Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on the 200th anniversary of the birth of Antoinette Brown Blackwell, a trailblazer born in my district in Henrietta, New York, and the first woman ordained as a mainstream Protestant minister in the United States.

Antoinette dedicated her life to justice, equality and faith. She captivated audiences as a lecturer on women's rights and temperance and preached wherever she was welcome. In 1850, she proudly stood at the first National Women's Rights Convention.

Committed to voting rights, she lobbied President Theodore Roosevelt for suffrage and remained a steadfast advocate for women. At age 95, she cast her very first vote, proof her decades of advocacy helped transform our Nation.

She was a minister, a reformer, a writer, and, above all, a woman of

courage and conviction. We remember Antoinette Brown Blackwell not just for what she achieved but for the path she paved for generations to follow.

Let us honor her on her 200th birthday and follow in her footsteps as we fight to protect every American's right to vote.

Mr. Speaker, I regrettably missed Roll Call No. 115 and Roll Call No. 116 on May 5, 2025.

Had I been present for Roll Call No. 115, I would have voted YEA, and had I been present for Roll Call No. 116, I would have voted YEA.

Mr. Speaker, I regrettably missed Roll Call No. 111 on April 30, 2025. Had I been present for Roll Call No. 111, I would have voted NAY.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the remarkable career of Peter Robinson, the Vice President for Government and Community Relations at the University of Rochester, who retired at the end of March after more than 35 years of exceptional service.

Throughout his tenure, Peter played a vital role in advancing the University's mission, leading its federal, state, and community relations efforts with great skill and dedication. Among his many achievements, he was instrumental in the University's affiliation with NextCorps, strengthening support for the Laboratory for Laser Energetics, and building lasting partnerships with state and local leaders.

Peter's advocacy helped secure hundreds of millions of dollars in funding for the University and Medical Center including $50 million for the Saunders Research Building and $50 million for the Emergency and Inpatient Tower. He has also secured major funding for the Eastman School of Music expansion, Wegmans Hall, the Goergen Institute for Data Science and Artificial Intelligence, and the Kornberg and Del Monte Biomedical Research Buildings.

Beyond his professional contributions, Peter served for 30 years in the New York Army National Guard, retiring with the rank of colonel. His deep commitment to veterans' issues continued through his work with the University's Veterans Alliance, demonstrating his enduring dedication to service.

I have known Peter since the start of my career and have always admired his insightful and strategic approach to complex legislative matters. His numerous contributions to the University and our community are immeasurable. He has built an incredible legacy that will strengthen and inspire future generations.

As he embarks on the next chapter, I extend my deepest gratitude for his decades of service and unwavering leadership. On behalf of the University of Rochester community and all those who have benefited from his work, I wish Peter Robinson all the best in his retirement.

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

Mr. Speaker, together with President Trump's recent voting- restrictive executive order, the SAVE Act would cripple American elections. It would end voter registration in the United States as we know it.

The SAVE Act would end mail-in registration. You heard that right, Mr. Speaker. All those States and all those people who register by mail--not vote by mail--registration by mail, it would end that. American citizens would have to appear in person at an election office and bring with them various documents and forms to register to vote.

Think about it, Mr. Speaker. Just to exercise your fundamental, inalienable rights as a citizen of this country, Republicans would force Americans into a paperwork nightmare, burying voter registration under a mountain of bureaucracy and red tape.

So what exactly would the SAVE Act do?

It would create enormous burdens for every American citizen who seeks to register to vote.

Let's dig into the details.

As my Republican colleague and friend admitted at the Rules Committee, under the SAVE Act, most Americans would be unable to register to vote using their REAL ID. Further, under the SAVE Act, almost 70 million American women will be unable to register to vote using their birth certificate simply because they changed their name upon marriage. The bill would disenfranchise survivors of domestic abuse who have changed their names for safety purposes, which is truly shocking.

The SAVE Act will also have a steep financial cost to American citizens because, yes, the SAVE Act does allow Americans to use their passports to register to vote, but one-half of all Americans do not have a passport, and a passport costs $130 plus additional fees. So the SAVE Act would cost American voters who do not have passports billions of dollars to secure them.

Americans are facing rising costs exacerbated by the recent Trump tariffs. Economists are warning about a looming Trump recession.

Let's face it. The SAVE Act would force U.S. citizens to spend billions of dollars to register to vote. This includes rural voters, many of whom now register to vote online or by mail, who will be forced to drive hours and cross hundreds of miles to present documentary proof. This includes senior citizens who are particularly likely to lack documentary proof of citizenship, including passports, copies of their birth certificates, or other documents.

What about the men and women in uniform who serve our country all over the world?

Can a member of our military use their military ID?

Surely military IDs should be enough to register to vote, but not according to the SAVE Act. Servicemembers will need to bring their military ID and a copy of their service record showing their place of birth within the United States. However, many servicemembers were born abroad, say to military parents overseas. Many are naturalized citizens. Those servicemembers will be blocked from using their military ID to register to vote.

Mr. Speaker, do you remember the SAVE Act's requirement that Americans show their documentation in person at an election office?

It will have drastic consequences. The SAVE Act will prevent members of our Armed Forces from registering to vote while deployed overseas.

Moreover, the SAVE Act is not actually meant to prevent noncitizens from voting. The SAVE Act is really about silencing Americans. This bill is about disenfranchising Americans, not noncitizens, but Americans, Americans like James Wilson.

James Wilson is an Arizona voter whom I met with last week. He was meant to join us in the gallery. He flew all the way to Washington, D.C., last week to watch Congress debate the SAVE Act. He was forced to fly home after the Speaker canceled 3 days of legislative work.

Mr. Wilson is an American citizen, born in Japan to a military father during the Vietnam war. Mr. Wilson is also a veteran. He proudly served our Nation overseas, including in Korea and Germany.

Like millions of Americans, Mr. Wilson does not have a passport because he does not need a passport. Like millions of Americans, Mr. Wilson does not have access to his birth certificate.

When Arizona introduced a restrictive voter registration law, a law just like the SAVE Act, Mr. Wilson's right to vote was imperiled. Mr. Wilson did not have any of the documents required by the Arizona law and required by the SAVE Act to prove his citizenship. But for a last- minute emergency court order, Mr. Wilson, an American citizen, a veteran, and a patriot, would not have been able to vote this past election.

If the SAVE Act becomes law, Americans nationwide will face the same bureaucratic nightmare that Mr. Wilson faced in Arizona. The SAVE Act will force Americans like Mr. Wilson to pay billions of dollars to exercise their inviolable right to vote.

House Republicans want to increase the burdens and amplify the costs in time, in money, and in effort for American citizens to vote. House Democrats do not.

The SAVE Act would cost American citizens something deeply important, something essential to the soul of this Nation, the right to freely and fairly participate in our elections.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge defeat of this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I always appreciate the work of my colleagues from the committee. We agree on many things, but this is certainly not one of them.

I want to reflect on what the gentlewoman from Florida and others have said several times, that the SAVE Act allows States to create a process to provide additional proof of citizenship. Why not write it in the bill? Why are we making the potential for 50 different standards to be set to prove citizenship? What additional forms would be used, a birth certificate together with an ID, also including a marriage certificate, also including a record of a changed name?

What must survivors of domestic abuse provide? Must they provide court orders protecting them from stalkers, restraining orders, divorce records, divorce papers? How much would that cost? How much paperwork do Republicans want Americans to drown in?

Further, how long will these new rules take? The SAVE Act takes effect immediately. What if States take months or years to amend their systems? What if they never do it?

You might have someone interested in voting, but their State hasn't acted. They have no way of proving that the name on their birth certificate, which differs from the name on their ID, is because they got married. They would be unable to register to vote.

Here is what we do know. President Trump's executive order doesn't want any alternative forms of identification, no alternative State processes, no additional avenues for voters. Why would we expect the EAC to disregard the President's clear desire to limit documentary proof of citizenship to a small, exclusive, difficult-to-obtain list of options?

I would say in addition to my dear friend--and I mean that sincerely--the gentleman from Wisconsin, I would like to remind him that an estimated 165,000 women in his district in Wisconsin have a different name on their birth certificate than is on their current photo ID. Under the SAVE Act, these women could not register using their birth certificate alone. Roughly 340,000 residents in Wisconsin's First District lack a passport, so the SAVE Act could cost voters in the district $45 million if they chose to comply that way.

I would also like to remind my colleague and friend, Representative Lee, an estimated 170,000 women in her district have a different name on their birth certificate than on their photo ID. Likewise, under this bill, these women could not use their birth certificate to register to vote because they have a different name now than at birth. Roughly 368,000 residents of Florida's 15th District lack a passport. It would cost voters in the district at least $47.8 million to secure a passport to register to vote.

These are the facts. This is what the bill requires. We should not gloss over it because this is a mountain of bureaucratic red tape. If you can't get it right in the bill, if you don't list marriage license in the Federal bill, and it is left to the States, who knows how and when we resolve these issues.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Bonamici).

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman from Oregon an additional 15 seconds.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to make note of the point that REAL ID in the United States does not have citizenship in almost all States. A handful have it. You couldn't even use your REAL ID.

If we are talking about voter ID and photo ID, it doesn't even allow you to vote under the SAVE Act. The gentlewoman should read the bill. It doesn't allow it, and I think that is part of the problem.

I would also note, Mr. Speaker, in Representative Miller's district, an estimated 150,000 women have a different name on their birth certificate than their current photo ID. Under the SAVE Act, these women could not use their birth certificate to register to vote and would not be able to use their ID, their driver's license. Roughly 414,000 residents of Illinois' 15th District lack a passport.

The SAVE Act would cost voters in Mrs. Miller's district $53.8 million should they avail themselves of a passport to prove the requirements of the SAVE Act.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Ross).

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

Mr. Speaker, I remind the gentleman that, in the United States of America, you have to be a U.S. citizen to vote in a Federal election. If you are not, you are subject to penalties for attempting to register to vote, and you are subject to felonies and deportation if you do vote and are not an American citizen. That is the current law.

I also remind my friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock), that an estimated 135,000 women in his district have a different name on their birth certificate than they have on their current photo ID, and roughly 290,000 residents of California's Fifth District lack a passport. The cost to those voters would be $37.7 million to get passports.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Georgia (Ms. Williams), my dear friend.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I hate to disagree with my dear friend, the gentlewoman from Oklahoma (Mrs. Bice), but the words ``marriage certificate'' do not appear anywhere in the SAVE Act. In fact, it could have been written in that way since Republicans are adding all these lists and requirements for people to do. Yet, it actually does make it harder for almost 70 million American women to vote.

Eighty-four percent of women choose their husband's name when they get married. That is just a statistic.

As we have discussed, under the SAVE Act, most Americans will be unable to use the standard-issued driver's license when registering to vote because most REAL IDs don't include citizenship on them. They don't automatically update if you haven't registered at all. When you go to register, there is nothing to update.

You have your birth certificate. In the case of Mary Beth Bauer, that is what it says on her certificate. Her driver's license now says ``Mary Beth Morelle.'' She would not be able to register using those two pieces of information. She would have to get an additional piece of documentation to register, which is not identified in the SAVE Act.

Mr. Speaker, I think we have talked about it at length. This is clearly intended to make it much more difficult. According to House Republicans, none of these women should be allowed to register to vote. They are roughly 25 percent of the U.S. citizen voting age population.

I also suggest to my friend from Oklahoma (Mrs. Bice) that an estimated 179,000 women in her district have a different name on their birth certificate than a current photo ID, and roughly 394,000 residents of Oklahoma's Fifth District lack a passport. The SAVE Act would cost them $51.3 million to secure passports.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Mullin), my dear friend.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I note that while the previous speaker, Ms. Boebert, has not had to bring all of those documents, she hasn't had to register to vote under the SAVE Act. That is actually the point.

Mr. Speaker, I also remind her that an estimated 159,000 women in her district have a different name on their

birth certificate than they have on their current photo ID and that roughly 284,000 residents of Colorado's Fourth District lack a passport. The SAVE Act could cost them $36.9 million to secure passports in order to register to vote.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Ramirez), my friend.

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

Mr. Speaker, I think my colleagues doth protest too much. I have read the bill many times. I have debated the bill. There is nothing in the bill that allows you to bring a marriage license to prove who you are when you register to vote. You will have to do all the things we suggest you will have to do, and that is exactly the problem.

I will also remind my colleague and friend from Florida that in Mrs. Cammack's district, an estimated 170,000 women in her congressional district have a different name on their birth certificate than on their current photo ID and that roughly 409,000 residents of Florida's Third Congressional District lack a passport. The cost to those individuals: $53.1 million to secure passports.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Alabama (Ms. Sewell), my dear friend and distinguished member of our committee and the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Elections of House Administration.

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

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman's comments lead me to the question: Do Republicans believe that every attestation under Federal law is rife for subversion? Americans must attest under penalty of perjury that their tax returns contain correct information. Do Republicans want to end this honor system by requiring Americans to provide even more documentation to the Internal Revenue Service?

It is a Federal crime to lie on alcohol, tobacco, and firearms Form 4473, the firearms transaction record. That form is filled out under the same honor system that governs voter registrations. Are you telling me that Republicans are open to strengthening gun licensing laws in the United States and no longer accept attestation?

Each of us must submit records to the FEC, attesting under penalty of perjury that our campaign committee reports are accurate. Do Republicans now want to provide the American people greater transparency around political spending because if they do, I have a bill they can support, the Freedom to Vote Act.

I will also suggest to the gentleman, Representative Bean, that an estimated 170,000 women in his district have a different last name on their birth certificate than is on their current photo ID and roughly 397,000 residents of Florida's Fourth District do not have a passport. It would cost them $51.7 million to secure one.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Conaway).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Figures), my friend.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Friedman).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Latimer), my dear friend.

Mr. Speaker, I was remiss earlier. I want to remind my colleague, Mr. Roy, that an estimated 150,000 women in his district have a different name on their birth certificate than on their photo ID, and 336,000 residents of Texas' 2lst District lack a passport, a cost of $43.7 million to those who would need to get a passport should they choose that.

Also, I would like to remind my colleague, Representative Kiley, an estimated 135,000 women in his district have a different name, and roughly 268,000 residents of California's Third District do not have a passport. The cost to them for getting one is $34.8 million.

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

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

The SAVE Act is, to put it nicely, the most severe voter suppression bill ever considered at the Federal level.

Coupled with President Trump's recent antivoter executive order, the SAVE Act would end the voter registration process for all Americans as they know it.

Republicans have repeatedly failed to present any evidence that noncitizen voting at the Federal level has ever affected the outcome of any election.

The SAVE Act will make it harder for American citizens to vote--for married women to vote, for servicemembers, students, rural Americans, senior citizens, Native voters, survivors of natural disasters, and survivors of domestic abuse to vote. It will make voting more expensive, in fact forcing American families to pay billions of dollars just to register to vote.

Democrats want a country where every American citizen can vote. That is why we champion bills like the Freedom to Vote Act, the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, and the Native American Voting Rights Act, not the SAVE Act.

I fiercely oppose this anti-American bill. I urge every one of my colleagues, Republicans and Democrats alike, to defeat this extremist, antivoter SAVE Act.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1234. This bill, as has been indicated, modernizes Congress and improves efficiency by eliminating the requirement that the Congressional Research Service print hardbound versions of its Annotated Constitution.

This measure, which I am proud to co-lead, passed by voice vote last Congress, and I am hopeful it will again today. I will take a moment to thank my dear friend, the gentlewoman from Oklahoma (Mrs. Bice), who chairs the Committee of House Administration's Subcommittee on Modernization and Innovation. I thank her for all of her hard work. It is always a delight to work with her.

I am sorry, Mr. Speaker, I didn't bring a physical copy of the Annotated Constitution. I am not sure I could lift it, and I think Mrs. Bice is stronger than I am.

This mandate to print the Annotated Constitution does come with significant and unnecessary personnel cost for the Congressional Research Service. As Mrs. Bice indicated, eliminating it would save us an estimated $4 million over the next 4 years.

At the Committee on House Administration where I have the privilege of serving as the ranking member, we spent a significant amount of time talking about the Supreme Court's decision in Loper Bright v. Raimondo.

That case ended four decades of precedent known as the Chevron deference, which required courts to defer to reasonable agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes.

While we may not all agree on the merits of this decision, there is bipartisan consensus that unless we want the courts deciding every single open policy question, then we, Congress, have to draft laws that are far more technical in specificity than we do now. That cannot be done without major assistance from subject matter experts such as those at the Congressional Research Service.

To that end, it is my hope that the millions we save from passing this bill will be promptly reinvested in CRS to enhance its capacity, an absolutely essential step as Congress continues to work to maintain our Article I authorities and prerogatives.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this practical, forward- thinking legislation. Again, I thank my colleague, Mrs. Bice, for her leadership, her partnership, and her friendship.

Mr. Speaker, I consider this a model of bipartisanship. What a great way to start off the week.

I again say, in the interests of modernization, saving important taxpayer dollars, and making sure that we are more responsive to the American people, I urge all of my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation. I thank Mrs. Bice again for her bipartisanship, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Rochester Community Players theater group on their 100th season.

As the second oldest continually operating community theater in the State of New York and a part of the Little Theatre Movement in America, their rich history dates back to 1925, with their opening performance at the Historic German House in Rochester, New York.

Today, the group performs throughout our city, providing opportunities for local professionals to share their talents on the stage and behind the scenes. We are blessed to have a vibrant and ever- growing artistic community in Rochester. The Rochester Community Players have been at the helm for an entire century, a remarkable accomplishment.

I congratulate President Michael Krickmire and Vice President Elaine Sauer on this momentous occasion and look forward to their continued work to uplift our local talent and provide high-quality entertainment for years to come.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and celebrate the distinguished career of Randy Gorbman, the News Director of WXXI, who will retire at the end of March. With over 45 years in journalism, he is leaving an indelible mark on the industry and our community as one of the longest-serving news directors in all of New York State.

Randy oversees WXXI's daily news operations across radio and digital platforms, all while reporting on local issues himself. Over his career, his work has covered historic moments including Y2K, the tragedy of 9/11, the changes in Rochester's economy and iconic businesses such as Kodak and Bausch + Lomb, and the local jazz festival every year. A steadfast leader in journalism, he has continually upheld the principle that every story matters.

I have had the privilege of knowing Randy since my time in the New York State Assembly, and I have always admired his keen ability to delve into complex legislative issues with both thoughtfulness and precision. Those who know him often describe him as insightful, sharp- witted, and deeply dedicated to his craft. His contributions to journalism and our community have been invaluable, leaving behind a remarkable legacy that will be difficult to replicate.

As he embarks on this well-earned retirement, I extend my heartfelt congratulations and gratitude for his many years of service. On behalf of the WXXI community and all those who have benefited from his journalism, I wish Randy Gorbman all the best in his next chapter.

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

Madam Speaker, I want to begin by thanking my dear friend and colleague, the chair of the Committee on House Administration, for bringing these bills to the floor and also for his partnership and all the great cooperation that we enjoy.

I rise today in support of H.R. 250. The bipartisan legislation would direct the Joint Committee on the Library, as Mr. Steil said, to procure a statue of Benjamin Franklin for placement in the Capitol to be observed by all those blessed to come and tour the United States Capitol.

As my colleague and friend, the sponsor of this bill, along with Representatives Brian Fitzpatrick and Chrissy Houlahan have observed-- and I am quite certain will observe once again in just a few moments-- while there are references to Benjamin Franklin across the Capitol and a statue tucked away in a back hallway, it is black when there are no lights on. There is no statue of one of the most important Founding Fathers accessible to the millions of visitors who have the privilege of touring the Capitol each year.

This legislation would change that, honoring one of the greatest minds and patriots in American history.

Benjamin Franklin was a statesman, diplomat, scientist, inventor, political philosopher, and businessman. His groundbreaking experiments pushed forward scientific understanding, his role as the first Postmaster General created the foundation of our modern mail system, and he was resolutely committed to freeing the Colonies from British rule.

He helped draft both the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution, and he negotiated the treaty that ended the Revolutionary War. His genius has shaped our Nation in innumerable ways, and he deserves to be prominently displayed and honored in the United States Capitol.

Madam Speaker, I look forward to working with the Joint Committee on the Library to obtain a new statue of Benjamin Franklin. I urge my colleagues to support this measure, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Houlahan), who is my dear friend and the person who has really led this effort.

In closing, Madam Speaker, I thank the people who have spoken here on an idea whose time has more than come. I think this is the appropriate way, and particularly, as Ms. Houlahan says, in recognition of our 250th anniversary upcoming, this will be the appropriate way to honor one of our truly great founding members of the American Revolution and our country.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I will begin by thanking my friend and colleague, the chair of the Committee on House Administration, Chairman Steil, for his leadership, his friendship, and for helping us get this bill to the floor.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 469. This bipartisan legislation would authorize the Architect of the Capitol to bury a time capsule commemorating the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 2026, to be opened on our Nation's 500th anniversary in the year 2276.

As my colleague and friend has indicated, the items in the capsule will be determined by bipartisan, bicameral congressional leaders. It will include written materials relating to the anniversary, representations of notable legislative and institutional milestones, and a message from this Congress to future colleagues in the 244th Congress. It seems remarkable.

The upcoming anniversary marks a powerful testament to the resilience of the American experiment. Our Nation has faced countless tests to our strength and unity, including a civil war, two world wars, natural disasters, and more. Yet, through each challenge, this country has stood and remains committed to fulfilling the ideals set forth in the Declaration of Independence 250 years ago.

As we navigate a time of deep division, partisanship, and growing threats to the values that sustain our democracy, this anniversary serves as a reminder to our shared responsibility to uphold the values of liberty and equality championed by our Founders.

I extend my thanks to the Semiquincentennial Commission for its leadership in planning for this momentous occasion, and I particularly commend my friend and colleague, Congresswoman Watson Coleman, for her introduction of this measure.

I also acknowledge the service of a fellow New Yorker, former Representative Joseph Crowley, who has lent his time and talents to the work of the Commission, as well.

I look forward to seeing the items chosen for the time capsule, and I commend my colleagues to recommend that they support this measure.

Mr. Speaker, I note that, last year on the floor, when we passed the bill in the House, I committed to being here when the capsule is opened, so I hope we pass it this year because I am not getting any younger. It is going to be hard to hold on that long, but I am committed to doing it.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Jersey (Mrs. Watson Coleman), who has had the leadership to bring this bill to the floor and who will speak on the measure.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted that we are able to pass both of these bills, hopefully unanimously. I think that

shows our work together on this committee on two important pieces of really remembering our legacy and our history. Hopefully this helps us to keep that in mind as we continue to navigate these difficult waters and, hopefully to our posterity, that they will remember these moments of people coming together to honor our Founders and to honor our future.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I thank my friend, the gentleman from Virginia, for yielding me time.

I rise today in strong opposition to this budget resolution. As an Appropriations Committee member, thoughtful consideration of government spending is a responsibility I don't take lightly. I believe every hard-earned taxpayer dollar must work for all Americans, not fuel wildly irresponsible economic theory.

I would like to think my colleagues on the other side of the aisle believe the same thing, given the rhetoric we have all heard over the last several years.

So I encourage the American people to watch what House Republicans do, not what they say.

Remarkably, instead of lowering costs, this reckless budget resolution bestows tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans while jeopardizing essential healthcare and nutrition programs. For this reason, I strongly oppose the budget resolution authored by House Republicans.

Shockingly, gutting programs our communities rely on isn't harmful enough because this resolution will also require taxpayers to borrow another $1.6 trillion over the next 10 years.

Our Nation's Founders vested in the House of Representatives the unique set of powers to make it responsive to the will of the people. The father of our Constitution, James Madison, said that ``the House should have an immediate dependence on, and intimate sympathy with, the people.''

House Republicans demonstrate no dependence on nor sympathy with the American people.

Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to reject this handout to millionaires and billionaires and work on a budget that instead advances the interests of American families.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the inspiring work being done by the Rochester Museum & Science Center, led by curator Jamie Jacobs, to create a new permanent educational exhibit that showcases contemporary indigenous artists inspired by their ancestors.

This exhibit, titled: ``Hodinosyo:nih Continuity/Innovation/ Resilience,'' honors the ingenuity of the indigenous people of North America and explores the role museums have played in preserving indigenous cultural heritage.

At the heart of the remarkable project is curator Jamie Jacobs of the Tonawanda Seneca Nation. His leadership has honored the enduring legacy of the Hodinosyo:nih people and created a space for learning, reflection, and reconnection.

The community of Rochester, New York, celebrates this incredible achievement and extends our deepest gratitude to the Rochester Museum & Science Center and Jamie Jacobs for sharing these essential stories.

Mr. Speaker, in late 2022, President Biden signed the bipartisan Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act (``ECRA'') into law, establishing new requirements for the counting of Electoral College votes pursuant to the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution (``Twelfth Amendment''). Congress intended that the ECRA clarify the sometimes-ambiguous existing federal law related to the counting of Electoral College votes, as established by the Electoral Count Act of 1887 (``ECA''). The overwhelming purpose of the ECRA was to prevent another attempt to disrupt or subvert an American presidential election through misrepresentation and obfuscation of the law.

The ECRA, like the ECA before and within it, is the result of a valid and constitutional use of power by Congress. Article II of the United States Constitution allows each state to appoint its electors to the Electoral College in ``such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct,'' and designates Congress as the body responsible for setting Election Day and the meeting of the Electoral College. Further, the Twelfth Amendment sets the procedures by which the Electoral College must meet and transmit their votes to Congress. Crucially, the Twelfth Amendment empowers Congress--not the President of the Senate, or any other individual or body--to count the Electoral College votes. Furthermore, the Constitution permits Congress to determine the rules for settling any Electoral College disputes, which it has done through the enactment of the ECA and the ECRA. Today's joint session, during which Congress will certify the Electoral College votes of each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia, will be the first meeting of its sort since ECRA's enactment. As such, this will be Congress's first time counting Electoral College votes in line with the ECRA's requirements.

It appears that Kansas's certificate of ascertainment, submitted to the Archivist of the United States, was signed on December 12, 2024-- one day past the statutorily-required deadline for such certificates set by the ECRA. It seems certain that Kansas's certificate of ascertainment would have been signed and transmitted within the statutory deadline but for a small ministerial error entirely unrelated to the results of the election or the authenticity of the certificate. There is no dispute regarding the outcome of the presidential election in Kansas, nor would the inclusion--or exclusion--of Kansas's Electoral College votes determine the outcome of the recent presidential election. Despite the error, it is right that Kansas's Electoral College votes be opened and counted today.

In the infancy of the ECRA's new statutory order, it is not surprising that states may misapprehend or overlook the law's requirements. Such minor lapses do not implicate the behavior that the ECRA intends to prevent--the deliberate misapplication or perversion of state or federal law to alter the outcome of a legitimate American election. In this instance, missing the ECRA's statutory deadline for certificates of ascertainment by a single day--due solely to a ministerial error--without other evidence of election-related irregularities, and in a state that will not be determinative to the overall outcome of the presidential election, is insufficient reason to reject Kansas's Electoral College votes. As such, Congress's consideration of the ECRA deadline is limited to the present circumstances.

States are not, however, excused from the requirements of the ECRA, and the parties responsible for their states' certification and ascertainment obligations should, in the future, make every effort to ensure that their duties are timely and suitably discharged.

Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Arkansas seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida received 6 votes for President and J.D. Vance of the State of Ohio received 6 votes for Vice President.

Senator FISCHER. Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of California seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Kamala D. Harris of the State of California received 54 votes for President and Tim Walz of the State of Minnesota received 54 votes for Vice President.

Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Delaware seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Kamala D. Harris of the State of California received 3 votes for President and Tim Walz of the State of Minnesota received 3 votes for Vice President.

Senator FISCHER. Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the District of Columbia seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Kamala D. Harris of the State of California received 3 votes for President and Tim Walz of the State of Minnesota received 3 votes for Vice President.

Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Hawaii seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Kamala D. Harris of the State of California received 4 votes for President and Tim Walz of the State of Minnesota received 4 votes for Vice President.

Senator FISCHER. Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Idaho seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida received 4 votes for President and J.D. Vance of the State of Ohio received 4 votes for Vice President.

Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Iowa seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida received 6 votes for President and J.D. Vance of the State of Ohio received 6 votes for Vice President.

Senator FISCHER. Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Kansas seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida received 6 votes for President and J.D. Vance of the State of Ohio received 6 votes for Vice President.

Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Maine seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Kamala D. Harris of the State of California received 3 votes for President and Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida received 1 vote for President and Tim Walz of the State of Minnesota received 3 votes for Vice President and J.D. Vance of the State of Ohio received 1 vote for Vice President.

Senator FISCHER. Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Maryland seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Kamala D. Harris of the State of California received 10 votes for President and Tim Walz of the State of Minnesota received 10 votes for Vice President.

Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of New Mexico seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Kamala D. Harris of the State of California received 5 votes for President and Tim Walz of the State of Minnesota received 5 votes for Vice President.

Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of New York seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Kamala D. Harris of the State of California received 28 votes for President and Tim Walz of the State of Minnesota received 28 votes for Vice President.

Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Ohio seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida received 17 votes for President and J.D. Vance of the State of Ohio received 17 votes for Vice President.

Senator FISCHER. Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Oklahoma seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida received 7 votes for President and J.D. Vance of the State of Ohio received 7 votes for Vice President.

Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Rhode Island seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Kamala D. Harris of the State of California received 4 votes for President and Tim Walz of the State of Minnesota received 4 votes for Vice President.

Senator FISCHER. Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of South Carolina seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida received 9 votes for President and J.D. Vance of the State of Ohio received 9 votes for Vice President.

Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote from the State of Texas seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida received 40 votes for President and J.D. Vance of the State of Ohio received 40 votes for Vice President.

Senator FISCHER. Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Utah seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida received 6 votes for President and J.D. Vance from the State of Ohio received 6 votes for Vice President.

Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Washington seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Kamala D. Harris of the State of California received 12 votes for President and Tim Walz of the State of Minnesota received 12 votes for Vice President.

Senator FISCHER. Madam President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of West Virginia seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida received 4 votes for President and J.D. Vance of the State of Ohio received 4 votes for Vice President.