Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, there are plenty of reasons to support pay increases for military personnel but oppose the bloated $895 billion defense budget. My hope is that the DOGE commission will seriously scrutinize the Pentagon budget, which has failed seven audits in a row if it is to be taken seriously.

Today, I speak out to oppose the NDAA due to the GOP leadership's insistence on inserting rightwing extremist dogma over national defense.

Taking away healthcare for trans kids and not expanding access to fertility treatments like IVF for wanting families are two examples.

Big Brother/Big Government attacks like those just don't belong in this bill. If we ignore extremism now, then the next time there will be another group attacked, and then another and another until eventually no one will be left to defend you when you need it, Mr. Speaker. Bullies and extremists rarely stop unless stood up to.

Stand up for military families' ability to make their own healthcare decisions, not what extremist MAGA Big Government wants. Mr. Speaker, the fight of others today might be your fight tomorrow.

Vote ``no'' on extremism.

Mr. Speaker, I was not present for four Roll Call votes in the House on Friday, September 20, 2024. Had I been present, I would have voted in the following manner: YEA on Roll Call No. 436, Motion to Recommit H.R. 5717; NAY on Roll Call No. 437, Passage of H.R. 5717; NAY on Roll Call No. 438, Passage of H.J. Res. 136; and YEA on Roll Call No. 439, Passage of H.R. 9106.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the following Proclamation:

Whereas; Don Sanford has spent his entire life near and influenced by bodies of water in both New York and right here in Dane County, Wisconsin, and

Whereas; Don moved to Madison in 1976 to work for Wisconsin Public Television and immediately found himself drawn to the beauty and recreational opportunities afforded by the chain of lakes, and

Whereas; Don is a licensed U.S. Coast Guard captain, a member of the Four Lakes Ice Yacht Club, past commodore of the Mendota Yacht Club, commodore of the International Nite Ice Yacht Class Association, and a boat captain for Belly Lou Cruises, and

Whereas; Don has a year-round passion for the lakes by racing sailboats in the summer and iceboats in the winter in addition to spending time sharing his knowledge with others while conducting tours of the lakes, and

Whereas; Don is the author of On Fourth Lake: A Social History of Lake Mendota which is the culmination of a lifetime of experiences, story collecting, research, and passion for Lake Mendota which details the history, lore, and anecdotes of the chain's largest lakes, and

Whereas; Don and his wife, Barb, have raised two fine sons who have each earned the rank of Eagle Scout, graduated from college, and have become successful working professionals, and

Whereas; Don serves as an inspiration to his fellow citizens through his selfless contributions to our community as an author, historian, tour guide, and Scout leader.

Now, therefore, be it resolved that I, Mark Pocan, U.S. Congressman for Wisconsin's Second District, do hereby express my appreciation to Don Sanford for his work to preserve the natural beauty and history of Dane County's most important natural resource--its lakes--and further wish Don Sanford a happy and healthy 75th birthday.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the following Proclamation:

Whereas; Audra Cohen-Plata has resided and is an active community member, dedicated public servant, and resident of Dane County, Wisconsin, and

Whereas; Audra fulfilled her duties as an intern in my legislative office as an undergraduate at the University of Wisconsin-Madison during my tenure as an Assemblyman in the Wisconsin State Legislature, and

Mr. Chair, I was not present for 30 roll call votes in the House today. Had I been present, I would have voted in the following manner:

NO on Roll Call No. 297, Brecheen Amendment No. 1 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 298, Brecheen Amendment No. 2 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 299, Brecheen Amendment No. 3 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 300, Burchett Amendment No. 4 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 301, Burchett Amendment No. 9 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 302, Gosar Amendment No. 13 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 303, Gosar Amendment No. 14 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 304, Gosar Amendment No. 15 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 305, Gosar Amendment No. 16 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 306, Greene of Georgia Amendment No. 18 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 307, Greene of Georgia Amendment No. 19 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 308, Greene of Georgia Amendment No. 20 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 309, Hageman Amendment No. 21 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 310, Hageman Amendment No. 22 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 311, Mace Amendment No. 35 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 312, Mace Amendment No. 36 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 313, Moskowitz Amendment No. 45 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 314, Ogles Amendment No. 50 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 315, Perry Amendment No. 54 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 316, Spartz Amendment No. 59 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 317, Steube Amendment No. 61 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 318, Tenney Amendment No. 63 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 319, Tenney Amendment No. 64 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 320, Tiffany Amendment No. 68 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 321, Waltz Amendment No. 72 to H.R. 8771;

NO on Roll Call No. 322, Wilson of South Carolina Amendment No. 75 to

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the following Proclamation Honoring Rick and Susan Wilcox for the 25th Anniversary of the Rick Wilcox Magic Theater:

Whereas Rick Wilcox was intrigued by magic at age 10, began his magic career astonishing guests at a restaurant in Brookfield, Wisconsin during high school, funded his UW-Madison degree with magic shows, and has never stopped pursuing his passion for magic and illusion;

Whereas Rick became a nationally sought-after act for corporate events with his showmanship and quick wit, and while managing

his entertainment business full-time, he married Susan in 1996 who happily became his business partner and eventually agreed to join him on stage;

Whereas Rick and Susan Wilcox, despite the glamour of performing around the world, determined to bring their business home to Wisconsin, and with extraordinary encouragement from their families, purchased and renovated a neglected, unoccupied 550-seat theater in Wisconsin Dells, transforming it into an economic, employment and enchantment engine for the region;

Whereas The Rick Wilcox Magic Theater became the first-of-its-kind when it opened on May 17, 1999: a theater dedicated to the art of magic, entirely owned, operated, and headlined by its namesake,

Whereas Since 1999, as owners and performers, Rick and Susan Wilcox have managed every aspect of their small business: producing and starring in thousands of shows for Midwestern families, hiring hundreds of staff members, maintaining the theater and property, and delighting tens of thousands with their unique on-stage chemistry, and mix of family-friendly comedy and illusion;

Whereas Rick and Susan Wilcox, by unanimous vote of their peers, won the magic community's most prestigious award, the 2024 Milbourne Christopher Illusionist Award, placing these two Wisconsin natives among the pantheon of magic's most-celebrated illusionists, including such past winners as David Copperfield, Doug Henning, Harry Blackstone, Lance Burton, and Siegfried and Roy;

Whereas The Rick Wilcox Magic Theater is nationally recognized as ``Wisconsin's Best'' on the Reader's Digest list of ``The 50 Best Family Travel Destinations in Each State,'' is the No. 1 rated activity in Wisconsin Dells by TripAdvisor, and continues to be a central part of the tourism industry in Wisconsin, and

Whereas The Rick Wilcox Magic Theater celebrated a remarkable milestone on May 17, 2024: 25 amazing years in business, and will continue to be a central part of the tourism industry in Wisconsin Dells; and

Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved That I, Mark Pocan, U.S. Congressman for Wisconsin's Second District, do hereby express my sincere appreciation to the Rick Wilcox Magic Theater and Rick and Susan Wilcox for their incredible 25 years of bringing magic, comedy, and joy to families in Wisconsin.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the following proclamation honoring the contributions of Dane County Executive Joe Parisi:

WHEREAS, Joe Parisi has had a long career in public service that dates back to 1996, having worked as a legislative aide in the Wisconsin State Capitol, elected as the Dane County Clerk, and elected to the State Assembly for Wisconsin's 48th District before being elected as the Dane County Executive on April 5th, 2011; and

WHEREAS, Joe Parisi handled the Dane County's budget with precision to run the Dane County Regional Airport, the Henry Vilas Zoo, the county landfill, a host of parks, much of the criminal justice system, and an impactful human services program; and

WHEREAS, Joe Parisi fostered excellent working relationships with South Central Wisconsin's local elected officials to invest in infrastructure, combat climate change, and protect the area's water, and

WHEREAS, Joe Parisi has been credited as championing partnerships with local organizations to help create trust with many communities within Dane County and promoting racial equity in government and the workforce, and

WHEREAS, Joe Parisi has been involved in projects such as youth training programs, expanding solar and renewable energy, apprenticeships in county parks, mental health initiatives, and a program that helps people expunge criminal records, and

NOW, THEREFORE, I hereby proclaim May 1, 2024, as Joe Parisi Day in honor of his service to his community, Dane County, and the State of Wisconsin. I join his friends, family, and colleagues in offering him best wishes on his well-deserved retirement.

Mr. Speaker, since the October 7 Hamas attack, Netanyahu has responded with a widespread bombing campaign in Gaza.

Just yesterday, nine Palestinians were killed in a strike near Rafah, six being children. This is anything but going after Hamas. This is a collective punishment of all Palestinians in Gaza.

Netanyahu doesn't support the United States' position of a two-state solution for peace. He doesn't respect our urges not to invade Rafah. He disputes what the U.S. and aid groups have said about famine taking over in Gaza. He launched an attack on Iran after the White House told him not to.

If he is not listening to us on matters of international security, how can he be trusted with more offensive weapons? Enough is enough.

I support the people of Israel, who don't want bombs raining on them from extremists in Gaza, and the hostages must be released. I also support the Palestinians, who deserve human rights and dignity.

Mr. Speaker, 35,000 people have been killed, and thousands more will die from starvation and disease. We are better than that, and so is Israel. I am not sure Netanyahu is, and that is why I can't vote to provide him with more unconditional offensive weapons today.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote.

Mr. Speaker, I have been attending town halls and meetings across my district for the last 2 weeks in smaller communities in Wisconsin like Edgerton, Sauk City, Monroe, Mazomanie, and Darlington. These are communities with hardworking people that have a strong work ethic and upper Midwestern values like fairness and compassion.

At those meetings, Mr. Speaker, I have heard a common thread: They don't like what they are seeing in Gaza and Israel. The vast majority recognize that the attack on October 7 was horrific and Israel had a right to respond, but they didn't have a right to collectively punish 2.3 million people stuck in Gaza.

They know that 1,200 people are dead in Israel from the attack and over 130 people are still being held by Hamas. However, they also know that nearly 34,000 people are dead in Gaza, 70 percent of which are women and children, clearly not members of Hamas.

They know that 2 million people have been displaced in Gaza and the majority of the buildings and infrastructure have been demolished or damaged by Israeli bombs. They know that the people are dying of starvation because almost every entry point to Gaza is through Israel and not enough supplies and aid are getting through.

They understand that the United States is trying to help with aid, but we have to drop it from the air or bring it in by sea because our friend Israel won't allow us to bring it in through easier, safer ways like by truck and transport.

They know that aid workers are being killed, 200 plus to date, including some from Chef Jose Andres' World Central Kitchen. The limited food, water, and supplies that are being let in have to be distributed, but aid workers are too often killed in the process of delivering humanitarian aid, making alleviating suffering even more difficult.

They don't understand how we can provide both armaments and aid to the same area, as that doesn't make sense to people with Midwestern sensibilities.

They tell me it looks like punishment for being Palestinian. They tell me it appears Benjamin Netanyahu wants people to leave Gaza for good. They tell me it looks too much like what genocide would look like, and that concerns them greatly.

The bombings of the World Central Kitchen workers, the seemingly targeted and repeated bombings, despite the Israeli military knowing their location and purpose, has been one more step too far by the Netanyahu government's handling of this war.

Enough is enough.

The indiscriminate killing must stop. The aid must flow. The hostages must be released and a cease-fire must hold to protect every child in Gaza and Israel.

The devastation has been severe, far more severe than it ever needed to be. The world would have understood a response going after Hamas killers, but the Netanyahu government has gone too far, way too far in its response.

That is why I helped lead a letter signed by 56 Members of Congress to the President to stop any additional offensive arms transfers to Israel without a thorough investigation of the World Central Kitchen killings and a plan for aid and assistance to get to starving Palestinians.

The United States has long supported two nations existing side by side in peace, a two-state solution, but Benjamin Netanyahu doesn't support that reasoned path to peace. And that, along with his punishing innocent Palestinians while allegedly going after Hamas, has made it time to get a divorce from Benjamin Netanyahu.

I support the overwhelming majority of Israelis who want peace. They want to live safely without bombs raining on them from extremists in Gaza. They too don't like the direction and mistakes of the Netanyahu administration, and they want the hostages returned immediately.

The overwhelming majority of Palestinians want peace, as well. They just want to live their lives with dignity and independence as they should, but they need to be treated as equals with human rights, which too often they are not.

I urge our government to do more to help distribute aid, utilizing great groups like the World Central Kitchen, UNWRA, and so many others that are doing this work. Our government must stop supplying any offensive weapons or equipment that damages Gaza further, especially in regard to any invasion of Rafah.

Let's take this awful, current situation and make some good out of it. We need to double down on a two-state solution that recognizes the many, many good people of Israel and Palestine that want to live in peace. It is achievable, and the United States is crucial to that peace. That is what I am hearing in my district.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to recognize my constituent, Mr. John McKenzie, a Wisconsin business owner who plays a significant role in the revitalization of Dane County through his generous philanthropy.

Mr. John McKenzie, through his highly successful family business, consistently gives back to his community by maintaining improving, and reinvesting in properties throughout Dane County.

Beyond his obligation to his business, Mr. McKenzie spent years working with the Boys & Girls Clubs of Dane County because of a heartfelt desire to improve the lives of young people, especially those belonging to underrepresented communities.

Mr. McKenzie partnered the Madison Area Builders Association with the Boys & Girls Clubs of Dane County to introduce opportunities and careers in the skilled trades to young people looking to better their lives.

This great idea gained momentum and not long after, with the help of Mr. McKenzie, the National Association of Home Builders and the national Boys and Girls Clubs created their own partnership, extending new opportunities to millions of kids across our Nation.

Mr. McKenzie not only sought to shrink the racial and gender wealth gap, but also to mentor kids on how to save, invest, and build for the next generation. On July 15, 2023, with $30.4 million dollars' worth of investments and donations, Mr. McKenzie opened the McKenzie Regional Workforce Center, a place where kids of all ages can participate in career introductory programming.

Mr. John McKenzie demonstrates that business-driven organizations and organizations with a social focus can form partnerships that benefit the entirety of their respective communities. For that, I commend him, and I join his friends, family. and colleagues in offering him best wishes and continued success.

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment. This amendment would prevent the FTC from implementing its policy statement explaining the scope of the commission's authority over unfair methods of competition.

It will create confusion and legal uncertainty in cases in which the FTC seeks to use this authority to stop unfair methods of competition that hurts consumers, honest small businesses, and workers.

The November 2022 policy statement informs the public, business community, and antitrust bar how the agency interprets the law based on principles from prior case law and agency.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no,'' and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

Current law requires that a party wishing to complete an acquisition must delay the transaction for at least 30 days following the submission of a pre-merger notification to give the FTC and DOJ an opportunity to review the transaction and determine whether to investigate it further. The statute gives the FTC and DOJ the ability to grant an individual case exemption from this requirement to wait 30 days. Granting this early termination, however, consumes agency resources, and the delay for parties associated with suspending early termination is minimal.

I strongly oppose this amendment, and I urge a ``no'' vote.

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

Mr. Chairman, I oppose the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.

The proposed revisions that this amendment seeks to block to OMB Circular A-4 include updates that consider the social cost of carbon and other climate-related factors in regulatory impact analyses. This change recognizes the urgency of addressing climate change and aligns Federal agencies with efforts to mitigate its impacts.

I strongly oppose this amendment, and I urge a ``no'' vote.

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

Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

Treasury's Climate Hub was created to leverage the Department's finance and financial mitigation efforts to confront the growing threat of climate change.

In just over 2 years, the hub has been instrumental in the implementation of the tremendously successful Inflation Reduction Act. The hub also contributed to successful negotiations that led to a substantial public-private climate finance commitment with South Africa and Indonesia.

This amendment would impede the Treasury's climate policy strategy as our Nation faces growing climate threats.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no,'' and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I oppose the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Womack).

Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Arkansas.

Mr. Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. Chair, I stand with the bipartisan statesmen who have argued against this amendment. I oppose the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. Chair, the amendment doesn't do anything. It simply says funds in the bill can't be used to prevent voluntary disclosures. The administration is already doing this.

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

Mr. Chairman, the amendment does nothing, and we oppose it. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

This amendment would fully block any rulemaking that the Office of Management and Budget's, Office of Information Regulatory Affairs determines to be significant. Each year that division can review anywhere from 300 to 700 rules.

There is no available data to determine how many of these reviews result in a significant determination. However, roughly, 100 rules each year clear the higher economically significant threshold.

This amendment would block any work on the roughly 100 economically significant rules the government promulgates annually and likely blocks countless others that result in a significant determination.

This amendment would grind government to a halt and interrupt vital work to improve the lives of Americans across a range of policy areas.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no,'' and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I oppose the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

To my distinguished colleague from Arkansas (Mr. Womack): I so appreciate your promptness that we run on your subcommittee, I was just giving you the promptness through this process. So that is why I was allowing you to use the time you had. I just want to explain that so you realize why I was sitting back.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. The White House Gender Policy Council is vital in advancing gender equity and equality. It helps ensure that all individuals, regardless of their gender, have equal opportunities and rights. The council takes a holistic approach to addressing gender issues and looking at areas such as economic security, healthcare, education, and violence prevention.

This comprehensive strategy allows for a more effective response to gender-related challenges leading to better outcomes for individuals and communities.

By establishing a dedicated council at the highest levels of government, the White House sends a clear message about the importance of gender equity and inclusion. The White House Gender Policy Council is important for advancing gender, equity, and equality.

Mr. Chairman, I strongly oppose this amendment, I urge a ``no'' vote, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Jeffries).

Mr. Chair, you heard from our Democratic leader. Democrats strongly oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment. This amendment doesn't belong in this bill. We don't deal with the IMF and Special Drawing Rights. That would be in the State-Foreign Operations bill, which we have already taken up on the floor.

Mr. Chair, I urge the sponsor to take up that bill in the fiscal year 2025 bill, assuming we ever get to that.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no,'' and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, as I said, we are not debating the merits of the amendment. It is just not appropriate in this bill, period.

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

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

The Treasury Department has identified significant technical concerns with this amendment. Specifically, the agency has concerns about how the amendment's construction would impact general licenses authorized by the Office of Foreign Assets Control.

I strongly agree with the need to enforce the sanctions included in Executive Order No. 13902 with respect to any person determined to operate in the construction, mining, manufacturing, or textile sectors of the Iranian economy. However, some terms like ``Islamic Republic of Iran'' and ``for, or on behalf of'' are vague and would create confusion as to how they would relate to existing authorizations.

Treasury believes this phrasing could cause unintended consequences outside of the intended scope.

Mr. Chair, for these reasons, I oppose the amendment and recommend a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment. This amendment doesn't belong in this bill. We don't deal with the IMF and shareholding. That would be part of the State and Foreign Operations bill, which has already gone through this body.

I urge the sponsor to take up the issue in that bill, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

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

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

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

For years, the Small Business Administration has rightly been concerned about small businesses from underserved communities accessing SBA loans. Through the agency's affiliation rule, the agency aims to combat persistent gaps in accessing capital that affects these small businesses.

By modernizing the lending criteria and conditions for SBA's small business loan programs and reducing red tape for SBA lenders, we will see improved access to capital for underserved businessowners, including women, minorities, veterans, and rural entrepreneurs.

Unfortunately, this amendment pulls the rug out from underneath the SBA's important effort to better support these businesses.

I strongly oppose this amendment. I urge a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment. It seems shortsighted to defund an effort to even look at an issue. The Central Bank Digital Currency Working Group is intended to complement the Fed's efforts by considering the implications of a U.S. CBDC.

It would be a good idea to examine whether there are economic benefits, including lower transaction and borrowing costs for U.S. households, businesses, and government.

In addition, the U.S. uses sanctions and other financial measures to address national security threats and deny criminals and other illicit actors access to the U.S. and international financial system.

Development of foreign CBDCs, including multi-CBDC platforms, could diminish the use of our dollar and the effectiveness of our tools in this space. I think it is at least worth letting Treasury look at the issue.

I oppose this amendment, urge a ``no'' vote, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch).

Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I am in disbelief over the ridiculously low spending levels proposed by the Republicans in the Agriculture appropriations bill. They slashed funding to 2001 levels, funding from over 20 years ago. That is a 41 percent cut, $10 billion, to the people that feed America, our farmers.

I don't see how any Member of Congress who represents rural America can show this much disrespect to their constituents. Certainly no Member from Wisconsin.

Here are a few examples of what the bill does:

It zeroes out the Dairy Business Innovation Initiatives completely, from $25 million to nothing. That is assistance for new and growing dairy businesses that want to get products like milk and specialty cheeses to market.

If you are an economically distressed farmer, of which, unfortunately, there are plenty, this strips assistance for 104,000 farm loan borrowers.

If you are a farmer who uses the Farm Service Agency for things like loans or disaster relief, this bill cuts FSA in addition to conservation programs like EQUIP that help farmers improve their operations and output.

If you get energy assistance as a farmer, good luck with that. The REAP fund will be cut by over $500 million, making your energy costs go up in rural America.

If you farm and supply food through international food programs, you are really out of luck because they cut it by $1.2 billion, a 69 percent cut.

With this level of cuts, I would assume this was a satire, a ``Saturday Night Live'' episode, but it is just another Tuesday night in the U.S. Congress where farmers apparently aren't valued by the House Republican majority.

No one who claims to support rural America could write or vote for an agricultural funding bill this bad. No one. I, for one, won't be supporting this kind of disrespect to the farmers in my district.

Mr. Speaker, as of today, Congress has less than 3 weeks to reach an agreement on government funding before the September 30 deadline. If we cannot complete this fundamental task, the one thing we have to do as Members of Congress, we risk shutting down the government, an outcome that would have devastating consequences for the American economy, American families, and our national security.

I wish I could stand here and talk about all the great bipartisan work that the House Appropriations Committee has been doing and reassure you that we are on track to fund the government on time, but unfortunately that is far from reality.

This year, House Republicans have abandoned bipartisanship and instead chose to draft some of the most extreme partisan and harmful legislation that I have ever seen. Their bills would enact devastating cuts that would jeopardize our children's education and futures, weaken our rural communities, increase costs for families, and leave our country less safe by directly cutting funds for necessary law enforcement.

On top of this, they have packed these bills to the brim with extreme policy riders that have no chance of becoming law, including abortion bans and extremist discriminatory policy.

We often say that your budget is a reflection of your values, and these shameful funding bills show that the House Republicans are lacking many.

It doesn't have to be this way. Over in the Senate, Democrats and Republicans have put together bipartisan funding bills, all of which have passed out of the Senate Appropriations Committee with overwhelming bipartisan support. House Republicans, however, are on an island of their own, seeking to jam their rightwing ideology down the throats of the American people or else subject them to a shutdown that will have devastating consequences. This would be the height of irresponsibility.

It has become clear that the House Republicans do not have a plan. Faux impeachment is just a distraction. They do not have a strategy, and the chaos and confusion will come at a cost of a government shutdown that the American people cannot afford.

Republicans in the House need to do the right thing: Come to the table with Democrats and both parties in the Senate and let's fund the government. It is not rocket science. It is just basic governance.

Wisconsin Shouldn't Impeach Justice Protasiewicz

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about what is happening in my home State of Wisconsin. There are calls from the gerrymandered State assembly to impeach the newest State supreme court justice before they have even heard a case.

Justice Janet Protasiewicz was elected overwhelmingly. She defeated her opponent by more than 200,000 votes. She won by 11 points. In a purple State like Wisconsin, that is a landslide. However, because she mentioned that Wisconsin's extremely gerrymandered State legislative and congressional districts might be a problem, the current State assembly is threatening to use their impeachment powers before she even has a chance to hear a case.

The State assembly is trying to overturn the will of the voters because they don't like who won the election. Using this logic, if the legislature doesn't like the possible outcomes of any election or cases before the court, it can conceivably threaten impeachment without actual cause and undermine the separation of powers of government. The legislature does not trump the judiciary. They are co-equal branches of government.

Under the Republicans' absurd logic, they could threaten impeachment over their gerrymandered maps or keeping Wisconsin's 1849 abortion law or even potentially over giving themselves a pay increase even if they thought the court would find it unconstitutional.

There is a standard for impeachment. It is for wrongdoing in office, not for disagreeing with the legislature. The fact that Justice Protasiewicz has not heard a single case makes this even more ridiculous.

Now the Republicans in Wisconsin are maybe changing their tune. They likely realize this impeachment farce might be a bad idea, but that is not stopping them from coming up with new bad ideas to stay in power. Now they claim they want an independent commission, a Trojan horse, to distract as a way to stay in power, an idea that they previously dismissed.

If the Republicans don't like the so-called fair maps that come out of this commission, they can still draw their own maps under this Trojan horse plan. It only requires a simple majority, which when you have gerrymandered maps, you certainly have. This is wrong. It does not represent Wisconsin's values and, frankly, it is un-American.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Rhode Island, David Cicilline, for his great work in Congress. He has been an LGBTQ+ leader, he has been a progressive champion, he has been a Judiciary Committee leader, and he has been a mentor to many of us in Congress, including myself. I am going to really miss having him and his wisdom in Congress.

I think a lot of people are going to miss him across the country. If you care about gun violence, you are going

to miss David Cicilline. He was the author of the assault weapon ban, so important as we have shooting after shooting after shooting with an AR-15. His bill would help address that in this country. He always goes above and beyond. Every time in this Chamber when there is a moment of silence and no moment of action around gun violence, it is so disheartening for everyone around the country, but that day that has been talked about when he was one of the organizers sitting down and taking over this Chamber to have a moment of action is one of the few times, in fact, the only time that I saw that in my 10\1/2\ years in Congress.

If you care about progressive values, you are going to miss David Cicilline. He was a progressive caucus leader. As chair of the DPCC, he led in articulating our values for Democrats, and he did an amazing job in doing that.

If you care about democracy, you are going to miss David Cicilline. Being an impeachment manager is a huge undertaking. You have, trust me, all kinds of people around the country who disagree with you saying all sorts of interesting things. David did an amazing job in standing up for this country and for everyone who cares about our democracy in that role.

If you care about consumer issues, you are going to miss David Cicilline. As the chair of that subcommittee on the Judiciary Committee dealing with antitrust and tech issues, he was fighting on behalf of consumers so that we could have more affordable cost of goods, so you didn't just have a few monopolies running everything.

If you care about equality and LGBTQI+ rights, I guarantee you are going to miss David Cicilline. He was the chair of our Equality Caucus for a very long time, and he was the lead author of the equality bill.

Most importantly, David has been a role model for LGBTQ youth across the country. It is not easy still, even in 2023, to be out and gay, especially in this body with people who still are attacking trans kids as a last gasp against equality. David has been our leader and a senior member of the Equality Caucus, and we so respect all of the work that he has done.

I am going to miss his positive leadership style, I am going to miss his commonsense vision, but, most importantly, I am going to miss his friendship.

David Cicilline has been a great mentor to many of us. We know he is going to do great back in Rhode Island, and I, too, am going to get to Clementine's.

Mr. Speaker, Republicans aren't being honest when they tell you they are trying to negotiate in good faith on the Nation's debt ceiling.

First, this shouldn't be a negotiation; it is paying our bills we have already spent. We have lifted the debt ceiling over 80 times before, including three times during President Trump's tenure because you have to pay your bills.

Second, the legislation they passed, as an alleged negotiation, shows how drastic they would like to cut spending but can't because they can't even put specifics on paper, like the President and the Democrats have. They would love to cut programs drastically, but the cuts would hurt so many Americans they can't actually do it. That is why they haven't released a budget.

I serve on the Appropriations Committee--let me explain what the Republicans want to do. They passed a bill to cut spending to fiscal year 2022 levels. That sounds innocuous enough, but here is what it actually means. Deep cuts.

We have discretionary and nondiscretionary spending. We can't cut nondiscretionary spending like Social Security and Medicare because, well, it is your money that we hold on to as a public trust. By law, we can't cut nondiscretionary spending. That only leaves discretionary funds that can be changed.

Discretionary funds are eligible for cuts or increases, but the GOP majority further limits that by saying they won't cut Pentagon spending, amounting to over half of the discretionary funds.

That leaves a much smaller portion of the total budget to absorb all the cuts they propose, adding up to a 22 percent cut of all remaining funds. That is 22 percent of the funds that help veterans, 22 percent of the funds to protect the border, funds for Meals on Wheels programs, funds for railroad safety inspections, education, housing, and healthcare, all cut.

Think about those levels of cuts and what that effect would have on you and your family. They talk a tough game on the border, but they would cut 22 percent of the funding going to protect the border. Cutting Border Patrol and Customs officers could increase the flow of people coming into the country and cut back on searches for fentanyl and other drugs at our points of entry.

They say they want to back the blue and support our police, but 22 percent cuts to Federal law enforcement and grants to local police departments are hardly the support they need.

They say they support our veterans--but cut veterans' food assistance programs and housing choice vouchers, hurting tens of thousands of veterans who have bravely served. Even the PACT Act that finally made it through Congress to help veterans exposed to toxic chemicals wouldn't get the funding needed to help those who served our Nation.

It keeps going. 180,000 fewer children would have access to childcare; 10,800 fewer OSHA inspections of plants would expose workers to unsafe conditions. Drug treatment courts would lose funding, and 29,000 fewer people would be able to get treatment for opioid addiction.

There is a reason why they can't put out a full budget. It is because these types of cuts aren't workable.

It is worse. If they do fund some areas, then other areas will see even deeper cuts--30 percent or more cuts in some of the areas I just mentioned. If they don't get these cuts, then they won't pay our Nation's current bills and will force our Nation into default.

When you sign a mortgage, you can't decide whether or not you are going to send your monthly check. If you default, then you lose your house, and your credit is shot. The same is true for the Federal Government.

You would also be directly affected by Republican default. Millions of people would lose their jobs. Interest rates for home buyers and small businesses would go up overnight. Stocks would tank, sinking your retirement investments.

Congress has to pay its bills like you do, responsibly, and you do that by lifting the debt ceiling now. If not, then, Mr. President, invoke parts of the 14th Amendment to pay our bills and not damage the economy.

Enough messing around. Get the job done, House Republicans. Your constituents deserve it.