▶ 0:05:08at any time. Today, the rules committee is convening to consider a single measure, HR4, the Recisions Act of 2025. As the speaker indicated early last week, the People's House is acting quickly upon the White House's request to terminate 9.4 4 billion in wasteful spending at the State Department, USAD, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and within other entities.
▶ 0:05:37Let's be clear about the context and precedence of what's going on here. Congress set up a process for enacting recisions of funds in the Congressional Budget and Empowerment Control Act of 1974, more than 50 years ago. We're following that thoughtfully deliberated process. President Trump and congressional Republicans campaigned on attacking wasteful spending. The public then gave us a mandate in November.
▶ 0:06:04So the new administration, which came into power in the middle of the fiscal year, then found wasteful spending. President Trump then acted and recommended that these funds be permanently cancelled. I cannot think of a more textbook scenario of the proper utilization of this process. A new president with a new agenda decides to inform Congress that he wants to save the dollars of hardworking taxpayers. That's really the whole story here. Nothing more to explain. It's not rocket science.
▶ 0:06:34What also is clear is the mandate that voters gave this Republican majority, a mandate to act precisely upon the commitments we made. This recisions package reflects hopefully only one step of the good work that the Trump administration has done to root out waste, fraud, and abuse across all corners of the federal government. The administration will need to remain vigilant in ensuring that taxpayer dollars are spent in both appropriate and thoughtful ways.
▶ 0:07:03The efforts of the staff of Doge, OM, and the rest of President Trump's watchd dogs have been herculean, and I'm particularly pleased see all the progress that has been made. This is an exercise in restoring fiscal sanity that was torched by the Biden Harris Republicans have our attention a fix to eliminating the rot of wasteful programs that have been allowed to fester for entirely too long.
▶ 0:07:30In contrast, our Democrat colleagues simply cannot prove to the American people that they're in favor of eliminating a single federal program outlay or trunch of taxpayer money otherwise. It's not in their DNA. Whether it's the 1.6 trillion in waste, fraud, and abuse cut in HR1 or this humbler nearly 10 billion in discretionary waste before us.
▶ 0:07:57House Republicans are serious about going after every morsel of wasted taxpayer money. It's the people's money. A single dollar wasted is one too many in our view. Let's take a quick minute or so to preview the waste that's going on here. Although I will not spend an exorbitant amount of time because it will inevitably be covered during our debate here today.
▶ 0:08:25With respect to foreign aid, 14 million in cash vouchers for migrants at our southern border, $24,000 for a national spelling bee in Bosnia, $1.5 million to mobilize elderly, lesbian, transgender, non-binary, and interex people to be involved in the Costa Rica political process.
▶ 0:08:50$20,000 for a drag show in Ecuador and $32,000 for an LGBTQ comic book in Peru. And then there's NPR. I honestly don't even know where to begin on that one. Even if someone were to accept the premise that we need to finance a public radio outlet, certainly we can all agree that it simply cannot be NPR any longer.
▶ 0:09:17NPR's own CEO testified before Congress that she's never seen any political bias at NPR. I don't know what reality she's living in, but it's it certainly isn't this one. Here's the kicker. NPR does harbor political bias. It took a $1.9 million grant to quote improve objectivity and diverse viewpoints end quote.
▶ 0:09:44There's the proof, and it's a concrete example that NPR's CEO was giving false testimony to Congress. You either understand that you're biased and need help apparently in the form of taxpayer grants, or you haven't witnessed any bias. You can't have it both ways. Then there's PBS. Again, I honestly don't know where to begin.
▶ 0:10:06On top of the concrete, statistically proven bias against conservatives, Republicans, and the Trump administration, this is the 21st century. We have Sesame Street now streaming on private services. So, the taxpayer is now subsidizing for-profit companies.
▶ 0:10:25We've seen private celebrities like Miss Rachel who's who are engaged in crossovers with Sesame Street, which again leverages taxpayer dollars to concentrate wealth to private individuals. As I've said before, I'm rather certain we will visit a lot of this wasteful spending in our discussion. What's important is that the American people know that wasteful spending goes on in Washington. Just ask them about their thoughts on it. Seriously, just ask them.
▶ 0:10:54Ultimately, this is really a question of what Congress will do about it. We cut 1.6 trillion just weeks ago, and I'm thrilled we'll be cutting nearly 10 billion in waste today. We remain on a positive trajectory, having passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, now taking up this recision package and soon moving into the appropriations process. Our work continues without delay.
▶ 0:11:21Again, I'd like to try thank the Trump administration for its leadership on this recision package. With that, I yield to the ranking member, Mr. McGovern, for any comments he wishes to make. Well, thank you, Madam Chair. Um, so let's just say the quiet part out loud. Uh, this recisions package is based on a scam, a conj job, a grift. Doge was never about good governance. It was never about efficiency.
▶ 0:11:50It was about giving Trump's ex- best friend Elon Musk a taxpayerf funed slush fund. He and Elon might be on the rocks, but this has always been about one thing and one thing only, rewarding Trump's donors. This bill is a perfect example of why people hate Washington. We hear all these promises about cutting waste, fraud, and abuse, and then you open up the hood and you look at what this bill is cutting, and it's not waste or fraud or abuse.
▶ 0:12:18It's gutting essential services that people rely on, gutting programs that save lives. It doesn't take a rocket science scientist to figure this stuff out. The USDA had to rehire all the bird flu experts after Doge fired them in the middle of the bird flu. The Department of Energy had to undo its own cuts after Doge sent termination notices to the people who secure America's nuclear warheads.
▶ 0:12:44The National Weather Service is rehiring people after Doge went in and gutted that agency. Now we hear we might not have enough meteorologists on hand to warn people of tornadoes and other severe storms. Doge was a disaster and we all know it. And now we're going to now we're going to start to codifying their absurd stupid cuts into law starting with USA ID and public broadcasting. Really? This is insane.
▶ 0:13:13And look at what the Republicans are not cutting. Look at what they won't dare to touch. These guys say we need to tighten our belts, and I'm all for it. But where is the recisions package for the Pentagon? What about going after the defense contractors that charge us $10,000 for a toilet seat cover? The Pentagon has never passed an audit. Never. They spend nearly a trillion dollars a year.
▶ 0:13:36And instead of looking at at the agency that spends $10,000 on a toilet, Republicans want to go after Sesame Street. I mean, what the hell is wrong with this place? Let's get our fiscal house in order. Democrats are on board. Let's claw back the billions and wasteful big oil subsidies. Let's look into ending massive tax loopholes and giveaways Republicans continue handing out to millionaires and billionaires.
▶ 0:14:01But please, please, let's not pretend this bill is about saving money when these cuts represent a tiny, tiny, tiny sliver of savings compared to the federal budget. Let's not pretend like what we're doing here today is anything other than a corrupt conj job designed to make people think Republicans are saving money so they can justify their tax cuts for billionaires. You guys are going after UNICEF and Sesame Street instead of going after the billionaires and big banks that pay zero in taxes. This is insane.
▶ 0:14:32You're gutting PEPFAR. PEPFAR, an overwhelmingly bipartisan program created by President George W. Bush to combat the global HIV crisis. Cutting this program by $400 million is going to kill people full stop. Follow the money, America. Look at who the Republicans refuse to go toe-to-toe with. It's the people who write them uh the big fat campaign checks, the billionaires, the big oil lobbyists.
▶ 0:15:02And at a time when authoritarian powers are challenging us on every continent, when the world is practically begging for us to lead, this package says, "Sorry, we can't fund diplomacy. We can't support global public health. We can't try to prevent war and conflict. We can't save lives because it might offend some billionaire who came up with these ideas while he was high on ketamine. This is literally nuts.
▶ 0:15:30America knows it and Republicans know it. What's disgraceful is so many of them are willing to go along to get along. America is better than this. We ought to lead with strength, not stupidity. Let's look for smart ways to cut government funding. Let's come together and find strategic ways to reduce spending, to cut back on waste, to go after fraud, but let's not pretend that that's what this bill does. This is a scam. It's a con con.
▶ 0:15:58And I urge my colleagues to vote no on this insane, disgraceful Doge disaster. And I yield back my time. Thank you very much, Mr. McGovern. Without objection, any prepared statements that our witnesses may have will be included in the record. I now welcome our panel, Representative Adder Halt and Ranking Member Deloro from the Committee on Appropriations.
▶ 0:16:24Your full statement will be submitted for the record and we ask that you summarize your statement in five minutes. Representative Adhalt, I welcome your Thank you, uh, Chairwoman Fox, and, uh, let me say to you and to ranking, uh, member McGovern and to members of the rules committee, um, on both sides aisle, thank you for the opportunity to testify today, uh, to as we look at proposed uh, uh, rescending certain proposals that they have been sent down from the president to
▶ 0:16:55Congress. The recision package before the committee today is an important step toward greater fiscal responsibility and prudent realignment of our spending priorities in foreign assistance as well as domestic broadcasting.
▶ 0:17:10You all know that this bill would rescend budget authority for 9.4 4 billion including funding for United Nations, climate change programs, refugee assist, refugee assistance, economic and development assistance, and corporation for public broadcasting. These recisions are proposed with a taxpayer in mind.
▶ 0:17:31The proposal clause back funds to reduce duplicative efforts, streamline our foreign policy goals, and require that our partners around the world contribute more fairly to our shared priorities. American taxpayers are not the only beneficiaries of this effort. Changing our foreign policy mission from a handout to a hand up will be a welcome news to our global partners.
▶ 0:17:57This package would protect the life-saving mission within the global health programs, but it would discard the DEI boondoggles that neither the American taxpayer nor 700 million people around the globe who live under the extreme poverty line have any desire for. Every dollar spent on woke foreign policy is not only a dollar wasted, but is a dollar devoted to tarnish our own uh nation's image.
▶ 0:18:25And I have spoken to lawmakers around the world and they totally agree. Uh not least is where the eyes uh the the very people they intend to help. For instance, let me give you an example. The state department is spent over it spends over $47,000 for a transgender opera in Colombia.
▶ 0:18:48By doing that, we mock both the American taxpayer and the 18 million people in that country who live below the profound poverty line. It is wasteful. It is counterproductive. And it ends with this package.
▶ 0:19:02Throughout the recision proposal, the administration outlines their commitment to refocusing programs to their core functions, which include life-saving work, protection of US national security, advancement of American values, and most important, making it a priority for return on investments to the American taxpayer.
▶ 0:19:23I commend uh President Trump for his unwavering adherence to his America first values and I would urge my colleagues to take up consideration of this bill to ensure that Congress does the same. Thanks for holding the hearing and I look forward to answering any questions that I could and I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Adhalt. Um Congresswoman Deloro, you're recognized. Thank you so much, uh Chairwoman Fox and Ranking Member McGovern and members of the committee.
▶ 0:19:49Uh, I am opposed to this bill to aid and abet billionaires in stealing from the American people and which does nothing nothing to help the American people with the cost of living. Since taking office, the Trump administration has unlawfully stolen funds appropriated by the Congress, passed by Republicans and Democrats in the House and in the Senate, signed into law by the president, upending the separation of powers and our constitutional order for what ends?
▶ 0:20:19to hand billionaires and the biggest corporations who already pay little or no taxes another massive tax break. To make our government so broken, so dysfunctional, so starve for resources, so full of incompetent political lackies and barereft of experts and professionals that its departments and agencies cannot feasibly achieve the goals and the missions to which they were lawfully directed.
▶ 0:20:44and ultimately to embrace privatization to give the biggest companies unchecked power to rig the economy against the middle class working and vulnerable families and to ensure the American people have no faith in the ability of government to do good in their lives.
▶ 0:21:01My colleagues, there is no inherent authority for the president to impound and there has never been uh for the record the myth of presidential empowerment power going back to 1789 which demonstrates that the president it's the congress that provides the power to delay funds or to say no to funds. It is not the president of the United States nor the OM director nor an Elon Musk. The late Justice Scalia and Renquist said so.
▶ 0:21:29Chief Justice Robert and Justice Kavanaaugh have said so and they are no liberal torchbearers of the Department of Justice and Government Accountability have said so. Alexander Hamilton where the purse is lodged in one branch and the sword in another, there can be no danger. Over 200 years of American history, say no.
▶ 0:21:52Uh this recisions package dated May 28th submitted June 3rd um uh 134 days after the president began unlawfully freezing across all the government freezing funding is an admission by President Trump and Russ vote that they have been breaking the law by impounding $425 billion in appropriated funding across the government government.
▶ 0:22:18that they do not care about the consequences for Americans or stealing the people's money. A quick note, uh Russ Vote believes and others here believe that the Empowerment Control Act is unconstitutional. But now, but now uh they want to exploit it for their own gains. They're using members uh uh they're using a mechanism that is outlined in the law for to be able to present a recision packets.
▶ 0:22:45uh and their the original position is they have broken the law. Now what they want to do is to use the mechanism in the empowerment control act to cya. That's what they're doing is and they don't believe that the the empowerment control act is constitutional but they're moving forward with this madness here. This is a bill to codify the right of billionaires to steal from rural and vulnerable American communities, children, and the global poor for the sake of handing even more money to billionaires.
▶ 0:23:16Congress needs to fight for the middle class, the working class, and the vulnerable, not to protect the interests of billionaires and big corporations. This is a bill to shut down rural television and radio stations, cutting off coverage of local news, eliminating emergency information like severe weather alerts, jeopardizing access to PBS Kids Children's programming like Sesame Street and Daniel Tiger's Neighborhood. This does not create efficiency, nor does it help the American people.
▶ 0:23:44This bill is to rip lifesaving support away from hungry, displaced, and sick people in developing countries and conflict zones across the globe to end programs that treat deadly diseases and prevent pandemics. Ripping lives saving aid away from current allies does not further our national interests. This is a bill to abandon the people of Ukraine while they resist Putin's tyranny.
▶ 0:24:08This is a bill to cut $400 million from PEPAR, a paragon of American leadership that has saved 26 million lives. Mothers, fathers, sons, daughters. Instead of facing a death sentence, people supported by PEPAR are raising families, building their communities, and helping their communities grow and develop. This is the bill that puts America last.
▶ 0:24:30When we retreat from the world diplomatically and through our assistance to vulnerable people, America will be alone without allies in a less stable world without the support of the international community. And do you know who will come out ahead? China, Russia, Iran, when people in need see bags of food and flour coming through that say USA. That shows the power of the United States that will be traded for food aid from China.
▶ 0:25:00We are here today considering cuts after months of unlawful empowerment that will conceal a Republican reconciliation bill to make the billionaires in America even more risk rich. Increase the debt by $3 trillion, rip health insurance away from at least 60 million Americans. This bill rescends $9.4 billion which Congress appropriated not even three months ago.
▶ 0:25:27And now the president is asking Congress to rubber stamp its proposal to steal from the American people without concern for the consequences. This bill does nothing to help the American people with the cost of living. I strongly oppose this bill which forfeits our global leadership, undermines our national security and steals from the American people to hand more wealth to billionaires. Thank you.
▶ 0:25:56Thank you, Congresswoman Delora. Congressman Adhalt, President Trump came into office in in the middle of a fiscal year which was appropriated before he came into the office.
▶ 0:26:10Do you agree that this is a textbook use of the Impound Control Act that when a president comes into office finds wasteful spending from the previous administration and Congress and decides that it should be rescended? Yes.
▶ 0:26:28I think it is a textbook uh example and uh of of use of the impound act and u I fully support the president's request to uh restore our integrity for uh foreign obligations and um you know um I totally support everything that the president doing that you you read some of the examples that we saw that were that is in this bill that has been done in the past administration that is absolutely uh ludicrous and uh this would address those
▶ 0:26:58very issues that I think most Americans would find find appalling and but so many of them don't even know about it. This goes ahead and addresses the issue and and um and deals with it so that we can use the money for the right purposes that uh it's in line with the president's mandate. And isn't it true that we've effectively been on Democrat levels of spending for years now given that the Democrats control the Senate and presidency last Congress?
▶ 0:27:27Yes, we've as we, as you know, we've done through the continuing resolution and we've moved forward on that uh back earlier this year. And so that's why this is needed here today. And isn't it true that when Democrats had full control of the levers of power, they expanded the federal government with an unprecedented 11 trillion dollar in spending, six trillion of which has been added to the national debt.
▶ 0:27:58Yes, you are correct. Thank you very much. I now recognize Mr. McGovern. Um, thank you very much. Uh, M. Uh, ranking member Delora, I'm going to play devil's advocate just for a second. Second, make believe I'm a Republican as so I'm gonna ask this question. How can we afford to send money overseas when we have needs at Make sure your mic's on. Yeah, I I I appreciate that if you're just to indulge me for a moment.
▶ 0:28:26I I I I think I I I got to dispel this myth that people are under. Chief Justice Renquist, with respect to the suggestion that the president has a constitutional power to decline to spend appropriated funds, we must conclude that existence of such broad power is supported neither by reason nor precedent. Disabuse yourself of this notion that this president or any president, Republican, Democrat, does not have the power to impound. I will get to your question now.
▶ 0:28:56Listen, we spend less than 1/ half of 1% of gross national project on overseas assistance. Current spending is 50% less in real terms spent on diplomacy and development than during the cold war. One out of every four countries have populations that face severe hunger, exacerbating conflict, instability, and hotspots around the world and directly impacts the US national and economic security. What is the PRC doing?
▶ 0:29:23My colleagues are in fear of the people's republic of China has increased development spending and financing by over 430% over the last 10 years. Uh and that's of available data. China has surpassing the US as the largest trading partner in many countries in Latin America and Africa. China has more embassies and consulates, diplomats and foreign assistants than anyone else in the world.
▶ 0:29:51They challenge us uh and uh democracy and capitalism around the world going virtually unchallenged. Let me just also say I want to just say they talk about waste, fraud, and abuse on the in these in the in these programs. Let's take a look at what we're talking about in the programs because I think it's really critically important uh to note what we are really talking about here. Uh you Yeah. No. Yeah. Maternal and child health.
▶ 0:30:21Does it sound Doesn't sound like a woke program to me or government waln Okay, you know, let's get rid of it all. Let's not worry about maternal morbidity or mortality development activities, water and sanitation.
▶ 0:30:37Let's talk about 26 million people 26 million people on lifesaving anti-retroviral treatment 2.3 million adolescent girls and young women reached with comprehensive HIV prevention services 6.6 6 million orphans, vulnerable children, and their caregivers receive critical care and support.
▶ 0:31:052 and a half million people newly enrolled on prep to prevent HIV infection. 83.8 million people provided with HIV testing services and 342,000 health workers directly supported by PEPAR. You got humanitarian needs, you got education needs. I, you know, I'm not sure people know what they were making reference to in terms of woke.
▶ 0:31:31These are the programs that are part of what is being rescended illegally. Uh uh uh it was illegally stolen and now we're coming around to rubber stamp to say it's okay. Mr. Adhalt, speaking of PEPAR, this recidious package cuts $400 million from the PEP from PEPAR which is an overwhelmingly bipartisan program created by President George W. Bush to combat the global HIV crisis.
▶ 0:32:00This program alone has saved, as Mr. Laurel pointed out, has saved 26 million people from dying of HIV and enabled more than 8 million babies to be born HIV HIV free. Uh there are now tens of millions of people on life-saving treatment with PEPFAR accounting for over 90% of preventative uh you know, treatments around the world. Your bill pulls the rug from under this program and kneecaps 20 years of bipartisan progress.
▶ 0:32:30Uh don't you agree, Mr. Adhold that eliminating HIV as a public health threat is an important goal that the US should continue to pursue? Well, as you know, this uh this proposal this that's been presented here to Congress. And let me just say this is the president president's proposal uh and uh Congress has the ability to vote it up or down. But uh but a lot the there is a lot of this money, excuse me. We're not going to have a separate vote on this. We're going to have to vote for this recisions package. Oh, right.
▶ 0:32:59But we like I said, it will be Congress will be allowed to vote on it. This is something the president just proposing. But um but the uh recisions package proposes to rescend uh 500 million from this count. But that's roughly only 12% of the funding. Well, let me just ask you I I just ask you I mean do you think that the question was do you think that eliminating HIV a HIV as a public health threat is an important goal that the US should continue?
▶ 0:33:25It is but there are a lot of things that's included in these programs that go beyond that. the e the equity programs, the LGBTQI plus we're talking about pepire, right? Well, a lot of these are are being misspent and is being let me say some Republicans have rightly expressed concern over these cuts, but I wonder if those who expressed concerns are going to do anything about it. For example, one Republican congressman from Florida said that PEPFAR quote saved a generation end quote.
▶ 0:33:54And in 2023, President Bush wrote an op-ed that there is no program more prolife than the one that has saved more than 25 million lives. Do you agree with President Bush that a program that has saved now more than 26 million lives is pro-life? Again, this is not completely cutting out this program. This is this is you're you're you are decimating this program. 400 a $400 million uh cut is huge.
▶ 0:34:22Um, you know, I I I I don't I just I don't the idea that it's it's kind of like the discussion we had today on the floor about a $300 million cut from SNAP. Don't worry, it's not nothing's going to be impacted. I don't know of a single person associated um with combating HIV AIDS around the world who doesn't say, including some of the founders of PEPFAR who work with with the Bush administration, that this will have a devastating impact.
▶ 0:34:49And what are you basically saying we could all work around this and there'll be no there'll be no impact? I think my understanding of what the president was requesting to restore the integrity of these programs and trying to get out the waste, fraud, and abuse that we've seen in it. And well, I I I I haven't I haven't seen the administration statement of the waste, fraud, and abuse in PEPAR. Look at since taking office, President Trump has illegally, as Mr. Mr.
▶ 0:35:14Laurel pointed out attempted to dismantle USAD, which has threatened the lives of millions of people who rely on this funding to present to prevent or treat diseases, afford food, and get access to clean water. Do you know how many deaths have been caused by Trump's decision to discontinue funding for I I'm assuming you tell me. Yeah.
▶ 0:35:36Well, according to Boston University School of Public Health, which is tracking the impact of these cuts, over 106,000 adults and over 200,000 children have already died due to the illegal termination of these programs. Do you know Do you know how many have died of HIV due to the disruption of PEPAR More than 50,000 adults and 6,000 infants. Do you know Do you know how many children have died of malaria?
▶ 0:36:09More than 29,000. Do you know how many people have died of tuberculosis as a result of these cuts? More than 25,000. I mean, global health programs, I hate to, you know, burst the bubble of my Republican friends over here. I mean, global health programs are not are not some woke initiative. These are a good investment. I mean this recision would eliminate public health security, global cooperation and America's reputation as a principled and effective leader.
▶ 0:36:40Ranking member Deluro, isn't it true that poorly controlled outbreaks can have severe economic and social consequences? Like what happens if the US no longer has staff embedded within other countries and we're not we're not notified that a disease needs to be addressed? Won't that increase the likelihood of that disease coming to our districts of the United States? That's precisely right. These these illnesses don't know borders.
▶ 0:37:06If we are not on the ground doing what we need to do in global health, then we are at risk. We are gravely at risk. whether it is uh a pandemic, whether it is um um Zika, whether it is Ebola or anything else. If we do not have people on the ground, if we do not have the CDC people who are there or others who are there who can really translate for us what is happening and deal with prevention, these diseases cross borders.
▶ 0:37:36They don't they don't say, "Okay, stop. I'm not going to the United States today." You know, it is so foolish what is being done to not only isolate the United States but put us healthwise in great uh uh uh jeopardy. Um and there's no rationale uh for it uh to to take away these opportunities for us to to safeguard the health security of the United States.
▶ 0:38:03If you can't think about others or whether they're going to live or die, think about the health security of the people in the United States. Yeah. And let's be honing here that the administration has already withheld money from a lot of these programs. That's why people are already dying uh as a result of these companies. Let me let me and humanitarian assistance rampant. Let me let me just ask maybe do a little math here. Mr.
▶ 0:38:27Adhold under the Republican tax scam, CBO says the deficit will increase by $3 How much bigger is $3 trillion in tax cuts uh than the 9.4 4 billion that you're rescending in this bill. It's 320 times bigger. Kind of put this what we're doing here in perspective. And under the Republican tax scam, CBO says the top 5% of earners will get a $1.6 trillion tax cut.
▶ 0:38:56How much bigger is the $ 1.6 trillion in tax cuts for the wealthy than the 9.4 billion that Republicans are rescending in this bill? 170 times bigger. Look, it is clear that this recisions package is a moral failure masquerading as fiscal responsibility. These so-called savings are a drop in the bucket compared to their to their giveaways for the wealthiest among us.
▶ 0:39:25It's a drop in the ocean and at what human cost. Uh these aren't we have a pepfire is not a woke program. I mean, it is one of the most successful programs that has ever been created to combat, you know, a public health emergency. And and before the recision, before the recisions in this bill, the FY25 funds were already $10 billion below the total humanitarian resources in the prior year.
▶ 0:39:54And this recision would pull back $1.3 billion in funding to the most vulnerable people in the world. Malnourished children, malnourishing refugees, people fleeing violence. You know, the historic level of humanitarian need flies in the face of this uh re recision.
▶ 0:40:15Um, by mid 2024, nearly 123 million people had been forcibly displaced by conflict and violence, marking the 12th consecutive annual increase. And the United States is helping to support displaced populations from Afghanistan, Burma, Ethiopia, Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, Syria, Ukraine, Venezuela, Yemen, and elsewhere.
▶ 0:40:40Ranking member Deluro, how can the administration make the argument that these funds are not needed and in particular, how would the recision package affect Ukraine? Well, I with first of all, let me just say the one thing support through programs like that have vaccinated more than 1.1 billion children and prevented more than 18.8 million future deaths.
▶ 0:41:07We talked about malnutrition cost the world three and a half trillion dollars in lost productivity and health care costs each year. According to UNI UNICEF at least 14 million children are now expected to face disruptions to nutrition from the cuts already made by donors.
▶ 0:41:28It is it is tell me the Ukraine is to walk away from the assistance for Ukraine is that flagship that says we will hold democracy sacrosan in our world.
▶ 0:41:58and to fritter around and whether it is the kind of social service help that we provided, security assistance that we provided. If we are not providing that, then we should stand back and say, "Go ahead, Mr. Putin. Take it all. Take it on." I mean, we're supposed to be a leader in the world. And being a leader in the world has to mean more than just sending bombs to every country in the world. What is it that they use?
▶ 0:42:24Is it everything is Let me close with this one one one one thing. So today on the house floor, you know, uh Miss Hochin and I get into a debate over uh the reconciliation package.
▶ 0:42:38Um, and she went through a list of all the reasons why the big ugly bill was such a good thing for us to pass and bragging about all the things that were in the bill, including including the fact that the that that the bill removes the tax on gun silencers that has been on the book for a century.
▶ 0:43:00And according to the Independent Joint Committee on Taxation, ending the tax on gun silencers costs $1.5 billion. $1.5 billion. That's more than the $1.1 billion Republicans are quote saving by eliminating all funding for public TV and radio. I mean at the end of the day this is a this is a discussion about values and you know and and what is important.
▶ 0:43:30Mr. add hold. I don't know how can you justify eliminating funding for public TV and radio which millions of Americans rely on particularly particularly in rural areas uh where people have no other source of local news when Republicans are taking these savings to give a big tax cut for gun silencers.
▶ 0:43:56I mean, how, you know, or how do you justify any of these cuts to programs that feed kids or combat I mean, if we're if we're trying to save money, I mean, how, you know, a removing the tax on gun silencers, like like why is that more important than funding some of the programs that we're here talking I think the bottom line is, you know, I think we got to remember America has invested.
▶ 0:44:25that I think we agree has saved a lot of lives. Yes. In the past. Yes. But where we would disagree by by this recision package, it's not going to stop that. We will continue to do that. And I think anybody's concerned about some of this stuff with Mr. Edold with the foreign policy you should it it already funding for many of these programs have already is already is has already stopped. So we are seeing the effects of this right now.
▶ 0:44:55And again, I just find it, you know, um, just stunning that no one, you guys don't have a problem with removing the tax on gun silencers, uh, but somehow you want to, which is $1.5 billion, but somehow you want to cut, um, you know, money for public TV and radio or PEPFAR or other humanitarian programs. I don't know. I mean, did the assassin's lobby ask for the u the repeal on um you know, on the tax on gun silencers?
▶ 0:45:25I don't know. I don't I mean like I I just I just find this so fundamentally wrong that you know this this Congress passed a bill to remove the tax on gun silencers um and says that we have to cut money to combat HIV AIDS because we got to we got to find I think that's a moral failing and I'll yield to Mr. Lauro for last word.
▶ 0:45:51I would just say to you, you know, you asked about Ukraine, but is is the of all of the civilian funding intended to support Ukraine and other partners in Eastern Europe and Central Asia who are all facing aggression from Putin.
▶ 0:46:10You can't say at the one side we've got to, you know, stop Russia, stop Putin, and then open the door for Putin to come in and to take over in in in these places.
▶ 0:46:23I I think just as a final final final point here um I I I have to go back this debate we should be having this debate there is no legal basis for stealing congressionally directed taxpayer funds that has been established in law and in our Constitution
▶ 0:46:54and now they're trying to find a way to rubber stamp Elon Musk's destruction if you will the road to destruction what they have done and you cherrypick out of the empowerment control act the provision which says is where you should have started of looking at how we might deal with uh with with with looking at at rescending money with 45day limit and you want to
▶ 0:47:24cherrypick that and then say okay that's what we're doing and we're going to codify these. It is really unconscionable as to the havoc that is being wrought on the both in terms of empowerment and dismantling the federal government and that's what President Trump Russ vote and Elon Musk are all about and my Republican colleagues will rubber stamp that effort and Mr. at all.
▶ 0:47:48I think did you want to respond to Well, let me just say, you know, we we've talked a lot about the PEP FAR and I know that's been a an issue that but with this recisions of uh I think it's around uh a little more than 8 billion um that's been rescended total funding for dem uh diplomacy and foreign assistance is still 51 billion. So yeah, it's, you know, I don't think we should get the picture that there's going to be like $100 because because of what has already been withheld.
▶ 0:48:17I went through a list of the number of deaths that have already occurred. All right? And that is just going to get worse with this additional cut. And I'll just close with this. I have always believed America's greatness is in our humanity. And I think what we see here is that my Republican friends somehow think our greatness is in our inhumity. I can't believe we're doing this. I cannot believe we're doing this. And by the way, this is the tip of the iceberg.
▶ 0:48:43Wait till we get to some of the other programs that are being unilaterally halted right now like the McGovern Dole um school feeding program feeding poor kids um in school settings. Um one of the most successful anti-hunger programs we have. But in any event, I don't want to belabor this point. Mr. Vote said that this is the first of a recision package. Yeah. No, I I this is a test and then they're going to come back with more recision which is in in violation and people need to understand. I I thank you both. I yel back.
▶ 0:49:14Thank you, Mr. McGover. Mishbach, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. And and first I would just like to say Mr. Adold if you would like if there's anything you want to respond to. I just wanted to give you Well, let me just say that you know the waste, fraud, and abuse is what this is all about. And I mean, we're we're hearing examples from the other side that I think are totally been taken out of um out of context. America has saved lives across the world. We all agree with that and we will continue to do that.
▶ 0:49:45Um, I think if and anyone that's concerned about the future of US foreign policy in this country uh should support this because uh rescending these counterproductive funds will help restore the integrity that we have had as a nation and our images abroad. And I can tell you it is u these polarizing pro uh policies and including including the DEI that have undermined our image around the world.
▶ 0:50:13Like I said, I have talked to members of parliament around the world and they are very concerned about what was happening in the last administration and this administration wants to go down another path and I totally agree that we need to go down another path. Thank you very much. And I just I just wanted to add that this is what government's supposed to do.
▶ 0:50:33You know the word stolen and stealing was used but government is supposed to be looking at programs is supposed to be looking at how we are pay how we are spending taxpayer dollars as elected officials. This is our job. This is our responsibility to look at programs to make cuts where necessary and to be responsible with the taxpayers's dollars. And um Mr.
▶ 0:50:57had hold you had mentioned um then and I think it bears repeating that we're only taking a portion in some of these cases it's as low as 12% but none of these these programs are not um being zeroed out and I just wanted to take a minute to read a couple of things this is from the white house on the proposed recision of budget authority and this is uh it says this proposal would not reduce treatment but would eliminate programs that are antithetical to American interests and worsen the lives of
▶ 0:51:27women and children. So they say very clearly that it would not reduce treatment and this is the one regarding the um HIV AIDS money. Um you know enacting the recision would reinstate focus on appropriate health and life spending. We look at another one where they're talking here which is another it's a it's a 12 just approximately a 12% cut. We're not zeroing it out. We're not you know gutting the program.
▶ 0:51:52a simple 12% reduction which I think we owe the American people the responsible thing to do which we have to make reductions and and it says this proposal would eliminate only those programs that neither provide life-saving treatment nor support American interests. So this is not we are the opposition likes to make this sound like we are gutting programs and leaving you know leaving people dying in the streets but that's not the case. These are these are modest cuts.
▶ 0:52:22These are modest recisions and and it's very difficult to um to listen to them saying that we're doing all of these horrible things and and well this is really the truth. And Mr. Adhold you had a comment. Let me just add that we we some of the examples that of the ways that we we have seen 1.5 million to advance diversity and equity inclusion in Serbia's workplaces and business communities. um 70,000 for production of a DEI musical in Ireland.
▶ 0:52:53Um 2.5 million for electric vehicles in Vietnam. And the list goes on and on. And that's what this recision package is trying to do to address those things. And um like you said, it's it's a very small portion that's being rescended, but um to hear the other side, it sounds like everything's been decimated and that's just not the case. I appreciate that.
▶ 0:53:16and and as we as we take a look at you know and and then we talk a little bit about NPR or NPR and you know the programs that they're funding they're busy using taxpayer dollars for programs that are called um when civility is used as a cudgel against people of color. Um in 2021 NPR lamented that animals deserve pronouns too. And then we've got when we're talking about children's programs, they have a drag a show called uh it's a drag queen.
▶ 0:53:47Um and it's a children's program called Little Miss Hot Mess. They've got another um one, the hips on the drag queen go swish swish swish. That does not sound like children's programming to me. That sounds like a political agenda. Exactly. And um and the American people are fed up with it. And uh so I think these are very these are very modest um as things go as we look at our debt. We have to be responsible um stewards of the taxpayer dollar.
▶ 0:54:16And so I think and and you know Mr. Adult you pointed out a few of the programs in some of these and um woke programs and the chairwoman did. And so, um, I I think that we that certainly when you look at what is going on here, these are modest cuts and we are trying to get at things that, um, that the American people don't agree. And and we even mentioned about the 32,000 for a transgender comic book in Peru. Yeah. The 2 million for six changes in LGBT u activism in Guatemala.
▶ 0:54:46And again, the list goes on. Yeah. On and on. And with that, I yield back. Thank you, Miss Fishbot. Miss Candlin, you're recognized. Thank you. I would first yield to the ranking member. I feel like I'm in the twilight zone here. I mean, basically downplaying the cuts that have already been made and downplaying these cuts that are in this recision package.
▶ 0:55:08Just to repeat uh and maybe you all think this is nothing and maybe it's something to joke about but uh we are we know that the uh because of the cuts in USA ID we already know uh that um you know uh 100 overund6,000 adults and over 200,000 children have already died have already died.
▶ 0:55:32We know that the disruption in PEPFAR already has resulted in more than 50,000 adults and and 6,000 children dying. Uh we know that be because of the cutbacks that have already been made, more than 29,000 people uh children have died of malaria and we know that over 25,000 people have died of tuberculosis. I mean, this is I I'm sorry.
▶ 0:56:02That's a big deal to me. You know, it's a bigger deal than giving a than removing the tax on gun silencers that has been on the books for a But I think maybe that's the difference here. That's the difference in our values and on our priorities. I I I find it appalling that people can sit here and just downplay the deaths that have already occurred and not even give a damn about the deaths that will occur as a result of these cuts. And I thank the gentle lady for yielding.
▶ 0:56:37Thank you. Um I I want to thank ranking member Deloro for reviewing the constitutional significance of this recision bill. I have to say the best thing about that bill is that it represents a long overdue confession or recognition by the Trump White House of Congress's Article One powers.
▶ 0:56:58Uh by submitting this bill, the White House and speaker admit that the president doesn't have the power to delay or cancel congressional budget authority without first submitting the proposed recisions to Congress so that Congress can review the requests and determine whether to enact all or part or none of the recisions.
▶ 0:57:18And that's why we should have a wholesome uh hearing and debate process with respect to these proposed recisions because they're being presented to us on a wing and a prayer and a bunch of lies. So um you know it's it's just ridiculous that this is how it's coming to us. Look, recision is a process created by law enacted by Congress during the Nixon administration. And and you know, stop me if you've heard this before.
▶ 0:57:42President Nixon tried to illegally impound public funds when he claims that he was cutting them to prevent unproven fraud, waste, and abuse in order to justify tax cuts for billionaires in big business. It's the same play that we're seeing here today. It's not a new playbook. We've heard and will continue to hear a lot of nonsense from our colleagues, but they're dancing around the obvious. This bill is a sham.
▶ 0:58:08Elon Musk's Doge efforts were a resounding failure, reportedly even ending up in maybe a little fisticuffs in the in the Oval Office or nearby when people called him on it. So, Doge has probably been the most inefficient and wasteful White House project in American history. In his short stint playing at being a public servant, uh Musk failed to find any real causes of fraud, waste, or abuse. And not for lack of trying.
▶ 0:58:36He didn't find any because that was never the objective. The real goal was to promote some weird culture war agenda and wage war on the nation's civil servants, people who serve the public faithfully, all in order to benefit the billionaire buddies and donors and Mara Lago dudes. Um, the federal budget is arguably the most scrutinized document in the whole country. It is monitored by multiple federal agencies. It's overseen by Congress.
▶ 0:59:05There used to be dozens of inspectors general before the current administration fired them and it's regularly analyzed by outside experts. The programs that Musk and his Doge brothers claimed to expose were already open to scrutiny, public scrutiny, whether through congressional processes, through oversight by Congress, and through a publicly accessible website which has been around since I think So in the absence of actual
▶ 0:59:36fraud and waste, Doge and the White House manufactured and continue to this day to repeat absurd and easily disproven lies about transgender mice and 150year-old social security recipients.
▶ 0:59:50So this Doge effort has all been about misdirection to mischaracterize and slander important federal programs so that they can be cut under the pretense of routing waste in order to justify the biggest corporate giveaway in American history. Republicans cannot fix the country's fiscal problems by cutting polio shots for kids and killing Big Bird. It just doesn't work.
▶ 1:00:17We can't close the deficit by targeting only non-defense discretionary spending and continuing to transfer our nation's wealth from our poorest citizens to the wealthiest billionaires by cutting essential services for Americans and supercharging fiscally ruinous tax cuts. But Republicans have made it clear they don't care about these facts. And by focusing only on non-defense discretionary funding, they're not pushing fiscal reform.
▶ 1:00:46They're pushing a radical social agenda on the entire country. So, think about what we're talking about here. Republicans are going to completely zero out funding for PBS, including, of course, educational programming for you or your kids. Republicans have been trying to kill Big Bird and Cookie Monster for over 30 years, and now Trump would like to actually do it.
▶ 1:01:06In this bill, Republicans are completely gutting the funds for many of our most successful and effective foreign policy programs, programs that promote America's leadership and reputation abroad, programs that counter the influence of China and Russia. Mr.
▶ 1:01:22McGovern and Miss Deloro have already talked about the harm that will occur from the proposal to zero out PEPAR, which for a very small sum of money has saved 26 million people across the world from dying of AIDS and has allowed nearly 8 million babies to be born HIV free. But I'm also thinking about programs like polio vaccination, which with bipartisan support from groups like Rotary had nearly eradicated that dread disease.
▶ 1:01:52but with the suspension of US programs is now making a comeback. I'm thinking about our support for anti-corruption efforts in Central America where for a couple hundred dollars we've been able to change conditions that lead to migration to the US at a fraction of the cost of the border walls and military theatrics that this administration is using instead.
▶ 1:02:15At a time when China is spending vast sums of money and resources to buy influence around the world, why on earth should we cut programs that foster relationships with our allies and will would be allies? This recision's package is a huge handout to our adversaries and I guarantee you that Moscow and Beijing are celebrating. I also want to point out another program that may be needlessly cut by this Republican bill, the International Fund for Ireland.
▶ 1:02:45This funding represents the US's commitment to one of the this country's biggest foreign policy victories in the last 50 years, the Good Friday Accord, which established a peace process to end a cycle of violence and brought peace to the island of Ireland. In the Good Friday Accord, the US committed to be a guarantor of that peace process and our support for the International Fund for Ireland is an integral and critical part of that commitment.
▶ 1:03:14No matter what we hear today from our Republican colleagues, cutting $9.4 billion is not going to do a damn thing to fix the deficit. But these cuts are going to have widespread consequences both at home and abroad. Truth is, if the Republicans wanted, they could work with Democrats in good faith to find a path forward for meaningful fiscal consolidation to address the deficit and the national debt. But that does not appear to be the goal of this process.
▶ 1:03:41You know, during this whole process, I found it odd that not once did our Republican colleagues seek to route actual Medicare fraud, which could in theory generate major savings for the country. And it's important to think through why that is. You don't solve Medicare fraud by cutting people's health care. You solve it by hiring and empowering auditors and lawyers who can investigate fraudsters and recover lost funds.
▶ 1:04:07It's estimated that every dollar spent on exposing Medicare fraud enforcement brings back $16. But this fraud is not committed by individuals. It's committed by companies, insurers, providers, medical device companies, and god forbid, Republicans bite the hands that feed them. So instead of sensible policies to tackle fraud and bring money to the Treasury, we get this, a damaging recisions practice that will jeopardize lives and harm our international alliances.
▶ 1:04:35An administration that is illegally withholding half a trillion dollars of congressionally appropriated funds. And a Republican Congress that's pushing legislation that will increase the deficit by $2.4 trillion dollar and take away healthcare from 16 million Americans. No sane, honest person can argue that this is fiscally responsible. And while billionaires and millionaires get their hand out, 16 million Americans are likely to lose their healthcare.
▶ 1:05:04And nearly every working American will have the burden of the cost of the president's tariffs. It's a massive scam. Beyond the actual text of this recisions bill, it's really important we highlight the fact that today's rule is also reportedly going to include provisions that will make significant policy changes to the Republican reconciliation bill, which you will recall was rushed through Congress with such haste in a series of hearings which started
▶ 1:05:34or ended in the middle of the night and which was so rushed that many of our Republican colleagues now claim that they didn't know what was in the bill. But now that the speaker is going to make major changes to that bill without any transparency or scrutiny. Um it's thousands of pages of bill. It directly impacts every single American. But now we're hiding the contents of the bill by tucking legislative tricks into a rule about another piece of legislation.
▶ 1:06:02So, how offensive is it that this big ugly bill, which is supposed to be the centerpiece of the Trump agenda, is being changed after it's already been voted on by the House of Representatives? How bad are these amendments that leadership has to resort to these kind of tricks?
▶ 1:06:17For that reason alone, all those Republican members who now say they voted for the big ugly reconciliation bill without knowing what was in it, they should vote against this bill because or they should vote against this rule so they can have the opportunity to debate and vote on the bill with full knowledge of what is actually in it and to be completely transparent to their constituents. So, um, Ranking Member Dellor, I did have a couple questions for you.
▶ 1:06:44The recision package proposes to rescend over half the budget for international development and economic in assistance. This funding promotes democracy in authoritarian countries, helps people fleeing conflict, and saves millions of children from starvation. If we cut these funds, aren't we turning our backs on the people and countries we've pledged to Well, the answer to that is yes.
▶ 1:07:09But I believe that um countries around the globe are beginning to believe that the US is uh can't be counted on. Uh that they're you know we our word is not our bond. I think we've proven that with regard to Ukraine.
▶ 1:07:26Uh I think uh we have we just you know turn our backs uh to uh allies who have been uh we have been countries that we have been allies for years whether it is Canada whether it is UK whether it is the European countries uh and I really do believe today that they they view that we can be a trusted partner in what they want to do but the things that you have ticked off that are are in are are in this bill you know And particularly
▶ 1:07:57um you know I mentioned Gavei the vaccination issue and and by and by the way China is hot to be part of that. They went in on COVID when we would not do that and and provide the international aid uh to uh uh to assist these countries with the with the COVID pandemic. But we've talked about global health programs with state and USID.
▶ 1:08:22We've talked about uh we've talked about PEPFAR uh that we we are uh uh the international peacekeeping. We're not interested in doing that in order that there there be cuts would undermine operations like the UN mission in Lebanon with UNIFIL. Uh progress is already underway. Further destabilizing that region and we know we can't destabilize that region. Migration and refugee assistance uh you know this is about people escaping violence and hunger.
▶ 1:08:51That is what we do. And this is, you know, refugee populations are rising in Sudan, in Burma, Ukraine, Afghanistan, Venezuela. And uh uh where are we in this? You know, if we are not then our own national security is at real is at real risk. Um this is u you know, economic support and development assistance.
▶ 1:09:19U this is vital assistance to Egypt, Jordan. Jordan is one of our strongest allies, strongest allies, the most stable country in the Middle East, and we turn our back on Jordan and the assistance that they need, the Pacific Islands. We weaken efforts to counter China's growing influence. U this is we we take resources away from the poorest countries.
▶ 1:09:45Um uh uh you know we've resulted we have forcing 40 million children out of school denying over six million small holder farmers access to improved seeds and fertilizer that heightens the risk of future food crisis uh and starvation.
▶ 1:10:02And if anybody remembers the French Revolution was fought over the price of bread and if you don't have food to feed your kids and so forth, you know, you you revolt or you go to the people who will provide you with that food for you and your family. And if it's not the United States, who will it be? Halting clean water access for 3.6 million people and the spread of disease and preventable deaths. Uh, you know, it goes on.
▶ 1:10:30then goes on and on and you know to make light of the fact that you know of what our position is in the world to which we are backing away every single day. We are no longer the trusted of the free world as we have been in.
▶ 1:10:58And that quite frankly I think your point is extremely well taken. I mean these are programs that Congress authorized, Congress set up, Congress funded from a combination of motives.
▶ 1:11:13I mean, I hear from our faith-based communities all the time about how how important it is that we are feeding people, that we're preventing disease, that we are assisting refugees, um, hearing from Catholic relief services, from the Lutheran services, from hyosin council, from all these different groups, bipartisan groups which um, have supported these programs since their inception. But there's also, as you suggest, there are national security implications as well. It's one of these classic situations where you do well by doing good.
▶ 1:11:43You observe the humanitarian reasons for keeping these programs afloat, but you also protect our national security. You protect our health. You have assistance to Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia. It's a $460 million cut. Ukraine is the largest recipient of the eliminate eliminated funding directed to anti-corruption activities, agriculture and food security. Resiliency on the energy grid.
▶ 1:12:10It eliminated funding also impacts support for Malddova, Armenia, Georgia, which count on US assistance to counter the threat of Russian aggression. You know, you can't You can't have it both You can't want to counter China's influence in the world or Russia's aggression and countering that and at the same time just take away all of the tools that allow us
▶ 1:12:41to be that force for their survival and for the survival of democracy around the world. And it's it's dangerous. It is dangerous to the United States of America in the direction that it's going. I'll just make this one last comment because I can't stop going back to this. These are illegal. There should be no debate about that.
▶ 1:13:10When you look at me like that, read the documentation. Let's go back. No, you haven't. 50 pages going back to 1789 where Antinine Scalia didn't know what he was talking about. Renquist doesn't know what he's talking about. Roberts didn't know what he was talking about. Kavanaaugh doesn't know what he was talking about. Alexander Hamilton, the founders of this nation didn't know what he was talking about.
▶ 1:13:37where there is the power of the purse which is enshrined in the constitution and it is enshrined enshrined in the United States Congress and not in the presidency. And these examples will show you that the only way that funds were either delayed or approved was through the power inserted by the Congress.
▶ 1:13:59I would would like to place this in the record so that people can read it and understand this myth of the president's ability to impound. Without objection, Miss Ganon, thank you and and thank you for your testimony, ranking member. Um, you know, aside from the constitutional reasons, the actual impact on people, this is all so misguided.
▶ 1:14:24this whole pennywise pound foolish approach of this administration in general, but particularly with respect to the recisions that are before us today. the idea that you would cut these really impactful low dollar investments in health and security um in favor of much more expensive military uh solutions is astonishing and I think extremely misguided.
▶ 1:14:54Thank you for your testimony. I yield back. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Ganlin. Uh Mr. Langworthy, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, Representative Alder Alderholt, uh, we're hearing a lot of claims today about how these cuts would jeopardize lives.
▶ 1:15:11Uh, but when Doge went into the investigation of USAD and other programs, they found that the percentage of taxpayer dollars that really made its way to actually helping people, as so many of us thought they were, was shockingly small given the large provided uh, to these organizations in um, as a whole year-over-year. Could you speak to that in in in some of what was found in these programs? Yes.
▶ 1:15:39Um, you know, I think you're you're uh I think what should be noted is that uh the other side here this afternoon has been making the u argument that we are decimating these programs. They're most of these pro programs are being are there's cuts where we're just looking at waste, fraud, and abuse.
▶ 1:16:02We're not cutting the entire programs and um we are trying to make it more effective and more efficient and we've uh myself and some of the other members of this committee have already mentioned countless examples of what we've seen in the Biden administration what they were doing and uh the president Biden had four years to identify the unnecessary programs of the instances of waste fraud and abuse. Um and all that time he never sent a recision package to Congress.
▶ 1:16:29President Trump began identifying the programs that were unnecessary the first day he took office. He has recommended a modest set of reduction and I stress it's a modest set when you look at the overall totals and um it is uh our position uh from the preparation standpoint we believe the package deserves a vote up or down on the house No, I appreciate that. And you know, we do hear a lot of sky is falling routine here in Congress and we have throughout the whole year.
▶ 1:16:58How, you know, any change to a baseline, you know, spending bill is the end of all good things. And and I mean, the term people are going to die is something that is constantly used by the other side to try to scare uh constituents and taxpayers into um uh turning against the change that they voted for in November. So, I I really appreciate, you know, your work and the hard work of the appropriations committee on this. I look forward to supporting the recisions package and I yield back. Thank you.
▶ 1:17:29Thank you, Mr. Langworthy. Mr. Neoose, you're Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, thank you, Mr. Adorhalt and uh Rank Member Deluro for being here and for your testimony and appreciate your insights regarding the package that the House Republicans have brought us to consider today. Uh Mr. Adhold want to ask you a couple questions. So I have a press release here.
▶ 1:17:58This is from June 10th, so just a few days ago. Uh this is from your majority leader Steven Scaliz in describing the bill HR4, the recisions act of 2025. And he says in this press release that this bill would quote cottifies President Trump's cuts to wasteful foreign aid initiatives as well as woke public broadcasting. Do you agree with that? Yes. Okay.
▶ 1:18:24And it also says, quote, "This legislation cuts $9.4 billion in waste." End quote. Do you agree with that? I do. Okay. And you'd characterize the programs that are being cut and rescended as waste. You've said that at great length.
▶ 1:18:41Why did you vote in favor of those programs when you voted for the CR three months ago when these when uh these program I knew that we had a new administration that would be coming in and be looking at the president has said from day one that he wants to get rid of the waste fraud and abuse that are in these programs. But why didn't you get rid of them? Well, because a lot of these we don't how we send the money to the administration and they have decided on their own to unilaterally do these programs.
▶ 1:19:10This is not something that Congress gave the for these particular you appropriated we appropriated the money but this was decided at a at a agency level. Yeah. I think maybe I'm missing something here. Mr. Hall you let me just let me just take a step back. So the $9.4 $44 billion that the administration wants to resend funding for, right? This is funding that Congress appropriated.
▶ 1:19:38You voted for those appropriations three months ago with the understanding what the president would be cutting out. So, I get it. So, I guess the argument is I'll vote for, let's say, funding public television with the understanding that President Trump will ask us three months from now to cut the very funding that I'm voting for. I don't really understand why. Like, why not just not appropriate those dollars three months ago? What was the point?
▶ 1:20:05Why not just say like three months ago, you all could have decided, Republicans could have said, "You know what? This $9.1 billion dollars, it's waste. It's fraud. We're not going to give it to the administration. We're just going to not appropriate those dollars. You're on the appropriations committee, correct? You're the chairman of the subcommittee, the relevant subcommittee here. So, I mean, you have the power to do that. I That's what I'm trying to figure out is why didn't you all do that?
▶ 1:20:31Well, again, uh, a lot of these particulars, we knew I I think many of us in on the Republican side knew that we had a new administration in town that would be using this money wisely and not doing what we had seen in the Trump way in the bid administration. I I hear you. I mean, I I think it's what you said previously. Again, I'm going to just try to figure this out.
▶ 1:20:52What I'm saying is that as the chairman of the appropriation subcommittee, you have the power to say, "I'm not going to vote to appropriate money for public television because I disagree with it, or I think it's waste. I think it's fraud." Or, "I'm not going to vote for foreign aid initiatives because I think it's fraud.
▶ 1:21:11I think it's You could decide to do that and you don't have to go through this entire process of sort of kabuki theater where you appropriate billions of dollars and send them to the administration only so the administration can come back and tell you now that those funds should be rescended.
▶ 1:21:30it it just doesn't and by the way several of your colleagues voted against the CR for that reason right so they basically made the argument my Republican colleagues said they probably various reasons they voted against it sure but I but I think some of them have said you know you know Mr. Massie as well as I do, right? He said, "Look, this this budget contains fraud and waste and abuse and I'm not funding it. I I don't want to support that kind of waste and so I'm voting against it." You made a different decision as as did many of your colleagues.
▶ 1:21:59And I guess what I'm saying is I I don't I just think that you could understand why the American people would be confused to hear your colleagues, right, other and you yourself say, "This is waste. This is fraud. This is the worst wasteful spending that we've ever seen. But just forget the fact that I voted for it a few months ago. Well, many of these programs are not being unilaterally just decimated. They they're trying to get the waste, fraud, and abuse.
▶ 1:22:27That is what the president is going after, and that's what I totally support, and that's why I support what the president's doing here. So waste, fraud, and abuse is something that the American people uh voted for this president because he uh gave examples when he ran as president that we've seen in this government. And we've listed many of the things here today that happened in the last administration. I you made a compelling case, but I'm just confused why you voted for it. So that that's it. That's all I'm really trying to figure out. But anyway, administration would would do right with this money.
▶ 1:22:56really has a a crystal ball knowing what the administration is going to do. No one is going to do day by day. Would you care to expect? I mean, am I am I understanding this right or I don't I don't what what part of this it does the administration it just got $9 billion in a pot of money and so it decides where it goes. Is that how this is a a kabuki dance here? Uh these are specific programs that were appropriated.
▶ 1:23:24Democrats ex one voted against a continuing resolution. Every Republican voted for a continuing resolution with all of this money there. Their president, our president, he is president of the United States, said that hey Congress, I don't care what you do. I don't care what each individual member who voted forward. I don't care what you do.
▶ 1:23:53I am going to steal that money because I don't like it. And I would also in two ways has our Republican colleagues turned over the power of the Congress and the power of the purse to the executive and I don't care who the executive is. I'm not willing to turn that power over.
▶ 1:24:19You did it with a continuing resolution because that puts all of the power in the hands of the executive. And you're doing it now with allowing their impounding and stealing the money that we said we wanted to appropriate for the goods and services that the people of the United States need. Well, and I I would say I just building on that um madame ranking member, I think the Trump administration, Mr. Adherol and OM and Mr.
▶ 1:24:48Vote, they're going to put you all in a tricky situation here in the coming months because I suspect what they're going to do once this is, you know, this I presume will pass the House. I don't think it's going to pass the Senate, but we'll see. But they intend to, it sounds like, send more recisions packages to the House, what they said.
▶ 1:25:06And they're going to put you or maybe a different subcommittee, but your colleagues, I should say, on the appropriations committee in a difficult position of having to come before this committee and label as waste appropriations for programs that you all voted for. And that's my point is I just don't I I think that that's a very I understand why Mr. vote believes that these programs are waste.
▶ 1:25:30I disagree with his characterization, but I understand I don't understand how any member who voted for it 3 months ago can now vote to repeal the funding today. But well, again, you got to remember that when we pass these appropriation bills, we don't micromanage every single dollar that this is what the administration has been doing in in the past with this money.
▶ 1:25:53this administration wants to stop it and wants to get and so I would welcome more recision package where they see waste for abuse that has crept up and that they have finding these programs. So yeah, but Mr. Adhalt, you know that several of these programs are wholesale eliminations there. They're not there's no ambiguity with respect to the appropriations that the Congress approved that they're now eliminating. So that there's not I hear what you're saying that there are some programs in which they have discretion, right?
▶ 1:26:22So they're how they're spending the money is your point that they're let's say they're uncovering some type of waste or fraud and they're sending it back. But my point is there's no ambiguity about a line item for public broadcasting. That that's a very clear you are correct. But right that's my point is but it is being submitted by the White House as provided on the Congressional Budget Empment Act of 74 and Congress will have an opportunity to vote up or down on this. Yes, I I get it. I look what I'm saying. They're not just taking it unilaterally. No, no, no.
▶ 1:26:52But that's not what I'm suggesting, Mr. Adhaw. What I'm suggesting is I understand that Mr. Massie voted against allocating dollars to public broadcasting. And so now that President Trump has submitted a recision budget here, recision, a package to resend funding for public broadcasting, I understand why he'll vote for that.
▶ 1:27:11I don't understand how members who voted to fund public broadcasting, not 10 years ago, not a year ago, three months ago, will now say, "Actually, we were wrong. President Trump is right. We should wipe the slate clean." But let's talk about public broadcasting because I I think it's it's an instructive example in my view. Um, you're of course familiar with Alabama public television. Absolutely. Right.
▶ 1:27:40Do you know how much of their funding they receive from the federal government? Oh, I I was talked with the Alabama Public Television. It's uh I think less than 20%. Yep. It's you're spot on. You know, you're you've done your homework. 13%. 13%. So, you're comfortable with cutting that funding because obviously that's what you're voting for. Unless you're unless I can change your mind, but it but I mean you you understand that Alabama public Let me finish, sir, and then I'll I'll give you a chance of course.
▶ 1:28:08You understand that with the passage of this package, Alabama public television will receive a 13% cut in their funding and you're comfortable with that? I understand that will be cut that. Yes. But you're comfortable with it. I mean, you're voting for it. Well, I am voting for the package. That is what the president has submitted. And like like I say, it's Alabama is not we're not going to be voting just on Alabama. Sure. It's going to be for the entire nation. And because Alabama has done a good job with some of the things they've done, but why cut them?
▶ 1:28:38But what unfortunately they're in the package with all the others. So maybe we can Have you tried taking them out? We we'll we may I may work with you on that. Well, I'd love if you could include Colorado, too, because Colorado's done some great things. I don't know. I got to look at Colorado first. I'm happy to give you give you some some uh in materials that I think would be very unfortunately there's been a lot of states that have poisoned the well and unfortunately hurt Alabama. But what a shame what a shame that is for the people of Alabama. I guess that's my point. I mean, it is a shame that they have done that. Well, let's fix it. Let's change that. I mean, why not?
▶ 1:29:08Why vote on this package? With you on it that we can agree on that I'll get a proposal. Could we work on that before this gets to the floor? Because it would be a shame for the people of Alabama and the people of Colorado to lose access to public. We'll do Massachusetts. I haven't talked to the chairwoman yet, but she might be passionate about North I digress. I'm sorry. I One last question. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate that. Um, and I would say I'll advocate for North Carolina public television, too.
▶ 1:29:38I'm I I would I'm happy to to be an advocate. And Mr. Adderhalt, you know, maybe there's a way we could talk before this gets to the floor so that Alabama public television doesn't get cut because I think that would be a real shame. My understanding I you can correct me here. I Well, maybe I ask you instead of stating the posating as a fact.
▶ 1:29:59Do you know if any of the Alabama newspapers, television stations, do they have any reporters up here in Washington these days? A lot of our local press, they've had to cut back, so they don't have in Colorado, for example, we only have a few people here in Washington that are covering the Congress. Do you know if Alabama has anybody up here with public television? Uh, public, private, you name it. Um, I know they used to. I I don't know what the current status is.
▶ 1:30:25We looked and the only person we could find is someone affiliated with the Alabama public television. That's it. So the state of Alabama, as far as we can tell, the only reporter that's up here in Washington on Capitol Hill covering matters relevant to the folks that you represent is from Alabama public television.
▶ 1:30:47And I'm pretty sure once you all finish gutting public television, public radio, I imagine they're going to have to bring that person back. So I I don't to me that doesn't seem I'm I'm sure you believe in transparency like I do. I would think we'd want to keep we'd want to keep the media watchdogs here in Washington. And I can't imagine that cutting Alabama public television.
▶ 1:31:12I would love to worry to get funding for Alabama public television because it has not been uh subject to these woke policies that so many of the other states have and therefore u we can work together on this. Well, I you're the chairman of the subcommittee. You represent Alabama. You've been in Congress Democrat votes. You've been in Congress a long time.
▶ 1:31:33So, I if I mean, look, I I all I know is when I go back to Colorado, I'm I'm hoping this bill, of course, as you can probably imagine, given the the nature of our exchange here, that I'm against it. And I'm hoping that it fails on the floor. And when I go back to Colorado, I'll be able to tell my constituents that I fought to keep Colorado public television, Colorado public radio, that public media outlet, those outlets rather, alive. Um, and I think it's going to be very difficult for some of my colleagues on their side of the aisle.
▶ 1:32:03Um, some of them obviously don't want, you know, the these funding streams to continue. But for those that that have said that they do, it's going to be awfully hard for them to make that argument with a straight face back home. But anyway, we I I see my the chairwoman is uh Yeah. All right. I'll I'll yield back. I'll I'll give the chair the ranking member an opportunity to respond. It's really it this cuts journalism in rural areas. Coverage of local news events threaten public safety.
▶ 1:32:32Uh uh it rural stations would be forced to close. 70% of federal funding for public meeting is awarded directly to locallyowned public television stations and public radio stations. I think that what we need is a list of every state, every district, and what is about to be lost. Because you hear us, we're going to rectify it for Alabama the same way we dealt with Oklahoma and his social security offices, but the hell with the rest of the country. The hell with the rest of the country.
▶ 1:33:01And that can't stand. Well, and I've got a Thank you, Madame Ricky member, and um perhaps I'll introduce a bill and we can call it the Save Alabama Public Television and Colorado public television bill. And it could just be a re a recision of this recisions package because that's I will take a look and see what Colorado Public Television's done. Okay. See if see if it passed the test. Well, I mean, let's hope right. I'm against it. You know, one would Anyway, I I'll yield back. I we believed it. Thank you, Madam Chair.
▶ 1:33:33Thank you, Mr. Noose. Mr. Scott, you're recognized. Madam Chair, I do have a couple of questions, but I will tell you my last uh interview with this Um, I I I just think back to and laugh because I actually got on the call a little earlier than the editor did and uh then the editor got on the call and literally with me on the call, instructed the reporter on what they needed to get me to stay say to match
▶ 1:34:04the uh narrative. I wish that I had it uh recorded. Um needless to say, we did not go through with the interview with them. uh clearly one of the most biased organizations I've ever been affiliated with and and as I said I wish that I had had it recorded. It's a uh a lesson learned by me to make sure that you're recording the cause too because of how these biased organizations are going to shift around what you actually say. So I've got a question for the two of you real quick.
▶ 1:34:33Have either of you ever been to uh Hyereabad? Have you ever been to Hyerabad? I have not. No. And you have not. I've been there. It um been to Delhi. I've I've been I've been to Hideerabad. But one of the questions here is about the cuts to the to the clinic in Hyerabad, right? And so what I will tell you is Hyerabad is one of the tech mecca of the world. And specifically, it's working to become the health tech mecca of the world.
▶ 1:35:00It has a population of about 7 million uh people in that area. Now, now we're talking about a $35,000 reduction from USAD. uh just factually speaking Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon, Boeing, IBM, a lot of the largest corporations in the world, a lot of large US corporations have huge facilities in Hyereabad. And and Hyereabad's budget is massive.
▶ 1:35:30It's massive. In fact, there there's a there's a news article, I think it was it may have been Reuters, may have been India Times. They're about to spend 20 $20 million on one on a beautifification project. $20 million is what Hyereabad is spending of their own money on a beautifification project.
▶ 1:35:49And now based on the testimony of the Democrats, they they want you to think that if we cut 35,000 in USAD projects to that area that all of a sudden the people of Hyereabad are going to start It's just not true. We have no business projects in Hyereabad. USAD should be should be delivering food and medical aid to people who are in dire straits.
▶ 1:36:20Hyereabad is one of the wealthiest places in India. They have plenty of money to fund their own health clinics and we have no business funding clinics uh in that area. And and I for one, I'm glad that we're taking a look at USAD. I'm glad that USAD is being put under the State Department. Uh they have had a very serious problem with certain people in that organization being a agenda driven, not missiondriven.
▶ 1:36:50uh they did not respect the culture on the continent of Africa and they went in with LGBTQ initiatives into uh countries on Africa where that's actually illegal and they put that agenda ahead of the mission. And when we talk about getting kicked out of of certain areas and the Russians and the Chinese and coming in and replacing us and I support I want to say this I support the mission of delivering food and medical aid to to poor people around the world.
▶ 1:37:20The USID mission must be consistent with the State Department the previous administration's own ambassadors, their own ambassadors had asked them to stop with the agenda driven stuff and get back to the humanitarianbased stuff. And the people at USAD would not give up on the agenda. And they put the mission of USAD at risk by being by being agenda driven.
▶ 1:37:50You can look at me like that all you want to. I know it personally. I go to No, it's my time and I listen. It's my time. It's my time and I spend a lot of time on the continent of Africa and I know exactly what I'm talking about. So do I. And I've had the discussions with the ambassadors personally and I had the discussions with Samantha Powers personally. I'm glad where we're sending this stuff. USAD needs to follow the State Department. It needs to be missionoriented, not agenda oriented.
▶ 1:38:18And we have no business funding projects or whatever we want to call them in areas that are as wealthy as Hyereabad. And with that, Madam Chair, I yield. Thank you, Mr. Scott. Miss Leisure Fernandez, you're recognized. Uh, thank you very much, Madam Chair. You know, and I think you started it exactly right. Uh, Ranking Member Delaro, you started by pointing out that Trump has done nothing to bring down the cost of groceries. Nothing to bring down the cost of groceries.
▶ 1:38:44Instead, Donald Trump and Elon Musk spent the last four months taking a chainsaw to the programs Americans actually do believe in. Uh, and now Republicans want us to put gas in that chainsaw. I'm not willing to do it. Uh, because I'm not going to bless the destruction of cherished public radio and television programs, healthc care, medical research, and international aid.
▶ 1:39:10We've heard already about the deaths that have already occurred. So when you say we are scaring people by saying people are going to Republicans acknowledge people are going to die. The Yale just did a study saying that bad billionaires bill is going to cost 50,000 lives a year. So we're not making this up. But the other thing we're not making up because they're already dying because of what's happened.
▶ 1:39:39And we keep hearing that they're doing this to prevent race, fraud, and abuse. Race, fraud, and abuse. Let's talk a little bit about waste and fraud, right? Trump and Musk, you know where I'm going, right? Trump and Musk have profited immensely from his presidency. Trump and his family's net worth has increased $2.9 billion since he took office. $2.9 billion. You know what that's worth?
▶ 1:40:10four years of for the Corporation for Public So, if we just sort of eliminated the fraud and abuse that we're seeing from this presidency, we could fund those important public broadcasting programs. You know, Trump and Musk, they've broken up, but we have their offspring still continues, right? That awful Doge. and it has cost us $135 billion.
▶ 1:40:41Doch has cost the American taxpayers $135 billion and that doesn't include any of the cost of all those lawsuits, right, ranking member? Um, so you know the $9 billion that they want to save here, right? Um they're going to destroy USA ID and they're going to basically, you know, cut off the knees off of Big Bird Musk 48 billion dollars.
▶ 1:41:10So we could fund the programs across the country that prevent infectious disease, that prevent the kind of deaths that I don't have the time to go into right now if we would just not have the fraud and abuse with those contracts.
▶ 1:41:26But ranking member Laura Delora, I did want to get to the issues about the Corporation for Public Broadcasting because you touched a bit about it and the whole idea that I'm sorry, Representative Adult, you know how important that public broadcasting is for Alabama. You were so uncomfortable when they were talking about and you would like to save it, but I'd like to save it for New Mexico, too. And we'd like to save it for everybody across this country. You understand that, right?
▶ 1:41:54And I'm going to ask ranking member Deloro, you look very appreciative of that. So I feel bad for you because you're in this spot for, you know, Alabama. No, Alabama's knowing you're not going to vote for their program here. You have you do have some states that have used their money wisely, but unfortunately there are so many states that have not with publications. Oh no. Oh no. I don't I can go there because you know what I'm woke agendas. I'm sorry, Mr. Mr. Adhold.
▶ 1:42:21If Alabama is using their money wisely, I can guarantee you New Mexico is using their money wisely. Representative Delori, you really wanted to talk a little bit more about the importance of these uh programs and I'll give you that time. Yeah. Well, I I do I mean send us a list. This is a whether it has been we asked you people at USAID send us a list of the programs that are not working and what is the criteria of which you ended those. This was two months ago to what is his name?
▶ 1:42:50Navaro, whatever his name was, and we have yet to hear back. Tell us what are the states that have not their the public broadcasting has has been contrary to to its purpose. No, there's just a lot of verbiage, etc. But I will tell you that they cut journalism in rural areas. That's local news and events that threaten public safety and emergency alerts, which should no longer be there. This is the alert system for tornadoes, for wildfires, for hurricanes.
▶ 1:43:20Um, uh, and FM and AM signals are essential in in evacuation scenarios. By statute, 70% of federal funding for public media by statute is awarded directly to locallyowned public television stations and public radio stations. Uh you've got more than 1,200 local public radio stations, 365 local public television stations.
▶ 1:43:46You know, yes, you can just tell them you're all out of business because we think you're not doing the right programming, but where is the evidence? Where is that evidence? Uh uh this is you know um it if you say it's going to you want to save Alabama as a gentle woman said she wants to save New Mexico. We've got Connecticut. We want North Carolina. We've got Texas.
▶ 1:44:16We've got Massachusetts. We've got Colorado. What is this? You're going to dial a phone and say Alabama's okay but the rest are not okay. That's the way this government is being run. And that has to do with tech companies calling up and saying, "Hey, don't deal with any tariffs that affect me, you know. So, you're exempted. Let's get real about what you sound like race, fraud, and abuse." When you're actually Well, I want to talk about waste, fraud, and abuse.
▶ 1:44:44You want to talk about waste, fraud, and abuse about a tax cut. Four and a half trillion dollars. My colleague said who this stuff is going to hider at badge. is going to $35,000. We got hundreds of millions of dollars going to corporations who pay zero taxes today. Zero. And we can give you a list of all of those. That's waste, fraud, and abuse. $ 48 billion to Elon Musk for his contracts. I have to agree with the president.
▶ 1:45:14Why don't we just end all of his contracts? I'm there. Let's do that in a heartbeat. Uh so we can get rid of that. You know, this is unconscionable which is being done and it's being done in the name of something that is non I don't even know what woke programming is in this. It's something that they've made up. It's made up. It's a construct.
▶ 1:45:36But, you know, and the thing is is the same way that we heard Representative Adel sort of support his world programming in in Alabama. Uh, I'd like to enter into the record, Madam Chair. World Republicans used to back NPR. Then MAGA changed everything. It's an article from the Washington Post without objection. And you know, when you think about uh why did they support this?
▶ 1:46:00They supported this rural programming because it was important because as you pointed out uh it did all of these things. Somebody said on the day over here on the Republican side, "Oh, we're not we're not cutting anything that is life-threatening." Well, and you know what? Hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, those are life-threatening. And you know who announces those? Do they do this in Alabama, Mr. Adel?
▶ 1:46:26Where it is your public radio stations that are letting people know about the incoming tornadoes, hurricanes, floods. That's what happens everywhere. And we have letters after letters of Hurricane Helen, right? They were people were relying solely on public radio because that's all that existed. And then what I love best is in North Carolina. In North Carolina, I love this is like their members were saying, well, you know what?
▶ 1:46:56We listen to bluegrass music on our NPR and then commodity prices for corn, soybeans, pork that are updated every half hour along with the weather. These are the kinds of things that people are getting from their public radio. And you ask why did Republicans like you, Mr. Adall, and I don't know why you changed your mind about the your Alabama um Well, I've always NPR is isn't in a different category. There's public Republicans have had great concerns about NPR.
▶ 1:47:23But public radio that you just at the CBS Corporation for Public Radio and it might be that uh Donald Trump that the answer to they used to support and now they don't is because he did a tweet no more funding for NPR a total scam. And you know what? This is what we're getting. We're getting rubber stamp Republicans. Rubber stamp Republicans because whatever he wants, they do. And Congress doesn't want us to be rubber stamping the presidency.
▶ 1:47:52They expect us to do our job and that's what we should be doing here. And Mr. Adall, I wanted to go through something else that I know you care a lot about and that's the debt and the deficit. I was looking at a a a piece you actually did u back in 2010 uh where you were complaining. I think you've taken a stance through your career that you are against uh debt and deficits and running that up. Is that correct?
▶ 1:48:21Well, and I think mo when it's uh most members of Congress are So, yeah. So, in 2010, you wrote an op-ed and you said, you know, this is really horrible. Uh I'm paraphrasing because right now we have 13.3 trillion in debt and a $1.4 trillion deficit, right? Do you remember writing that or is that something that's It's been a while back. It's been a while, but that's like what you were thinking.
▶ 1:48:46Do you know what happened with the deficit uh uh with the debt? It's exploded deficit after you wrote that in We had an Obama presidency and it went In a Republican when we have Republican the deficit goes up and then in the six years following that operation
▶ 1:49:17there been down. You have debt debt on there as well. What is the debt? No, this is a chart about the about the deficit. And then what happened is we had Trump come in and he did those tax cuts. And what happened to the chart? They went through the roof. So then Biden comes in and even with what we have to spend to deal with the pandemic, brought the deficit down.
▶ 1:49:43But what does what does the bad billionaires bill or the big beautiful bill or whatever you want to call it, what does it do? What does it do to the debt and the deficit? Well, that's some opinion of it. Yes, there's some opinion. Well, the CBO, Madame Chair, may I enter into the record the CBO estimates $3 trillion dollars of debt from House Obama OBBA?
▶ 1:50:09That's really May I has has has uh the Congressional Budget Office been wrong in the past? Well, not on this actually. They've been wrong on a few things. They did not anticipate the pandemic, but then did anybody really anticipate the pandemic? They didn't. they did. So, the pandemic was something that did affect some of their projections, but really they haven't been. And it's not just the CBO.
▶ 1:50:36Every other reputable, including conservative outlets that have looked at that, the Kato Institute, you know, go through it. They've all said this is increasing the debt and the deficit. And this $9 what does it represent? Uh, and it took me a while to do this math, ranking member Delaro, but the nine billion dollars that they want to save now, do you think it represents maybe 1% of the deficit?
▶ 1:51:06Not even. Right. Not even. It's a molecule. It's a It's not even a drop. It is so small. It's a molecule. They will destroy our standing across the country, across this planet. They will destroy the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. They will cost the lives that we're talking about for a molecule of savings compared to their debt.
▶ 1:51:35Now, madame uh ranking member, I don't know if you wanted to address anything else. I'm the last Democrat on Look, I I just think it's clear They have impounded they have impounded and stolen funds.
▶ 1:52:02Now they want to uh rubber stamp as you pointed out uh through the mechanism that comes from that empowerment control act which is which is a legal process but it's the cart before the horse. You want to do something like this then you come to the congress you don't do it. So that this is, you know, it's it's almost a wasted debate. There shouldn't been any conclusion that even the 2025 budget, you voted for a continuing resolution.
▶ 1:52:27It says that means you continue the 2024 dollars, you carry them over to 2025, but no, that's not what you that's not what you do. So you reneg on what you did in voting for the the the resolution.
▶ 1:52:41you you compound that with stealing the dollars through this empowerment process and then you want to rubber stamp that these the these recisions for things that you don't happen to like though it was voted on by Democrats by Republicans in the House and in the Senate and signed by the president. That is kind of a basic tenant. Every school kid knows that you, you know, the House votes, the Senate votes, Democrats vote, Republicans vote.
▶ 1:53:09You come together, you work it out, you sign a bill into law. Let's all go to see Schoolhouse Rock, uh, so that we know how a bill becomes law. Maybe we need a Sesame Street episode on how a bill becomes of Big Bird and Ernie for God's sakes. Um, uh, you know, face where we are really at. And um this compounded by this is a recision package, but then you take a look at a reconciliation package.
▶ 1:53:40Um you can call it whatever you want. Um but it is unbelievable. It's Medicaid, it's Medicare, it's the Affordable Care Act. And let me just tell you and and 16 million people losing their healthc care coverage. And folks want to say that Medicare is not up for grabs. Well, let me just tell you what the PGO statutory PIGO uh act said.
▶ 1:54:06Um that you go over the the deficit like two three three um $3 trillion over that you then trigger sequestration. Sequestration says it's a 4% cut across everything. That means $500 billion in cuts to Medicare. So don't continue to lie to the American people that that isn't going to be to to be cut.
▶ 1:54:30This is a talk about a Ponzi scheme that that Musk said that was social security. This is a Ponzi scheme and it is a house of cards and it's going to come crashing down on you because the American public are beginning to understand what's happening to them and to their families.
▶ 1:54:51And that's what's the important piece here is the consequences that you are, you know, you are reigning on with the American people and domestically and internationally that we are going to try to stop if we can with votes. And we hope that we there may be some votes on the Republican side that understand what's going on and will join us in ending this charade. Yeah. Because basically Republicans want health care for working families. They want health care for the seniors who who deserved it.
▶ 1:55:20They want to make sure that we feed our children and what Republicans are doing is mugging big bird in broad daylight. And with that, Madam Chair, I yield back. Cost of living. Thank you, Miss Leisure Fernandez. Mr. Griffith, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. You know, Madam Chair, I I'm listening to the discussion and I hear our colleagues saying that this recision package is merely a molecule in the makeup of federal spending.
▶ 1:55:50And then I wonder why they spent so much time attacking the molecule. H I think thou dust. No, there's two things my time. I think thou dost protest too much. It's my time. Thank you, Mr. Chairman or Mr. Ranking member. But I like to get through my stuff and then if you want to say something, I might be willing to yield. But I like to get through my stuff and and so you know, it's just kind of interesting. Let me let me also say that I agree with Mr.
▶ 1:56:20Scott when he says that the what the USAD's mission was and what I understood it to be for most of my life I support. I was on a trip a couple of years ago. Went to a refugee camp in Africa. Learned all about this peanut butter stuff that they helped to uh create and helped to spread around that if you can get this stuff.
▶ 1:56:43kind comes in kind of a squeeze tube and the stuff is is incredible and if you can get that to a child before their organs start shutting down they live and it doesn't take much time. It's amazing stuff. That's what I support. I support the USA ID doing that.
▶ 1:57:02And since this controversy came up where it was clear that that at least a significant portion of their money, I don't know how much, but more than a molecule, Madam Chair, was being spent on uh culture wars. And I don't think USAD is supposed to be involved in the culture wars on the right or the left. Doesn't matter to me whether it's coming from the right or the left. It's not our job to go in there and do that.
▶ 1:57:23our our purpose, as I understood their mission, Madam Chair, was to feed the little children and to do what they could do to make hunger less. And so I I agree that it needs to be reorganized. I agree it needs to be revamped. And I need I think that the US government, no matter what the agencies called in the future, needs to get back to the mission of making sure we're taking care of feeding those children.
▶ 1:57:47And when I talked to my constituents in the district about this, many of whom would tell you because it's a relatively poor district that they don't understand federal spending uh on, you know, and foreign governments and so forth, they don't understand that. But when I talk to them about the peanut butter stuff to a to a person, they nod and they go, "Yeah, I'm okay with that. I'm okay with So, we we may have to do some reorganization, but I just want to make it clear that I do support that because I'm going to talk about some other things.
▶ 1:58:17So, Madam Chair, I'm going to ask us to reflect back in time. The year is 2002. It's um it's a tough time in the economy in Virginia. I was in the state We were facing a two billion dollar legislature was out of session and Virginia has a requirement to have a balanced budget.
▶ 1:58:43So, the governor stepped in with the red pin and made That's what adults in leadership do. He cut 1,800 state jobs. Cuts were expected to cut up to 4,000 jobs at the state's universities and colleges. Community services were cut. Libraries were cut. Almost everything was on the table, including cultural items.
▶ 1:59:10One such program that was cut at the Library of Virginia and which was one of all my one of my all-time favorites, Madam Chair, was the Virginia Cavalcade magazine. This is a part of my collection. They stopped publication in 2002 because the Commonwealth of Virginia could no longer afford it.
▶ 1:59:29And when I went and and got my collection, I I I was just thrilled that the one that was on top was of the Little League game played in Norton in 1951, the first Little League game in the South with integrated teams. And it's fascinating to me because times change. People would think that the people of the Mountains uh were racist, but in reality, it was the Charlottesville team that refused to let the integrated team play on their field, so they had to play the game in Norton.
▶ 1:59:59in southwest Virginia, in the mountains, in Appalachia. But this, as it by its own definition, it was the quarterly Illustrated magazine of Virginia history and culture. And it did all kinds of things. It did art. This is an this is a big article on an artist from Southwest Virginia named Walter Biggs. This was about the Powatans and on and on. And it was a marvelous publication. But the governor had to cut. He did what he had to do.
▶ 2:00:26While there was angst, there was angst about a number of the cuts that had to be made, governor did what he had to do. And as a result, a lot of things got cut. And then Governor Mark Warner, now Senator in the United States Senate from Virginia, made those cuts because that's what adult leadership does.
▶ 2:00:45Sometimes when you're facing a deficit and a debt a debt of almost $ 37 trillion, you have to figure out what can we cut? What can we cut? And so I would ask my colleague from Alabama because I've heard all kinds of things. The recision bill is not the reconciliation bill, is it?
▶ 2:01:13In fact, the recision bill is a bill to cut spending. Isn't that correct? Correct. And and I would say I've heard lots of stuff here In fact, we finished with, you know, I forget whether it was killing, whacking, cutting off at the knees big bird. What's fascinating is, let's get the facts straight. The recision does not touch Big Bird.
▶ 2:01:38It touches the Corporation for Public It has always perplexed me and this has been my position since the 90s when I first started studying this stuff. Why in the world the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and PBS never got and they may have changed something recently, but to my knowledge they have never gotten and historically they didn't get any royalties from the corporation that owns Big Bird.
▶ 2:02:06They've never gotten any royalties, nothing from Jim Henson Productions. Oh, they may pay for a particular show. They may, you know, but the corporation owns all of those intellectual properties. And so when they do toys, dolls, talking Elmo, when they do movies, and I heard today about spin-off TV shows, and if they're airing reruns, Corporation for Public Broadcasting gets nothing.
▶ 2:02:38And I understand that in the 1960s that was fairly standard for television networks, but the production companies like Desiloo, Viacom, Paramount, that would be the owners of the Star Trek merchandising and broadcasting rights, now partners with CVS.
▶ 2:03:02Uh but all of that they've made billions and these corporations have made billions and I don't understand why because those those television stations got the benefit of having the the non public for public television stations got advertising dollars. But why they didn't ask for that has always been perplexing to me. So let's get our facts straight everybody.
▶ 2:03:28This is not going to have a huge impact on Big Bird because Big Bird's going to go somewhere else. Big Bird can go elsewhere, particularly if if they and they may have a contract for now, but they can go elsewhere. Jim Henson originally worked for Jimmy Dean, and I got a story on that, but I won't tell it today. But he originally worked for Jimmy Dean. He was willing to give up some rights.
▶ 2:03:50We know that because he offered part of his corporation when he got the call to do work for PBS and C on the on the company that was going to do Sesame Street. He offered Jimmy Dean part of his company and they could have gotten a piece of it and they didn't. And that's always perplexed me because then they wouldn't need to keep coming back to the government to ask for money.
▶ 2:04:12But Big Bird, Ernie, Cookie Monster, none of those are owned by PBS, the public the uh Corporation for Public Broadcasting or PBS. Now, it was a different world back in 1967. I mean, you had uh local calls, what we today we would call local calls.
▶ 2:04:34I mean, today you can call the world pretty much local, but as late as 1993 to call inside of Rono County on telephones, you had to pay a toll. In the Virginia House of Delegates, I had to have special phones so people, my constituents, could call me without having to pay a toll.
▶ 2:04:57even though I only represented Montgomery County, Rono County, and the city of Salem, which is completely surrounded by Rono County and the and the city of Rono. And you had there was toll calls. The world has changed. And it it really bothers me that everybody thinks that somehow that the Corporation for Public Broadcasting doesn't have to change with the Times.
▶ 2:05:20when they were created for television, we only got two channels at my house. We didn't have a big giant TV and we weren't in the right spot to get ABC. We only got CBS and NBC. So, so PBS made sense to get some additional broadcasting. Today, everybody has access, some even free over the air, but to hundreds of channels. And so, things need to change. And I've said this since the 90s.
▶ 2:05:49Now, NPR, the public radio local affiliates, a little bit different. I recognize that. They're a little bit different than than the other and and I've long wanted to be helpful and supportive where I could uh to help them, but unfortunately, they're tied together. And maybe someday there'll be a bill or something that separates them out and we can get that that straightened out a little bit. But I have been confused here today. And maybe things are different in other parts of the country.
▶ 2:06:19because they don't do local news. They do regional news, they do state news, and they carry some national news that they get from various sources, but they don't carry uh local news. My district's 9,000 plus square miles. We got basically two different networks of national radio uh programs. they can't do local news in every one of the communities that that they're serving.
▶ 2:06:49So, they do regional and state news. They don't do local news. And and that's been uh talked about today. And I'm just not sure that it's certainly not accurate in my district. I can't speak to others um and to what they do, but um you know, it's they're all over the the place. And then we get to the emergency broadcast system as we used to call it. It may be the emergency alert system now. I don't know.
▶ 2:07:18But Mr. Chairman, that's not a part of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. That's a completely separate agency, is it not? Or a separate entity, is it not? That's my understanding. Yes. Yeah. And so when you talk about the warnings for tornadoes and for storms, I'm not saying they don't carry some of that on the local uh national public radio affiliates, but that's not who you listen to. Because if you're listening to that for half my district, you're listening to what's going on in Rono. That's not you.
▶ 2:07:47That's not about about half my district, you know, up on the up on the Appalach in the Appalachian Mountains and on the plateau. Uh it's not them. And likewise, a lot of the programming in Deep Southwest comes out of Tennessee. It might be similar in some ways. They might say, "Hey, watch out in certain counties." I get that.
▶ 2:08:07But if you're in my home district, you're you're paying attention to your local TV station or you're you're listening to your local AM now with an FM transponder that that gets it into FM because they're going to zero in on a specific county. In fact, I got one of my counties where there's a mountain in between. You got one radio station on one side of the mountain and another radio station on the other side of the mountain.
▶ 2:08:31And you better be listening because when the flood is hitting um you know a specific uh area like Hesai, you better be on the right radio station because if you're listening to the other one, they're not going to have any flood at all on that side of the mountain. All the water's on this side of the mountain. And so I've been a little perplexed by this wailing and nashing of teeth claiming that somehow we were going to have all these storms that people weren't going to know about because if we relied on and and I'm not I'm not picking on the local affiliates of the public radio.
▶ 2:09:01I'm just saying that's not their role in our region. I can't speak for other regions of the country, but I got to believe in large rural districts, it's pretty much the same as mine. That's what I believe. And so I think that that doing these recisions is appropriate. I support it and I I just want to make I mean if we're going we can have disagreements. That's what we do in Congress. We have disagreements. We fight it out. But let's get the facts right.
▶ 2:09:27Corporation for public broadcasting is not the emergency broadcast system that we all grew up with. Maybe now the emergency alert system. Big Bird is not owned by PBS. Bert and Ernie are not owned by PBS. Jim Henson Productions is a separate entity. It's not owned by the production company for Sesame Street or PBS. And and so when you talk about we're going to be kneecapping Big Bird, I submit we might be setting Big Bird free.
▶ 2:09:52Big Bird might make more money being set free to go into the private market area whenever their contract is up with PBS and may be able to get more nationally and internationally when they are set free. But that's a contract negotiation.
▶ 2:10:10and it has nothing to do with this recisions bill and loving Big Bird and Bird and Ernie and loving the story of the original uh Jim Henson Productions and how they got started on the Jimmy Dean show. He was originally a country music star for those who don't know and then took his money and went into sausage. But he didn't take Jim Henson's money because as I was telling you the other day, Madam Chair, he said to Jim Henson something along the lines of, "Son, that's your talent. I don't want any of your company.
▶ 2:10:40God gave you that talent. Go out and have success. But he got his start Henson got his start on the Jimmy Dean show. So there's a Oh, by the way, and and by the way, Jim Henson show was not on PBS. No, you're going to be shocked, Madam Chair.
▶ 2:10:55Jim Henson, I mean, excuse me, Jim Henson's show on which he was, the Jimmy Dean show was a syndicated show on corporation forprofit television stations that used to run on Saturdays or Sundays, depending on what channel you were watching it on. I I know the chair I know you're sensitive to the time. I just wanted to flag that. I know that's something you've been concerned about at the All right, I yield back.
▶ 2:11:23gentleman said I talked too long so I yield back the gentleman yield this is about the peanut butter issue that you said because we're in agreement that's called RUTF it is the uh ready to use therapeutic food and you're right you do that and you can save a child's life but that is all part of the international disaster assistance in which $500 million is being cut long it's supportive we're on the channel RUTF which is produced in Georgia uh with the peanuts and
▶ 2:11:53in Rhode Island at a company called Adia and it is a number of other states. So it is a homegrown American product which is useful in terms of saving youngsters lives. Thank you very much. Thank you Madam Chairman Morgan. I wasn't even born when Big Bird was around. So, I did eat Jimmy Dean sausage.
▶ 2:12:21So, you know, we've been on TV. This is going on three hours. We got here at 2 and I want to thank both of you for being here. Simon, I noticed you were paying attention. You stayed awake, which is very good. Um, no. I mean, you know, I hope the public that's watching this, uh, we we this is two different worlds with the Republican party and what the Democrats stand for.
▶ 2:12:47Now, I've heard criticism after criticism over every little nitpicking thing on the recisions and on reconciliation bill. And, you know, I guess it's a a either, as Morgan said, know the facts. I think this country's got a cancer and it's called debt. I think to tune to $37 trillion. I think that um every agency we have from social security to highway trust fund, Medicaid, uh Medicare is running a deficit.
▶ 2:13:17Uh and I've heard nothing but criticism, you know, and I look down through the four years that the Biden administration uh starting with 2021, you add up all the deficits they ran, it's a little over eight trillion dollars.
▶ 2:13:32Um, and you know, I I keep hearing the phrases malnourished children, the health of Americans, the um, you know, the criticism of Elon Musk, who, by the way, I think he donated his services. But where was your voice when you had a chance to speak on the Biden administration? Where were any cuts present prevented presented?
▶ 2:14:01Uh, you said nothing, you did nothing, and you were silent. Where was your voice when the Biden administration let 20ome million people come across this border for over over 160 countries? When you had the chance, you said nothing, you did nothing, and you you were silent. Where was your voice uh when the fentanyl deaths that were caused by letting illegals and letting China route the fentanyl into America?
▶ 2:14:32Where was your voice then on the children that were starving? You you said nothing, you did nothing and you were silent. Uh where was your voice when you obviously had a president in Joe Biden who was mentally, let's just say compromised. Don't go there. And the fact that he would he could not read a thank you note from a go there. I will go there. The time is not yours. You spoke for I don't know how many hours and you're out of line. You're dis you know you y'all know no no no order.
▶ 2:15:02The district was you know you knew nothing. You with Joe Biden being incompetent and the books are being written by the um by the newscasters who who aided and emedded it.
▶ 2:15:16you risk this country and you put this country through an administration like Joe Biden who was who was incompetent and when you had a voice to say something you said nothing you did nothing and you were silent and folks um you know I hope every recision that we have and when you say when you read down through the list uh you know 2 million for sex change surgeries in Guatemala 520 million to pay consultants to speak people in Africa about
▶ 2:15:46China climate change. I could go on and on. Uh we either get this country right financially. Uh but when y'all had the opportunity, you you said nothing. You did nothing. It was nothing that you would do. It was all words. Are you going to interrupt? No. It's not. The time is not yours. You No. Miss Laura, I like you, Mr. Mr. Mr. Norman. Mr. Norman, wait just a second. Mr. Laura, Mr. Norman is making rhetorical comments.
▶ 2:16:16He is not asking you Well, let me clarify, Miss Deloro. Let me clarify. Mr. Norman is not asking you a question. Appreciate that. When he yields time to you, then you can speak. Okay. Thank you. Question. I apologize for that. Well, you know better than that. You're too smart. There were no questions to you. And I'm just making a statement because we've been sitting here going on three hours. I would just say that the American people, we've got two differences.
▶ 2:16:46Uh two, you got one group, government is your guide. You never cut anything and you just are willing to let this country go into bankruptcy. I am not. And Mr. I hope the beauty of what this party has done to come together. Yes, it hurts some things in in Alabama as Mr. Necus was was uh you know was pointing out. It hurt some things in South Carolina. I can't pick uh and cherrypick the things in South Carolina and ask you in Alabama just to ignore it.
▶ 2:17:16No, we're in this boat together and we're going to sink if we don't all come together. I hope we have a recision package uh every week and 9.4 uh trillion is a is is minuscule tear drop in the ocean. But I hope every week we had recisions. We could cut five to ten trillion and h get this country back on frivolous spending that's that Elon Musk has had the bandwidth to identify.
▶ 2:17:44And I will tell you this, he he and Donald Trump get criticism. They've done they've done the great things in this country that no one had the courage to do. When the people in the mountains of North Carolina, the government wouldn't do anything.
▶ 2:17:59When Biden was getting getting a photo op in Greenville, South Carolina, which I would no never dare to go to, uh, and offer $700, Starlink came at no charge by Elon Musk when President Trump had the ability to put these things forward and to cure the rampant violence that's happening now in California, which the my good friends on the left, you know, there are no consequences for violence and tearing up cities.
▶ 2:18:26All that to say is uh I admire what uh Robert what your committee did. I admire what we're doing as a party and uh America will not be able to provide any help if we don't get our own health uh back in order. Mr. Idaho, do you have anything to say? No, let me just say that again as I said before that uh this recision package is an important step to getting uh fiscal responsibility as you've pointed out.
▶ 2:18:55It's uh and uh I I agree with you. I look forward to more recision packages that go to the root of trying to get out of waste, fraud, and abuse. I think that's what a vast majority of the American people want. That is why Donald Trump was elected in his last election. And um I look forward to these recision package that get to the root of the real problem and waste, fraud, and abuse. And uh like I said, I'll join you with you in supporting those. And uh we look forward to seeing those before the House floor.
▶ 2:19:25Well, and 77 million people didn't get it wrong. They see it. They they know it. That's why it's astonishing. They're keeping that same logic. Uh which is illogical. And the American people are not going to put up with it. Um so anyway, thank you for what you're doing and uh since we're going on to three hours, I will yield back the balance of my time. Thank you, Mr. Norman. Seeing no further um members to ask questions, this panel is excused.
▶ 2:20:02We have we have um two witnesses I understand who would like to offer to the recision package. Uh, Mr. Goldman was here earlier. I don't see him now.
▶ 2:20:29Miss Johnson is Thank you, Miss Johnson. Thank you so much. Thank you so much, Madam Chair. It's always a treat to come to rules. It's always the interesting part of this business. Um, remember, we want you to tell the truth here, Miss Johnson. I always do, ma'am.
▶ 2:20:59Thank you for being here. It's it's a privilege and thank you all so much for the opportunity. Um, you know, I've I've just had the uh privilege of listening to the prior debate and my you know, the this recision package is significant. Um, it addresses many many areas. I would like to focus on two. Um, I've offered two amendments for this committee. I'll talk to about both of them uh together in my time just to expedite things. Uh, the first is PEPFAR.
▶ 2:21:30Um, I have an amendment uh revoking the recision of PEP FAR and restoring the $400 million in funding. You know, PEPAR has saved 26 million lives across the world and has helped ensure eight million babies are born free of HIV. If you care about babies, if you care about life, if you care about families, you must care about PEPFAR.
▶ 2:22:01Ending PEPFAR could result in as many as 11 million new HIV infections in just six short years. These programs support nearly 48 million women and couples with modern contraceptive care. This funding will have catastrophic impacts on global health.
▶ 2:22:25You know, we in this country have the benefit of amazing research, amazing scientists because this government has funded NIH. It has funded critical health care research to eradicate and really minimize the This is not a disease that is limited to the LGBTQ community. This disease impacts everyone.
▶ 2:22:56If you are sexually active, you are at risk of contracting HIV. We've made such progress. And then to have this government, this Congress turn its back on the millions and millions of dollars that have been spent to get us to this place where HIV and AIDS is controllable. It's manageable. The risk is minimizing. It would be devastating.
▶ 2:23:23And it and that is the wasteful part of this to turn the back on the progress that we've made when we're so close to coming. So that's my first amendment would be to restore PEPAR funding. My second amendment addresses the Corporation of Public Broadcasting and restoring the 1.1 billion dollars stripped from PBS and NPR.
▶ 2:23:46You know, we've had debate here today about whether or not uh PBS, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, is woke. Um, I've heard these comments that it's gotten too progressive in its commentary. So now what's happening is we have no public space. Public broadcasting and the public media is the place for arts. It's the place for nonprofitable things to happen.
▶ 2:24:17Sometimes we need the Shopan piano conerto prepare played. Sometimes we need masterpiece theater. We need to spark the creativity. Music and art transcends culture. It transcends language. It transcends race. It transcends generation. It is the soul of our humanity. And the fact that we are taking this away from everyone is irresponsible on the cultural institutions of this country and what communications has founded.
▶ 2:24:47You know, we've had uh when you have when you're in rural Texas, sometimes the NPR station, the or the the the local PBS station is the only radio station out there. It's the only thing that gives commonality that reaches us to keep people from being isolated. You have states in my state, we could travel through many of yours before we even get to the one end of the others of mine. And we rely on PBS.
▶ 2:25:16We rely on the corporate corporation of public broadcasting to bring generations of programs for our children and for our own humanity. It's a travesty to the cultural progress that this country's made. It's a travesty to our history. It's a tragedy to the children of the future to not have access to PBS Kids, to PBS and the wonderful characters that have been developed over the history.
▶ 2:25:44So I would implore you all to please restore the funding of these two critical programs. It is very vital to the health of our nation, to our role in the world, and it is my strong desire that we see them going forward in a productive and positive way. And with that, I yield back. Thank you very much, Miss Johnson. Um, Miss Galan, do you have any questions? I just thank the member for her testimony. fully support both amendments and hope they move forward. Thank you.
▶ 2:26:16Thank you very much, Miss Scandal. Mr. Norman, no, Miss Leger Fernandez. just a few points um that I wanted to ask about because uh you know I really enjoyed uh the uh uh testimony from Representative Griffin and what's happening in Virginia and he made a point that Sesame Street is going to be on HBO and Netflix, right? Uh, sounds like Sesame Street might be all right.
▶ 2:26:44But one of the points I think is important and why your amendment is key is that working they can't afford the $20, the $30, whatever that monthly fee is because, aren't I correct that Sesame Street is free right now on PBS? You can get it over your TV with an antenna that can cost you $5 and you never have to pay anything else.
▶ 2:27:12Now PBS is available to 97% as US TV households at no cost commercial free compared to what you'd have to pay. And you know what the key thing is? Because even though you represent that big beautiful city of Dallas, you know Texas, don't you? Because you served in the state legislature. So, what do you think about the concept of saying it's all right to make families have to pay when they might not have that money?
▶ 2:27:42Well, the thing is is that Sesame Street is I grew up on Sesame Street. You know, I bet you most most folks in this building grew up on Sesame Street, learning how to read, learning to find our favorite characters, learning how to find our way in the world, how to treat our neighbors, how to do so many things to learn how to be good human beings that Sesame Street offers. And it's obviously effective by the fact that it has stood the generations and the decades of time.
▶ 2:28:12We have had an election because people can't afford their life. The Republicans campaigned effectively on they're going to lower costs of living for people, but that has not happened. And this is not achieving that campaign promise.
▶ 2:28:32In fact, when you are now going to force people to choose between ed great quality educational content for their kids or that healthy snack they need in the afternoon or that new pair of sneakers that are worn out because their feet grew too big too fast or whatever the case may be, families are struggling.
▶ 2:28:55And there's one thing that we've heard throughout this Congress in each one of our districts is that the American people are having a hard time. The cost of living is far outpacing the wages. The cost of goods are going up exponentially. The tariffs are making prices increase or not bringing them down. And people are scared and they're nervous and they're frustrated.
▶ 2:29:21And now what we're doing is to tell that working mom that's got three jobs that's trying to make ends meet that now no you can't have that moment of break and park your kid in front of Sesame Street. A great program that you can feel comfortable to know will help your kid when you go fix dinner because you're exhausted.
▶ 2:29:43And now we're taking away that lifeline for so many families across this country at at such a nominal amount of our overall budget for what it provides for our young people and their minds in their future is irresponsible to me in this legislation. Thank you.
▶ 2:30:05And I think that's really important that this is costing American working families more money when they say we're going to cut the corporation for public broadcasting and the education funding. That's basically it. And then the other thing is I really want to thank you for highlighting PEPAR because the other thing that it provides stability uh across this AC across this planet and it's talking about the babies.
▶ 2:30:30I mean we need to talk about the babies more in this committee and so thank you very much for talking about that and the stability and the fact that it also when you have stability across the country you don't have as much migration and you don't have as much immigration uh on the on the country should be born with HIV. Yeah. And it is preventable and we are going to make it to where millions of children are going to have this disease unnecessarily and it is at the foot of this Congress. Thank you very much.
▶ 2:31:00And with that, I yield back, Madam Chair. Thank you very much, Miss Kenny. Madame Chair, I would just ask unanimous consent to insert a statement from Representative Goldman. In the record, he was waiting to testify on his amendment to restore the funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, but had to leave. Without objection. Thank you. Thank you. Um, is there anyone else seeking to testify on HR4?
▶ 2:31:27Seeing none, this closes the hearing portion of our meeting. Without objection, the committee stands in recess until the conclusion of the 5:00 pm vote series. Yes, ma'am.
▶ 3:55:47Now, I apologize that we're a little from the time we announced u but I think everybody understands the difficulty sometimes in meeting a specific time. The chair will be in receipt of a motion from the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Griffith. Madam Chair, I move the committee grant HR4, the Recisions Act of 2025, a closed rule. The rule waves all points of order against consideration of the bill.
▶ 3:56:17The rule provides that the bill shall be read considered as read. The rule waves all points of order against provisions in the bill. The rule provides one hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the majority leader and the minority leader or their respective design. The rule provides for one motion to recommmit.
▶ 3:56:33The rule further provides that provisions of section 1017 of the empowerment control act of 1974 shall not apply to a bill or joint resolution introduced with respect to the special message transmitted under section 1012 of that act on June 3rd, Finally, the rule provides that the House Resolution 492 is hereby adopted. Thank you very much, Mr. Griffith.
▶ 3:57:04You've now heard the motion. Is there any discussion or amendment to the rule? Mr. McGovern, you're recognized. Madam Chair, um so um we received this um engrossment correction resolution just uh a little while ago and it's kind of written in very kind of technical terms. Um and I'm just wondering whether somebody could give us maybe a summary of what's in it. Well, I believe Mr.
▶ 3:57:32McGovern, we've also given you um the uh engrossment resolution summary. I believe this has been given to your you and your staff which outlines in detail what what um what this does. I mean I'm happy to to um go over it if you like. This is purely technical. Yeah. There there are no changes, no no drastic changes.
▶ 3:58:02There are um 18 items and um uh they're again very technical. As you all know, reconciliation bills are different from other types of legislation. They're prohibited from including any provisions deemed as extraneous in the Senate. Right?
▶ 3:58:29So, we all know that we're dealing with Senate Parliamentarian rules. So, what we're doing is striking a few provisions in the bill that Senate parliamentarians concluded would jeopardize the privileged status of the bill in the Senate.
▶ 3:58:47So, we're taking out all we're taking all necessary steps to enable the one big beautiful bill act to be considered expeditiously in the Senate and sent to President Trump's desk under the reconciliation process, which is what this engrossment resolution does.
▶ 3:59:09I also want to remind the ranking member and my Democrat colleagues that when they were last in the majority, they also utilized an engrossment resolution to strike extraneous provisions from their American Rescue Plan in 2021. Well, thank you. And I would just say that, you know, striking a comma is technical. striking striking entire sections seem a little bit more substantive uh to me.
▶ 3:59:38But anyway, but let me just for the record, I just want to just um is is the section regarding uh the 10-year moratorum uh on states um regulating AI still in the bill? It's not addressed. It's not addressed in this resolution.
▶ 4:00:01And the other one is um the provision uh that was in the original bill that would make it uh more difficult uh to hold in contempt u administration officials who defy a court order. Is is that still it's not addressed in this resolution? Okay. And I just also would just for the record would say that and I don't want to be misunderstood here.
▶ 4:00:24Uh I'm not saying that engrossment corrections are always a terrible procedural tool, but I'm saying that members uh who regret supporting, you know, a reckless bill uh that would explode our deficit and debt uh among other things. Um uh because they haven't had a chance to read the bill.
▶ 4:00:44Um and if they want to figure out a way to kind of make amends, um it seems to me that uh uh this is a redo uh in many respects of of that vote. U but it's but the redo will be in the in the form of of of the rule. Uh and so I am I have a I have an amendment to the rule.
▶ 4:01:07Um, I move the committee strike section three from the rule which deems as adopted HRES 492, the engrossment correction resolution for the Republicans reconciliation bill. And Madame Chair, again, this rule uh which um we were just handed executes major changes to your reconciliation bill um without which it it cannot be brought up in the Senate as you pointed out.
▶ 4:01:35And we've we've not been given a lot of time to digest all the changes and analyze the changes. Um no time to hear from CBO about any impact that these changes might have. Um and you're doing this with no separate vote or debate on the House floor. So if this rule does not pass, uh the reconciliation bill would not proceed to the Senate. Uh so this is a a major vote that we are now considering.
▶ 4:02:04Um, I would just say for the record that this process has been a disaster from the beginning. Uh, you're playing games with people's lives, with people's access to health care and and to food. Uh, and we have complained about the tax benefits for the welloff and well-connected uh that are in this bill. Um, and um, you know, and there's some pet projects in this bill that um, you know, we we're concerned about as well. But it's not just Democrats who are pointing out the problems.
▶ 4:02:34Since the bill passed, several Republicans, members of your party, have come out against the bill, saying they wouldn't have supported it if they known what was in it. Elon Musk, uh, you know, his quote is, "This is a massive, outrageous portfilled congressional spending bill." End quote. He called it a disgusting abomination. Um, and this is someone who until just recently worked for Donald Trump and was running our government.
▶ 4:03:00Representative Green of Georgia posted on X, quote, "Full transparency, I did not know about this section on pages 278 to 279 of the OBB that strips states of the right to make laws to regulate AI for 10 years. I am adamantly opposed to this. It's a violation of states rights, and I would have voted no if I had known that this was in there." End quote.
▶ 4:03:23At a town hall, Representative Flood of Nebraska said he wouldn't have voted for the bill if he knew about the provision that makes it more difficult for federal judges to hold people in contempt. Representative Perry, a founding member of the Freedom Caucus, started trashing the bill after he voted for it. He said uh he sounded the alarm and posted quote, "We expect massive massive in all capitals improvements from the Senate before it gets back to the House." End quote. And that's because it blows a hole in in the deficit.
▶ 4:03:53Uh so to those members, I have some good news for them. This is your chance. Uh you can they can be the change because this bill again was so rushed and the process was so sloppy that Republicans have to revote on this before it gets sent over to the Senate. So everybody who complained, the rule vote tomorrow is your chance to vote no.
▶ 4:04:16you can prevent this bill, which many on the Republican side have come out against uh from moving forward to the Senate and you could fight for whatever changes you want in the House. Voting no on this rule is voting against this bill in its current form. Um and we'll see whether people actually have the courage of their convictions. Uh this bill got jammed through, nobody read it, and now we're making changes at the 11th hour. As Mr.
▶ 4:04:42Massie pointed out this morning, the speaker is using the rules committee to change the text of the bill after the house voted on it. So, I'm offering this amendment to strike the engrossment resolution from the rule because again, I think this process uh was lacking. Uh and it and it should end here and now. Um I don't know whether I'll be successful in the rules committee.
▶ 4:05:03Uh but I hope that tomorrow uh that some of the Republicans uh will join with Democrats in voting uh no um on the rule. And I'll point out that uh we could easily report out a rule for the recisions bill on its own or it could be brought up under uh under under as a privilege resolution.
▶ 4:05:23Uh so you know trying to use that as cover for again a revote on the reconciliation bill I don't think um uh you know quite frankly is a is a credible argument but any event I would urge a yes vote on my Um any further discussion on uh Mr. McGovern's amendment? Yes madam chair. Yes.
▶ 4:05:49Yeah, I I had a couple questions as well because we are looking at this two-page kind of technical piece. Um, I know that 13 House Republicans sent a letter on Friday to the Senate asking that the Senate make changes to the bill to extend the clean energy tax credits that are otherwise going to sunset within 60 days or whatever. Do we know whether this uh these amendments address the request of those 13? not addressed in in this resolution.
▶ 4:06:18My other question is, as you noted, there are 18 changes or 18 paragraphs of changes here to the reconciliation bill. Seven of them deal with the Social Security Act. Can you explain what those changes to the Social Security Act involve?
▶ 4:06:34There there were pieces in the uh big beautiful bill that um implicated social security and we cannot touch social security in any way in uh the big beautiful bill or in a reconciliation bill and therefore it's yeah it's statutory and we're making sure there is no connection to social security.
▶ 4:07:00Again, that that's basically technical to make sure this we have to pass something. We have to send something over to the Senate which uh meets all the rules of the Senate. Everybody understands that here.
▶ 4:07:18And so what we're making sure is that what we send to the Senate does not have any uh piece of it that would cause the whole bill to be taken down. Okay. Well, I I do support Mr. McGovern's amendment. Um certainly we've heard enough from our our Republican colleagues about them having voted for the bill and not knowing what was in it.
▶ 4:07:42So, um, making sure that there is an opportunity to debate and understand and actually have their votes reflect their understanding of the bill would seem like, uh, an appropriate measure here. So, I would support the amendment. Well, I I would say in response to what Mr. McGovern said, we worked on the big beautiful bill for a year and a half. So, it was not rushed. It was not rushed through any committee.
▶ 4:08:11A great deal of work went into the bill and uh I cannot account for members who did not know what might have been in the bill but the the provisions of the bill were out there for the whole world to see and this resolution is basically technical and it's not even three pages long.
▶ 4:08:34Um, if you take out the section of page one that t that's mostly filler, not filler but introduction and then this tiny bit on the page on page four. So, it's pretty short um technical correction bill and we we did give your staff the details of what's in the resolution. Madam Chair. Yes, Miss Ledger Fernandez. Did you yield back already?
▶ 4:09:04So, you yielded back, Miss G. Yes. That's what I thought. Thank you. So, I have a couple of questions and then I want to yield to the ranking member. You said that uh because you know to say that these are technical corrections. We know that you know with a few words Congress can change a lot, right? And so to say that I think we got it maybe three minutes before we walked in. the Democrats were here because we were told to be here at six and we did too. Yeah. Okay. So, you know, I think that that that's one of the concerns.
▶ 4:09:34But I do have a question. So, with regards to the social security, you say these are just minor changes. Uh the CBO reported that the uh big bad billionaires bill which will increase our def deficit uh would also uh lead to sequestration and hits to the Medicare would lead to what? I'm sorry. sequestration sequestration sequestration uh so that we would have a 500 about a $500 billion hit to Medicare.
▶ 4:10:03Do do these do these provisions cure that? Do these affect that at all? Yeah. Social Security includes the Medicaid provisions and and that's why you're seeing a reference to social Okay. So it does not fix the fact that that uh that Medicare will still be negatively impacted by your bill.
▶ 4:10:30No, we nobody who is receiving Medicare or Medicaid is going to be affected. There's going to be 500 Oh, sorry. Yeah. Is going to be affected. Anybody who is legally eligible for Medicaid and Medicare will not see any impact to his or her benefits. So that's okay.
▶ 4:10:54So I'm just getting clarification because the CBO has already told us the number of the the millions of Americans who will lose health care, including those who lose health care from Medicare. This the buyer's remorse rule, I'm going to call it the buyer's remorse rule that we're taking up now. Uh you're clarifying that doesn't fix the problem to Medicare. Uh and you're right.
▶ 4:11:18You know, the reality is the Republicans in this committee held a meeting on the Trump's bad billionaire bill in the middle of the night. So you could hide it from rep from Americans. We spent 21 hours in this committee talking about the bill. We had over 101 Democrats show up because we thought it was important that the American people knew what was in the bill as we knew it at the time.
▶ 4:11:45But the reality is the bill that we passed out of the rules committee, we got handed a lot of changes at the last moment. You keep doing this where we are having to rush to figure out what you're doing because you are not really letting the American people know. You know what we are?
▶ 4:12:05We're going to keep letting the American people know that you are cutting their health care, that you are cutting their nutrition programs, that you are cutting education, and then today that you're also going to cut Big Bird and all those important programs that are saving lives across this planet.
▶ 4:12:26We're going to keep telling about them, telling the American people about them because they don't like the fact that you're doing that in order to give these tax cuts to the billionaire donors of Trump and the Republicans. So, we're going to keep doing that uh because it's really important because even with these buyer remorse provisions or these bird bill provisions and some of them are great. I'm glad that you are no longer going to be mining in the boundary waters.
▶ 4:12:53like why should you be mining in the boundary waters that clean water for so many right and you were going to force a mine there force a mine there so I'm glad that you took that out but there are so many other things that you are doing that just do not make sense and that the American people don't know so even though you passed that in the dead of the night uh we're getting this a few minutes you know before it's due we're going to keep raising the point and the ranking member is right all those Republicans
▶ 4:13:24who don't like the uh tax credits that going to become who don't like all of the harms that going to come to your communities, this is your chance. And ranking member, do you want to say more? I thank I thank the general lady. I would just again repeat I mean this is a revote on the budget reconciliation bill. Um, all Democrats are going to vote voted no on that uh because we thought it was it didn't represent our values and after the bill had passed.
▶ 4:13:51Many Republicans said it didn't represent their values from a different perspective. So, this is a revote. Um, so we will all vote no because we think it's a bad bill. To those U Republicans who said it was a bad bill, whether it's for the AI provision or for the fact that it blows a hole in the deficit and the debt, you know, um, We'll see whether they actually meant what they said. Um, you know, saying something after the fact doesn't take a lot of courage.
▶ 4:14:18Um, but actually standing up and being counted when it matters and voting down this rule tomorrow will matter. And I urge a yes vote on my amendment. Right. So, they have a second chance. They can vote no against cutting healthcare. They can vote no against all of these bad provisions that they've rised on this rule. Uh and so we'll see what uh uh our colleagues do with the Republican remorse rule. Uh and with that uh I yield back. Thank you very much, Mr.
▶ 4:14:48Noose. You're recognized. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Just one quick question kind of builds off the ranking members uh comments and I wonder if maybe the majority can help me understand it. With respect to the resolution, are there any changes in the resolution that are unrelated to the privilege question in the Senate? So I what I'm trying to understand is No.
▶ 4:15:12So these are all a byproduct of the privilege review that that the Senate parliamentarian conducted. There's nothing else in here that connects back to that. That is what I said at the beginning, Mr. Negus, and I was about to repeat it, so thank you for asking. No, no, no. That's I'm That was a good faith question. I'm not I guess the question is secondary question.
▶ 4:15:36Is there anything that would limit under the current rules the ability to make other changes within this rule? I'm sorry. I don't really know what you're trying to What I'm getting at is we, you know, we Mr. Mr. McGovern mentioned there was a letter that was signed by 13 of your colleagues, 13 of our colleagues, Republican members, asking to make changes to the Senate bill regarding the IRA provisions.
▶ 4:16:03And I'm just trying to understand if theoretically you could make those types of changes in this rule in the same way that you've made these other changes that will be engrossed, right? I I think you're you answer your own question because you said the letter went to the Senate. The rep I think that's what you said that 13 Republicans sent a letter to the Senate. Correct. So they didn't send the letter to us.
▶ 4:16:30We do not expect any other changes, but they're going to vote on this what is right here before us. We want to get this bill over to the Senate. We want the bill to be privileged and there are these items that would threaten the privileged nature of the bill and so that's why we are doing these things. Got it.
▶ 4:16:53It's up to the Senate to take up any letters sent to them by House members when the Senate considers the bill. The idea is let's get this bill to the Senate so it can consider. And so I would just simply say m and thank you madam chair for that explanation. And so I think I doubt any of our colleagues are watching the rules committee deliberations.
▶ 4:17:16But in so far as they are what I would say is they have a real opportunity to change this bill in the way that they're changing it now. I mean tomorrow when we vote on this rule, Republicans will be changing the reconciliation bill, deleting the boundary waters mining provision, making all sorts of other changes. And there are many Republicans who the last two weeks have been publicly say or I guess less than two weeks last week have been saying publicly that they regret maybe Mr.
▶ 4:17:45Norman is one of them I don't know he can he can he can clarify that they regret voting for that initial bill and that they'd like to see various changes made and so I'm just suggesting that why not do that now? I mean they're members of Congress. They could change it now. They don't have to wait for the Senate to change it. They're going to vote tomorrow on changes. Well, they'll have that opportunity tomorrow, Mr. Negus, and and maybe you would like to lobby them on your on your behalf. I will certainly encourage them.
▶ 4:18:15I I will yield to the ranking member, and I appreciate the just, you know, with all due respect um to your response to Mr. Goose. I mean, those members who signed the letter to the Senate probably didn't know that you were going to have to do this engrossment correction uh uh res uh amendment uh to to fix some of the uh mistakes that were made in this bill. And for example, I you could you if I'm Mr.
▶ 4:18:40Mcus's line of questioning, for example, uh the gentle lady from Georgia said she if she had known that the AI provision were in the bill, she wouldn't have voted for it. Could you include that in um in this res in this in this correction resolution and and and delete that and then send it over to the Senate.
▶ 4:19:05Um, I mean that's any any member who has any regrets about his or her vote on the first bill has the opportunity to vote no on the rule tomorrow as you all have said and we'll make that clear and I appreciate that, Madam Chair. And I would simply close by saying with respect to the letter that was sent to the Senate, it seems to me that they should have sent our colleagues and maybe they didn't know that they should have sent that letter to Speaker Johnson because the bill had not been sent to the Senate.
▶ 4:19:33So, I don't know what John Thun would do with that letter. He doesn't have the reconciliation bill. The reconciliation bill the Republicans have pursued is downstairs. It's sitting at the clerk's desk. Um, so I I mean that that's where they should change it. But in any event, I I will uh I'll Thank you, Mr. [ __ ] I I really do want to thank you, Madam Chair, for clarifying that because now it's really clear to all of our colleagues, especially the colleagues on the Republican side, it was a very close vote, right? It was one vote.
▶ 4:20:00So every single person who signed that letter who has regrets could change their vote and it would go the other way and we'd be back here and they could insist. So anybody who has an issue that their constituents want them to stand the ground on or that they believe that their values now's the time. So I really appreciate that you clarifying that that's indeed what the issue is right now. Right now is the time. Uh, you got to second.
▶ 4:20:28You got to you if you have remorse, as you put it, Madam Chair, if you have remorse about this bill, vote no on the rule tomorrow. That simple. That's not what I said. But anyway, I I don't want words put in my mouth, Mr. McGovern. Okay, everybody yields back. Anybody on our side wish to say anything? Uh well, let me say this is not the last opportunity to vote on the big beautiful bill either and that needs to be pointed out very clearly.
▶ 4:20:59I doubt that any of us have had the opportunity to vote on the perfect bill. I doubt that any of us have had a chance to vote on the perfect bill because almost every bill has something in it, especially a major bill that maybe we weren't totally in favor of, but we vote for it because the majority of what's in it. And I suspect that's what will be the final vote on this bill.
▶ 4:21:29It won't be perfect. We won't all every one of us that votes for it agree with every single measure, but it will be so good that we will want to vote for it. So, hearing no further discussion, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor of Mr. McGovern's amendment signify by saying I. I.
▶ 4:21:58opposed say no. No. Thanks somebody. I can't do I couldn't do that. Mr. McG um in the opinion of the chair. The nos have it. The agree amendment is not agreed for a roll call. Mr. McGovern asked for a roll call. Any of you have musical talents willing to put your um vote into a note? The clerk will call the role. Mrs.
▶ 4:22:29Fishbach, no. Mrs. Fishbach, no. Mr. Norman, no. Mr. Norman, no. Mr. Roy. Mrs. Hchin? Mrs. Hchin? No. Mr. Langworthy? No. Mr. Langworthy? No. Mr. Mr. Scott, no. Mr. Griffith. Mr. Griffith. No. Mr. Jack. No. Mr. Jack. No. Mr. McGovern. Hi. Mr. McGovern. I Miss Gallon. Hi. Miss Gallon. I Mr.
▶ 4:22:59I. Mr. Noose. I Miss Ledger Fernandez. M. Ledger Fernandez. I Madam Chair. No. Madam Chair. No. The clerk will report the total. Four yays, eight nays. And the nos have it. The amendment is not agreed to. Is are there other amendments? Madam chair, I have an amendment to the rule.
▶ 4:23:26I move the committee make an order amendment number five offered by Representative Johnson, which strikes the recision of funds from the bilateral economic assistance funds appropriated to the president global health programs that in that includes the FY25 funding for PEPFAR. This package cuts PEP FAR by $400 million, an overwhelmingly bipartisan program created by President George W. Bush to combat the global HIV crisis.
▶ 4:23:51This program has saved 26 million lives and enabled more than 8 million babies to be born without HIV. Republicans want to take an ax to this program, throwing millions of men, women, and children off their HIV treatments and dismantling 20 years of progress. In fact, the withholding of funds has already resulted in deaths uh due to HIV. If Republicans actually care about life and not just saying they're pro-life, I would urge them to vote yes on my amendment to protect millions of people from dying of HIV.
▶ 4:24:20And I yield Thank you, Mr. McGovern. Any further discussion on the amendment from Mr. Hearing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Those opposed say no. No. In the opinion, chair of the nose have it. The amendments not agreed to. Mr. McGovern request a roll call. The clerk will call the role. Mrs. Fishbach, no. Mrs. Fishbach, no. Mr. Norman, Mr. Norman, no.
▶ 4:24:50Mr. Roy, Mrs. Houchin. Mrs. Houchin, no. Mr. Langworthy. Mr. Langworthy. No. Mr. Scott. Mr. Scott, no. Mr. Griffith, no. Mr. Griffith, no. Mr. Jack, no. Mr. Jack, no. Mr. McGovern, I. Mr. McGovern, I Miss Scallan. I scallan. I Mr. Negus. Mr. Negus. I Ledger Fernandez. Hi. M. Ledger Fernandez.
▶ 4:25:08I madam chair no madam chair no clerk will report the total four yays eight nays and the nos have it the amendment is not agreed to I have one other amendment madam chair Mr. from the governor is recognized. I have an amendment to the rule. I move the committee make an order amendment number three offered by Representative Titus which strikes the recision um of funds for the US Institute of Peace.
▶ 4:25:33Doge has tried illegally shutting down the US Institute of Peace, an organization established by Congress 40 plus years ago to help promote peace around the world. Apparently now in this Republican Congress, even world peace is controversial. Honest to God, I never thought I'd I'd see the day. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment to restore funding for the US Institute of Peace. And I yield back. Uh Mr. McGovern yields back. Does anyone else wish to speak on the amendment from Mr.
▶ 4:26:03McGovern? Um hearing none, the question is on the amendment. Those in All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Those opposed say no. No. In the opinion chair of the nose have it. The amendments not agree for a roll call. Madam Chair, Mr. McGovern, request a roll call. The clerk will call the role. Mrs. Fishbach, no. Mrs. Fishbach, no. Mr. Norman, Mr. Norman, no. Mr. Roy, Mrs. Hton. Mrs. Hchin, no. Mr. Langworthy, Mr. Langworthy, no. Mr. Scott, no. Mr. Scott, no. Mr.
▶ 4:26:33Griffith, Mr. Griffith, no. Mr. Jack, no. Mr. Jack, no. Mr. McGovern, I Mr. McGovern, I Miss Scallan, Scallan, I. Mr. McG. Mr. Noose, I miss Ledger Fernandez. I Fernandez I, Madam Chair, no madam chair. No. The clerk will report the total. Four. Yes. Eating nays. The noses have it. The amendment is not agreed to. Any further discussion? Miss Scandlin, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. I have an amendment to the rule.
▶ 4:27:01I move the committee make in order amendment number two offered by representative Titus which strikes the paragraph that rescends funding for the assistance for Europe, Eurasia and Central Asia account. This part of the bill would decimate support for Ukraine and its partners in the region facing Russian aggraion in Russian aggression and the impact of its fullscale invasion.
▶ 4:27:28I have hundreds of Ukrainian uh constituents or relatives of Ukrainian uh constituents and they and I find it incomprehensible that Republicans in the in Congress and the White House have decided to cozy up to Putin and totally abandon the people of Ukraine as they defend their democracy.
▶ 4:27:49Ukraine and neighboring countries are defending fundamental freedoms and the United States of America with this bill and under Republican control is turning its back on them. So I would urge a yes vote on my amendment and yield back. The gentlewoman yields back further discussion on the amendment. Madam Chair. Yes, Miss Ledger.
▶ 4:28:12Madam Chair, I'd like to offer my support for this amendment because I do think that it is important that and I'm glad that we're going to have I anticipated a recorded vote on this because I think it is important that Republicans say where they stand with regards to Ukraine and Putin. And when you are taking funds away from Ukraine and the humanitarian aid that is needed there, you are basically saying you are standing with Putin in this war.
▶ 4:28:42And so I am pleased that I will be able to vote uh yes on this amendment because I will be standing with democracy and I will be standing with humanitarian aid when I vote yes on this amendment. And I would urge my colleagues to join us. Madam Mr. Scott, I respect the lady from across the room, but don't don't say I'm standing with It's just not true.
▶ 4:29:11If you want to talk about the war in Ukraine, Joe Biden not having the brass to enforce the sanctions against Russia is what allowed Russia to fill their coffers. the the Greeks selling all of the ships to the Russians for them to run the ghost fleet gave Russia the ability to fill their coffers.
▶ 4:29:35The Europeans allowing their banks to continue business in Russia is what allowed Vladimir Putin to fill his coffers. There are a lot of people that are at fault for this war continuing to happen. But I will tell you this, I have voted to support Ukraine every step of the way. And and I will continue to support Ukraine every step of the way, even if it puts me at odds with the leadership of my party.
▶ 4:29:59But I I I respect you, but don't dare say that my vote, even though because it differs from you, is a support for Vladimir Putin. Is there further discussion or debate? Hearing none. The question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Those opposed say no. No. No. In the opinion chair no have it. The amendments not agreed to. Roll call vote please.
▶ 4:30:29M. G request a roll call vote. The clerk will call the role. Mrs. Fishbach. No. Mr. Fishbach. No. Mr. Norman. No. Mr. Norman. No. Mr. Roy. Mrs. Houchin. No. Mrs. Hchin. No. Mr. Langworthy. Mr. Langworthy? No. Mr. Scott? No. Mr. Scott? No. Mr. Griffith? Griffith? No. Mr. Jack, no. Mr. Jack, no. Mr. McGovern, I. Mr. McGovern, I Miss Scallan, I vote for the people of Ukraine. M. Scallan, I. Mr. Negus, I. Mr. Negus, I miss Ledger Fernandez.
▶ 4:30:57I Ledger Fernandez, I Madam Chair, I No, sorry. No, Madam Chair. No. Clerk will report the total. Four, eight nays. The nos have it. The amendment is not agreed to. Have another Miss Kanlin. Thank you. I have an amendment to the rule. I move the committee make an order amendment number 10 offered by Representative Mendez which would strike the language that resends funds for migration and refugee assistance.
▶ 4:31:29The cruelty of this recision is pretty astonishing. It guts funding to support people fleeing conflict and starvation across the globe. Uh global displacement is at its highest level in nearly a century and our migration and refugee assistance funding is a small but key piece of our nation's foreign policy and national security providing lifesaving support to help meet the basic needs of refugees.
▶ 4:32:00This h account has had bipartisan support for decades. Weaguers, Rohingya, Afghan, Sudin, and Syrians are among the many people whom we have promised to help by providing lifesaving humanitarian aid. And it's a betrayal to cut them off with this recision.
▶ 4:32:18And if our colleagues are not moved by the humanitarian aspect of this funding, please at least recognize that the migration and refugee assistance funding improves our bilateral relations, bilateral relationships, and our national security. Gutting this account is not only bad for the millions of displaced people around the world, it's bad for our country's foreign policy. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
▶ 4:32:45Um, is there further discussion on the If not, hearing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Those opposed say no. No. Any opinion share? The nose have it. The amendment's not agreed to. I request a Miss Galen request a recorded vote. The clerk will call the role. Mrs. Fishbach, no. Mrs. Fishbach, no. Mr. Norman, Mr. Norman, no. Mr. Roy, Mrs. Houchin. Mrs. Hchin, no. Mr. Langworthy. Mr. Langworthy, no. Mr. Scott. Mr.
▶ 4:33:15Scott, no. Mr. Griffith, Mr. Griffith, no. Mr. Jack, no. Mr. Jack, no. Mr. McGovern, hi. Mr. McGovern, I Miss Scan, I scan, I Mr. Noose. Mr. Noose, I M. Ledger Fernandez, I led Fernandez. I Madam Chair, no. Madam chair, no. Clerk will report the total. Four yays, eight nays. The nose have it. The amendments not agreed to. Madam Chair, Miss Ledger Fernandez, you're recognized. Madam Chair, and I have an amendment to the rule.
▶ 4:33:45I move the committee make an order amendment number one offered by Representative Goldman to HR4, which strikes the provisions in the bill that rescends funds for the Corporation of Public Broadcasting. As a member of three different NPR stations myself, I'm a proud proud co-sponsor of this amendment because I know how important these radio stations, these TV stations are for rural communities, especially during times of disaster.
▶ 4:34:16Uh, and they provide the information nobody else did. it. You know, we suffered the world's the New Mexico's largest wildfire, the Hermit's Peak. There was nobody else broadcasting to these areas because the disaster took everything down. KN&N TV was one of the few places they could get information.
▶ 4:34:40And while public media has kept me and my community safe and informed, these stations also kept my three children entertained. You know, we listen to the children's hour. We sell all those programs together. Sometimes I sneak and see them myself anyway because they are actually good. They are actually good. But I'm fighting for public media, not just for my district, but for the stations in my Republican colleagues districts, too.
▶ 4:35:09That means supporting educational outreach program like South Carolina's ETV your path your journey to address the local workforce skills gap by increasing awareness of non-degreed careers in South Carolina.
▶ 4:35:24This amendment means fighting for funding to go to Georgia public broadcasting so that two to eight year olds in Georgia, especially those who come from low-income backgrounds, can participate in Ready to Learn, which is an innovative public media initiative that improves the math, science, and literary skills of our nation's youngest citizens.
▶ 4:35:46So, I'm happy to fight for PBS North Carolina, for Alabama, for everybody's public broadcasting stations because it is important. The studies have shown how important these programs are for children's learning. And it doesn't work when you just say they can go and get it at Netflix because Netflix costs money.
▶ 4:36:11public broadcasting belongs to the public and is free for working families. Uh so I urge a yes vote on this amendment. You've heard uh the discussion of the amendment by Miss Ledger Fernandez. Is there any further discussion on the Hearing none, the questions on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Those opposed say no. No.
▶ 4:36:40In the opinion chair, the nose have it. The amendments not agreed to. A recorded vote, Madam Chair. Thank you, Miss Ledger. Fernandez has requested a recorded vote. The clerk will call the role. Mrs. Fishbach, no. Mrs. Fishbach, no. Mr. Norman, Mr. Norman, no. Mr. Roy, Mrs. Henchin, no. Mr. Langworthy, Mr. Langworthy, no. Mr. Scott, no. Mr. Scott, no. Mr. Griffith. Mr. Griffith, no. Mr. Jack, no. Mr. Jack, no. Mr. McGovern, Mr. McGovern, I. Miss Gallen, I scallen I. Mr. Nagus, hi. Mr. Goose. I Mr.
▶ 4:37:09Le Fernandez for Big Bird. I Mr. Le Fernandez. I Madam Chair. No, Madam Chair. No. Clerk will report the total. Four yays. Eight nays. The nos have it. The amendment is not agreed to. Any further amendment or discussion? Madam Chair, Miss Leisure Fernandez, you're recognized. I have an amendment to the rule.
▶ 4:37:31I move the committee make an order amendment number 11 offered by myself which strikes the recision of funds for the economic support fund which includes funding for women peace and security and the women's entrepreneurship and economic empowerment act. Um you know the bill claws back $1.65 billion appropriated uh for these funds I just mentioned. Both of these funds were passed by Congress because we recognize the importance.
▶ 4:38:00They were bipartisan funds. We know that women who are caught in areas of war and areas of disaster need help. They're the mothers of the babies we talk about that we care so much about.
▶ 4:38:18And I think that's it's really important that we continue to fund these programs because that's who we are as a nation and it reflects our values that we will respond to needs across this planet and in other countries when it means keeping women safe, when it means keeping families safe. And we also know that when we create stability in these other countries, it's good for America for lots of reasons.
▶ 4:38:46And we should not be giving away to China the upper ground on these issues. Republicans constantly talk about fighting China, but when it comes time to vote for the programs that support soft war against China, our way of gaining influence, they seem to back down and vote no.
▶ 4:39:13I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this amendment for the reasons I discussed and I yield back. Thank you, Miss Ledger Fernandez. Is there further discussion on the amendment? Hearing none, the questions on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I. All those opposed say no. No. No. In the opinion chair of the nose have it. The amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 4:39:41Miss Ledger Fernandez requests a recorded vote. The clerk will call the role. Mrs. Fishbach, no. Mrs. Fishbach, no. Mr. Norman, Mr. Norman, no. Mr. Roy. Mrs. Houchin. Mrs. Hin. No. Mr. Langworthy. Mr. Langworthy. No. Mr. Scott. Mr. Scott. No. Mr. Griffith. Mr. Griffith. No. Mr. Jack. No. Mr. Jack. No. Mr. McGovern. Hi. Mr. McGovern. I. Miss. Scallan. Hi. Mr. Scallan. I. Mr. Noose. Hi. Mr. Noose. I. M. Leger. Fernandez. Hi. M. Le Fernandez. I. Madam Chair. No. Madam Chair.
▶ 4:40:10No clerk will report the total. Four yays. Eight nays. The nos have it. The amendment is not agreed to. Madam chair. Yes, Mr. I I I think we have no further amendments. But again, I just want to restate for the record that if you want to make changes to to this bill, you don't have to wait for the Senate to do it. We could do it right here in the House of Representatives. And that's what this vote will be about tomorrow. I yield back. Thank you, Mr. McGovern.
▶ 4:40:40Hearing no further discussion, the question is on the motion from the gentleman from Virginia. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Those opposed say no. No. No. In the opinion and chair, the eyes have it. The motion is agreed. As for roll call. A recorded vote has been requested. The clerk will call the role. Mrs. Fishbach. I. Mrs. Fishbach. I Mr. Norman. Hi. Mr. Norman. I. Mr. Roy. Mrs. Souchin. Mrs. Howchin. I. Mr. Langworthy. Hi. Mr. Langworthy. I Mr. Scott. Hi. Mr. Scott. I Mr. Griffith. Hi. Mr.
▶ 4:41:10Griffith. I Mr. Jack. I Mr. Jack. I Mr. McGovern. No. Mr. McGovern. No. Miss Gallon. No. Gallon. No. Mr. Noose. No. Mr. Nagus. No. Miss. Ledger. Fernandez. No. Ledger Fernandez. No. Madam Chair. I. Madam Chair. I The clerk will report the total. Eight yays, four nays. And the eyes have it. The motion to report is agreed to accordingly. I'll be managing the rule for the majority. and I'll be doing it for the Mr.
▶ 4:41:39McGovern will do it for the minority. Without objection, the committee is adjourned.