Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, we have four bills in this rule today. All of them are completely closed--no amendments, no debate, completely closed. I feel like I am in Russia. Three of them are from the failed rule last night, which was the third failed rule in this Congress, the seventh under Speaker Johnson, and the tenth of the reigning Republican majority. That alone demonstrates Republicans' inability to govern.

Then we have the so-called SAVE America Act. The gentleman from Texas is going to spend today's debate trying to convince you that this is a commonsense, simple bill, but I want you to remember a very few important facts while he is talking.

First of all, it is already illegal for noncitizens to vote in Federal elections, period, full stop. If noncitizens are voting in Federal elections, they should be prosecuted. We don't disagree on that.

Second, nobody disputes the fact that voters should follow the law and indicate who they are. We agree on that, too. Nobody is debating that on the floor today.

What we are debating is whether we are going to believe the BS conspiracy theories cooked up by Donald Trump and MAGA Republicans about whether or not elections can be trusted in this country.

What we are debating is whether, in response to those lies, we are going to require Americans to go down to their county clerk, to take the train to city hall, or to drive down to the registrar's office and jump through bureaucratic hoops just to register to vote.

Who asked for more red tape? Did Jim Crow call?

I mean, that is what this bill is about. It is not about voter ID. It is about voter registration, and it is about voter suppression.

We always tell people to vote, make their voices heard, participate in our democracy, right? Those are supposed to be good things.

Why are Republicans passing a bill that makes it as hard as possible to vote? I will let them answer that question, but I guess it is about what I have come to expect from a party that no longer believes in democracy, though.

Yesterday, in the Rules Committee, I asked the chairman of the Committee on House Administration a simple question: Did Donald Trump win or lose the State of Minnesota in the last three Presidential elections? It is not a curve ball; not a difficult question.

Of course, anyone living in reality knows the answer to this--Donald Trump lost Minnesota three times--but not Donald Trump. He continues denying election results. He said just last Friday that because of voter fraud, he feels he won Minnesota.

The Republican chairman of the House Administration Committee, the congressional committee which regulates Federal election laws, couldn't give me a straight answer, couldn't answer that question. He couldn't tell me if he agreed with Donald Trump. He wouldn't say who won Minnesota. He went through all kinds of contortions to avoid answering the question.

I mean, this is a simple question. That is shocking, Mr. Speaker. I mean, you guys want America to trust you to write our election laws? Americans can't even trust you to tell us who won the election.

Oh, and then here is another thing: One of the changes that were made--by the way, this bill didn't go through committee process. I mean, this was kind of rushed to the floor. All kinds of major changes have been made in the last week, but here is one of the major changes: This bill, if passed, was supposed to take effect in the year 2027. There is a change in this bill. It takes place immediately, for this election.

I mean, how is that going to happen? We have elections beginning in a matter of a few weeks, and you are expecting every State to be able to comply with all these new rules and regulations, like, immediately?

This is about sowing chaos and confusion. My friends on the other side know they are probably going to lose the next election, and they are going to lose big. Rather than live up to the reality or respect the voters, they are going to try to make up some conspiracy theory that the election was stolen or undocumented migrants came in and voted against them.

Here is the hard truth: If Republicans want to know why people are losing faith in our elections, they ought to look in the mirror. They ought to look in the mirror.

People are losing faith because Donald Trump, the election denier in chief, can't admit he lost. People are losing faith because Tulsi Gabbard and Kash Patel's FBI raided an election office in Fulton County, Georgia, based on recycled conspiracy theories. They seized 2020 election results, even though it was Donald Trump who asked the Georgia Secretary of State to find 11,780 ballots so that he can win, even though he lost, and that is on tape.

They are losing faith in our elections because they saw Pam Bondi trying to shake down Minnesota's State government, saying the administration would only withdraw ICE if Minnesota handed over their voter rolls to Trump's DOJ. They are losing faith because of bills like this, which force every State in America to give their voter rolls over to DHS Secretary Kristi Noem.

Let that sink in. She is probably one of the least trustworthy people in the country right now. I wouldn't trust Kristi Noem to tell me the correct time, and we are asking States to turn over their voting rolls to her. Give me a break.

We don't need any more lectures from Republicans about the sanctity of democracy or why people are losing faith in our democratic institutions. We know why, and we know what this bill is. This is Jim Crow 2.0. Republicans think that when fewer Americans vote, they win. It is as simple as that.

I am so sick of the other side just making things up. This widespread voter fraud conspiracy is all part of the same election denialism that goes right up to the Oval Office.

The other side has been making these claims for years now. We have heard about this for over a decade. They claim that massive numbers of noncitizens are voting, swaying elections, and that rampant voter fraud is changing results.

Every single one of those claims, Mr. Speaker, has been investigated again and again by Republican Governors and Republican Secretaries of State, by journalists, by academic researchers, and by President Trump himself, whose own voter fraud commission was disbanded because he couldn't find enough evidence to warrant the absurd allegations that he was making.

Every time these claims are investigated, they disappear like a mirage. This entire bill is fundamentally predicated on a lie. In fact, when you crunch the numbers, you are more likely to be struck by lightning than to successfully impersonate someone at the polls. Enough already.

The SAVE America Act is a terrible bill that makes it harder for American citizens to participate in our democracy. That is it.

America does not want to be saved by a Republican Party that spent a year propping up Trump's tariffs, which have driven costs through the roof. We don't want to be saved by the people who continue covering up for pedophiles in the Epstein files. America certainly doesn't want to be saved by the same people who still can't get over losing the 2020 election so they are going to try to rig the next one.

Go save somebody else, but we don't want this garbage. We will fight like hell to stop you from making it harder for millions of Americans to register to vote.

We know why you are doing this. It is because you are afraid that you are going to lose in November. Well, too bad. Too bad. Either change your crappy policies or face the voters and deal with the consequences of your own actions. Those are the only two options in a democracy.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, let me first correct the gentleman from Texas, who mischaracterized deliberately my remarks. I made it very clear in my opening, and I will read it again to him, that if noncitizens are voting in Federal elections, they should be prosecuted. We all believe it. He doesn't have to listen if he doesn't want to, but please don't mischaracterize what I said.

Mr. Speaker, I am looking over to the other side of the aisle and can't help but be stunned by the number of people over there who I remember coming on this floor and denying the election results in the year 2020 because they didn't like the results.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to urge that we defeat the previous question. If we do, I will offer an amendment to the rule to make in order amendment No. 10 to the SAVE America Act, which prohibits Members of Congress, the President, the Vice President, their spouses, and dependents from owning or trading stocks.

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

Mr. Speaker, to discuss our proposal, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Morelle), the sponsor of the amendment and the ranking member of the Committee on House Administration.

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

Let's talk about common sense for a second. When the gentleman from Texas introduced this bill, the effective date was in 2027. All of a sudden, because, I think, a right-winger on their side did a tweet that caused all kinds of chaos, they moved for it to take effect immediately, notwithstanding the fact we have primaries beginning in some States in a matter of just a few weeks.

I would just point out to the gentleman who just spoke that we have this thing called a Real ID. For 20 years, we have been trying to implement it. We spent billions of dollars trying to implement it and still not everybody has it. It has taken 20 years. My colleagues are pushing all these new changes on States. They have to do it in a matter of a couple of weeks?

We all know what this is about. We all know what this is about. People see through this. This is not about protecting our democracy. It is not about preventing undocumented immigrants from voting. That is already illegal in this country. This is about sowing confusion and chaos because they know they are going to lose the next election. What an underhanded way to deal with elections in our democracy. What an insult to the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Simon).

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article from ``ABC News'' titled: ``Election Fact Check: Noncitizens Can't Vote, and Instances Are `Vanishingly Rare.' ''

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article from NPR titled: ``Despite grand claims, a new report shows noncitizen voting hasn't materialized.''

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article from the Cato Institute titled: ``Noncitizens Don't Illegally Vote in Detectable Numbers.''

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record another piece from the Cato Institute titled: ``Trump's Claims About Noncitizen Voting Are False. We Can Prove It.''

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article from the American Immigration Council titled: ``Unpacking Myths About Noncitizen Voting--How Heritage Foundation's Own Data Proves It's Not a Problem.''

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an excerpt from an academic article from the journal on Electoral Studies titled: ``An exploration of Donald Trump's allegations of massive voter fraud in the 2016 election,'' which finds:

`` . . . expansive voter fraud concerns espoused by Donald Trump and those aligned with him are not grounded in any observable features of the 2016 election.''

Mr. Speaker, the final thing I will say before I yield to my colleague here is that not too long ago former Governor Rick Scott claimed erroneously that there were hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants registered to vote in Florida. He launched this massive investigation and spent all kinds of money investigating it. It was essentially a witch hunt.

I would ask my colleagues if they know how many people were prosecuted in that or convicted of any crime. One person was prosecuted.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy) read a list, and I asked him to yield to me, but he didn't want to. What the gentleman was doing was cherry-picking cases basically to sow distrust in our elections, just like Donald Trump does.

If the gentleman wants to read a list, I will read a list.

Matt DePerno, a former Michigan Republican State attorney general candidate, was charged with conspiracy and undue possession of a voting machine.

Former Republican Michigan State Representative Daire Rendon was also charged with conspiracy to commit undue possession of a voting machine and false pretenses. What was Ms. Rendon's punishment for this? The Republican Party promoted her to be the chairwoman of the party in her congressional district.

A Republican county clerk in Colorado, Tina Peters, is in prison for a scheme to breach voting systems, fueled by 2020 election conspiracy theories.

A Republican official in Georgia was fined for illegally voting multiple times.

A former GOP lawmaker in Arizona pled guilty to attempted election fraud involving forged signatures.

In North Carolina, four people pled guilty on Monday to misdemeanors for their roles in absentee ballot fraud in rural North Carolina during the 2016 and 2018 elections to help Republican congressional candidates.

Let's not even get into Donald Trump actually being recorded--it is recorded--asking for 11,800 votes to basically change the results in Georgia during the 2020 election.

If my Republican friends want to talk about voter fraud, look in the mirror. Look in the mirror and maybe remember that old saying: ``Physician, heal thyself.''

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Johnson).

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

Mr. Speaker, I love the fact that all these guys have are statistically insignificant anecdotes that they like to put forward here.

The gentleman from Texas talked about how wonderful the economy was. This is an article that just appeared today. The Bureau of Labor Statistics found that U.S. employers added 181,000 jobs last year, far fewer than the 1.46 million that were added in 2024.

You may be impressed by that, but I am not a cheap date when it comes to making sure people have jobs in this country.

The gentleman from Texas said that we don't want to protect elections. We do. We want to protect them from you. We want to protect them from Trump. We want to protect them from all of you who are trying to suppress the vote, who are constantly in denial over the results of our elections.

Last night, we had Republicans come before the Committee on Rules, and they couldn't even bring themselves to say who won the 2020 election. They couldn't even say that Donald Trump lost Minnesota. They are so afraid of being punished by this administration. It is pathetic.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Virginia (Ms. McClellan).

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

Mr. Speaker, I disagree very strongly with what was just said. I don't see Trump trying to preserve our elections. I have been witnessing him trying to undermine trust in our elections and to rig our elections.

Mr. Speaker, the bill before us is a prime example of how awful the process has been under this Republican majority. The SAVE America Act was introduced by the gentleman of Texas just 12 days ago, and it included significant changes from its original version, the SAVE Act.

After the SAVE America Act's initial introduction, the Committee on Rules posted a complete rewrite of it last Friday. Even after two sweeping rounds of edits, Republicans were not done changing their half-baked bill. Yesterday, they posted a manager's amendment, which makes more changes, including changing when the bill would take effect and which voter IDs would be acceptable. We have seen three totally different versions of this bill in a dozen days.

It is important to say that all of these changes were backroom deals. There were no hearings, no markups, no regular order. The chairman of the Committee on House Administration didn't even feign a desire to include rank-and-file members in the process. He actually requested a completely closed rule for this bill.

Mr. Speaker, bad process is not a rare occurrence around here. It is a fundamental feature of Republican governance. Last Congress, Republican leadership made history for running the most closed, unproductive, dysfunctional Congress in modern American history. This Congress, Republicans have only doubled down on this shameful record.

Eighty-four percent of measures that Republicans have sent to the House floor have been totally closed, no amendments, no discussion, no democracy, just take it or leave it. Republican leadership has blocked 82 percent of amendments submitted to the Committee on Rules, over 3,300 amendments blocked, including most Republican amendments, and over 60 percent of bipartisan amendments.

If you are a Democrat, forget it. I am not sure they even read what we submit.

This blockade on amendments is leading to some shameful records. For example, this Republican majority set a record for the fewest House votes cast in the first session of a 2-year Congress in over 35 years. Under Speaker Johnson, the Committee on Rules is where democracy goes to die.

With that in mind, Mr. Speaker, why should we trust Republicans to rewrite voting laws when they are setting records for blocking voting in the people's House? This Republican Congress is an insult to the American people and a disgrace to our democracy.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentleman from Texas I appreciate him reading that list, but the reason we know about that is because those people were caught. The list I read of Republican officials who were caught engaging in voter fraud, the reason we know about it because they were caught. The system is working. Stop trying to sow division and chaos into our electoral system.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the gentleman from Texas who wrote this bill: How the hell are States supposed to implement this new bill in a matter a few weeks? His original bill gave States until 2027. We have primaries coming up in a matter of a couple of weeks. How the hell is this going to be implemented, Mr. Speaker? This is ridiculous. This is about sowing division and chaos in our elections. The bottom line is it is a rotten thing to do.

People want to participate in our democracy. They want to vote. I am going to tell you, I can't wait until the next election because they are going to vote you guys right out of office. The economy stinks under this administration. I mean, the rhetoric coming out of this White House is appalling. Enough.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am not going to respond to the gentleman who characterized January 6 as a normal day of tourism here.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for pointing out these anecdotal cases of voter fraud, and I appreciate the fact that he mentioned they were all caught, just like all the Republican officials that I read, and I have a volume more that I could read. They were caught, so it sounds like the system works.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, let me state, again, for the gentleman from Texas, because he doesn't seem to understand me: Nobody should vote illegally.

If this is the rampant problem they say it is, then maybe he should call Pam Bondi and ask her why she has only secured one or two voter fraud convictions nationwide out of over 155 million votes cast in 2024.

Maybe he should explain to us why his solution to a small handful of voter fraud cases is to punish the 155 million American citizens who did vote by making it harder for them to vote the next time.

Again, Republicans keep insisting there is this massive voter fraud conspiracy. The onus is on them to prove their absurd claim. Every time they try, every time this is investigated by States, by commissions, and by prosecutors, the result is the same: no widespread voter fraud conspiracy. There have been billions of votes cast over decades and a teeny tiny percentage of fraud. That is not a crisis, and it certainly is not a justification to rewrite the rules of democracy. But that is what is happening with the Republican lies to erode the trust in our democracy. That is why this bill is so toxic.

Again, the SAVE America Act tells millions of Americans: You have to show up in person and jump through hoops just to register to vote. Mr. Speaker, you can file your taxes online, you can pay your bills online, and you can get your medical results online, but if this bill passes, you can't fully register to vote online. That is nuts.

You have to buy a passport, Mr. Speaker--that is $130--or you have to buy a copy of your birth certificate. Good luck, because you might even have to pick that up in person. What if a person lives in a rural community and has to drive 100 miles round trip just to get to the clerk's office?

What if they can't afford to take the day off from work just to register to vote?

Who gets punished?

They are students, seniors, Americans with disabilities, and working parents who just can't leave a shift early to stand in line at a clerk's office window that closes at 5:00.

We know this isn't really about voter fraud. It is not about protecting our elections. This is a smokescreen. It is a distraction. If Republicans wanted to protect elections, they would be focused on real threats: cyberattacks, foreign interference, disinformation, intimidation, and violence against election workers. That is where the real danger is. Yet this bill does nothing to address those things.

The SAVE America Act is about denying elections and sowing distress in our system. That is because, according to Donald Trump, it is only fair and square when he wins. When Democrats win, then it is fraud. That is their whole argument in a nutshell.

The most ironic thing of all is that Republican leaders are the ones who seem to commit voter fraud the most. A Republican county clerk in Colorado is in prison for a scheme to breach voting systems fueled by 2020 election conspiracy theories. A Republican official in Georgia was fined for illegally voting multiple times. There was a former GOP lawmaker in Arizona.

Mr. Speaker, this isn't about voter suppression. This is a lousy bill, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, I know mistakes happen, but just so everyone knows what is happening here:

You introduced a bill less than 2 weeks ago. Then you gutted that with a substitute amendment. Then you changed that version with a manager's amendment. Now you have to fix that amendment.

There was no hearing, no markup, and a slew of changes and fixes in a matter of days. It makes you wonder what other mistakes there are, all to make it harder for millions of people to vote.

I would just say to my colleagues: Slow down. Do this process right. You want to implement this bill in a matter of weeks when we have primary elections coming up in a matter of weeks? I mean, it should give everybody pause. This process of legislating here needs to improve.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Roy

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

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia for yielding me the customary 30 minutes and for his riveting presentation, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, before I say a word about the rule or the bills in front of us, this is the first full day that we have convened since two Federal officers shot and killed another American citizen in Minneapolis, Alex Pretti, an ICU nurse who took care of our Nation's veterans.

Alex was on a public street. He was exercising his First Amendment rights while filming Federal agents. He was exercising his Second Amendment rights as a law-abiding, concealed-carry gun owner. He was doing what any decent person would do: helping a woman off the ground after she had been shoved down by a Federal officer. For that, he was punished with death, shot by his own government.

This wasn't an isolated tragedy, Mr. Speaker. It was the second public killing of an innocent American in Minneapolis tied to Homeland Security. Renee Good, a mother of three, was shot by ICE on January 7, mere weeks before the murder of Alex Pretti.

Mr. Speaker, as co-chair of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, named after our former colleague, the only Holocaust survivor to serve in the United States Congress, I have spent years documenting and standing up to human rights abuses carried out by authoritarian regimes against their own people.

Let me say this plainly: A functioning democracy does not execute people in the street. That is the kind of thing you see in North Korea, Mr. Speaker, or Iran; not in the United States of America.

It is beyond the pale. In my view, this administration and those at the Department of Homeland Security, in particular, should not get another cent until there are some serious actions taken. I personally believe we should abolish ICE and start all over. At a minimum, there needs to be some serious, systemic reforms made, which brings us to today's rule debate.

Over the weekend, the Senate acted on the government funding bills House Republicans sent them 2 weeks ago, except for a short-term CR that continues DHS funding at the current levels for the next 1\1/2\ weeks.

I want to be crystal clear about where I stand: I am voting ``no''. I will not stand by and give any more money to Stephen Miller and Kristi Noem to bankroll an out-of-control operation that is terrorizing communities and shredding the Constitution.

We are watching masked, armed agents force their way into homes without judicial warrants. We are seeing blatant violations of the Fourth Amendment. We are witnessing agencies act with impunity. We are hearing about kids getting kidnapped on their way to school and grandparents dragged from their homes. We are listening as government officials smear dead Americans as domestic terrorists instead of answering basic questions about what happened.

Mr. Speaker, I am not interested in business as usual, not for 2 more weeks, not for 2 more seconds.

A Federal judge recently described ICE's conduct in January as an extraordinary pattern of defiance of court orders. They said ICE ``has likely violated more court orders in January 2026 than some Federal agencies have violated in their entire existence.'' That should give every single Member of this House pause. It is certainly my red line, and I think it ought to be a red line for this whole body.

Mr. Speaker, it is not just DHS funding. This package also gives a massive increase in funding to the Pentagon. Why are we writing a blank check for the so-called Department of War while this administration threatens allies, breaks the law, and treats Congress like an afterthought? Why are we giving Pete Hegseth more money than the administration even asked for while we get fewer answers, fewer guardrails, and fewer constraints on reckless action?

On top of all of this, Republicans have jammed in a measure to repeal D.C.'s new tax law. Let me just tell my colleagues, this would blow a $600 million hole in D.C.'s budget, over half a billion dollars gone because Republicans in Congress want to meddle in local governance when they can't even manage a budget of their own.

I mean, they just added $4 trillion to the national debt in their one big, ugly bill. Let that sink in. I mean, it is ridiculous. The Mayor and the chairman of the D.C. Council warned that this would throw a huge wrench into D.C.'s current tax filing season and force people to refile their taxes. That is insane.

If this bill becomes law, they would be ripping away D.C.'s new child tax credit, money that would go directly to families to help them put food on the table and reduce childhood poverty. Republicans talk a big game about family values, and then they turn around and take money out of kids' pockets. It is shameful. By the way--you can't make this stuff up--this measure had no hearing and no markup. I say, so much for regular order.

When I asked the Oversight Committee chairman yesterday basic questions about D.C.'s budget, he had no answers. He had no idea how big D.C.'s budget is or how much D.C. spends on the Metro, schools, or infrastructure improvements. He had no idea how much money D.C. raises in local taxes and how much of a budget shortfall their outrageous bill would cause. These are the most basic questions

that you could possibly ask about whether to overturn D.C.'s tax law, and he couldn't answer them. He had no clue.

Let's be honest about what this is. It is powerful people in Washington telling local communities: Sit down and shut up. We know better. Then they leave working people to clean up the mess.

The final bill in this rule is another massive giveaway to mining CEOs and polluters that lets them gut their own regulations. It is the same pattern. It is the same pattern every single time: more power for the strong, more pain for the vulnerable, more protection for insiders, and more excuses for lawlessness. Enough is enough.

Mr. Speaker, I am voting ``no'' on this rule, ``no'' on this underlying package, and ``no'' on all these bills. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

I want to respond to the gentleman from Georgia, who comes down here with the same old, tired MAGA talking points when it comes to ICE and Homeland Security.

He comes down here to confuse people, to somehow imply that Democrats don't want to lock up violent criminals. On the contrary, we do. That is what we were promised that the worst of the worst would be pursued and would be held accountable. However, that is not what is happening. That is not what is happening.

In Minnesota, ICE agents have been intimidating people in hospitals, forcing hospital management to issue protocols for employees on how to best engage. Our doctors and nurses ought to be focused on tending to patients and not dealing with ICE agents. It is despicable. I mean, agents showed up to a Minnesota hospital with a man who immigrated here legally. Just 4 hours after his arrest, he had at least eight skull fractures in addition to life-threatening brain hemorrhages.

When people have exercised their First Amendment rights to protest, ICE meets them with only more abuse, beating peaceful protesters and dousing them in pepper spray.

Mr. Speaker, we have all heard by now the horrifying story of Alex Pretti, an innocent American citizen, an intensive care nurse who was brutally murdered by Federal agents. This wasn't an isolated incident. The administration has shot 13 people during immigration enforcement operations since September.

I am going to say that again, 13 people have been shot by the Department of Homeland Security. Four of those shootings were fatal. Those are four people who would be with us today if not for the insane administration's cruel oppression of our communities. I mean, ICE agents are not protecting our borders. They are ambushing our communities, decimating our families, and taking innocent lives.

Mr. Speaker, Republicans nearly tripled ICE's budget last summer with their big, ugly bill; and all that money ought to be clawed back. As far as the appropriations package before us, again, I refuse to send another cent to Stephen Miller or Kristi Noem. She ought to be impeached, and he ought to be fired immediately. They are undermining our Constitution, and the Department that they run is murdering American citizens on the street.

We are hearing about young children being kidnapped. We are hearing about off-duty police officers being detained by ICE. We are hearing about ICE going after people because of the color of their skin. That is what we object to. Let's go after the criminals.

By the way, we are not the party that pardoned all the insurrectionists on January 6 and said that the slate is clean. By the way, those people go on to murder innocent people, to rape women, and molest children.

There is a difference here. We want to go after the violent criminals, those who have committed terrible crimes. That is what we were promised, and we were lied to. We have had it.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, the Florida man who just spoke characterized the murder of two Americans by ICE agents as unfortunate. It is not unfortunate. It is goddamned unacceptable, and everybody should be outraged by that.

He also bragged about the fact that he has been in Congress for 10 months, and the government has been shut down twice. I hate to be the one to remind the gentleman, but the last time I checked, his party is in control of everything: the White House, the Senate, and the House. You run the show. Maybe November will be a month of reckoning. Let's hope so for the sake of this country.

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to make in order amendment No. 47 to the Senate amendments to H.R. 7148, which would allow for an up-or-down vote on whether to cut the $75 billion Republicans gave ICE in their big, ugly bill and use those funds to undo some of the big, ugly bill's disastrous healthcare cuts.

Mr. Speaker, last year, Republicans voted to kick more than 15 million people off their healthcare--15 million Americans--through an over $1 trillion cut to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act.

Republicans claimed that this was for deficit reduction, but we know that wasn't true. That was a lie. According to the nonpartisan budget experts at the Congressional Budget Office, their big, ugly bill added $4 trillion to the national debt, in part, by giving ICE boatloads of cash to run roughshod through American cities with zero safeguards. This must end.

If Democrats defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to repurpose these ICE funds toward lowering healthcare costs, which Republican Senators Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins voted for just last week. I challenge my Republican colleagues in this body to do the same.

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

Mr. Speaker, to discuss our proposal, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Amo), the sponsor of this amendment.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am confused. I mean, the gentleman wants to say that the Republicans are not in control, even though they control the White House, the House, and the Senate. Yet, the Republicans were in control to throw 15 million people off of healthcare. Republicans were in control to add $4 trillion to the debt. The Republicans were in control to cut Medicaid by $1 trillion. The Republicans were in control to give ICE unlimited amounts of money with no guardrails. Now, they are telling us they are not in control? I am confused.

Let me just say this. My colleagues across the aisle can't have it both ways. Again, I hope that the Republican control of this House and of this Senate is short-lived because, quite frankly, this country cannot stand another 2 years of this, where if a person is rich and well-connected and a friend of the President, they get all kinds of sweetheart deals. If they are not, if they are a hardworking, middle- class family, they get screwed. People have had it. They see through this.

To say that my colleagues are not in control when they have been cutting programs that have helped poor children, that have helped middle-class families, when they have given tax breaks to multimillionaires and billionaires, give me a break.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson), the distinguished ranking member of the Committee on Homeland Security.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thought the gentleman was asking me a question and that we would have a conversation. I will tell him that we don't want a shutdown. We want them to reel in an out-of-control ICE agency that is killing American citizens right before our very eyes. That is what we want.

I don't understand for the life of me why that is such a heavy lift from my Republican friends, but that is what we are asking for. We don't want to shut the government down. That is not who we are.

By the way, again, Republicans are responsible for the last shutdown. They went on vacation rather than stay in Washington to try to negotiate a deal.

Here we are. All we are asking for is let's reel in this out-of- control agency, and my friends find that too difficult to comprehend.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Lois Frankel).

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

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, under the Republican rule, we don't have regular order anymore. We should be debating appropriations bills one at a time. They bunch everything together.

Mr. Speaker, not only do they bunch things together, but they don't even call for amendments anymore. This is the most closed Congress in history. The Rules Committee and this House of Representatives has become a place where democracy goes to die. My friends should be ashamed of what they are doing to this institution.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Mrs. Fletcher).

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

Mr. Speaker, that was a lot of words to justify the most closed Congress in history.

Mr. Speaker, 83 percent of the rules have been closed. That is 8 out of 10. Republicans don't even call for amendments anymore, and people know that it is a waste of time to come to the Rules Committee because they have already been tipped off that there are going to be no amendments in order.

Mr. Speaker, 90 percent of Democratic amendments have been rejected. A big chunk of Republican amendments have been rejected. I am sorry that Republicans' rank and file are such cheap dates when it comes to legislating, but they cave all the time and they vote for these crappy rules that are totally closed, so that is a bunch of bullshit. Let's be honest. That is what we are talking about here. That is not an accurate assessment of what is going on here.

This is the most closed Congress in history. Republicans should be ashamed.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time

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

Mr. Speaker, I remind my Republican friends, who kind of just go along to get along, that Mr. Arrington, who is a chairman, had 71 percent of his amendments blocked.

I will go right down the list.

Congresswoman Mace had 76 percent of her amendments blocked.

Congressman Steube had 79 percent of his amendments blocked.

I could go right down the list. These are all Republicans who just routinely get blocked.

Enough. Enough. This is a ridiculous argument. The bottom line is a lot of words to justify the most closed Congress in history.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez).

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

Mr. Speaker, in closing, listening to the debate by my Republican colleagues, I know Republicans want to pretend like they are not in control because that absolves them of responsibility and accountability. They don't want to own their own record because they know their record sucks. They want to pretend like they are not in control because if they pretend like they are in control, if they acknowledge that they are in control, then they will be held accountable in November.

Look at what they have promised compared to what they have done so far:

Tax breaks for billionaires; they make sure their big donors are taken care of while they screw over regular people.

$40 billion to Argentina; hurting our farmers and ranchers, importing more beef from South America.

Bombing Venezuela, threatening to invade NATO allies.

Meanwhile, prices are not down. Prices are up because of the stupid tariffs and lousy economic policies.

They promised to release all of the Epstein files. They still haven't done that. In fact, they are covering up for the President of the United States.

People are struggling more than ever because Trump's economy sucks. They are making it easier for the elites, easier for the billionaires, easier for the Epstein class, and harder for everybody else.

Maybe that is why even Republicans are finally acknowledging MAGA was all a lie. Of course, their members only acknowledge that after they leave. Let's listen to Trump's former top ally, Marjorie Taylor Greene. Here is what she said: ``I think people are realizing it was all a lie. It was a big lie for the people. What MAGA is really serving in this administration, who they are serving, is their big donors.''

Look at who Republicans have helped. They have been in charge for a year. They have helped Big Oil. They have helped Big Banks. They have helped Big Tech.

Look who was in the front row at Trump's inauguration: billionaires. That is all he cares about. Look at their promises to go after ``the worst of the worst'' when it comes to immigration, another broken promise. Stephen Miller and Kristi Noem are not going after the worst of the worst. They are going after kids, VA nurses. They are deporting veterans, for God's sake.

We are sick and tired of the broken promises and the lies. Enough. I talk to Republican colleagues all the time who privately confess to me that this is a disaster, and then they come on the floor and talk to the press and say everything is beautiful. That is just not reality.

This President and this administration are taking this country in the wrong direction. We have people that are being murdered in our streets by U.S. Federal agents. When is enough going to be enough? I can't believe this. Go along to get along, I get it. Everybody over there is afraid of the guy in the White House, but maybe you should be more afraid of your constituents. Maybe you ought to listen to your constituents because they are sick and tired of this BS. They have had it. They want Congress to be a body that fights for them, that fights to improve the quality of life for average people. They want this body to be a place where we debate important issues passionately, and we skip all the crazy debates we have on trivial matters.

We can do so much better, but it requires my friends on the other side of the aisle to kind of grow a spine, to stand up and to say and do the right thing.

This is nuts what is happening: People being murdered in our streets; Federal agents crashing into people's homes without a judicial warrant; former off-duty police officers being detained by ICE; people with brown and black skin being detained routinely by ICE. This has to stop.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this rule. Let's get to the negotiating table. Let's do something to reel in this out-of-control agency. Going along to get along is no longer an option.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, food costs are sky high, and millions of people across the country are losing their SNAP benefits due to Trump's big, ugly bill, which made the largest cut to food assistance and healthcare in American history.

Amazing organizations, like Lorraine's Soup Kitchen & Pantry in Chicopee, Massachusetts, are working to bridge the gap so that families don't go hungry amid these reckless Republican cuts.

Lorraine's, named after the first executive director of the soup kitchen, has been providing nutritious food and hope to families in western Massachusetts for 30 years. Under the incredible leadership of Kim Caisse, Lorraine's serves hot meals and provides nutritious pantry staples and produce to hungry families.

As part of my statewide End Hunger Now tour, I visited the pantry with my friend, Richie Neal, ranking member of the Ways and Means Committee. We learned about an increase in need due to Republican cuts and talked directly with pantry workers and people experiencing hunger.

As Congress prepares to consider the next farm bill, we must repeal the SNAP cuts enacted as part of the big, ugly bill and fully restore food assistance programs as we work to end hunger now.

Mr. Speaker, local grocers play a pivotal role in improving access to nutritious food. That is why I joined my dear friend and colleague, Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley, and State and local leaders on a visit to El Valle de la Sultana Market in Everett, Massachusetts, last Friday as part of my statewide End Hunger Now Tour.

Victor and Martha Gutierrez and Audriana Perdomo own La Sultana markets, which have been providing cultural staples to the people of Everett, east Boston, and Somerville for 30 years. We visited the newest location in Everett, which was stocked with delicious and culturally appropriate foods like fresh produce and meat and heard directly from people who shop at the store for groceries.

Their message was loud and clear. Skyrocketing food prices and cuts to SNAP are impacting their ability to feed their families. Their powerful stories provide me further motivation to fight Trump policies that are driving up the cost of food and to once and for all end hunger now.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

First, Mr. Speaker, let me thank the staff on the Rules Committee, both the majority and the minority staff, because they put up with an awful lot. The way this House is being run, the process and procedures, are absolutely awful.

Mr. Speaker, I would say that this is a clown show, but that would be an insult to actual working clowns who probably lost their healthcare in the big, ugly bill that Republicans passed, but whatever. This is not the way this House of Representatives should be run.

Out of the four appropriations bills before us, only one, the Defense bill, was given an amendment process, where the majority issued a call for amendments.

Overall, 9 out of the 12 appropriation bills this cycle did not receive any call for amendments. In other words, nobody was asked to offer amendments to participate in this process. They were told that their views and their opinions didn't matter.

Last week, Republicans made in order 2 out of 78 amendments submitted to the two-bill minibus that we considered. Again, neither of those amendments had a call for amendments prior. The week before, Republicans made zero amendments in order on a three-bill minibus out of 40 submitted. Only one of those bills had an amendment process prior.

Today, they are making 2 amendments in order out of the 164 amendments submitted to the final appropriation bills before us. They were submitted by Democrats and by Republicans, so 99 percent of those amendments that were offered have been blocked.

The Republicans went on last night about regular order, but they only solicited amendment ideas on 3 out of the 12 appropriation bills that fund our government. Give me a break. This is not the way this place is supposed to be run.

Again, I get it. They are worried about pleasing the rebels within the Republican Conference who always threaten to bring down a rule if they don't get what they want, so I assume that is what happened by making two Republican amendments in order today.

Here is another thing that I noticed in this bill. There is this creation of an ethanol domestic energy council, aimed at kind of buying off people from Iowa, I guess. In the rule, it says this council will be appointed by the Speaker of the House to develop legislative solutions to address the crisis facing our Nation's farmers and refiners.

I asked in the Rules Committee whether the Speaker would only appoint Republicans. The answer was that you can submit whatever you want to the Speaker. It is his decision, but we don't know. So, I don't know whether this is a bipartisan council or just a partisan council.

A question was asked in the Rules Committee: Will it only be Members of Congress on this council, or could members of industry or the energy companies be on this council? We were told that they think it is just Members of Congress, but we don't know.

I mean, I don't know. Those are pretty relevant questions, and this is kind of being tossed in here essentially to buy people's votes.

Here is the deal: To those Republicans who are being bought off by this creation of this new council, let me recall back in September when we were having a debate on whether to kind of extend the pause on Trump's terrible tariffs. All of a sudden, we were told that we had to pause the vote. We went on and on and on for a while, waiting and waiting and waiting, and then we were told that there would be a special trade working group established. The press reported that Congressman Adrian Smith, who is the head of the Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee, would be the head of that working group, and they would address the issue of tariffs. They said it would be a thoughtful process.

Mr. Smith was before the Rules Committee the other day, and I asked him about this trade working group that apparently bought off Republican votes, Republicans who were concerned about the tariffs. I asked him who the Members are on this trade working group. He said that he talks to all Members. I asked who the Members are on this trade working group, and he didn't have an answer. Do you know why? They never appointed anybody to be on the trade working group.

I asked him how many hearings, gatherings, and meetings this trade working group has had. He couldn't answer that because they never had any meetings. I asked if there were any publications or reports that have been produced by this trade working group, and he couldn't answer that because there were none.

Now, we are being told--now, Republicans who are kind of concerned about the issue of ethanol are being told that we are going to create this council for you, this new working group for you, and you should be happy.

I am just going to say this, with all due respect to my Republican colleagues: Those of you who are bought off by this in order to vote for this rule, where I come from, we have a name for that, and that is ``cheap date'' because that is what this is. At the end of the day, nothing--nothing--will end up happening.

I am just going to say one other thing before I get into the substance of these bills. When I was the chairman of the Rules Committee, I made nearly half of all amendments in order. This Republican majority has blocked 80 percent. That means Democrats--and, by the way, a lot of Republicans, a majority of Republican amendments have been blocked. Let me say that one more time. A majority of Republican amendments have been blocked.

I don't know what is wrong with Members over there, but come on, a majority of Republican amendments have been blocked, and you continue to go along to get along. They are not just blocking us. They are blocking their own Members. There have been 106 closed rules so far in this Congress, more than Democrats had in the entire Congress the last time we were in charge.

Again, I know you have a slim majority, but here is another fact that you ought to let sink in: We have had the fewest votes on the floor in 35 years. I mean, that is what this Congress is all about.

Again, I would just say, as somebody who loves this institution, who believes in this institution--and I know many of my Republican colleagues feel the same way--I mean, things have to change.

This place has become an institution where trivial issues get debated passionately and important ones not at all. All the issues that I hear about in my townhalls--the high cost of healthcare, rising food prices, the high cost of utilities--we don't talk about those things here.

We are dealing with messaging bills. When it comes to anything of substance, like these appropriations bills, we are basically told to take it or leave it, that our views don't matter. Again, this is not just Democrats, but Republicans, as well.

Mr. Speaker, again, I am grateful for the hard work of the appropriators and their staffs. These bills are complicated, and the hours are brutal. In this political climate, getting anything done, let alone in a bipartisan way, is no small thing.

While no bill is perfect, I agree with the chairwoman that there are provisions in this package that would make a difference in people's lives, and I think, in some cases, in a positive way. The three-bill minibus--Labor-HHS-Education, Defense, and Transportation-HUD--rejects President Trump's proposed $163 billion in cuts. It continues funding for priorities like medical research, NIH, opioid response grants, childcare, and Head Start. It includes badly needed funding to hire more than 2,500 air traffic controllers.

Democrats blocked more than 40 poison-pill riders that Republicans tried to jam in on reproductive care, vaccines, sanctuary cities, and more. I thank Ranking Member DeLauro for holding the line and keeping that garbage out.

I want to talk about something bigger than the line items because, in my view, these bills are being written as if we are still operating under rules that, let's be honest, this current administration does not recognize. The President has shown over and over again that he won't follow the rules. He treats the law like a suggestion. He treats Congress like an obstacle. He treats the Constitution like it is optional.

When we respond with business as usual, that isn't responsible. It is naive. If we don't build in real guardrails, strong, enforceable guardrails, then we are not just funding programs, but we are handing over power. We are writing checks and crossing our fingers that an administration that is proud of breaking the rules will suddenly decide to behave.

Here is the perfect example: This three-bill minibus increases defense spending by more than $8 billion above the President's own budget request, yet it does nothing to rein in this administration's recent illegal military actions around the world, nothing that makes clear that Congress and not the President decides when America goes to war.

The same kind of blank-check governing is also present in the Homeland Security bill. Let's not mince words: ICE is out of control. We are watching Federal agents roll through communities like they are above the law: stopping people, harassing people, intimidating them, and, yes, shooting them.

That is not America. That is not freedom. It sure as hell is not what our parents and our grandparents fought for.

We have history in this country. We know exactly where ``show me your papers'' leads. We know what it looks like when a government decides that certain people don't belong and then builds an enforcement machine to terrorize them into submission.

Yet, here we are, being asked to hand DHS more money with nowhere near the due diligence or the ironclad accountability that this moment demands. Hell, Republicans already supercharged DHS with $75 billion in their big, ugly bill last year. Now, we are supposed to keep feeding the beast? I say hell no. I don't think ICE deserves a single cent more, which is why I am voting ``no.''

I will acknowledge the work that went into these bills. I will acknowledge some provisions that could help people, but I do not trust this President. I do not trust Trump's OMB. I do not trust this administration, which has made lawlessness a habit, to follow the intent of Congress just because we typed it into statutory language.

Call it Trump derangement syndrome, as some of my Republican friends have labeled it. I call it learning from experience. I call it paying attention. This is our last real leverage point. Once we fund it, once we sign the checks, the power shifts. With this President, that is terrifying because he is erratic and lawless.

We tried to put up guardrails. We offered amendments to rein him in. The Republicans all voted them down, every single one of them. They voted against accountability, and they voted against constraints. It is crazy. It tells you everything you need to know, Mr. Speaker. They would rather give him a blank check than do their job as a coequal branch.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' on this rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Mrs. Fletcher).

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

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentlewoman just listing off a bunch of criminals, and we don't take issue with arresting violent criminals. Violent criminals should not be on our streets no matter where they are born, and they should face justice. But the issue is that ICE is terrorizing communities and attacking people, including U.S. citizens.

In Minnesota, a U.S. citizen said ICE took him at gunpoint in his underwear, without a warrant, in front of his 4-year-old grandchild.

In another instance, a U.S. citizen went on his lunch break, and masked Federal agents detained him in a choke hold.

In Miami, Federal agents ripped a woman from her car as she screamed that she was a U.S. citizen.

ICE agents in Minnesota ate lunch in a small-town Mexican restaurant. When they were done enjoying their meal, they detained two workers who served them.

In California, a U.S. citizen on his way to work at a food bank pulled over to warn Federal agents that they should wrap up their stop of another individual before school-age children gathered for the bus. Moments later, an ICE officer shot him in the back.

In Chicago, ICE agents stormed an apartment complex by helicopter as families slept and deployed chemical agents near a public school.

Mr. Speaker, ICE is wreaking havoc on people all over this country, trampling over the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens at every turn. U.S. citizens across the country are carrying their passports out of fear of being detained without cause.

There are reports of Native Americans who are U.S. citizens being detained by ICE. Thirty-two people have died in ICE custody in 2025-- 32. It was ICE's deadliest year in over two decades.

In just the first 9 months of Trump's second term, over 170 U.S. citizens were detained by ICE, and nearly 20 were children. Two dozen were held without being able to call lawyers or their family. These citizens have been dragged, tackled, beaten, tased, and shot by immigration agents.

Mr. Speaker, I can go on and on and on. Let me be clear. This is an out-of-control agency at war with communities around the country. They don't give a damn if you are a U.S. citizen. The silence on the other side of the aisle is outrageous, as if this is no big deal. Wait until it happens to you or a loved one.

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

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

I urge we defeat the previous question. If we do, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up S.J. Res. 88, which would allow for an up-or-down vote on whether to terminate President Trump's global tariffs.

Mr. Speaker, on April 2 of last year, President Trump announced he was opposing tariffs on virtually all countries, including our closest allies like the United Kingdom, the European Union, Japan, Norway, and Taiwan--the list goes on--based on a bogus national emergency.

He called it ``liberation day.'' Let me tell you that the only liberation my constituents have felt is money being liberated from their hard-earned paychecks because the price of basically everything has gone up since Donald Trump took office.

The price of beef has risen 16.4 percent over the last year. The price of coffee is up a whopping 19.8 percent. The price of lettuce is up 7.3 percent. Frozen fish is up 8.6 percent. In total, families paid $310 more for groceries during President Trump's first year in office compared to 2024.

It is now abundantly clear that President Trump broke his promise to lower costs on day one, in large part due to his cost-increasing tariffs. Although the President and his cronies claim that these tariffs are paid by foreign governments, in reality, it is the American people who pay the tariffs.

According to a newly published study, which analyzed $4 trillion in shipments over the past year, American consumers and importers paid 96 percent of the cost of tariffs, while foreign companies shouldered a measly 4 percent of the cost.

Last October, more than 2\1/2\ months ago, the Senate sent to the House on a bipartisan basis this joint resolution to terminate the global tariffs. In this House, our Republican majority has continued to block a simple up-or-down vote. They have basically endorsed the increase in the cost of living for average people.

Speaker Johnson promised his Members that he would create a working group to address the tariffs. We now know this tariff policy working group is a mirage. It doesn't exist. You got taken.

When I ask the Republican chairman of the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Trade about the working group, which he was supposedly in charge of, he said he didn't know who was on it or whether or not it had ever met.

Are you serious? Are you serious? Most Republicans, even the ones who oppose the tariffs in private, are continuing to go along to get along with this.

When are Republicans who know better going to stand up against this crazy tariff policy that is raising costs at home and destroying our alliances? It is never too late to do the right thing. By voting to defeat the previous question, we can finally have an up-or-down vote in this body on whether to terminate President Trump's disastrous global tariffs.

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

Mr. Speaker, to discuss our proposal, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks), the ranking member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Johnson).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for raising an issue that he got a working group on--a working group that may meet or not meet, may have members or may not have members, and may do something or may not. Boy, wow, that is something.

Mr. Speaker, today, I recognize someone who has quietly made this place work day after day and vote after vote. Ray Salazar is leaving the House after more than 11 years of service to this institution and to the Democratic Caucus. I want to say plainly and on the record that we are thankful for his service.

Ray started here the way that a lot of great public servants start: by showing up, doing the work, and earning trust. From an internship with Congresswoman Colleen Hanabusa, to Whip Hoyer's AmeriPAC, to becoming a special assistant to the Office of the Democratic Whip, Ray learned this place from the ground up.

Ray then served as floor assistant for Whip Hoyer, floor director for Leader Hoyer, and deputy floor director and senior adviser. Most recently, he has been floor director for the Democratic Whip, Katherine Clark, helping Members to navigate the toughest moments, the longest days, and the most important votes.

For the Rules Committee specifically, Members and staff relied on Ray for many, many years. Whether it was getting information about the floor at 1 o'clock in the morning or helping to solve tricky procedural problems, he has been a reliable and valued part of the Rules family.

He is a graduate of Hawaii Pacific University with a background in international relations, national security, and advanced military education focused on joint warfare. He understands the world. He understands the institutions. He understands that democracy runs on people who do the hard work, the unglamorous work.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Ray for his professionalism, his steadiness, and his service. We will miss him on the floor, and we wish him nothing but success as he begins his next chapter.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, after all the time that we spend together, the gentlewoman can just call me Jim.

Mr. Speaker, let me close with this: Republicans are running this place like a clown show. Over and over again, House Republican leadership shuts down the amendment process. Over and over again, they limit debate. Over and over again, they tell Members to take it or leave it.

Mr. Speaker, 80 percent of all amendments were blocked. We had to have the Speaker up in the Rules Committee this morning because, apparently, the only way Republicans can get their amendments made in order around here is by blackmailing the Speaker and threatening to take down the rule.

Last night, we had Members showing up with serious amendments, amendments aimed at basic accountability, basic guardrails, basic limits on a lawless administration. The leadership's answer is no, one structured rule for the minibus making in order two Republican amendments. Homeland is a closed rule entirely--no accountability, no guardrails, no nothing.

That is not how the people's House is supposed to work, and it is especially dangerous right now because this is not a normal administration. This President has shown he will say one thing and then do another. He will assure Congress and then ignore Congress.

Now, we are supposed to pass funding bills without ironclad guardrails on what this administration can do with that money, whether it is foreign adventurism, whether it is some half-baked scheme about Greenland, or whether it is building out a domestic secret police force that treats human beings like trash.

Let's be honest. If you cannot trust an administration to follow the law, then you don't give them a blank check. That is exactly what this process risks doing.

I want to see this House do its job. I want Members on both sides to be able to offer amendments, to debate them, and to vote on them. I want to see real constraints to prevent taxpayer dollars from being used to violate rights, to trample the Constitution, or to fuel an agency like ICE that is behaving like it answers to nobody.

I urge my colleagues: Do not rubberstamp a process that shuns accountability. Don't enable an administration that ignores Congress. Don't

pretend that normal rules can contain abnormal lawlessness.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to start by saying something simple that shouldn't be controversial in the people's House. On questions of war and peace, on questions of life and death, Congress is not supposed to be a potted plant. We don't get paid to outsource hard decisions. We don't get brownie points for showing up.

Our Founders weren't naive about threats, but they were realistic about power. That is why they chose to entrust Congress with the power to make war--not the President, not the courts, not the States--but the elected Representatives of the people.

Call me crazy, but I think if we abdicate that power, we are not only doing a disservice to the people we represent but we are violating our sacred oath of office, our oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

The last time I brought up this resolution, I was told it was premature because there had been no strikes in Venezuela. Let me quote what my Republicans friends said in their own words.

Chairman Mast said: `` . . . this resolution to me doesn't make much sense because we are not in hostilities inside Venezuela.''

Congressman Keith Self said: `` . . . which is not necessary, as it removes our Armed Forces from hostilities against a country where there have been no hostilities.''

Congressman Warren Davidson said: `` . . . is the contention that this is a present condition, that there are U.S. Forces in violation of the War Powers Resolution, or is it a hypothetical future?''

Congressman Tom McClintock said: ``If the President launched an unprovoked attack on Venezuela . . . without congressional declaration, we should have this debate. Until then, I think Democrats would do well not to cry wolf on such an important matter.''

Even Susie Wiles, the President's own Chief of Staff, said that if he were to authorize some activity on land, then we would need Congress.

We got lots of smug lectures from the other side. Guess what. On January 3, 2026, not only did Donald Trump authorize land activity in Venezuela, but his administration did not come to Congress beforehand. We were not even the first group that he talked to after the attack on Venezuela.

I guess the best we can get from the current majority here is that there is never a good time for Congress to assert its war powers. It is either too soon or it is too late.

I don't think it is too late because we are still dealing with the consequences of this unauthorized and unlawful military strike. Nicolas Maduro, a brutal tyrant, was removed from power. The Trump administration replaced Maduro with his own damned vice president. Is that the big victory that my friends think we should be celebrating? Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.

They left in power the same illegitimate regime that rules through oppression, fraud, and violence. They left in control the same security apparatus that violates people's rights. They preserved the same corrupt cartel state.

Am I missing something here? From what I can tell, the President put our troops in harm's way without congressional consent, all so that he could replace one dictator with another dictator. Everything is the same except the face at the podium.

Now the President says he is the one running Venezuela. I don't even know what the hell that means.

He says we control the oil. What happens if the Venezuelan people don't want that? Will he send troops into Venezuela? What is the clearly defined mission here? I don't know what it is.

Look at what has happened since he claimed he is in charge. Repression has gotten worse. Security forces are interrogating people at checkpoints, confiscating phones, and detaining journalists. Again, I ask: What was this all about? We don't know what will happen next.

Whether you support Trump's actions or oppose them, shouldn't we all agree that we should have a debate on this stuff and that we should authorize an expansion of military forces if that is what is in the future? That should be a debate. We should have a vote on it. That is all we are asking here.

This is crazy. We can't be asleep at the switch. There is no oversight, no hearings, and no votes. It is just blind obedience to the executive. That is not the way this place is supposed to run.

If my colleagues respect this institution, the House of Representatives, they will vote ``yes'' to stop this madness from going any further than it already has. We ought to vote on these issues.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I just say to the distinguished chairman that his arguments are: It is either too early, or it is too late.

Our troops were on the ground. Our troops were shot at. They were wounded. Thankfully, they are home and they are safe. With this, all we are saying here is that if you are going to expand and utilize the military again, you come to Congress and ask for a vote.

That is not just our prerogative. It is our responsibility. It is in the Constitution. That is our damn job. If you don't want to do it, do something else. Yet it is our responsibility.

In terms of the gentleman's interpretation of the War Powers Resolution, I will simply suggest that maybe he and his team go to the Congressional Research Service and get a briefing to understand how it works, but this is our responsibility. It is our job.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Houlahan).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania.

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

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman keeps talking about the resolution, and here it is. I did talk about the resolution, and let's talk about the resolution again. I have it right here. It is two pages.

The way the resolution is written is to comply with the War Powers Act. The resolution would simply prevent further escalation. If you are watching at home, read it yourself, H. Con. Res. 68. The reason we think we need to do that is because the administration already did not get permission before escalating the first time.

By the chairman's logic, the only time we can ever have a vote is if there are physically boots on the ground. That just is logically insane. It doesn't comport with the way the War Powers Act is written. By his logic, the President should be able to launch a preemptive nuclear war without congressional authorization. That is nuts.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Ryan).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Castro).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Massie).

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I have still not gotten an answer to the only question that matters today: Why did we strike Venezuela, spending taxpayer money and putting American troops in harm's way to replace Maduro with his own Vice President, someone who is an illegitimate ruler who is just as ruthless and evil as Maduro?

I don't know why we did that. What was the point? Not a single one of my colleagues can answer that question because they have no answer. They know voting for this resolution is right.

If people want to put our troops in harm's way, if they genuinely believe more military action may be necessary in the future, if that is what you believe, whether to defend oil fields or to do something else, then you shouldn't just pound the damn lectern and wave the flag. You need to come before this entire Chamber to move a bill to authorize the use of military force.

My friends should have the guts and backbone to put an Authorization for Use of Military Force on the floor. Spell out the mission. Spell out the objectives. Tell the American people how long it lasts, what it costs, why it matters, and how we get a legitimate, democratic government in Venezuela. Have the guts to vote. That is all this resolution is requiring, but don't give me this bs about how before the strikes it was premature to vote, and now it is too late.

I have seen this movie before, Mr. Speaker. It always starts with the White House telling us that it will be quick, clean, and over in a matter of days. Then, months later, years later, you get troops deployed, kids coming home in caskets, and taxpayers paying for endless quagmires that never end, and the same people here on the floor telling us that we are premature or crying wolf are suddenly nowhere to be found.

That is the truth, Mr. Speaker. Wars are easy to start, but they are hard as hell to stop.

This resolution ought to pass no matter what you believe about further military involvement in Venezuela. What it says plainly is that if the President is contemplating further military action, then he has a moral and a constitutional obligation to come here and get our approval.

The people we represent did not send us here to be potted plants while the White House sleepwalks us into another mess. If this administration wants to escalate, make the case to the American people. Get consent through their elected Representatives. Follow the Constitution.

Let me tell you what I think. I think this was all so that Donald Trump could get a good headline. I think it was so he could distract from the lousy economy and the fact that he is still covering up the Epstein files. I think it is about theft because the oil being taken from the people of Venezuela is being sold off and used to finance a slush fund in Qatar controlled by, you guessed it, Donald Trump.

I don't think I have ever seen such a brazen example of corruption in my life. The President of the United States put American troops in harm's way so he could steal oil from Venezuela and deposit it into his own pocket. I think it is a disgraceful thing to do.

It is time for my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to grow a spine, obey their oath, and do their damn jobs. You should vote ``yes'' on this resolution, whether you support President Trump's actions or you disagree with them.

All this says is simply that if he wants to expand military operations, he has to come to Congress. It is that simple. It is not complicated. This is about the Constitution. This is about our oath. This is about representing the people who sent us here. I mean, to do anything less is a dereliction of our duty.

I can't even believe that this is controversial, the idea that somehow we don't want to vote on whether to authorize the use of military force, whether it is in Venezuela or anywhere else.

What is wrong with my colleagues who think this is such a big leap that this is somehow not justified? Read the Constitution.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, last Friday, with my friend Congressman Steve Lynch, I visited Quincy Community Action Programs in Quincy, Massachusetts, as part of my Statewide End Hunger Now tour.

We kicked off our visit with QCAP CEO Beth Ann Strollo and some of the young kids in their Head Start program enjoying healthy breakfasts of yogurt and berries. They were so enthusiastic.

Later on we heard from Ted Donnelly, who leads QCAP's food and nutrition programs at their South West Community Center. He spoke about the record-breaking number of people coming to the food pantry every month, especially when USDA let SNAP benefits lapse during the Republican shutdown.

We also heard poignant stories from a few of QCAP's clients, Nisha, Marybeth, Tanya, and Danielle. One noted that she would love to work more hours, but if she does, she will lose all of her food benefits.

Mr. Speaker, my visit to QCAP strengthened my resolve even more to fight back against the Trump administration's vicious attacks against our antihunger programs and end hunger now.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, we had plenty of time last night in the Rules Committee to debate these awful, lousy bills: H.R. 6945, H.R. 6359, and H.J. Res. 140. I encourage everyone to look them up. Don't take my word for it.

Two of these bills are about misleading pregnant women to stop them from making decisions about their own

bodies. This is all part of the Republicans' war on women. These bills are aimed to please anti-choice protesters who are flying into Washington this week. The third is about making it easier for a foreign mining company to dump pollution into a pristine wilderness recreation area in Minnesota.

All of these bills are being brought to the floor under completely closed rules--no amendments, limited debate, no nothing. I won't waste more time on these terrible bills. They are just more of the same stupid garbage that this majority has brought to the floor time and time again.

What I do want to highlight, Mr. Speaker, is that this week marks 1 year since Donald Trump was sworn in as President of the United States. Republicans have had total control of the entire Federal Government-- the House, the Senate, and the White House--for over a year.

Yet still, after an entire year in charge, Republicans continue to point the finger at Democrats rather than take responsibility for their own embarrassing failures and broken promises. Republicans and Trump ran on fighting for working people, but every single day, they have governed on behalf of billionaires and corporate donors.

Let's take a look at some of these broken promises. Donald Trump said he would put America first. He has not. What he has done is given a $40 billion loan to Argentina. He stabbed American ranchers in the back, proposing that we import beef from South America. He threw a fancy party at the White House for a Saudi Prince who murdered an American journalist. He has not put America first.

He also promised no more endless wars. Give me a break. He renamed the Pentagon the Department of War. Last year, he bombed Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen. He bombed Venezuela and now says that we are running the country, whatever the hell that means. He is also threatening to take an autonomous territory from Denmark, a NATO ally.

Let's go over another failure. Donald Trump promised ICE would only deport the worst of the worst. Guess what. That is not true. ICE agents are terrorizing not just immigrants, but U.S. citizens, sowing chaos, murdering an unarmed American mom in broad daylight, and deporting veterans and asylum seekers who are here legally.

Another campaign promise: Donald Trump said he would lower prices on day one. Oh, my God, Mr. Speaker, has anyone in this administration gone shopping? Let me say this as someone who buys his own groceries in Worcester, Massachusetts. Prices are not only high, but they are going up even more because of Trump's reckless tariffs. Remember when Trump bragged about how he would get gas down to $2 a gallon? It is $3 a gallon down the street from my house.

Let's keep going down the list. Trump said he would get drugs off our streets and put criminals in jail. Give me a break. He pardoned the guy who created the dark web market that smuggled in tons of fentanyl. Then he pardoned the Honduran ex-President convicted of trafficking tons and tons of cocaine into the United States.

Let's not forget, he pardoned all the January 6 rioters, many of whom have since gone on to reoffend with illegal gun possession and committing child sex crimes after Donald Trump let them out of jail.

Then, of course, we have the promise that Trump would replace ObamaCare with something better. Instead of something better, Republicans let the enhanced ACA tax credits expire at the end of 2025, which means that now people are paying more. Tens of thousands of people in Massachusetts alone have now dropped coverage, meaning they have no insurance at all.

Republicans don't have a plan to replace ObamaCare. They never have. Fifteen years later, I am starting to think that they never will.

Now, another thing that Donald Trump promised: no corruption and full transparency. Remember that promise? Seriously, how much money does one family need to make off the Presidency before Republicans admit it is corruption? The Trump family has gotten nearly $4 billion richer since he took office last year. How much can one family treat the Presidency like a piggy bank before Republicans finally step up and do something about it?

Why is his ballroom being funded by billionaire donors? What are they looking for?

What about the Epstein files? There has been no transparency there. We had to force a vote in Congress. He reluctantly signed the bill, and he still hasn't released all the files. Less than 1 percent of the files have been released. What the hell is taking so long? What is he so afraid of? What is he hiding?

It has been clear to me since day one of Donald Trump's disgraceful Presidency what it has been all about. Look at who was in the front row of his inauguration, all billionaires: his Treasury secretary, a billionaire; his education secretary, a billionaire; his entire Cabinet, Health and Human Services, Energy, Interior, all led by billionaires.

These people don't shop for themselves or they don't worry about paying rent. They don't care about us. Trump said he would drain the swamp. What a bunch of BS. He moved the swamp into the Lincoln bedroom for God's sake.

The bottom line is simple: He has not done a single damn thing that he promised to do. Not only have they failed, they have failed catastrophically, and look no further than the bills on the floor today.

There is nothing for workers, nothing to lower grocery prices, nothing to take on price gouging, nothing to bring down rent, nothing to help people buy a home, nothing to lower prescription drug costs, nothing to raise wages, nothing to strengthen workplace protections, and nothing to create jobs. Just culture war garbage and corporate giveaways is all the GOP knows how to do.

After 1 year of total power, there is nobody else to blame. This is the Republican record, and it is awful. This is Donald Trump's economy, and it sucks. The people back home see it. They feel it. They are living it. They see who keeps getting help and who keeps getting hurt. They see the billionaires cashing out while working families get squeezed. The Republican Party has had a year, and the American people have had enough.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

I will correct the Record on something. Donald Trump promised he would lower gas prices to $2 a gallon. I just did Google maps and looked at the price of gas in the gentleman's district. It is like $2.80. That is a far cry from $2.

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 12, the Women's Health Protection Act, to restore the rights of women to an abortion nationwide and undo extremist abortion bans in States across the country.

Mr. Speaker, since the Supreme Court's Dobbs decision, 13 States have imposed complete abortion bans and many more have imposed extremely short timeframes to get an abortion, endangering women, threatening doctors with criminal prosecution, giving politicians in State capitol buildings extreme power over personal medical decisions and fundamental freedoms.

The bills in this rule are part of that dangerous trend. One bill actually diverts Federal TANF funds meant for low-income families to fund so-called crisis pregnancy centers, which provide pregnant women oftentimes with fake medical advice with the goal of dissuading them from accessing contraception or abortion care.

Republicans aren't providing more funding for TANF. God forbid they do that. Giving this money away to these fake medical clinics is stealing money from low-income families who need real help. The damage these fake pregnancy centers do isn't theoretical.

In my district, a woman was told by one of these centers that she had a viable pregnancy, but as time went on and she continued to feel sharp pains, she went to a real doctor and was diagnosed with an ectopic pregnancy that threatened her life and resulted in an emergency surgery. She will have lifelong complications. If she had received actual medical care earlier, she could have received the treatment she needed before it was too late.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so we can bring up a bill that will actually protect women and allow them to access the full suite of reproductive care options.

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

Mr. Speaker, to discuss our proposal, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Chu).

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

Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentleman who just spoke that some of us had different experiences. In my district, a woman almost died from one of

these crisis pregnancy centers because she got bad advice from a quack. Don't lecture us about our dedication to making sure that women are not only presented all options but treated by people who are actually qualified.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New Mexico.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting. Now the gentleman is blaming the Governors and not Biden. I don't even know where the hell Worcester is. I never heard of that place the way he is saying it. It is certainly not in Massachusetts.

Mr. Speaker, in any event, while this Chamber is wasting more time on yet more messaging bills, a real crisis is unfolding in plain sight. Our allies are preparing for a possible military conflict with the United States. Let me repeat that again.

Our closest allies, our partners in freedom and peace for decades, are reinforcing their territory because the President of the United States has plunged us into the greatest transatlantic crisis in a generation.

Are we supposed to be relieved by the fact that finally, after a week of chaos, he said he won't use force? Is that supposed to somehow comfort us? I don't really feel very comforted because these are the same people who told us they wouldn't invade Venezuela the week before they invaded Venezuela. Let me remind everyone how this started.

Last weekend, Donald Trump sent a message to Norway's Prime Minister. I want the President's words in the Record because the American people deserve to hear them.

``Dear Jonas, considering your country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped eight wars plus, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of peace.''

Now, let's listen to that again. Since he didn't get the prize, the President of the United States says he no longer feels obligated to think of peace.

Then he pivots from grievance to threats, saying that he wants ``complete and total control of Greenland.''

That is nuts. Again, this is truly crazy. This is the President of the United States talking about a NATO ally the way that Putin talked about Crimea before he invaded Ukraine.

`` . . . if we don't do it the easy way, we are going to do it the hard way.''

Again, that is not a Putin quote. It is a Trump quote. You can hardly tell the damned difference anymore. Wake up, America.

Are any of my friends on the other side of the aisle going to step up and put an end to this insanity, or are we all just going to shrug it off and move on? The President's own words show that he is living in a different reality. He told The New York Times that acquiring Greenland is psychologically important to him. Not to the United States, but to him personally.

Mr. Speaker, just so we are all on the same page, the U.S. does not need to invade Greenland to protect America. We already have a U.S. military presence there, and Denmark has basically said that they are happy to partner with us even further, because our militaries already work very closely, to make sure that Russia or China doesn't gain a foothold in the Arctic, so his own justification is total BS.

Threatening to annex Greenland actually makes us less safe. If we wanted to stand up to Russia, I can think of a really easy way to do that that doesn't involve invading a NATO ally. No, no, no. In no way is this about national security or defending the Arctic. It is a cover story.

This is about a thin-skinned, petty man throwing a global tantrum because he didn't get the prize that he thinks he deserves. Through all of this, barely a peep from most Republicans--not a whisper. Imagine if this were a Democratic President. They would be up in arms. We would be having investigations and subpoenas, and it would be a national scandal. Yet, we are hearing nothing from Republicans because they are in a cult.

I will say what they won't: None of this is normal. This is not a joke. This is not something Republicans can

shrug off or turn away from. This President is threatening a NATO ally in writing, and the world is responding.

European allies have begun sending troops to Greenland to protect it from an American invasion. Canada has signaled that such an invasion would activate Article 5, meaning our allies would be obligated to take military action against us. Record-setting protests are taking place in Greenland and in Denmark because they have no interest in being taken over by Trump.

Instead of deescalating, Trump is ramping up--tariffs, threats, blackmail, trying to bully our allies into letting him grab territory.

Do you know what the kicker is to all of this? Working people will pay the price for Trump's little temper tantrum. When you blow up alliances, you don't just blow up diplomacy. You blow up supply chains. You blow up markets. You blow up global stability, and it is never the billionaires who eat the cost. It is families. It is farmers. It is workers. It is regular people.

Maybe that is why 91 percent of Americans think that taking over Greenland is a stupid idea, but here is the bottom line: China benefits when America alienates Europe. Russia benefits when NATO is weakened and distracted. Every authoritarian on Earth benefits when the President of the United States starts acting like a two-bit tyrant.

I will just end on this: The world where America invades Greenland is a horrible, horrible world. It is a world with no moral compass. It is a world with no North Star towards liberty and justice. It is a world where China, Russia, and America conspire together to subvert freedom, democracy, and peace. It is a world I don't want to live in, but it is the world that will come to be if we allow this President to do what he says he wants to do.

My message to our allies is simple: Do not mistake this President for the American people. Stand up to him. Do not appease him, and know that there are Americans and there are Members of Congress who will stand with you in defense of democracy, alliances, and the rule of law.

My message to House Republicans is even more simple: It is time to take the car keys from grandpa. Stop worshipping this President. Stop acting like you are in a cult. Grow a spine, and for once in your lives, cut the BS and do something to stop him.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is incredible to be lectured by people who claim they are pro-life but who vote to take food away from hungry kids in this country, who vote to cut SNAP by $200 billion in the big, ugly bill, who vote to cut Medicaid by $1 trillion in the big, ugly bill. It really is incredible. It takes my breath away.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Bonamici).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Oregon.

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

Mr. Speaker, first of all, let's be clear, all of these crummy bills that are coming to the floor today are under completely closed rules.

The gentlewoman who just spoke, her amendment was blocked from being debated and voted on on the House floor by my Republican colleagues. Everything is just closed--their way or the highway. It is a terrible pattern that has developed here.

Mr. Speaker, after 1 year of total Republican control, there is nowhere left to hide. Republicans ran on helping working people. They ran on lowering costs. They ran on grocery prices and rent. What did they do? They delivered all right--for billionaires and big donors.

If Wall Street wanted a tax break, it would get done in a nanosecond. If Amazon wanted another loophole, it would materialize out of thin air. If Big Oil wanted another permit, they would roll out the red carpet. If Big Pharma wanted to rip off people, Republicans look the other way.

That is how things have worked around here for the last year. It is never a problem paying for tax breaks for billionaires, but somehow, when everyday people needed help, Republicans were nowhere to be found. They cut food assistance, cut Medicaid, and cut help for regular people. They stole from those with the least to give more to those with the most.

I am so sick of the excuses. For a year, we have heard Republicans blame everyone but themselves: blame Biden, blame Democrats, blame George Soros, blame the Clintons, blame Kamala Harris, blame the blue States, blame the media, blame fill-in-the-blank.

Here is a thought, Mr. Speaker: Why don't you guys blame yourselves? You control the House, the Senate, and the White House. You are in charge. You set the schedule. You control the government. You have been in power for an entire year. If you are still blaming someone else, that is really not a strategy. It is a confession.

As much as you guys might need a priest, I am not here to offer forgiveness or absolution. I am here to demand accountability.

Republicans need to take ownership of your pathetic, incompetent, disastrous inability to deliver on anything you said you would.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois, Dr. Foster, for yielding me the time and for scheduling this hour on this most important topic.

The threat of nuclear weapons challenges our conscience. It is a threat not just for Americans, but for all humanity and all species of life on our planet.

The idea of nuclear conflict isn't an issue that families normally discuss around the kitchen table, but it is real. It is deadly serious. It demands our urgent attention. We cannot afford to throw our hands up and say there is nothing to be done.

The United States can take concrete action today: Extend the New START treaty. The arc of arms control is one of success led by Presidents of both parties.

Forty years ago, there were 70,000 nuclear warheads in inventories around the world. Today, there are 12,400--far more than we should have, but it is progress.

Arms control is hard work. It involves technical expertise, diplomatic skill, and political will. Today, we need all three. That is because the last control agreement remaining in force between the United States and Russia expires on February 5, in only 22 days.

The New START treaty limits the number of deployed strategic nuclear warheads for each party to 1,550, on no more than 700 deployed long- range missiles and bombers. Extension is common sense for our security.

First, New START promotes stability. With the war in Ukraine, tensions between the U.S. and Russia are high. Negotiating an extension offers space within that relationship to lessen tensions.

Second, if not renewed, we risk the possibility that each side will go beyond the treaty's limit in a misguided pursuit of geopolitical advantage.

Third, there is no nuclear strategic gain from deploying more warheads on more delivery vehicles. Our massive, largely invulnerable nuclear arsenal is more than sufficient for deterrence.

Fourth, increasing our strategic forces might incentivize China to accelerate its nuclear buildup.

Lastly, it would cause us to funnel billions more taxpayer dollars into our nuclear arsenal when we should be restoring funding to healthcare, medical research, and food and nutrition programs here at home.

Why is it that we always have money for bombs, but when it comes to helping improve the quality of life for our people, we are told we can't afford it? It doesn't have to be this way, and both Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump seem to agree. Both Presidents have spoken favorably of extending New START.

In September, Putin said: ``Russia is ready to continue to adhere to the central quantitative restrictions under the START treaty for 1 year after February 5, 2026,'' if the United States reciprocates. In response, Trump said: ``Sounds like a good idea to me.''

Here we are, 22 days from expiration. The White House has yet to reply to the Kremlin's offer. The clock is ticking.

I ask the administration to respond to the Russians today: announce we will abide by the New START limits, build confidence, and create time and space for negotiation.

President Trump can be a leader for peace. Last year, he said, from the Oval Office: ``There is no reason for us to be building brand-new nuclear weapons. We already have so many. You could destroy the world 50 times over, 100 times over, and here we are, building new nuclear weapons, and they are building nuclear weapons.''

President Trump, I have to say, you are right. He can join Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and Ronald Reagan among the Presidents with major arms control wins.

Mr. Speaker, as a Member of Congress, I have worked to reduce the threat of nuclear weapons. With Representative Jill Tokuda of Hawaii, I introduced H. Res. 317, a resolution that calls on the U.S. Government to return to the negotiating table on nuclear disarmament and to lead a global effort to reduce and eliminate nuclear weapons.

I have also introduced, with Senator Ed Markey from my State of Massachusetts, the Hastening Arms Limitation Talks Act of 2025, or the HALT Act. Our bill outlines a vision for a 21st century freeze on the testing, production, and deployment of nuclear weapons.

We never thought there would be a need to revive the nuclear freeze movement, but here we are.

Let me quote from Michael Klare, an arms control expert at Hampshire College and a constituent of mine: ``February 6 is likely to bring us into a new era, not unlike the early years of the Cold War, in which the major powers will be poised to ramp up their nuclear warfighting capabilities without any formal restrictions whatsoever. That comfortable feeling we once enjoyed of relative freedom from an imminent nuclear holocaust will also then undoubtedly begin to dissipate. If there is any hope in such a dark prognosis, it might be that such a reality could, in turn, ignite a worldwide anti-nuclear movement like the Ban the Bomb campaigns of the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s.''

We have a path out of this. Trump can make good on his statement that there is no need for new nuclear weapons. He can extend New START limits on deployed warheads.

For our sanity and for the safety of Americans and all of humanity, let's make the world less dangerous.

Mr. Speaker, I again thank the gentleman from Illinois for leading this effort.

Mr. Speaker, at the end of last year, a Massachusetts- based foundation committed to ending hunger, the Eos Foundation, and released its annual school breakfast report card.

We have all heard the old adage that breakfast is the most important meal of the day. For kids experiencing hunger, it is especially true.

The Eos Foundation has put its money where its mouth is literally, by providing funding and technical assistance to schools to establish robust breakfast-in-the-classroom programs.

Springfield Public Schools is a shining example of what is possible. With support from the Eos breakfast-in-the-classroom model, 84 percent of students are now getting breakfast up from 44 percent a few years ago.

Mr. Speaker, we can and we should do more to close the breakfast gap, the difference between the number of students receiving school breakfast versus lunches. I am committed to doing my part. I have a bill that would increase the Federal meal reimbursement rates for school breakfasts and lunches.

Mr. Speaker, thanks to the incredible partners at the Eos Foundation, we are making progress one school at a time.

Madam Speaker, this week I am officially announcing a statewide End Hunger Now tour, where I will be visiting every congressional district in Massachusetts to hear from people struggling to put food on the table, to see firsthand why getting nutritious food into every community matters, and to learn from the organizations that are making a difference in people's lives.

I am proud that Massachusetts is taking a stand to fight hunger, but I am ashamed that in the richest country in the history of the world nearly 48 million people, including 14 million children, don't know where their next meal is going to come from.

I think our national hunger crisis is more than just a policy failure. I think it is a moral outrage, one that Trump and Republicans have made worse by ripping food assistance away from people so they can give tax breaks to billionaires and canceling USDA's gold-standard hunger report to bury the impact of their cruel cuts.

Madam Speaker, this tour is about fighting back, and I hope you will follow along as I keep fighting to end hunger now.

Mr. Speaker, after months of delay, the Trump administration finally released an annual food security survey, which confirms what we know to be true: Hunger is increasing in this country.

Nearly 48 million Americans, including 14 million children, in the richest country in the history of the world, are food insecure, meaning that they lack the money and resources to acquire adequate food to feed their families. Those are moms, dads, grandparents, and kids who are unable to consistently access the most basic necessity: food.

Mr. Speaker, it is no wonder that the Trump administration has unilaterally canceled all future food security reports. They know that their big, ugly bill and Trump's terrible economy are going to cause food insecurity to skyrocket, and they are desperate to hide the data from the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I am here to say that Democrats in Congress are not going to stand by while Trump tears apart basic needs programs. We will continue calling attention to the increase in hunger caused by this administration and their Republican allies in Congress, and we will always fight for a future when we finally end hunger now.