservative if it no longer protects innocent, precious life in the womb or looks the other way at the number one cause of death in this country, abortion, and funds it in policy, as some just voted to do today with the latest NDAA?

How can a party call itself conservative if it no longer fights for Biblical morality, the traditional family, or the definition of marriage?

In fact, I have said many times that almost everything that plagues our society and our country is a failure to follow God's design for morality, marriage, and the family.

How can a party call itself conservative if it no longer fights for a commonsense, scientific definition of sex and gender and funds the LGBTQ agenda, as we have been doing for the past 4 years?

How can a party call itself conservative if it no longer fights for the true equality of all and, instead, tolerates DEI and CRT, racist policies that we are funding?

How can a party call itself conservative if it no longer fights for individual freedom, personal responsibility, and self-reliance, or if it no longer places a premium on work or believes that people have a responsibility to provide for themselves, but instead, the party funds government dependence and generational poverty?

How can a party call itself conservative if it no longer fights for limited government, reduced spending, or fiscal responsibility and instead borrows and funds massive deficits?

I often speak in my district about the little-known and little- regarded Ninth and 10th Amendments to the Constitution. When you ask a group what the Ninth and 10th Amendments are, almost no one knows what those amendments are.

The Ninth Amendment says: ``The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.''

What that means is we have every right that the Constitution doesn't prohibit to us. We retain all the others. Just because the Founders listed some rights doesn't mean we don't keep every other right.

The 10th Amendment says: ``The powers not delegated to the United States,'' or the Federal Government, ``by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or the people.''

What the Founders were saying, of course, is the Federal Government had limited power, and everything else was supposed to be left to the people or the States.

Almost everything we do in this body is unconstitutional and violates the Ninth and the 10th Amendments. We have strayed so far from these constitutional limits, as so many Republicans have embraced expanded Federal power, the growth of government, more spending, and diminished freedom for the individual.

We consistently reduce the rights or freedoms of the people. We regularly

seize from the States and the people the power that should be left to them.

Again, it is all about the money. It is all about the purse strings that are entrusted specifically to this body.

We are in danger of fulfilling the famous quote attributed to Alexander Fraser Tytler. He said this a couple of hundred years ago:

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government.

It can only exist until the voters discover that they can

vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that

moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates

promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with

the result that a democracy always collapses over loose

fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.

``The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back into bondage.''

May we determine not to accelerate that on our watch, not to let this happen on our watch. May we determine to leave those who come behind us a better America than we found it. May we determine to leave Congress having truly made a difference.

Mr. Speaker, once again, I thank the citizens of Virginia's Fifth District for the privilege of representing them in Congress, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I must bring attention, once again, to our Nation's existential threat represented by $36 trillion in national debt and another $2 trillion deficit this year.

Yet in this very Chamber just a couple of days ago, every Democrat joined two-thirds of Republicans in adding $200 billion in new mandatory spending.

So is our debt and our spending just campaign talking points?

Is it just a slogan, or does it really matter?

Do we really care about it?

I will commend Senator Rand Paul from Kentucky who just yesterday had the courage to stand alone and block emergency spending because he said it needs to be paid for. What a concept, that we would pay for the new spending on top of the layers and layers of debt that is causing so much inflation, higher interest rates, and threatening the financial future of our kids and our grandkids.

Why not cut the expansion of the IRS?

Why not cut a trillion dollars in climate credits?

Why not cut the tens of billions of dollars of COVID funds that are still not covered for?

Why not cut the spending for the U.N. or UNRWA or the WHO?

Mr. Speaker, there is so much low-hanging fruit. I am so thankful that we will have Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy looking at that in the new administration.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the FAFSA Deadline Act.

This legislation will formally set October 1 as the annual publication date for the Free Application for Federal Student Aid, or

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that H.R. 82 be laid on the table.

Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the End Woke Higher Education Act, a bill that will refocus college accreditation on academic excellence--there is a concept--and correct the First Amendment rights of college students.

The Federal Government pays billions in hardworking taxpayer dollars each year to colleges and universities assuming that accredited schools are preparing students to think academically and to earn a good job after graduation. It is increasingly clear that many students aren't prepared for life after college.

Today, $1.6 trillion of taxpayer dollars are missing from the Treasury because graduates aren't paying back their student loans.

Of course, Democrats think that is wonderful because they think it is the government's job to provide free college education for everyone.

Sadly, many college students leave their university with little to show for it besides crushing debt, bleak job prospects in the Biden- Harris economy, and too often, liberal brainwashing from what they were taught.

Students are suffering under the misguided priorities of our institutions, and accreditors are contributing to the problem.

Instead of working with colleges to ensure that academic progress will lead to student success, accreditors are determined to impose their diversity, equity, and inclusion standards on institutions.

This bill simply prohibits accreditors from forcing colleges to adopt DEI standards in order to receive accreditation.

In addition, this bill protects the fundamental rights of free speech and free association on college campuses.

That means religious clubs on college campuses can have the same access to resources that are available to any other student group.

Unfortunately, here in 2024, it is still common for faith-based organizations to be discriminated against on college campuses, which makes this legislation necessary and important.

Restricting First Amendment rights and empowering divisive ideology on our college campuses is not serving our students well. This legislation will help stop those harmful practices.

I thank my friend, Mr. Owens, for leading on this legislation. I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. Speaker, the distinguished gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs) has led four border trips that I have been on during my time in Congress. I have been there six times, but four times under the leadership of Mr. Biggs. I appreciate his leadership on the Border Security Caucus and his leading this Special Order hour tonight on this all-important policy and depicting the harm being done in our country, the existential threat to our country, which is the border invasion.

I find it interesting that Democrats don't care about the border invasion. They just don't like us to call it a border invasion. Democrats don't care about the illegal aliens flooding into our country. They just don't like us to call them illegal aliens because whether it is their policies on energy and climate, national security, national defense, law enforcement--or pro-criminal, I should say--their policies on transgenderism, abortion extremism, or this policy of tonight, the immigration border invasion, Democrats cannot be honest with the American people about what they really believe and what they really want to do to our country or they would never win another election.

If the American people fully understood the harm the Democratic Party is doing with this border invasion and that they are doing it on purpose, that it is the plan that they are executing, then they would never win another election. That is why border czar Harris, who has massively failed at her one job, the one job we know that she was given as Vice President, the border czar job, she is now trying to distance herself from this responsibility and the catastrophic impact upon the country.

The fundamental difference between Democrats or VP Harris and Republicans on the border and immigration is Republicans believe that America should decide who is able to come to our country and under what conditions.

Democrats believe that everyone around the world, that 96 percent of the world's population that does not live in the United States, is entitled to come to America legally or illegally in spite of whatever their background and their intentions might be.

For them, the noncitizens, the illegals, get to decide and set the policy. That is why they will never answer the question of how many is too many, or what is the end game?

Is it because they believe that these illegals flooding our borders are truly just unregistered Democrats who will vote for them legally or illegally in the next election?

That is why they oppose the SAVE Act. They didn't even want any efforts, any attempt to try to prohibit or prevent noncitizens from voting in our elections.

Are their policies because they want to transform America by flooding our country with non-Americans who don't speak our language; who don't know or respect our laws; who haven't earned their citizenship or demonstrated they can contribute to our society and make us better and stronger; who aren't familiar with, much less devoted to, our Constitution; and who haven't embraced our values or our culture, so that if you flood enough of them in here illegally or otherwise we will no longer at some point be America?

How do they not care about their own DHS's numbers of some 12 million illegals who have come over the past 4 years with some 3 million known got-aways, the truly dangerous ones who avoid apprehension, who avoid surrendering for the free social services, housing, education, healthcare, and so forth that is provided by the Biden-Harris administration?

The stress on our public safety has been so effectively shared tonight by Congressman Biggs and the others who have spoken before me.

Do the Democrats and border czar Harris not believe the border invasion is happening?

Do they not believe it is a bad thing?

Again, if the American people knew and understood the Democrat position on the border and the illegal invasion, then they would never win another election if they realized they are doing this to us on purpose.

Only time will tell how dangerous the illegals are whom the border czar Harris has helped invade our country.

Only time will tell the harm that awaits the citizens of the United States from those who evaded apprehension, those who have the criminal backgrounds and the terrorist ties who are trafficking drugs and women and children into our country.

This is Kamala Harris' America, and the American people are paying the price as has been described so effectively here tonight. The American people have had enough.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Biggs for leading this Special Order tonight.

Mr. Speaker, as the chair said, if ESG funds performed better, investors would choose those based on their performance, not because they are ESG compliant.

Mr. Speaker, I support passage of 5339. This legislation will protect Americans' retirement savings from the left's woke agenda.

On day one, the Biden administration pursued a radical agenda focused on so-called diversity and equity instead of truly helping everyday Americans.

This agenda infiltrates every sector of our society under the Biden administration, including the way people invest their hard-earned money.

For decades, Federal law has required fiduciaries, or those we trust to invest on our behalf, to adhere to principles of prudence and loyalty to the investors' best interests.

The prudence and loyalty of the fiduciary to the investor protects the American public. Now the Biden administration has decided these principles are no longer the primary concern.

No, under Biden-Harris, your best interest is not the main priority. Investments must now meet certain radical and environmental standards and support the left's equity agenda.

This could mean investing in a solar energy company and overlooking an oil or a gas stock that might be a better financial investment.

It might mean that the company overseeing your portfolio needs to adhere to DEI practices and hire people because they look a certain way, not because they are the most qualified. This is called ESG investing, and, of course, this is wrong.

The bill today includes one of my bills, No Discrimination in my Benefits Act, which amends the law to say that any fiduciary must be selected without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

Adding this language will preserve the merit-based standard that Americans expect employers to use when hiring.

Instead of addressing the state of the economy, which would be a much better way to ensure that individual retirement plans are doing well, Democrats double down on DEI and believe, or at least claim to believe, that a lack of diversity is why your pension or your 401K isn't getting the rate of return you expected. They, of course, don't want to blame the Biden-Harris economy.

For example, Senate Democrats actually sent a letter to 25 companies requesting information about the gender and race, the DEI makeup, of the asset managers of their pension plans. The letter voiced concern over the problem of White men dominating the industry and demanded answers from the companies on their plans to diversify their employees based on sex and race rather than their skills and expertise.

The American people don't care about the diversity makeup of someone who is flying a plane or who is performing surgery on them, and they don't want it with respect to the management of their life savings, but the Democratic Party wants to force companies to make decisions in direct contradiction to the longstanding Civil Rights Act, which they claim to support.

Using someone's race or sex to determine their eligibility for a position is wrong, and civil rights law agrees, even if the Democratic Party does not.

Hardworking Americans want the most competent and knowledgeable person to manage their benefits. They want to know their assets are safe and they will have a good return on investment.

The ESG investing agenda is in direct opposition to this, so I urge passage of H.R. 5339.

Mr. Chair, Mr. Meeks talks like there is a final draft of the treaty. We, again, have not seen it. How else would he seem to know or claim to know that it is an executive agreement? We thought it was still in negotiations.

Mr. Chair, I am in strong support of H.R. 1425 requiring any agreement reached by the World Health Organization to be deemed as a treaty, and thus, requiring the approval of the Senate by a two-thirds vote.

The WHO corruptly handled the China virus due, in no small part, to WHO Director-General Tedros being heavily influenced by Chinese President Xi.

In 2020, Tedros praised China for their handling of the pandemic, even though it was clear that they were withholding critical information about the true origin and nature of the virus.

This year, member states of WHO have been working to come to an agreement on what is called the pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response accord. Thankfully, this agreement, which would absolutely be an unconstitutional surrender of sovereignty of the United States, has not been finalized.

However, the World Health Assembly, the body deliberating language in the agreement, has already agreed to several amendments committing to solidarity and equity, establishing a new body to facilitate effective implementation, and creating an international human rights authority to improve coordination between countries.

This is nothing more than an international power grab by leftist elitists

who hate America, want to infringe on individual privacy, and seek to attack the fundamental principles of American self-governance and self- determination.

The WHO symbolizes and represents what the left wants for the world and for the United States, where national sovereignty and individual freedom mean nothing.

The Democrats don't believe in American exceptionalism, American sovereignty, our founding Judeo-Christian principles, or the preservation of that which makes us unique and the hope for the world.

That is why they believe that everybody in the world has the inherent right to come to America, whether legally or illegally.

Just 4 short years ago, the Biden administration--or the Biden-Harris administration as it used to be called--was shutting down our economy and forcing us to stay in our homes due to the China virus. They think that went great, and they would gladly do it again if it was beneficial to their own interests.

The United States should end all taxpayer funding of the WHO, formally withdraw as a member, and ignore any and all edicts put out by that body.

Until we do that, at a minimum, we should ensure the Senate holds them accountable for their infringement on our sovereignty and require a two-thirds approval of any agreement or treaty, which is what it really is.

I thank my friend Mr. Tiffany for his leadership, and I thank Mr. Davidson for leading this debate on this important issue. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this resolution to nullify the Biden administration's harmful Title IX rule that for the first time includes sexual orientation and gender identity in the definition of sex.

With the stroke of a pen, the Biden administration is making law apart from congressional action, destroying Title IX's promises of equal opportunity for women and eliminating single-sex spaces like bathrooms, locker rooms, and campus housing for female students from kindergarten through grad school.

This forces schools to adopt progressive Democrats' radical worldview that sex is something that can change on a whim and is not a God- created, scientifically immutable design embedded in our DNA.

Democrats would rather perpetuate the harm of gender confusion than stand up for women and girls. Thankfully, the courts have intervened, and this rule is temporarily blocked from going into effect in 14 States, including my home State of Virginia, but if this resolution isn't successful today, a majority of American schoolchildren and teachers will suffer under this policy when they return to school next month.

This school year, we can expect to see more boys joining girls' sports teams in middle school and high school, thanks to Democrats' radical progressive policies.

You can thank our radical Democrat friends when your daughter finds out her freshman roommate is actually a man.

Brace yourself for the onslaught of investigations at the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights when teachers and students who refuse to use nonbiological pronouns are reported to the authorities.

I appreciate Representative Miller's effort to protect women and girls. I am proud to support this legislation, and I urge all of my colleagues to nullify the Biden administration rule by supporting H.J. Res. 165.

Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted NAY on Roll Call No. 248, and NAY- Roll Call No. 249.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize all men and women in uniform who have made the ultimate sacrifice for our Nation.

Since our Nation's founding via the Revolutionary War, more than 1 million Americans have given their lives to protect the freedoms that we hold dear today.

Every fallen member of the armed services and their families deserve our deepest expression of gratitude, not only on Memorial Day, but every day.

The words of Jesus Christ in John 15:12-13 apply to these heroes most deserving of remembrance, when He said: This is My commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends.

As we reflect upon the ultimate sacrifice of more than 1 million American servicemembers this Memorial Day, may we also remember the family and friends they left behind.

Their pain and grief are unimaginable, tempered only by the joy of their memories and the knowledge that they gave their lives in service to the greatest country the world has ever known.

I join other Americans in offering them my prayers and heartfelt appreciation. May God bless them, and may God continue to bless the United States of America.

Mr. Speaker, I was not present for the second series on May 15.

Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 201; YEA on Roll Call No. 202; YEA on Roll Call No. 203; YEA on Roll Call No. 204; NAY on Roll Call No. 205; NAY on Roll Call No. 206; YEA on Roll Call No. 207; YEA on Roll Call No. 208; NAY on Roll Call No. 209; NAY on Roll Call No. 210; NAY on Roll Call No. 211; and NAY on Roll Call No. 212.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the topic of the subject of this Special Order.

Mr. Speaker, of all of the harm done over the past 3 years by Democrats, perhaps most damaging has been the loss of faith and trust in our most sacred institutions, especially our judicial system and our Federal law enforcement.

Like never before, the Department of Injustice has explicitly demonstrated a willingness to target conservatives and political opponents. They are not even pretending anymore.

Whether conducting SWAT raids in tactical gear at the homes of pro- life protesters, targeting and arresting concerned parents at school board meetings, buying private data on those exercising their Second Amendment rights, surveilling Catholics practicing their faith in Richmond, or the disparate treatment of January 6 prisoners, it is no surprise that half of the country doesn't trust the people in power in this administration.

Of course, their biggest and most immediate target is the 47th President of the United States because they know that Donald J. Trump is the primary obstacle to their quest to conquer and control the citizens of the United States, stripping them of their pesky constitutional freedoms.

The egregious lawfare, the abusive legal persecution of President Trump, is nothing more than election interference at the highest levels. It is a violation of voters' rights. It is criminal conspiracy. Their aim is to put in jail the only person, President Trump, who is protecting the American people from 4 more years of descent into an abyss from which we would never recover.

Democrats know with our country and every American far worse off than they were 3 years ago, they cannot beat President Trump at the ballot box. Whether you are talking about the border invasion, whether you are talking about the surrender of our energy independence, whether you are talking the onslaught of regulations that is costing the average family thousands of dollars, whether you are talking about the 40-year high inflation that Americans are suffering under, whether you are talking about our weakened military or our weakened foreign policy and the conflicts all over the world that didn't exist when President Trump was in office, Americans in this country are much worse off than they were 3 years ago when President Trump was in office.

The department of injustice, because they cannot beat him at the ballot box in November, colludes illegally and unconstitutionally with these rogue prosecutors and judges in New York and Atlanta.

They send Matthew Colangelo from the Department of Justice to New York. They corroborate with Fani Willis' boyfriend, who bills the Georgia taxpayers for hours spent working with the Department of Justice. The judge in New York City, who just happens to be assigned somehow every high-profile case of persecution of high-profile conservatives, abuses his power by declaring a gag order, not to ensure the defendant, President Trump, gets a fair trial but to prevent President Trump, the defendant, from defending himself in the court of public opinion.

The efforts to rig the 2020 election included the suppression of conservative views, the phony Russia collusion scandal, spying on the Trump campaign, the dirty Steele dossier, the relaxation of voting procedures in the name of COVID to facilitate the ability to cheat.

Their efforts to rig the 2024 election, however, are much more explicit and transparent: prevent President Donald Trump from being on the ballot. When that failed, keep him off the campaign trail and bleed his resources. Better still, the coup de grace for them: Put him in jail via dishonest convictions and crooked courts while he waits for what will surely be certain victory by appeal.

As always with these people, the process is the punishment. In fact, this judge in this New York City trial, his daughter is raising millions of dollars off the trial for the Democratic Party.

The ex-con, the star witness, admitted today to multiple counts of perjury in his testimony under oath. These ridiculous trials, so-called improper business records, so-called overvaluation of assets, alleged document mishandling in Florida for a President who can declare anything declassified by simply possessing it, alleged election interference--that is rich coming from the Democratic Party and these rogue prosecutors colluding with the DOJ. All of this began when President Trump declared his candidacy for reelection.

Who was harmed by these alleged crimes? Who were the victims? What was the real crime? Of course, no one, no one, and nothing. This is not going to work. The American people know it for what it is.

The truth and the law are on the side of President Trump, and he is going to be the 47th President.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs).

Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Biggs, an esteemed member of the Judiciary Committee for his comments.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry), my good friend.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs) for some final thoughts.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Biggs for his comments.

We have seen over the last 3 years the consequence of electing people who will abuse power, weaponize the Federal Government against citizens and

political opponents, and carry out disparate justice treatment based on political views.

Both Chairman Perry and Chairman Biggs have spoken eloquently about the Constitution, our true north, our compass, which is just a minor inconvenience to the folks on the other side, who have a mentality of show me the man, I will show you the crime.

We cannot let them win in this endeavor. We must hold them accountable. That is why it was a privilege today to go up, Mr. Speaker, and defend our former President and future President of the United States for the abuse of power that is being directed at him right now as they target truly the American people as he stands in their way.

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