Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in celebration of The Rock Church of Terrell's 20th anniversary and to congratulate Pastor Gary Weems on his retirement and transition to a senior bishop role. Since its founding in 2005, The Rock Church of Terrell has been a symbol of love, hope, and faith to people from all walks of life in my hometown of Terrell, Texas.

Pastor Gary began his ministry in Terrell in 1996, immediately offering himself and his family to the enrichment of our community. Alongside his wife, Jodi, Pastor Gary has dedicated his life to the service of the body of Christ and full-time ministry for 48 years. His faithfulness and love have made a profound and enduring impact on the Terrell community. In his absence, The Rock Church of Terrell will welcome a new generation of pastoral leadership. Pastor Gary's son, Ben, will assume the role of Senior Pastor, continuing his father's legacy of dedicated service. I wish the best for Pastor Ben and his wife, Chelsea, and Associate Pastor Bodie Jones and his wife, Stephanie, as they embark on this new journey.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the incredible accomplishment of the Trinity Valley Community College Men's Basketball Team, who, under the leadership of Coach Greg Heiar, secured their first-ever national championship in 2025.

In his first season as head coach, Coach Heiar led the Cardinals to a 69-61 victory over Connors State in the NJCAA D1 Men's Basketball National Championship in Hutchinson, Kansas. This victory concluded a dominant 34-3 season, marking the best in the program's history.

The Cardinals showed remarkable resilience, determination, and unity throughout the season. They embraced the tough, defense-first mentality instilled by their coach, and each player's commitment to the team's success played a critical role in bringing home this historic title.

I extend my heartfelt congratulations to Coach Heiar, his coaching staff, and the entire men's basketball team. Their hard work, dedication, and pride in their community have made this championship a lasting symbol of excellence for the Trinity Valley community.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the remarkable career of Dana Skelton, who retired in July 2024 after 42 years of dedicated service to the students and community of Terrell Independent School District.

Dana's legacy in Terrell ISD began in 1982 when he stepped into the role of Director of the Terrell High School Band. Under his leadership, the Tiger Band flourished, earning UIL Superior and Sweepstakes ratings, performing at Texas Stadium, and achieving excellence at the Texas State Solo & Ensemble Contest. Dana's commitment to building a strong, disciplined program transformed the band into one of the finest in the state, growing from just 68 members in the 1980s to 192 by 2000. His work helped instill values of perseverance, teamwork, and leadership in thousands of students.

In addition to his work with the band, Dana played a key role in expanding Terrell's fine

arts programs. In 2000, he became the district's Fine Arts & District Projects Director, where he helped design and build the Terrell ISD Performing Arts Center. Since its completion, the Performing Arts Center has become a home for artistic expression and a gathering place for students and residents alike.

Dana's influence extended far beyond the walls of the school. He worked tirelessly to ensure that the arts remained a vital part of the Terrell community, promoting a sense of pride and bringing people together through music, theater, and the performing arts. His leadership in securing funding for the Terrell ISD Excellence Foundation and organizing the E! Terrell Entertainment Series helped elevate Terrell's cultural landscape for years to come.

I extend my deepest gratitude to Dana Skelton for his decades of service, leadership, and unwavering dedication to the students and families of Terrell. His impact on the community will be felt for generations. I wish him and his wife, Sherry, all the best as they begin this next chapter of their lives.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory of Officer Jacob Andrew Candanoza of the Terrell Police Department, who lost his life in the line of duty on December 8, 2024.

Officer Candanoza embodied the highest ideals of courage and commitment in his service to the Terrell community. On December 8, during a routine traffic stop, Officer Candanoza made the ultimate sacrifice to protect and serve.

Officer Candanoza dedicated his life to the protection of our Nation as a sergeant in the United States Marine Corps between 2014 and 2019. Following his military service, he worked with the Dallas Sheriff's Office as a courtesy patrol technician. After being sworn in as an officer with the Terrell Police Department in July 2024, Officer Candanoza quickly earned the respect of his colleagues and community for his professionalism and compassion. His sacrifice is a solemn reminder of the debt of gratitude we owe to all who serve on the thin blue line.

My deepest condolences go out to Officer Candanoza's family, friends, and fellow officers during this profoundly difficult time. May his memory serve as a beacon of courage and a reminder of the dedication of our law enforcement community.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous material on H.R. 1398.

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

Mr. Chair, H.R. 1398, the Protect America's Innovation and Economic Security from CCP Act focuses our attention on the single greatest threat to the American people: the Chinese Communist Party.

Our intelligence community has been raising these concerns for years, labeling China the defining threat of our generation. These concerns were also echoed in FBI Director Wray's testimony before our House Judiciary Committee back in July.

China's multipronged war against our people, economy, and infrastructure has caused the CCP to infiltrate our communities, sow disharmony, and steal our hard-earned successes. The CCP achieves this by aggressively targeting and recruiting civilians to spy on other Chinese nationals and to steal critical data from their employers.

Trade theft alone costs our economy over half a trillion dollars annually, with China behind most of it. This bill addresses this problem by creating a dedicated program under the DOJ called the CCP Initiative, prioritizing the focus on countering economic espionage.

The initiative establishes an enforcement strategy to protect critical sectors most vulnerable to the CCP's thievery: academic institutions, R&D labs, and the defense industrial base.

The rollback of the China Initiative left us lacking a dedicated approach and no oversight on issues of critical national interest. This bill fixes the administration's mistakes by adopting a clear, multifaceted approach. It builds a framework of multiagency cooperation and mutual consultation, ensuring that effective measures against our Nation's greatest threat are never compromised by an incompetent executive wing.

To ensure DOJ's cooperation and dedication of at least some resources in this area, an annual reporting requirement has been included that secures congressional oversight and involvement. The bill also requires no additional funding from Congress and has a negligible impact on the DOJ's current budget under the program.

I would like to underline that the worst affected by this rollback are people of Asian descent. People of Chinese origin in the United States, especially Chinese-American citizens, are identified and disproportionately targeted by the CCP for their schemes. The CCP ruthlessly targets and harasses people, especially those who refuse to bow down and are considered dissidents.

Letting this continue without a strong counter leaves our people extremely vulnerable to the CCP's cruelty, which emboldens China. Passing this bill will not only counter existing cases and deter new attempts to infiltrate our country but also signals that the CCP's days of targeting our communities are over.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of safeguarding our economy, our people, and our future against the greatest threat of our lifetimes. Join me in supporting H.R. 1398. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I have heard a lot about the ruined lives of intellectuals and academics. I have also heard about the conviction rate. It is true there were only eight convictions, but one of the comments made was we should focus resources on actual problems.

What happened when we did that, when we took away this China Initiative and replaced it with nothing? In the last 2 years we have only had two convictions. Our Department of Justice has really failed to protect our domestic industry. It has really failed to protect those who have been preyed on by China, and the CCP Initiative serves to correct that.

Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cline).

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

I want to say first, the current DOJ, the Biden DOJ, performed their own review, and they found not a single case was handled or considered with bias or prejudice. They concluded that all decisions were borne out of genuine national security concerns. That is in response to this claim that lives have been ruined and that these were racist pursuits.

The other thing I want to say is this bill is race, gender, and nationality neutral. Investigations are conducted based on the factual reality of the situation.

Foreign nationals tend to favor recruiting people of their own origin, and that is especially so with the CCP. A full review by the current DOJ--again, this is the Biden DOJ--found not one case of bias or prejudice.

Everything we have heard today about all these racist pursuits were based in bad intentions, which was actually unfounded and proven incorrect by the current Biden DOJ. They said that there was not one single case of bias or prejudice.

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

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

I would think the Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus would want to stand against China with me, but I will do it alone on behalf of those who are willing to stand up against the Chinese Communist Party.

I denounce everything that has been said about this bill being racist. I absolutely denounce the false claims of racism. They are baseless.

I actually join with the Biden DOJ in saying that with the Trump prosecutions there was no bias, there was no racism. I actually would like to stand up for Chinese-American citizens that are being prosecuted, persecuted, searched after, and in some cases destroyed while some of our friends across the aisle do nothing. They get on the mike and say you guys are racist for pushing this legislation, and I think folks are tired of it. I really do.

I am really tired of seeing Chinese police stations in cities across our Nation. I am really tired of turning on the news and seeing that a spy in the New York Governor's office has been signing orders and doing all kinds of stuff in the name of the Chinese Communist Party. I am really tired of hearing stories about American citizens, Chinese- American citizens, living here--these are our people, these are our people--being persecuted by the Chinese Communist Party. That is what this bill seeks to do.

You can get up here and say this is racist and the last administration wasn't successful, but the facts are Republicans want to do something. We want to stand up to China, and we want to stand up for the Chinese-American citizens who in many cases are seeing their Representatives get on the microphone and say, you know what, we are not going to do anything. We are going to say that China is a threat, but we are not going to support any legislation that would do something about it.

I am really excited about this bill. I am even more excited about the Trump administration that is coming up because we are going to really go after China. Chinese Americans across the United States should really, really be excited about Donald Trump taking over as President because they will finally have an advocate in the White House after 4 years of being disregarded.

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

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

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

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

Mr. Chair, I am sorry that my colleagues are amused because Republicans are horrified. We are sickened by what China is doing to Chinese Americans. If the Asian Pacific American Caucus would love to put their sign up there while they denounce this fantastic bill, if they would like a member of their caucus who will fight for and on behalf of Chinese-American citizens, then I would be happy to join. Get me an application. However, until that happens, until all Members of this Chamber wake up and realize that China is the real threat here and realize that the main talking point, what they do as they come, and any time someone stands up against China, they start playing the race card because they know if they play the race card, they will get folks to shut up.

China just loves it. I am sure they are watching this debate in Beijing and laughing every time someone gets up and calls this policy racist. I am sure they are just loving it to see folks get up and talk about the China Initiative that the Biden DOJ so fantastically got rid of and what a success it was for China.

The Biden DOJ has even said since then that there was no bias and there was no racism.

So everything we are hearing today is just false. I am not going to call someone a liar, but I am going to tell you that what we are hearing today, Mr. Chair, is false. I heard from Mr. Nadler before he reserved a while ago. He said crimes against Asian Americans were up in the Trump era.

What person with a brain in America thinks that Donald Trump is the reason crime is up anywhere?

Joe Biden is the reason, and Kamala Harris is the reason that crime is through the roof in this Nation. Americans are unsafe.

Mr. Nadler said: I wouldn't count on a Trump victory.

Frankly, I am not going to count on anything in the days we live in, but I can count on the American people to not hold Donald Trump responsible for the crime epidemic that we are experiencing in this Nation.

I am baffled by the opposition to this bill and the silliness on the other side that insinuates Donald Trump as somehow behind some kind of crime spike. Give me a break. The American people know who is behind this crime, and they are going to watch her talk about it tonight. If she won't talk about it, then I hope Mr. President, Donald Trump, will, as I know all Americans believe he is the one to stand against this spike in crime that I am so happy Democrats acknowledge exist.

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

Mr. Chair, I will just say this: If you believe that crime is down under Joe Biden, then you probably believe the border is secure.

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

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

Mr. Chair, fear and division is what the Chinese Communist Party hopes that we will become all about.

This bill seeks to stop China and the Chinese Communist Party's efforts to destroy this Nation. That is their ultimate goal. Every time a Member of Congress gets up and says that any effort to defeat China is a racist effort is really unfortunate.

However, I do believe that common sense will prevail. I do believe we will pass this tomorrow, and I want to thank everyone for their support.

This bill is an important tool. It is one of many tools we are passing this week.

We are spreading the word and sharing with the American people that Republicans are serious about standing up to China, that Donald Trump is serious about standing up to China. Despite the fact that we have taken the last 4 years off and let China climb ahead, and we have opened our borders and said send as many millions of folks that you want, I do believe the American people deserve better, and I think they will vote for better. We have let the crime rate spike, we have just let it happen, and it is a real shame.

Mr. Chair, I appreciate my colleagues' consideration, I urge a ``yes'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, even though I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. Chair, the amendment would require the annual report to Congress in this bill to include a description of the level and effectiveness of coordination and information sharing between government entities and private companies about economic espionage threats.

American companies and innovation have led the way for over a century, and the first line of defense to preventing economic espionage and intellectual property theft is the vigilance of the owners of this property. Including this information in the report will ensure that Congress can adequately oversee the CCP Initiative and ensure that it is meeting its objectives.

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

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, even though I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. Chair, this amendment would require the annual report to Congress in this bill to include a description of the CCP's financial intelligence capabilities.

The CCP has decided that the fastest way to catch up to the technological leadership of the United States is to steal U.S. intellectual property. This theft is not only an economic issue but also a national security issue.

Technological success often leads to financial success. By engaging in financial intelligence activities, the CCP can ascertain which companies and entities have the most valuable intellectual property.

To appropriately counter the economic and national security threats posed by the CCP, we need to understand their ability to conduct financial intelligence activities.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory of Hugh Armstrong, a dedicated civic leader and former district manager of the Athens office of Texas Power and Light, who passed away on Monday at the age of 84. Hugh Armstrong managed TP&L's Athens office from 1982 to 2002. In 1987, his outstanding contributions to the community were recognized when he was named Athens Citizen of the Year.

Mr. Armstrong served as president of the Athens Chamber of Commerce, the Athens Economic Development Corporation, and the Athens Rotary Club. Hugh was honored as a Paul Harris Fellow in recognition of his substantial contributions to Rotary's humanitarian and educational programs. In 2014, Keep Athens Beautiful awarded Hugh the Margaret Myers Award for his dedicated service. When the city reorganized its Park Board in 2015, Hugh was chosen as Vice Chairman.

Born in Paris, Texas, Hugh graduated from high school in 1958 and earned a bachelor's

degree from North Texas State University, where he met his wife, Carol. After graduation, he served in the Marine Corps from 1962 to 1968 as a long-range artillery specialist. For 42 years, Hugh was a devoted and respected member of Athens Methodist Church.

I extend my heartfelt condolences to Hugh's family and friends. His memory will not be soon forgotten.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Jess Laird, a banker and community servant, who will be retiring from 36 years of service to the First State Bank of Athens on March 12. Jess passionately dedicated himself to his community for decades, consistently putting the needs of his neighbors, friends, and family before his own.

During his 36 years at First State Bank, Mr. Laird advanced from Loan Officer to President and CEO. In addition to his roles at the bank, he served in leadership roles at the Athens Rotary Club, as President of the Athens Economic Development Corporation, in the Athens Chamber of Commerce, and on the UT Health Athens Board of Managers. In his free time, Mr. Laird was involved with the Athens Teenage Baseball Association where he coached as his sons played baseball.

As he steps down from his duties, I wish him, his wife, two sons, and three granddaughters all the best. I am proud to represent the city of Athens, which owes a great deal to Jess Laird, and I applaud him for his lifelong dedication to his family, career, and Athens, Texas.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the swearing-in of Jill Dutton as State Representative for Texas' 2nd House District. Mrs. Dutton is a strong conservative, entrepreneur, and devoted to the people of Van Zandt County. I am confident she will be a determined and effective representative for her constituents.

Mrs. Dutton embodies Texas' highest values. She is a former school board member with Van ISD where she fought for parents and students. When a tornado struck her town, she worked to rebuild the schools and develop a new Career & Technology Center that now prepares students for careers after graduation. She has dedicated herself to serving the people of Van Zandt County and I look forward to what she will accomplish for the people of Texas.

I am proud to represent Van Zandt County and am confident that she will diligently serve them in the Texas Legislature. I wish her and her family the very best as she begins her term.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to celebrate the extraordinary achievement of the Malakoff Tigers in clinching the 3A Division 1 State Football Championship. Their remarkable undefeated season, culminating in a 16-0 record, has not only brought home the school's first-ever football title but has also showcased the exceptional talent and spirit of Henderson County.

Special congratulations to Head Coach Jamie Driskell, quarterback Mike Jones, the Offensive MVP, and middle linebacker Parker Poteete, the Defensive MVP, for their outstanding leadership and skill. The unwavering dedication and hard work of the entire team and coaching staff are inspirational. The Malakoff Tigers have set a high bar for excellence, and I eagerly anticipate more triumphs and great success for both the team and Malakoff High School in the future.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 947, I call up the bill (H.R. 788) to limit donations made pursuant to settlement agreements to which the United States is a party, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous material on H.R. 788.

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

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of H.R. 788, the Stop Settlement Slush Funds Act. This legislation seeks to repair a loophole that has been exploited by the executive branch agencies to redirect funds from Federal law enforcement settlements to outside, nongovernment entities.

Under this third-party settlement policy, agencies reach a settlement and include mandatory donation terms to externally divert these funds to third parties instead of either depositing them with the Treasury or exclusively using them to provide restitution to the victims.

Instead of depositing these settlements with the Treasury or compensating the victims, which should be the only appropriate use of these funds, agencies give sizable chunks to third parties diluting the share of the victims and even cutting out the Treasury completely.

Let me summarize this. Currently, when the Department of Justice reaches a settlement, oftentimes we don't know where it goes. More often than not, they give favorable terms to whoever they are settling with and say, if you divert XYZ dollars--in many cases millions--to a charity of our choosing, then we will call this quits, we will let you off, and you will get out of here.

What is happening, though, is, one, the people don't know where these settlements are going; two, Congress has no oversight of where this money is going and how it is spent; and, three, executive branch is going around Congress and spending dollars without going through the appropriations process. That is wrong.

Mr. Speaker, what you will hear from the other side today is that this is an essential tool. I would like to go back and forth and give you examples of failures of this policy, Mr. Speaker.

To be fair, this is not just something that the Biden administration is guilty of. This has happened in prior Presidential administrations. Fortunately, under President Trump's administration, this policy was stopped temporarily. Unfortunately, Congress did not end it because it was stopped.

What we should have done when President Trump was President is ended this policy then. Unfortunately, here we are. The Biden administration has reactivated it, and millions of dollars that could have gone to victims or could have gone to the U.S. Treasury for this Congress to then appropriate are now going to special groups, often liberal groups that are pet projects of this administration. It is my goal to end this policy once and for all. It is bad business for the American people, it is wrong, and it needs to be stopped no matter who the President is.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, let me read this to you. This is from Bob LeClair, head of the Hawaii Legal Aid Foundation and executive director of the Hawaii Justice Foundation: ``I would be willing to have us build a statue [to Obama DOJ Associate Attorney General Tony West] and then we could bow down to this statue each day after we get our $200,000.''

Now, what is that about?

That is about one of these liberal groups getting money from the Justice Department in backroom settlements, and this is just one little quote that we found in an email that we were privy to, because at the end of the day, we don't even know about all these settlements.

I want to show you all this. Let's assume that everything my colleague said was true about these settlements and how great they are. Let's just assume for a second that we all agree that all these groups that are getting settlements are good groups and that this is a worthy cause and a worthy use of settlement.

Everything he just told you only relates to the 1.4 percent of where these settlements have gone because the rest of the 99 percent of settlement funds, we have no idea where they went. We don't even know what groups got them because the DOJ is making these backroom deals.

One of the problems that I have with my friends across the aisle is saying that this is a gift to big business.

Mr. Speaker, what they are going for is to preserve the status quo. The status quo is giving breaks to big businesses.

Mr. Speaker, let me give you an example. Bank of America settled with the government in exchange for getting to walk away from these charges. They were allowed to pay some money to some of these liberal groups to help with banking needs, et cetera. If they are not forced to admit guilt and write a check to the U.S. Treasury and say we are guilty, then we are letting them get away. That is what Democrats want to do.

Democrats want a corporate violator to be able to come forward and say, hey, I made this big donation to this great group, and don't tell anyone that we actually pled, and we didn't have to admit guilt.

So the shreds of evidence are actually much greater than just shreds. We have so many instances of waste and corruption within this process, but, unfortunately, everything I am telling you and everything the gentleman is telling you only relates to 1.4 percent of it. We don't even know how bad the other 99 percent of it is.

It is Congress' job to appropriate funds; it is the Department of Justice's job to carry out justice, and that is that.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wyoming (Ms. Hageman).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Moran).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Montana (Mr. Zinke).

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

It is really not always the case that the government gets a cut of these settlements. Let me give one example. A recent and shocking example involves the Epstein scandal. JPMorgan Chase entered into a $75 million settlement for its role facilitating Mr. Epstein's heinous practices.

It has been reported--of course, we don't know all the details here-- that of the $75 million settlement that they had in the Virgin Islands, $30 million went to charity--we don't know which ones--$25 million went to enhance Virgin Islands infrastructure--I am sure that was all appropriately spent--and $20 million went to attorneys' fees. None of it went to the U.S. Treasury. We now have reports of another settlement that they are working on with the Justice Department. We don't know where that went.

Again, I will bring you back to this graphic I have. Of all the settlement funds, no one in this Chamber, no one in this building, no Member of Congress knows where 98.6 percent of that money went.

Whatever you are hearing about how great these settlement slush funds are by the other side, they are only talking about what they think they know of the 1.4 percent, and what they think they know is what they are told because there is no accountability for these funds.

Unlike Federal funds, which Congress should be appropriating, where we hold organizations accountable--if an entity is receiving Federal dollars, they have to account for it--when these settlement slush funds go out to whatever organization they go to, we don't have any idea how they are being spent. No Member of Congress has any control over that money.

Mr. Nadler is right, it doesn't belong to the Federal Government, but when it is deposited into the Treasury instead of given to some aid group or whatever alleged great cause that the Justice Department is telling us exists, when it is deposited into the Treasury, then Congress gets to appropriate it because it is the people's money to handle as they see fit.

First of all, victims should be given restitution, not some slush fund that claims to do right by victims. Secondly, after the victims, the money, if we want to do right, if we want to go enhance the soils after a disaster in Congresswoman Jackson's district, that is something that the executive branch should oversee with Federal dollars that this body appropriates. That is not something that we should outsource to some group at the direction of the executive branch.

I share my colleague's concerns about victims. I am disappointed that the other side would stand up for these big businesses that are actually getting great deals, unfair deals where they get to write some slush fund check to some group that we have no way of showing any kind of accountability over. These big businesses are walking away. It is shocking to me that the other side is standing up for a process that actually lets big offenders walk away with a sweet deal and a good little PR press release. It is a shame.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill and oppose this practice.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Norman).

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

Before I close, I will be nice and give my friends across the aisle a little gift. I realize they think all these are great, so for the sake of being bipartisan, I am going to give an example of a bad actor that was a Republican with respect to these slush funds.

Back in 2005, then-United States Attorney Chris Christie required the pharmaceutical company Bristol Myers Squibb to donate to his law school alma mater, Seton Hall University. In exchange for not charging the drug-making giant with securities fraud, Christie's office would require it to fund a professorship at Seton Hall University Law School, Christie's alma mater.

Do we really think that is good policy?

It doesn't matter who is in the White House, what party is controlling the executive branch, this is a wrong policy. I hope this bill passes.

My colleague did say it is dead in the Senate. Let's just assume it is dead in the Senate. I pledge here before this entire body that if we have a Republican President someday, I will carry this bill forward, and I am willing to bet that someone across the aisle will join me because they won't like the conservative, far-right groups that a

Republican Justice Department is diverting slush funds to.

I hope that my colleagues will get on board now. If this bill should not make it to the President's desk, I will be right back here in a year, God willing, if a Republican is President, and I hope my colleagues will join me then.

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

Mr. Speaker, this is really bad business for the American people. These settlement slush funds are wrong no matter who is in power and, frankly, victims are being overlooked. Victims should be made whole, and any other kind of settlement the government wants to work out with wrongdoers should be a fine to the United States Treasury because whatever good cause we may agree or disagree about for restitution for larger groups of victims, perhaps, that is something this Congress should decide through the appropriations process.

I encourage my colleagues to join me in stopping this practice. We have seen abuses all the way from the Bush administration to the present, and it needs to stop.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 788, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I appreciate the spirit of this amendment. I appreciate my colleague. I appreciate this bill, which I am supporting. I agree that Hamas is a terrorist organization, and I want nothing more than for them to be taken down.

What I have not heard from my colleague within my party is all the good that has happened thanks to Qatar's efforts in the last few weeks.

There is a whole lot of bad to talk about, but I didn't hear anything about the hostage negotiations that would not be happening without the people of Qatar, without the leadership there. I thank the Qatari leadership for helping us get those hostages out.

A couple weeks ago, I had a family member of a 12-year-old boy in my office that said, Congressman, will you do anything you can? We are trying to get these hostages out. The people of Israel want them out, and we are not making any progress. What can you do?

You know what I did? I went down to the Qatari Embassy. I sent someone down and said, I want to speak to you guys. We need some action. We need more efforts. We need more results.

In the last week, what we have seen are hostages coming out of the Gaza strip.

Now, there are those that say we shouldn't negotiate with terrorists. The people of Israel--and I defer to the Israelis on this matter because they are the ones living among these folks. They are saying they want these hostages back. They are saying they want to work with the Qataris in bringing them back. They have thanked them for their efforts.

The other thing I haven't heard from my colleague within my party-- and frankly, I am disappointed some of my colleagues within my party have not spoken up against this amendment in particular--is about the great, fantastic United States Air Force base that we have in Qatar.

If they are such accomplices to terror, if they are such bad folks over there running the Qatari Government, why do we have an Air Force base there?

This amendment is badly timed.

I agree with the concepts in this amendment. I agree that I would love everyone on Earth to condemn Hamas.

This amendment right now does not help us achieve our goal, and that is to bring these hostages back. That is what our friends in Israel want. They want these hostages back.

If you don't want these hostages back, if you don't want a United States Air Force presence over in the Middle East, then go ahead and vote for this amendment.

What you are saying to the Qataris is we want you to cease efforts. We want you to turn over whoever it is that you have that you are negotiating with.

By the way, the American Government, we are the ones that asked them to keep this channel open with Hamas. We are the ones, the United States, that said Hamas needs to be close and able to be accessible.

Mr. Chair, I ask colleagues and staffers that are watching this amendment debate back in the office to go back to your boss, especially if you are Republican, and say, you know what? We have a Member from our own party saying this is a bad idea because we have hostage negotiations that are happening right now that will not be helped if this amendment is passed.

Everyone in this Chamber knows this amendment is going nowhere if it gets on the bill, but that doesn't matter.

The concept of giving the middle finger to the one group in the Middle East that is actually helping us achieve some hostage releases, and that is the Qataris, I think is a bad policy, and I urge opposition to this amendment.

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

Mr. Chair, I rise today to urge passage of my amendment regarding certain enforcement actions with regard to center high-mounted stop lamps.

I know my colleagues probably don't know what that is, but we refer to those commonly as center brake lights. This amendment is intended to prevent the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration from advancing on its misguided effort to overregulate and further confuse the collision avoidance industry that manufactures pulsating brake lights.

These devices, with over 4 million operating effectively today, have a demonstrated track record of improving safety. Studies have shown a reduction in rear-end collisions in excess of 30 percent with the vehicles that have utilized this technology.

These safety devices are simple, aftermarket products installed by dealerships when a vehicle is purchased. They allow the top brake light on a vehicle to pulse rapidly, which provides a heightened visual alert to trailing drivers who may be distracted and don't notice that the vehicle in front of them is braking.

This reduces the likelihood of rear-end collisions and creates a safer environment on our roads, especially in stop-and-go traffic.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment to safeguard drivers across the Nation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I suspected I would hear what I just heard, but I would like to correct a few things.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is not doing their job. Congress passed a law ordering them to conduct a study in 2019. They said they would, and they haven't done it yet. Not only have they not conducted a study, but they just recently reengaged on this issue this past summer. They failed to engage with me.

I have sent several letters asking them to do the job that Congress instructed them to do, but they have managed to order those manufacturers of this pulsing brake light to turn over all of their client lists because they wanted to then go after the dealers that have installed these lights and force them to turn over their client lists, and I think that is wrong.

This amendment is intended to force action by NHTSA to step back. If they are not going to do their job, then at least don't get in the way of something that works.

The studies have shown a reduction in rear-end collisions by over 30 percent with vehicles that have these brake lights. I will also point to something that is really shocking to me, frankly, and that is that 10 to 15 States, including Maryland, Texas, California, Utah, and Tennessee, have expressly agreed with the industry's analysis that these are actually helpful to the safety of Americans on the road.

Any time Texas and California agree on something, I am inclined to think it might actually be a good thing.

The other thing I will point out is something that I think many of those watching this debate are afraid to mention, and that is the fact that we have these manufacturers that have these deals that they worked out with these auto dealers, and they make these parts. They talk with these auto dealers and say they can sell this and make this amount of profit. They got all this worked out.

When it comes to this pulsing brake light, it is not a manufacturer- provided part. This is something a private company--and now there are four, five, or six. They all compete against each other. This industry makes these lights and has now dealt with the auto dealers outside of the manufacturers. As a consequence, the manufacturers don't like it.

I am not going to accuse the manufacturers of dealing with NHTSA, but I will say it is very bizarre to me that NHTSA is not going forward with the study that this Congress, in 2019, asked them to do.

It is very bizarre to me that NHTSA, instead of conducting a study, instead of working with members of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, like myself, are asking for client lists of this industry. That is just really weird to me, especially when the device that is so controversial is approved by Texas, California, and, frankly, some liberal States that all think this is really great.

Mr. Chair, I encourage my colleagues from across the aisle to recognize this is not a partisan issue. This is bipartisan. This is a good amendment, and I hope that we will all vote for it tonight when Americans have gone to bed and we are back here on the House floor voting late tonight. I hope my colleagues from across the aisle will join me in supporting this amendment.

Mr. Chair, I yield my remaining time to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves).

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

Mr. Speaker Pro Tempore, I rise to commemorate the extraordinary service of Texas State Representative Gregory Keith Bell from Forney, Texas, and his company, Intex Electrical Contractors, founded in 1983 when Mr. Bell was the young age of twenty-one. Rep. Bell continues to serve as President and CEO of Intex, working with an outstanding leadership team.

Due to the extraordinary effort of Rep. Bell, Intex is celebrating its 40th anniversary serving the Metroplex. The company has received numerous awards for its excellent work and has been recognized as one of the top one hundred fastest-growing private companies in North Texas. The leadership team brings over two hundred years of industry experience. Intex is a Certified Minority Business Enterprise and was ranked Top Specialty Contractor in 2005. I am proud to represent Rep. Bell, his family, and the team at Intex in Washington, and I am proud he represents my family and me in Austin.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Brookshire's Grocery Company on its 95th anniversary and commemorate its service to the Texas community. In 1928, Wood T. Brookshire and his wife founded their grocery company at a small store in Tyler, Texas. The store began with four employees and has grown to over 200 stores across several other states. To this day, Brookshire's is led by the founder's grandson, Brad Brookshire.

Brookshire's has grown from its humble beginnings into a thriving enterprise known for its philanthropic efforts and dedication to its local community. Brookshire's has consistently led hunger relief efforts across the South, among other important initiatives. I extend my gratitude to Brookshire's not only for its commitment to excellent customer service, but consistently going above and beyond to deliver the best experience for its customers. I have no doubt Brookshire's stores across Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Oklahoma will continue to prosper and serve as an inspiration for entrepreneurs. Texans certainly look forward to its positive impact on the community for many years to come.

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

Mr. Chair, I rise to urge my colleagues to support amendment No. 53 to H.R. 4665 that puts an end to international organizations circumventing our immigration laws.

The Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration is an anchor that ties down our Nation's right to determine our own immigration policies and handcuffs our government from acting in its own best interest. The United Nations should not be making immigration laws for our country.

President Trump pulled us out of this compact; President Biden, I believe, wrongfully put us back in. What this amendment does is it restricts any funding that will go to compliance with this.

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

Mr. Chair, I will quote Ambassador Nikki Haley, who said:

While we will continue to engage on a number of fronts at

the United Nations, in this case, we simply cannot in good

faith support a process that could undermine the sovereign

right of the United States to enforce our immigration laws.

We don't need to outsource our lawmaking to the United Nations. One of the compact issues that I have is that it strongly encourages migrants who do not have permission to stay in the country of destination, they are able to return to their country preferably on a voluntary basis.

The United Nations should not be making immigration law for the United States. If we are admitting--which I am happy to hear my colleague admit--that we do have a crisis, the last thing we are going to admit on either side is that it is, in fact, orderly, which is what this compact seeks to achieve in an international body.

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

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

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

Mr. Chair, this amendment ends the United Nations International Organization for Migration taxpayer-funded slush funds, commonly referred to as the Refugee Travel Loan Program. While this may be a noble idea, a lot of Americans don't realize that what this money does is it first flows through the nongovernmental organizations that then, cheerfully, take a cut of that, 25 percent.

Mr. Chair, 25 percent of all of these moneys go through NGOs and they keep 25 percent. It is turned into a loan that is obviously never paid back. These numbers of refugees are continuing to be encouraged, and the caps continue to be encouraged to be raised by these nongovernmental organizations that are making money off of this program.

Mr. Chair, I would say to anyone who is for this, I hope they will join me in reforming this program, but until then, I don't think it is wise to spend American taxpayer dollars on something that is just enriching these NGOs on the backs of the American taxpayer.

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

Mr. Chair, it is true that this is issued as a loan, but

less than 1 percent of these have been paid back. These aren't real loans; these are giveaways of taxpayer dollars to refugees.

I don't have a problem supporting legitimate refugees, but what really bothers me is that these nongovernment organizations are taking a 25 percent cut. So the refugees are not even getting the total amount of this loan, but the enriched nongovernment organizations are.

That is why you hear from groups like Lutheran Family Services, Jewish Family Services, and Catholic Charities that say: We are happy to help with this refugee problem. We are happy to go down to the border. We are happy to help facilitate this loan program because we know that we are not going to be on the hook for any of this money, it is the American taxpayer. In fact, we are going to get a 25 percent cut of whatever fake loan we give out.

Mr. Chair, it is really un-American to force the American taxpayer to fund this ridiculous program. The fact that we have charitable organizations profiting off of it and encouraging more and more of it is offensive to me, as well.

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

Mr. Chairman, I urge passage, and I yield back the balance of my time.