Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chair for the opportunity to say a few words.

Mr. Speaker, this administration and my colleagues on the left claim that they want to give pregnant women every option. If that were true, then they would have no problem with this bill.

The fact is the left is only interested in funding avenues that encourage women to have abortions. This line of thinking belittles the abilities of women to make informed decisions across the country.

Unfortunately for women everywhere, the left is shouting lies and inaccuracies at the top of their lungs, calling pregnancy centers a scam. These people clearly have not been to a pregnancy center. I have been to many.

The fact is pregnancy centers empower women. Take, for example, Kristen in Louisiana. She thought her pregnancy was the end of the world. She contacted her local pregnancy center, sharing her concerns about single parenting, including physical, emotional, and financial concerns. She was so relieved to work with a team that was ``confidential and nonjudgmental every step of the way.'' They informed her of all the resources available to her, including free Lamaze and parenting classes and even scholarships.

She would never have known about all of these resources available to her had she not gone to a pregnancy center

that was committed to empowering her with the knowledge, information, and support she needed to feel confident in choosing life.

Today, nobody could imagine their lives without Kristen's daughter. Since working with her local pregnancy center, she has gotten married. Her husband adopted her daughter, and the two went on to have more children together. Kristen graduated college, got her master's degree, is a professor, and is applying to the Ph.D. programs.

Make no mistake, Mr. Speaker, conservatives are here for unborn babies and their mothers. I introduced the Supporting Pregnant and Parenting Women and Families Act to ensure the administration does not block funding for pregnancy care centers across the country like the one that helped Kristen. They are providing support and empowering women to raise their families.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 969 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. Speaker, we are here to debate the rule providing for consideration of H.R. 6914 and H.R. 6918, which provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the Committee on Education and the Workforce and the Committee on Ways and Means, respectively, and provides each one motion to recommit. The rule further provides for consideration of H. Res. 957 under a closed rule, with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. Speaker, citizens across this country, and even Members on both sides of the aisle, have been imploring this administration to end its open-border policies, yet these cries have fallen on deaf ears. The President has failed to maintain operational control of this Nation's borders, causing the worst border crisis in American history.

Of course, this crisis extends way beyond the border. Every community in the country is facing the consequences of this administration's failure, from the strain on schools to the horrifying fentanyl epidemic being worsened by the astonishing amount of narcotics coming across the border.

In short, the policies of this administration have created a border crisis, a national security crisis, and a humanitarian crisis. It is so irresponsible and embarrassing that I almost understand why the Biden administration refuses to take responsibility for it.

Be that as it may, the fact is the responsibility lies with Secretary Mayorkas; the appointed border czar, Vice President Harris; and President Joe Biden.

H. Res. 957 condemns the national security and public safety crises these actors and other Biden administration officials have created, denounces the Biden administration's open-border policies, and urges the President to end said policies.

We are also here to discuss two pieces of legislation to support expectant mothers. H.R. 6914, the Pregnant Students' Rights Act, requires institutions of higher education to provide information on the rights of and accommodation and resources for pregnant students. According to the CDC, nearly one-third of all abortions performed in America are for women aged 20 to 24, college-aged students. While most colleges are required to accommodate pregnant students under Title IX, many women are unaware of those requirements and the resources available to them and feel that they have to have an abortion or give up their educational goals.

This bill simply requires these institutions to share information about resources and accommodations they already provide.

H.R. 6918, the Supporting Pregnant and Parenting Women and Families Act, a bill I introduced with Representative Tenney from New York and Representative Chris Smith of New Jersey, prohibits the Department of Health and Human Services from keeping TANF dollars from being used to support pregnancy centers. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families provides $16.5 billion annually to support assistance activities for needy families.

Certainly, pregnancy centers, which provide a wide variety of resources to pregnant women, from treatments to diapers to counseling, qualify for this kind of funding. Unfortunately, the Biden administration has shown their antiwomen, pro-abortion hand again, proposing a rule to modify allowable uses of TANF that singles out pregnancy centers in a way that could prevent States from using these funds for these vital care centers.

Make no mistake, conservatives are here for unborn babies and their mothers, and we want to ensure these moms are supported throughout their pregnancies and empowered to raise their families. These bills do just that.

Each of these bills delivers on the commitment House Republicans have made to the American people. We are here to protect the rights of Americans; we are here to hold the government accountable; and we are here to secure this country and its borders, all of which this administration has failed to accomplish.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Langworthy).

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

Mr. Speaker, I am a little confused. Helping women and their babies and providing information is now an extreme agenda according to my colleagues across the aisle.

Supporting and promoting unrestricted abortion up until the time of birth is an extreme agenda.

The majority of pregnancy resource centers are affiliated with a national organization and have voluntarily signed on to an industry standard called Commitment of Care and Competence created by Heartbeat International that set an ethical code where they agree to adopt a transparent and honest service model.

Pregnancy resource centers provide honest information about services they offer, including ultrasounds and pregnancy testing. They do not hold themselves out to provide all forms of healthcare.

According to a recent report surveying 2,750 pregnancy care centers in 2022, there were 4,779 licensed medical staff, 5,396 licensed medical volunteers, over 500,000 hours of ultrasounds performed, and over 100,000 hours of RNs meeting with STD and STI tests for clients.

If my colleagues really believed in giving pregnant women every option, like they claim, they would have no problem with this bill. We are talking about information and care.

However, the fact that they are pushing against it so passionately just proves what my colleagues and the pro-life community have been saying all along, the left is antiwoman and will find any avenue they can to encourage women to have abortions. There are so many resources that exist that would actually empower them during their pregnancy and raising their families.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I have to repeat it: Helping women and their babies and providing information is not an extreme agenda. We are talking about taking care of women and their babies.

Supporting and promoting unrestricted abortion up to the time of birth is an extreme agenda, and it is a real shame the Democrats and the Biden administration are purposefully targeting and misrepresenting pregnancy centers in the rule and seeking to intimidate States that fund them and denying college students information.

Pregnancy resource centers play a vital role to both mothers, fathers, and their families, empowering them in their decision to choose life for their baby by providing realistic alternatives. They are another option for women who choose to use their services who are looking for an alternative to abortion.

All pregnancy resource centers are open and receive clients on a voluntary basis, and it is disgraceful that Democrats misconstrue these organizations in an effort to limit a woman's choice to raise their child.

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

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.

We certainly have covered a lot of topics here today, and House Republicans are working hard to keep our commitments to the American people: holding government accountable, securing our border, and protecting the rights of the unborn and their mothers.

Conservatives care deeply about defending the unborn and empowering women to confidently choose life, whether it be on a college campus or by ensuring access to care at pregnancy centers.

As thousands march for life across the country in the coming days, now is the perfect time to raise awareness of all the wonderful options that exist for women.

For nearly 3 years, we have seen a failure to act by the executive branch of this government to secure our borders. Biden beat his own record, with the 2023 fiscal year beating 2022 as the worst year at the border.

Mr. Speaker, 169 individuals on the terror watch list were apprehended trying to cross the border illegally. That number includes only the ones that we know about.

I am thankful for the hard work and thankless work our Customs and Border Patrol agents are doing and do not want to diminish any of the work that they are doing, but the administration's negligence has damaged our national security. Whether it is done through incompetence or malice, those responsible must be held accountable for their inaction.

To be clear, I am not talking about those hardworking CBP agents. I am talking about DHS Secretary Mayorkas; the so-called border czar, Vice President Harris; and President Joe Biden.

Mr. Speaker, I support the rule and underlying legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 922 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. Speaker, we are here today to debate the rule providing for consideration of H.R. 357 and H.R. 1147. It provides a structured rule for H.R. 1147 and makes in order bipartisan and Republican amendments, provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and provides one motion to recommit. The rule further provides for consideration of H.R. 357 under a closed rule, with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the Committee on the Judiciary and one motion to recommit.

Under our Constitution, those who make the laws are accountable to those who elect them. Career Federal employees are not beholden to the voters of this Nation, and yet unelected bureaucrats across the Federal agencies--in one case in particular, a single low-level career employee--have been making thousands of rules that impact this country's voters and taxpayers.

According to a recent Pacific Legal Foundation study, career employees and unconfirmed officials issued over 70 percent of the rules at the Department of Health and Human Services between 2001 and 2017. These rules have economic impacts on the people of this country, just as the laws we pass in this Chamber do, yet we are accountable to the voters who elect us. Federal employees are accountable to no one.

Former President Trump addressed this issue with an executive order that required agencies' informal notice-and-comment rules to be initiated and signed by senior appointees, with exceptions. The Biden administration has revoked that. As a result of revoking this order, in 2021, Congress passed just 143 laws while Federal agencies issued 3,257 rules, costing taxpayers $1.927 trillion, or the equivalent of $14,684 per household.

According to the study, only 2 percent of the Food and Drug Administration's rules were issued by principal officers, and 25 of these rules had an impact on the American economy of at least $100 million or had other substantial economic impacts. That means unelected bureaucrats, who are not accountable to the taxpayers, are costing those taxpayers thousands upon thousands of dollars.

This majority has made a commitment to ensuring our Federal Government is held accountable. The Ensuring Accountability in Agency Rulemaking Act would lessen the power of career civil servants who are not accountable to the taxpayer. It would require, with exceptions, that rules be issued and signed by presidentially nominated and Senate- confirmed appointees. This upholds the Constitution by putting decisions in the hands of those who are held accountable to the American people. It improves the ways this government is by the people and for the people.

We are also here to discuss the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act. Mr. Speaker, coming from one of the top dairy producing districts in the country, I am proud to stand here in support of this legislation. The bill expands milk options for the school lunch programs under the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act to include flavored, unflavored, whole, and reduced-fat milks.

Whole milk has been demonized as unhealthy, but it is full of the calcium, potassium, vitamin D, and protein that growing kids need. Since the misguided Obama-era regulations were put in place that the Biden administration has chosen to continue, rather than seeing health improve, we have continued to see child health decline. We also have fewer people participating in the school lunch programs. Like many of the regulations that took place at the time, the milk restrictions are not having their intended effect.

Meanwhile, dairy farmers in my district are struggling. Milk prices and demand remain stubbornly low, in most cases below the margin of your average dairy farm. For what purpose? Because the Federal Government places arbitrary restrictions on the meals our children can enjoy?

This bill is a win-win for children and producers alike. It gets kids the nutrients they need while giving schools more flexibility to meet the needs of their students, and it provides a larger market for dairy farmers to sell their delicious product they stand proudly behind.

Mr. Speaker, I support the underlying legislation, urge all Members to do so, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I want to comment that rules and rulemaking is one of the things that I hear from my constituents. It is one of the most important things that they talk about and call me about when they have concerns.

I think H.R. 357 simply makes the process accountable the way it should be. We should not have bureaucrats making rules from D.C. for farms in Minnesota or for a variety of streams and waterways in Minnesota when they are not there seeing it.

I think this is an important part of the government being responsive and accountable to the American people. I find it very important that we need to get the rulemaking under control.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Langworthy).

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.

I do just want to comment that I was in my district this weekend, and I heard a lot about out-of-control rulemaking at the Federal level by the government in general.

Do you know what, Mr. Speaker?

I did hear about whole milk, so I do think the issues we are dealing with are of concern to the American people.

Moreover, I am proud of my colleagues for following through on their commitments to the American people. The Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act directly responds to constituents who want to expand the options for healthy drinks in our school. Expanding the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act to include flavored, unflavored, whole, and reduced fat milk options decreases the control Washington has over the day-to- day choices Americans make and increases the chance that a kid will reach for a milk over a soda.

The Ensuring Accountability in Agency Rulemaking Act holds the government accountable by requiring rules made in Federal agencies to be issued and signed by presidentially nominated and Senate-confirmed appointees, ensuring the rules made in Federal agencies are beholden to taxpayers' priorities.

Mr. Speaker, I support the rule and the underlying legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

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

Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment to prohibit funds from being used by the SEC to regulate or require the disclosure of data regarding agricultural emissions.

Mr. Chairman, the SEC under Chair Gensler has been marked by a radical and tyrannical enforcement agenda that stretches the bounds of the SEC's jurisdiction and buries hardworking men and women in bureaucratic busywork.

Look no further than the SEC's climate-related disclosure rule, which would require public companies to disclose the emissions data of their supply chains. For food companies and agribusinesses that rely on farmers and ranchers, that means collecting emissions data at the farm level.

Let me be clear, Mr. Chairman, the SEC has no authority to regulate farmers and ranchers. Yet, that is exactly what the Chair is attempting to do.

The SEC is charged with protecting investors and facilitating financial market activity, not policing the tens of thousands of family farms in my district. Yet, the proposed rule would burden my constituents with mountains of paperwork and regulatory burdens if they want to do business with a public company.

These are farmers that, unlike their publicly traded counterparts, do not have the compliance, legal, and scientific departments to satisfy the requirements under this rule.

Production agriculture is already regulated by the EPA, the USDA, and State and local governments. As a result, farmers and ranchers are climate champions, not villains. The last thing they need is more unelected bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., who have never set foot on a farm telling them how to do their jobs.

Mr. Chair, this amendment eliminates the duplicative, unnecessary, burdensome, and ultimately inappropriate regulatory effort and allows farmers in my district and throughout the country to do what they do best: feed and fuel the world.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I feel that there is no issue in being duplicative and very clear on what we are trying to accomplish with this amendment because it is important to make sure that we are protecting the farmers, those people, like I said before, who feed and fuel the world.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Womack).

Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time is remaining.

Mr. Chairman, let me echo some of the things that the chairman said regarding protecting the farmers.

We have to protect the farmers. It is a national security issue. It is a food issue. It is a fuel issue.

It is important that we make sure that we get the legislation and the bills right, the language right, in order to protect them.

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

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 838 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 838 provides for consideration of H.R. 4820 and H.R. 4821

under a structured rule and makes in order Democratic as well as Republican amendments. The rule further provides for consideration of H.R. 6126 under a closed rule and provides one motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, House Republicans have made a promise to the American people. We promised to deliver single-subject appropriations bills that responsibly fund government by cutting wasteful spending and investing in necessary services. We have passed six such bills so far, which is nearly three-quarters of overall discretionary spending. I am proud to say that we are keeping that promise here again today as we work to pass two more.

H.R. 4820 and H.R. 4821 will cut billions in unnecessary government spending and prevent overreaching regulations while prioritizing vital programs. The Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies appropriations bill reduces funding for Department of Transportation grant programs by over $6.6 billion and the Department of Housing and Urban Development by over $1.7 billion.

The Appropriations Committee made these cuts by rejecting the administration's request to increase bureaucracy and their request to increase wasteful climate and equity initiatives. It rejects their request for additional program initiatives, including one to make the DOT's Federal vehicle fleet electric to the tune of $26 million and $300 million for Green New Deal grants promoting environmental justice priorities in public housing of all places.

It cuts all this and more while funding key programs. It will strengthen our infrastructure; prioritize transportation safety, including funding the training of 1,800 new air traffic controllers; and focus on housing assistance for vulnerable Americans, including the elderly, the disabled, and veterans.

The Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations bill rightsizes agency funding levels while expanding access to critical minerals. It also repeals this administration's waters of the United States regulation, something so important to States like Minnesota that know full well how to manage their waters and do not need the government telling them how to do their job.

Can you imagine having to go through the Federal Government when your field floods because now those waters fall under WOTUS authority? WOTUS is just another example of unnecessary government overreach.

The bill also limits the abuse of the Endangered Species Act. This also impacts States like Minnesota where the gray wolf population is not just maintained but is actually thriving. Because in California the gray wolf population is dwindling, the administration would force Minnesota to follow the same regulations as California. Complete nonsense.

I am proud to support this legislation that prioritizes public safety while trusting the States to do what is right for them.

Mr. Speaker, finally, I stand here today in full support of our ally Israel. The supplemental package we are debating today will provide critical aid to our friend, as they defend themselves against terrorists, while respecting taxpayer dollars.

On October 7, our allies in the Middle East were attacked by Hamas terrorists, murdering 1,400 people. The victims include women, children, innocent bystanders, and even American citizens since the attacks started.

Israel and the U.S. enjoy a unique and longstanding relationship as one of our closest non-NATO allies. We have, for decades, provided assistance to help Israel defend itself, and House Republicans are continuing that tradition today.

The Israel Security Supplemental Appropriations Act provides $14 billion for Israel to defend itself against foreign terrorists. This includes funds for Iron Dome and David's Sling defense systems and further development of the Iron Beam defense system.

Perhaps more significantly, this bill is offset through rescissions of the Democrats' IRS army funding provided under the Inflation Reduction Act. This rescission represents an important effort to respect the taxpayer and the dollars they entrust in us. America's support for Israel is unwavering, but there is simply no reason why the funds we provide should be placed on the backs of future generations by furthering our debt crisis.

This is a commonsense solution, and I commend Speaker Johnson and Chairwoman Granger in putting forth this bill at such a timely juncture. I look forward to supporting this legislation, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to support the rule and the underlying legislation, and I urge all Members to do so.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring the focus back to the discussions in front of us.

It is worth reminding everyone that while we may have had a delay, we have still passed six appropriations bills this Congress. The Senate has just passed their first three appropriations bills this week. The House has passed bills representing the majority of the Federal discretionary spending, which is roughly three-quarters of the budget, and the Senate has passed just 17 percent.

Make no mistake: we still have a lot of work to do, but Speaker Johnson and the House Republicans will continue to work towards passing every bill individually before our November 17 deadline. I do invite my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to join us.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Langworthy).

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

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

Madam Speaker, I will bring the discussion back to the real issues at hand and talk about the fact that the American people and my constituents sent me to Washington to responsibly fund government and to stop overregulation and unnecessary interference from Washington. Overturning WOTUS, reining in the EPA, and investing in transportation safety, these bills do exactly that.

The appropriations bills we are debating today cut unnecessary programming and prioritize the programs that serve the American people while allocating critical funding for vulnerable populations.

I am proud of the work that my colleagues on the Appropriations Committee have done to take an honest look at government spending and make the sometimes hard decisions about where realistic cuts can be made. It is especially important because the national debt continues to rise and burden the next generation.

I support the rule and the underlying bills, and I encourage Members to do the same to make sure that we are responding responsibly to the national debt and the crisis that we are facing.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in memory of Granite Falls Mayor David Smiglewski.

On September 22, the mayor passed away after a long and courageous battle with ALS.

Mr. Granite Falls, as many came to know him, began his service in city government in 1979 as a member of the city council. In 1996, he became the city's mayor and served in that role for 27 years until his passing.

During his tenure, Dave's commitment as a leader and advocate never wavered. He guided his community through devastating floods in 1997 and 2001 and a tornado in 2000.

He even spent his final days here in Washington, working to secure highway funding for his community.

The people of Granite Falls and the people of Minnesota have lost one of their greatest public servants.

We can all only hope to be more like Dave Smiglewski. I offer my deepest condolences to Cindy, his wife of 40 years, and his children, Cody, Seth, and Laurel.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in memory of Officer Jake Wallin, a brave young veteran from Saint Michael, Minnesota.

On July 14, while responding to a crash in south Fargo, a gunman shot

and killed Jake and wounded two of his fellow officers and one civilian.

Without hesitation, to protect those whom he served, Officer Jake Wallin made the ultimate sacrifice.

My prayers go out to the Wallin family. Please know that the people of western Minnesota share your loss and we pray for Jake's family and for his law enforcement family.

Mr. Speaker, let us never take for granted the heroes who walk among us.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 398 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.

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

Mr. Speaker, we are here to debate the rule providing for consideration of H.R. 2494, the Protect Our Law enforcement with Immigration Control and Enforcement Act of 2023, or the POLICE Act; H.R. 3091, the Federal Law Enforcement Officer Service Weapon Purchase Act; and H. Con. Res. 40, expressing support for local law enforcement officers and condemning efforts to defund or dismantle local law enforcement agencies.

It provides for structured rules for all three bills and makes in order Democratic as well as Republican amendments.

Given all that our police officers do for our communities each and every day, I am honored to stand here in defense of this legislation to support them.

According to the FBI, assaults on law enforcement officers increased by 11.2 percent from 2020 to 2021. Many of these violent crimes have been committed by illegal aliens. As this administration continues to let the crisis at the border spiral out of control, these types of assaults will continue to increase.

There are things we can do to deter criminal assaults and protect our officers. The POLICE Act would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to clearly state that the assault of a law enforcement officer is a deportable offense. If those who have been given the privilege of coming here cannot respect our laws or those who enforce them,

they should not enjoy the benefit of remaining in our country.

The second bill under consideration today, H.R. 3091, would allow law enforcement officers to buy retired and surplus military service weapons at fair market value, so long as the officer is in good standing with their employed agency. Under current law, Federal law enforcement agencies are required to destroy retired and unneeded firearms. The Fraternal Order of Police estimates that this wastes up to $8 million a year. This bill is a commonsense solution to save taxpayer dollars and support law enforcement officers.

Finally, H. Con. Res. 40 expresses Congress' support for local law enforcement officers and condemns efforts to defund or dismantle local law enforcement agencies.

Unfortunately, because there are people out there, even some serving in Congress, who want to defund the police and want to continue the anti-law enforcement rhetoric, this bill is necessary.

In a time when police officers are regularly attacked for their profession, 2021 being the deadliest year in two decades for law enforcement officers, according to the FBI, it can never be stated enough that the U.S. Congress supports this country's police officers.

The brave men and women across this Nation who risk their lives every day need to know that we condemn any efforts to defund them, and we support them. They need to know that we stand with them and are here to do everything in our power to protect them in the way they protect and serve our communities. That is why I encourage my colleagues to stand with me and support these pieces of legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues not to make excuses about this legislation, not to say that it doesn't have this, it has this, or you changed this because they are playing word games.

The public is watching, and law enforcement officers are watching. Today, with your ``yes'' vote on this legislation, you can show your support for law enforcement.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Reschenthaler).

Mr. Speaker, I have to mention again, we have legislation in front of us that will honor our law enforcement officers. When we go off on tangents and talk about what words are there and what words are not there, the simple fact is, a ``yes'' vote on this legislation will show our support for law enforcement.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. Houchin).

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

Mr. Speaker, I have a much easier way for the other side to deal with the debt ceiling. Instead of the procedural antics we are going through, maybe what they should do is encourage the President and the Senate leaders to get to the table and negotiate.

The House Republicans did their job. We passed a debt ceiling bill with spending cuts and an increase off of this floor. We have done our job. I think the real message here is National Police Week. That is what we are talking about. We are talking about the support and respect for our law enforcement officers.

I just want to maybe bring it back to what we are really talking about. I, unfortunately, have had the unfortunate honor to have three officers lost in the line of duty in my area, and so I would remember those names: Officer Brian Klinefelter, Officer Tommy Decker, and Officer Josh Owen. Officer Owen was just a few weeks ago.

Present in the Capitol yesterday was Officer Arik Matson, who was shot 3 years ago in the line of duty and survived. Let's talk about that. Let's talk about the officers that we are honoring.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Langworthy).

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Rutherford).

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

I am honored to be here today to support this rule and this legislation to make sure we honor our law enforcement and that we are moving forward.

This is a completely different agenda from the legislation that my Democratic colleagues were advancing at this time in the 117th Congress last year. By this time 2 years ago, Democrats had already passed legislation that would have removed qualified immunity for police officers acting in good faith, voted to restrict policing methods that keep officers safe, and supported investigations into departments that insinuated that police officers are racists and white supremacists.

Today, House Republicans are changing the narrative and standing up for law and order and for those who enforce it. If my Democratic colleagues don't think this matters, then they clearly are still not listening to what the law enforcement community needs.

Today, they have the opportunity to show their support for law enforcement.

The defund the police movement has been disastrous in the areas that have tried it, emboldening criminals. Cities like Minneapolis and San Francisco have seen dramatic increases in crime, and residents and businesses alike are fleeing in droves.

Crime is skyrocketing throughout the country, and the lack of respect for law enforcement in this country also means fewer people are willing to enter the profession. This needs to change, and we in Congress can pass legislation like the bills today that support our police officers and show them their sacrifices and services are appreciated.

It is time for leaders to stand up for law enforcement and stop the anti-police rhetoric. I ask my colleagues on the other side to join with us in supporting and honoring law enforcement by voting for this rule today and supporting the legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I support the underlying legislation, and I urge all Members to do so.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, on Saturday night, Pope County Deputy Sheriff Josh Owen was tragically shot and killed in the line of duty. He and two other law enforcement officers were responding to a domestic violence call in Cyrus, Minnesota, when the suspect opened fire. It was his 44th birthday.

Deputy Owen spent nearly 12 years with the sheriff's office and recently received a Distinguished Service Award for his actions responding to a house fire.

He is pictured here with his K9 partner, Karma.

He was also a military veteran serving with the Minnesota National Guard and deploying to Iraq for 22 months.

Josh leaves behind a wife, Shannon, and a 10-year-old son, Rylan.

Those of us with ties to law enforcement, who see loved ones risking their lives every day to protect and serve others, share their pain.

Josh's colleagues placed a squad car on the front lawn of the sheriff's office on Sunday, and the community has made it into a memorial to pay their respects to this outstanding member of the community and show his family how loved he was.

Yesterday, there was a procession to bring his body home. Law enforcement agencies from across the State turned out to honor their fallen brother. This is a devastating, heartbreaking reminder that our men and women of law enforcement put their communities above all else every single day.

I am praying for Deputy Owen's family and for Pope County and Minnesota law enforcement communities as they mourn the loss of this hero and continue to serve and protect us every day.

Mr. Speaker, over the weekend, while responding to a domestic violence call, Deputy Sheriff Josh Owen of Pope County was tragically shot and killed. It was his 44th birthday.

Deputy Owen spent nearly 12 years with the sheriff's office and recently received a Distinguished Service Award. He was also a military veteran, serving with the Minnesota National Guard and deploying to Iraq for 22 months. He leaves behind a wife and son.

This is a devastating, heartbreaking reminder that our men and women in law enforcement put their communities above all else every single day. We are praying for Josh's family and for the Pope County community as they mourn the loss of a local hero.

I ask now that we have a moment of silence in honor of Pope County Deputy Sheriff Josh Owen.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time. He is new to the Rules Committee, and we have really enjoyed having him there so far.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution providing for consideration of three important bills.

H.J. Res. 24 and 26 would repeal two recent actions by the D.C. Council that would have drastic negative consequences nationwide.

The first would give illegal immigrants the right to vote in local elections. By pursuing this effort, D.C. leftists would dilute every lawful vote, which would have profound implications on all of our elections.

The second would further promote the left's soft-on-crime agenda. According to the Major Cities Chiefs Association, cities across the country have experienced increases in homicides by nearly 50 percent and aggravated assaults by over a third.

The so-called Revised Criminal Code Act would only accelerate these crime rates by eliminating mandatory minimums, reduce penalties for violent crimes, and bottle up local courts that are paid for by the Federal Government--Federal tax dollars from across the country.

Under the D.C. Home Rule Act of 1973, Congress retains the ultimate say over affairs within the seat of our Federal Government.

The authority is derived under Article I of the Constitution, which grants Congress the authority over D.C., in ``all cases whatsoever.''

Congress has voted to overturn various D.C. efforts throughout the years, as recently as 2014. Western Minnesotans know these efforts will not simply remain in Washington. Radical leftists in the Twin Cities are pursuing similar efforts.

Recently, it was claimed at the Minnesota State Capitol that illegal immigrants are voting in droves. Western Minnesotans know that the Twin Cities' liberals will not be outdone by D.C. in promoting soft-on-crime policies.

My constituents know that if we do not take a stand, these radical ideas will continue to spread across the country.

Finally, I appreciate that Representative Massie's legislation to repeal the vaccine mandate for air travel is also included in this rule.

We still face issues at the land ports of entry in my district and across the northern border. It is my sincere hope that we also repeal a similar restriction on travel between the U.S. and Canada at land ports of entry in the coming weeks.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include any extraneous material.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to mark the 50th anniversary of Roe v. Wade.

Abortion is one of the greatest tragedies in our Nation, and Roe v. Wade opened the door for abortions on demand until birth.

Over the last five decades, more than 60 million unborn lives have been taken and a tragic, irreversible mark has been left on countless mothers, fathers, and families.

While there is still so much work to be done, I stand here hopeful. The pro-life community is stronger than ever. With last year's Dobbs v. Jackson decision, this country is beginning to move in the right direction to defend the defenseless and support life. We are changing hearts and minds.

Of course, we still have a long way to go in this fight, and I am proud that one of the first things that we voted on in this Congress was the born-alive act to protect babies who have survived an attempted abortion.

I am also proud to have introduced two bills to help protect the unborn, women, and taxpayers: the Defund Planned Parenthood Act, which I was asked to carry by former Congresswoman Vickie Hartzler who carried the bill in the last Congress, and the Protecting Life and Taxpayers Act.

We know that Americans across the country value the lives of the precious unborn babies, and it is just wrong to force them to spend their tax dollars on something that goes against their most closely held values.

This evening, I am pleased to be joined by so many champions of the unborn to celebrate the victories, with many more to come.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Cloud), who is championing the efforts with Chairman Bost to end taxpayer-funded abortions at the VA. He has been a lead sponsor of the Women's Public Health and Safety Act, which gives States the authority to exclude abortion providers, like Planned Parenthood, from receiving Medicaid funds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Norman), who will be reintroducing the Ensuring Accurate and Complete Abortion Data Reporting Act which would compel States to report both the number of abortions and the number of infants born alive after an abortion attempt.

Mr. Speaker, I know that we will all continue to be a voice for the voiceless. It is so important, and our work is not done.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Moore), another defender of life.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for all of his work.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Clyde), who reintroduced the Protect the UNBORN Act last week to prohibit the implementation of and funding for President Biden's pro-abortion executive orders.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn), who is looking forward to reintroducing the Second Chance at Life Act, which would require abortion facilities to provide information at least 24 hours in advance that explains that the chemical abortion process may be reversed before taking the second of the two drugs required.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his pro-life leadership.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Babin), who is a great defender of life.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his commitment.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ogles), who is a freshman and a great pro-lifer.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his commitment to the unborn and for those wonderful words.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Rutherford), who is a proud father, grandfather, and great-grandfather committed to fighting for life.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for his remarks. He mentioned the culture of death, but we are working and we are succeeding in turning back into the culture of life and changing hearts and minds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Stauber), who is my great friend. My colleague from Minnesota is a true champion of life.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Minnesota for sharing his personal story and that strong and true support for life.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelly), who introduced the Heartbeat Protection Act which would prohibit abortions when a fetal heartbeat is detected with the exceptions of rape, incest, and life of the mother, when necessary.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania. We are here to speak up for the unborn. We hear their cry, and we will continue to fight and hear the unborn.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Guest), who with the House Congressional Pro-Life Caucus chair, Chris Smith, helped lead the amicus brief in support of Mississippi's Dobbs case. The amicus brief was joined by more than 200 Members of Congress, including myself, and urged the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade. The Congressman from Mississippi was instrumental in that fight.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Guest for all of his work in defense of the unborn.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Aderholt), the Values Action Team chair and a longstanding protector of life.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate all the work Mr. Aderholt has done. We will continue our fight, and we will continue our work to protect unborn life.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Grothman).

Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Grothman for his words and his commitment to the unborn.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson), a champion of life, the chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, and my friend.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for his steadfast commitment to the unborn and strong support of the right to life.

Mr. Speaker, I thank all of my colleagues who spoke this evening for standing up to give a voice to the voiceless unborn children, for standing up for life. Our Conference will continue to be strong for mothers and their unborn children.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 8 o'clock and 9 minutes p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, January 25, 2023, at 10 a.m. for morning-hour debate.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the Rules Committee and my friend from Oklahoma for yielding me the time and for the experiences we have had on Rules in the last year.

Mr. Speaker, for far too long Democrats have run roughshod over the norms and practices of the people's House, weaponizing our rules to insulate themselves and protect their allies in the Biden administration from proper oversight. That ends today.

I thank the chairman, Speaker McCarthy, and our leadership for spending countless hours putting together this package that better reflects the historical practices of this institution while receiving feedback to ensure

the work we do is by the people and for the people. There are numerous items that I truly believe are vast improvements from the previous 2 years, but I will focus on three.

First and foremost, this package finally ends the ludicrous pandemic procedures that have done lasting, if not permanent, damage to this institution. Legislating requires us to see each other eye-to-eye in order to understand where the other is coming from. Remote proceedings and a locked-down Capitol have reduced this institution to a computer screen, and the work product has deteriorated as a result. It is long past time for us to get back to work.

Second, the rules package finally creates a more transparent process by which we legislate. As then-Chairman McGovern once said, ``a lousy process leads to bad legislating.'' Today, through a mandatory 72-hour rule, we allow more thoughtful and deliberate consideration that will improve what we pass out of this House.

Finally, this rules package helps restore some fiscal sanity. Over the past 2 years, the American people have been hindered by out-of- control spending by the government and now our constituents are saddled with trillions in debt and the highest inflation levels in a generation.

House Republicans today will once again ensure the Federal budget operates like any other, requiring offsets for any additional spending increase, eliminating budget gimmicks, and requiring inflationary analyses of the bills we consider.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand by my friend and colleague from Oklahoma in support of this package, and I urge Members to do the same.

Madam Speaker, earlier this year Congressman Emmer and I introduced legislation to honor the three Minnesota National Guardsmen who were tragically killed on December 5, 2019, when their helicopter experienced engine failure.

Chief Warrant Officer Charles P. Nord was just 30 years old and led a full and happy life with his wife, Kaley, and their daughter, Lydia, and he was very excited for the arrival of his son, Jack.

He found his calling as a medevac helicopter pilot and also as a crop sprayer, and often said he felt like he had landed his dream job. He is deeply missed by the many close friends and family he made in the service and in his community.

H.R. 6220 would name the post office in Perham, Minnesota, in honor of Chief Warrant Officer Nord's service and sacrifice. It is my honor to memorialize him and his service this way.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.