Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the gentleman from Waco emphasized Waco, Texas, and I thank Congresswoman Crockett for bringing us together.

Our friend, our colleague, was mighty proud of being born in Waco, Texas. For that reason, I want to take note of her loving parents, Edward Johnson, a tailor, and Lillie Mae White Johnson, a stay-at-home mother. They, of course, instilled in our friend, our sister, the love of this country and that you could do anything you wanted to do. She was surrounded by their love and the love of her siblings. She had in her the gifts of faith and charity and the importance of education.

As a child, she knew she wanted to be a doctor, but how many have heard the word ``no'' from those who were part of her educational journey? Some said it was because she was a woman. Others knew it was because of her race.

Eddie Bernice Johnson was not to be denied. She left the State of Texas ultimately and went to St. Mary's College in Notre Dame. We have heard some stories about how even the veterans hospital thought they were hiring a man when she finally came back and became chief of psychiatric medicine as it relates to the Veterans Administration.

As I speak about her today, I simply want to say that she elevated the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. I remember staying on that committee for a while before going to the Homeland Security Committee, and she would always say that she will continue to invest in that committee so that she could lead, for she was science and technology.

She loved diversity. That is why the Taiwanese community loved her. The LGBTQ+ community loved her because, before anyone else would recognize their diversity and their humanity, she did. They loved her in Dallas.

No matter what walk of life you may have had, what faith you may have had, what walk of life you may have had, or the neighborhoods you came from, Eddie Bernice Johnson was there to be a fighter for your rights, to be a spokesperson, and to be one of strength when you needed it.

She knew the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Yes, she was a friend of President Lyndon Baines Johnson, President Jimmy Carter, and all those who came after.

I am glad to stand here today to be able to honor her parents, her siblings, and her wonderful son, Kirk, and the beautiful grandchildren and great-grandchildren that she loved.

Her homegoing service was simply that, a homegoing celebration. I remember saying that night that she was truly a yellow rose. To fellow Texans, she loved Texas. A yellow rose she was, and she was a strong Texas woman.

She will be strongly missed. The Congressional Black Caucus will miss her. Our colleagues will miss her. I will tell you, Texas and the Nation will miss our iconic friend, the Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson. EBJ is what we called her. The 30th District of Texas will never be the same, but she has given her successor the tools to carry on.

God bless you. May you rest in peace and rest in power.

Mr. Speaker, we have come together on this day to celebrate, cherish, and honor the extraordinary life of Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson, for a life well lived.

Eddie Bernice Johnson was born in Waco, Texas to her proud and loving parents Edward Johnson, a tailor, and Lillie Mae White Johnson, a stay- at-home mother.

She was surrounded by the love of three siblings who grew up attending Toliver Chapel Baptist Church, where her mother instilled in her children the gifts of faith, charity, and the importance of education.

Eddie Bernice Johnson as a child knew she wanted to become a doctor but was told by a High School guidance counselor that it would be impossible for her to be a doctor because of her gender.

This attempt to crush her spirit was not successful--she graduated high school at 16, with a determination to pursue a career in medicine.

Eddie Bernice Johnson moved to Indiana to attend Saint Mary's College of Notre Dame, where she earned her nursing certificate. She then transferred to Texas Christian University, to successfully pursue a bachelor's degree in nursing.

She later attended Southern Methodist University and earned a Master of Public Administration in 1976.

Eddie Bernice Johnson with passion and determination used her nursing education to enter a career in medicine; and broke barriers to become the first African American to serve as Chief Psychiatric Nurse at the Dallas Veterans Administration Hospital, where she worked for 16 years.

Eddie Bernice Johnson has amassed a legacy of being--the first--to accomplish many goals during and following her medical career.

She entered public service following the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, because these laws enabled African Americans in the South to register and vote for the first time since Reconstruction.

Eddie Bernice Johnson in 1972, during her first race for public office won a landslide victory to serve in the Texas State House, where she became the first black woman to be appointed to Chair the Labor Committee.

In 1977, President Jimmy Carter appointed her regional head of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, making her the first African American woman in that position.

In 1986, she returned to elected office as a member of the Texas State Senate.

And, in 1993 was sworn into the House of Representatives as the Member serving the 30th District of Texas.

During her time in Washington, DC she served as ranking member and chair of the House Committee on Science and Technology; and sat on the influential Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

She also served on many Caucuses including the influential Congressional Black Caucus and served as its 17th chair from 2001 to 2003.

Rep. Johnson was a dear friend and will be truly missed by all who knew her.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman from Connecticut for yielding. He is long serving and longstanding, and I have been together with Mr. Larson on this issue it has to be two decades, and I can only thank him for realizing that people will simply die--I am going to

say that--without the lifeline of Social Security. He has recognized that, and that is why we are in the fight.

That is why we have to continue the fight. That is why we have to come back in the next Congress and get this done because if it is not done in this Congress--we must get it done. We must get it done.

Let me give you breaking news. Let me tell you why we are all on the floor, why there are 12 Members on the floor and there were others on the floor previously. This is a national crisis. The House Republican Study Committee, a caucus of 176 House Republican Members, has proposed multiple harsh cuts to Social Security in the fiscal year 2024 budget. Although the budget is vague on details, they will be holding--and may have held--a press conference, and reporting has come out that they intend to cut your Social Security. They intend to violate the very special sacred trust--yes, do violence to the sacred trust that from the days of President Roosevelt every American--except those, of course, that were in some of the professions of people of color that we had to fix--every American felt that they could live, that they could survive because of Social Security.

I want to thank John Larson for championing together on the Social Security 2100 Act to be able to bring about an increase of benefits of 2 percent across the board on the average for all Social Security beneficiaries for the first time in 52 years; improve the cost-of- living adjustment so it reflects inflation; increase benefits to boost lower income seniors; improve benefits for middle-income widows and widowers; restore student benefits up to age 26; increase access to benefits for children living with grandparents and other relatives; and celebrate--celebrate repealing the windfall elimination provision, which means in the government pension offset that currently penalizes public servants.

I can walk the streets of the 18th Congressional District, and when all of these hardworking public servants are saying: Have you helped me? I can say yes. We will end the 5-month waiting period.

Mr. Speaker, I am here today to join Mr. Larson in vigorous support of the Social Security 2100 Act and to be able to say that we are here because there is a crisis because there is purposeful intent to snatch Social Security from the hands of beneficiaries, including children. I want to stand with you in the passage of H.R. 2100 because I want the lifeline to continue. I want the story of President Roosevelt to continue in the hands of Americans, people of color, those who have started in life in a low income and those who may end life in a low income but have as their lifeline Social Security.

I am standing with you.

Mr. Speaker, since 1935, the Federal Government has provided Social Security coverage to the American people and kept the promise that a lifetime of work will be rewarded with the peace of mind, certainty, and a sense of stable retirement.

Social Security has transformed what it means to grow old in this country. This system allows our citizens to retire gracefully and with honor.

Social Security is the United States' most effective anti-poverty line.

Social Security keeps 22.5 million Americans, including children above the poverty line.

There are 98,576 Social Security recipients in Texas who receive $143 million in monthly benefits. 8,118 of those are children who rely on our support to go to school every day and live safe and secure lives.

In the 18th Congressional district, Social Security recipients inject more than $97 million into the local economy annually; nationwide, this figure is $775 billion.

It is Congress' responsibility to keep that promise and to fund Social Security for all Americans. Congress must also ensure the benefits keep up with Americans' expenses--today, tomorrow, and forever.

Social Security is a lifeline for many. Social Security has been a stable and secure source of income for millions of seniors and families, many of whom desperately need it.

As our population ages and increases in size, we must protect the benefits that we have become accustomed to for current Social Security recipients and all future recipients.

We must work together to strengthen and protect Social Security, which is why I am a strong supporter of H.R. 4583, the Social Security 2100 Act.

Far too often, it is overlooked the seismic impact that Social Security has had in shaping our national economy and the structure of life chances for hundreds of millions of Americans through the years.

According to the 2022 Social Security Trustees report, if Congress does not act to correct Social Security funding issues, retirees will start receiving reduced benefits starting in 2034.

Reduced benefits would force millions of Americans into poverty.

For about half of senior beneficiaries, Social Security provides a majority of their income.

These seniors have worked extensively and paid into the Social Security system like they were asked to.

They held up their end of the bargain.

Congress must ensure that we are able to hold up our end of the bargain.

H.R. 4583 would increase social security benefits, improve the Cost of Living Adjustment (COIA), ensure no one retires into poverty, and repeals provisions that currently penalize many public servants.

We must continue to support our seniors, veterans, and children who all benefit from Social Security.

I urge my colleagues to support this vital legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to address my absence from Roll Call Votes on Thursday, October 26, 2023, through Monday December 11, 2023. I was detained in my District-TX18. Had I been present I would have voted as follows:

ROLL CALL NO. 558, On the Passage of Making appropriations for energy and water development and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes, I would have voted NAY.

ROLL CALL NO. 557, On the Motion to Recommit, Making appropriations for energy and water development and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes, I would have voted YEA.

ROLL CALL NO. 564, On Agreeing to the Resolution, Providing for the expulsion of Representative George Santos from the House of Representatives, I would have voted YEA.

ROLL CALL NO. 563, On the Passage of Making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes, I would have voted NAY.

ROLL CALL No, 562, On the Motion to Recommit, Making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes, I would have voted YEA.

ROLL CALL 561, On the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended Hamas and Other Palestinian Terrorist Groups International Financing Prevention Act, I would have voted YEA.

ROLL CALL NO. 560, On the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree, Declaring it is the policy of the United States that a nuclear Islamic Republic of Iran is not acceptable, I would have voted YEA.

ROLL CALL NO. 559, On the Motion to Table, Censuring Representative Rashida Tlaib for antisemitic activity, sympathizing with terrorist organizations, and leading an insurrection at the United Stares Capitol Complex, I would have voted YEA.

ROLL CALL NO. 578, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree, as Amended, Condemning the support of Hamas, Hezbollah, and other terrorist organizations at institutions of higher education, which may lead to the creation of a hostile environment for Jewish students, faculty, and staff, I would have voted YEA.

ROLL CALL NO. 577, On the Passage of Israel Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2024, I would have voted NAY.

ROLL CALL NO. 566, On Agreeing to the Resolution, Providing for consideration of the bills (H.R. 4821) Dept. of Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024; (H.R. 4820) Dept. of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024; and (H.R. 6126) Israel Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2024, I would have voted NO.

ROLL CALL NO. 565, On Ordering the Previous Question, Providing for consideration of the bills (H.R. 4821) Dept. of Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024; (H.R. 4820) Dept. of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024; and (H.R. 6126) Israel Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2024, I would have voted NAY.

ROLL CALL NO. 597, On the Passage of Making appropriations for the Department of the Interior, environment, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes, I would have voted NAY.

ROLL CALL NO. 596, On the Motion to Recommit, Making appropriations for the Department of the Interior, environment, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes, I would have voted YEA.

ROLL CALL NO. 622, On Agreeing to the Resolution, Censuring Representative Rashida Tlaib for promoting false narratives regarding the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel and for calling for the destruction of the State of Israel, I would have voted NAY.

ROLL CALL NO. 608, On the Motion to Table, Censuring Representative Rashida Tlaib for promoting false narratives regarding the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel and for calling for the destruction of the State of Israel, I would have voted YEA.

ROLL CALL NO. 602, On Agreeing to the Resolution, Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4664) making appropriations for financial services and general government for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes, I would have voted

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2670, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024.

Congress has the solemn duty to ensure that those who wear the uniform of the United States--and those civilians who provide logistical and operational support--have the equipment, training, and resources needed to carry out and complete their mission.

And we must never forget that a grateful nation has a sacred obligation, in the words of President Lincoln, ``to care for him who has borne the battle, and for his widow and his orphan.''

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member Smith, and the committee staff for their diligent work that resulted in this bipartisan, bicameral report, which includes my legislation, the Foreign Extortion Prevention Act.

I was pleased to work with Senator Whitehouse to help negotiate the inclusion of this legislation, which will be the most significant international criminal anti-corruption legislation since 1977.

The Foreign Extortion Prevention Act will finally enable U.S. law enforcement to indict foreign kleptocrats for extorting U.S. businesses and Americans.

The harms caused by foreign bribe demands are innumerable and include foreign officials who demand bribes and extort individuals in furtherance of trafficking of children and drugs into and out of the United States.

These crimes largely go unpunished.

With the passage of FEPA (through the NDAA), however, those who violate the provisions of FEPA could face a criminal fine of up to $250,000 and a prison sentence of up to 15 years.

As reported by Transparency International U.S. in May 2023, a recent survey by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development found that foreign officials who demand or receive bribes are only criminally punished by their home governments some 20 percent of the time.

As many of you are aware, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) prohibits U.S. companies from bribing foreign officials.

But it does not protect U.S. companies from predatory foreign officials who solicit bribes--and then partner with the Chinese state- owned enterprises (SOEs) that are more than willing and able to pay them.

China does not appear to have ever enforced its own version of the FCPA, despite the Communist Party's continued crackdowns on companies it perceives to be corrupt or disloyal.

FEPA, by making it a crime for a foreign official to demand a bribe from a U.S. company, would therefore not only help to level the playing field for U.S. companies--but it will also deter and hold accountable corrupt officials who, by betraying their oaths for Beijing's bribes, become complicit in the Communist Party's global campaign to subvert rule of law and upend the security order.

By joining with the United Kingdom, Germany, France, and other democratic allies who have already enacted similar legislation to protect their own businesses, the United States can set an alternative example to China's use of corruption as a tool of foreign policy--one that, in promoting honest competition and rule of law, will ultimately benefit our national security.

In order to restore competitiveness, the United States must double- down on the rule of law.

The kleptocrats that extort U.S. companies also cheat their own people out of economic development and prosperity.

The United States must stand with these victims of kleptocracy.

This means combating the demand side of bribery--we must make kleptocrats think twice before they demand a bribe.

Already, the U.S. Department of Justice is attempting to deter the demand side of bribery with the tools that it has.

However, without a specific authority to prosecute foreign extortion, we are leaving the DOJ without the key tool that it needs to achieve this goal.

It is long overdue that we expand our foreign bribery laws to capture the malfeasance of foreign kleptocrats--in this age of globalization, we can wait no longer.

Please join me in passing the FY2024 National Defense Authorization act, which includes my legislation, the Foreign Extortion Prevention Act, which protects rule-abiding companies, and stands up for the victims of kleptocracy around the world.

It is time that we expand our foreign bribery laws to capture the malfeasance of foreign kleptocrats--in this age of globalization, we can wait no longer.

This legislation will protect rule-abiding companies and stand up for the victims of kleptocracy around the world.

So, I look forward to the NDAA being signed by the President of the United States and becoming law.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the bipartisan NDAA, H.R. 2670, because there are men and women on the front lines across the world who are doing the work of this Nation: The civilians and men and women in the United States military that are providing logistical and operational support with equipment, training and resources needed to carry on.

Yes, and we have reaffirmed diversity, equity, and inclusion, as well as the personal rights of our soldiers to have reproductive care.

In addition, my bill, the Foreign Extortion Prevention Act, was included, which stops Americans from being extorted overseas. It will finally enable U.S. law enforcement to indict foreign kleptocrats for extorting U.S. businesses and Americans individually that basically stops the prosperous work that we are doing.

Mr. Speaker, as well I stand here supporting the Biden-Harris administration, because inflation is going down and retail purchases are going up. We are spreading broadband across America, and, yes, we are standing together to fight against denying women their reproductive rights.

Biden and Harris are going forward with this Democratic Congress, and we are standing here working for America. We will never leave you alone. We will always stand with you.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to yet another shameful effort to erode the founding principles of our democracy.

This resolution is a pitiful attempt to continue the politicization of our government's ability to function once those who are duly elected to serve seek to govern.

Impeachment is not a punishment, sought to be inflicted when one branch of government merely disagrees with or dislikes what a coordinate branch has done.

It is a serious remedy designed to prevent abuses of power and is designed to ensure that ours remains a government of, by, and for the people.

This is about the duty of the President of the United States--you do not impeach people because you disagree with their approach to their service to the country or to the provisions on their policy. We do not impeach people on that basis.

No, this resolution does not provide any meaningful or sincere effort to protect the American people.

Rather, this resolution sets forth nothing more than a partisan fishing expedition and should be rebuked as such.

Impeachment is serious, yet here we are engaged in a baseless political stunt to impeach our current President.

The U.S. Constitution governs the order of our nation, and it dictates the work of the Congress.

Article I details the powers of the House and the exercising of these powers as they relate to the coordinate, coequal branches of government, codified in Articles II and Articles III: three equal branches of government coexisting and cohesively working to provide oversight to the respective actions of the Congress, the Executive and Judiciary.

Specifically, Article I, Section 2, Clause 5 indicates that the ``House of Representatives . . . shall have the sole power of impeachment.'' Article II states that the ``The President . . . shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.'' Article II also requires that the ``President take care that the laws are faithfully executed.''

That language is stark and clear--and throughout our history it has been used in varying periods where the assessment was that the law has been breached.

Sometimes Congresses are concerned that the weight and view of the American people should be considered. Sometimes they are moved by the urgency of the matter.

This has worked, with challenges of course, since 1789, yet the outright abuse of our constitution to use impeachment as a political tool is an abomination of our congressional duties.

As constitutional scholars have long laid out the historical guardrails and mandates upon which must heed, I would like to point to a few salient remarks from the September 28, 2023, Committee on Oversight and Accountability hearing entitled ``The Basis for the Impeachment Inquiry of President Joseph R. Biden'' as reminders for us all here today.

In the testimony of Michael J. Gerhardt, Burton Craige Distinguished Professor of Jurisprudence, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, he highlighted the clear warning from Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist Papers, and what he foresaw in the dangers of trivializing impeachment through petty partisanship.

As quoted in Alexander Hamilton, No. 65, the Federalist Papers (1961), he states that impeachment may ``agitate the passions of the whole community , and to divide it into parties more or less friendly or inimical to the accused. In many cases it will connect itself with pre-existing factions, and will enlist all their animosities, partialities, influence, and interest on one side or on the other; and in such cases there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the relative strength of the parties, than by the demonstrations of innocence or guilt.''

As Professor Gerhardt noted, ``in other words, an impeachment proceeding, including the initiation of an impeachment inquiry, must rise above petty partisanship in order to ensure its legitimacy.

And as aptly stated in the testimony of Johnathon Turley, Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University School of Law, in highlighting the carefully crafted powers vested in the House of Representatives pursuant to Art. I, Sec. 2, cl. 5. is that:

``The Framers debated and crafted this standard and process to avoid an `anything goes' mentality. That was the reason our Framers opposed the `maladministration' standards as too malleable and indeterminate. While we continue to have passionate and good-faith debates over the meaning of the high crimes and misdemeanors standard, it is not intended to give the House carte blanche for any impulsive impeachment theory.''

Nearly fifty years ago, my predecessor Barbara Jordan of Texas's 18th Congressional District, declared, in the first presidential impeachment inquiry in more than a century, that:

``My faith in the Constitution is whole, it is complete, it is total. I am not going to sit here and be an idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the destruction of the Constitution.'' She noted ``those are impeachable `who behave amiss or betray their public trust'' (quoting from the North Carolina ratification convention).

In this vein, we should not be here today in efforts to betray and diminish our Constitution and rule of law.

The unsubstantiated accusations, that the President of the United States has abused his powers and that his conduct is in dereliction of his duties as President, flatly outrageous.

When the Framers of our Constitution designed our government, they bifurcated power between the federal and state governments, and divided among the branches.

They vested in Congress the capacity to make the laws, and in the Executive the power to faithfully execute those laws.

Because the House enjoyed a natural superiority, as most representative of the passions of the populace, the Framers vested in the House of Representatives the sole power of impeachment and made the Senate the judges.

Yet, entirely unlike the incredulous and now confirmed illegality of President Trump's behavior while in office, President Biden has certainly not earned the same stain of impeachment from the House of Representatives and his conduct absolutely does not merit conviction and removal from office by the Senate.

When the Founders inserted the Impeachment Clause in Article I, Section 2, Clause 5, they did so to preserve our democracy, protect the American people, and to prevent the abuses and excesses of the Chief Executive.

The Constitution has served our nation well for over two hundred years.

Yes, in order to keep faith with the Framers and with our future, we must preserve, protect and defend that Constitution and all its provisions.

This impeachment resolution, however, is not one that is within the national interest but a disgrace to our government and its entrusted duties.

My Republican colleagues are sadly focused on the wrong priorities.

The American people want us to focus on helping their families, not attacking the President and his family.

This so-called ``impeachment inquiry'' is just an extreme political stunt.

President Biden is a good and honorable man who has spent his life serving the American people.

Extreme House Republicans are pushing these lies to try to smear him for political purposes.

They have been investigating President Biden all year--obtaining tens of thousands of pages of documents and dozens of hours of witness testimony--but have found no evidence of wrongdoing by the President.

In fact, over and over again, Republicans' own witnesses and documents have embarrassed them by debunking their ridiculous allegations.

They now want to waste time on the House floor voting on this extreme stunt, instead of focusing on advancing important priorities like Ukraine aid or doing their job to avoid a government shutdown in a few weeks.

No vote will make this baseless fishing expedition legitimate.

They have proven all year just how illegitimate this impeachment stunt is.

All a vote would do is put every Republican who supports it on record pushing an extreme agenda.

This is not what Congress should be focused on.

Democrats and President Biden will stay focused on putting people over politics.

As such, I ask my colleagues to vote no on this shameful resolution.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition and join with the opposition to H. Res. 918 directing certain committees to proceed with an impeachment inquiry of President Biden.

As we all know how serious this is, Madam Speaker, let me remind you that Article II of the Constitution says that a President shall be removed from office on impeachment for and conviction of treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors. Article II says it also requires that the President take care that the laws are faithfully executed.

There is no charge or challenge of facts that the President has not executed his job carefully, that he has committed high crimes, misdemeanors and treason. In fact, out of 35,000 pages of financial records, 2,000 pages of Treasury records, 36 hours of testimony, and a number of witnesses, tens of thousands of VP area emails, there is nothing.

This is extreme, a political stunt, and there is no evidence worthy of putting forward this impeachment.

In the words of an outstanding scholar, Professor Michael Gerhardt, in other words, an impeachment proceeding, including the initiation of an impeachment inquiry must rise above petty partisanship.

We cannot do this under the circumstances of petty partisanship. Mr. Biden should not be impeached.

Madam Speaker, during the 118th Congress, Democrats have worked persistently to advance legislation and policies that support the American people.

This Congress, Democrats have been met with fighting and incompetency from Republicans, an unwillingness to work together, and one of the most unproductive sessions in the history of Congress.

Despite the chaos, we have kept the government from defaulting on its debts and made sure that the government stayed open to do the work of the people.

I have worked with my colleagues to fight for the 18th Congressional District of Texas and my constituents, ensuring that the work of the federal government continues despite the chaos from Republicans.

House Democrats stand firm in our commitments to protect essential safety net programs and vital services, deliver for our districts, and prevent further cuts that would threaten the wellbeing of our constituents.

Democrats are united in putting People Over Politics to lower costs and grow the middle class.

As we wrap up the 1st session of the 118th Congress and look forward to the 2nd session, it is the job of Congress to fund our government, pass legislation that betters the lives of the American people, and ensure that we advocate for our constItuents.

Extreme MAGA Republicans have had a difficult time coming to a consensus on how to pass their wildly unpopular and harmful legislation.

Instead of working in a bipartisan matter, they are wasting time and taxpayer dollars by bringing legislation to the floor that has no chance of passing the Senate and being signed by President Biden.

Congress should be working to lower costs and protect of national security instead of focusing on partisan politics.

As we go home for the holidays to our constituents and families, we bring with us a looming government shutdown, a result of incompetency and disfunction from extreme MAGA Republicans.

When we come back in January we must get back to our work.

The American people deserve a Congress that is serious in manner and functions to the best of its ability.

My friends across the aisle have not been willing to compromise during any of the most time-sensitive and dire moments in the 118th Congress.

While they have been focused on division and fear, House Democrats have worked to advocate for their communities while simultaneously offering to collaborate on the most crucial legislation on a bipartisan basis.

In this Congress, I have worked tirelessly to improve the lives of my constituents in Houston.

I have worked to fight against sex trafficking and introduced legislation to stop human trafficking in school zones, introduced gun safety legislation as well as legislation to stop the trafficking of fentanyl, and have brought over $200 million in grants to my district.

While I am proud of the work that I have done for the 18th congressional district of Texas, there is still much work that we need to do.

We have been kicking the can down the road for months, and rather than address the main duty as members of Congress--funding the government--House Republicans instead are launching baseless accusations against our President to score cheap political points.

Under Republican leadership we have just barely avoided two government shutdowns by the skin of our teeth and have been unable to pass meaningful legislation that would improve the lives of Americans.

This is not to say Democrats have not tried to reach across the aisle.

We indicated we would be open to negotiation to avert the first shutdown, and we were

rebuffed until the situation was at its most critical point.

We indicated we would be open to negotiation to avert the second shutdown, and our friends across the aisle took to the media to express countless times that they would refuse to work with Democrats to find a solution.

By trying to suppress Democratic voices, Republican leadership is silencing half of the country simply because they have a different worldview.

Moreover, by not passing serious legislation, Republicans are stifling the very constituents who put them in office.

To serve the people who elected us to Congress, we all must work together to enact positive change born from compromise and a combined desire to serve as a voice for our constituents.

The performance of Republican leadership in this Congress has been utterly disappointing, and I urge my colleagues across the aisle to remember that to serve the people, we must work together to provide comprehensive and meaningful legislation.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much and his good friend as well for yielding, and I appreciate their intent, but let me be very clear: What we have here is a complete collapse of a system that is attempting to save lives.

Our administrative process, our administrative APA, these individuals are grounded with the expertise of the particular agencies that they are in.

Under this legislation, what we would have is a complete politicizing of the Presidentially appointed and Senate-confirmed appointees because that would be another monkey wrench, if you will, into why they should not be confirmed.

In addition, this will encourage gamesmanship. If you think the confirmation process is slow, wait till this bill becomes law.

Congress already has, and the Republicans have used it quite often, the Congressional Review Act so that we can determine whether or not rulemaking or a particular issue is one that is not only reviewed but should be changed.

In the rulemaking process with experts that we oversee, because we have congressional hearings, we are dealing with clean air, clean water, safe toys, safe cars, and safe workplaces, but, more importantly, as I was sitting in a meeting today, we are dealing with a new initiative dealing with taking lead out of water.

Do we want to stop the process of removing lead from the water that our children drink because we implement this particular procedure that will stop our Presidentially-appointed officials from doing their job, from helping us to ensure that our children are safe?

This is a slowdown. This is where lives are not saved. I would argue to my friends that this legislation, unfortunately, should not move forward because there is too much good work going on and the work that is going on will be thwarted, will be stopped.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from the AFSCME, American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, who oppose this particular legislation, along with the administration policy statement as well as a number of other agencies.

Madam Speaker, this legislation is opposed by the Coalition for Sensible Safeguards. I would like to dwell on this question of water and lead coming out of water since many of us were here during the Flint incidents, and we also know what goes on in our own congressional districts.

Let's not stop children from living. Let's not stop the lifesaving regulatory process. Let's oppose H.R. 357.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 357, The Ensuring Accountability in Agency Rulemaking Act.

H.R. 357 would require any agency rule promulgated under the Administrative Procedure Act's notice and comment process to be ``initiated'' and signed by someone who was appointed to their position by the President and confirmed by the Senate, with limited exceptions for national security and public safety.

Simply put, this anti-regulatory bill is an attempt to codify bad federal policy issued during the Trump Administration that was later repealed by President Biden, and it would add unnecessary ambiguity and delay in the rule making process from beginning to end.

While my Republican colleagues will tell you that this is just about transparency and accountability, it is not.

This is about shutting down the regulatory process.

By requiring that any rulemaking be initiated and signed by a presidentially appointed and Senate confirmed official, this bill could grind the regulatory process to a halt during long appointment periods or presidential transitions.

Rulemaking could be delayed (or even prevented altogether) by the already substantially politicized Senate confirmation process, especially during the transition between Administrations and for agencies that experience frequent turnover or have longstanding vacancies among their senior leadership.

If you think the confirmation process is slow and contentious now, wait until this bill becomes law.

The party opposing the President will have every incentive to block a nomination and prevent an agency from having an eligible head in place who can issue regulations.

Like the Separation of Powers Restoration Act (SOPRA) and the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act--that nearly all House Democrats opposed earlier this Congress--this is a patently transparent effort to effectively halt Executive agencies from performing their Congressionally mandated duties to serve the American people.

This proposal is a dangerous solution in search of a problem.

While H.R. 357 purports to improve agency accountability, the proposal actively undermines the constitutional authority of agencies to delegate the routine task of signing a rulemaking to subordinates as an efficiency measure.

Senior agency appointees already ratify the signing of the rulemaking after the fact to comply with this clause.

And Congress also already plays a significant role in placing and removing restrictions on agency rules by conducting oversight and restricting how funds can be used and passing legislation to limit agency discretion.

As demonstrated time and time again in the House this year, Congress can use the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to overturn rules it disapproves of.

For instance, my Republican colleagues have already tried to use the CRA to repeal reasonable restrictions on deadly weapons, jeopardize affordable student loan repayment and make it harder for women- and minority-owned businesses to access funds to grow their businesses.

While most can agree improvements can be made to the regulatory process, measures that make it harder for agencies to make new rules cuts against the interest of all who reside in the United States. Because most importantly, regulations are necessary to save our lives.

Regulations are critical to ensuring the safety and soundness of virtually every facet of our lives, including clean air, clean water, safe toys, safe cars, and safe workplaces.

We should reject any effort that would prevent agencies from issuing these life-saving regulations.

Yet rather than ensuring public protections and industry accountability in and through agency rulemaking, this bill would create confusion, ambiguity, uncertainty, and pointless delays.

The bill would only ensure delay and prevent necessary public protections from being promulgated in the process causing, and avoidable harm and risk to the public.

If enacted, this bill would give extreme legislators another opportunity to obstruct federal policymaking by blocking the confirmation of agency officials in the Senate, putting critical government functions from civil rights enforcement and financial regulation to protecting consumers and the environment in jeopardy.

It is also important to highlight that the Coalition for Sensible Safeguards, consisting of over 160 labor, consumer, and environmental organizations are strongly opposed to this bill.

Additionally, if the President were presented with H.R. 357, he would veto it.

For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote in opposition to H.R. 357, The Ensuring Accountability in Agency Rulemaking Act.

Madam Speaker, the people of Texas have been on an emotional roller coaster, and they have been on an emotional roller coaster with our fellow Texan Kate Cox, her husband, and her family.

This young woman wanted nothing more than to have a healthy baby and to expand their family. It was that love and deep desire that caused her to go public on an absolutely abusive law that tells her what kind of medical care she can get.

In addition, it should be made clear that a judge did give her permission to make the decision with her doctor, her faith, and her family. However, political intervention to the State supreme court caused them to stop her in her tracks. This young woman had to leave Texas.

Madam Speaker, that is why I am back here, to reintroduce, if you will, my legislation, that creates a criminal offense for anyone to stalk someone who is attempting to get good healthcare in the State of Texas.

That is all Kate Cox wanted.

I will be standing by her and her family, as many Texans will. We must stop this now, and we must reinstate reproductive freedom in this Nation.

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her great leadership.

Madam Speaker, I stand here for the children. We must stand for the children. A little boy riding with his grandmother, Oleksandr Ivanov, was killed by the Russians and more children have been killed in all the conflicts that are going on.

We must move forward so that the humanitarian aid comes along with the aid that is needed to fight the Russians who have lost 87 percent of their military since they started. This can be winnable for the children. We need humanitarian aid in all the wars that are now going on, and I want to stand for that fight. The bill named after Oleksandr Ivanov is to protect our children wherever they are, humanitarian aid and war aid to ensure that the children are our priority. I hope that this fight will be won, and we will win for democracy and we will win for our children.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to support Ukraine as it stands up to tyranny and defends their sovereignty in the face of Russia's continued, unprovoked aggression. But I rise for the children in all wars--and I ask and demand humanitarian aid for children in all the wars.

We must send the unmistakable message that in the 21st Century, a dictator cannot conquer or carve up neighboring territories.

On February 24, 2022, Russia, under the leadership of Vladimir Putin, launched a premeditated war against Ukraine in an attack on democracy and a grave violation of international law, global peace, and security.

The war in Ukraine continues to severely impact people's lives and damage civilian infrastructure, triggering evacuations from front-line areas and driving humanitarian needs.

According to the United Nations Refugee Agency, as of July 2023, there are a recorded 5.1 million internally displaced people in Ukraine, 6.2 million refugees from Ukraine globally, and 17.6 million Ukrainian people in need of humanitarian assistance.

The unjust and brutal war has put millions of Ukrainian women and children at risk of trafficking. Millions of children have been deprived of their education and are experiencing trauma, and according to a report by Yale University, more than 6,000 children are in Russians custody.

According to a report by Yale University Humanitarian Research Lab (Yale HRL), at least 6,000 children from Ukraine ages four months to 17 years have been held at camps and other facilities within Russia- occupied Crimea and mainland Russia since Russia's full-scale invasion began.

Forcibly transferring children of one group to another group is a violation of Article II(e) of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide 1948 and the Geneva Convention IV, including articles 24, 25, 50, 78 and 82.

Today, I call my colleagues to action and ask that they join me in seeking liberty and justice for all those in Ukraine.

Ukrainian children are being forcibly taken to Russia and put up for adoption into Russian families in an apparent effort to assimilate them, a practice that genocide scholar Timothy Snyder has said could be considered genocide under the 1948 Genocide Convention.

Ukraine's Office of the Prosecutor General has confirmed more than 17,000 cases of Ukrainian children abducted to Russia. But the number is likely much higher.

The U.S. State Department has said it has reliable information that Russian authorities have deliberately separated Ukrainian children from their parents during so-called ``filtration'' procedures and abducted others from Ukrainian institutions before putting them up for adoption inside Russia and estimates that the number may be as high as 260,000.

This is only the first step in what appears to be a deliberate Russian policy.

Once Ukrainian children arrive in Russia--or in Russian-controlled part of Ukraine such as Crimea--they are put into Russian orphanages. After a short period, they are given Russian citizenship.

This is done because Russian law allows for the adoption of foreign children.

Last Spring Putin signed decrees streamlining the process for children to receive Russian citizenship and for adoption.

Families are also given financial incentives to adopt children.

In Russian custody, Ukrainian children are subjected to reeducation programs meant to ``Russify'' them, told that their parents no longer want them, and convinced that their future lies in Russia.

Disgustingly, Russian propaganda cynically portrays its adoption of Ukrainian children as an act of generosity that gives new homes to helpless orphans.

Russian state media shows local officials hugging and kissing newly arrived Ukrainian children and handing them Russian passports.

Many of these children are not orphans at all.

Ukrainian institutions also house children whose parents were not in position to take care of them for a period of time or who had special needs.

Once adopted, children's names and dates of birth are often changed, making it extremely difficult to find them and reunite them with their families in the future.

We need to act now to stop the abduction and forced assimilation of Ukrainian children to Russia.

We need to raise our concerns loudly and often and speak out to counter the disgusting Russian propaganda that would use children in this way.

We should consider whether there is a need to establish a registry to record data on children believed to have been taken to Russia or Russian-occupied territories to assist law enforcement and also future family reunification in the future.

Of course, any such system must protect children's personal information.

In addition, we should also look at what role international organizations might play in tracking and rescuing these children, including the Red Cross.

Further, Ukraine's children are suffering serious injury and trauma due to Russia's genocidal war on Ukraine.

According to the United Nations, almost two-thirds of the country's children have been displaced.

Thousands have been injured and, although UNICEF has said more than 1,000 children have been killed, that number is likely much, much higher as there is no reliable way to verify how many civilians have been killed in the most decimated areas of Ukraine, like Mariupol, where, just as one example, Russian forces bombed a theater housing hundreds of civilians despite clear markings that children were present.

In addition to the immediate dangers of war, the effects of war on children could have lasting consequences.

Many Ukrainian children have witnessed unimaginable violence, including the murders of their own parents or family members.

They have had to endure the stress of being under almost constant bombardment, in fear of their safety.

Others have experienced hunger, cold, and weeks spent hiding in wet, frigid basements without daylight or fresh air and without sanitation or healthcare.

This constant stress takes a heavy toll on the youngest victims of war.

Moreover, disruptions to education may never be fully recovered.

In this regard, I would like to recognize the Ukrainian government's exceptional campaign to keep children linked to their schools by mobilizing the remote learning infrastructure built up during the COVID-l9 pandemic, as well as the many European countries which have opened their schools to Ukrainian refugee children.

Children--and their families--need support to heal from the trauma they have experienced.

There are organizations on the ground providing psychological treatment, art therapy, humanitarian aid, and for some even new homes.

We all need to support such programs and to act now to ensure their continued action and expanded reach.

The longer children go without receiving treatment for their trauma, the longer it will take to heal.

There is also significant concern for the physical, mental, and psychological well-being of women in Ukraine.

Amnesty International reports that women in the country face grave risks, an increased burden of caring responsibilities and immense stress and hardships when living in war zones.

Amnesty International's Secretary General explains that ``Time and time again, women bear the brunt of war's brutality. They are consistently on the frontlines of conflict--as soldiers and fighters, doctors and nurses, volunteers, peace activists, carers for their communities and families, internally displaced people, refugees, and too often as victims and survivors.''

Women confront increased sexual and gender-based violence and perilous health conditions, while being forced to make life and death survival decisions for their families.

At the same time, women are often excluded from the decision-making processes and their rights and needs remain unprotected and unmet.

While many women in Ukraine have joined the resistance to Russian aggression, very often caregiving responsibilities for children and family members fall disproportionately on women.

Managing these caregiving responsibilities is especially difficult in the perilous conditions of the conflict.

A woman living in the conflict zone in Donetsk Oblast, told Amnesty International how the invasion has impacted her as a mother and caregiver for her parents: ``All changed for the worse. Men [from the family] are at war, women are left alone, many with small children on their backs without any income. There is no help--no physical help, no financial aid.''

The invasion has also had a distinct detrimental effect on women's mental, physical and sexual and reproductive health.

For menstruating women and girls, limited supplies any increased prices for menstruation management products are forcing them to choose between food and sanitary products.

I am especially concerned about reports of rape and sexual assault committed by Russian troops, not only of women, but also of children and men.

Gender-based violence is aggravated and intensified for those living in the conflict-affected regions for many reasons.

These include the lack of security, the absence or erosion of the rule of law, the pervasiveness of impunity for the perpetrators, and lack of trust in the occupying authorities, as well as the stigma attached to disclosing experiences of sexual and gender-based violence.

This is not only an effort to humiliate and terrorize, but also could amount to genocide as some women report being told by their tormenters that they would be raped until they could no longer have Ukrainian children.

Russia must be held accountable for their heinous actions and the war crimes they have committed against the women, children, and people of Ukraine.

I urge Congress to act to protect the safety, security, and well- being of the people of Ukraine, especially vulnerable populations like women and children.

Congress cannot remain complicit in the face of Russian aggression.

We must act to defend the rights and freedoms of Ukraine's children and all its people.

To hold accountable those who have committed these atrocities and have put the lives of thousands of Ukrainian women and children at risk, I introduced H.R. 5800, the Oleksander Ivanov Act.

Mr. Chairman, our universities across America have opened the doors to working-class Americans and impoverished Americans to be able to access a better life and education.

I speak to this amendment that indicates that any donation, as much as $1, has to be under this particular act.

First of all, this is a blanket representation that our universities are taking moneys from terrorists. I am outraged to say that the University of Houston, University of Texas, Texas Southern University, and Prairie View A&M would be in the position of taking money from terrorists.

If you pass this amendment, you implode the innocent persons who are giving donations and the work of our universities attempting to provide dollars to educate more Americans--more impoverished Americans who simply have families that cannot afford for them to go to school. This is an outrage.

I want everybody to know that under this particular act, $1 has to be reported. That $1 may come from a grandmother or that $1 may come from a hardworking parent.

Generous and kindhearted people from the faith institutions that many of our universities come under, Mr. Chair, you are going to ask them to vet or to determine whether terrorists are involved.

It is not the question of whether terrorists are involved. I want this Nation to be protected. We now realize that we are subject to a lot of terrorist potential because of the times we are in. I take it seriously. I am on the Homeland Security Committee.

Nevertheless, this $1 is to make a mockery of the hard work of many folks at ``working-class'' universities and colleges, our community colleges, and 2-year colleges that themselves receive donations from people who are grateful that they allowed them to be a vocational nurse or welder and, because of that opportunity, they were able to make a living for themselves and their families.

We must have rational and reasonable thinking here. I am grateful for America's hierarchy of education because so many people come here to be educated.

Mr. Chair, let us vote this amendment down. Let us not do this and undermine the educational system of this Nation and the Constitution.

Mr. Chair, it should be made very clear that there is not one American, not one Member of Congress, not one Democratic Member of Congress, as well, joined with colleagues who reasonably understand our mutual commitment to the national security of this Nation, who wants any interference in the important research that is being done by universities across America.

They are the hope of the world. There are brilliant students who come with complete innocence here to the United States to create global research that will help not only this country but the world.

I want that to continue. I want the bad actors to be wiped out. Clearly, as my friends have now moved from China to the Mideast, I abhor Hamas. They are terrorists, but I am yet to find a dollar from them to any legitimate institution here in the United States.

What I will say is that we have a system in place. It builds on the Chips and Science Act and the Presidential memorandum on government- supported research.

Mr. Chair, we already have a process to weed out and stop it. I can't imagine stopping research at the Yales and Harvards and Princetons, but I also can't imagine stopping it from the ordinary universities across America.

Let us support the present legislation and the U.S. Department of Education and stop blaming our educational institutions and calling them terrorists.

Mr. Speaker, I was not able to cast my vote during Roll Call No. 691 on December 1, 2023, due to circumstances that necessitated my remaining in the District. As a consequence, I was unavoidably delayed and was not present in the House Chamber to cast votes on this date. Had I been present, I would have voted as follows:

On Roll Call No. 691, on Agreeing to the Resolution (H. Res. 878), ``Providing for the expulsion of Representative George Santos from the United States House of Representatives'', I would have voted YEA.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 5894--Labor, Health, and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024.

House Republicans had an opportunity to engage in a productive, bipartisan appropriations process, but instead are wasting time with partisan bills that cut domestic spending to levels well below the Fiscal Responsibility Act agreement and endanger critical services for the American people.

As with all the additional appropriation bills that have been up for consideration on the House Floor, I strongly oppose the passage of this bill for a myriad of reasons.

The 2024 Labor, Health, and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act provides $163 billion, which is a 28 percent cut of $64 billion, and brings us back to a level unseen since 2008.

This dangerous and irresponsible legislation would do the following:

Decimate support for children in K-12 elementary schools and early childhood education.

Abandon college students and low-income workers trying to improve their lives through higher education or job training.

Stifle lifesaving biomedical innovation by cutting funding for cancer research, mental health research, and neurological research, and by slashing funding for advanced research projects intended to develop new cures and therapies.

Surrender to ongoing public health crises in mental health, opioid use, HIV/AIDS, and health disparities.

Harm women's health by cutting programs that support maternal and child health, eliminating programs that provide access to health services and contraception, and adding numerous partisan and poison pill riders related to abortion and reproductive health.

This bill is out of regular order. It was never marked up and considered in the House Appropriations committee.

There is no example of this happening in the last 20 years.

House Republicans are stripping $63.8 billion away from Texas, making it harder for Texans to access education, health care, employment, and more.

I think we can all agree children are our future and that we should invest to make our future better and brighter.

As Chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, I am extremely passionate about the wellbeing and education of children.

Which is why I offered the Jackson Lee Amendment No. 51 as incorporated in the En Bloc.

Despite the horrible provisions throughout the entirety of this appropriations bill, the Jackson Lee Amendment No. 51 as incorporated into En Bloc Amendment is an important amendment that would increase by $2 million the Head Start Act, including Head Start partnerships.

One of the objectives of the Congressional Children's Caucus is to ensure that all the children in this country have an opportunity to receive an education, including early childhood development.

Head Start helps all children succeed, especially vulnerable children.

If we continue to underfund education in the United States, our children will suffer, we will dismantle public education, and we will be weaker as a nation.

This legislation would kick teachers out of classrooms.

The United States is already in a teacher shortage and this bill would cut another 22,300 teachers from Texas schools due to cuts from Title 1.

This bill would severely impact teachers and students all over the state of Texas, where the Texas Education Agency has already decided to unnecessarily takeover Houston ISD.

Houston ISD is the largest school district in the state, with a student population of more than 200,000, according to a breakdown by the Texas Tribune.

A TEA takeover would have a negative impact on each Independent School District (ISD) because a board of managers are not elected, and they don't have to answer to the constituents in those districts.

State takeovers in other districts have led to school closures, layoffs, and no improvements in test scores.

The vast majority of school districts that have been taken over by state agencies (TEA included) have not improved but declined.

TEA has no experience managing a district of 200k-plus scholars and we should not suffer as the guinea pigs.

Texas is behind the national average of how much the state spends per student in the classroom.

More specifically, data from the U.S. Census Bureau shows that Texas spends $3,000 less than the national average.

We have to stop the State from intermeddling and overstepping into our educational systems--causing further harm and damage to our communities.

This legislation will make cuts to schools and communities that are already suffering.

With the pandemic, burnout and the rise in the cost of living, teachers are already struggling, and this bill will only add to that.

Without the support of our teachers, students will be left behind.

I also offered the Jackson Lee Amendment No. 24 as incorporated in the En Bloc.

Again, despite the horrible provisions throughout the entirety of this bill, the Jackson Lee Amendment No. 24 as incorporated into En Bloc Amendment is an important amendment that would increase and decrease by $2 million the National Cancer Institute in order to research triple negative breast cancer.

Breast cancer accounts for 12.5 percent of all new annual cancer cases worldwide, making it the most common cancer in the world.

This issue is extremely important, especially for the brave men and women in the military, who are up to 20-40 percent more likely to develop breast cancer.

There are few people in this country whose lives have not been touched by breast cancer.

Yet, there are persistent disparities in breast cancer incidence and death rates.

Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States for Black and Hispanic women.

Black women are more likely to die from breast cancer than women of any other racial or ethnic group.

Experts believe that it's partially because about 1 in 5 Black women is diagnosed with triple-negative breast cancer, more than any other racial or ethnic group.

Compared with non-Hispanic white women, Black women are less likely to receive guideline adherent care and have an approximate 2-fold higher mortality incidence, resulting in a disproportionately higher risk of death from Triple Negative Breast Cancer.

Triple Negative Breast Cancer (``TNBC'') is one of many forms of breast cancer and accounts for about 15-30 percent of all diagnosed invasive breast cancer cases in the United States.

Due to its aggressive behavior, TNBC grows quickly and is more likely to have spread at the time it is found and is more likely to come back after treatment than other types of breast cancer.

TNBC cells do not contain (are ``negative for'') three key receptors that medicines typically target in other types of breast cancers; therefore, there are limited treatment options that can be used to treat the cancer.

Patients with an early diagnosis can often be treated with chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery; however, the limited therapies available specifically addressing the management of TNBC has made treating this disease a challenge for clinicians.

Recent innovation in targeted therapies have fueled advances in the fight against TNBC.

Advances in breast cancer screening and treatment over the last few decades have reduced the overall breast cancer mortality rate, yet the disproportionate impact of TNBC on racial and ethnic minority communities raises considerations about the underlying determinants driving the disparities.

It is necessary to promote TNBC education, raise awareness about the disease-related disparities, and tackle inequities within the health care delivery such as inadequate access to screening, diagnostic testing, and care, to improve early detection and survival.

Providing the NIH with the resources necessary to research TNBC could save thousands of lives each year.

The Jackson Lee Amendment No. 24 would allow for more research so we can one day hopefully learn a way to reduce the number of Americans affected by breast cancer.

Additionally, I have introduced H.R. 225, the Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Research and Education Act of 2023, which focuses on expanding, intensifying, and coordinating programs for the conduct and support of research on triple-negative breast cancer, a type of breast cancer that is difficult to detect but disproportionately impacts African American and Hispanic women.

While these Jackson Lee Amendments are important, the negatives of this appropriations bill vastly outweigh these positive amendments-- which is why H.R. 5894 must be voted down.

Importantly, this bill is harmful for women's reproductive rights.

Access to abortion and fertility care is essential to a person's freedom, including for service members, to make decisions about their health and well-being, and having control over their economic security.

Anti-abortion policymakers want to take away women's ability to make personal decisions about their health and safety.

We must defend their freedom to control their own bodies, lives, and futures.

The shameful attacks on women's reproductive health rights make it crystal clear: anti-abortion lawmakers will take any action to ensure people cannot access abortion care.

Anti-abortion lawmakers are pushing an extreme agenda to take away service women's freedom and autonomy, all while trying to claim they support women's rights.

Access to reproductive health care, including abortion and fertility care, is critical to our democracy and overall well-being as a free nation.

As policymakers, we must ensure that all Americans can access abortion care without barriers.

We aren't truly free unless we can control our own bodies, lives, and futures.

Our laws and policies should protect our rights, not try to control and dehumanize us.

This bill will undoubtedly have a devastating impact on all Americans.

As we know, the National Institutes of Health has had major progress in human health advances, promising medical findings, and research insights.

Yet, significant cuts to NIH make maintaining American research and development leadership worldwide more challenging at a time when competitor nations are increasing their support for biomedical research.

Funding cuts will delay progress towards new cures, treatments, and diagnostics that benefit the nation and drive our biomedical innovation economy forward.

Beyond sustaining American leadership in biomedical research, the NIH is a major catalyst for local economies, directly and indirectly supporting over 560,000 jobs and producing $96.84 billion in new economic activity in FY22, equaling an economic return of $2.64 for every $1 in research funding.

This bill eliminates funding for the Ending the HIV Epidemic Initiative within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (-$220 million), the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program (-$165 million), and Community Health Centers Program (-$157 million).

The bill also cuts funding for the Minority HIV/AIDS Fund by 53 percent (-$32 million).

We have made significant advances in HIV/AIDS research and it would be devastating to cut back on the important work that is being done.

Rather than cutting billions of dollars for NIH-supported medical research occurring in nearly every congressional district across the country, the House should build on decades of strong bipartisan support and investment that has led to the lifesaving medications and treatments Americans rely on every day.

We must fund the NIH and the Department of Health and Human Services in order to research and solve conditions such as Triple Negative Breast Cancer, diabetes, and HIV.

This legislation would also impact Federal Work Study programs and Supplemental Education Opportunity Grants making it more difficult than it already is for college students to pay for a higher education and receive financial aid.

The elimination of these programs and the flat funding levels of Pell Grants for the first time since 2012 would create financial emergencies for low-income students.

Cutting these programs would not only drive-up student borrowing and potentially discourage the next generation of students, but it would also create a real and immediate financial shortfall for current low- income students who have rely on these programs to earn their degree.

This legislation would also take away funding from our elderly population.

Under the current LHHS bill there would be a $250 million dollar decrease to the Social Security Administration's customer service budget at a time when the agency continues to struggle to deliver timely and accurate service. This year saw continued record high hold times and wait times for disability claims.

The bill has a $15 million decrease for Elder Rights Supports, funding used to protect older Americans from elder abuse.

The Senior Community Service Employment Program would be eliminated. This program provides the opportunity for tens of thousands of older Americans to find work despite pernicious age discrimination.

This bill negatively impacts every single person in the United States from the youngest to the oldest.

This bill doesn't choose to impact just Republicans or Democrats.

We will all feel the severity of this bill if it is passed.

We cannot better the lives of everyday Americans with this terrible bill that eliminates much of the progress that has been made in education, public health, and the workforce.

This reckless underlying legislation would painfully impact the lives of millions of Americans by making disastrous cuts to programs that workers and families count on every day.

Instead of investing in America, Republicans would rather focus on advancing unpopular and dangerous right-wing priorities.

The proposal in front of us here today is not a reasonable middle ground, nor is it even a starting point for discussion.

I recognize that we are in the midst of austere budgetary and political times, however, we cannot continue to ignore the return on investment that advanced developments in health research, employment assistance, and education will yield to the American public.

I urge all my colleagues to oppose this dangerous and shameful bill.

Mr. Chair, pursuant to House Resolution 864, I rise in support of the En Bloc Amendment incorporating the Jackson Lee Amendments No. 24 and No. 51 to H.R. 5894--Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024.

I thank my colleagues on the Rules Committee for making in order Jackson Lee Amendment No. 24 and No. 51 and for including them in the bipartisan En Bloc Amendment.

The Jackson Lee Amendments No. 24 and No. 51 are potentially life altering amendments in an unfortunate and distracting appropriations bill.

The Jackson Lee Amendment No. 24 as incorporated into En Bloc Amendment is an important amendment that seeks to increase and decrease by $2 million the National Cancer Institute in order to research triple negative breast cancer.

Breast cancer accounts for 12.5 percent of all new annual cancer cases worldwide, making it the most common cancer in the world.

This issue is extremely important, especially for the brave men and women in the military, who are up to 20 to 40 percent more likely to develop breast cancer.

There are few people in this country whose lives have not been touched by breast cancer.

Yet, there are persistent disparities in breast cancer incidence and death rates.

Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States for Black and Hispanic women.

Black women are more likely to die from breast cancer than women of any other racial or ethnic group.

Experts believe that it's partially because about 1 in 5 Black women is diagnosed with triple-negative breast cancer, more than any other racial or ethnic group.

Compared with non-Hispanic white women, Black women are less likely to receive guideline adherent care and have an approximate 2-fold higher mortality incidence, resulting in a disproportionately higher risk of death from Triple Negative Breast Cancer.

Triple Negative Breast Cancer (``TNBC'') is one of many forms of breast cancer and accounts for about 15 to 30 percent of all diagnosed invasive breast cancer cases in the United States.

Due to its aggressive behavior, TNBC grows quickly and is more likely to have spread at the time it is found and is more likely to come back after treatment than other types of breast cancer.

TNBC cells do not contain (are ``negative for'') three key receptors that medicines typically target in other types of breast cancers; therefore, there are limited treatment options that can be used to treat the cancer.

Patients with an early diagnosis can often be treated with chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery; however, the limited therapies available specifically addressing the management of TNBC has made treating this disease a challenge for clinicians.

Recent innovation in targeted therapies have fueled advances in the fight against TNBC.

Advances in breast cancer screening and treatment over the last few decades have reduced the overall breast cancer mortality rate, yet the disproportionate impact of TNBC on racial and ethnic minority communities raises considerations about the underlying determinants driving the disparities.

It is necessary to promote TNBC education, raise awareness about the disease-related disparities, and tackle inequities within the health care delivery such as inadequate access to screening, diagnostic testing, and care, to improve early detection and survival.

The Jackson Lee Amendment No. 24 would allow for more research so we can one day hopefully learn a way to reduce the number of Americans affected by breast cancer.

Additionally, I have introduced H.R. 225, the Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Research and Education Act of 2023, which focuses on expanding, intensifying, and coordinating programs for the conduct and support of research on triple-negative breast cancer, a type of breast cancer that is difficult to detect but disproportionately impacts African American and Hispanic women.

The Jackson Lee Amendment No. 51 as incorporated into En Bloc Amendment is an important amendment that seeks to increase and decrease by $2 million the Head Start Act, including Head Start partnerships.

I think we can all agree children are our future and that we should invest to make our future better and brighter.

As Chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, I am extremely passionate about the wellbeing and education of children.

One of the objectives of the Congressional Children's Caucus is to ensure that all the children in this country have an opportunity to receive an education, including early childhood development.

Head Start helps all children succeed, especially vulnerable children.

If we continue to underfund education in the United States our children will suffer, we will dismantle public education, and we will be weaker as a nation.

This legislation would kick teachers out of classrooms.

The United States is already in a teacher shortage and this bill would cut another 22,300 teachers from Texas schools due to cuts from Title 1.

This bill would severely impact teachers and students all over the state of Texas, where the Texas Education Agency has already decided to unnecessarily takeover Houston ISD.

Houston ISD is the largest school district in the state, with a student population of more than 200,000, according to a breakdown by the Texas Tribune.

A TEA takeover would have a negative impact on each Independent School District (ISD) because a board of managers are not elected, and they don't have to answer to the constituents in those districts.

State takeovers in other districts have led to school closures, layoffs, and no improvements in test scores.

The vast majority of school districts that have been taken over by state agencies (TEA included) have not improved but declined.

TEA has no experience managing a district of 200k plus scholars and we should not suffer as the guinea pigs.

Texas is behind the national average of how much the state spends per student in the classroom.

More specifically, data from the U.S. Census Bureau shows that Texas spends $3,000 less than the national average.

We have to stop the State from intermeddling and overstepping into our educational systems--causing further harm and damage to our communities.

This legislation will make cuts to schools and communities that are already suffering.

With the pandemic, burnout and the rise in the cost of living, teachers are already struggling, and this bill will only add to that.

Without the support of our teachers, students will be left behind.

I recognize that we are in the midst of austere budgetary and political times, however, we cannot continue to ignore the return on investment that advanced developments in health research and education will yield to the American public.

For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to support the bipartisan En Bloc Amendment incorporating my amendment, the Jackson Lee Amendments No. 24 and No. 51.

While the negatives of this appropriations bill disappointingly outweigh my positive amendments, I respectfully ask my colleagues to vote in favor of this amendment notwithstanding my strong opposition and encouragement to vote down the underlying bill.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentlewoman from Connecticut for her leadership as former chair and ranking member. I thank my good friend from Texas, as well.

I think they are completely accurate that left to their own devices, we could have an appropriations process that would work, but I thank Chairwoman DeLauro for laying the groundwork of the crisis that we are now in.

Let us be very clear: It is the Democrats who have come to save America and to stop this dastardly shutdown. As I have listened to the debate on the Labor-HHS, all I could see was the crushing of the American spirit, the eliminating of GEAR UP and TRIO, the very programs that give a lifeline to young people across America; a stamping down of the greatest of our aspirations.

Weeks ago, the President gave to us a supplemental for Ukraine and Israel and the border, ensuring that we would be able to provide funding and engage the way we should for Defense. And now we are hearing that in a crisis, we don't even have humanitarian aid that is needed in Gaza.

All we are doing here is kicking the can, but thank goodness Democrats are able to say that we refuse to shut down the government and it is because of the cities that are so desperately in need. How dare we put our cities in this catastrophe of having a government shutdown?

In the State of Texas--I am here today to vote for this CR--172,877 Active-Duty and Reserve personnel and their families would not be paid.

What would impact the city of Houston is: $2,742,702,800 in funding to small businesses in Texas would not get that funding for creating jobs. They are the job engine of America and Houston will be devastatingly impacted;

176,276 persons traveling through Bush Intercontinental Airport and our airports in Texas would face slowdowns because TSA would not be working;

786,686 people in Texas would lose access to their nutrition programs--women, infant, and children denied food;

168,413 Federal workers in our city alone laid off, and;

3,291,584 beneficiaries would not have the SNAP program to feed their families.

This is shameful. But we are here today to ensure the government does not shut down and to make sure that, even though it is not perfect, even though the bills that we are watching that Republicans say they are doing, are literally taking the lifeline out of the hands of our fellow Americans, not doing border security, not providing humanitarian assistance that is needed, but yet Democrats stood tall. We are going to fund this at FY23. We are not going to have the draconian taking away of reproductive rights.

Mr. Speaker, we would not have the denying of reproductive rights, discriminating against people because of their LGBTQ+, or discriminating against them because of race or immigrant status. We won't have any of those draconian provisions in there. Thank God we will not have the cuts that we have seen that would hurt the American people, hurt Texans, hurt Houstonians.

The CR is the right way right now because we have no other door, and it will be Democrats that will save America, save our 50 States, save Texas, save our cities, save Houston. I am here today to ensure that we move forward so that we can do what is right by the American people.

Mr. Speaker, when Congress fails to do its job, the consequences are real.

Families suffer, the economy takes a hit, and government costs rise-- all unnecessarily.

H.R. 6363, Further Continuing Appropriations, and other Extensions Act of 2024 proves one thing, this weak Republican majority is unable to govern without help from the Democratic Caucus.

Instead of working to finish the FY 2024 funding process between now and when the first CR was enacted, House Republicans wasted time by ousting their own leader, further propelling the House into chaos and

bringing partisan bills to the floor that not only have zero chance of becoming law but include massive cuts and poison pill riders that move us further apart, not closer to resolution.

H.R. 6363 would avoid a government shutdown today, but kicks the can down the road and adds unnecessary complexities that will increase the likelihood of future shutdowns by creating two separate CR dates.

January 19, 2024: Agriculture, Energy and Water, Military Construction and Veterans Affairs and Transportation, Housing and Urban Development.

February 2, 2024: The remaining eight.

This legislation also lacks emergency funds requested by the Biden Administration to accommodate increased participation in WIC.

An estimated $405 million is needed in the second quarter is needed to administer the program.

This legislation also lacks emergency supplemental funding for Ukraine, Israel, humanitarian assistance, childcare, disaster victims, broadband, Indo-Pacific allies, and a number of other pressing priorities.

Although this legislation is flawed in many significant ways, a government shut down would be devastating for Americans across the country.

A government shutdown would hurt hard working families in Texas:

172,877 active duty and reserve personnel serving our nation's armed forces in Texas would be forced to go without the pay they earn during a shutdown.

The Small Business Administration would stop processing small business loans, halting a program that provides $2,742,702,800 in funding to small businesses in Texas every year.

176,276 people flying through Texas airports every day would face potential delays and safety concerns due to staffing impacts on TSA agents and air traffic controllers.

786,686 people in Texas would soon lose access to Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) benefits.

168,413 federal workers in Texas would be furloughed or forced to work without pay, in addition to the many employees of businesses with government contracts who could be laid off, furloughed, or see their hours cut.

Workers at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) would be sidelined, risking interruptions and delays to the 892 food safety, pharmaceutical manufacturing, and other inspections conducted in Texas last year.

The Department of Agriculture would be forced to stop processing housing loans, which provide $456,125,359 in funding to help 2,742 families in rural Texas communities buy homes every year.

The Department of Agriculture would be forced to stop processing farm loans which provide $209,391,000 in funding for farmers in Texas every year.

3,291,584 Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) beneficiaries in Texas would lose access to benefits in a prolonged shutdown.

5,413,161 people who visit national parks in Texas every year would be turned away or unable to fully access parks, monuments, and museums.

State governments would be forced to pay for federal services like the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program, potentially risking benefits for the 20,846 TANF beneficiaries in Texas.

A government shutdown would hurt working families, damage our economy, interrupt vital services, endanger our national security, and force millions of our troops and government employees to work without pay.

It is time to get serious, it is time to do the work we are required to do as Members of Congress regardless of our political stripes.

Congress has a responsibility to keep our government open, and I hope we can work with House Republicans and the Senate to facilitate the timely completion of full-year spending bills and a supplemental package.