Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, like so many others, I deeply regret that we are here in what was a totally avoidable situation.

I must take you back to January, however, which for many of us was about not repeating the failures of the past and letting Republican voters across the country down once again, when in the past for many years, when Republicans have had majorities in this Chamber, we have passed our major spending bills predominantly with Democratic votes; something the other side of the House has never and would never do with majority control.

Back in January, I expressed my concern that the previous 2 years during my first term here in this House, we had not used every tool at our disposal to fight against the harmful, radical Democrat agenda that is destroying the country, bankrupting the country, and under which the American people are suffering.

Most in here wouldn't know that I helped persuade my five colleagues who comprised the remaining resistance in the wee morning hours of January 7 to switch our votes to ``present'' to let Mr. McCarthy become Speaker.

I went to him on this very floor to tell him that he was finally going to become Speaker on the next vote. In that moment, it was clear to me that I or we could have asked for anything in exchange for switching our votes to ``present,'' but I and we asked for nothing.

The very next week, I requested and had a meeting with Speaker McCarthy to tell him he had my full support and that I wanted him to be successful because the country needed him to be successful.

In the ensuing months, I helped him narrowly pass the Parents Bill of Rights and the Limit, Save, Grow bill--I think both of those by just one or two votes--helping persuade some of my most conservative colleagues to come along despite some of the concerns they had with those bills.

We remained united as a Conference through the Limit, Save, Grow vote as we passed a bill that was cutting spending to pre-COVID levels for nondefense discretionary spending or just over $100 billion, historic spending cuts, as the Speaker had committed to do in January. It also included a host of other conservative fiscal reforms.

Unfortunately, however, that unity and that commitment to significant year-one cuts and spending reforms were discarded in the failed responsibility act, as I call it, which passed overwhelmingly, once again, with a majority of Democrat votes, validating the concern many of us had in January.

Many of us had begged the Speaker, pleaded with the Speaker repeatedly, to utilize the debt ceiling to leverage spending cuts and reforms.

Instead, he negotiated an unlimited increase to the debt ceiling through January of `25, as much as we can come together and gleefully spend through January of `25, with no significant wins for the American people in that FRA or failed responsibility act.

The Speaker then said that we would use appropriations to bring the fight and finally reduce our spending.

He said the levels of the FRA were the ceiling and not the floor, and recommitted multiple times to go back to the $1.471 trillion that was the Limit, Save, Grow levels, radically, historically saving $100 billion and lowering the deficit this year under Republican majority from $2.2 trillion to $2.1 trillion. That is what we were asking the Republican House to do, to go to $2.1 trillion.

Meanwhile, the Speaker had committed to bring a balanced budget vote to this floor, something that still has not happened despite the work that has been done in our Budget Committee to mark it up and have it ready to come to the floor.

He also promised that we would bring all 12 appropriations bills well before the September 30 fiscal deadline. We did not.

We simply, as Republicans, needed the Speaker to cast the vision, request the support of the entire Conference, all of whom voted for the Limit, Save, Grow levels, except for four who wanted to go even further, to lead us in joining him, sticking with him, supporting him, and sending the most conservative spending bills with the most conservative cuts possible to the Senate as the best starting position for negotiations with the Senate. Many of us begged and pleaded with the Speaker to do that over the past 5 months.

When the Speaker failed to lead us to pass our spending bills, bringing only 1 of 12 to the floor before the August district work period, Members began to negotiate amongst themselves without the Speaker to find compromise.

I was among those who reluctantly agreed last month to split the difference between failed responsibilities, $1.526, and the Limit, Save, Grow, $1.471. I reluctantly agreed to do that, to go to $1.526, in order to pass our bills on to the Senate.

We then essentially forced the Speaker with the pressure of the shutdown threat of the calendar to bring those four bills to the floor last week, all of which I voted for, despite some of them not cutting to the levels we agreed to and other concerns I had with the bills.

I reluctantly voted for a 30-day conditional CR, continuing resolution, because it cut an additional $10 billion in the month of October, going back to the pre-COVID $1.471 levels for defense, nondefense discretionary, 30 percent, and it had border security. I voted for that.

However, when that vote failed, the Speaker, this past Friday in the Republican Conference meeting, made it abundantly clear that he was willing to do anything to avoid the temporary discomfort and the pressure of a pause in the 15 percent of the nonessential Federal Government operations, which would guarantee that we would lose to the Senate Democrats and the White House. If you are not willing to say no, then you are guaranteed to lose.

That was confirmed with the passage of the unconditional 45-day CR this past Saturday, once again with 209 Democrat votes. The Republican bill, 209-1 Democrats; 51-0 on the Senate side.

The Speaker fought through 15 votes in January to become Speaker but was only willing to fight through one failed CR before surrendering to the Democrats on Saturday. We need a Speaker who will fight for something, anything,

besides just staying or becoming Speaker.

If there was ever a time to fight with $33 trillion in national debt, a $2 trillion deficit this year, 40-year high inflation, 20-year high interest rates, a downgraded credit rating, and for the first time in modern history and despite all the help of the media blaming Republicans in the House, the polls showing that the public was blaming Biden and the Democrats for an imminent shutdown. If not fight now, when would we fight? Now is and was the time.

With the Democrats driving the fiscal bus off the cliff at 100 miles an hour, we cannot simply be content to be the party that slows it down to 95 just so we can sit in the front seat and wear the captain's hat.

Our current debt and our spending trajectory is unsustainable. We need a Speaker, ideally somebody who doesn't want to be Speaker and hasn't pursued that at all costs for his entire adult life, who will meet the moment and do everything possible to fight for the country.

A red line was crossed for me, I regret, on Saturday, and so it is with regret that I must vote against the motion to table, as I did, and vote to vacate the Chair.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Danville Police Department officers who recently received the 2023 Valor Award. Each year, the Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police recognizes law enforcement officers who perform an act of extraordinary heroism while engaged with an adversary at imminent personal risk in the line of duty; presenting them the Valor Award, the highest award offered by the association.

Corporal Todd J. Hawkins, Officer Lance I. Neighbors, Detective Lieutenant John D. Dixon, Detective Sergeant Richard Wright, and Detective Jordan T. Land were recognized with this reward.

These officers were responding to a robbery when the suspect began firing at them. One officer returned fire, and the detectives chased the suspect by car until he crashed and fled the scene on foot. After finding the criminal as he was attempting to break into an occupied residence, the detectives de-escalated the situation and convinced the individual to surrender.

Displaying the utmost valor and courage, these members of the Danville Police Department were rightfully selected to receive this reward. They deserve our deepest gratitude for keeping our communities safe.

I am honored to represent such an outstanding group of officers, and I thank them for their continued service and sacrifice.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation to protect our students' access to hunting, archery, and similar programs across the country.

Virginians are passionate about these outdoor sports, and school programs are a wonderful way to cultivate that passion while teaching aspiring outdoorsmen how to safely exercise their Second Amendment rights.

That our action is necessary today to fight back against the radical, activist Department of Education is a testament to how much the Biden administration hates our constitutional rights and wants to use every means possible to restrict those rights and impose gun control on law- abiding citizens.

Currently, the leftist Department of Education interprets the law to restrict funding for hunting and archery programs in the schools. Congress never intended this, and we shouldn't even have to clarify it to the agenda-driven, unaccountable bureaucrats in the Biden administration.

Nevertheless, today's bill provides that clarification and ensures that Federal dollars can continue to go to schools with hunting and archery programs.

The genesis of this problem comes from a law that I opposed last Congress, the so-called Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which was actually a gun-grabbing effort by the left that prevents States and districts from hardening schools to protect their students, teachers, and staff.

We should do more to repeal and reverse the harmful impacts this legislation has had on our schools. If we permit teachers to be armed and trained, it will discourage the threat and reduce the potential impact of bad guys with guns attacking our schools.

Instead of blocking funding for defensive training, we should support training teachers and staff to use the Second Amendment to protect our children.

I believe our schools will be safer if we prosecute criminals, support our law enforcement, including SROs, and support teachers and staff who want to be trained and permitted to concealed carry in schools.

Federal investment and resources can play a key role, but Congress must also reduce and eliminate Federal legal barriers so that States and communities can protect their own students in the most effective way possible.

Mr. Speaker, I support the legislation today because it is a step in the right direction, but we should go further and also permit teachers to be trained to defend their students in schools. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 5110.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

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

Mr. Chairman, here we are trying to fund our government for the year at a time when we have $33 trillion in national debt and we are on track for a $2 trillion deficit this year, and so we are literally borrowing some $2 trillion to fund the government this year. It is incumbent upon us to be careful with how we spend hard-earned taxpayer dollars.

Mr. Speaker, within that context, the Biden administration continues to weaponize every level of the Federal Government, abusing their power to push their harmful leftist agenda on Federal employees and the American people.

Exhibit A would be the Department of Defense abortion travel policy which violates current law, but this harm that is being done to the American people by this administration manifests itself in other ways, as well. The Biden administration continues pushing diversity, equity, and inclusion policies through all Federal agencies largely enforced by the Office of Civil Rights.

My amendment would reduce funding for the Office of Civil Rights within the USDA by 50 percent, permitting necessary functions to continue but sending a much-needed message on behalf of the American people that they cannot use their taxpayer dollars to implement their radical leftist agenda.

DEI initiatives promote hiring quotas rather than merit-based policies for selection and promotion. The Federal Government should be hiring and firing--now there is a concept for the Federal Government.

The Federal Government should be hiring and firing employees based on the quality of their performance or lack thereof, not based on the color of their skin or the gender they claim to be identifying as on whatever particular day.

My amendment cuts a little over $8 million. When we have $33 trillion in national debt and we are on track for a $2 trillion deficit, my amendment would cut a little over $8 million from the Department so that taxpayer dollars can be appropriately used rather than promoting the leftist radical agenda of the Biden administration.

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

Mr. Chair, the justification of the gentleman from Georgia just enumerated there is already protected by law. It is already illegal to discriminate on the basis that he is talking about there. Thanks to the Supreme Court, we are moving to a post- discrimination society. We are going to no longer discriminate based on race. The Supreme Court is moving us that way in education. We ought to be doing it with the Office of Civil Rights in the USDA, as well.

We should be using taxpayer dollars for those farmers and programs that actually benefit the American people and have the highest return or at least a return and one that is not harmful for the American people.

If the Office of Civil Rights were simply ensuring that people were protected as required by law, again, there wouldn't be a problem, but the Biden administration has subverted these types of offices to promote their divisive radical leftist agenda.

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

Mr. Chair, the Biden administration has completely lost touch with the idea of hiring and firing people according to their performance and the work that they do, and instead wants to base those decisions on a person's immutable characteristics and achieving quotas in the name of equity.

My amendment will hold these individuals accountable to simply do their jobs instead of promoting a radical agenda and wasting taxpayer dollars--again, dollars that are borrowed from our kids and grandkids.

I urge my colleagues to vote in support of my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

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

Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to reduce to $1 the salary of the director of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research within the FDA.

As part of the Republican House majority, conservatives were able to secure important reforms to the House rules, including reinstating the Holman rule. The Holman rule dates back to the 1800s and was created to reduce spending, but it has also been used as a measure of accountability to exercise oversight over unelected bureaucrats by reducing the salaries of Federal employees.

I have concerns that the position of director for the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research has been politicized because of decisions it has been involved in related to abortion.

In January, the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy for the main chemical abortion drug, mifepristone, was updated. A multidisciplinary team within the FDA approved changes that eliminated the in-person distribution requirement of mifepristone and allowed for retail pharmacies to dispense the abortifacient.

A Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or REMS, is required by the FDA for certain drugs with ``serious safety concerns to help ensure the benefits outweigh its risks.'' It is baffling to me that these bureaucrats would acknowledge that mifepristone is inherently dangerous yet advance policies that discourage a woman from even having to show up at a doctor's office.

This office was complicit in these dangerous updates that impact women's health. My amendment provides needed scrutiny over the bureaucrats who issue documents, not laws, that literally carry the power of life or death.

Whatever value these offices provide to drug safety has been clouded by political judgment. Congress should take a serious look at these offices, and we can start by holding pro-abortion officials accountable for such a destructive decision.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to stand for life and support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Harris).

Mr. Chairman, FDA administrators who originally approved mifepristone knew it had risks attached to it. In the following years, those risks have been confirmed and proven time and again to the mother and, obviously, ultimately to the child.

Between 2002 and 2015, the rate of chemical abortion-related emergency room visits increased by more than 500 percent.

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

Mr. Chair, at least seven offices within the FDA are responsible for administering the decision that made the chemical abortion drug easier to access. My amendment reduces to $1 the salary of the director of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.

Congress has a responsibility to not just appropriate money but to also conduct oversight for the use of taxpayer dollars. My amendment does both.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to stand up for life and support my amendment.

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

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to reduce to $1 the salary of the director of the Office of Surveillance and Epidemiology within the FDA.

As part of the Republican House majority, conservatives were able to secure important reforms to the House rules, including reinstating the Holman rule, which dates back to the 1800s and was created to reduce spending, but it has also been used as a measure of accountability to exercise oversight over unelected bureaucrats by reducing salaries of Federal employees.

I invite my colleagues to consider this amendment as a form of oversight, transparency, and accountability--what value does this office provide, and is the person who occupies it using their position for political purposes?

Earlier this year, the FDA updated the risk evaluation and mitigation strategy for the main chemical abortion drug, mifepristone. This document changed the policy surrounding the distribution of the drug, making it easier to access, and, therefore, more dangerous for women.

Many peer-reviewed studies show that women who take chemical abortion pills are at risk of severe side effects, including hemorrhaging, the need for follow-up surgery, and even death. Yet, this FDA guidance would formally eliminate the in-person distribution requirement.

My amendment provides scrutiny over the bureaucrats who issue documents--not laws--that literally carry the power of life or death. Whatever values these offices provide to drug safety has been clouded by political judgment, and Congress should take a serious look at those offices, and we can start by holding pro-abortion officials accountable for such a destructive decision.

I urge my colleagues to stand for life in support of this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today in support of my amendment to reduce to $1 the salary of the director of the Office of Risk Management within the FDA.

This amendment asks the question: Is this person who oversees the Office of the Director of Risk Management actually protecting women and children from risk?

The office is one of at least seven within the FDA that helped develop a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS, for the chemical abortion drug mifepristone. These REMS documents are required by the FDA for certain drugs with serious safety concerns to help ensure the benefits outweigh its risks.

It is baffling to me that these bureaucrats would acknowledge that mifepristone is inherently dangerous, yet advance policies that discourage a woman from even having to show up at a doctor's office.

Earlier this year, the FDA updated the risk evaluation mitigation strategy for the main chemical abortion drug mifepristone, and this document changed the policy surrounding the distribution of the drug.

Chemical abortion has four times the complication rate of surgical abortion. These risks would only increase with advanced pregnancy and lack of medical supervision.

Of course, mifepristone REMS doesn't factor into the risk evaluation process, and the drug ends the life of the precious, innocent child in the womb.

Mifepristone deprives the developing child of the hormones that he or she needs to grow and then is paired with another drug to violently expel the child from the womb.

My amendment provides needed scrutiny over bureaucrats who issue documents that literally carry the power of life or death.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to stand for life and support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

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

Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to reduce to $1 the salary of the director of the Office of New Drugs within the FDA.

This amendment provides accountability on behalf of the 63 million children lost to abortion since 1972. If our Federal agencies are not protecting the most vulnerable among us, we should not give them more of our hard-earned taxpayer dollars.

This year, the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine brought a lawsuit against the FDA with evidence that the original approval process for mifepristone was incomplete. This case argues that the FDA wrongfully fast-tracked approval and neglected the pediatric study requirement. The case is still ongoing, but the details show a pattern of the FDA systematically removing any meaningful safeguard from the drug to make it as widely used as possible.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to stand for life and support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

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

Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to reduce to $1 the salary of the director of the Office of Compliance within the FDA.

Americans don't want their taxpayer money funding bureaucrats who make decisions contrary to their values. In this case, this director was complicit in harming women and their unborn children by loosening restrictions on

mifepristone, the chemical abortion drug.

The FDA has even looked the other way to permit chemical abortion drugs to be distributed via mail, which clearly violates the Federal law outlined in the Comstock Act.

Americans expect Federal regulators to value women's safety and children's lives more than profits for the abortion industry.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to stand for life and support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

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

Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to reduce to $1 the salary of the director of the Office of Medical Policy within the

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

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

Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to reduce to $1 the salary of the director of the Office of Regulatory Policy within the FDA.

Mr. Chair, between 2007 and 2019, total FDA employment increased 79 percent. Today, there are over 18,000 employees. The FDA actually makes it very difficult to discern the exact number among the thousands of employees who were responsible for the updates to the abortion pill Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy.

We can glean from FDA documents that multidisciplinary teams, including at least these seven offices I have mentioned across my debate time, played a role in approving the changes that eliminated the in-person distribution requirement of mifepristone and allowed for retail pharmacies to dispense the abortifacient.

The names of specific individuals responsible are shrouded in mystery. The names are redacted from public documents related to this massive policy change, but we can reasonably conclude that the directors were indirectly or directly responsible.

Whatever value these offices provide to drug safety has been clouded by these political judgments, and Congress should take a serious look at these offices. We can start by holding these pro-abortion officials accountable for such a destructive decision.

Mr. Chair, I ask my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chairman.

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

My amendment will defund three radical executive orders issued by President Biden. These executive orders are intended to combat so- called discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation.

The weaponized bureaucratic regime wants to promote everything regular Americans stand for: freedom of speech, marriage as being between one man and one woman for life, and other values that so many people outside of Washington hold dear.

The Biden administration wants to instill fear in the hearts of regular Americans. My amendment would block any taxpayer dollars that would be used for the implementation of these woke executive orders in any agency. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which, by the way, saw significant Democrat opposition, clearly outlines who is protected from discrimination.

Now, the left wants to impose extra requirements on businessowners and the American people and force them into either having to walk on eggshells or face being sued for a supposed incorrect statement.

This amendment will defund President Biden's directives to promulgate woke ideology throughout the entire government instead of serving the American people. This culture of fear is not what made America the Nation that it is.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I urge strong support for my amendment for the values that have made America the country we love today.

Democrats are opposed to the very idea of America so much that they oppose the values that Americans know and love.

My amendment will preserve that America and fight back against the left's woke agenda. I urge my colleagues to support this effort and vote in favor of this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the extraordinary life of service of 20-year-old Louisa County EMS and firefighter Mia Ethridge.

Mia was fatally injured in an accident back in July while responding to a call for help. She tragically succumbed to those injuries on September 1, 2023.

Firefighter Ethridge leaves behind a great legacy of passionately serving her community and will be remembered by many for her kind and welcoming personality.

Stafford Fire Captain Gustavo Leite, who trained Ethridge, described her by saying: ``She was always there. An incredible young lady with leadership, she had the heart and the spirit.''

I offer my sincerest condolences to the family, friends, and community, and my prayers remain with them as they grieve the loss of her life.

In 2 Corinthians, Chapter 1, Paul writes: ``Praise be to God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of compassion and the God of all comfort, who comforts us in all our troubles.''

May her family find comfort in this as they mourn her passing and remember her life.

It is an honor to recognize the exemplary public servant that Mia Ethridge was and the selfless devotion she had to helping others.

Path Forward on Appropriations

Mr. Speaker, the appropriations path forward is simple, but it requires strong leadership from the Speaker, who must, one, persuade the Republican Conference to support the return to the 2022 spending levels that he committed to in order to ascend to the position in January and for which 217 Republicans voted in April; two, pass our 12 appropriations bills out of the House at the committed 2022 levels, implementing the Republican policy priorities for which we campaigned and the American people entrusted us with the majority back in November; three, the passage of those bills represents a good-faith effort to appropriately fund the government and avoid or quickly end any pause in affected nonessential spending, and then it is the responsibility of the Senate to avoid another Schumer shutdown; and, four, ensure strong, principled, and courageous conservatives are included on the conference committee to negotiate with the Senate for the best possible outcome for the American people.

The American people are counting on us. They have entrusted us with the majority as we ran on returning fiscal sanity to this House and implementing Republican priorities that would reverse the harms under which the American people are suffering perpetrated by the Biden administration.

Mr. Speaker, the Constitution gives the responsibility for the Nation's finances to the House of Representatives. It is the House's responsibility to pay the Nation's debts, to manage the Nation's finances, to protect our ability to borrow, when necessary. The Founders warned us about the dangers of excessive debt, the dangers of perpetual debt, and yet we find ourselves with the highest level of debt to our GDP that we have had since World War II.

The World War II generation came out of a literal battle, a war to save the world from imperialist Japan and Nazi Germany, which caused significant borrowing to fund that war, to fund that conflict, but that generation paid that debt down to a manageable level shortly thereafter.

Here we are today with $32 trillion in debt, nearly $100,000 per American citizen. I have said that many times on this floor, in committee hearings, in speeches and interviews, $100,000 per American citizen.

One time when I said that on this very floor, it was opposite the then Budget Committee chairman from the other side, Mr. Speaker. When his time came to speak, he said, stop saying that. We are not asking anybody to pay it back. As if it was not real, as if it was monopoly money, and if it didn't matter.

However, the days of spending without consequence are now over. I believe the American people are beginning to connect the numbers, the stats, the dollars, what they hear about with Federal spending, the deficit and the national debt, to their own very lives, because the American people are suffering from 40-year high inflation.

As a matter of fact, the consumer price index showed today that prices have risen 17 percent in the 2\1/2\ years since President Biden took office. That means $1,000 in 2020 is now worth just $832 today. Americans are experiencing record-high inflation, 40-year high inflation, but it is even higher than the 17 percent for the essentials, for groceries, for gasoline in the tank, for utilities, and, yes, for housing costs.

The average mortgage today payment is $1,218, which is more than double what it was when President Biden assumed office. That is a direct result of Federal spending causing massive inflation, which was then reacted to by the Biden Fed that has raised interest rates to 20- year highs, further exacerbating it. Of course, we have had our credit rating lowered for just the second time in our history.

Americans are suffering under this debt. Americans' futures are more bleak financially because of this debt. It is a terrible threat to our children and our grandchildren, and we, as the Republican majority, must do something about it.

We, as the Republican majority, elected by the American people after running on a platform of fiscal responsibility, are leading a House of Representatives that will have a $2 trillion deficit this year.

We are here tonight with this Special Order time to talk about our spending, to talk about our deficit, to talk about our national debt, and to talk about the budget battle that we are in at this very moment, the appropriations process to fund our government, and what we will do with the faith and the trust the American people placed in us last November when they gave us the House majority.

I am pleased to be joined by a couple of my distinguished colleagues tonight. I have with me Congressman Ralph Norman from South Carolina and Congressman Clay Higgins from Louisiana.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Norman) to share his thoughts on this topic tonight.

Maimed

Mr. Speaker, as the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Norman) has said, debt is the opposite of freedom.

There is a biblical principle to that. It says the debtor, the borrower, is a slave to the lender. Again, the Founders warned us about the consequence of excessive debt.

I was reminded, as Mr. Norman was speaking, that I feel like I am living through the movie of how to destroy a country produced by President Biden.

If you were going to set out to destroy a country intentionally 2\1/ 2\ years ago, what would you do different than the things that Mr. Norman has outlined today, whether it is our border invasion, purposefully, willfully facilitated by this administration, or whether it is our national debt with predominant responsibility to the Democratic Party, but also contributed to by Republicans? We have the opportunity to do something about that now in this Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I recognize my friend from Louisiana (Mr. Higgins) to express his thoughts accordingly.

Mr. Higgins, we are going to spend some $20,000 per citizen this year. There are 330 million Americans. In a Republican majority Congress, we are going to spend nearly $7 trillion, about $20,000 per citizen. We will borrow $6,000 of that $20,000. This year alone, we will borrow $6,000 per citizen; not per taxpayer, not per household, but per citizen.

Of the $20,000 per citizen that we will spend this year, only $3,000 per citizen will be for the primary responsibility of the Federal Government, the safety and security of the Nation, to defend the Nation. We will spend $20,000 per citizen, we will borrow $6,000 of that, and only $3,000 will be for protecting the Nation from foreign invasion, keeping the Nation safe and secure.

To Congressman Higgins' point, with the explosion of debt from $1 trillion in 1980 to now nearly $33 trillion today, the interest on the debt, what we are paying to service the debt is about $1 trillion a year. With interest rates rising, that cost is only going to go higher in addition to the spending disaster that we are experiencing.

What are we prepared to do? It doesn't matter what you believe in, it doesn't matter what you say you stand for if you are not willing to have the courage of your convictions to take risks to fight for that for which you claim to believe. It is no coincidence that one thing the gentlemen with me tonight, Mr. Norman of South Carolina and Mr. Higgins of Louisiana, and I share in common is that we are members of the House Freedom Caucus. I believe the American people are counting on us and putting their hope in us that maybe we will be the ones who will make this stand and not betray them and not let them down.

I go back to January. What January's Speaker battle was ultimately about was that we, as a renewed Republican majority, would not do what we have always done and therefore fail, as we have failed to deliver for the American people, particularly when it comes to fighting to cut our spending.

Yes, Democrats are better at spending than Republicans are, but Republicans have contributed, as well with a failure to follow through on the things that we run on.

We had commitments made in January that we were going to cut our spending at least back to pre-COVID levels for nondefense discretionary spending; pre-COVID levels, which was the highest level of spending in the history of the country at that point, the most reckless, bloated, and excessive spending in the history of the country at that point.

We voted together as a Republican Conference to that effect in April. We voted together for pre-COVID-level spending in April with the Limit, Save, Grow Act. However, that was discarded with the debt ceiling agreement where the Republican House came together with the Democrat majority of the House and the Senate and the White House for a debt ceiling agreement that is unlimited until January of 2025, as much money as Congress can gleefully come together and spend between now and January of 2025, where most projections say we will be $35 to $36 trillion in debt by that time.

We were told when we were negotiating the debt ceiling bill and when the debt ceiling bill came forward--which we did not vote for, my colleagues and I--well, we will fight during the appropriations process. That is when we will fight to cut our spending. As a matter of fact, we were told when we were negotiating H.R. 1, the energy bill, we will fight during the appropriations process to cut our spending.

We were told when we were fighting for the H.R. 2 Secure the Border Act that we would begin to cut spending during appropriations. Even during the NDAA negotiations, we were told that we would use the appropriations process to cut our spending. We were told we would pass 12 appropriations bills out of this House, implementing Republican priorities at pre-COVID levels for nondefense discretionary spending.

Now we are at a crisis point where will we deliver for the American people. We are only talking about $115 billion in spending cuts to reach that pre-COVID level, $115 billion when we are running a monthly deficit, to Mr. Higgins' point, of $150 billion a month.

What we need to do is come together as a Republican majority, pass our 12 bills that implement our policy priorities, our legislative priorities, do our job here in the House, cut our spending to pre-COVID levels that we committed to doing in January and in April, send it to the Senate and demand that they pass those House bills that the American people elected us to pass. Then if the Senate wants to shut down the government, let them shut it down.

Mr. Higgins, when I am in my district--we both came from our districts over these last few weeks--the American people didn't express concerns to me that the government might shut down.

The American people expressed concern to me about our national debt. They expressed concern to me about our spending. They expressed concern about rising crime. They expressed concern about the border invasion. They expressed concern about the weaponization of the Federal Government against them, a two-tiered justice system. They expressed concern about the faith and confidence in our election system.

The way for us to address those issues is by passing our bills, implementing our policies, and cutting our spending.

I yield to Mr. Higgins for any final thoughts he might have.

Mr. Speaker, may we meet the moment, may we be that transformational Congress that cuts spending and does not let the American people down.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to Mr. Norman the final minute that we have for his final thoughts.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 8 o'clock and 26 minutes p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until tomorrow, Thursday, September 14, 2023, at 10 a.m. for morning-hour debate.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the actions of emergency responders in Appomattox and Campbell Counties.

Recent major rainstorms caused severe flooding that affected many of the residents of these counties. When that happened, the Concord Rescue Squad, the Concord Volunteer Fire Department, and the Appomattox Volunteer Fire Department sprang into action, working around the clock to courageously save many people from the floodwaters.

These three emergency squads mobilized and volunteered their time once again, as they always do, to help those in need. All their water rescue teams were activated as they demonstrated true selflessness, bravery, and decisive action, while making multiple rescues of drivers trapped in submerging cars.

In fact, these three volunteer squads effectively responded to over 10 calls in one night. They had to navigate dangerous conditions and unsafe roads, helping to clear fallen trees, power lines, and other debris. They also saved many others whose houses were flooded with no other way to escape the floodwaters.

I am grateful for the valiant efforts of the Concord Rescue Squad, the Concord Volunteer Fire Department, and the Appomattox Volunteer Fire Department. I am proud to represent them in Virginia's Fifth District.

Danville Fire Captains Hone Skills

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the accomplishments of three fire captains in Danville, Virginia.

Few people demonstrate the mental and physical strength, personal diligence, or sacrificial love and commitment to their communities that fire captains do.

Three Danville fire captains recently honed their skills through the Virginia Chief Officer Academy. The academy is a 6-day training period established to equip aspiring chief officers in overcoming whatever leadership challenges may come their way.

During the program, students were trained in personal leadership and other skills needed to lead at the executive level.

I am proud to congratulate these captains on their completion of this program at the University of Richmond on Saturday, July 22:

Captain J. Satterfield,

Captain W.T. Poteat, and

Captain J.P. Haymore.

They have worked tirelessly to effectively serve the Danville community. After completing the program, these men are even more ready to lead as chief officers in the Danville Fire Department.

I am proud to represent these hardworking individuals in the Fifth District of Virginia, and I admire their excellent character and determination to help those in need.

Mr. Chairman, I am proud to rise in support of the amendment offered by my friend from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry) that is appropriately titled the SHOW UP amendment.

Isn't that the minimum standard--to show up--to come to work, especially when you are on the Federal dole paid by the taxpayer?

This amendment would ensure that the staff of the FAA do what most Americans probably assume that they are already doing and actually go back to work.

It requires the FAA to comply with the SHOW UP Act.

The problem, as Mr. Perry has already mentioned, with these Federal agencies--have you ever tried to get a passport recently or a visa recently and need help with a Federal agency?

The employees are not at work.

The SHOW UP Act was already passed with bipartisan support earlier this Congress, and this commonsense amendment requires agencies to return to the policies that were in place as of December of 2019, just 3\1/2\ years ago.

It also stipulates that agencies may not arbitrarily expand telework policies unless the Office of Personnel Management deems that it would have a significant, positive impact on the agency's mission. It is hard to imagine how that would truly be the case.

Removing the FAA's ability to perpetuate its current relaxed telework policy simply puts the FAA on the same footing as its counterparts in the private sector and requires these Federal employees to do what the civilians they are purportedly there to serve are required to do: show up to work every day.

The China virus has long dissipated, and it is time for the FAA employees to resume their normal day-to-day duties in the office, and it is ridiculous that we have to try to force this to happen.

Mr. Chairman, I will give you some stats.

An October 2022 survey by the OPM of 558,000 Federal employees revealed that 20 percent never report to a physical office, while 46 percent come to the office some of the time.

Unfortunately, unions like the American Federation of Government Employees--a government union should be illegal, by the way--are fighting to keep America's Federal employees at home permanently.

Mr. Chairman, another survey from the OPM found that 80 percent of managers in Federal agencies report they are managing a poorly performing staff and it is nearly impossible to take actions like demoting or firing them, thanks to the government unions.

The problem is even worse when you consider a May Federal News Network Survey showed that only 8 percent of Federal employees are coming in to work--8 percent every day.

Mr. Chairman, when there is an unfortunate incident that happens at the FAA, we need these FAA employees onsite and ready to respond to do everything they can to remediate the situation.

My constituents go to work every day, and, Mr. Chairman, your constituents go to work every day. They don't want to pay the salaries of Federal employees who don't have to show up to work.

Again, it is hard to believe we have to have an amendment to require this, but this amendment should pass, and I hope all my colleagues will support it.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the extraordinary athleticism and achievement of Albemarle County swimmer Thomas Heilman.

On June 26, the 16-year-old Heilman claimed his spot in the world swimming championships after earning the silver medal in both the men's 100-meter butterfly and the 200-meter butterfly races.

Heilman broke a longstanding record for his age group when he finished the 200-meter butterfly just 22 milliseconds behind the winner of the race, a swimmer 5 years older than him.

By finishing the race in 1 minute, 54 seconds, and 54 milliseconds, Thomas Heilman broke the 15-16 National Age Group 200-meter butterfly record which Olympic gold medalist Michael Phelps had held for 22 years.

Heilman's coach, Gary Taylor, of Cavalier Aquatics in Charlottesville, said Thomas is very coachable, has a tremendous work ethic, strives to be his best self, and is the consummate teammate.

Thomas has certainly made Albemarle County and the rest of Virginia's Fifth District proud of his accomplishments. I am honored to represent this extraordinary young man in Congress, and I wish him success in his already outstanding athletics career.

Democrats Made the NDAA a Cultural Issue

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Republican leadership and the House majority for passing what was an outstanding NDAA, our National Defense Authorization Act, last week, that focuses on the priorities of force readiness, effectiveness in lethality, and ensuring that America has the strongest military machine on the planet. It focuses on Republican priorities that the American people voted us, the majority, to implement.

The strong NDAA is reversing the policies of the previous majority and the Biden administration that were so harmful to our military. I am going to remind everyone that it was the Democrats, the former majority, that made the NDAA, the defense bill, a cultural issue, an ideological issue, with their policies. It was the Democrats who put abortion funding into the military bill. It was Democrats wanting to pay for transgender surgery and the Democrats who focused on DEI and CRT ideology in our military. It was the Democrats who said the purpose of the military was to fight the climate war and put a climate focus on our military funding. It was the Democrats who were discharging members of the military for not getting a vaccine they didn't want and didn't need.

This new NDAA that was passed last week with the Republican majority and sent on to the Senate simply reverses the harmful policies that have been hurting recruitment and reducing the effectiveness of our military. This now goes on to the Senate, and I hope the Senate will pass this Republican House bill to make our military stronger and make our Nation safer.

Mr. Speaker, I support the legislation today that will allow the Department of Education to withhold Federal funding from schools that house illegal aliens at public school facilities.

This bill focuses on schools, but the issue here is only a symptom of a much larger problem, a blatant disrespect for the Federal immigration laws by this President and the Democratic Party at large.

It is no coincidence that cities like New York and Chicago have announced plans to shelter hundreds of immigrants in school gyms and college dorms. These sanctuary cities are breaking the law by refusing to enforce Federal immigration policy.

These cities blatantly defy the law of the land and then beg the Federal Government for money when they can't handle the consequences that come with their participation in unchecked illegal immigration.

Americans have been suffering under this pattern of lawlessness for years, and it is time for it to stop. President Biden has violated his Article IV, Section 4 constitutional duty to protect the States from invasion, and now it is our American schoolchildren who are paying the price.

I think the mother of a kindergartner and a second grader at a New York school said it best: ``Why would I bring my child to a school where there [are] grown adult men in their gym? You won't let a stranger come into the school with no ID, but you will let them live in your school gym?''

Our schools should not be left vulnerable to the lawless immigration policies pushed by Democrats. This legislation provides the incentive for mayors and Governors to protect our children instead of encouraging Biden's border invasion policies that are harming Americans.

The Biden border crisis impacts every part of our Nation: our national security, our health security, our education system, our welfare system, and now, even more so, our children in our public schools.

When is enough enough? What is the endgame of these Democratic policies?

Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to stand against the Biden administration's disastrous policies that harm our schoolchildren and support passage of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the courageous actions of three young lifeguards in

Fluvanna County at Lake Monticello in the Fifth Congressional District of Virginia.

On July 6, a woman lost control of her vehicle following a medical episode, leading her to drive through a gated pool area, hit a picnic table, and then on to the beach and into Lake Monticello, where her car began to sink.

Witnessing these events, lifeguards Paige Tomaras, Zachary Butler, and Savannah Peterson sprang into action to save the driver from her sinking vehicle. Thankfully, the driver was pulled from her car and brought to the shore, where eventually EMS would arrive to transfer her to receive medical attention.

Paige, Zachary, and Savannah ultimately saved the driver's life and displayed a type of heroism that each of us would hope to resemble.

The Lake Monticello community is blessed to have such an outstanding group of brave, young lifeguards who are willing to step into action without hesitation, and it is an honor for me to recognize and represent these selfless individuals.

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from Florida for

bringing this important amendment, and I appreciate him allowing me to speak for a moment to support the amendment.

This amendment would prohibit the Biden administration from unilaterally issuing any restrictions on the 1033 program, which allows police departments across the country to have access to lifesaving military surplus equipment.

It is imperative that our Federal, State, and local law enforcement maintain access to this equipment used to protect and save the lives of Americans, especially in circumstances of terrorist attacks, search and rescue operations, natural disasters or, yes, riots in our cities.

The Obama and Biden administrations put restrictions on the 1033 program that helps police departments across the country. Their antipolice action would limit the ability for police departments to obtain equipment needed for border security, counterdrug operations, and more.

In a time when morale is low in police departments across the Nation, thanks to antipolice riots and calls to defund the police from my friends across the aisle, we must take every action possible to ensure our law enforcement officers have the tools they need to keep themselves and our communities safe, essentially to do their jobs.

Mr. Chair, I am proud to support the amendment, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment to the NDAA, which would simply block funds from being made available to the Naming Commission established by Congress just a few years ago.

The intent of that commission was to try to rewrite our Nation's history by changing the names of our famous military bases and forts, tearing down statues, and even putting blankets over monuments with names not deemed worthy of remembrance by some. What a tragedy.

You only have to look outside my district at the famous Monument Avenue in Richmond, Virginia, which has recently been desecrated by the removal of once famous beautiful monuments.

This effort to remove statues and rename bases encourages an endless cycle of renaming institutions, buildings, and cities across the country under the destructive ruse of political wokeness.

Historical sites are healthy environments to observe varied perspectives of historical events, engage diverse viewpoints, and inspire robust conversation as we remember our Nation's history. We should protect American memorials to preserve and remember our history.

It has been said that those who do not remember history are condemned to repeat it.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to consider the precedent being set by this arbitrary effort to rewrite our Nation's history.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this amendment to preserve our history and fight these reckless efforts to destroy our country, our Founders, and our history.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers).

The true history of America is that no nation in the history of the world has rescued more people, freed more people, fed more people, ministered to more people, and, yes, evangelized more people around the globe.

No nation in the history of the world has been more welcoming to people from all nationalities, all races, all ethnicities, and given more opportunity, more upward mobility to people of all races, all ethnicities, and all nationalities.

No nation in the history of the world did as the United States did just some 85 years after declaring our independence, where the Nation went to war with itself where the majority population suffered great loss of blood and treasure to free the minority population. No nation in the history of the world has it happened like it has happened in the United States of America.

It was our Founding documents and principles that provided the framework for us to realize our ideals of all men being created equal, endowed by our Creator by unalienable rights.

The United States is unique among the nations of the world. Our history is worth preserving. It is worth protecting. It is worth remembering. It is worth honoring. It is worth learning and growing from.

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

Mr. Chairman, it is time to defund this Naming Commission. It is time for us to move past these efforts to change our history. It is time for us to preserve our history and our Founders and the principles of our Nation, and to defund the Naming Commission.

Mr. Chairman, I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the 100th birthday of Mrs. Ruth Yarbrough of Dry Fork, Virginia.

Mrs. Yarbrough was born on July Fourth, 1923, in Dry Fork, where she continues to be an active member of her Pittsylvania County community.

She is the mother of four sons and has been blessed with an abundance of grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

While raising her four sons, Mrs. Yarbrough accompanied her children to their school, Stony Mill Elementary School, so frequently that the principal offered her a job as a dietician. She held that position for over 30 years.

Mrs. Yarbrough lives a vigorous life, still living independently and hosting many visitors in her home. She is steadfast in her faith in God and is currently serving as a deaconess at Guildfield Baptist Church.

We can all learn from the wisdom that Mrs. Yarbrough graciously shares, often stating that the secret to longevity is to ``love the Lord, be nice to others, and smile.''

I am honored to represent such outstanding constituents like Mrs. Yarbrough. Please join me in celebrating Mrs. Yarbrough's birthday and the long-lasting legacy that she continues to hold.

Mr. Chair, I thank Mr. Davidson for his leadership on trying to correct this egregious policy coming from the Biden administration.

The American people are suffering today. They are suffering from Bidenflation, 40-year high inflation. They are suffering under higher grocery prices. They are suffering under high gas prices, higher utility energy prices, all as a result of this President's policies.

They are suffering under the massive inflation that has caused housing prices to rise, and then we have complicated that with raising interest rates to make homeownership out of reach for most Americans.

Here comes the Biden administration to the rescue. They are going to charge most Americans higher mortgage fees when they go to borrow to buy a home as a result of having good credit.

I worked in the lending industry for 17 years. Lending prices and fees are based on credit. They are based on stability. They are based on ability. They are based on the loan to value, the amount of loan that you take relative to the value of the home.

The lending industry knows what they are doing. They want to make every possible loan they can make, and they want to price it appropriately, according to the risk.

However, what this does, what we are trying to overturn here, what the Biden administration wants to do, is reward or incentivize bad behavior.

Credit is a reflection of good behavior. There is not even really a correlation between income and credit. There are many high-income individuals who borrow more than they can afford or have bad character demonstrated in their credit. There are many low-income individuals who have outstanding character, outstanding credit history because they do the right thing.

Now, what the Biden administration wants to do is to penalize them and to subsidize that bad credit on the backs of folks who have good credit, of course.

I thank my friend from Ohio, Mr. Davidson, for his leadership on this, his efforts to overturn this terrible policy. It is socialist and un-American, and it is simply wrong. I thank him for his leadership.