Floor Statements

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk as the designee of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs).

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment, which eliminates $230,599,000--a lot of money whether you are in Arizona, Pennsylvania, or Washington, D.C.--in funding to the U.S. Agency for International Development, funds appropriated to the President capital investment fund.

I once again bring up the amendment to address the massive spending that is appropriated to USAID. The capital investment fund is for expenses for overseas construction and related costs and for the procurement and enhancement of information technology and related capital investments.

We all want a new office. We all want a new computer. We all want a new phone. We have massive debt right now. We are going to run $2.2 trillion behind this year alone.

I don't know who at home when they can't pay their bills, when they are literally borrowing money from their enemy, goes out and spends more.

We are not even talking about spending more on our own home or our own phone or our own computer. We are talking about spending more on somebody else's and, quite honestly, in many cases in places where they don't even like America.

Mr. Chairman, our country is now $33 trillion in debt. How in good conscience can we continue with this spending?

This is the time to invest in the United States of America and our constituents who are struggling to pay for their groceries, to pay for gasoline, to pay for their ever-rising electricity bill, and it is going to keep on rising.

Your gas prices are going to keep going up, and so are your food prices because of the policies of this administration.

Mr. Chairman, we don't have any more money to spend on things that might be great to have, might be nice to have, might make us feel good. We don't have the money. When you don't have the money, you don't spend it.

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

Mr. Chair, I agree with the gentlewoman from the other side of the aisle. We should be countering China. If we are going to use USAID to do that, well, that is all well and good, too, but let's enumerate how we are actually going to use this money to counter China.

What we are expected to believe is that they need this money, and we are

going to counter China somewhere in Eastern Europe. Maybe we are, but let's make the case.

What you are asking is the American people to borrow money from China to then somehow counter China and just give all these folks that are smarter than all the rest of us all the money, and I am sure they will figure it out.

I don't know if you are keeping up with current events, but China is eating our lunch right now while we are spending all this money that we are borrowing from China.

I think the case makes itself. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, when everyday Americans, like the folks I have the honor to represent in Pennsylvania's 10th Congressional District, have too many expenses, they are simply forced to cut back. They don't have any choice.

That is what they had to do in this high inflation, high cost of living, Biden economy where gas, food--seemingly everything. I don't know that anything has gone down. For sure, food, gas, electricity prices are just going up and up.

So what do folks do at home?

They don't go out to eat as often. They don't have a meal out with their family. They might have to cancel a few subscriptions, put off some repairs around the house, put off buying a new pair of shoes, you name it. The point is that they pare back their spending sometimes to the bare bones because they have to keep a roof over their head and food in their bellies.

Now, the paring back that I just discussed is something that this body, this institution has been unwilling, unable, and simply refused to do now for decades. Decades, $33 trillion worth of that.

Many of my colleagues on this side of the aisle have highlighted via amendment the wasteful, bloated spending that this place has perpetuated, especially during the pandemic; unbelievable amounts during the pandemic.

I appreciate the work of the chairman. He has worked diligently to bring this thing back closer in line with some reality, but there are still places we can cut.

This amendment reduces the amount of international disaster assistance from $3.9 billion to zero.

Now, everybody is going to take a gasp.

Zero international disaster assistance?

Ladies and gentlemen, in our country, the International Disaster Assistance account is zero. It has dried up.

The good gentleman from Florida, his State just suffered a hurricane. There isn't any disaster money for them. What about the folks in Hawaii? What about the folks all across the country dealing with floods and fires?

There isn't any money in the United States of America for them, but heaven forbid, we have to make sure we are all around the globe helping all those folks at the expense of the people in America.

I am not trying--and no one is trying--to be punitive or cruel here. The fact is that this process is broken and the results of it are broken, and the American people are tired of being broke from what we do here in Washington.

This is a nearly $4 billion line item that we simply can't afford. We want to be helpful. Every single one of us wants to help, but we are using the money that other people earn to help other people overseas while the people that earn the money are struggling, and that is immoral and unacceptable.

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

Mr. Chair, I am glad that the gentlewoman mentioned people of faith and their care for people, not only in their community but around the globe. It is awesome. In the church that I attend, that is exactly what we do, and that is exactly what we should do--be our brother's keeper, be our brother's and sister's keeper--but the good Lord never said force your brother to be someone else's keeper. That is between them. And that is exactly what we are doing here is forcing people that can ill afford their own bills and their own tragedies that they are suffering in the United States to pay for the tragedies in other places. That is immoral.

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

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

Mr. Chair, this amendment reduces the amount of economic support funding from $2.9 billion to $1.8 billion.

Like a few of my colleagues on this side of the aisle have said this week, this is a necessary haircut to a program that has ballooned massively just since two Presidents ago.

In the 5 years from fiscal year 2018 to 2023, this account went from $1.8 billion to $4.3 billion. People wonder, how do we get $33 trillion in debt? You get it a billion at a time just adding up.

Let's look at the use of these funds from the report of this bill. Cooperative projects, sustainability challenges relating to water resources, agriculture, and energy storage. That is interesting. Have you ever heard of Flint, Michigan? They are concerned about their water resources.

Agriculture? Our farmers aren't allowed to buy fertilizer--or can't afford it in this country based on the policies of the administration.

Energy storage? We are paying for batteries overseas. It is not enough that we force our own constituents to use unreliable power, now we are going to force the rest of the world to do it and pay for it.

How about scientific research collaboration in the Middle East? That is awesome because other than our one ally there, there is not much scientific collaboration that I am interested in participating in-- certainly not with Iran.

The Middle East partnership initiative, which according to the State Department supports governments and their citizens to achieve shared political economic and stability objectives, how much money are we going to throw in this money pit year after year after year, decade after decade?

In the administration's budget request they will say the use of funds to foster economic resilience in Greenland. Are they in peril in Greenland?

Strengthen transparent governance and promote civil society and independent media in South Asia and provide rapid, flexible support and assistance to government and civil society in Africa.

These are all laudable things. The question is can you afford them, and we cannot. I remind everybody we are simply borrowing from China to pay for these things--all of these things.

Reasonable people can disagree about whether the American taxpayer dollars need to promote civil society or scientific collaboration abroad; however, the fact remains we must find places to save, and this reverts a highly inflated item--highly inflated. Again, $1.8 billion to $4.3 billion in 5 years.

I would just ask what is the metric we use to determine whether this is successful or does anything at all to support the American people?

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

Mr. Chair, again, we all want to do what we can, but we shouldn't be borrowing money from China, our number one adversary. We are borrowing it from them allegedly to counter them, and, oh, by the way, while we are borrowing it from them to counter them, we are allowing them to operate in our financial markets without the same controls and restrictions we place on American companies.

That is ridiculous. It is so ridiculous that it probably costs us more to counter them. We could do much more by just not allowing that, but, instead, we are going to allow that and take taxpayers' money and spend it to do this. It would cost so much less to do this if we would just do the right thing in the first place.

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

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

Mr. Chair, this amendment cuts migration and refugee assistance funding from $2.5 billion to $0.

This money, the $2.5 billion, goes toward refugee programs around the world, including for shelter, healthcare, and sanitation.

Again, we all want to do what we can. We all want to help. Nobody is trying to be cruel or punitive here, but we don't have enough money to deal with the refugee crisis in our own country, which is self-imposed.

Our constituents here at home can't afford their own shelter, can't afford their own healthcare, their own food because of the policies of the administration, yet we are forcing them to pay for it around the globe, oftentimes with companies that have encouraged and inspired people to migrate to their countries and become refugees in their countries, and yet we are paying for that.

Furthermore, during the debate on the Homeland Security funding bill this week, many of my colleagues on this side of the aisle rightfully pointed out the disaster occurring at our southern border to the tune of thousands of people every single day coming in.

Oh, by the way, what other countries around the world are helping with our refugee crisis, with our refugee and migration assistance?

So our taxpayers are paying for the one that we are encouraging and allowing in our country, and they are being forced under penalty of law in their taxes to pay for the ones in other countries, too.

All of our districts have been affected by the influx of drugs, including fentanyl. In my district just in the last week, half a dozen people died from fentanyl that came across the southern border into my town thousands of miles away from the border.

One of the refrains of the Biden administration and border czar Harris seems to be that the only way to solve this is to address the root causes instead of simply enforcing our own border.

Mr. Chair, we are not going to solve any of this under the current policies that we are seeing, and we are certainly not going to solve it around the globe by forcing our taxpayers to pay for it, encouraging more of it all around the globe.

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

Mr. Chair, like I said, every single one of us wants to help. Every single one of our hearts breaks for people who are forcibly displaced.

I would say, as well, that I question the numbers of forcibly displaced. There are people in this country saying that all the people coming illegally to this country are being forcibly displaced when that is obviously not true.

By the way, maybe we would be more amenable to taking the taxpayers' hard-earned money and spending it overseas on these migrations if we would solve our problems here in the United States of America. How can we force them, how can we ask them, to spend their hard-earned tax dollars overseas when we refuse to solve the problems right here at home and force them to pay for that, as well? It is insult upon injury.

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

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

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

Mr. Chair, let me say from the outset that I certainly appreciate that the bill's drafters prohibit assessed contributions to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, also known as UNRWA.

Now, that is a nice-sounding name. Unfortunately, what the organization does is not so nice. This amendment applies a bill-wide prohibition on making any ``funds appropriated to otherwise made available by this act'' for UNRWA.

The issues with UNRWA have been well established and well known in this town and around the globe. They effectively turned a blind eye to terrorists storing weapons at their facilities in 2014 and hired staff with ties to terrorist organizations.

Further, and almost maybe even more disturbing, the curriculum of UNRWA's schools, which uses the textbooks of the host government or authorities, has long contained materials that are anti-American, anti- Israel, anti-Semitic, and supportive of violence--direct violence. It just can't be understated, and that is not histrionic. That is not hyperbole. That is what it is.

As recently as 2022, watchdog organizations found that UNRWA educational material still contains anti-Semitic and otherwise objectionable material even though it has been brought up time and time again. Yet we keep paying for it, and they keep doing it because they don't care. Why would they care? We keep paying for it.

Not one more dime of our taxpayer money should go toward an agency that has continuously promoted hatred toward this country, toward our taxpayers, toward the things we believe in, and toward our allies--in particular Israel.

I absolutely urge support of this amendment. I don't quite honestly understand why we have to do this.

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

Mr. Chair, oversight. I am sure there is always oversight. There is going to be oversight again with this bill and the next bill and with the authorization, the State Department authorization. The oversight and accountability haven't gleaned any results.

I have been in the hearings. I have seen the textbooks. I am sure the gentlewoman from the other side has seen them, as well.

As long as we keep paying, they are going to keep doing it. We can provide all the oversight we want to, but no one is going to be held accountable. You know how I know that? Because they have been doing it, and no one has been held accountable.

I am sure they are grateful. I am sure the students are grateful to receive the textbooks. I am sure the population is grateful to receive our money as they thumb their nose at us and do things that are antithetical to every single person in this country that is paying the bill.

It is long past time that we say enough. If you are not going to respect and appreciate what we give you appropriately, then we are not going to give it to you until you can get your act together and stop espousing violence to the very people--biting the hand that feeds you. That is what it is. It is biting the hand that feeds you, Mr. Chair.

Until they are willing to do that, there is only one way to send a message--and that is to quit funding our own demise.

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

Mr. Chair, let me just tell you what I think is damaging to our leadership: having our allies see us pay with our hard-earned tax dollars for their adversaries to promote violence toward them. I think that is damaging. If I were those allies, I would be questioning how that is helpful.

Now, I am glad that my colleague brought up the fact that the textbooks are checked and that we should know what is in them and there are constant reviews and so on and so forth. Mr. Chair, we can't trust the textbooks in our schools in our own towns in this country. You think we know what is going on in the Middle East with the money we are paying for theirs? I suggest we don't.

As far as consistency and educational appropriateness, let me remind everybody, this is the same organization that pays stipends for people that go kill Jews and Americans. They pay stipends for that. So, of course, it is culturally appropriate. It is educationally appropriate. It is consistent. It is consistent with their message of hatred, and we are paying for it, and that is why we should end this now.

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

Mr. Speaker, I'm honored to recognize Mr. Alton Russel Heimbach on the auspicious occasion of his 100th Birthday on August 7, 2023.

Mr. Heimbach enlisted in the U.S. Army at 19 years old. Earning the rank of Sergeant (SGT), he served in Company C, 157th Combat Engineers and fought with ``The Greatest Generation'' on the Atlantic front, He served in General George Patton's 3rd U.S. Army, which marched across Northern France.

SGT Heimbach's platoon landed on Utah Beach in Normandy on June 25, 1944. He was instrumental in keeping the 3rd Army moving by building bridges and repairing roads that were destroyed by the Germans. Most significantly, he helped to build the first Bailey Bridge, implemented primarily to help our Troops cross the Seine River, but served many thereafter, these bridges were critical to our mission of pursuing the retreating Axis forces. When Patton's 3rd Army moved into Paris, the 157th Engineers were among the first Soldiers to enter the city. SGT Heimbach went on to serve in Rhineland, Germany, Austria, and other areas in Central Europe, until his return to the United States upon the end of World War II in December 1945.

After military service, Mr Heimbach had a successful and varied career ranging from heavy machine equipment operator to superintendent. He remains dedicated to the Mechanicsburg Church of the Brethren, and his wife, Maria and their 3 children, Alton, Mary, and Brian.

Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to commemorate Alton Russel Heimbach on his 100th Birthday, but also for his distinguished, tireless, and selfless service to our Nation. He sets the standard by which we all should be judged. I wish him Godspeed, and many more years of great health, prosperity, and happiness.

Mr. Speaker, I'm honored to recognize Ronald E. Myers, upon the auspicious occasion of his retirement on October 1, 2023 after 32 years of service as Director of Maintenance for the Graham Capitol Corporation.

Mr. Myers enlisted in the Army on October 31, 1978, after graduating high school in Lower Dauphin. He completed basic training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, and became qualified as a helicopter mechanic at Fort Rucker, Alabama. Then-Sergeant Myers specialized in the UH-I/ Iroquois (``Huey'') aircraft (his favorite), the critical aircraft for troop and logistics transport, and direct combat gun support capabilities. Sergeant Myers' performance and duty as a mechanic of these premier and complex aircraft was critical to the Army mission.

After his service in the active component Army, Sergeant Myers honorably served in the Pennsylvania National Guard, wherein he earned the rank of Staff Sergeant (E-6) and continued to serve our Nation for 22 years. In May 1991, after his military retirement, he transitioned to the civilian/private sector, wherein he became Director of Maintenance for the Graham Capital Corporation flight department, now culminating his duties after 32 years on October 1, 2023.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the 10th Congressional District of Pennsylvania, I'm privileged to commend former Staff Sergeant Ronald E. Myers for his tireless and selfless service to our communities, Commonwealth, and Nation. I wish him Godspeed, and great health, prosperity, and happiness in his future adventures.

Madam Speaker, we were promised that this year would be different, that we would run all 12 spending bills individually and actually find some savings for the American people. Yet, this is another year where the taxpayers' hard-earned dollars are just squandered.

Congress has passed all required spending bills only four times in about the 50 years since we have been under the current system. The last time Congress actually passed all the bills was 1996, when the U.S. national debt was a staggering $5.2 trillion.

Just last week the debt hit $33 trillion. This is a cycle of perpetual failure, and, yes, our citizens are sick of it. The American people have lost faith in our ability to handle the country's fiscal issues.

Madam Speaker, the other side talks about how efficiently they moved through things. Yeah, they moved through things. In 1996, we were $5 trillion in debt. Now we are $33 trillion in debt. They have efficiently spent us into bankruptcy because there is no amount of money, Madam Speaker, there is zero amount of money that they won't spend. They will spend as much as the American people make and then so much more.

The cost of living is tied to the spending, Madam Speaker. Our citizens--my bosses and their bosses--can't afford their groceries, gasoline, or electricity because this town continues to spend like there is no tomorrow.

Madam Speaker, we should pass this rule so we can pass the 12 bills and so we can reject the nongermane Senate bill that hooks the FAA with Ukraine spending. Maybe both of those are important, Madam Speaker, but tell me why I have got to vote to keep airplanes flying in the United States and also vote to spend money in a war 8,000 miles away. The American people are sick of that failure theater, Madam Speaker.

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

Mr. Chairman, this amendment cuts the Rural Business Program Account in half from last year's enacted budget amount of $43,125,000.

The Rural Business-Cooperative Service, like a lot of Washington, D.C., programs, has a good name. It doesn't always do good things. Unfortunately, it continues the age-old government sin of picking winners and losers instead of just letting the market work.

I ran a small business, and people would tell me that the government wants to be a good partner. I wasn't looking for a partner in my business. I was looking to run my business. If there was a partner, surely it wasn't the government, which had no idea about what I did in my business.

What businesses need is for the government to get out of the way and stop making it difficult if they don't bend the knee to whatever the government demands of them.

Let me just tell you what we are funding with this money. This comes right from the code cited in this appropriations bill: Loans for the purposes of reducing the reliance on nonrenewable energy sources by encouraging the development and construction of solar energy systems and other renewable energy systems.

If you want to do that, you can get some of this money. If you don't want to do that, you can forget it.

Mr. Chair, we have seen the government-mandated shift to green and oftentimes unreliable energy sources, and we have seen what it has done to the country. The Secretary of Energy tried to take a drive a little while ago in her battery-operated vehicle and didn't make it too far.

We are not against these things, but the market should decide, not the government. The government is not the market, and it doesn't make the most efficient decisions.

Even in places where the shift hasn't directly caused tragedy, every single one of our constituents is facing higher prices because of these policies.

Because of these policies, we are literally building a grid on top of the grid that we already have, and the grid that we have, we are actually diminishing it at the very same time we are demanding more from that grid.

Remember your healthcare costs, how they were going to go down when we socialized medicine with the Affordable Care Act, and now you can't afford medicine? Get ready because you are not going to be able to afford your electricity, either. This program supports that unaffordability, which is why it should end.

This is only the tip of the iceberg. This very spending fight has highlighted the true amount of waste and duplication in the Federal Government the gentleman before me just spoke about.

I offer a list of agencies that offer direct or indirect funding for this very

thing: Department of Agriculture, Department of Commerce, Department of Defense, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of the Interior, Department of the Treasury, and Small Business Administration.

My goodness. If every household and every business duplicated all the things the Federal Government did, they would be broke, too, because we sure are now.

Again, I am more than supportive of small businesses and towns. That is where I got my start, picking fruit, baling hay, working in small businesses. The first business outside of agriculture was Ray's Exxon on Route 15. That is a small business.

These businesses, like every other one and our consumers, have faced the record-high cost of living due to government-mandated shutdowns and harmful Biden policies.

Every single one of these businesses and all individual taxpayers ought to keep more of their money that they earn instead of having it redistributed to whomever the government chooses to be the winner.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlemen from Maryland (Mr. Harris).

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from Louisiana for yielding. He has a great amendment. Now, he doesn't have great hair right now--there is a little too much of it--but he has a great amendment.

He is talking about the abuse of States. I come from Pennsylvania where these waivers are continually abused.

Let's face it, Mr. Chair, they wouldn't have to be abused, they don't have to be abused at all. If my friends on the left would quit destroying the economies and the fabric of the household that makes a living and makes everything more expensive for them, none of this would be required. First, they destroy the house's income, and then they subsidize it and force them to do this.

These waivers are indicative of this policy, Mr. Chair, and the gentleman from Louisiana makes a great point. This is a great amendment, and it should be adopted because these programs exist to help people but not to be abused by States that use them to push people further into poverty, which is what happens. They can never get out, and they are ever dependent. These waivers support that, and that is why they should end.

Mr. Chair, I thank Mr. Tiffany for the amendment. I want, with him, to speak on behalf of parents and children, not on behalf of politicians and so-called scientists.

This is what we know. We shouldn't even be having this conversation because we didn't enact this Federal Government to ban things from us. We want to make the decisions. Children want to make the decisions. Parents want to make the decisions. We know what is best for us. We don't need them to tell us. We will figure it out ourselves. Over the course of a couple hundred years, we have done pretty well here without scientists and politicians telling us and our children what is good or what is bad.

Let me tell you what is good and what is bad. What is bad is school lunches today. Do you know how I know? Because kids don't want to eat them. All the nutrition they are getting? They are not getting it because they don't want them. The only time they are going to eat them is if it is the only thing they have to eat, and you are limiting that now. It is absurd.

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin for offering the amendment. I hope that we win this amendment, and kids and parents can finally make choices for themselves.

Mr. Speaker, I'm honored to recognize the 112th National Day of the Republic of China (Taiwan).

I join all those celebrating this Day, memorializing the beginning of the Wuchang Uprising on October 10, 1911 that led to the collapse of the long-reigning imperial Qing Dynasty and foundation of the Republic of China on January 1, 1912.

Chinese Americans are a vital, valued, and vibrant community not only in my legislative district, but throughout our United States. I wish them and all observing this occasion, Godspeed, and a safe, happy, and momentous celebration.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of Pennsylvania's 10th Congressional District, I'm privileged, humbled, and honored to commemorate the 112th National Day of the Republic of China (Taiwan). May the friendship between our two Free Nations remain robust.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 390.

Mr. Speaker, I'm honored to recognize Ronald E. Myers, upon the auspicious occasion of his retirement on October 1, 2023.

Staff Sergeant (U.S. Army, Retired) Myers enlisted in the Army on October 31, 1978, after graduating from Lower Dauphin High School. He completed basic training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, and went on to Fort Rucker, Alabama, to become qualified as a helicopter mechanic. SSG Myers specialized in the UH-I/Iroquois (``Huey'') aircraft, which remains his favorite, as it was the critical aircraft for Troop and logistics transport, and direct combat gun support capability. Sergeant Myers' performance and duty as a mechanic of these premier and complex aircraft was critical to the Army mission.

After his service in the active component Army, Sergeant Myers also honorably serviced in the Pennsylvania National Guard, where he earned the rank of Staff Sergeant (E-6) upon retirement. On May 1, 1991, he transitioned to the civilian/private sector, wherein he became Director of Maintenance for the Graham Capital Corporation flight department, in which he still serves after 32 years.

Mr. Speaker, I'm privileged to commend Staff Sergeant (U.S. Army, Retired) Ronald E. Myers for his tireless and selfless service to our Country. On behalf of the 10th Congressional District, I wish him Godspeed on his future adventures.

Mr. Speaker, I'm honored to recognize Mr. Richard T. Freistak on the amazing occasion of his 100th Birthday on September 6, 2023.

Mr. Freistak graduated from Middletown High School in 1942, and enlisted in the U.S. Navy in 1943. While selflessly serving our Nation from 1943 through 1946, he was deployed to the South Pacific theater in World War II.

After his discharge from the Navy, Mr. Freistak studied architecture at the Pennsylvania State University, graduating in 1951 with an Engineering Curriculum Architecture degree. While at Penn State, Mr. Freistak was a member of the Theta Kappa Phi fraternity, as well as the Nittany Lion Club that focused on providing scholarship and support to Penn State student athletes. Throughout his life, he attended Penn State football games as often as possible.

Mr. Freistak's family owned and operated the iconic West Shore Theatre and Drive-in Theatre, the venture he also worked at and supported. Most importantly, he stayed close with his Mother, who blessed her family with her presence for 103 years.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the 10th Congressional District of Pennsylvania, I'm privileged and humbled to honor and commemorate Mr. Richard T. Freistak on the blessed occasion of his 100th Birthday, as well as his tireless service to our Nation and communities. As a true member of ``The Greatest Generation,'' he has set the standard by which we all should be judged. I wish him great health, prosperity, love, and Godspeed in his future adventures.

Mr. Speaker, I'm honored to recognize Greg and Carol Kupp upon the auspicious occasion of the 90th Anniversary of ``Kuppy's Diner'' on August 6, 2023.

Kuppy's is located in the heart of Middletown, Pennsylvania, and has remained a beloved landmark since Percy Kupp founded the establishment in 1933, during the Great Depression. Kuppy's has been owned and operated by Fourth Generation Kupps (Greg and Carol) since 1991, with the Fifth Generation (Rachel) working alongside them daily, and even mentoring the Sixth Generation (Jackson) to take over someday. The Kupp Family is dedicated to continuing the tradition of their small, hometown, hardworking, friendly, and community-based establishment where all are welcome and treated like family.

Kuppy's Diner has enjoyed and earned extraordinary success, due in no small part to Percy Kuppy's philosophy, ``if you serve good food at reasonable prices, people will be satisfied.'' But perhaps the most significant factor in Kuppy's longevity, popularity, and legacy is the Kupp Family's tireless dedication to and appreciation of their customers and community for nearly a century.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the 10th Congressional District, and surrounding communities, I'm honored and humbled to commemorate Greg, Carol, and the entire Kupp Family upon the 90th Anniversary of Kuppy's Diner in Middletown, Pennsylvania. I wish them continued God's blessings for all they have built, achieved, and contributed, not only to the communities of Central Pennsylvania, but to the United States of America.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored to recognize Tech Sergeant Michael A. Bettis.

Sergeant Bettis is retiring upon 20 years of tireless service to our Nation. His service in the U.S. Air Force as a Firefighter spanned from 2000 through 2004, during which he was twice deployed. During his deployment in the UAE, he was selected for Senior Airman below zone, and also earned the Air Force Achievement Medal. He then deployed to Qatar in 2004, before a brief return to civilian life.

Tech Sergeant Bettis was called back to our Nation's service in the West Virginia Air National Guard, wherein he cross-trained into the Security Forces in 2008, and deployed a third time in 2010 to Saudi Arabia. He reenlisted in the Pennsylvania Air National Guard, where he finished his storied and successful career.

Mr. Speaker. I'm privileged to commend Tech Sergeant Michael Bettis on his tireless, selfless and loyal service to the United States, and I wish him Godspeed in his future.

Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted YEA on roll call No. 295.

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

Mr. Chair, this amendment strikes sections 206 and 207 of the underlying bill that restricts the sale of reserved N-Numbers for profit, or as the underlying bill calls it, N-Number profiteering.

Instead of addressing the real pressures and pressing issues facing the aviation industry, such as serious staffing shortages--pilots, controllers, employees of the FAA, mechanics, et cetera--that are causing massive delays and cancellations all around the country, Congress feels the need to interfere with small businesses transferring and selling N-Numbers. What an egregious crime.

For those who don't know, N-Numbers are the clearly marked registration numbers for civil aircraft within the United States. They are transferable and reusable. When you see an airplane go by that says N123456 on the tail, that is the N-Number. When the aircraft identifies itself to air traffic control, it says, ``Air traffic control, this is November 12345 inbound,'' or whatever.

Currently, small businesses have sprung up that reserve and sell these N-Numbers, providing aircraft owners with the ability to obtain their desired N-Number, much like a vanity plate on a car, while allowing these businessowners to make a living.

These private transactions between consenting parties provide value to both the buyer and the seller. Otherwise, these transactions just wouldn't happen.

Unless the plane owner seeks a specific N-Number, they are able to get one of the 454,910 N-Numbers currently available for reservation directly from the FAA for $10 apiece. They can get them right now for $10. None of that has changed. In other words, no one is forcing anyone to do business with the N-Number brokers unless they want to.

The practice of reserving and selling these N-Numbers is not harming anyone. Instead, it is an innovative commercial venture providing value to all parties. It certainly is not something for Congress to be interfering with and bothering itself with over the behest of private plane owners.

This amendment removes this gross government overreach and allows freedom of enterprise in America to continue.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to stand up for the market, protect contractual freedom, and support this amendment.

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

Mr. Chair, I appreciate the chairman of the full committee and his perspective on this. Nobody likes the pirating or the abuse, so to speak, of the system, but to disallow it altogether is not the answer.

To me, this is Congress, and if this is such an egregious problem, then we can handle the software issue directly without destroying an industry that is obviously good for the buyer and the seller.

Quite honestly, I don't know how many of us who have bought and sold a car and transferred the license number said: ``Oh, my goodness, if I don't have the same license number, well, I can't sell the car.'' I am not really worried about the license number. I just need to be able to drive the car.

If it is such a problem, why don't we address that portion of the problem and not cut everybody out of the deal?

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

Mr. Chair, I acknowledge that the bill is not only about this issue, but the pressing issues that we have, the ones that you already talked about, I would say that the bill could do a lot more on those issues. Those are the things that concern the American people: safety, access, and canceled flights.

I will tell you that it is great that we are mandating the FAA to do something. We are mandating that the American people have to do something. We are mandating that the FAA fully complement controllers.

That doesn't mean controllers are coming out of school. That doesn't mean controllers want to take the job. You can mandate it all you want, but if the people aren't willing to do the job or are not available to do the job, they are not going to be there to do the job. I see that as a wholly inadequate response and solution to a pressing problem that I predict is going to get worse between now and the next 5-year reauthorization.

Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of this amendment. I think it is a good amendment. If we have to deal with the other problem directly, then let's deal directly with the other problem of the software and not punish everybody.

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

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

Mr. Chairman, I don't think many of our constituents have a

high opinion of Washington, D.C., bureaucrats. Congressional staff spend hours helping constituents just get a human being on the telephone to get answers from agencies like Social Security or the IRS.

A recently released GAO report showed that 17 of the 24 Federal agencies in GAO's review used an estimated average of 25 percent or less of their headquarters buildings' capacity in a 3-week sample period, which means 75 percent of the building is empty.

These are headquarters, to be clear, not field offices in the middle of nowhere. This is where the people are, generally speaking, in Washington, D.C., actually.

The Republican Conference has undergone a concerted effort to ensure that these bureaucrats actually do their work in the office.

In the first few weeks of this Congress, we passed the SHOW UP Act-- which passed the House on a bipartisan basis with all but one member of the Republican Conference and three Democrats--that would simply require agencies to reinstate the telework policies in effect on December 31, 2019, and require approval of OMB for further expansion of telework policies.

This bill, as written, allows the FAA to implement out-of-control telework policies for FAA employees during a time when workforce issues--both at the FAA and in the aviation industry broadly--are hindering the efficient movement of the flying public.

In my view, this is unwise and is the exact opposite direction that we should be going.

This amendment applies the policies of the SHOW UP Act to only the FAA. This is a commonsense policy upon which the House has already voted and voted in an overwhelmingly bipartisan basis.

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

Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for his comments regarding our work in the subcommittee.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my good friend from Virginia (Mr. Good).

Mr. Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman.

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

Mr. Chairman, this is a nearly 50-year-old temporary program. It is indicative of everything in Washington: Nothing ever dies here. We just spend more and more money.

The DOT literally picks winners and losers, where neighboring airports have to compete against the Federal Government, which subsidizes routes for the very same market. Approved subsidies include funding leisure routes. That is not essential. That is leisure.

Flights on EAS routes are relatively empty compared to nonsubsidized flights, and the obvious outcome of subsidizing these routes is that they are not economically viable. That is why they are subsidized. It is because nobody really needs them. There are other options that are reasonable.

The industry continues to suffer from a pilot shortage, a mechanic shortage, labor all across the board, ATC, et cetera. All we are doing is making it worse by misallocating these resources.

Pilots are flying planes to places where there aren't any customers, and they are canceling routes where people need to fly.

The bill does make significant improvements. However, the program remains inherently unfair and represents a significant misallocation of resources at a time when we can ill afford to do so.

Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption.

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

Mr. Chairman, this amendment strikes the section that allows the administration to consider expanding the CLEEN Program.

Now, as a reminder, in the CLEEN Program, the FAA provides awards to industry to develop and integrate technology that will reduce noise, emissions, and fuel burn.

Now, looking over some of the projects, some of them aren't completely useless: improvements to wing performance and thermal efficiency for turbines may well contribute to cost savings. But that actually begs the question: Why can't these projects be funded by private industry alone?

Surely, if they improve fuel efficiency, that is a clear profit- driven motive to invest in new technologies.

The program also funds the development of ``alternative'' jet fuels which is just another facet of the left's crusade to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to meet completely arbitrary and unscientific targets.

The administration aims to achieve ``net zero'' greenhouse gas emissions from the aviation sector by 2050.

Mr. Chairman, I want you to think about that because you won't be flying when that happens.

The so-called sustainable aviation fuel is critical to achieving this foolhardy goal.

However, this fuel doesn't change the physics of an engine. The engine still emits carbon dioxide. Instead, emissions are actually produced out of waste products cooking oil and agricultural waste instead of fossil fuels, and then the engine burns that. That is what you are paying for, Mr. Chairman. The program makes taxpayers pay for that fuel.

These fuels are extremely expensive and not widely adopted, as low as 0.1 percent at last counting. The CLEEN Program acknowledges these shortcomings.

Phase II simply furthered the understanding of key biofuel properties in demonstrating the viability of them. So it acknowledges it is actually not really changing anything, but we are just spending a lot of money burning cooking oil in an aviation engine.

There is absolutely no reason we should actually be expanding this program that is pouring taxpayer dollars into technologies into which the public sector is unwilling to invest.

They are unwilling to invest because there is no money in this. The only way it works is if the taxpayers pour all their money into it.

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

Mr. Chairman, my friend on the other side of the aisle is a good man. He is just, I think, misdirected on this occasion.

I will be clear. I don't want the administrator to be spending time approving this contract or that contract. I don't want him doing any of it.

As far as hydrogen, I marvel at this premise that somehow the government is the only one that can figure this out. Somehow this country figured out and invented the internal combustion engine, the lightbulb, the airplane, and went to space.

But heaven forbid we figure this out without the government and without these taxpayers being forced to pay for it.

The third phase of the CLEEN Program is awarding more than $100 million for aircraft and engine companies to develop and demonstrate aircraft technologies that reduce fuel use, emissions, and noise. Relating to sustainable aviation gas, CLEEN funds are trying to research higher blends of biofuels to petroleum-based fuels which can affect seal performance.

On average, this fuel costs three to five times more than conventional jet fuel. We already have the jet fuel. It is already efficient. It is already clean. We have already reduced emissions more than all the other countries combined. We already met the Paris climate accords requirements without being in the accord.

Now, other barriers to adoption include risks related to adoption, including safety.

Mr. Chairman, as a person who has sat behind the stick and who has been up in the air, I can tell you the pucker factor is pretty high when the engine quits. I don't know about you, but I don't want to be experimenting with fuel while I am up in the air, and I don't want the pilots up front to be forced to experiment with it because the government says so.

We have something that works. The private sector can figure this out. They can invest in it, they can pay for it, and they can perfect it.

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

Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.

Mr. Chair, we don't need to provide more subsidies to support this climate smart agriculture practice and production of aviation biofuel feedstocks.

It actually makes your food more expensive because we are burning your fuel in an aircraft instead of pumping it out of the ground where the fuel has come from and has worked very, very well.

There are up to $3 billion in DOE loan guarantees. I want to win the race, too, but the Federal Government picking winners and losers ensures that we probably will lose the race because we are going to pick the wrong one, as the Federal Government normally does.

Once again, this is an absurd policy. If it were viable at all, the private sector would invest in it.

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

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

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

Just like the last amendment, this amendment recognizes the fact that our country is out of money. We are borrowing money to pay our bills, and we are paying for things that we can't afford. We are paying for things that these folks can't afford.

Mr. Chair, this amendment reduces the authorization levels in section 101, which is airport planning; section 103, which is operations; and section 1111, which is research and development.

The authorization levels in the underlying bill represent a significant increase from the levels set by Congress in the 2018 reauthorization bill.

For example, the underlying bill raises the authorizations by significant

amounts from FY 2023 to FY 2024: 101 by $650 million, 103 by $1.2 billion, and 1111 by $41 million.

This amendment reduces the growth of these authorization levels while still increasing the funds authorized for FAA, resulting in a net savings of nearly $5 billion.

If we are going to raise the level, understanding and recognizing inflation caused by out-of-control spending in this place, we are going to recognize and understand that the FAA still has to continue to operate, but we are not going to raise it so much.

Our national debt is out of control, and it is this mindless, rapid growth of spending in Washington that has put our Nation on the brink of catastrophe.

Moreover, this massive increase in funding is not resulting in a safer or more efficient FAA mission. That is their mission: safety, more efficiency. It instead represents a significant misallocation of resources to woke and green missions at the expense of safety and financial sanity.

We must reorient the FAA back to its original mission and ensure the funding we provide to them is appropriate to meet the moment while not wasting taxpayer resources.

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

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from the other side of the aisle, but I want to clarify. It is not a cut. We are actually increasing the spend; just not as much.

Now, I know in Washington, oh, my goodness, who knew the request was up to $4 billion? I imagine they would take more than $4 billion if we gave it to them.

We are broke. Hello, America. Wake up, everybody. I have a news flash for you. We don't have anymore money. We are borrowing money to pay the bills. We are borrowing money to pay for things that we can't afford. That is what we are trying to fix here.

If you want to save some money somewhere else and spend it here, I am all ears. Let's talk about it. Something has to give. These people can't afford any more. They are not getting more out of this.

I have been in the room. I used to sit on appropriations in the State House. I know how it goes. Well, we spent this much this year or last year. We are just going to add some more this year.

Nobody goes through line by line and says, oh, well, this costs this much more because concrete costs X and labor costs Y. Nobody does that. They just add money to it.

It is all arbitrary, and we know it. Everybody in this place knows it. That is why we should spend less because we don't have the money to spend.

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

Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.

Mr. Chairman, since my good friend brought it up, it was a bipartisan agreement. So the world knows that it was a bipartisan agreement here, known in Congress as what is called a four-corners deal: two on their side, two on our side.

There are 435 Members of Congress. I wasn't involved. I wasn't one of the four. You weren't one of the four. Nobody else here was one of the four.

They decided to spend all these billions of dollars. They didn't come to me and say, well, we need this much for concrete and this much for research, because they decided, and this is what is in the bill. Heaven forbid anybody challenge it.

Mr. Chair, we do not have the money. We should reduce the authorization. It is still an increase, just not as much, and it recognizes the fact that our country is broke.

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

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

Mr. Chairman, this amendment strikes the word ``vertiport'' from the definition of ``heliport'' for the purposes of AIP funding, the same funding that the gentleman on the other side of the aisle just mentioned that we need so much of.

As a helicopter pilot, I am very interested in the funding for heliports, but vertiports are going to use some of that funding; meanwhile, not paying anything in.

Let me tell you, Mr. Chair. Vertiports exist for the purpose of advanced air mobility and electric vertical takeoff and landing or eVTOL vehicles, which only exist in prototype and other nascent stages.

Mr. Chair, eVTOL is so immature in its development that there is a reality index that actually exists--an Advanced Air Mobility Reality Index.

The reality index ranks companies and essentially determines whether there is a reality that these things are ever going to even come to the market, be produced, and be viable. Is that something we should be investing in?

These are ranked and combined to describe the likelihood of the aircraft certification and production on scale. Again, this is a ranking of the likelihood that these things even get produced, much less used.

Furthermore, if these vehicles become the norm, Jetson style like their proponents envision, allowing AAM vehicles to receive the benefits of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund without paying into it, evokes the same debate we are currently having about the government- mandated transition to electric automobiles which don't pay into the highway fund. They don't pay in, but they use it.

The same thing here. These vehicles want to use it, but they don't want to pay into it. They are robbing from everybody else that has to use it that actually currently exists and are used.

I haven't even gotten into the drawbacks of the potential vehicles, but how about being concerned about adequate storage for hazardous materials to respond to lithium and other critical mineral-related fires?

The fires are challenging enough for firefighters to address on the ground or at sea, let alone having them occur between skyscrapers.

If you wonder, do these fires actually exist, you can just search the internet. It is widely known. You can see the electric vehicles burning at the charger, burning people's garages, burning and burning and burning. There is a problem because they are unstable.

If you want to get in the air and fly in one of these things, God bless you, but your money is going to be transferred to deal with these things that don't pay into the fund. They don't pay anything in, yet they are going to draw money out.

This system works when the users pay into it. That is how it works. Otherwise, these folks up here are going to have to pay extra because there is not going to be enough money in the fund to pay for all of it.

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

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for the clarification, and I marvel at the fact that we can include the definition and the term in preparation for something that right now doesn't really exist practically. It is in people's minds, and it is on a computer. There are prototypes out there.

We can do that, but we can't find any way to charge and make sure they are paying their fair share into the fund that they are going to use the infrastructure of, right? The infrastructure is created by the fund, and they are going to use it, but they ain't going to pay. We can't figure that out, but we sure can make sure that they have access to everything else that everyone is paying for.

Ladies and gentlemen, in Washington, D.C., this is how things go awry. This is how you go broke. This is how you can't afford things that you need to do, like pay for your highways, filled now with electric vehicles that are not paying into the system, paying nothing for the roads that they are on, weighing thousands of pounds in excess of most of the regular cars that are using the road now and are paying the fee.

Do you know what we are going to do because we are so brilliant and because that is working so well? We are going to double down and do it in the air, as well. That is awesome.

It is not awesome, ladies and gentlemen. Do you know what else is not awesome? Most of the materials sourced in this stuff come from the Communist Chinese, made by slave labor, whether it is the actual slave labor in concentration camps in east Turkistan or whether it is the child slave labor in the Congo feeding the Chinese machine, feeding the machine here so we can virtue signal that we are doing everything clean, that we are electrified and are not going to charge anybody for it. Somebody is going to pay.

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

Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.