Mark Walker

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table H.R. 3401, with the Senate amendment thereto, and concur in the Senate amendment. This bipartisan bill passed the Senate 84-8 and could be sent to the President's desk for his signature today.

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

Mr. Chair, less than 10 days ago, this body missed a perfect opportunity. You see, natural disasters are unpredictable, but you know what isn't? Congress failing to do their job and prepare for them.

For too long Washington has governed by crisis and shifted its responsibility to adequately care for those in need, opting instead to saddle our children and grandchildren with an impossible debt.

Then days ago, this body wanted to spend more than $19 billion with no consideration of how to pay for it. Was it for a worthy cause? Absolutely. Of course. I would hope that every dollar appropriated by Congress is for a worthy cause. But as then-Representative Mike Pence said in 2005, following the devastation of Hurricane Katrina, does Congress have a duty to ensure that a catastrophe of nature does not become a catastrophe of debt?

Congress should pay for these emergency packages by either cutting spending in other areas that are less of a priority or responsibly budgeting for them ahead of time.

Disaster aid shouldn't be added to the debt. That is akin to going to the emergency room after an injury, putting the charges on a credit card, and then pretending that credit card bill is never going to arrive.

The bottom line is this, that even during an emergency, Washington needs to pay its bills.

My amendment is relatively simple, Mr. Chair. My amendment would be a 1-year reallocation of the Department of State and USAID's bilateral economic assistance and independent agency funds to cover the disaster recovery.

Let me explain. Combined, these accounts amount to more than $23.9 billion and would fully cover the disaster recovery, including the $5.87 billion in debt servicing costs of the borrowed funds, all while prioritizing America's recovery and resiliency.

America is still the most philanthropic country in the world and would continue to be.

Mr. Chair, this amendment recognizes our dire fiscal health by reducing foreign aid during these times and prioritizing Americans and American recovery efforts first.

As the President and this administration have said on multiple occasions, we must prioritize our domestic needs first and put the American citizens at the front of the line, especially during these times of disaster relief and especially since we are the ones that will foot the bill.

With these spending offsets, I believe we can show the American people we are serious about their recovery from disasters in a fiscally responsible manner that will not burden our future generations with debt and despair.

Finally, we can help our neighbors and serve the Americans impacted by natural disasters by prioritizing our families before foreign interests.

Congress should take this opportunity to put America first and lead responsibly.

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

Mr. Chair, my amendment is simple. It is about prioritizing domestic needs. It is about prioritizing these families that have suffering. It is about prioritizing these children who are suffering.

We need to be responsible.

Mr. Chair, I thank the chairwoman and the ranking member for their hard work in the appropriations process, but nowhere is this spending disaster relief ever talked about. It is time that we do so.

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

Mr. Chair, I thank the ranking member for his work.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 1. While my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have deemed this bill to be ``for the people,'' a more proper characterization would be ``for the politicians.''

Voting is a foundational right for all Americans, and the egregious provisions of this bill would jeopardize our freedoms. In particular, this legislation fails to address the issue of ballot harvesting.

As we have seen in California and my own State of North Carolina, ballot harvesting has created troubling irregularities in several elections due to the lack of oversight and opportunities for voter manipulation and intimidation.

Ballot harvesting allows political operatives with a partisan agenda to get involved in the collection and submission of votes, creating an opportunity for organizations or campaign workers to exploit voters and violate our fundamental rights.

Americans should have a choice on how they want to vote, who they want to support, and if they want to vote at all.

Not only would H.R. 1 manipulate the voting process, but it would also restrict our rights as Americans to donate to the campaigns of our choosing and would allow the Federal Government to use our taxpayer dollars to subsidize elections.

Aside from the proposed matching donations with a 6-to-1 ratio, H.R. 1 would create a pilot program to provide $25 vouchers for eligible voters. In practice, that means taxpayer money from hardworking Americans could be used to finance campaigns for candidates they do not support.

If this doesn't limit free speech enough, another provision of the bill politicizes the Federal Election Commission by reducing membership from six to five. This makes a traditionally nonpartisan organization political, giving one party the power to make partisan decisions about election communications.

With the vague standards created by H.R. 1, this would affect any group wishing to advocate on behalf of any legislative issue.

In short, this legislation violates the First Amendment. Even the ACLU has problems with it. It creates an avenue for fraud and subjects voters to potential exploitation.

While my colleagues across the aisle will support this bill to subsidize their own elections and keep their party in the majority, I will stand up for our rights as Americans and vote against one of the worst bills ever, this abhorrent assault on our election system.