Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, as ranking member of the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government, I am here to emphasize that this proposed constitutional amendment would undermine our system of checks and balances and fly in the face of the Founders' wisdom.

I think it would be a grave mistake to dictate how many Justices should sit on the Supreme Court in perpetuity and, thereby, lock in for a generation, or more, a rightwing majority, which has engaged in an unprecedented assault on Supreme Court norms and our constitutional order.

For the past several years, in the wake of the Court packing that occurred during the first Trump administration and under the Senate leadership of Mitch McConnell, constituents have called for Supreme Court reform at every townhall that I have held.

Those calls have grown louder in the wake of each decision that has lessened our individual rights and liberties or enabled the administration to avoid accountability or overrule the powers and duties reserved to the American people through their Representatives in Congress and in the ethical lapses of the Court's own members.

People are paying attention. They are demanding a Court that is more responsive to we the people than to an administration that is beholden to special interests and oligarchs.

The American public, the Founders, and the Constitution demand more than a misguided constitutional amendment that would permanently tie Congress' hands by capping the number of Justices, especially when there are more pragmatic solutions that have not yet received due consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to reject this measure.

Mr. Speaker, as I think we can all tell from the ensuing debate here, there are serious issues that this body needs to be wrestling with, but the Speaker has chosen to put on the floor this week H.R. 139, a bill that would make daylight saving time permanent.

I think there is one thing everyone in this Chamber can agree on: Americans do not like changing their clocks twice a year.

The big question isn't whether we should ditch the switch; it is how. Unfortunately, the bill that the Speaker has chosen chooses the wrong solution by making daylight saving time permanent nationwide while denying States the right to enact permanent standard time if they so choose--not if, but when they discover that Congress made the wrong choice.

We can all understand the appeal of an extra hour of sunlight in the summer, but permanent daylight saving time comes with serious health and safety concerns with even darker winter mornings.

If this bill becomes law, winter mornings across the country are going to look very different. Millions of Americans will wake up during the winter months in complete darkness, with the Sun not rising until long after people get up and travel to school or work or have to go about their days.

In much of upstate and northern New York, communities will not see the Sun rise until well after 8:30 a.m. In Michigan, it will be close to 9 before the Sun comes up. In parts of the Pacific Northwest, sunrise will be pushed even later than 9 a.m.

In many parts of the country, children will be waiting for schoolbuses in darkness. Parents will be driving to work before sunrise. Morning commuters, students, and pedestrians will be starting their day in the dark, not because of the seasons, but because Congress decided to move the clock instead of following the Sun.

We don't have to speculate about what would happen under permanent daylight saving time. We already tried it. During the 1974 energy crisis, Congress made daylight saving time permanent in a failed attempt to save energy. It lasted less than a year.

Families found themselves sending their kids to school in the dark, and there was a rash of fatal crashes involving schoolchildren. Communities raised serious safety concerns, and public support, which initially was quite strong, quickly collapsed. Congress repealed the policy within months.

The science has only become clearer since then. Medical and scientific experts have endorsed the move to permanent standard time because permanent daylight saving time disrupts our natural circadian rhythms, the internal clocks that regulate when we sleep and wake. That disruption has been linked to higher rates of heart disease, stroke, chronic sleep deprivation, and other adverse health concerns. These bad outcomes are even more serious and long-lasting than the sleep deprivation, traffic accidents, and heart attacks that follow the twice-yearly changes that we currently have.

I have also heard directly from my constituents. Like most Americans, they are ready to ditch the switch, but when I ask which permanent system they would prefer if they had to choose, the clear preference was for standard time. A Gallup poll last year found that Americans preferred permanent standard time to permanent daylight saving time by 2-to-1.

That is why I have introduced the bipartisan Sunshine for Our Kids Act with Representative Pat Harrigan. Our bill would end the clock changes and make standard time the national default.

Importantly, it would also allow for States to adopt permanent daylight saving time through State law if they choose.

If we are going to make a permanent change that affects every American, we should follow the science, learn from history, and prioritize Americans' health, particularly that of our children. That is why I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule and on H.R. 139.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to this rule and to the underlying bills.

At its core, this Republican reconciliation budget bill is a statement about priorities, and the priorities reflected in this bill could not be more out of step with the needs and values of the American people.

Families across this country are struggling to afford housing, groceries, childcare, and healthcare. Americans are dealing with rising costs, economic uncertainty, and the consequences of another unending war in the Middle East.

Americans were promised lower prices and stability, but instead, they are watching gas prices climb back up to $5 a gallon while inflation continues to rise and squeeze household budgets.

Against that backdrop, Republicans have decided that what the country really needs is to spend another $70 billion on ICE and Border Patrol. This is on top of the roughly $140 billion Republicans already provided to those agencies last year, much of which remains unspent.

Taken together, Republicans are proposing to spend nearly a quarter trillion dollars, all deficit spending, to expand detention camps, fund mass deportation, increase surveillance, and accelerate an immigration crackdown that has already caused enormous harm across our country.

Republicans are doing this while simultaneously claiming that America cannot afford investments in schools, housing, nutrition assistance, or healthcare.

Let's be honest about what this reconciliation bill represents. Republicans spent years pretending to be deeply concerned about deficits and debt, claiming to be the party of fiscal responsibility. They have attacked virtually every Democratic proposal to help working Americans and families, saying that those measures are fiscally irresponsible, but they have used their control of Congress and the White House to add trillions with a t, trillions of dollars, to the debt by giving tax cuts to their wealthy friends and corporate donors.

Now, Republicans are adding hundreds of billions more in debt to put more masked and armed ICE agents on our streets and to build out a nationwide network of corporate detention camps. Apparently, deficits only matter when tax dollars are used to help everyday Americans instead of Trump's billionaire buddies.

Mr. Speaker, it is also telling that Republicans are using a completely partisan process to ram through this S. 2 legislation. Once again, they are using the partisan reconciliation process to pass a budget because they have refused to negotiate through the normal appropriations process. Specifically, they have refused to enact any reforms to address the lawless behavior of ICE and Customs and Border Protection under the Trump administration.

Democrats proposed bipartisan funding solutions for DHS. We proposed reforms, accountability measures, and guardrails after repeated abuses by ICE and CBP resulted in chaos and death on American streets. We asked for basic transparency and oversight after the killings by Federal agents of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, American citizens. We asked that ICE and CBP be

held to the same standards as every other responsible law enforcement agency in this country.

Republicans said no. They said no to everything. There is not a single provision in this bill to rein in these rogue agents at DHS.

The Senate rejected amendment after amendment that would have imposed even minimal constraints on these agencies. The House bypassed committee consideration altogether. Why? It is because Republicans know the American people do not support the chaos that this administration is inflicting.

They know Americans don't want masked and armed Federal agents rampaging through their neighborhoods, at their kids' schools and soccer games, and in shopping malls and workplaces.

They know Americans are alarmed when lawful residents, law-abiding community members, and even citizens, are roughed up or detained by

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

Mr. Speaker, I am so glad that my colleague from Arizona brought up the impact of immigration on our Social Security system. The fact that immigrants pay into our Social Security system but are not eligible to take benefits out has actually acted to extend the life of that system and is a very important component of keeping that system working, in addition to all the benefits that immigrants bring to our country.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, Renee Good, Alex Pretti, and Ruben Ray Martinez are all American citizens killed by Federal agents in our names, and our colleagues are unwilling to stand up and do anything to prevent that kind of senseless death in the future.

Instead, they try to get sympathy, which naturally should be provided to anyone who has suffered a family member's loss, but they can't lecture us that this is about human trafficking when DHS and the Department of Justice have pulled the resources from human and drug trafficking prevention and corporate crime prosecution. They have pulled those resources to direct them toward their massive deportation and detention effort. Eighty percent of the people they are detaining have no criminal records. It is all distract and divide.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Mrs. Fletcher).

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I am so glad to hear my colleague from Iowa express support for the safety of our law enforcement officers, and I would like to offer him and the whole caucus the opportunity to live up to that sentiment.

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to allow the House to take an up-or-down vote on an amendment to S. 2 authored by Ranking Member Raskin, which would prohibit anyone who was convicted of or pleaded guilty to assaulting a law enforcement officer on January 6, 2021, from receiving a settlement payment from the Department of Justice.

This taxpayer-funded slush fund to compensate insurrectionists and Trump allies is a disgrace. Even though the DOJ has paused this effort, the President on Sunday said he loves the idea and doesn't know what is going to happen to it. Since my Republican colleagues seem unwilling to kill this slush fund outright, maybe they will at least accept some restrictions on who can get legal settlement money from

the Federal Government and from taxpayers.

This next vote is very simple. Democrats want to vote to enshrine the following language into law: ``The Department of Justice may not use taxpayer funds to make settlement payments to individuals convicted of or who pled guilty to assaulting law enforcement officers at or around the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.''

These individuals beat and injured dozens of law enforcement officers with bats, bike racks, fire extinguishers, and flag poles on January 6. They should not receive taxpayer-funded payouts.

If there are just a few Republicans who agree and are willing to join us in defeating the previous question, we could fix this right now.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), the ranking member of the Committee on Rules, to discuss our proposal.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, underneath all the rhetoric we have heard today, this debate comes down to a very simple question about what kind of country we want to be and what we believe government should do for the people it serves.

As Americans struggle with rising costs, economic uncertainty, and the consequences of this reckless and expensive war in Iran, Republicans have chosen to spend nearly $210 billion in taxpayer dollars on ICE and CBP.

At every turn, this Republican majority says that there is no money for housing, for schools, for healthcare, for SNAP, for WIC, or for food for infants and children. Yet, somehow, there is always enough to fight forever wars, to give tax cuts to the wealthy, and to drive chaos and division into our communities.

The tragedy is that Congress could choose a different path. We could invest in our communities instead of detention camps. We could lower costs for working families instead of enriching lobbyists, consultants, and private prison companies. We could protect constitutional rights and strengthen public trust instead of rewarding agencies that have repeatedly abused both.

We could implement humane and sensible immigration policies that support, rather than suppress, our economy and economic development, and that don't scare away foreign visitors, whether from Niagara Falls in the Buffalo area or from Independence Hall in my district, where we are seeing the direct impact of bad immigration policy on visitors for our 250th anniversary and for the World Cup.

These are the choices before this House. This legislation is not a serious attempt to solve problems. It is an ideological project built around fear, division, and the concentration of executive power.

Think about what this bill will do. Republicans are about to spend exorbitant sums to put more masked agents on our streets, to spy on their political opponents, and to build a sprawling network of detention camps, private corporate detention camps, capable of imprisoning tens of thousands of who? Political enemies? It doesn't take a lot of imagination to see where this authoritarian project is going.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question and demonstrate their support for law enforcement by denying payments from the President's slush fund to the people who attacked law enforcement officers here at the Capitol on January 6, and I urge my colleagues to reject this dangerous waste of taxpayer money.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, on January 22, the Trump administration forced the National Park Service to remove panels at Independence Hall National Park, the cradle of our liberty, telling an important chapter in George Washington's Presidency.

Early in our Nation's history, Philadelphia was our Nation's Capital, and when Washington moved to the President's house near Independence Hall in 1790, he brought with him eight slaves from his Virginia plantation.

Mr. Speaker, 10 years earlier, Pennsylvania had begun to abolish slavery, allowing slaves brought to the Commonwealth by residents of other States to claim their freedom if they lived there for 6 months or more.

Therefore, from 1790 to 1797, President Washington rotated the slaves he brought to Philadelphia so that they could not establish the 6 months of residency which would have given them their freedom.

The panels that President Trump ordered to be removed were the result of decades of scholarship and community advocacy to acknowledge and examine the paradox between slavery and freedom at the founding of our Nation.

Telling the story of the slaves who lived in President Washington's home in Philadelphia is an expression of the American values of courage and honesty, acknowledging that our Founders and our Nation were not perfect at its inception, but that we must continually strive to form a more perfect union, to learn from the lessons of the past, lest we repeat them, and to acknowledge the humanity of those who were enslaved.

Telling the history of George Washington's use of slave labor reflects a mature choice to own up to past imperfections and mistakes rather than erasing history and the people who lived it.

The current White House has chosen a different path, seeking to erase our history and the people who lived it to fit a whitewashed and largely fictitious narrative.

The White House says that the panels were removed to ``ensure accuracy, honesty, and alignment with shared national values'' and claims that the panels were aimed at ``demeaning our brave Founding Fathers.''

This White House doesn't want Americans to learn about the horrors of slavery, the wrongful internment of the Japanese Americans, the denial of civil rights to a host of people, or other abuses of our past because they don't want us to identify the abuses in our present.

The panels at the President's house must go back. The city of Philadelphia has filed a lawsuit, and I am working with Congressmen Evans and Boyle, my colleagues in the Philadelphia delegation, to demand their return. However, that is not all that needs to happen.

Our history, all of our history, the triumphs and horrors, must be acknowledged.

Mr. Speaker, we all need to take notice and stand up to this administration's abuses, lawlessness, and attempts to erase facts and history because the ability to tell the truth is probably the most essential American value.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3497, the Medal of Sacrifice Act.

Every year, over 100 sworn law enforcement officers and over 100 firefighters die while on duty or from hazardous conditions related to their service.

While there are a number of different memorials for them, there is currently no memorial or medal that honors all public safety officers who die in the line of duty.

From 2015 to 2024, the leading causes of death for law enforcement officers were: COVID-19, job-related illness, car accidents, and shootings. These causes are responsible for 94 percent of line of duty law enforcement deaths.

I have had conversations with the families of fallen officers about their pain and struggles. They are why I worked to push forward a bipartisan bill, the Honoring Our Fallen Heroes Act, which expands disability benefits for the families of firefighters and other first responders who develop cancer because of their service.

We were able to bring 179 colleagues together on a bipartisan basis to pass this measure, which was signed into law last December, to honor sacrifice not just in remembrance but through tangible support.

In that same spirit, I think we can, and must, come together on a bipartisan basis to do more to keep officers and the communities they serve safe in the first place by: investing in public health, making our roads safer, and combating gun violence so we can keep weapons out of dangerous hands.

Finally, in addition to this recognition, I can't really imagine what is going through the minds of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle when they say they support this bill when Republican leadership in the House still hasn't complied with the 2022 law passed by this body to honor the men and women of the Capitol Police and beyond who protected and defended us and our democracy on January 6, 2021.

It is a stain upon this institution that the plaque dedicated to those officers, to their patriotism and sacrifice, has not yet been installed in the Capitol because this administration and its lapdogs in Congress think they can rewrite history to hide their betrayal and cowardice.

Is it too much for the leadership of this body to have the decency to acknowledge that the Capitol Police, the Metropolitan Police, and others saved the lives of Members of Congress on that day at great personal risk to themselves? Is it too much to say thank you?

All that said, I support this bill to award medals of sacrifice to other public safety officers who lose their lives in service to their country and their communities, and I thank them.

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

Mr. Speaker, I endorse the comments of the sponsor of the bill. I totally agree we should be honoring the sacrifice of our public safety officers and it is right that that honoring should start from the top. I could not agree more that the President should be recognizing those public safety officers who have given all for this country, and I would put at the top of that list right now Brian Sicknick and Howard Liebengood.

Mr. Speaker, I am ready to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 3497, the Medal of Sacrifice Act, which would award medals to honor those who lose their lives while serving as public safety officers. I encourage my colleagues to support it, too.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 988, a bill to amend the charter of the National Woman's Relief Corps to formally change its principal office from Springfield, Illinois, to Murphysboro, Illinois, where I understand it is already located. It also moves its place of incorporation from Washington, D.C., to Illinois.

The Woman's Relief Corps was formally organized in 1883 to preserve the memory of those who served in the Civil War and provide assistance to veterans, widows, and orphans. The National Woman's Relief Corps, as it is now known, was congressionally chartered on September 7, 1962, and continues to serve all of our veterans and their families.

Congress has incorporated both public and private organizations since 1791. While organizations are free to incorporate under D.C. laws or the laws of any other State, many continue to seek charters from Congress for the related prestige, which can help expand membership and increase funding. More than 90 organizations hold congressional charters, and many of them have principal offices and places of incorporation outside D.C.

Particularly as this administration has slashed programs that serve our veterans, gutted staff at the Veterans Crisis Line and Veterans Health Administration, and made drastic cuts to programs that veterans and their families rely upon, like SNAP and Medicaid, organizations that work to support our veterans, like the National Woman's Relief Corps, are more important than ever.

Ultimately, this bill is a straightforward administrative fix, and I support it.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, the Woman's Relief Corps began as a way for patriotic women to show their continued loyalty to the Union and support Civil War veterans.

More than 140 years later, the organization continues to serve veterans of all wars and endeavors to ``encourage the spread of universal liberty and equal rights of everyone.''

I support the National Woman's Relief Corps' work, and I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate one of Philadelphia's great figures, Stephen Moylan. As we approach America's 250th anniversary, I find it fitting that we reflect on the individuals whose service and sacrifice helped lay its foundation.

Born in Cork in 1737, Stephen Moylan emigrated to Philadelphia in 1767 after experiencing religious persecution. Like so many immigrants, Moylan came to America seeking freedom and opportunity and went on to play a critical role in the fight for independence.

During the War for Independence, he served in several key positions, including as the second Quartermaster General of the Continental Army, Commander of the Fourth Continental Light Dragoons, and a trusted aide to General George Washington. Moylan is also credited as the first to have used the phrase ``United States of America'' reflecting his belief in unity among the colonies.

Moylan was a man of many accomplishments. Notably, in 1771 he was elected the first president of the Friendly Sons of St. Patrick in Philadelphia, an organization established on the principles of welcoming and supporting Irish immigrants. Today the organization continues his work by promoting Irish culture, education, and providing aid.

On January 14, 2026, the Friendly Sons and Daughters of St. Patrick, in partnership with Irish America 250, co-hosted an event at Villanova University to honor Stephen Moylan. This kick-off commemorated the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence and highlighted the Irish contributions to American History and culture.

Ultimately, Stephen Moylan's life and legacy serve as a powerful reminder of the role Irish immigrants have played, and continue to play, shaping the American Republic. His service to Philadelphia, the Revolutionary cause, and to generations of Irish Americans reflects the long-lasting values of unity, service, and liberty shared among the Irish and American people.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule.

Let me begin by acknowledging the hard work of our colleagues on the Appropriations Committee who, despite deep divisions and really difficult political conditions, have assembled a bipartisan compromise to fund additional portions of the Federal Government for the current fiscal year.

The bill before us containing the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act and the National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, includes hard-fought Democratic priorities, despite our minority position in the House and Senate. These Democratic priorities will help working families and small businesses safeguard our elections and protect American values and interests abroad.

Democratic appropriators secured funding for vital government programs that the White House sought to cut, including the CDFI fund, which promotes economic development in low-income communities; the Small Business Administration, which provides invaluable financing that allows people to start or grow their businesses; and the Election Assistance Commission, which supports State and Federal election integrity across the country. The package also provides a long overdue increase in funding for the Federal Defender Services, which gives access to justice to those who cannot afford it.

Importantly, the bill restores funding, with meaningful safeguards, for humanitarian and democracy building programs at the Department of State, programs that were illegally shut down earlier this year by the Trump administration.

This bill ensures that the U.S. will continue to provide economic and humanitarian assistance. Specifically, it will support women and women's health in developing countries and will combat HIV and AIDS worldwide.

These are victories, and they matter. They matter for small business owners struggling to secure a loan. They matter for low-income neighborhoods that are essentially red-lined by big banks and that rely upon Community Development Financial Institutions. These victories matter for women and girls around the globe seeking safety, education, and healthcare.

The restoration of State Department funding matters for all of us who still believe in the promise of American leadership in advancing a safe and prosperous global community.

Ultimately, we cannot afford to let funding lapse for those agencies, and given that we are 4 months into the current fiscal year, I commend our appropriators for crafting these bipartisan bills to address fiscal year 2026 so that we can immediately start working on appropriations for next year, fiscal year 2027.

However, Mr. Speaker, commendable as this package is and as much as I respect the work of our colleagues on the Appropriations Committee, I also believe this package reveals the limits of what we can achieve to meet the needs of the American people under Republican control.

Let's be clear: This bill isn't some compromise where both sides get a little of what they want. It is the most Democrats could get from a Republican Party that continues to knuckle under to the whims of the Trump administration and turn a blind eye to its worst abuses. That is why our Republican colleagues have rejected multiple provisions to rein in the unconstitutional power grabs by this President and his administration.

Republicans control the Senate, the House, and the White House. Under unified Republican control, we have seen the Federal Government used not to help the American people but to punish the President's enemies and to enrich and protect the rich and well-connected at the expense of the American people.

We have seen it when the Republican trifecta passed a partisan bill that gave huge tax cuts to big business and billionaires but refused to extend the ACA tax credits that helped millions of Americans afford their health coverage.

In their main legislative accomplishment so far, Trump and congressional Republicans blew a massive hole in the deficit with their tax cuts for the rich and then tried to pay for it with cuts to Medicaid, SNAP, and public health programs that Americans rely upon.

We are seeing it play out after a masked Federal agent shot and killed Renee Good, an American citizen in Minnesota. In the wake of that killing, we learned that Department of Justice leadership blocked the decades-long practice of initiating an investigation of an officer- involved shooting by the Office of Civil Rights. Having blocked that investigation, they instead opened a politically motivated criminal investigation of Ms. Good's widow as it tries to brand protected speech by Americans as domestic terrorism.

The failure to investigate the lawfulness of the officer's use of force and the weaponization of the investigation to attack the widow are so beyond the pale that it has sparked a mass resignation by career prosecutors at the Department of Justice.

It goes on. Last weekend, the Trump White House launched a criminal investigation against Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, not because he broke the law, but apparently because he refused to surrender the independence of the Fed and submit to the President's demand that he lower interest rates. This is an unprecedented attack on the independence of the Federal Reserve, an institution that is critical to the stability of our economy because it is above partisan politics. Yet, under Republican rule, the independence of the Fed and other nonpartisan agencies is being destroyed before our eyes because this President cannot tolerate dissent, and his party will not restrain him.

Just last week, the administration blocked $10 billion in social services funding to States with Democratic leadership. Yesterday, President Trump went even further, announcing his intent to withhold Federal funds from any State that does not embrace his toxic immigration priorities. This is extortion, plain and simple, directed against the American people he was elected to serve, and the House Republican majority is letting him get away with it.

Of course, we cannot forget the continued coverup of the Epstein files. The Department of Justice was mandated by law to release the Epstein files last month, last year now, but the vast majority of the files are still being kept secret, leading us to ask again: Whom is Trump trying to protect, and why is it the Republicans refuse to hold him responsible for this blatant coverup? What possible justification could there be for this secrecy, except to protect the wealthy and powerful men implicated in those documents.

A suggestion of the answers have come from an unlikely source. According to former Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, the President yelled at her in a phone call that he didn't want to release the Epstein files because ``my friends will get hurt.''

The list goes on and on, and the Republican agenda is clear. They abuse the powers of the Federal Government to protect the elite and punish the vulnerable.

While I will support the appropriations minibus this week, I call on my Republican colleagues in the House and the Senate to take seriously their obligations to this institution under Article I of the Constitution. We cannot sit by and watch as the executive branch grabs more and more power at the expense of Congress and at the expense of the Constitution.

Congress' power of the purse is not just a budgetary tool. It is one of the last real checks we have on a President who believes that he is above the law and only constrained by his own morality.

I know my Democratic colleagues fought for everything they could in this bill under deeply constrained circumstances, so the failures in this bill are a reflection of the Republican majority, which continues to look the other way as the President dismantles our Federal institutions and subverts our democracy.

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

Mr. Speaker, just to be clear, I didn't say these were good bills. I said they were the best bills we could get under the circumstances, and certainly we would craft very different bills.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Khanna).

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

Mr. Speaker, nobody is questioning that the Federal Government has the duty and authority to arrest and detain and deport these so-called worst of the worst, rapists, drug dealers, people who have been convicted, but that is not what is happening across the country. That is not what ICE is doing.

Eighty percent of the people that they have picked up and that they are detaining have no criminal record. What we are seeing in Minnesota, this door-to-door, stopping people in parking lots, and asking if they are citizens, that is not targeted enforcement. That is putting masked and armed agents on the streets and causing chaos, as we have repeatedly seen.

The Rules chairwoman mentioned one of the people who has been picked up is absolutely someone who probably deserves to be picked up. However, they have had over 2,000 ICE agents in Minneapolis for about 6 weeks, and they have arrested about 20 people who fit that profile.

In addition, of course, they have killed Renee Good. They have arrested American citizens. They have tackled kids outside their high school. They have tackled teenagers working at Target. They have terrorized an entire community. That does appear to be part of the point here is to create propaganda and videos to scare Americans to project this military power in our streets, which, for any student of American history, that is why we left the U.K.

I think that the objection here is to the lawfulness of what has been happening in Minnesota, in Chicago, in L.A., across the country, and the need to really change how things are being done there.

If we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to make in order Mr. Hoyer's amendment to the FSGG appropriations bill, which restricts obligating any remaining unobligated balances for the new FBI consolidated headquarters facility until GSA, in consultation with the FBI, submits the contracted and completed architectural and engineering plan for review.

Mr. Speaker, our colleague, Mr. Hoyer, has served with honor for over four decades and has ushered countless pieces of bipartisan legislation through this House.

Now, in this case, all he is asking for is a vote, that the Members of this body vote on an amendment to make sure that before an extremely consequential and expensive decision is made with respect to the location of the FBI headquarters, we receive the architectural and engineering plan that the General Services Administration is supposed to complete. That seems like the least we could do.

Regardless of one's position on Mr. Hoyer's amendment, it deserves a vote on the House floor.

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

Mr. Speaker, to discuss our proposal, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the sponsor of the amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland.

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

Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the Rules Committee, Republicans rejected over 70 amendments submitted by Members of both parties. This included a handful of amendments that I have submitted, which if adopted, I obviously think would have improved the bill.

I will highlight those amendments in light of the reporting about the chaos at the Department of Justice after its leadership quashed a transparent investigation into the fatal shooting of Renee Good by an ICE agent and instead insisted on opening a criminal investigation into her widow. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and other Trump officials and conservative commentators have tried to brand Renee Good as a domestic terrorist in gross contradiction to known facts, but that is not the key issue here.

Putting aside the refusal to investigate the lawfulness of the agent's use of deadly force under those circumstances, and the heinous implication that Renee Good somehow deserved to die because she objected to the presence of armed and masked Federal agents in her neighborhood and that she was disrespectful, the President's characterization, this investigation, and these comments from Secretary Noem, are the direct result of an underreported and underappreciated effort by the Trump administration to criminalize constitutionally protected speech.

Earlier this year, President Trump issued a sweeping memo, directing Federal agencies to target Americans with criminal and civil investigations on the explicit basis of constitutionally protected speech.

The memo literally defines specific categories of political opinions and beliefs that law enforcement must now

treat as instances of domestic terrorism.

Following this directive, the Department of Justice then changed its policies to direct Federal law enforcement agents to target Americans with criminal investigations for expressing these sanctioned political views or for participating in protests against the Trump administration.

This is the kind of political oppression you would expect to see from authoritarian states like Russia or China, but no, it is here. It is happening at home.

Our Republican colleagues, who are often so quick to complain about censorship or the weaponization of the Federal Government, have remained silent while President Trump has turned the Department of Justice into a tool of political suppression.

Last night, I proposed an amendment to prohibit the use of any Federal taxpayer dollars to investigate or prosecute Americans on the basis of their lawful and constitutionally protected speech.

Mr. Speaker, every single Republican on the Rules Committee voted against my amendment, blocking it from coming to the House floor so our entire body could vote on it.

The First Amendment protects everyone's speech. There are no carve- outs for those we disagree with. Apparently, as we saw in last night's vote, House Republicans do not agree with that fundamental American value.

While Rules Republicans voted down my amendment to protect Americans' right to free speech, they did make in order a questionable amendment from our Rules colleague, Representative Roy, that would defund the D.C. Federal courts and specifically withdraw the salaries for the staff of two Federal judges.

These two judges have been targeted by President Trump and congressional Republicans because they have done their job. They have not bent to the President's will. They have interpreted the law as written. Therefore, House Republicans are taking the extreme position of zeroing out the salaries of their staff. It is a cruel and un- American attack on the judiciary that completely subverts our constitutional order.

Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, underneath this debate about the appropriations minibus is the difficult reality that House Republicans have abdicated their responsibilities to this Chamber, to the Congress, and to the Constitution. We are not just debating a budget bill. We are debating whether Congress will continue to function not just as a coequal branch of government but as the Article I source of the laws that run our country.

Under Republican leadership, we have seen Congress turned into a rubber stamp. Republicans have surrendered to the whims of a President who sees laws as optional and power as personal.

These two appropriations bills, while necessary for the continued operation of essential government functions, are the limit of how far the Republican Party is willing to go in defying the President.

Unfortunately, Republicans are more interested in protecting power than in responsibly governing for the benefit of the American people. Our job isn't to protect the President. Our job is to fund the government responsibly and to serve as a check on executive overreach.

As masked agents roam our streets, terrorizing our communities, as Trump entertains starting another forever war, and as the Epstein files remain covered up, now is the time for Congress to stand up for the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question and rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to today's rule.

While Americans are going into the holiday season struggling with rising prices and the high cost of living, with just days left before health insurance premiums are set to skyrocket for 22 million Americans, while the President is leading the country to war with Venezuela, and yet another mass shooting has claimed the lives of young Americans, Republicans are using the final legislative days of 2025 to prioritize six unserious, make-work bills.

They are using precious floor time and resources to put forward messaging bills with no chance of passing, bills that have nothing to do with the reality that most Americans are living

and the problems that they want Congress to solve.

But that is what this country has come to expect from House Republicans who have used their control of the House as a vehicle for PR stunts and to pick the pockets of working people in order to line the pockets of the wealthy and the well connected.

Under Republican control of the House, the Senate, and the White House, 2025 has been a year of chaos, controversy, and corruption in which every day brings a new self-inflicted crisis.

While most of this chaos has originated from the White House, congressional Republicans are no less responsible, for they have aided and abetted this administration's agenda at every turn. How humiliating that in recent weeks, staff at the White House have openly mocked the subservience of House Republicans.

From day one of this term, Republicans in Washington have made clear they are here to serve their donors, to serve billionaires and big business, and not the American public. They spent the first half of the year ramming through their partisan big, ugly bill which gave permanent, budget-busting tax cuts to the rich while canceling Medicaid and SNAP for millions of Americans.

They continually prioritize big business and culture wars in legislation like the bills before us in today's rule, a series of bills that put their thumb on the scale for the oil and gas industry at the expense of Americans' health and the stewardship of the environment. Republicans are deliberately choosing to raise Americans' healthcare costs because they refuse to extend the ACA tax credits.

Americans everywhere are pleading with Congress to lower the cost of living as families struggle to afford housing, healthcare, childcare, and even groceries. Trump campaigned on a promise that he would lower prices on day one, but once in office, he has put tariffs on almost every good coming into the U.S., directly raising the prices for nearly everything we buy.

Whether it is food at the grocery store, home appliances, a new car, Trump's trade wars and tariffs have made everything more expensive. These trade wars have undermined key portions of our economy. The tariffs have already cost us nearly 50,000 manufacturing jobs, and our tourism industry is suffering greatly.

Making matters worse, Congress could end the tariffs today. The House could vote today on any number of Senate-passed resolutions that would end the Trump tariffs, but Speaker Johnson has blocked every one of those bills. House Republicans have now voted on four separate occasions to block legislation that would end the Trump tariffs. They have repeatedly doubled down on that decision to keep your prices high.

But it is not just the tariffs. Just last week, House Republicans blocked bipartisan legislation that could have become law, that would have built new homes all over America, lowered rents, and made mortgages more affordable.

With healthcare, Americans are seeing the biggest increase in health insurance costs in 15 years, yet the Republican majority is actively opposing extension of the ACA tax credits that lower premiums for 22 million Americans.

While Republicans fail to act on affordability, they are also conspicuously silent on the near daily corruption emanating from this White House. Trump has pardoned hundreds of criminals convicted of serious offenses, including drug traffickers, money launderers, and fraudsters, depriving Americans of justice and restitution and enabling at least some of those pardoned to commit further crimes.

In many of these pardons, they have come at a price. Trump pardoned Juan Orlando Hernandez, who is convicted of trafficking 400 tons of cocaine into the United States. Ostensibly, this pardon will influence a Presidential election in Honduras.

Trump pardoned the CEO of Binance after he made a $2 billion investment in the President's company, World Liberty Financial. Nearly a dozen well-connected individuals, many of them donors to the President's campaign or investors in his companies, have also received pardons.

Trump has also shown a curious leniency to major criminals. He pardoned Ross Ulbricht, who ran one of the biggest drug-trafficking and money-laundering operations on the deep web.

The President also dropped criminal charges against multiple MS-13 gang leaders in order to help cover up a corruption scandal for his ally, Salvadoran President Bukele.

He has directed Federal prosecutors and law enforcement officers to drop investigations of serious crimes, including drug and human trafficking, in order to focus on immigration enforcement, letting countless criminals off the hook.

Of course, we can't forget the yearslong coverup of the Epstein files. On the campaign trail, Trump and his allies swore they would release the Epstein files, but once in office, they have blocked the release for 11 months. Ultimately, it has taken an act of Congress to force the President to release those files. The deadline to release the Epstein files is this Friday, but we still haven't seen a single document from the White House or the Department of Justice. Again, all of this begs the question: What exactly is this White House trying to hide?

All this time, while Trump is pardoning drug traffickers and dropping charges against gang members and violent insurrectionists who assaulted cops, congressional Republicans have been silent. If you ask Speaker Johnson about it, as the press has, he will tell you he has no idea what you are talking about.

Republicans are silent as Trump and his White House cause crisis after crisis. Trump and Hegseth are leading us into another forever war in Venezuela. The President has called for the execution of Democratic Members of Congress. The administration has withheld FEMA funding for disaster victims but gave a $40 billion bailout to Argentinean hedge funds.

Administration officials are wasting taxpayer dollars to fly around the country for personal business and photo ops. ICE and Border Patrol have detained more than 170 American citizens, including nearly 20 children, and that total is growing by the day.

The national debt is over $2 trillion higher in just this year alone. It is all so insulting to you, to me, to every American, to see this flagrant corruption and shameful mismanagement on a daily basis. House Republicans seem to have priorities so completely at odds with the needs of the American people that they have ignored all year the kitchen-table issues that American families struggle with every single day.

Instead, they have spent their time in Washington, when they have actually come to Washington, working on industry handouts, gold-plated ballrooms, and stirring up insane culture wars.

You deserve better. America deserves better. We deserve a functioning Congress that actually works for the American people, not just the wealthy and well connected.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I think the point we are trying to make is that this shouldn't be about economic policy. The Republican leadership's refusal to address the Trump tariffs and the damage they have inflicted upon our economy and upon American families' pocketbooks should be the topic before the House instead of these makeweight bills that are never going to become law.

Mr. Speaker, at the start of 2025, the Republicans knew there were two big tax provisions due to expire at the end of this year, now, within the next 10 days. One of them was the 2017 Trump tax cuts which overwhelmingly went to the wealthiest Americans, and the second was the ACA tax credits that helped millions of Americans afford health insurance. This has been known to everybody all year.

Now, our Republican colleagues made the choice in their big, ugly bill, which they spent so much time and energy on this summer, to extend the Trump tax cuts for the wealthy, and they have also made the intentional choice to let the ACA tax credits expire. In doing so, they are causing the premiums for 22 million Americans to skyrocket. It is likely that millions of Americans will lose their health coverage this year due to our Republican colleagues' failure, refusal, in fact, to address that issue.

Mr. Speaker, when we hear our Republican colleagues talk about their healthcare bill that they are trying to bring to the floor this week, know that their legislation will not renew the ACA tax credits. It will not lower premiums, and it will not lower costs.

Mr. Speaker, 80 percent of the bill is simply new paperwork requirements for pharmacy benefit managers, and the parts of the bill that do involve healthcare costs are horrible. They basically want to sell Americans junk insurance policies, and people know about these. These are the policies that have low sticker costs but terrible coverage when you need it, Mr. Speaker.

We really just have been imploring our colleagues to come to the table to try to do what the American people need them to do so that Americans have health coverage when they need it, and we have not seen them be willing to do that.

That is why we have a discharge petition sitting there at the desk. We just need four Republicans to join all of the Democrats in the House to force a vote to extend the ACA tax credits, and we would invite them to do so.

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to provide for consideration of H.R. 6074, which would extend the Affordable Care Act enhanced premium tax credits for 3 years, through 2028.

Mr. Speaker, for months, Democrats have sounded the alarm about the expiring enhanced premiums, urging the Republican majority to join us in extending these premiums before the end of the year so that all of our constituents can get the healthcare coverage they deserve.

Millions of Americans have already received notices from their health plan that their premiums are going to skyrocket starting January 1, 2026, just a few days from now, in some cases by over $1,000 a month. The median income in my district is about $80,000 for a family of four. They can't afford an additional $12,000 a year for health insurance.

However, there are only 3 legislative days remaining to fix this problem before the health insurance costs of over 20 million Americans rise, but this Republican majority has ignored and blocked any effort to extend those credits. The majority even told their own moderates they won't get a vote on the floor to extend them.

I am happy to give them that vote right now. We can defeat the previous question, and we can consider a bill that would extend the ACA enhanced premium tax credits for 3 years.

There is no more time to waste. The deadlines are all passed. We have to act now for the American people.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Min) to discuss our proposal.

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

Mr. Speaker, I completely agree with my colleague from New York that Congress needs to get serious about affordability both of everyday products and services but also health insurance, and that is why we have offered the amendments that we have and why we have been urging our colleagues across the aisle for months to address this issue.

However, as we focus on the rule today, which does not address affordability, there are a number of issues dealing with electricity prices. American households right now are paying record-high electricity prices, prices that have been rising, and most analysts are predicting will continue to rise more in 2026.

There is only one real way to lower electricity prices. That is to build more energy in the United States. Democrats did this, made serious efforts toward this when we passed the Inflation Reduction Act. We provided a forward-looking mix of financial incentives to build more power from all sources but especially from wind and solar. Those measures have been embraced by the American people, and they have been embraced by our energy industries.

However, while our Republican colleagues say they want to lower electricity bills, they have actively torpedoed these efforts to build more domestic energy.

President Trump and congressional Republicans have rescinded nearly all the investment incentives from the IRA. As a result, we are seeing domestic power generation decreasing, household electricity costs rising, and thousands of good-paying jobs being effectively canceled.

At the same time, the big, beautiful bill gave huge handouts to the oil and gas industry. These are handouts that won't increase energy production but will simply pad the profits of Chevron and Exxon. This is the Republican energy agenda: higher prices for you, the consumer, and higher profits for the oil and gas industry.

It is an incentive that we see continued in some of the bills under consideration in this rule today, which will require that coal- generating electricity plants stay online even when they have outlived their usefulness and profitability. Meaning, once again, consumer costs go up, but the coal industry gets the benefit.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, we have heard some well-intentioned debate from our Republican colleague today, but the fact remains that this week is being wasted on messaging bills that will not become law.

All year, Republicans have failed to act on affordability. They failed to bring down housing costs, to control inflation at the grocery store, or to lower electricity bills. They were elected to office to tackle these problems, but for an entire year, they have sat on their hands, opting for press conferences and tweets instead of legislation and dealmaking.

Earlier this year, Republicans ended healthcare coverage for 15 million Americans with their big, ugly bill. All this year, Republicans have blocked each and every effort to renew the ACA tax credits. Now, health insurance costs are at a 15-year high, and premiums are set to skyrocket for 22 million people.

In my district and in most of America, electricity prices are through the roof. Meanwhile, the Trump administration has bent over backward for AI companies, cut billions of dollars in energy investments, and canceled major clean energy projects.

In Congress, Republicans' energy agenda continues to boost oil and gas profits but does nothing to actually lower bills.

This past weekend, America witnessed yet another mass shooting that took the lives of two and critically injured nine more. This year has seen 391 mass shootings. We have lost nearly 14,000 people to senseless gun violence. No matter how many times we see the same tragic story play out on the news, our Republican colleagues keep their heads in the sand and refuse to bring forward or endorse commonsense gun safety legislation, which the majority of Americans and law enforcement leaders support.

This term, Republicans have turned Congress into a rubberstamp for executive action. It is a major abdication of our constitutional responsibilities, and it has done irreparable damage to this institution. It is my sincere hope that 2026 brings new opportunities for bipartisan action on these pressing issues.

The American people deserve better than a President who governs by tweet and a Speaker who has neutered Congress' role in our constitutional order.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question and rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the rule. The fiscal year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act presented to us without amendment is, against all odds, a strong bipartisan compromise between Republicans and Democrats on the Armed Services Committee.

I have to admit that I was pleasantly surprised to see this year's NDAA come to the floor untouched by some of the rightwing extremist policy riders that in recent years have been attached to important bills like the NDAA.

However, this morning in the Rules Committee, Republicans green- lighted dozens of amendments containing controversial poison pills that may very well make their way into the bill. I hope that my Republican colleagues are able to demonstrate some restraint this week and vote down these bad policies. We cannot afford to politicize our national defense.

A good NDAA, like a good budget, is one that is probably perfect for no one. It is the result of compromise and negotiation. In the case of the NDAA, it is oriented around the shared goal of making sure that our Armed Forces continue to be the best in the world.

However, while the FY26 NDAA is strong in many ways, it also falls short in some crucial areas. Above all, it falls short in its lack of meaningful policy to rein in the Trump administration's reckless and illegal actions.

Out of fealty to their dear leader, Republicans have refused at every turn to perform meaningful oversight of this administration, to push back on Trump's worst impulses, and to exert Congress' Article I powers against the executive's repeated overreach. In the context of the NDAA, there hasn't been a single oversight hearing scheduled in the House or Senate to address the ongoing misuse of our military forces.

Of all Trump's abuses, his worst have been in the domain of national defense. Empowered by a partisan Supreme Court and aided by complicit national security staff, Trump has repeatedly used the U.S. military to commit reckless and even illegal acts that imperil our security, weaken our status in the world, hurt our relationship with our closest allies, and endanger our own citizens.

The President claims to have broad, undefined, and unchecked executive power. He has installed corrupt and incompetent appointees who jeopardize our national security and economic stability. He has imposed Federal troops and the National Guard on civilians across America, despite fierce opposition from local residents and political leaders. He has sent armed and masked Federal law enforcement agents to terrorize immigrant communities. Those agents have harassed and detained U.S. citizens exercising their First Amendment rights.

The President has initiated multiple politically targeted criminal investigations against his opponents and unilaterally defunded programs that are important to our national defense and our security.

While Republicans gleefully cheer on military deployments in American cities, I bet they would lose their goddamn minds if those troops were sent to their home States which have substantially higher crime rates.

If the real rationale for these deployments is to address high crime rates, States like Arkansas, Missouri, and Louisiana would be at the top of the list. We all know this.

We all know this isn't really why the National Guard has been deployed to D.C. or L.A. or Chicago. As with so many acts by this White House, it is just pretext. It is pretext for an agenda based on fear, intimidation, performative violence, and retribution.

Trump's agenda is about power and self-dealing, not problem-solving. That is all it is. There are no solutions. There are no plans. Time and time again, we have seen this White House reject and defund proven solutions in favor of no-tolerance policies and flashy shows of force.

In the process, this administration has wasted millions in taxpayer dollars with stunts like sending Dr. Phil on an ICE raid with a camera crew.

They sent hundreds of people, many of whom had no criminal record, to a violent, inhumane prison in El Salvador and produced a video of their abuse and humiliation.

They sent uniformed military troops to the streets of American cities, damaging the relationship between our citizens and our Armed Forces.

This past week may have seen the most egregious and violent misuse of military force yet that we know of. Last week, President Trump ordered the extrajudicial execution by the U.S. military of 11 men on a speedboat in international waters, thousands of miles away from the U.S. He then posted a snuff video of that act on social

media. We still have not seen credible evidence or legal justification for that strike.

That killing represents a sinister choice. The Navy and Coast Guard interdict drug smugglers on the high seas all the time. If we knew these men were smugglers and we knew where they were, an intentional decision was made not to stop the ship and, instead, to kill the people on it.

There is no congressional authorization for a President to kill drug dealers at home or abroad. This killing on the high seas is not authorized by international law.

The President cannot declare anyone he wants to be a criminal or an enemy combatant and then summarily kill them. This is the logic used by dictators and despots to disappear and kill dissenters and political opponents. A President who acts as judge, jury, and executioner is flat out un-American. If we allow such conduct, then we are no better than the terrorists and criminals we claim to fight.

Additionally, earlier this year the President approved air strikes against Iran, doing so without congressional authorization and in contravention of the Constitution.

No matter what one thinks about the merits of that attack, this was a flagrantly unconstitutional act.

Taken together with last week's assassinations on the high seas, we now have a President who claims to be able to kill whoever he wants, whenever he wants, and for whatever reason he wants, all without accountability under the law to Congress and to the American people.

Moreover, as we speak of the separation of powers enshrined in our Constitution, over the weekend, the President unilaterally decided to rename the Department of Defense as the Department of War in what can only be described as a PR stunt. It is a decision he doesn't have the authority to make.

Whether or not this gimmick will distract from the Epstein files and this administration's economic failures, it will certainly cost taxpayers a fortune, with estimates ranging over $1 billion. Experts predict that our enemies will use the move to portray the United States not as a guarantor of peace but as a threat to international stability.

The NDAA is one of Congress' best opportunities to rein in these kinds of abuses of military power, specifically abuses by this President in his role as Commander in Chief. Unfortunately, this bill misses that mark. It lets the President get away with starting illegal wars and committing illegal killings.

Further, Pete Hegseth still has not faced any consequences for leaking confidential information to journalists and wasting taxpayer dollars on makeup mirrors. Tulsi Gabbard has not faced consequences for manipulating intelligence reports that contradicted the President's claims about Venezuelan gangs. No one has been held accountable for firing intelligence officials who claimed falsely that his strikes on Iran had obliterated its nuclear capabilities.

I know that my Democratic colleagues on the Armed Services Committee fought hard for oversight in the NDAA. Unfortunately, the price of a bipartisan bill to support our troops was that Republicans would continue to enable this administration and many of its worst actions.

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, House Republicans' efforts to turn a blind eye to the President's apparent misconduct are not limited only to matters of national security. For months, the President and most House Republicans have blocked the release of the Epstein files.

During the 2024 campaign, the President and his inner circle, particularly Pam Bondi, Kash Patel, and Dan Bongino, all repeatedly promised that they would release the Epstein files, but once they came into office and found the President to be frequently mentioned in those files, they changed their tune.

In the past few months, the President has gone to extraordinary lengths to prevent the release of the Epstein files. His DOJ approved the highly unusual transfer of Epstein's convicted co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell, to a cushy minimum-security prison, apparently in exchange for her agreement to distance the President from Epstein's sex trafficking activities. The President has even threatened members of his own party with retribution if they vote to release those files.

These threats appear to be working because House Republicans continue to provide cover for the administration, repeatedly voting down amendments in the Rules Committee that would have forced the release of the Epstein files.

In fact, just this morning, Rules Committee Republicans once again blocked the release of those files, and we have not seen our Republican colleagues stepping up to sign the discharge petition that could lay this issue to rest once and for all.

The longer this goes on, the more it seems appropriate to ask: What are they trying to hide, and whom are they trying to protect? What is the ``wonderful secret'' that Trump and Epstein share?

Mr. Speaker, I bring all this up because the other bill in this resolution, H.R. 3486, the Stop Illegal Entry Act, is another distraction to divert attention from this White House's ongoing issues and the Epstein files. It is a messaging bill that is light on substance, bad on policy, and just something shiny for House Republicans to talk about other than the Epstein files.

The bill purports to be tough on undocumented immigrants, but it doesn't do a single thing to improve our broken immigration system. What it will do is siphon even more taxpayer dollars into the hands of for-profit prison companies. Instead of deporting undocumented immigrants, this bill would require convicted immigrants to serve lengthy prison sentences here in the United States.

Guess who would benefit from that, Mr. Speaker? GEO and other private prison companies that have invested millions in the President's political campaigns.

It is already a crime to enter the country illegally. Despite the propaganda from the other side, prosecutions against unlawful entry are regularly the most prosecuted cases in the United States under Presidents of both parties. Those found in violation of these statutes are already subject to prison sentences and mandatory removal. However, Republicans are proposing to jail undocumented immigrants for up to 10 or 20 years, wasting billions of taxpayer dollars and limited Federal prison space.

American taxpayers are certainly justified in asking our Republican colleagues: Why should we imprison someone who is subject to deportation here in the United States and at that cost to the American taxpayer?

Every day, we are seeing a new atrocity committed by ICE and the Department of Homeland Security. All over America, masked ICE agents, often in unmarked cars, are taking parents from their children, arresting the elderly, arresting law-abiding immigrants, and even detaining citizens.

Trump says he is going after the worst of the worst, but over 70 percent of the immigrants his government has rounded up have no criminal record. In fact, the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security are reallocating resources away from investigating major crimes so they can terrorize undocumented immigrants who are just trying to work a job and provide for themselves and their families, including some who were legally present here and had legal status until this administration suddenly reversed it.

For all its bluster, this administration is not doing anything to combat gangs or serious criminals. They are not arresting the worst of the worst or gangs like MS-13 or Tren de Aragua. It is not doing anything about the smugglers and human traffickers at the border.

Instead, ICE agents are scrambling to meet Stephen Miller's quotas by arresting people at work or when they attend court hearings on their legal cases for asylum or citizenship, as they are required to do, and the hell with the impact on the local community, or, in the case of the disastrous raid on the Georgia battery plant last week, the hell with our allies and foreign investment in our country.

In the latest example of how this administration's disastrous immigration agenda is at odds with reality, last week, ICE was directed to make a flashy, high-profile raid at a Hyundai plant in Georgia, arresting over 400

South Korean nationals whom we had explicitly invited to invest in manufacturing here and bring jobs to the United States. This stunt has been a complete disaster. It caused a major diplomatic rift with one of our closest allies and biggest economic partners, and it has given the whole world reason to believe that it is a mistake to move manufacturing to the U.S.

In truth, the Stop Illegal Entry Act is just another shiny object that is supposed to divert attention from the Epstein files and the failures of this administration. Republicans don't actually care about reforming the immigration system. They have repeatedly rejected all attempts to do so. They just want to campaign on telling horror stories about immigrants, regardless of the truth.

All we see from this House majority is distraction after distraction, all to divert attention from the President's failure to deliver on promises to the American people.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. Ansari).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Conaway).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Delaware (Ms. McBride).

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

If we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to provide for consideration of H.R. 4849, the Protecting Health Care and Lowering Costs Act of 2025, introduced by Congressman Gray.

Mr. Speaker, in July, Republicans jammed through their big, ugly bill. This 870-page monstrosity includes the largest cuts to healthcare in American history. It takes healthcare coverage away from more than 15 million Americans, American citizens, including 10 million who would lose their care due to the $1 trillion in cuts to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act and another $5 million because Republicans failed to extend the tax credits that help make ACA plans more affordable.

These cuts will throw millions of Americans off coverage entirely, bury families in medical debt, and result in hospitals and nursing homes closing, especially in rural America.

In my district, 21,000 people are likely to lose their healthcare. In the gentleman from Georgia's district, 36,000 people are estimated to lose their healthcare.

Mr. Gray's bill would reverse those disastrous cuts, as well as permanently extend the tax credits that help make ACA plans more affordable for millions of Americans.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. McDonald Rivet) to discuss our proposal further.

Ms. McDONALD RIVET. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the hardworking men and women not just in Michigan but across the country.

Working families in Michigan and across the country are really struggling. There are 200,000 people in my district alone who rely on Medicaid.

While the Republican tax scheme gives huge giveaways to billionaires and breaks to the wealthy, it neglects the ACA tax credits working families in my district depend on to cover their insurance premiums. It cuts Medicaid by $1.1 trillion, kicking tens of thousands of my constituents off their healthcare, and it raises costs for everybody.

Our Protecting Health Care and Lowering Costs Act reverses all of that, and we should pass it today. We aren't just making a point. We are fighting for the retired teacher from Mount Morris who needs Medicaid because her insurance isn't cutting it. We are standing up for the pregnant woman whose rural hospital is at risk of being shut down because of the Republican tax giveaway.

We are raising our voices for the family from Bay City who will have to sit down at the kitchen table to figure out if they should pay for rent or their child's visit to the doctor.

We know that as a result of the billionaire tax giveaway we are going to see premiums rise for working people across our country. The ACA tax credits need to be reestablished now.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, if we are going to discuss what should be disclosed with these Epstein files, all the more reason to bring this bill forward. We can amend it in Rules and carry on from there, but that is not what we are seeing from our colleagues across the aisle. They are trying to bury it, and I assume they will continue to do so.

This House and this Congress cannot afford to continue allowing an unrestrained and reckless President to trample on the Constitution and Congress' powers and responsibilities. Every day brings a new crisis with this White House, and they are all of its own making.

Since Trump announced his tariffs, the U.S. has lost 42,000 manufacturing jobs, tourism is tanking, and unemployment is on the rise. Costs for everything from electricity to groceries to health insurance are up, not down.

In fact, we are facing the biggest increase in health insurance costs in 15 years, even as the cuts in this big, bad bill threaten to bring more hospital closures.

Trump's attacks on the Federal Reserve could cause another financial crisis. Masked agents are roaming our streets, and reports of human rights abuses at ICE detention facilities are growing. Far from ending the wars in Gaza and Ukraine, Trump has amassed naval forces off the coast of Venezuela and could provoke another unauthorized war.

This administration is out of control and Congress must act. Republicans can't keep their heads in the sand. They have already failed to protect core Article I spending authorities, the power to make appropriations and the power to declare war. Continued inaction will only allow more power grabs by this White House to occur.

At every turn, Republicans have fought Democratic efforts to place oversight and enforcement riders in legislation that we are passing. With this NDAA, our Republican colleagues are, again, blocking policies to restrain this President and prevent him from using the Armed Forces as political weapons. This cannot be allowed to continue. We must reject this rule and the Republicans' failed agenda.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.