▶ 0:33:01Nobody's challenging us. Okay,
▶ 0:33:08I call this uh meeting the appropriations committee to order. I'd like to welcome everyone to today's meeting. Uh today we'll be marking up our financial services and general government appropriations measure for fiscal year 2026. As with our previous markups, it's my intention to complete all of our work on this bill today.
▶ 0:33:31Uh while we'll need to take a recess for floor votes as needed, we will otherwise be here today until our work is completed. And with that, we'll begin uh the markup. Again, our only order of business today is consideration of the financial services and general government appropriation for fiscal year 26. I will now recognize Where is the chairman Joyce? He got up and walked out.
▶ 0:34:02Well, we will be in temporary recess Yeah, no kidding. When he comes in, give him a hard time.
▶ 0:34:30Yeah, it's over. We thought without strong leadership, we just accepted every Democratic amendment and moved on.
▶ 0:34:46Is somebody like emailing him or calling Well, you have to begin these things with a laugh.
▶ 0:35:01Joyce is certainly doing his part.
▶ 0:35:10It might carry.
▶ 0:35:31well, you don't need to apologize to me. There's a whole committee here you can apologize to.
▶ 0:35:38So, to repeat my last line uttered several minutes ago, I'll now recognize Chairman Joyce to present the bill. Thank you, Chairman Cole. And uh I apologize for running a a little bit tardy there. I made the mistake of going down to my office and ran into some new friends. I guess they are in the hallway.
▶ 0:36:02Um anyhow, I'm pleased to be here to present the fiscal year 2026 financial service and general government appropriations bill for the full committee's consideration and appeal. I'd like to thank Chairman Cole and ranking member Deloro. And of course, I'd like to thank Ranking Member Hoyer. I value his insights on and off of this subcommittee. I'm proud of the bill we're marking up today. It reflects the hard work of the subcommittee since March. Counting our member day, we've had nine hearings on top of the additional briefings to inform our work.
▶ 0:36:33As all of you know, the financial services and general government or FSG bill covers a broad swath of federal government, including the department of treasury, the executive office of the president, the federal judiciary, and more than 20 independent commissions, departments, and agencies. The FSG topline funding level for fiscal year 2026 is 23.341 billion, $410 million less than last uh fiscal year 2025 allocation.
▶ 0:37:01This number includes the disaster funding we provide the Small and Business Administration. In drafting the fiscal year 2026 bill, I focused on three priorities. Ensuring fiscal responsibility, leveraging new technology, and strengthening national security. These are priorities of which members on both sides of the aisles should agree and support. Title One funds the Department of the Treasury at 11.3 billion.
▶ 0:37:24This is a 20.4% 4% lower than the fiscal year 2025 enacted levels and 5.8% less than the bill we reported out of the full committee last year. Within the Department of Treasury, the bill funds the Committee on Foreign Investment of the United States at 21 million, the Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence at 230.5 million and the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund at 276.6 million. Title two uh funds the executive office of the president or EOP.
▶ 0:37:54Funding the EOP is cut by 3.6% from fiscal year 2025 enacted levels to 828 million within the EOP. The bill funds the office of management and budget at 129 million. OM as a reminder received 100 million in the reconciliation bill. The information technology oversight account and reform account ITOR at $10 million which is the administration's request.
▶ 0:38:20the high-intensity drug trafficking area or Haida program within the Office of the National Drug Control Policy or ODCP at 299 million and the drug-free communities program at 136 million. Title three of the bill funds the federal judiciary. Like members of Congress, we need to ensure the security of our Supreme Court justices, our federal judges, and the people that work in our federal court system. The bill provides $18 million for the Supreme Court justices personal security.
▶ 0:38:50The bill funds uh court security at $892 million. We ensure the administrative office of the United States Court has the funding it needs to strengthen their cyber security and IT modernization Title 4 sets out the federal payments to the District of Columbia, which are cut by 4.6% from the fiscal year 2025 enacted levels to 823 million.
▶ 0:39:13To support the president's efforts to make DC safer, we fund the emergency planning and security costs in DC account at $70 million to ensure that District Columbia has sufficient federal funding for public events in the nation's capital during the fiscal year 2026. This includes securing events like our country's 250th anniversary celebration. Title 5 funds our uh independent agencies.
▶ 0:39:37This includes the SEC, the FTC, the FCC, GSA, USPS, SBA, and other smaller agencies. Total funding for the Title 5 is approximately 1 and a.5 billion, which is 34.4% reduction from the fiscal year 2025 enacted. Finally, this bill continues the important policies that apply across the federal government and the District of Columbia in titles 6, 7, and 8. Most of these provisions are legacy writers, which have been around for years, if not decades.
▶ 0:40:06These uh these provisions reaffirm important pro-life protections, defund the disastrous climate rule, stop the bid era divisive social policies, prohibit mask and vaccine mandates, protect traditional marriage, codify the reigns act and other critical executive orders issued by President Trump, including eliminating waste and saving taxpayers dollars by conser by consolidating procurement, restoring common sense to federal office space management, modernizing payments to and from America's
▶ 0:40:36bank account and protecting America's bank account from waste, fraud, and abuse. As I said at the beginning, I'm proud of the work the subcommittee has accomplished to date. I would close by encouraging my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this important bill, and I yield back.
▶ 0:40:52Thank you, gentlemen. I now like to recognize my good friend, Mr. Hoyer of Maryland, for remarks on the bill.
▶ 0:40:58Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. On the record, I'll I'll thank Mr. Joyce uh for his uh fairness and for his uh listening to some of my suggestions and even pursuing some of them.
▶ 0:41:26Uh we had a number of hearings as he said u including the the ninth which was the members day but we had uh eight substantive hearings on the issues before this committee. They were good hearings. Uh and I want to thank him for scheduling some but not all of the people that I think we should have heard from about the consequences of the actions that we are going to take today.
▶ 0:41:52But I want to thank the staff in particular Matt Smith and Phil Tazani, my my own staff as well. Uh and the committee staff, Kim Betts, James Gilkanssky, Alex Yos, Mike Patterson, um Paulus Toma and others. And and I want to thank the staff in my office as well um for their help.
▶ 0:42:21Ladies and gentlemen, uh this bill is not going to see the light of day in the United States Senate. Mr. Chairman has the chairman of the bid committee full chairman has observed that this was a start. Uh we are starting 27 days before the end of the fiscal year. Uh that's not a good start.
▶ 0:42:46In part, we're not starting because as the chairman told us, we were unable and subcommittee chairman have told me we were unable to get information from uh OM contrary to the law and contrary to uh past practice. But I want to thank Chairman Joyce and all the staff that I have mentioned, Quinn Hirs on my staff has been terrific. I know they share many of my frustrations about the sorry state of our appropriations process.
▶ 0:43:16They did their best to make the most of our subcommittee's meager allocation. And by the way, we are one of the last committees to be funded and we did not adopt all of our 302bs at the same time and therefore did not know what money would be left over at the end of the process.
▶ 0:43:39The bill before us is severely cuts funding for the FSG by 3.2 2 billion or 12% below the fiscal year 2025 which of course was the fiscal year 24 put together by an administration then in office in December 23. That cut is debilitating but it's not surprising.
▶ 0:44:04This bill is a product of the same policy that the Republicans have been pursuing for decades in my view. And that policy you're on your own. We're not here to help you. We're not here to reach out and lift you up. Uh we're not here to assist you in the challenges that may be facing you. You're on your own. You're particularly on your own if you live in the District of Columbia.
▶ 0:44:29Republicans continue to withhold the $1 billion the chairman mentioned that the 70 million for DC to assure safety. What he didn't say was we cut a billion out and we're doing 70 back. That's a pretty bad trade. Uh that $1 billion took from the city government earlier this year.
▶ 0:44:53Money that district collected from its own citizens, not federal DC tax money, revenues. That is tanamount, my friends, to defunding uh in part the Metropolitan Police Department. Republicans also slip poison pills into this bill that make it harder for DC to enforce traffic laws that make it easier to carry concealed weapons in the district and on the metro.
▶ 0:45:20Everyone in this room wants to make the nation's capital safe and safer. That is happening by the way if you look at the statistics very substantially down from uh recent years. What Trump is doing in the district is not about safety. However, it shows it's a show of force against his political opponents and a loyalty test for his coalition.
▶ 0:45:48We don't need mass federal agents from a dozen different agencies swarming the streets without a coherent strategy. We don't need to take thousands of National Guardsmen away from their families to patrol the district. There was no emergency. Are there crimes? Yes. Should we get do everything we can to eliminate crime, period? Yes. But it is a bad policy to start using our armed forces to accomplish that objective.
▶ 0:46:18And defunding the Metropolitan Police was not a way to get to our objective. We could have used them on January 6th, by the way, our National Guard to stop Trump's insurrectionists from maming our Capitol But Trump told us for hours, members of Congress of the United States, the institution of the you're on your own.
▶ 0:46:46Even as Speaker McCarthy implored him implored him to stop the mob. No national guard were called out immediately. Later he told the the criminals, those who plead guilty to crimes, "You're pardoned." Is that tough on crime?
▶ 0:47:13The consequences of this administration's actions and this bill extend far beyond DC. The bill's major offense is to undermine the goal of reducing our deficit. We all ought to condemn this 2.79 billion or 23% cut below the 25 level of the Internal Revenue Service. The agencies whose work makes all the other activities of our government possible.
▶ 0:47:37That includes a more than 2.4 billion or 45% cut below the fisc year 25 enacted for IRS enforcement. 2.4 billion from 5.4 billion leaving three billion. That's a very, very substantial cut that will make it easier for millionaires, billionaires, and corporations to avoid paying what they owe. IRS data suggests that every $1 invested in force yields seven in revenue return.
▶ 0:48:07Crucially, research from Harvard and and the Treasury Department itself found that when targeted at the top 10% of earners, $1 invested in IRS enforcement yields $12 in revenue. So, this $24 billion cut uh results in $29 billion in lost revenue this year. Is that fiscally responsible?
▶ 0:48:33Hardworking Americans who do to pay their taxes each year will have to pick up the tab for the hundreds of billions of dollars in lost revenue from this bill over the years. Those same folks will also have harder time filing their taxes because of this legislation cuts to IRS customer service. The president asked for $853 million more than this bill appropriates for IRS services. No phones are going to be answered.
▶ 0:49:01No people are going to be at the offices to help people as they come in. And of course, direct file has been eliminated as well. This bill reduces funding for the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, the Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, and other agencies tasked with going after criminals and keeping the Americas safe. Maybe the National Guard will do it. Under this administration, you're certainly on your own if you're a federal worker.
▶ 0:49:26Worse than that, Trump vote and their Doge co-conspirators think federal workers are all villains and they ought to be put in trauma. Sadly, Mr. Chairman, this legislation maintains the pay freeze the Trump administration imposed. They've now come back with 1%. I'll be offering an amendment later. They ought to receive 3.8% cost of living adjustment, maintaining pay parity with our military service members, which the president proposed.
▶ 0:49:53Even the agencies that were left largely intact, thanks to the efforts of chairman Joyce, and I thank him for that, still aren't safe. Not when this administration is willing to impound and redirect funding directed by the Congress and signed into law by the president. I will say once again, Mr.
▶ 0:50:14Vote and this administration believe that what we do here today and what uh the Senate does and we pass and the president signs is a suggestion, not a law. It won't matter how much we give the agencies vote illegally withholds and pounds and redirects that funding as he sees fit. Back in July, votes said the appropriations process has to be less bipartisan.
▶ 0:50:42As it is less bipartisan, it becomes less passable and there's more likelihood we'll do some sort of omnibus or maybe even next year some CR. Frankly, it doesn't sound like the uh he wants an appropriation process to exist at all. Indeed, he has acted over the last seven to eight months as if the appropriation process is irrelevant and without consequence.
▶ 0:51:09That's something we all ought to stand against in support of this institution and this committee. If the people's representatives are irrelevant, our democracy is dead. Don't leave the American people on their own. Vote no. Thank the gentleman. I now recognize myself for remarks on the bill.
▶ 0:51:39I want to thank you, Chairman Joyce, and thank you, Ranking Member Hoyer, ranking member of the full committee, Delora, and all the members of the subcommittee. Today, we continue our work on fiscal year 2026 financial services and general government appropriations bill. This legislation impacts every American and the good governance of our constituents expect.
▶ 0:52:00From our economy and the branches of the United States government, including the executive office of the president and the federal judiciary to financial agencies, the scope of this bill is vast. Taxpayers expect us to meet the most pressing needs while cutting waste and ending policies that don't work. This bill does just that. It reduces spending below last year's level, ensuring dollars are directed where they matter the most. Fiscal responsibility does not mean pulling back on essential services.
▶ 0:52:31It means focusing on investments that protect freedom and strengthen our country. Uh we show how to make necessary choices that reflect the priorities of the American people. Importantly, this measure advances President Trump's America first agenda. It blocks harmful Biden era rules, reigns in wasteful programs and ensures government works smarter, faster, and more efficiently for the people.
▶ 0:52:55This includes critical investments in cyber security and IT modernization, protecting our financial systems from bad actors, safeguarding hardworking Americans from IRS overreach, and strengthening efforts to stop fentanyl and other deadly drugs from pouring into our communities. The measure also codifies several important executive orders to protect taxpayers from waste, fraud, and abuse, and prevent improper payments.
▶ 0:53:22All in all, it supports hardworking Americans and small businesses by protecting consumer freedom, upholding our financial and judicial systems and driving economic growth. I thank Chairman Joyce for his work, and I look forward to consideration of this bill by the full committee today. And with that, uh, uh, I yield back. I now recognize Ranking Member Delore for her opening remarks on the legislation.
▶ 0:53:48Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to you and to Chairman Joyce um, uh, for your uh, work together and your friendships and as we try to move forward with the uh, financial services and general government um, full committee markup. Um, I also want to just say a a a thank you and welcome back everyone.
▶ 0:54:08I hope it was a good August uh recess and you I'm sure everybody was working, but as well as enjoying uh family and friends uh for a while before we uh get back to what we're doing here. And I often quote Betty Davis's comment from the movie All About Eve. Fasten your seat belts. It's going to be a bumpy ride.
▶ 0:54:29So uh as as we as as we move uh forward uh let me just acknowledge two things before I make my remarks and that is I I just want to welcome the free DC advocates who are here today. Uh and Mr. um Hoyer has addressed the issues the billion dollars that is is out there and actually to allow DC government to do what is in the best interest of DC uh residents. But continue your advocacy.
▶ 0:54:58Um the um uh uh the other issue I do want to mention uh Mr. Chairman um because you and I have been down this road many times. On the record uh I want to say on the record that while our committee rules technically allow our full committee to mark up a bill um while there is a different appropriations bill on the floor. Uh our longstanding practice had been to avoid it and and I I know what the rules are.
▶ 0:55:27says, "No subcommittee shall sit while the House is reading an appropriation measure for amendment under the five-minute rule or while the committee is in session." And yes, in fact, this is a full committee, not a subcommittee. Uh but nevertheless, that is a a technicality and and and today there's the energy and water bill that's on the floor.
▶ 0:55:46people have an interest in the energy and water bill um both in wanting to speak or what it means for their constituents and and members are put in a position to either miss the debate on the floor or miss it in committee and uh I I hope that you know maybe after today and we can have a discussion we will revert to our long-standing tradition of avoiding the conflicts one one one of our bills is on the house for the work that we do here and the work of appropriations on on the floor
▶ 0:56:16is critical. It should not be undermined uh with regard to a technicality and I have a feeling that that is broad-based on this on this on the full committee. Democrats and Republicans uh feel exactly the same way about this. So I thank you um for listening to me on that. Also want to say a thanks to our subcommittee uh staff. Both sides of the aisle. Let me shout out in particular Matt Smith and Philip Tazani. Um goes without saying I oppose this bill.
▶ 0:56:45It ignores the growing cost of living crisis. It provides cover for billionaires, biggest corporations to continue hoarding and stealing wealth while gutting protections that make the economy work for the middle class and for the working class. Americans are struggling with rising costs of everyday necessities. They struggle every day. They live paycheck to paycheck, but the president and House Republicans are not laser focused on the cost of living crisis. In fact, they are making it worse.
▶ 0:57:12Since taking office, President Trump's administration has stolen resources that Democrats and Republicans appropriated for programs and services across the federal government, including many funded in this bill that make the economy work and keep the playing field level for everyday Americans and that keep products safe for our children.
▶ 0:57:33Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vote has orchestrated a lawless upheaval of the entire federal government based on his diluted and debunked views of government and of the law. He has decided that his views, his priorities are superior to the priorities, the directives and the lawful decisions of the Democratic and Republican representatives in the United States Congress. That is the fundamental issue. Vote does not care about the law.
▶ 0:58:01The latest example of this disregard came on Friday with his illegal pocket recisions request. Vote doesn't care about the Congress. He wants to upend the bipartisan appropriations process and he certainly does not concern himself with the plight of the American people. He wants to govern by illegal empowerments by reconciliation recisions thereby getting around or eliminating the role of the appropriations committee the nerve center of the government as it is set out in the constitution.
▶ 0:58:29Grover Norquist, founder of the Americans for Tax Reform, said in 2001 he wanted to shrink the government to the size that you can quote drown it in a bathtub end quote. Russ Vote is pursuing Norcross's vision. While the eliminates agencies, fires civil servants, steals funding from the American people. Russ Vote is concentrating power and resources in his agency, determined to give himself unchecked control over the entire federal government.
▶ 0:58:59At the same time, Republicans big ugly bill hands massive tax breaks to billionaires and to corporations. It also provides Russ Votes Office of Management and Budget with an unprecedented, unwarranted, and unjustified $100 million windfall.
▶ 0:59:18While he shutters and dismantles agencies that are delivering services the American people rely on, he also is looking at $129 million in this bill. $229 million. Our job is to say no to his budget requests. And unfortunately, the bill House the bill the House Republicans have put before us goes even further to ensure that the economy works for no one.
▶ 0:59:46No one but the wealthiest billionaires and largest corporations. The bill, this bill says to billionaires and to price gouging corporations, your taxes, we're looking the other way. Your consumer products, we take your word that they are safe. Your scams and junk fees, those are none of our business. market manipulation, insider trading, go right ahead. What does this bill say to the middle class or working-class families? You're on your own.
▶ 1:00:10On the heels of a massive four and a half trillion dollar giveaway to billionaires and corporations in the big ugly bill, this bill guts the Internal Revenue Service and underfunded IRS means slower processing of Americans tax returns, delays to crucial benefits like the child tax credit. But it also means that those with the most resources, like billionaires, powerful corporations, can escape scrutiny and avoid paying taxes when the IRS cannot afford to ensure they are meeting their obligations.
▶ 1:00:41On average audits, each dollar of IRS spending yields just over $2. But for the wealthiest tenth of 1%, audits produce nearly triple the return with each dollar yielding over $6 in revenue. 2021, at least 55 of the largest corporations in America, in a year when they took in over $40 billion in pre-tax income paid no federal corporate income taxes. Zero.
▶ 1:01:08Nike, Ullet, Packard, Dish Network paid zero federal income taxes, profiting on the backs of honest American families. After Republicans already gave billionaires more tax breaks, now they are kneecapping the IRS, thwarting enforcement of the tax code. This bill cuts the Federal Trade Commission and the Security and Exchange Commission, which mean scam peddling, price gouging, and market manipul manipulating corporations get a green light.
▶ 1:01:36Families trying to avoid groceries and save for their retirement only get empty promises. These cuts are not just numbers on the page. They have severe consequences for all American people. In April, the Consumer Product Safety Commission recalled several products that posed a danger to toddlers in Connecticut and across the country. The children's ride-on tonka dump trucks were recalled due to burn risks. Woodenshaped sorder car toys sold on Amazon were recalled due to a choking hazard.
▶ 1:02:06No one in my district told me they voted for more dangerous toys for their children. Yet the following month, Doge began weakening the Consumer Product Safety Commission, firing commissions as the administration seeks the dismantling of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. This bill further uh furthers their goal by cutting the commission's funding, putting children at risk, enabling corporations to sell dangerous products. And while Republicans claim they are concerned with election security, they are taking steps to make elections uh easier to steal.
▶ 1:02:36They're cutting funding for the Election Assistance Commission by 40%, gutting the independent bipartisan commission that helps keep elections fair and secure. Connecticut Secretary of State Stephanie and Thomas reached out to me. She expressed her concern for the ramifications of such a cut to the EAC, warning, and I quote, "At a time when this administration is putting increased pressure on local election workers, they are removing the tools that help states run safe, secure, and accessible elections.
▶ 1:03:06By cutting the EAC's budget, they are taking away the support our cities and towns rely on to serve voters and ensure that our election equipment is secure. Congress needs to understand that you get what you pay for. End quote. Weaker consumer protections, weaker election security. Do you really believe that the American people asked for any of this? Republicans have put forward yet another bill that favors billionaires and corporations.
▶ 1:03:32Yet another bill that does not fight waste, fraud, and abuse, but embraces it. I cannot support this bill. I thank you and I yield back.
▶ 1:03:42Thank the gentle lady for comments. Before we move on, I want to address very quickly a a point my good friend made that I agree with. Uh I gentle lady's correct about the challenges of having a bill on the floor and a bill in committee at the same time. It's not a practice that I uh did lightly or enjoy doing at all. And uh I would agree with your remarks.
▶ 1:04:05We did it largely because uh frankly we had a week taken away from us that shouldn't have been in my view. And believe me, my leadership heard about my view on that ad infant item. Uh, and that cost us two bills in and then we left for what I would consider too long in August break.
▶ 1:04:24Uh, and that cost us yet another bill. So, we're in a timeline crunch and I know my friend wants to get to a resolution and the first best thing we can do or get bills out here. We're not going to agree on the bills at this point. We never do and that's fine. Uh, but I know we need to get them out. so we can sit down and begin to hammer out the differences. So I regret very much the inconvenience this causes to lots of members, not the least the members that are on the floor itself.
▶ 1:04:53You two of our best members, ranking member captor and of course chairman flashman. Uh but it was just unavoidable to you know keep things moving and we will try to minimize that in the future.
▶ 1:05:06I thank you so much Mr. Chairman. I I thank you for making the point because it's it's a fair point and it's the right point to have made and I would even agree a little bit with my friend from Maryland. Uh we got the presidential budget much later than required and we did not get all the information we needed and that's been another problem in scheduling. I will tell you this though that was true of almost every administration I've ever seen in their first year. Nobody ever gets it.
▶ 1:05:33I mean we we require a budget with no penalty by February the 15th. President of the United States was inaugurated January the 19th. Nobody makes that bill or that that deadline. But uh we did have some difficulty in getting the information we needed in a timely fashion. We have uh enough to proceed now. But the gentleman made a fair point and I want to acknowledge that as well.
▶ 1:05:57Having said that, uh again, best thing we can do is proceed and try and get our work done and move into the next phase of the process. So with that, are there any other members wishing to make general comments on the bill? Gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Bishop is recognized.
▶ 1:06:13Thank you very much, uh, Chairman Cole, and thank you, Ranking Member Deloro. Thank you, Chairman Joyce, and Ranking Member Hoya. I wish I could stand here today in support of this bill, but I can't. Not in good conscience. Uh I can't vote yes to pass it out of committee as it's currently written. The financial services and general government bill for FY26 is deeply flawed and I'm disappointed in the direction that it takes.
▶ 1:06:44Let's call it what it is. It's a gift to the powerful and it's a slap in the face to working people. The bill guts the IRS's enforcement budget yet again. And we know exactly whom that helps. Billionaires and big corporations that can afford to use dubious accounting tricks and sometimes outright fraud while everyone else gets stuck footing the bill.
▶ 1:07:13If there's a problem with the tax code, we should change it through legislation. The majority had the opportunity to do that just a couple of months ago. It simply does not make sense that the majority lacks such faith in the tax bill that it passes.
▶ 1:07:31And it doesn't make sense to exacerbate the problems that already burden the IRS because of chronic underfunding, leading to delays and confusion that make it harder for everyday folks to file their taxes. But it doesn't stop there. The bill also slashes funding for the Federal Trade Commission, our nation's watchdog for unfair business practices, right after President Trump fired two commissioners.
▶ 1:08:01It rewards that abuse of power and it undercuts an agency that protects people from scams, price gouging, and junk fees. It's the same story with the Consumer Product Safety Commission. Three commissioners fired illegally without cause and again silence in this bill. Instead, the agency sees a funding cut which only makes it harder to keep dangerous products off store shelves.
▶ 1:08:32Working families and honest businesses ultimately pay the price when watchd dogs get defamed. by slashing support for the Small Business Administration. The bill cuts programs that help small business owners lower energy costs and stay competitive. On top of all that, the bill is stuffed with more than 60 extreme policy writers.
▶ 1:08:57It attacks reproductive rights, DC self-governance, and clean energy programs. My colleagues across the aisle would rather force through a dangerous political agenda than sensibly fund our government. And even with election threats growing by the day, this bill pays lip service to election security.
▶ 1:09:22If my colleagues truly cared about protecting our elections from foreign interference, they'd put the resources behind it. But instead, we get empty rhetoric and zero urgency while they put the right to vote at risk.
▶ 1:09:39Election security grants providing funding for critical equipment upgrades and hardening security against our global It is imperative that we not bury our hands in the sand when it comes to the constant threat international actors pose to our election security and our election integrity.
▶ 1:10:02This bill weakens the agencies and the programs that protect consumers, support small businesses, and safeguard our democracy. I oppose this legislation as it stands and I encourage my colleagues to importantly uh incorporate truly bipartisan priorities and bring Congress back to its position as co-equal branch of government.
▶ 1:10:28I cannot support the bill in its present form and I urge a no vote. I yield back.
▶ 1:10:37Thank the gentleman. The gentle lady from Minnesota, Miss McCullum, is recognized for opening remarks on the
▶ 1:10:45for yielding. I rise in opposition to fiscal year 2026 financial services and general uh government appropriations bill. I'm disappointed and I'm going to keep it to just just to one area uh to see that this bill fails to provide a safe harbor for banks, credit unions, and other financial institutions that provide services to hemp state sanctioned cannabis businesses.
▶ 1:11:12Without this common sense legislation, which has been included in past bills, this bill fails to ensure that all businesses have access to financial services. But for now, as I said, I'm going to really limit my my conversation and focus on hemp and hemp farming. Um, there are many states that have passed state laws working on hemp farming. I started working on this in 1992 when I was a member of the Minnesota State Legislature. for right now.
▶ 1:11:40California, Colorado, Florida, Kentucky, Arkansas, Arizona, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Connecticut, Michigan, Delaware, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Minnesota, Oregon, Virginia, Louisiana, Maryland, Nebraska, Tennessee, New York, and Georgia all are working with their farmers to produce hemp.
▶ 1:12:05Now, the hemp uh in the past six years and across the country in Minnesota have rebuilt a domestic supply chain of hemp and hemp products that are authorized under the 2018 farm bill. And I was trying to get a hold of Dr. Harris to make sure I support what he has put in the farm bill for some of his legislation language on that.
▶ 1:12:27These farmers provide feed stock for the hemp extraction market, which has valued over 28 billion dollar and has created over $300,000 agricultural and retail jobs. Hemp is used in a variety of projects, textiles, paper, cardboard alternatives, construction of concrete, insulation, drywall, lotions, oils for therapeutic and medical purposes. Hemp businesses are legal.
▶ 1:12:56Banks serving hemp businesses must file specific spec suspicious I got it out suspicious activity reports with the financial crimes enforcement network. Many banks are um you know find this heavy compliance bison and they live in fear of federal penalties.
▶ 1:13:16As a result, many hemp businesses operate primarily in cash, jeopardizing the safety of their employees, their customers, or they seek the few banks who are willing to accept the risk. Until we do something to regulate this common sense hemp and cannabis policy, and is we get it implemented, we won't be able to ensure that all businesses have access to the financial services they need to operate with their hemp or farm businesses.
▶ 1:13:43I'd like to thank my my friend and I don't say this very often and the good chair chairman Joyce for being a leader on this issue. I look forward to continuing to work with you and if we could do something just for hemp farms working with what's in the farm bill with with uh Chairman Harris. I think it would be a big boon for the 20 states that I listed for farmers for our agriculture here in the United States. And with that, Mr. Mr.
▶ 1:14:11Chair, I thank you for the time and I yield back a lot of time.
▶ 1:14:15You did. The gentle lady has set an admirable example. I hope others follow. So, I thank the gentle lady. I now recognize my good friend, the gentle lady from Ohio, Miss Caper, for opening remarks on the bill.
▶ 1:14:28Thank you uh very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for your comments earlier uh about uh trying to find a way to allow me both to handle a bill tonight on the floor and be allowed to work in committee. Uh so Chairman Cole, Ranking Member Deloro, Chairman Joyce, and Ranking Member Hoyer, um I am very um honored to speak on this legislation before us today.
▶ 1:14:51Uh yet again, we are gathered to go over a bill which puts billionaires first while slashing resources for our nation's families and households. This financial services and general government appropriations bill puts billionaires first by limiting the Internal Revenue Services ability to make sure the ultra weealthy and big corporations pay their fair share of taxes.
▶ 1:15:18We all know the Internal Revenue Service is 20,000 persons short to do that and those at the very top of the income scale are let uh free to skate wherever they wish. We also know uh that this bill hurts our economy by decimating the small business administration. I come from a small business family. We know this bill forces Americans to pay more for the mandatory act of filing their taxes.
▶ 1:15:44And the bill puts our citizenry and children at risk by cutting the Consumer Product Safety Commission. How backwards is that? And this bill continues to jeopardize core functions of our United States Postal Service, a beloved government service dating back 250 years for which I used to carry all over my community.
▶ 1:16:07So I don't see how these efforts align with my Republican colleagues constant refrain of America first and families first. Really? Let me turn to my home state of Ohio where there are almost 1 million small businesses. These businesses cover a wide variety of industries and employ over two and a quarter million Ohioans.
▶ 1:16:31When I visit small businesses across my district, I see Ohioans supporting their community and creating our culture through their work as local pharmacists, bakers, producers, mechanics, farmers, growers, and too many professions to list.
▶ 1:16:47Yet, this proposed bill cuts, are you ready, $324 million, a third of a billion dollar from the United States Small Business Administration, threatening the more than 62 million Americans who work in or own a small business or need a loan or refinancing a loan.
▶ 1:17:07This cut just won't just limit the SBA's crucial support for American businesses that make and grow what makes and grows America, but will also jeopardize our local, state, regional, and national economies. Over of exporters are small businesses who contribute to the overall $1.8 trillion in exported goods from the United States each year. And we sure need to export more than we import.
▶ 1:17:34This bill also makes it harder for small businesses and their employees to file their taxes by eliminating the free Internal Revenue Service Direct File Program. As a pilot program, this system saved $140,000 Americans across 12 states, an estimated $5.6 million in tax preparation fees last year. So, this is just a small glimpse of the tremendous savings we could give to all taxpayers.
▶ 1:18:03if this program was implemented in all 50 states. The pilot programs were an overwhelming success. And this bill throws the baby out with the bathwater by unfairly terminating the entire direct file program. That's taking American business backwards. This shows how House Republicans are clearly choosing greedy tax filing corporations over helping American taxpayers in the small business realm. They don't care about helping you to save money.
▶ 1:18:32They care about their H&R block and turbo tax lining their pockets with your hardearned money. The choice to put corporations ahead of working Americans does not end there. For over 50 years, the Consumer Product Safety Commission has helped keep the American public safe. They are responsible for a nearly 50% decline in fire deaths. They've almost certainly eliminated child deaths by refrigerator or garage doors.
▶ 1:18:59and they've contributed to the 80% decrease in childhood poisonings. Even though the Consumer Product Safety Commission has repeatedly shown that they are efficient and successful with the funds they are given, this bill advocates for deep, harmful cuts. Slashing the Consumer Product Safety Commission only benefits guess who? Big corporations. As one constituent said to me the other day, "Marcy, America doesn't belong to us anymore.
▶ 1:19:27It's gone corporate." And we can sort of see the current majority party will continue to put billionaires ahead of the people of our country and their families. Your priority is seen again in your efforts to diminish and break down the postal service. So becomes the path. The postal service uh was created in our constitution. It is not like any other organization.
▶ 1:19:53It has a noble and legal obligation as the nation's largest non-military government service. It serves every household. It serves every business. And it's still the most uh uh affordable rate for mail pieces and for boxes. So, I urge my colleagues to reflect on their intentions for this bill and the long-term implications were to become law. Unless this bill is heavily amended, I'll be voting no.
▶ 1:20:20and I urge my colleagues to do the same to vote for the American people, not just the billionaire class. I thank you and I yield back.
▶ 1:20:29Thank gentle lady, the gentle lady from Florida, Miss Werman Schultz is recognized for opening remarks on the
▶ 1:20:45Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I I rise today, as I have the past nine appropriations bills this committee has considered this year, to express my deep concern with terribly low funding levels and rampant partisan writers. While I have deep respect for both my friends, Chairman Joyce, and a true mentor, Ranking Member Ranking Member Hoyer, I am unable to support this bill.
▶ 1:21:11One of the most vital agencies this bill funds is the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which among other critical public safety responsibilities funds drowning prevention through the Virginia Graham Baker Act or VGB. The VGB program directly reduces injuries and deaths at pools and spas through a grant in education and national awareness campaign. Drowning is the number one cause of preventable death for children younger than five in this country. I know a lot of people aren't aware of that, but that is fact.
▶ 1:21:38And sadly, prevention efforts at the federal level are nearly non-existent. This is a passion of mine throughout my entire legislative career. Um, and this is the bill where I have the opportunity to help raise people's awareness and ensure that we can all commit ourselves to trying to prevent young children from needlessly dying. I do truly appreciate that this bill continues to recognize that drowning is a public health issue by including $2.5 million for the G VGB grant program.
▶ 1:22:08This continues providing assistance to states, local governments, and Indian tribes for education, training, and enforcement of pool safety requirements. But I'm hopeful that for America's leading cause of preventable death for our youngest, most vulnerable children that we can do more over time because we must commit ourselves to end this scourge of preventable deaths. I'm hopeful that for America's leading cause of preventable death for our youngest, most vulnerable children that we can at least commit to that.
▶ 1:22:36I'm equally troubled by the recent assaults against the CPSC and its independents where only the three Democratic large D commissioners were fired without cause. Every day, the CPSC stops unforeseen tragedies in homes across America. It's an agency that needs more independence and funding, not interference and elimination. If Trump succeeds in taking a wrecking ball to it, more dangerous toys, cribs, and electronics will end up in American homes, endangering families everywhere.
▶ 1:23:07I plead with each of you on this committee to do all we can to ensure it remains wellunded and nonpartisan in its work. Another critical agency that this sub that this subcommittee believes delivers much needed oversight to is the United States Postal Service. The hardworking men and women of the postal service sounded the alarm bill for bill for over six years now. But time and again, the USPS's previous leadership dismissed those concerns and Congress's role to conduct lawful and effective oversight.
▶ 1:23:36Whether it's closing post offices, assigning accurate zip codes, distri disrupted distribution facilities, or missing or stolen mail, the USPS's leadership needs a more involved Congress, and thankfully this bill begins to meet that challenge. We've rallied together as a committee to hold the USPS accountable, and I'm glad that this bill continues to move in that direction. While I appreciate those provisions, the overall bill is unacceptable.
▶ 1:24:02Especially so when you take into consideration the reckless cuts and the awful partisan policy writers attached to this bill. Just like our previous appropriations bills, the majority in this president are focused on anything but making life more affordable for the American people. While shielding corporate greed, promoting more price gouging, and gutting protections for children and families, this bill and the president's budget request walk away from Republicans commitment to lower costs, securing our elections, and promoting competition in our economy. Look at some of the president's commitments and what this bill does.
▶ 1:24:32President Trump said he would fight drug addiction and an illicit drug trade that destroys so many families. Yet, the Office of the National Drug Control Policy sees a cut under this bill and was underfunded in the president's budget request by over $433 million. This includes the drug three communities program, which Trump tried to cut to zero, but thankfully, Chairman Joyce and Ranking member Hoyer knew better and saved the program's funding.
▶ 1:24:55The president and his administration time and again said they would restore our foreign policy leadership, national security, but they cut the National Security Council and the Office of the National Cyber Director. Worst of all, this funding bill and the president's budget makes clear that American families, children, and vulnerable communities will lose out. All so that greed, and those who skirt the law for a quick buck can win. The Federal Trade Commission, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the SEC all see cuts. We all know this makes it harder to keep our families safe, our economy strong, and our markets competitive. Mr.
▶ 1:25:25Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that you tried to insulate some of the damage of the president's budget request, but it's clear to me and to my constituents that this bill leaves working Americans in the dust, and it does it all to lift up the privileged few who place play inside Trump's golf clubs. It could have been worse, but I cannot support a bill that leaves so many Americans behind and makes life more dangerous for our children and busy working families. Children, especially cannot ensure their own safety. We have laws that need a robust CPS-C to do that when those responsible fail them.
▶ 1:25:54With a heavy heart, I urge my colleagues to vote no and I yield back.
▶ 1:25:59Thank the gentle lady. The gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Boan, is recognized for opening remarks on the bill.
▶ 1:26:07Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, today we are considering a bill that does nothing to lower costs for families and only leaves them less protected uh by having scammers and predatory fees go rampant and ultimately costing them more. Um, this bill only benefits uh billionaires and big corporations because of the cuts. The cuts to the Federal Trade Commission, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the IRS only allow this behavior to run even more rampant. Oh, sorry.
▶ 1:26:36Someone's coming through here. All right. Um, our constituents have been telling us that the cost of living is too high and this bill fails to do anything to help them. But don't take it from me. Look at the Republican summary for the bill. has no mention of lowering costs for families. Instead, the closest you can get is it protects consumer freedom in kitchen appliances. That's not exactly what people are asking for. This subcommittee has important jurisdiction.
▶ 1:27:06If we want to lower costs, we could fund and empower the Federal Trade Commission, for example, that goes after rising costs. when they're properly funded and empowered to work for the people. We have seen them bring down the price of inhalers, ban junk fees, and go after uh price fixing in the rental housing market. If you want to actually bring down the national debt, how about funding the IRS?
▶ 1:27:28Study after study finds that when we fund the IRS and have them go after the wealthiest tax cheats, we bring in far more than we spend. This bill proposes that we cut the IRS enforcement nearly in half, 44%. And it's such a large cut that it makes up for 80% of all the cuts in this bill. A study that I know Mr. Hoyer mentioned as well found that every dollar we invest in auditing the wealthy uh yields $12 in revenue for the federal government.
▶ 1:27:58The most recent projections from the IRS estimate the tax gap is over 600 billion a year. That's money that's owed to the government that we're unable to collect because we don't have the staff to go and enforce the existing laws. But who are we cutting? Well, we're cutting money for the Small Business Administration, a 9% cut. I don't believe I have small business owners calling my office asking for less support. But you know who doesn't get a cut in this bill? Doge.
▶ 1:28:29Doge gets a $2 million increase despite no transparency or any idea of what's going on in that office. Do we even know who's working there? We never have had a budget hearing with them and surely we can find better places to send those funds. Unfortunately, we're considering a bill that has no chance of becoming law as written. However, we are continuing a process that ultimately hurts this institution.
▶ 1:28:56Uh we are a co-equal branch of government, not a subservient branch of government. Yet, we're acting like it when the president does recisions of the very funds that we all in a bipartisan way have approved. It's it it's going to be something that's going to have a longer term impact than us right now. When I was home over the August break, I was mentioning a former elected official from Wisconsin to some people uh from a couple decades ago, and no one knew who the person was.
▶ 1:29:25Look, people aren't really going to remember most of us uh down the road in a couple decades. But the actions we do right now will linger uh and they can linger in a stenchy way uh or they can linger in a good way. Unfortunately, by not standing up to a co another branch of government that's taking away our article one powers from the constitution, uh we are diminishing this institution. So it's not just this bill, Mr.
▶ 1:29:55Chairman, um that's diminishing the institution. It's this process. Um and I am sad. Uh you know, one thing about going back home is you get maybe a little chance to get grounded again. And this place is anything but grounded Washington DC. But what we're doing matters and what we're doing is really hurtful to the institution. We survived the last Trump presidency by working together on this committee and getting things done. And for your sake, you've survived the Biden administration by doing the same.
▶ 1:30:24But right now, we don't need to be simps for the president. And unfortunately, too many of our actions are like that. And I would hope that we would find a way to stand up. It's hard to trust each other when recisions are occurring of our funds. And um you know, I know you have a tight margin that's going to make things tough between now and September 30th, but uh it's also the actions really that are making this the toughest.
▶ 1:30:47And uh it's what makes makes me the saddest when I come back to Washington knowing uh that we don't have enough respect for ourselves to do the right thing. And I yield back.
▶ 1:30:59Thank the gentleman. The gentle lady from New Jersey, Miss Watson Coleman, is recognized for remarks on the bill.
▶ 1:31:10You have not because you asked not. So, could I ask that the temperature in this room be elevated just two degrees so that I'm I'm not freezing from my nose to my toes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, thank you uh Mr.
▶ 1:31:32Chairman and the financial services and government appropriations bill before you needs my attention because the bill before us today is more than just a spending bill. It is a statement of priorities. Unfortunately, these priorities are deeply skewed. This bill is written to benefit billionaires and big corporations, to weaken protections for ordinary consumers, and to override the democratic choices of the people of the District of Colombia.
▶ 1:32:02Let me start with how this bill benefits billionaires and the wealthy. The single biggest example is the way it guts the IRS. Enforcement funding is slashed. Audits of high in income taxpayers will plummet and complex cases involving partnerships and multinational corporations will be untouched. We know what that means.
▶ 1:32:26In practice, billionaires who hire teams of accountants and lawyers will find it even easier to avoid paying their fair share. Meanwhile, everyday taxpayers, people who get a W2 and a standard refund, we will have no choice but to make up the difference.
▶ 1:32:44On top of that, the bill blocks the IRS from expanding its free uh direct file program, a simple online tool that would let ordinary Americans file their taxes without paying private companies. Who benefits from killing the direct file? Well, that would be the big tax prep corporations and their wealthy investors. Who loses?
▶ 1:33:0910 millions of people, taxpayers who will be forced to keep paying these fees just to fulfill a civic duty. This bill also handcuffs the SEC and the FTC, two agents who agencies whose job is to protect markets and consumers.
▶ 1:33:28The SEC is prevented from enforcing f rules that would make large disclosure disclose cyber security risk and provide clearer tax transparency. So that means more mega mega mega mega meggars go unchecked. More monopolistic um practices are tolerated and small businesses well they get squeezed out.
▶ 1:33:54Consumers end up paying higher prices and workers lose bargaining power. All so that a few massive corporations and the billionaires who own them can consolidate even more wealth and power. Not unlike what the president is trying to do with our government. So when the supporters of this bill say it's about fiscal restraint, let's be clear, it is. It is not. It is about stacking the deck for the wealthy and the powerful. Now, let me turn to how this bill harms consumers.
▶ 1:34:25The cuts to the FTC and the SEC and the other regulatory agencies mean fewer investigators, fewer enforcement actions, and fewer safeguards. That leaves consumers more exposed to scams, fraud, deceptive advertising, and financial abuse. Families trying to save for retirement will have less protection against risk risky Wall Street practices.
▶ 1:34:48Small businesses will be left more vulnerable to predatory behavior by their larger Even the election assistance commission is slashed by nearly 50 40%, weakening our democracy at a time when voters deserve confidence that our elections are wellrun. When you hollow out agencies like these, the costs don't disappear.
▶ 1:35:13They are simply passed along to ordinary Americans in the form of higher prices, greater risks, and fewer protections. And finally, let's talk about the District of Columbia. Buried in this bill are riders that override the choices of DC residents. One of the most troubling is the effort to impose open carry in Washington DC. Let's be very clear. The people of the district through their elected officials have chosen to maintain strong gun safety laws.
▶ 1:35:44These laws reflect the reality that this city is home not just to residents but also to embassies, federal buildings, schools, and millions of visitors each year. For Congress to step in and dictate gun policy, forcing open carry on a city that has rejected it, it is not only dangerous, it is a profound violation of home rule and democracy. Residents of DC deserve the same right to govern themselves as residents of any other state.
▶ 1:36:14Instead, this bill undermines their voice and makes their city less safe. So, let's step back. Why? What we have here is a bill that protects billionaires from oversight and accountability, leaves consume consumers exposed to fraud and abuse, strips the power of the District of Columbia of their de democratic right to s decide their own public safety laws. That is not fiscal responsibility. That is not good governance.
▶ 1:36:44That is government that is captured by the wealthy few at the direct expense of the American people. We should reject this bill and demand an appropriation process that reflects the values of fairness, accountability, and democracy. And with that, I yield back and thank you, Mr. Chair.
▶ 1:37:01Thank you, gentle lady. Gentleman from New York, Mr. Morelli, is recognized for comments on the bill.
▶ 1:37:11Uh, thank you uh very much, Mr. Chairman. Uh there are a number of deeply troubling aspects of this spending bill, including the insertion of pol policy writers that are so partisan that they are designed, I think, to make it all but certain that this bill cannot and will not garner bipartisan support.
▶ 1:37:31With such a highly partisan legislative strategy, it's no wonder we are currently operating under a fullear continuing resolution and uh staring down a funding abyss at the end of this month. uh this is not a serious exercise and I do hope the majority adjusts its strategy before it's too late. Uh I would continue to with general observation about the bill but as the ranking member of the committee on house administration I'd like to spend a few minutes talking about the importance of funding for our elections.
▶ 1:38:01Voting is the foundation of our democracy. It is our responsibility to see that every eligible American citizen can cast their ballot and that every vote is counted. The revolutionary idea upon which this country is built is the people govern themselves. There are no kings in America. But the fulfillment of the promise of that vibrant democracy requires people to participate and exercise the right to vote.
▶ 1:38:26House Democrats have and will continue tirelessly to work to protect that franchise and we will continue to press this issue. The effort uh presents a stark contrast to the Republican agenda which is constantly focused on restricting access to the ballot and limiting the ability of the people to participate in that vibrant democracy.
▶ 1:38:47The bill before us today provides a mere $15 million for election security grants and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle along with the president often claim to care about election security. Yet once again, it is deeply disappointing that the refusal to treat funding for elections with the serious that seriousness that it demands.
▶ 1:39:07Over and over again, uh I hear from state and local election officials across the country doing the work on the ground that the one of the most significant needs in election administration is robust and consistent funding. I recall making these same exact points in previous years where this committee attempted to zero out funding for election security grants. Uh thankfully those bills were unable to even pass the House floor.
▶ 1:39:31And while the bill does include 15 million uh for election security, that is merely a drop in the bucket for what is necessary. And I'm very grateful to um my colleague, Mr. Bishop, for his amendment to quadruple the amount of election funding, which is still less than is necessary. But I will support that amendment uh and continue to work to assist our state and local election officials, particularly in this environment of increased threats and intimidation to election officials around the country.
▶ 1:40:00These public servants are on the front lines of upholding our democracy, ensuring our elections remain accessible, accurate, and transparent, and seeing to it again that every eligible American has equitable access to the ballot and their ballot is counted under the United States Constitution. of both the states and the congress have a responsibility for regulating our elections.
▶ 1:40:22The elections clause of the constitution article 1 section 4 clause one states that the times, places, and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof, but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations.
▶ 1:40:41I would be remiss, colleagues, if I didn't point out there is no mention of the president of the United States authority to unilaterally eliminate mail-in voting by executive order contrary to the president's unhinged rants on truth social. Such a proposal is unconstitutional. It's unlawful and it's unserious and House Democrats are going to vigorously pose it every single step of the way.
▶ 1:41:05During a time when the president is attempting to distract or outright cheat his way to the next election, it's crucial for Congress to both do its job and give state and local election officials the resources they need to do their jobs. Without these resources, we are consciously undermining the very foundation of American democracy. I urge defeat of the bill and I yield back.
▶ 1:41:27Thank the gentleman. The other gentleman from New York, Mr. Espad, is recognized for opening remarks on the bill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise in opposition to this bill, which is a full of is full of harmful provisions and cuts um which will stunt economic growth by hurting small business owners, opening Americans up to scams and stopping tax enforcement for large corporations.
▶ 1:41:56The bill underfunds small business development centers and minorityled small business owner programs. With nearly 8,000 small businesses within my district, I am concerned that the inadequate allocation of resources will hurt them and their ability to help grow the economy and create more jobs. Uh, small businesses continue to be the biggest employers in our nation.
▶ 1:42:22Not the big box stores, not the big corporations, but small mom and pop businesses. And and they need our help. They need Congress to be an advocate for them by dismantling and underfunding agencies like the FTC and the Securities and Exchange Commission. This legislation benefits those that seek to scam hardworking Americans.
▶ 1:42:47It does nothing to curb OM's attempt to needlessly withhold funding from programs and it erases the autonomy that DC has enjoyed for decades and deserves. It continues to enable plain closed federal law enforcement in unmarked cars to literally kidnap people off the street. For these reasons, I oppose this legislation and I urge my colleagues to do the same. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
▶ 1:43:13I thank the gentleman and the gentle lady from Illinois, Miss Underwood, is recognized for remarks on the bill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I strongly oppose the fiscal year 2026 financial services and government appropriations bill that we are considering today.
▶ 1:43:37As Donald Trump continues his assault on the rule of law, this bill gives him more of the tools he needs to further dismantle our democracy. Once again, Republicans in Congress are prioritizing billionaires and corporate special interests, turning their backs on working families, children, and small This bill will raise costs for families, harm small businesses, compromise public health, and help the wealthiest more than it helps working people.
▶ 1:44:04It helps Donald Trump continue his attack on our system of checks and balances like his recent illegal attempt to fire Federal Reserve Board Governor Lisa Cook. This bill undermines the stability of our economy and the security of our future. And it makes it easier for criminals inside and outside of this administration to keep breaking the law.
▶ 1:44:28Incredibly, this bill gives the IRS less funding in 2025 than when I first came to Congress in 2019. Why is it? Because this majority wants to weaken the IRS's ability to make the president's billionaire buddies pay their fair share. We may disagree about tax policy, but this is not about tax policy. It's about whether the rules apply to everyone.
▶ 1:44:54This bill is built for Wall Street executives and white collar criminals, not working Americans. It makes it easier to cheat and harder to get caught. Friends, when you cut the IRS and make it slower and less effective, you're not somehow lowering taxes. You're just protecting tax cheats and making regular services worse for those who pay their fair share.
▶ 1:45:20Cutting the IRS makes means that billionaires and fraudsters get out of paying theirs. Money that could be invested in Medicare, in Social Security, in rural hospitals, in schools, or to pay the roads and bridges our communities depend on. It's shameless. And after passing massive c tax cuts for the wealthy that are already sending health care costs for working Americans skyrocketing, Republicans in Congress are cutting even more.
▶ 1:45:45We should all want an IRS that answers the phone when taxpayers need help and a highquality, efficient taxpayer advocate service that helps the case workers in all of our offices better serve our constituents. We should all want direct file services so that filing taxes is as easy and cheap as possible. But Republicans are making services like these worse and more expensive. It's a lose-lose. And this bill doesn't stop there.
▶ 1:46:12It guts the FTC, the agency that keeps oil and gas companies, grocery mega chains, and online retailers from price gouging families, defrauding consumers, and crushing royal grocerers and other small businesses. Why would Republicans weaken the watchdogs that fight against monopoly power? Because these corporations are their friends. They bankroll their campaigns. They fund their inauguration parties and cash in on Republican tax cuts.
▶ 1:46:38Finally, this bill continues the illegal, unnecessary, and expensive occupation of the District of Columbia. President Trump's excuse for his wasteful military occupation of DC was supposedly to stop violent crime. But now, Republicans are using this bill to overturn DC's own gun laws and allow anyone to carry a concealed gun on the streets of the district.
▶ 1:47:02Allowing hidden guns in front of the White House, the Capitol, and our nation's monuments while sending our National Guard to patrol the streets is a recipe for If Republicans really cared about public safety in DC, they'd release the billion dollars that they gutted from the district's local budget. That's not even federal funding. That's local funding that DC taxpayers have already paid that Congress won't let them spend because DC is not a state.
▶ 1:47:30Those funds could be used to train police officers, improve emergency response, and strengthen community safety. Instead, this Republican Congress is imposing extremist policies, overriding local voices, and undermining the safety they claim to protect. So, let's not pretend. Republicans are not serious about lowering costs. They're serious about cutting and privatizing the agencies that protect families, then pointing to underperformance as an excuse to cut them further. The American people want fairness.
▶ 1:48:00The data shows working families are paying taxes while the wealthiest do not pay their fair share. The people we represent deserve better. They deserve a functioning IRS that enforces the laws equally. They deserve protection from monopoly abuse, and they deserve to know that their retirement savings are managed responsibly. This bill is the perfect summary of the Republican agenda. Help Donald Trump and their wealthy donors break the law while working people get left behind.
▶ 1:48:26I urge my colleagues to oppose it and I yield Thank gentle lady. The chair recognized a gentleman from California, Mr. Leven, for remarks, but before he makes them, the chair wants to observe. As promised, the chocolate that you distributed from your district was indeed very good. So, thank you very much.
▶ 1:48:45I appreciate that, Mr. Chairman.
▶ 1:48:46Gentlemen is recognized. may even get extra time. Who knows?
▶ 1:48:49I appre if anybody wants more chass.
▶ 1:48:54Thank you. Those are from my district. Enjoy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh thank ranking member Deloro as well. Unfortunately, I can't support the bill as written. Uh the bill has some problems that have been discussed, but I think at its core, it fails to hold the administration accountable for ignoring the very appropriations laws passed by this committee.
▶ 1:49:15You know, in past markups, I've talked about OM director vote and specifically how he wants to end the bipartisan appropriations process that I sincerely believe that everyone in this uh room is committed to. Our constituents expect every one of us to work in good faith across the aisle to deliver results for the communities that we serve. But the work that we do together means nothing if the executive branch destroys the checks and balances our founders created. Mr.
▶ 1:49:44Chairman, I'm so pleased to see that plaque is still there on the dis. No money shall be drawn from the treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law. Article 1, section 9, clause 7. We all know what that plaque says and what it means. And we also uh know that there have been presidents throughout history who have tried to expand the power of the executive branch. That's not something new. But I would offer that what this administration is doing really is unprecedented.
▶ 1:50:12The Government Accountability Office, again, that's the nonpartisan watchdog. They have said it plainly that the so-called pocket recisions being considered by the OM are illegal. They are illegal. They violate the Empowerment Control Act. When the executive branch decides on its own not to spend funds that we appropriated as the Congress, that is illegal. when it substitutes its judgment for Congress's, that also is illegal.
▶ 1:50:42And we have to be clear about where this leads. Today, the target of a pocket recision might be something that you oppose, but tomorrow it inevitably will be something that you support. If Congress debates it, if Congress passes it, if the president then signs it into law, then that's the law of the land.
▶ 1:51:03And what I don't respect and what frankly none of us should tolerate is the idea that a president any president can turn around and simply refuse without the consent of Congress without the appropriate process being followed just refuse to spend the money required by law because the president doesn't like the policy outcome. That's not his power. That's our power.
▶ 1:51:25If we allow a president to pick and choose which laws to enforce and which dollars to spend, then my friends, we have shredded article one of the constitution and handed over the very authority that the framers entrusted to us. We are the appropriators. Our job is to defend this institution's constitutional role. And if we don't, we will set a precedent that will weaken Congress for generations or perhaps even permanently.
▶ 1:51:53We cannot allow the executive branch to hollow out our power of the purse through illegal pocket recisions. And of course, beyond this constitutional issue, there are a number of troubling funding changes. First, I'm concerned the bill decimates enforcement funding for the IRS. This is how we go after the tax cheats and the fraudsters. That shouldn't be controversial. At the same time, the bill underfunds taxpayer services at the IRS, the very department that helps to make filing your taxes easier.
▶ 1:52:23And all of us, we work for our constituents. We have casework with the IRS, and we want that casework to go smoothly. And we want the IRS to have the funds to be able to respond effectively. We shouldn't be making it harder for everyday Americans to file their taxes while making it easier for some to cheat the system. That's just wrong. I'm also disappointed that the bill cuts funding for the Small Business Administration. Look, small businesses in each of our districts are facing unprecedented challenges with rising costs.
▶ 1:52:54We should be offering more support to the mom and pop businesses in our district, not less. While I appreciate the hard work of my colleagues in drafting this bill, for those reasons and others, I cannot support it as written. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
▶ 1:53:08Thank the gentleman. The gentle lady from Pennsylvania, Miss Dean, is recognized for remarks on the bill.
▶ 1:53:14I thank the chairman. Unfortunately, uh, I rise in opposition to this bill, but I thank you, Chairman Cole, Chairman Joyce, Ranking Member Deloro, Ranking Member Hoyer. Uh, this is not the bill that American families, my constituents deserve. It benefits billionaires, big corporations, while raising the cost of living on Americans. We've already heard some of the high level concerns and smaller concerns from many of my colleagues.
▶ 1:53:42So, I'm going to focus on just a few items uh that will particularly harm my constituents in Pennsylvania's fourth congressional district. First, not only does this bill cut funding for IRS, hamstringing its enforcement capabilities, which we know we enhanced uh to the increase of our coffers. This bill makes it more expensive for Americans to file their taxes by eliminating the IRS direct file pilot program.
▶ 1:54:09More than two million Pennians were eligible for Direct File, an online tool that allowed taxpayers to file file their federal and state tax returns for free. This program was a huge success, saving taxpayers money and receiving rave reviews. Why would we eliminate this? Next, this bill cuts funding for CDFIS, Community Development Financial Institutions.
▶ 1:54:35This comes after a recent OM document revealed that as much as 75% of the FY25 CDFI funding remains unobligated. Of course, it was a continuing resolution uh that did this. Pennsylvania's CDFI network, which has 17 PA based C CDFIS, is essential for ensuring access to underserved communities in my state.
▶ 1:55:02In 2024, network members received two uh $21.5 million in awards. And every $1 of CDFI financial assistance typically unlocks eight $8 in private capital, turning a $250 million federal investment into as much as $2 billion of financing for small businesses, homeowners, and community projects. The CDFI fund is one of the most coste effective ways to facilitate access to capital for those who need it most.
▶ 1:55:32Why are we continuing to support Why are we not continuing to support it in a strong bipartisan way? Again, we are facing a cost of li living crisis. This administration came in saying they would reduce the cost of living on day one. Well, unfortunately, through the policies of immigration and chaotic tariffs, uh we are in an inflationary cycle with costs going up. The bill fails to meet this moment.
▶ 1:56:00From bananas to baby seats to building materials, costs are going up and my constituents are noticing it. This this bill is upside down on so many areas. It puts our children and families at risk, more vulnerable to scams and predatory junk fees. It makes it more difficult for Americans to vote. weakens election security by cutting funding for the election assistance commission.
▶ 1:56:30Who would ever want to weaken our election system? Especially folks in this room. I urge my colleagues to vote no. And Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
▶ 1:56:43Thank gentle lady. The gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Mane, is recognized for comments on the bill. Thank you, Chairman Cole and Ranking Member Deluro, Chairman Joyce, Ranking Member Hoyer for the opportunity to speak on the fiscal year fiscal services and general government appropriations bill.
▶ 1:57:01First, I'm grateful uh that this bill continues a long-standing bipartisan support for the Office of National Drug Control Policy Programs, including the Haida and Drug-Free Communities Program in Indiana's first congressional district. The Haida program provides Lake Porter and Leaport counties with essential support to combat drug trafficking and address emerging threats. The drug-free communities program also helps communities across my district prevent youth substance abuse and reduce addiction.
▶ 1:57:28I know firsthand life-saving resources these programs provide and I applaud the committee for the rec for recognizing the importance of these successful initiatives. However, I cannot support the overreaching legislation because it does nothing to lower the cost of living and benefits the wealthy over the working families. Specifically, the bill harms economic development through severe funding cuts to the community development financial institution, reducing their capability to provide financial services, loans, and affordable housing in lowincome communities.
▶ 1:57:59It also slashes funds for the Small Business Administration, harming our ability to support small businesses, entrepreneurs that are striving to create work and wealth. The legislation further attacks Americans consumers by doubling down on efforts to weaken Consumer Finance Protection Bureau and limiting the Federal Trade Commission's capacity to increase competition and address fraud.
▶ 1:58:21Additionally, by gutting the funding of the IRS tax enforcement activities, the bill destroys efforts to ensure the wealthy and the corporations pay their fair share. Combined with the tax breaks for the wealthy in the re in the Republic reconciliation bill, the Republican reconciliation bill, these IRS cuts continue the majority's assault on American working families.
▶ 1:58:44The bill also poses risks to our democratic institutions by endangering our election security, failing to protect the federal workforce and allowing doge and the For example, cutting funding for the election assistant commission when we face increasing election security threat diminishes voting rights access across the country.
▶ 1:59:10Indiana has utilized election security grants to help upgrade our state's election infrastructure. Instead of building on these critical investments, the bill deestimates resources for the commission and underfunds these necessary grants. The bill fail fails to address the administration's ongoing attacks on the federal workforce, which have impacted countless civil servants in Indiana's first congressional district.
▶ 1:59:36It further fails to impose need checks and balances on Doge and OM as the agencies continue to violate our legal principles and freeze appropriated funds. The financial services and general government bill is intended to promote economic development, support our democratic institutions, and strengthen our federal government. Unfortunately, this bill this bill fails to achieve these objectives and instead only makes the cost of living crisis worse.
▶ 2:00:04I urge my colleagues to reject this misguided legislation and work in a bipartisan manner to build an economy that works for all Americans. And I yield back. I thank the gentleman. Are there any other members wishing to make general comments about the bill? Uh gentle lady from Washington is recognized for general comments on the
▶ 2:00:25Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um two years ago, I had a mayor from one of my small towns uh come to me, Mayor Rob Gordon. he was looking for assistance to buy a firet truck. And um if you look at the the data, you know, 25 years ago, you could get a a pretty nice rig for 250k. Today, it's over a million. And uh he was not able to do that on his own. He was looking for help in pursuing that funding. And uh he had been a volunteer firefighter since he was 15 years old and um unfortunately died of stomach cancer before the firetruck could be delivered.
▶ 2:00:56Um the consolidation that has happened in the firetruck and emergency vehicle apparatus industry is profound. Um it is um you'll see like parts that used to be interchangeable are no longer interchangeable. So you have to get a part delivered specially. Sometimes the shipping is more expensive than the part itself. Um and we can't ignore the elephant in the room. We need to look at the invisible junkyard that's been created um that has precipitated.
▶ 2:01:24It's it's estimated that 65 to 75% of the emergency vehicle industry has been consolidated by just three companies. Um, and that means that our taxpayers, our emergency responders are left footing the bill on this.
▶ 2:01:38And so I'm very grateful for the inclusion in the manager's amendment of uh to direct uh the FT uh to understand and begin to look at what has led to the consolidation whether we're talking about um whether we're talking about the regulatory environment that has made it so difficult for small businesses to stand up or the consolidation broadly. So thank you and with that I yield back.
▶ 2:02:04Thank the gentle lady. Are there other members wishing to make additional comments about the bill or initial comment? Seeing no other members wishing to make opening remarks, I'd like to recognize Chairman Joyce to offer a manager's amendment.
▶ 2:02:18Thank you, Chairman Cole. Uh I have an amendment at the desk. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of the amendment.
▶ 2:02:24Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman's recognized for comments on his amendment.
▶ 2:02:30Uh thank you uh Mr. Chairman. and I'm pleased to offer this managed amendment to the FY2026 FSG bill. Um, but before I describe the amendment, I want to first thank ranking member Hoyer and Deluro for working with us on this. I appreciate their commitment to ensuring that we have the best product available.
▶ 2:02:50This manager's amendment includes provisions that direct the judiciary to implement workplace processes and procedures, re reiterate the importance of national campaign on pool safety, direct OPM to brief Congress on federal civilian workforce, and to ensure USPS's reopening temporarily closed facilities among other issues. I keep my remarks brief, ensure those with provisions in this amendment have some time to speak.
▶ 2:03:16I would like to think that the the time they had in the opening statement had wore them out. Uh but but but to that end, I've supplied some uh lunch. Uh which, you know, I I made sure we have a a good lunch, a solid lunch. It'll hopefully make you sleepy. but if in fact we get stuck with dinner and I have to provide dinner, we're going to grl. But I would like to thank my colleagues for their hard work and yield back my
▶ 2:03:47Well, I thank the gentleman for his efforts, but let me tell you, based on long experience, it ain't going to work. Uh, with that, I recognize my good friend, the gentleman from Maryland, uh, to address the manager's amendment.
▶ 2:04:06Thank gentlemen very much. Are there other amenders seeking recognition to speak on the amendment? Hey,
▶ 2:04:12it's very expensive.
▶ 2:04:13Seeing none, I recognize Chairman Joyce for one minute to close.
▶ 2:04:18I urge uh unanimous support of the manager's amendment.
▶ 2:04:23Thank gentlemen. The question is now on the amendment. All those in favor say I.
▶ 2:04:28Those opposed say no. The opinion of the chair, the eyes have it and the amendment is adopted. I now recognize a gentle lady, the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Laura from Connecticut for an amendment. General lady from Okay, that's quite all right.
▶ 2:04:57Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk and I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
▶ 2:05:01Without objection, the reading of the amendment dispensed with. Gentle lady's recognized for remarks on her amendment.
▶ 2:05:07Mr. chair and my colleagues, this amendment would ensure transparency and accountability of taxpayer dollars by creating and funding an independent office of inspector general for the Office of Management and Budget, OM. My amendment does not increase spending and it funds the Office of Inspector General with existing resources.
▶ 2:05:34Given OM's influence, an inspector general would be a powerful force for preventing waste, fraud, and abuse, and building public trust that American taxpayers dollars are being safeguarded. This is exactly the purpose for which inspectors general were established in by the Inspector General Act.
▶ 2:05:58Congress recognized the importance of maintaining public trust in crucial agencies and institutions and there are now 72 dedicated inspector general roles across the federal government keeping an eye out for waste for fraud and abuse. That brings us to OM which is one of the most powerful agencies in government the so-called nerve center of federal spending. It plays a central role in shaping federal budgets and regulatory policy.
▶ 2:06:28Yet, it lacks a dedicated watchdog. OM is not subject to the same independent oversight that applies to the rest of government, including agencies with far narrower missions and far less influence. And that is not just my opinion.
▶ 2:06:46Uh it was Representative Virginia Fox, chair of the rules committee and and uh um she has supported this idea, sponsored legislation to implement an OM inspector general in the past. Um in 2022 um for the 2023 bill, uh it is roll call, so if you want to look it up, roll call 334.
▶ 2:07:11Um it would include provisions that passed the house twice in the 117th Congress. Many of you including repres representatives Ammedday Carter Diaz Bolard Gonzalez new house rushinthaler Simpson Valadeo and chair and leaders of this subcommittee and full committee chairman Joyce and chairman Cole have voted in support of these provisions because in America no one is above the law. That should include President Trump and Russ Vote.
▶ 2:07:41Their unlawful stealing of funds promised to communities across the country is hurting workingclass, middle class, and vulnerable Americans. OM, regardless of which political party controls the White House, must play by the same rules as everyone else. And Congress must reaffirm its commitment to the idea and purpose of inspectors general as nonpartisan watchd dogss.
▶ 2:08:02The president began his administration by firing 17 inspectors general across agencies including the Department of Defense, state, housing and urban development, veterans affairs, energy and transportation. Since then, eight of those fired IG's who together oversaw $5 trillion in appropriated funds and three and a half million federal employees sued the administration and the president's own lawyers have admitted in court that they did not follow the law on firing them.
▶ 2:08:30Regardless of which party is in power, no administration should be able to fire watchdogs and evoke accountability. And an agency like OM with access to controlling every dollar that the federal government spends cannot be allowed to go with less oversight than nearly every other agency in the executive branch. Um, this amendment is an opportunity for my Republican colleagues to once again vote for this common sense good government measure.
▶ 2:08:58I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and I yield back.
▶ 2:09:03Thank the gentle lady gentleman the chairman of the full sub of the subcommittee. Mr. Joyce is recognized to respond to the amendment.
▶ 2:09:12Thank you Mr. Chairman. I oppose this amendment. OM is part of the executive office of the president of the EOP. The EOP including OM are charged with implementing the president's policies. The only offices within an agency that have a specific inspector general are the Internal Revenue Service, the National Economist's Office, and the National Security Agency. The IRS has a budget of little less than 12 billion and 100,000 employees. NSA, while classified, is estimated at 11 billion and 35,000 employees.
▶ 2:09:40OM has a budget of 129 million and 500 employees. If we're serious, we should work with our authorizers to amend the IG Act of 1978. The Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel already has responsibility for investigating and prosecuting individuals and agencies such as OM and for these reasons I encourage my colleagues to oppose this
▶ 2:10:02Thank gentlemen. Gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hoy is recognized for remarks on the amendment. Mr.
▶ 2:10:06Chairman, I rise in strong support of this uh amendment. Mr. vote uh doesn't believe that he has to follow the law. We've heard a lot of talk about waste, fraud, and abuse.
▶ 2:10:29This is an agency whose leader says the constitutional law as found by the Supreme Court is not correct and I'm not going to follow it. And we don't want an inspector general saying, "Uh, Mr.
▶ 2:10:47Director, what you're doing is illegal, an undermining of the separation of Is the vote going to be we don't want an inspector general determining whether the director of OM, one of the most powerful people in our government, can without consequence break the law.
▶ 2:11:18Is that what your no vote is going to say with respect to this amendment? If so, again, as I said in my opening statement, our democracy is in trouble because to simply mouth the words, we need to get rid of waste, fraud, and abuse with which all of us agree.
▶ 2:11:44And then to turn down an overseer for somebody who has some of the greatest power to hurt people and yes to help people in our country
▶ 2:11:58is unfathomable. vote yes on this check, which all of you, if this were a would have said, "Well, of course." But luckily in the last administration, we had an OM director who respected the who believed the Congress was in fact the
▶ 2:12:28passer of laws of statutes that needed to be followed not voluntarily, but because they were the law. Vote yes on this amendment. Thank gentlemen. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentle lady from Connecticut is recognized for one minute to close.
▶ 2:12:57Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I I I think it's it's interesting to note that there are 74 agencies that have um uh inspectors general and we're now looking at an agency that has an oversized role uh in the in in the spending of federal dollars.
▶ 2:13:16It's also I think important to know that when we and I say we I say I and in a bipartisan way uh just a few years ago required the uh transparency and accountability of aortionments as how and when the money is taxpayers dollars is being spent. Uh that passed uh Mr.
▶ 2:13:36vote uh eradicated that effort until the court said that he had to go back and deal with posting the information and telling us what was being spent, not being spent, and being accountable and transparent. Uh, and now that they have to put that website back back up, this is a, as I said in in in in my remarks, an agency that has control over every single dollar that the federal government is spending and it has no watchdog.
▶ 2:14:06That makes no sense uh, at all. And to add to that, this has been bipartisan legislation introduced by a Republican member, a senior Republican member, Congresswoman Virginia Fox. And so many, including the ranking of the the chair of the subcommittee and the chair of the full committee voted for an IG for OM. I there is this is not gotcha.
▶ 2:14:36This is not anything else but transparency uh and not the opakqueness in which Mr. Vote tries to deal today. But OM needs to have a watchdog and I'm proud to propose this amendment. I really am. Uh I you know I voted to create an OM inspector general when Democrats control the house. I did a portionment when Democrats were in uh in in in in uh heading uh the administration etc.
▶ 2:15:05Please join in moving this policy forward again today. I urge my colleagues to support it. I thank you.
▶ 2:15:13Thank gentle lady. The questions now on the amendment offered by the gentle lady from Connecticut. All those in favor say
▶ 2:15:21All those opposed say no.
▶ 2:15:24Opinion of the chair. The nos have it.
▶ 2:15:27Roll call has been requested.
▶ 2:15:30Sufficient number of hands been raised. Recorded. uh vote for a recorded vote. clerk will call the role.
▶ 2:15:40Mr. Adder Holt,
▶ 2:15:42Mr. Adder Holt, no. Mr. Agular.
▶ 2:15:46Mr. Aguilar. I Mr. Alford. Mr. Amade.
▶ 2:15:53Mr. Ammeday. No. Mrs. Bice. Mr. Bishop. Hi.
▶ 2:15:59Mr. Bishop. I Mr. Calvert. Mr. Carter. Mr. Casease. Mr. Casease. I Mr. Sisammani. Mr. Sisammani. No. Mr. Klene. Mr. Klene. No. Mr. Cloud. Mr. Klyurn.
▶ 2:16:24Mr. Klyurn. I. Mr. Clyde.
▶ 2:16:28Mr. Cole.
▶ 2:16:30Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Quay Mr. Quayar Istan.
▶ 2:16:36Mine I Mr. Lauro
▶ 2:16:40Mr. Lauro I Mr. Diaz Bolard
▶ 2:16:43Mr. Diaz Bolard no Mr. Edwards Mr. Edwards no Mr. Ellie Miss Escobar
▶ 2:16:54Miss Escobar I Mr. Espayat
▶ 2:16:57Mr. Espayot I Mr. Fleshman
▶ 2:17:00Mr. Fleshman. No. Miss Frankle. Miss Frankle. I. Mr. Franklin. Mr. Gonzalez. Mr. Gonzalez. No. Mr.
▶ 2:17:14Mr. Guest. No. Mr. Harter.
▶ 2:17:17Mr. Harter. I. Dr. Harris. Dr. Harris. No. Mrs. Henson. Mr. Hoyer.
▶ 2:17:27Mr. Hoyer. I. Mr. Ivy. I
▶ 2:17:31Mr. Ivy I Mr. Joyce
▶ 2:17:34Mr. Joyce no Miss Captor
▶ 2:17:37Miss Captor I Mr. Loa
▶ 2:17:40Mr. Loa no Miss Lee
▶ 2:17:44Miss Lee I miss Llo
▶ 2:17:46Miss Lllo no Mr. Leven
▶ 2:17:49Mr. Mr. Leven. I Miss Malloy.
▶ 2:17:53Miss Mallaloy. No. Miss McCullum.
▶ 2:17:56Miss McCullum. I Miss Ming.
▶ 2:17:59Miss Ming. I Mr. Molinar.
▶ 2:18:02Mr. Molinar. No. Mr. Moore.
▶ 2:18:05Mr. Moore. No. Mr. Morelli.
▶ 2:18:09Mr. Morelli. I. Mr. Morvan. Mr. New House.
▶ 2:18:15Mr. New House. No. Miss. Perez.
▶ 2:18:19Miss Perez. I Miss Pingri.
▶ 2:18:22Miss Pingri. I Mr. Pokean,
▶ 2:18:25Mr. Pokean. I Mr. Quigley.
▶ 2:18:29Mr. Quigley. I Mr. Rashenthaler.
▶ 2:18:33Mr. Rogers? No.
▶ 2:18:34Mr. Rogers? No. Mr. Rutherford? Mr. Rutherford? No. Mr. Simpson?
▶ 2:18:40Mr. Simpson? No. Mr. Strong?
▶ 2:18:43Mr. Strong? No. Mrs. Torres? Mrs. Torres? I. Miss Underwood. Hi.
▶ 2:18:49Miss Underwood. I Mr. Valido. Mr. Valido. No. Miss Wasserman Schultz.
▶ 2:18:57Mrs. Watson Coleman. Mrs. Watson Coleman. I Mr. Wac.
▶ 2:19:05Mr. Zinci.
▶ 2:19:07Mr. Zinci. No.
▶ 2:19:09Does any member wish to record their vote or change their vote? Gentleman from Florida. Mr. Franklin, no.
▶ 2:19:19Gentleman from California,
▶ 2:19:22Mr. Calbertt, no.
▶ 2:19:24Gentleman from Georgia,
▶ 2:19:27Mr. Clyde, no.
▶ 2:19:29Gentleman from Pennsylvania,
▶ 2:19:31Mr. Rashenthaler, no.
▶ 2:19:33Gentleman from Arkansas.
▶ 2:19:37Mr. WAC, no.
▶ 2:19:38Gentleman from Missouri.
▶ 2:19:40Mr. Alford, no.
▶ 2:19:42Gentle lady from Oklahoma.
▶ 2:19:44Mrs. Bice, no. Gentle lady. A gentleman from Texas.
▶ 2:19:48Mr. Carter. No.
▶ 2:19:49Gentle lady from Florida.
▶ 2:19:51Miss Werman Schultz. I
▶ 2:19:53gentleman from Indiana.
▶ 2:19:55Mr. Murvan. I
▶ 2:19:58Are there others wishing to change or record their vote? Clerk will tally.
▶ 2:20:50On this vote, the eyes are 28, the nose are 32, and the amendment is not Now recognize Chairman Joyce to offer Republican onblock amendment.
▶ 2:21:05Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk and I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of the
▶ 2:21:10Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman is recognized to explain his
▶ 2:21:16Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This amendment adds several new provisions uh that strengthen the FY26 bill and report, including supporting the opportunity scholarship program, prohibiting funds in the act from being used to support sister city activities between the District of Columbia and any city in China, directing the GAO to study the procurement of federally procured vehicles under the buy American trade and trade agreements act.
▶ 2:21:40uh codifying several executive orders issued by president in August, including cracking down on crime in DC, as well as ensuring all Americans have access to banking services in the United States. Codifying the president's executive order is critical. As Mayor Bowser said just last week, the presence of officers in the district has enhanced what the MPD has been able to do with this city. In fact, the mayor reported last week the carjackings are down 87% over the year in addition to homicides down 38% and robberies down 68%.
▶ 2:22:11I think we can all agree that less crime in our nation's capital is a good thing. In addition, I talked to many of you in July about the concerns I've had the debanking of lawful activities. The president signed an executive order on August 7th that prohibits politicized or unlawful debanking. This amendment codifies that EO.
▶ 2:22:28In addition, the amendment includes several priorities from Republican members, including preventing DC from being able to use funds to support sister city events with China, preventing funds from procuring vehicles by manufacturers owned by the PRC or by manufacturers that have a relationship with entities on one or more of the sanctioned lists. The unblock also considers the administration's focus on modernizing technology and prioritizing cyber security. Finally, the amendment ensures the ESG does not play a role in any type of investing or credit ratings.
▶ 2:22:59I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and I yield back.
▶ 2:23:04Thank the gentleman. The gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hoyer is recognized for remarks on the amendment.
▶ 2:23:13Other manager's amendment. We haven't done any work on this and I rise in opposition not because we haven't done any work on it but because our side opposes a number of provisions that are in Mr. Joyce's partisan uh amendment. Therefore, I rise in opposition and urge members to vote no. The amendment interferes with DC home rule once one more time.
▶ 2:23:39adding executive orders on DC to a bill even blocks the city from engaging in sister city relationships. Um obviously uh that is their judgment even if I might agree with uh the judgment as to what city they have relationship with. It overrides long-standing authorizing language that evenly allocates support for DC schools among uh public schools, public charter schools, and private school vouchers.
▶ 2:24:10Uh obviously, what this amendment does, it takes money away from public schools and gives it to voucher programs for private schools. The bill interferes with DC's laws as well, protecting individuals who receive or perform uh services for pregnancy. uh you use contraceptions in LGBT residents. Uh obviously that is a very controversial issue among us should not be in such an amendment.
▶ 2:24:37SEC language is included on climate change and its use in evaluating credit rating and bond marketing uh which many oppose includes two executive orders. One of which would potentially make it more difficult to combat money laundering and white collar crime. Another, they would make it more difficult for states to carry out bail reform, meaning poor non-violent individuals could be locked up for longer times of trial before trial.
▶ 2:25:06For these reasons, I must oppose the gentleman's amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same. And I yield back.
▶ 2:25:14I thank the gentleman. Do any other members seek recognition to speak to the onblock amendment? Uh, gentleman from West Virginia is recognized.
▶ 2:25:26Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And, um, I want to thank uh, Chairman Joyce for including my amendments specifically on ESG in this onblock amendment, which two of my amendments are included in this. And these provisions would require Security Exchange Commission to report to the committee on how credit rating agencies incorporate ESG criteria into bond evaluations, credit rating method methodologies and their effect on the public market.
▶ 2:25:55So why this is so important to me? I was previously the state treasurer of West Virginia and we were facing a downgrade in our bond rating due to factors such as the industries that we undertake, oil and gas, coal demographics, and then flooding, which just so happens to happen when it rains sometimes because we got tall mountains and hills and hollers and at the bottom of the holler when it rains it floods.
▶ 2:26:25And so all these things were affecting our bond rating, but specifically around coal, oil, and gas. These aren't things that we can necessarily change overnight, but it's a bit of an extortion racket because we're not able to go out into the free market and go find other rating agencies to do our bond rating. There's only a couple of them that you can deal with.
▶ 2:26:50Moody's S&P that are going to do the bond ratings for the state like West Virginia which I was the state treasurer of and the chief financial officer. So, we were caught in in between a rock and a hard place on this.
▶ 2:27:02And I think this is why it's so important for the states because if we don't comply with the rating agencies and what they're asking us to do in terms of the industries that are so critical to a state like West Virginia, which we reap easily a billion dollars, a quarter of our budget is from coal, oil, and gas severance taxes. It's going to cost us more money to build roads, hospitals, and schools, which we have to bond out.
▶ 2:27:28But then we're going to be taken from the other side of our pocket, which pays for things like schools and all these other types of issues that support the state government of West Virginia and many states, not just West Virginia. But I think the end of the day, the rating agencies just need to look at the fiscal health states and institutions and otherwise and just look at those factors instead of trying to force us into some political position to score political points and just do what they're meant to be
▶ 2:27:59doing in terms of raiding the fiscal health of the state like West Virginia or any other type of entity. So, thank you very much for including my um two amendments on ESG on this and uh I will be a yes and urge my colleagues vote yes. Thank you.
▶ 2:28:14Thank the gentlemen. Uh are there any additional members wishing to make comments on the amendment? Seeing none, I recognize Chairman Joyce for one minute to close. I'm sorry I missed the gentleman from Georgia. Gentleman from Georgia is recognized to make comments on the bill.
▶ 2:28:32Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise in strong support of this Republican end block amendment. I want to thank Chairman Joyce for including my amendment in this end block that would prohibit funds for the District of Columbia to be expended to carry out title one or title two of the DC law entitled Human Rights Sanctuary Amendment Act of 2022. As we all know, mepha stone is the chemical abortion drug used to starve an unborn baby of the necessary nutrients to live.
▶ 2:28:57In 2023 alone, it is estimated that Mepha Stone accounted for 63% of abortions, resulting in approximately 60 642,000 unborn babies losing their lives in 2023. In the wake of the DOS decision, proabortion advocates have been creatively exploring ways to expand abortion access and ultimately undermine strong pro-life state legislation like the laws we have in my home state of First, the Biden administration
▶ 2:29:28removed the requirement for a woman to receive mepha stone in person from a health care provider. This in-person requirement allowed providers to determine gestational age, rule out life-threatening ectopic pregnancies, or identify signs of abuse before def dispensing mphone. This change not only possesses serious medical risks to a woman, but also bypasses the pro-life state laws by permitting the interstate shipment of abortion pills.
▶ 2:29:56Second, to defend abortion providers from prosecution, liberal states have drafted shield laws which allow abortion providers to perform abortions or prescribe abortion medication to individuals in states where life is protected without legal repercussions. Currently 23 states and Washington DC have similar shield laws.
▶ 2:30:19While these shield laws remain under litigation in several states, we have the opportunity and should repeal this unjust law starting here in DC. And that's why I'm proud of my amendment to prohibit enforcement of DC's shield laws.
▶ 2:30:35My amendment would prohibit funds to the District of Columbia from being used to carry out Title One and Title Two of the Human Rights Sanctuary Amendment Act, which seeks to protect individuals and providers in DC from being held legally accountable for engaging in or providing abortion and abortion pills such as methone across state lines. The DC Act goes even further to protect gender transition and hormone pill treatment among other things.
▶ 2:31:03Specifically, Title One prohibits DC officials from cooperating with outofstate investigations or legal actions targeting these activities and allows individuals, including providers, to sue for damages if they are targeted by such out ofstate lawsuits.
▶ 2:31:19Title two requires that any outofstate subpoena seeking information or testimony must include a sworn statement confirming it is not related to these protected bodily anomaly activities before it can be enforced in DC.
▶ 2:31:35In practice, this means that DC providers who prescribe abortion pills or home or hormone therapy, even to those residing in states where these actions are restricted or illegal, they are shielded from legal consequences under DC law.
▶ 2:31:49This hits home in my home in my own district in Georgia where as a test case, a pro-life crisis pregnancy center was able to easily order abortion drugs online with no confirmation of age of the patient or the state of the pregnancy, both of which were in direct opposition to Georgia law. These drugs were shipped to them in an ominous brown envelope with a return address labeled Jane Smith. And this is the envelope right here.
▶ 2:32:22The envelope contained three small bags of white pills labeled 1, two, and three, but with no further instructions and with no explanation or warning of the consequences of ingesting the This deadly package was shipped right was shipped out of DC right here, as evidenced by the postmark from our nation's capital. And you know what the return address was? The West End Library. These purveyors of death are desperate to remain anonymous.
▶ 2:32:51Every innocent life lost to abortion is a tragedy. However, there are basic interstate legal respects that are in place for nearly every issue except this bizarre shield law to spread a woke ideology across the country where it isn't wanted.
▶ 2:33:06Our nation's capital should be protecting life and respecting state autonomy, not bypassing the law to continue a culture of death across this You know, the birth certificate of our nation, the Declaration of Independence says that life is the number one thing that must be protected and governments are instituted among men to protect these things.
▶ 2:33:30I believe these shield laws across the nation are dangerous as they empower providers to prescribe drugs which cause irreversible harm and perpetuate abuse with no accountability. These laws must be litigated and removed, but we must start by repealing DC's provision. So, I urge all my colleagues to support this common sense Republican end block, and I yield back. I thank the gentleman.
▶ 2:33:53Uh, are there other members wishing to address the Seeing none, recognize Chairman Joyce for one minute to close.
▶ 2:34:03Thank you. I in support of the That was an eloquent statement. Question is on the amendment. All those in favor say I. I. All those oppose say
▶ 2:34:19The opinion of the chair, the eyes have
▶ 2:34:27Recorded vote has been requested. All those in favor raise their hand. Sufficient number in support. Recorded vote is ordered. The clerk will call the role. Mr. Adder Holt I
▶ 2:34:38Mr. Adderhalt I Mr. Aguilar
▶ 2:34:42Mr. Alford
▶ 2:34:43Mr. Alford I Mr. Amday
▶ 2:34:46Mr. Amday I Mrs. Bice Mr. Bishop
▶ 2:34:51Mr. Bishop No Mr. Calbertt
▶ 2:34:54Mr. Calbert I Mr. Carter
▶ 2:34:56Mr. Carter I Mr. Casease
▶ 2:34:59Mr. Casease no Mr. Sisammani
▶ 2:35:03Mr. Sisammani I Mr. Klene.
▶ 2:35:06Mr. Klene. I Mr. Cloud.
▶ 2:35:09Mr. Klyurn.
▶ 2:35:12Mr. Klyurn. No. Mr. Clyde.
▶ 2:35:14Mr. Clyde. I Mr. Cole.
▶ 2:35:17Mr. Cole. I Mr. Quayar.
▶ 2:35:20Mr. Quayar. No. Miss Dean. Miss Dean. No. Mr. Lauro.
▶ 2:35:27Mr. Lauro. No. Mr. Diaz Bolard.
▶ 2:35:30Mr. Diaz Bolard. I Mr. Edwards. Mr. Ellie, Miss Escobar, Miss Escobar, No Mr.
▶ 2:35:42Mr. Espayot. No, Mr. Fleshman. Miss Frankle, Miss Frankle, no. Mr. Franklin, Mr. Franklin, I. Mr. Gonzalez, Mr. Gonzalez, I. Mr. Guest. Mr. Guest. I Mr. Harter.
▶ 2:35:59Mr. Harter. No. Dr. Harris. Dr. Harris. I Mrs. Henson. Mr. Hoyer.
▶ 2:36:08Mr. Hoyer. No. Mr. Ivy.
▶ 2:36:11Mr. Ivy. No. Mr. Joyce.
▶ 2:36:15Mr. Joyce. I. Miss Captor. No.
▶ 2:36:17Miss Captor. No. Mr. Loa. Miss Lee. Miss Lee. No. Miss. Let
▶ 2:36:26Miss Llo. I. Mr. Leven.
▶ 2:36:28Mr. Leven. No. Miss Mallaloy.
▶ 2:36:31Miss Mallaloy. No, Miss McCullum.
▶ 2:36:34Miss McCullum. No, Miss Ming.
▶ 2:36:37Miss Ming. No, Mr. Molinar.
▶ 2:36:40Mr. Molinar. I Mr. Moore.
▶ 2:36:43Mr. Moore. I Mr. Morelli.
▶ 2:36:47Mr. Morelli. No. Mr. Murvan. Mr. New House.
▶ 2:36:53Mr. New House. I. Miss. Perez. Miss. Perez. No. Miss Pingri. Miss Pingri. No. Mr. Pokean. Mr. Pokean. No. Mr. Quigley. Mr. Quigley. No. Mr. Rashenthaler. Mr. Rashenthaler. I Mr. Rogers. Mr. Rogers. I. Mr. Rutherford. Mr. Rutherford. I. Mr. Simpson. Mr. Simpson. I. Mr. Strong. Mr. Strong. I. Mrs. Torres. Mrs. Torres.
▶ 2:37:24No. Miss Underwood. Miss Underwood. No. Mr. Valado. Mr. Valido. I. Miss Wasserman Schultz. Mrs. Watson Coleman. Mrs. Watson Coleman. No. Mr. Wac.
▶ 2:37:39Mr. Zinci.
▶ 2:37:41Mr. Zinci. I.
▶ 2:37:44Are there members wishing to record or change their vote? Gentle lady from
▶ 2:37:51Recorded as a no.
▶ 2:37:52Gentle ladies recorded as a no.
▶ 2:37:56No. On I for Miss Mallaloy. Gentle lady from Oklahoma.
▶ 2:38:02Mrs. Bice. I
▶ 2:38:04gentleman from Tennessee.
▶ 2:38:08Mr. Fleshman. I
▶ 2:38:09gentleman from North Carolina.
▶ 2:38:11Mr. Edwards. I
▶ 2:38:12gentleman from New York.
▶ 2:38:14Mr. Loa. I
▶ 2:38:16gentleman from California.
▶ 2:38:24Mr. Agular. No. I don't know what uh does a gentleman need a little more time.
▶ 2:38:34Gentle lady from Florida.
▶ 2:38:37That's always a good thing. Okay. Do we have uh I'm sorry, gentleman from Indiana.
▶ 2:38:48Are there other members wishing to record or change their vote?
▶ 2:38:54Seeing none, oh, excuse me. Uh, gentleman from Arkansas,
▶ 2:38:58Mr. WC I.
▶ 2:39:00Again, are there other members wishing to change or record their votes? Seeing none, the clerk will tally.
▶ 2:39:40On this vote, the eyes are 32, the nose are 28, and the amendment is adopted. and gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hoyer is recognized for an amendment.
▶ 2:39:57Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh,
▶ 2:40:02I uh I have an amendment at the desk and I ask unanimous consent that the reading thereof be dispensed with.
▶ 2:40:09Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentleman's recognized for remarks on his amendment.
▶ 2:40:15Um, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I offer an amendment which incorporates this premise of parody uh of raises of COLA adjustments of cost of living adjustments between the military and the civilian employees of the federal government.
▶ 2:40:35The military obviously has additional uh compensation beyond their salaries, but uh we do not relate to that. We don't address that at all. This would provide a 3.3% raise uh for federal employees and a.5% adjustment for cost of living in whatever jurisdiction the federal employee is employed.
▶ 2:41:02And as you know, 80% of those are are employed in places other than Washington DC or its suburban Um the uh average pay cola adjustment over the years has been somewhere in the neighborhood of 3%. The president again proposed in his budget 3.8% uh adjustment for the military personnel.
▶ 2:41:30Now I want you to all think about two people who are doing exactly the same thing in the Pentagon. One is a military and one is a civilian. Uh both uh comparable ability and uh uh comparable workload and they will be paid desperately. One of the things that we heard a lot of talk about is inflation. Big issue in the campaign.
▶ 2:42:00big issue in campaigns before that. Uh obviously inflation affected everybody across the board and you said it was way too high and people were struggling. I think that was true.
▶ 2:42:15Um this uh follows the assertion by Russell vote of He said, "We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected when they wake up in the morning. We want them to not want to go to work because they are increasingly viewed as the villains.
▶ 2:42:44We want to put them in trauma." Now, ladies and gentlemen, I some of you have been employers, maybe all all of us at some point in time have been employers. And you want a workplace uh that reflects an environment which people want to work for work in.
▶ 2:43:03If we make it so that federal employees don't want to work, if we reduced uh as we have and the objective is hundreds of thousands of reductions in federal employees and then what has happened in almost every agency they've turned around and they need to hire back. There are a number of programs that people took voluntarily. Some felt it was not voluntary. They were going to get either ripped or they were going to take an early out.
▶ 2:43:33Uh but I offer this amendment to provide civil civilian employees a 3.8% actually is 3.3% is adjusted by a half a point for location. That increase could maintain would maintain the long-standing principle of pay parity between federal military and civilian employees.
▶ 2:43:51I mentioned that because obviously that is what the president concluded was a reasonable adjustment for cost of Well, civilian employees are not exempt from that inflation. Donald Trump and Russell Vote instituted a pay freeze when they came in.
▶ 2:44:15These are hard-working, patriotic professionals who often forego more lucrative opportunities in the private sector because they want to serve the American people, no matter who is president. There was a statute that was passed under George HW Bush which set up a commission to determine what the raise ought to be uh or the cola adjustment ought to be.
▶ 2:44:42That commission has always reported under Republican and Democratic commissions a substantially higher adjustment in pay than has been given. That is because they determined to be comparable comparable not more than not less than but comparable to their private sector responsibilities. people who have equal uh that the raise should be X.
▶ 2:45:12It has never been adhered to and it has constantly grown till it's now well close to 30% of an adjustment to make comparable the pay of public sector federal employees with their private sector counterparts. As I said, they're often working side by side with military service members um who are under the president's proposal.
▶ 2:45:41Uh he is now adjusted, by the way, as you know, in August, consistent with law, to a 1% COLA adjustment for federal employees. Now, none of you believe that inflation is just at 1%. You said you were going to bring it down, but it hasn't gotten to 1%.
▶ 2:46:00For Federal employees ought to be compensated fairly for their work, not short changed, not demeaned by how vote is doing it and insulted. The real villains are those who serve their own interests and not the public interest.
▶ 2:46:18Uh I don't mean the private sector interests but I mean public employees or elected officials who serve their own interests who are getting very wealthy doing that who the very wealthy in America who got a big tax cut. These folks didn't get a big tax cut.
▶ 2:46:42I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this uh so that we can recruit and retain absolutely essential people to make sure that our government is operating efficiently, effectively and will make America great. I yield back.
▶ 2:47:07Thank gentlemen. Chairman Joyce is recognized to respond to the amendment.
▶ 2:47:12I oppose the gentleman's amendment. Do other members seek recognition to speak to the amendment? Uh, gentleman from Maryland. Uh, the other gentleman from Maryland is recognized to respond to the amendment.
▶ 2:47:28There's even more gentleman from Maryland, but uh, not in the room right now, but thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I rise in support of the amendment and um, you know, want to thank the gentleman for uh, offering the amendment and his leadership on this issue.
▶ 2:47:42I I'll keep it short, but one and because we're going to talk about this on some of these other amendments during the day, too, but one of the points I want to make um for us to understand is that, you know, we have a lot of outstanding people working in the federal government uh that are being pushed out of the work right now. And the challenge is making sure that we we have a strong enough uh staff uh in the federal government to do the work and do it the right way.
▶ 2:48:09And so one of the things that we might want to do as sort of a mental test is ask each other as members of Congress, would we treat our employees the same way that that we're treating the federal government employees right now? Uh, and one of the points I want to make there is that when I first became a staffer on the Hill in 1987, almost 40 years, I know I look younger than that, but um, you know, I made $25,000 a year.
▶ 2:48:38And, you know, if salaries hadn't increased to keep pace, you wouldn't have the fantastic staff that you have right now. And one of the other pieces to that too is that we have to understand that there's competition that comes from with the private sector. A lot of the staff that you have right now could leave you right now and make more money in the private sector, but they choose to stay in part because they love what they do. They love the public service, but we're also paying them enough so they can stay.
▶ 2:49:07One of the reasons I left the first time was I got married and started having kids, so I had to go. Um, I had six, but you know that it really had to go to the private sector for that. But, but the point I'm trying to make is that we're not going to maintain the talent that we need to get the work done. And that's especially true when we get to the science and tech side.
▶ 2:49:28And I think frankly the the Trump administration's attack on science and tech within the government whether it's NIH or the CDC or whatever NASA and some of these other agencies is really going to be damaging to the United States in the long run especially in our competition with China. And as AI rolls out and some of these other uh you know quantum computing and the like we need to make sure we've got people in the government who know what that is and how to work with it.
▶ 2:49:55Two years ago, before I thought this was we were going to end up at a place like this, I was calling for us to create a special uh agency where we could develop the science and tech talent because we were already having trouble attracting it to the federal government. Whereas our competition with China, they don't have any trouble attracting the the talent. They just push it into there. And they're outdoing us by by tfold easily. Exponentially more people, more talent that they're pushing into these positions than the United States is.
▶ 2:50:24We're not going to be able to maintain this and keep pace with China if we keep pushing the talent away. The Chicago Bulls were great because they had Michael Jordan and Scotty Pippen. We're cutting them right now from from the team based on what we're doing. Last point on this front, um, and I do hope we'll consider this. Some of the things that we're cutting people from doing, for example, my father died from Alzheimer's. I'm a cancer survivor.
▶ 2:50:51We're cutting people who are doing the research to find cures for these kind of illnesses. This sort of increase would help to keep those people on on board. Um although we pushed many of them out already, the new problem we're going to have is how do we go to young people now and say, you know, you ought to come work for the federal government. We could fire you at an instant, even if you're doing an outstanding work.
▶ 2:51:15We could fire you even though you're in the middle of potentially life-saving research that's making a difference or could make a difference to the American people in a way that we might not even know or understand yet. And we're going to say when we fire you that you were doing a bad job and you deserve to get fired no matter what a great job you were doing. We need to reconsider the track that we're on. This amendment is a good first step in that direction. I urge my colleagues to support it.
▶ 2:51:43Thank gentlemen. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hoyer is recognized for one minute to close. Ladies and gentlemen of this committee, your purchasing power of your salary is now 40% less than it was in We run because we want this job. We like this job. We think it's doing something for our country.
▶ 2:52:15that will not be guaranteed on the vacancies that we are creating and the people that we need. I would urge you to understand this is not a raise. This is keeping the purchasing power of our employees just as it would be for us.
▶ 2:52:42That is good fiscal policy. It is good personnel policy and it's good policy not only for this institution but also for those who work to make America a better place. Vote for this. Do the right thing for the people who serve our country. Thank the gentleman.
▶ 2:53:11The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Maryland. All those in favor say I.
▶ 2:53:17All those opposed say no.
▶ 2:53:20Opinion of the chair. The nose have it.
▶ 2:53:23Roll call has been requested.
▶ 2:53:27Thank you. Sufficient number of uh uh in support. A recorded vote is ordered. The clerk will call the role.
▶ 2:53:35Mr. Adhalt.
▶ 2:53:38Mr. Aguilar.
▶ 2:53:40Mr. Aguilar. I Mr. Alford Mr. Alford No Mr. Ammedday
▶ 2:53:45Mr. Amday No Mrs. Bice
▶ 2:53:49Mr. Bishop
▶ 2:53:51Mr. Bishop I Mr. Calbertt
▶ 2:53:54Mr. Calvert no Mr. Carter
▶ 2:53:56Mr. Carter no Mr. Casease Mr. Sisammani Mr. Sisammani no Mr. Klene
▶ 2:54:05Mr. Klene no Mr. Cloud
▶ 2:54:09Mr. Mr. Klyurn.
▶ 2:54:11Mr. Klyber. I Mr. Clyde.
▶ 2:54:14Mr. Clyde. No. Mr. Cole.
▶ 2:54:16Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Quayar.
▶ 2:54:19Mr. Quayar. I. Miss Dean.
▶ 2:54:21Miss Dean. I. Mr. Lauro.
▶ 2:54:24Mr. Lauro. I. Mr. Diaz Bolard.
▶ 2:54:28Mr. Diaz Bolard. No. Mr. Edwards. Mr. Elsie. Miss Escobar. Mr. Espayat.
▶ 2:54:40Miss Escobar. I Mr. Espayat.
▶ 2:54:45Mr. Fleshman.
▶ 2:54:46Mr. Fleshman. No. Miss Frankle.
▶ 2:54:49Miss Frankle. I Mr. Franklin.
▶ 2:54:52Mr. Franklin. No. Mr. Gonzalez. Mr. Guest.
▶ 2:54:58Mr. Guest. No. Mr. Harter.
▶ 2:55:00Mr. Harter. I. Dr. Harris.
▶ 2:55:04Mrs. Henson. Mr. Hoyer.
▶ 2:55:09Mr. Hoyer. I Mr. Ivy.
▶ 2:55:11Mr. Ivy. I Mr. Joyce.
▶ 2:55:14Mr. Joyce. No, Miss Captor.
▶ 2:55:17Miss Captor. I Mr. Loa. Miss Lee. Miss Lee. I Miss Lllo.
▶ 2:55:27Miss Llo. No. Mr. Levan.
▶ 2:55:29Mr. Lean. I Miss Mallaloy.
▶ 2:55:32Miss Mallaloy. No. Miss McCullum.
▶ 2:55:35Miss McCullum. I Miss Ming.
▶ 2:55:37Miss Ming. I Mr. Molinar Mr. Molinar. No, Mr. Moore.
▶ 2:55:43Mr. Moore. No, Mr. Morelli.
▶ 2:55:45Mr. Morelli. I Mr. Mvan.
▶ 2:55:48Mr. Morvan. I Mr. New House.
▶ 2:55:51Mr. New House. No. Miss Perez.
▶ 2:55:53Miss Perez. I Miss Pingri.
▶ 2:55:56Miss Pingri. I Mr. Pokean.
▶ 2:55:59Mr. Pokean. I Mr. Quigley.
▶ 2:56:01Mr. Quigley. I Mr. Rashenthaler.
▶ 2:56:04Mr. Rashenthaler. No, Mr. Rogers. Mr. Rogers. No, Mr. Rutherford. Mr. Rutherford. No, Mr. Simpson. Mr. Simpson. No, Mr. Strong. Mr. Strong. No, Mrs. Torres.
▶ 2:56:20Mrs. Torres. I, Miss Underwood,
▶ 2:56:23Mr. Underwood. I, Mr. Valido,
▶ 2:56:25Mr. Valido. No, Miss Washerman Schultz.
▶ 2:56:28Miss Washerman Schultz. I Mrs. Watson
▶ 2:56:32Mrs. Watson Coleman. I Mr. WAC. Mr. Wac, no. Mr. Zinci, Mr. Zinci, no.
▶ 2:56:39Does any member wish to record their vote or change their vote? Gentleman from New York.
▶ 2:56:44I don't think the gentleman is recorded.
▶ 2:56:48Mr. Espat, I
▶ 2:56:49gentleman from Texas.
▶ 2:56:53Mr. Cloud. No.
▶ 2:56:55Gentleman from Hawaii.
▶ 2:56:57Mr. Casease. I
▶ 2:56:58gentle lady from Oklahoma.
▶ 2:57:00Mrs. Bice. No.
▶ 2:57:02Gentleman from Alabama. Mr. Adhalt, no.
▶ 2:57:08Gentleman from North Carolina.
▶ 2:57:10Mr. Edwards, no.
▶ 2:57:12Gentleman from Texas.
▶ 2:57:14Mr. Gonzalez, no.
▶ 2:57:16Gentleman from Maryland.
▶ 2:57:18Dr. Harris, no.
▶ 2:57:20Did we got the gentleman from New York?
▶ 2:57:23Mr. Lo,
▶ 2:57:24Mr. Loa, no.
▶ 2:57:27Are there others wishing to record or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tally.
▶ 2:58:10On this vote, the eyes are 28, the nose are 33. The amendment is not adopted. Um, sir, Uh, gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hoyer, is recognized for an amendment. Mr. Chairman to debate.
▶ 2:58:40Thank you. So I offer number three.
▶ 2:58:43Okay. And gentleman asks that the reading be dispensed with.
▶ 2:58:46Yes. I ask unanimous consent.
▶ 2:58:48Without objection. The reading of the amendment dispensed with. The gentleman's recognized for remarks on his amendment. Ladies and gentlemen, the United States has long had one of, if not the best civil service uh in the one of the least political uh most talented uh people hired on merit.
▶ 2:59:19Uh this amendment ensures that that will This amendment ensures that the Trump administration cannot use any funds in this bill to reclassify federal workers as at will or uh subject to being fired for no That includes the schedule G category, a backdoor way to not only hire more political
▶ 2:59:49appointees, but also to pay them higher wages, which is ironic in light of the vote that we just had on the COLA adjustment for federal OM director, as I've said so many times, has said that uh he wants the bureaucrats that, and by that, he uses bureaucrats as an epithet, not as a um will not want to come to work.
▶ 3:00:15This administration has fired hundreds of thousands of federal workers. Now, they've called it early out uh taking uh leave uh for some six months with pay and then retiring. There are all sorts of ways that they have been uh both induced and forced uh to retire.
▶ 3:00:45They've also been subjected to political loyalty tests. A number of employees were let go because they were inconsistent with the administration's views. Is that the kind of civil service you We're going to win the presidency one day.
▶ 3:01:07If you look at the history in the last 75 years gone back and forth every 12 years or eight years or four So if we create a civil service that can be removed at will, we will have the spoils system reinstated in the federal government.
▶ 3:01:31This committee has no business aiding Trump and Voit in that illegal effort to vilify federal workers and dismantle our civil service. Now, the president and others have proposed some reforms. I think we need reform. It takes us too long to hire people. It's very difficult to get rid of non-performing employees.
▶ 3:01:55Uh we ought to make sure that the American public is convinced uh and committed to removing people who are not earning their pay. But those who are earn are earning their pay ought to be protected from arbitrary capriccious and partisan removal. I therefore ask each of you to support this. I don't think you will probably on your your side on the Republican side of the aisle.
▶ 3:02:24Uh but if you don't, it will undermine a civil service system that frankly is the envy of the world. Please vote yes on this amendment and keep the civil service system a non-political merit-based
▶ 3:02:44Thank the gentleman. The gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Joyce, recognized to respond to the amendment.
▶ 3:02:51Thank you, chairman. I oppose this amendment from the ranking member.
▶ 3:02:59Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Ivy's recognized.
▶ 3:03:05Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll be brief. Um I I do want to ask my Republican colleagues though what the vision is going forward. I mean, are we really going to have the massive turnover every four to eight years of the the civil service? Um because if you do it that way um there's going to be enormous disruption. There's going to be an enormous loss of talent every four years.
▶ 3:03:29There's going to be politicization that gets injected into this in a way that we don't want to have and especially in in certain types of policy positions. I know there's concern that you know President Trump had voiced previously about you know the the civil service not supporting his agenda and the like. Um, you know, I'll set that to the side for the moment.
▶ 3:03:51Uh, I've got my views about it, but you know, at the end of the day, I think we want to make sure we have people there who are talented, capable, and experienced and have institutional knowledge. We don't want to turn it over every four years. But that's the system you're creating. Back to the analogy about what we would want for ourselves. You know, when we when you lose the majority here in the House, your committee st you don't you don't lose your entire committee staff. You don't you get to keep some of them.
▶ 3:04:17You have to reduce the the the the total number that you've got, but you get to keep some people there. And the reason you want to keep some people there is they have talent, they have knowledge, they have institutional history, and can help continue to move things moving forward in the kind of way that we need. Give you continuity and um allow us to do the work that we need to get done in the right way. And the relationships that get built are important, too. You're throwing that out the the window with the schedule left move.
▶ 3:04:46It it really is enormously damaging to an extraordinary system that we set up. And you know, Congressman Hoyer mentioned this too, but I I've had a chance to go visit some countries in other um other parts of the world. And um we are the envy of of the world with respect to to this type of civil service, places where they have corruption. They can't they keep fighting to figure out how to get rid of it and they can't do it. They have a lack of talent. They keep trying to find ways to bring the talent in and they can't do it.
▶ 3:05:16We've got all of those things in place right now and I know there are some adjustments that the Trump administration wanted to make, but the medax is not the way to go. The chainsaw definitely is not the right way to go. Let's make sure we keep a system in place that allows the government to do good work that the people need to get done because they have the talent, the commitment, and the expertise to do it. And with that, I yield back.
▶ 3:05:40Thank you, gentlemen. Are there other members wishing to address the Seeing none, the gentleman's recognized for one minute to close.
▶ 3:05:49Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, as I said, if we want to return to the spoil systems, we can do that. But as the gentleman from Maryland said, that will mean every four years or every eight years. um whether it's even of the same party, you're going to have a political You're going to have a loss of memory.
▶ 3:06:17Uh and you're going to have uh employees who are not going to tell their bosses, "I don't think that works." They're going to salute as so many are doing today. Yes, sir. I may not agree with you, but you're the president of the United States. Yes, Very frankly, I want my staff to give me their honest opinion, not a yes, sir.
▶ 3:06:44And uh frankly, if they disagree with me and I disagree with them, I'm going to prevail because I'm elected. That's the difference between us. Federal employees not elected. They are selected on a merit basis. If you don't think it's a merit basis, make sure it is I'm for that. Uh but don't subject our civil service to the politization that will be inevitable if we don't adopt this amendment.
▶ 3:07:16Thank the gentleman. The questions now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Maryland. All those in favor say I.
▶ 3:07:24All those opposed say no.
▶ 3:07:27The opinion of the chair, the nos have Recorded vote has been requested. Sufficient support has been shown. The clerk will call the role.
▶ 3:07:37Mr. Adhalt. Mr. Aguular. Mr. Agular. I. Mr. Alford. Mr. Alford. No. Mr. Ammedday. Mrs. Bice. Mrs. Bice. No. Mr. Bishop.
▶ 3:07:53Mr. Bishop. I. Mr. Calbertt.
▶ 3:07:56Mr. Calbert. No. Mr. Carter.
▶ 3:07:59Mr. Carter. No. Mr. Casease Mr. Sisammani Mr. Sisammani No Mr. Klene Mr. Cloud Mr. Cloud No Mr. Klyber
▶ 3:08:13Mr. Klyber I Mr. Clyde
▶ 3:08:16Mr. Clyde no Mr. Cole
▶ 3:08:20Mr. Cole no Mr. Quayar Dean Irro
▶ 3:08:28Mr. Buro. I Mr. Diaz Bolard.
▶ 3:08:31Mr. Diaz Bolard. No. Mr. Edwards.
▶ 3:08:34Mr. Edwards. No. Mr. Ellie.
▶ 3:08:38Miss Escobar.
▶ 3:08:40Miss Escobar. I Mr. Espayat.
▶ 3:08:42Mr. Espayat. I. Mr. Fleshman.
▶ 3:08:46Mr. Fleshman. No. Miss. Frankle. Miss. Frankle. I. Mr. Franklin. Mr. Franklin. No. Mr. Gonzalez. Mr. Gonzalez. No. Mr. Guest. Mr. Guest. No. Mr. Harter. Hi.
▶ 3:08:59Mr. Harter. I Dr. Harris. Dr. Harris. No. Mrs. Henson. Mr. Hoyer.
▶ 3:09:06Mr. Hoyer. I Mr. Ivy.
▶ 3:09:08Mr. Ivy. I Mr. Joyce.
▶ 3:09:12Mr. Joyce. No. Miss Captor.
▶ 3:09:15Miss Captor. I. Mr. Loa. Miss Lee. Miss Lee. I. Miss Llo. Miss Llo. No. Mr. Leven. Mr. 11. I Miss Mallaloy. Miss Malloy. No, Miss McCullum.
▶ 3:09:34Miss McCullum. I Miss Ming.
▶ 3:09:37Miss Ming. I Mr. Molinar.
▶ 3:09:40Mr. Molinar. No. Mr. Moore.
▶ 3:09:42Mr. Moore. No. Mr. Morelli.
▶ 3:09:45Mr. Morelli. I Mr. Morvan. Mr. New House. Mr. New House. No. Miss Miss Pingri. Miss Pingry I Mr. Pokean Mr. Pokean I Mr. Quigley Mr. Quigley I Mr. Rashenthaler Mr. Rashenthaler no Mr. Rogers Mr. Rogers no Mr. Rutherford Mr. Rutherford no Mr. Simpson Mr. Simpson no Mr.
▶ 3:10:14Strong Mr. Strong no Mrs. Torres Mrs. Torres. I Miss Underwood. Miss Underwood. Miss Underwood. I Mr. Valado. Mr. Valido. No. Miss Wasserman Schultz. Miss Wasserman Schultz. I Mrs. Watson Coleman. Mrs. Watson Coleman. I Mr. WAC. Mr. Wac. No. Mr. Zinci. Mr. Zinci. No.
▶ 3:10:45Are there members wishing to record or change our vote? Gentleman from Nevada. Mr. Ammedday. No.
▶ 3:10:54Um, gentleman
▶ 3:10:56Mr. Adder Holt.
▶ 3:10:57Mr. Adder Holt.
▶ 3:10:58Oh, gentleman from Alabama.
▶ 3:11:01Mr. Adder Holt. No,
▶ 3:11:06he is recorded.
▶ 3:11:08He is.
▶ 3:11:08He He is
▶ 3:11:09Okay. Gentle lady from Oklahoma.
▶ 3:11:11Uh, she is
▶ 3:11:12been recorded. Okay. Gentleman from
▶ 3:11:17He's there. If if you've been recorded, please sit
▶ 3:11:23Gentleman from Texas.
▶ 3:11:25Mr. Elsie, no.
▶ 3:11:27Gentleman from New York.
▶ 3:11:28Mr. Loa, no.
▶ 3:11:30Gentleman from Texas.
▶ 3:11:33Mr. Quayer. I.
▶ 3:11:35Gentleman from Indiana.
▶ 3:11:36Mr. Murvan. I.
▶ 3:11:38A gentle lady from the state of
▶ 3:11:40Miss Perez. I
▶ 3:11:41a gentleman from Hawaii.
▶ 3:11:44Mr. Casease. Hi.
▶ 3:11:46Are there others wishing to vote or change their vote?
▶ 3:11:52Seeing none, clerk will tally.
▶ 3:12:32Uh on this vote the eyes are 28, the nose are 33 and the amendment is not adopted. Uh we will hold at this point. Obviously votes are underway and I think the next debate or two may be relatively lengthy. So want to don't want to have to get into it and then pull back from it. So I would just ask you after the vote series please return as quickly as possible and as soon as we have a quorum we'll try and begin. Thank you.
▶ 4:32:31Committee will reconvene and gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hoyer's recognized for an amendment.
▶ 4:32:41Thank you very much.
▶ 4:32:42Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman, uh, this amendment,
▶ 4:32:49would gentleman like the reading dispensed with?
▶ 4:32:51I I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed.
▶ 4:32:55Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman's recognized for remarks on his amendment.
▶ 4:33:02Thank you very much. This amendment u adds back the money that was cut from uh which means it's a $2.4 billion addition to IRS. And one might say that's absurd. We where do we get $2.4 billion? That's a good question.
▶ 4:33:27And the answer to that question lay in the 302b allocations made to all the subcommittees. And I suggest it was made without a recognition of the adverse impact that shortch changing this subcommittee would have on its ability to fund IRS in light of the fact that IRS and particularly enforcement is a approximately 80% of this bill.
▶ 4:33:59So the option I have is to offer an amendment and try to argue as to why we need not cut IRS. I dare say there is nobody in this room who understands the consequences of cutting 2.4 billion or 44% of the IRS budget. Their personnel has already been substantially reduced.
▶ 4:34:30I've got a couple of charts here. You may be interested. Some of them are a little complicated, but I want to show them to you. First of all, Marcy, can I Well, you I I you don't have to help me. I just don't want to block you, but I did.
▶ 4:34:49Uh, what this shows is three things. First of all, it shows the number of returns filed. The number of returns filed uh since uh has increased uh some 40 million to over 260 million. to 270 uh from 236.
▶ 4:35:19The budget uh in real numbers adjusted for inflation has decreased almost every I see you're riveted. The number of tax returns is represented by the blue which means that the tax returns have going to 270 million.
▶ 4:35:49The budget in real terms has been reduced and the budget adjusted for inflation has been reduced even further. A reporter who covers this for a financial enterprise said this is the largest cut in IRS since 2011.
▶ 4:36:13For any of us in this room to expect that the IRS can do its job with this kind of cut is irrational. Period. Not subject to argument.
▶ 4:36:31So that what will inevitably happen and what uh some folks have opined that we will lose somewhere in the neighborhood over the next decade $2 trillion. It's an interesting figure because we're going to also lose trillions of dollars as a result of the uh irresponsible bill that we passed without funding.
▶ 4:37:01I would remind you that when we passed the Affordable Care Act, it was all paid for. All paid for. Let me show you the uh next one. These are staffing cuts.
▶ 4:37:22It shows that as uh this represents a staff cut or one way or another voluntary leaving through some of the programs that we had, Vera and others um or being rifted. that was the new employees that were hired under the IRA or some other way of removing employees.
▶ 4:37:48We've had a 50% reduction one way or another or we will have it's 25,000 now and that's that's a a fourth and the objective is to reach Now, any of you who have run an enterprise where you've got people and you've hired people and you put them on to accomplish an objective, you know that if you've done right,
▶ 4:38:19cutting 50% will simply reduce the ability of them to perform their job. Now, I told you last year, and I won't show you that chart again, we've gone from auditing the most difficult accounts, and obviously they're the people who have the most money and most complicated returns, some of which are thousands of pages.
▶ 4:38:42We've gone from 9.4% down to six ten of a percent in checking. Why? Takes a lot of time. They don't have the personnel to do it. And there we are. Now, none of you are interested in what I have to say. I can tell that. But this is not partisan.
▶ 4:39:05This is a critically component for every one of you that sits on any subcommittee in this room. You increased defense spending substantially by $150 billion. You did that because you was you thought it was necessary to do the job of securing our country.
▶ 4:39:34I suggest to you that this amendment is no less important in securing the security of our country, the reduction of our debt, and the reduction of our deficit.
▶ 4:39:50and making sure that the average guy or gal doesn't have to pay so much because the wealthy of wealthiest of us, whether we be individuals or corporate, are not paying their fair share. You're all going to vote no. I can tell And Mr. Chairman, I will tell you, it's really frustrating. This is a very serious issue. I talked to four commissioners.
▶ 4:40:22Two worked uh one for George HW Bush, one for Trump reading in his first term, uh one for Oiden, Obama and Biden, and one uh worked for Clinton, I All four of them said this is not All four Republicans, Democrats, every Secretary of Treasury has
▶ 4:40:53opined that this is not possible. This of course is not going to happen because the majority of us at some point in time will conclude that it is not I regret seriously that we don't really address these issues in any other than a partisan sense with all of you committed to voting no on something that you know as men and women who have to manage your own
▶ 4:41:23budgets is impossible to implement consistent with the interest of the United States of America. It's sad that we've fallen to this Yes sir.
▶ 4:41:42With that
▶ 4:41:44with that I'll withdraw the amendment.
▶ 4:41:49Okay. That case thank the gentleman and the gentleman from Maryland Mr. Hoyer is recognized for an amendment.
▶ 4:42:12this is the last amendment I'm going to offer that will be rejected because I'm not going to offer anymore. I'm also sad about that.
▶ 4:42:23Would the gentleman like the
▶ 4:42:24I I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed. Without objection, the reading of the amendment's dispensed with and the gentleman's recognized for remarks on his amendment.
▶ 4:42:34I urge my colleagues to support this for now and for the future. This amendment will require all federal law enforcement officers and members of the National Guard deployed in Washington DC to wear a body camera to keep their faces gun covered and to display their name, agency, and badge number if that is relevant.
▶ 4:43:00Police departments across the country maintain those practices, including the Metropolitan Police. If federal agents are to do the Metropolitan Police Department's job with the Metropolitan Police, they need to follow its policies. Instead, over the past weeks, we have seen videos of federal agents wearing masks, refusing to identify themselves, and using excessive force while making arrests. I want DC to be safer. I want all our cities to be safer.
▶ 4:43:30We all do. the president uh has exercised a a power that I don't believe any president outside of the civil rights activity has exercised. Eisenhower did obviously in the 50s and 60s.
▶ 4:43:50This is a culmination of years of a Republican tax not only on home rule but the residents of the nation's capital it themselves and they deserve better. Mr. President, I mean Mr. Chairman, this uh deals with a situation reminiscent, frankly, of when Pinocha was the dictator.
▶ 4:44:22And we saw people picked up off the streets and taken away as we did at at Tus University some months ago in unmarked cars with unidentified Uh and a dangerous implication for our country and our values.
▶ 4:44:45Again, uh this is a serious issue that we're confronting in terms of not just short-term what's happening today, but long-term policy as to how the military of the United States of America is going to be used.
▶ 4:45:04Is it going to be turned into a law enforcement agency or is it going to continue to serve the interests of the American people in confronting threats from abroad or from enemies?
▶ 4:45:22Again, I referenced uh uh January 6th uh where there was a great hesitancy to use the National Guard by the president of the United States. Even after the urging of the speaker of the House of Representatives, Mr.
▶ 4:45:43He and I were together along with Mitch and we were all asking that the insurrection that was underway would be confronted. It was not. Now, briefly, crime in the District of Columbia is the lowest point it's been in 30 It's down 35%.
▶ 4:46:10Homicides down 32%, robberies down 39%, armed carjackings down 53%. Armed assault down 27%. if there was no emergency yesterday or the day before, there is certainly no emergency today. Should we get to crime? Should we have given that billion dollars to DC to invest in crime fighting? Yes, we should have. Should we increase law enforcement? Yes, we should have.
▶ 4:46:40Not a Democrat in this committee, I think, maybe I speak too broadly, is for defunding the police as you allege all the time. But I pointed out Finen and other areas where law enforcement has been cut, not only in this bill, but in other bills. So, Mr.
▶ 4:46:56Chairman, I urge the passage of this amendment so that the citizens of the District of Columbia and the visitors to the District of Columbia will know who is confronting them, who is trying to put them uh under arrest uh and uh can identify them uh as Americans expect to be able to do so and have their law enforcement act responsibly and with uh transparency. And I yield back the balance of my time.
▶ 4:47:27Thank the gentleman. The chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Joyce, is recognized to respond to the amendment.
▶ 4:47:35Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would oppose the ranking members amendment, but I would offer that I'm uncertain why we continue to let protesters wear masks, but our law enforcement cannot. Why is protecting the identity of those who want to destroy our cities and infrastructure more important than to protect those Americans who want to preserve law and order in our Are there other members wishing to express? Gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Ivy is recognized to address the
▶ 4:48:04Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, well, I know the amendment's going to pass, but I ask my colleagues to keep a few things in mind as this bill goes forward because there are some dangerous implications that can spin out of this depending on how it goes. Um, a couple of the things that concern me are National Guard troops aren't trained to be law enforcement officers on the street. So, what that means is, for example, um, they're not trained with respect to chain of custody.
▶ 4:48:33So, if they seize evidence on some circumstance, they're not supposed to be doing this under posy commitatus, but we just saw from the LA judge that they they actually have been doing this. So breaking the chain of custody means there's a piece of evidence that doesn't come in. The case get thrown out. Could be a serious case, could be a raper, a murder. Second version of that is Miranda. Uh if they're stopping people and they're not trained on Miranda because as a as a soldier, you don't have to do that.
▶ 4:49:01Um but if they mess that up, a confession could get thrown out. a a damaging statement could get thrown out in a homicide or a rape or a murder case or an armed robbery case. These are serious issues that we need to think about. One of the other ones I' I'd urge you to think through as this goes forward is the use of force. Um, you know, the force continuum is something that police officers are trained in.
▶ 4:49:27In other words, you know, incident doesn't go straight from zero to lethal force right off the bat. you move through and you use less dangerous non-lethal methods if you can to diffuse the situation. So, police officers carry pepper spray. Um, for example, tasers is another one. All police departments have that. DC has that. The guys I've seen on the street with the National Guard do not have that. It's zero or 100.
▶ 4:49:57They've got M4s. By the way, with the M4, just keep this in mind. Uh, cuz I saw these guys. as I was out with my wife having dinner at the warf and there were about 30 of them in different groups moving around and they didn't all have M4s. Some of them had uh 9 millimeter handguns, but many of them had this weapon that's great on the battlefield, but not so great in this context because on the war if there were a lot of people strolling around, it was a nice day.
▶ 4:50:26And my first thought was the throughand through shot. If they had to shoot somebody, even for a legitimate reason, the bullet goes right through a human body and keeps going. And anybody standing behind that is going to get taken out. and they keep moving fast enough that they can take out other people, but they don't that, you know, they're not really trained uh to to use it in that way because it's not they're not trained to work on a civil street context in a restaurant. They're supposed to be using this in in a different context.
▶ 4:50:56Those are a couple of the things I have concerns about. You know, the amendment talks about um wearing body cameras. We uh implemented that when I was the state's attorney in Prince George's County. It turned out to be enormously successful and useful. Same thing with respect to the cameras. Not having faces covered ended up being a great management tool for the police because they could see what officers were doing. You could praise them if they were doing it right. If they weren't doing it right, you could retrain them or in some instances fire them.
▶ 4:51:26We don't have that ability here with some of these law enforcement officers who are wearing masks and no identifying information on their shirts. In fact, if they come up to you and say, "Um, I'm going to arrest you." You don't even know if they're actually law enforcement. So, the one I saw that really bothered me, it was a woman who was picked up, uh, I think she was a student at TUS. They get out of the van, four guys surround her, they're in black, faces covered, no identifying information, and they force her into a van.
▶ 4:51:57How did she know, or any of the people on the street know that that wasn't a gang rape about to happen? Let's at least get basic things like identifying information on the on the uh the clothing that they're wearing so we can avoid scenarios like that. Last point on this, I know that there's a lot of arguments about making the these streets safer. Any crime is bad. We always want to lower it to the extent we can.
▶ 4:52:26But if to the extent this is an honest effort to do that, here's my request. Don't do something for 30 or 60 days because you're not going to fix crime whether it's DC or Memphis or in a city in a red state. It's not going to happen. We've had it since K and enable. We're going to continue to have it. If you really want to do something though, get permanent law enforcement on the staff. Hire the cops.
▶ 4:52:54DC had $1.1 billion that we're still holding that they want to use to hire cops. Give them the money. Having these guys on the streets costs a million dollars a day. Use that money to hire cops. I sponsored a bill Wesley Hunt and I last year. It's called recruit and retain. Takes the money, puts it in so they can hire more cops. So whether it's DC or whatever city can hire more and get them on the streets. Right now they're doing that with ICE. $50,000 signing bonus. Can we do that with regular cops?
▶ 4:53:23Can we do that with people who are going to be on our streets making them safer? you know, let's just be careful about how we go about this. I know there's a lot of political heat in the moment, but there's a long-term consequences to how we do this. And if we do it right, we can really continue to push crime down. If we do it wrong, it's going to lead to bad situations. And with that, I yield
▶ 4:53:45Thank the gentleman. Gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Quigley's recognized for remarks on the amendment.
▶ 4:53:53Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to add uh to the remarks of my seatmate and colleague, Mr. Ivy. When it comes to Chicago, I don't know anyone says everything's fine. We don't need to do anything. But if we're serious about this, let's recognize a few points. First of all, uh in terms of actual crime rates and violent crime, there are red states and red cities that have higher crime rates.
▶ 4:54:21Why aren't we even talking about those in terms of, oh, we have to go help out? Second, when it comes to those numbers, the amount of money it took to deploy in Los Angeles, Chicago could hire 2,000 police officers. We used to have we used to spend money on cop grants here, right? Under President Clinton and Republican administrations.
▶ 4:54:49We passed appropriations for cop grants. You want to have a serious talk about crime in Chicago? I will meet you at State Madison because we need help. Right. The state's attorney would be glad to get the assistance we're talking about. She's doing a lot of very unique things. Also, the former Secretary of Education, Arie Duncan, runs Chicago, has antiviolence programs that act as interceptors.
▶ 4:55:19those that uh get in between potential acts of violence because they know people. They're from the neighborhoods and they have proven to reduce crime in those areas. So, look, I want to get serious about this. There's a way to do it that's not so extreme. It's not so temporary. There's no way you could afford to have the National Guard out there as long as we're talking about.
▶ 4:55:42But to have national guards being sent from red states and some cases red cities with higher crime rates and send them to my city, I don't take it as a serious effort to address the issue. If you want to do that, we're more than ready.
▶ 4:56:02Thank gentlemen. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment?
▶ 4:56:07Seeing none, the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close. I think uh Mr. Ivy well stated the consequences of this action and of this precedent. There are five of you who are members who represent the states who have sent National Guard troops to DC.
▶ 4:56:34I ask you to think about what you would think if a blue state like Maryland sent National Guard uh to West Virginia, to Ohio, to Louisiana, to Mississippi, or to Tennessee. I would like you to think about the precedent uh that this sets for how the military is to be used.
▶ 4:57:00contrary to the uh desires of the overwhelming majority of military leaders in this country because they know as Mr. Ivy pointed out they're not trained to do this and they realize there is trouble in doing things that they are not trained to do.
▶ 4:57:23So in that context, I I would hope you would uh at least put some caution to this effort by making this transparency a reality. I urge an no, excuse me, a yes vote on the amendment.
▶ 4:57:42Thanks, gentlemen. The questions now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Maryland. All those in favor say I.
▶ 4:57:49All those opposed say no.
▶ 4:57:51No. the opinion of the chair of the nose have it and the amendment is not accepted. The gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Bishop is recognized for an amendment.
▶ 4:58:06Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk and I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of it.
▶ 4:58:13Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman's recognized for remarks on his amendment. I'm offering an amendment that would increase federal funding to strengthen the security and integrity of our election systems and investments that it's not just necessary but is urgent.
▶ 4:58:32Election security grants are not partisan and they should be apolitical since Republicans and Democrats benefit alike when everyone can trust that their vote was counted fairly and freely.
▶ 4:58:48My amendment would restore this critical funding by increasing the mark for election security grants from 15 million to $75 million with the pay for coming from office of management and budget which recently received $100 million in the reconciliation bill. This means that even upon adoption of my amendment, the agency would not see a decrease in funds this year.
▶ 4:59:19We all know that there can be and that there are vulnerabilities in the technologies, the infrastructure and the processes that we are allowing to administer our elections. And we need to keep adapting as hackers and other malign actors utilize this new technology and new strategies.
▶ 4:59:41We have taken bipartisan steps in the past to support state and local efforts to secure our democratic institutions and we need to revive this. Congress appropriated $425 million for election security funding as recently as FY2020.
▶ 5:00:02However, that figure has dropped to a poulry $15 million in the fullear continuing appropriations bill that we passed earlier this year and is repeated in this bill. Federal funding plays a pivotal role in supporting the health and resilience of our nation's election systems, which are run by local governments in everyone's district.
▶ 5:00:27These funds would allow jurisdictions that are already strapped for cash to replace aging voting machines with secure voter verifiable systems to conduct robust post-election audits to ensure accuracy.
▶ 5:00:44to strengthen cyber security measures, to train election officials and poll workers, and implement best practices to guard against interference from outside Upgrading election infrastructure is not a one-time fix, but it's an ongoing The average lifespan of electronic voting machines is 10 to 20 years.
▶ 5:01:11And in many jurisdictions, they have even older systems than that. As of 2024, 28 states were using voting equipment that's 10 years old or older.
▶ 5:01:26Alarmingly, this includes discontinued and unsupported equipment in 12 of those Outdated machines often rely on obsolete software that's difficult to maintain and far more vulnerable to cyber attacks. Without sustained funding, counties, especially in rural communities, struggle to replace this aging equipment.
▶ 5:01:55We must secure every jurisdiction, regardless of size, regardless of budget. We've got to assure that they have the tools needed to protect the vote. By adopting this amendment, we will send a clear message that Congress takes seriously our responsibility to protect the integrity of our elections.
▶ 5:02:22So, I ask this committee to please support my amendment. And with that, I yield back. I thank the gentleman. The chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Joyce, is recognized to respond to the amendment.
▶ 5:02:36Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I oppose the
▶ 5:02:51Uh, Mr. Chairman, I support this The federal government paid nothing for federal elections, that is our members of the United States Senate or presidential elections until we pass the election assistance commission in 2002. Um Bob Nay from Ohio uh was the SP a Republican from Ohio sponsored that bill and I co-sponsored that bill.
▶ 5:03:21It was the first time the federal government had participated in helping local election boards and states to fund elections. Uh we then sent grants to the state in the amount of $3.2 billion that was signed by President Bush. It was signed because uh he wanted to see the election system run properly and believed that we had a responsibility to participate in that.
▶ 5:03:52Uh I would urge uh us to support this amendment given the fact that we if needed could backfill. As Mr. Bishop pointed out the appropriations committee was bypassed and a h 100red million was given to the OM in the reconciliation bill. So it's not as if they don't have resources. They do.
▶ 5:04:20After this amendment, they'll have $50 million left. Added to the 100 gives them 150, which is some 30 million over what they have this year. So this is not an amendment which will either kill OM or break the The figure that has been provided by this committee will provide some 300 some $30,000
▶ 5:04:50uh to 50 states uh if you took it even. Obviously that won't happen which will mean that some small states will get pennies. Uh while we lament the fact that the election system is not as well-run, as open, as as we would like it.
▶ 5:05:11So that I would just simply suggest to you that what the gentleman's amendment does is to ensure that the federal government pays its part of running elections in this
▶ 5:05:27Thank the gentleman. Are there other members wishing to address the Seeing none, the gentleman from Georgia is recognized for one minute to close. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will keep my closing short and sweet.
▶ 5:05:44Elections are the foundation of our and now is not the time to be complacent in the face of external threats that have not disappeared and are in fact evolving. Please support my amendment to restore election security grants funding to a much more reasonable level that is in line with fiscal years 2022 and 2023.
▶ 5:06:15That I ask support for the amendment and I yield back.
▶ 5:06:21Thank the gentleman. The questions now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia. All those in favor say I.
▶ 5:06:27I. All those opposed say no.
▶ 5:06:30Opinion of the chair. The nose have it. Roll call has been requested. Sufficient short uh support being shown. The clerk will call the role.
▶ 5:06:42Mr. Adhalt. Mr. Aguilar.
▶ 5:06:46Mr. Aguilar. I Mr. Alford. Mr. Alfred. No. Mr. Ammedday.
▶ 5:06:51Mr. Ammeday. No. Mrs. Bice.
▶ 5:06:54Mrs. Bice. No. Mr. Bishop.
▶ 5:06:57Mr. Bishop I. Mr. Calbertt. Mr. Calbertt. No. Mr. Carter. Mr. Carter. No. Mr. Casease. Mr. Sisammani. Mr. Ciscomani. No. Mr.
▶ 5:07:09Mr. Klene. No. Mr. Cloud. Mr. Cloud. No. Mr. Klyurn.
▶ 5:07:14Mr. Klyburn. I. Mr. Clyde. Mr. Cole.
▶ 5:07:18Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Quayar. Mr. Quayar. I. Miss Dean. Miss Dean. I. Mr. Deloro. Mr. Diaz Bolard. Mr. Diaz Bolard. No. Mr. Edwards. Mr. Edwards. No. Mr. Elzie. Mr. Elsie. No. Mr. Miss Escobar. Miss Escobar. I. Mr. Espayat. Mr. Fleshman.
▶ 5:07:44Mr. Fleshman. No. Miss. Frankle.
▶ 5:07:46Miss. Frank. I. Mr. Franklin. Mr. Franklin. No. Mr. Gonzalez. Mr. Gonzalez. No. Mr. Guest.
▶ 5:07:53Mr. Guest. No. Mr. Harter. I
▶ 5:07:56Mr. Harter. I Dr. Harris.
▶ 5:07:58Dr. Harris. No, Mrs. Henson.
▶ 5:08:01Mr. Hoyer.
▶ 5:08:03Mr. Hoyer. I Mr. Ivy.
▶ 5:08:06Mr. Ivy. I Mr. Joyce.
▶ 5:08:08Mr. Joyce. No. Miss Captor.
▶ 5:08:10Miss Captor. I Mr. Loa.
▶ 5:08:13Mr. Loa. No. Miss Lee.
▶ 5:08:15Miss Lee. I. Miss. Let
▶ 5:08:18Miss Llo. No. Mr. Levan.
▶ 5:08:20Mr. Leven. I. Miss Mallaloy.
▶ 5:08:23Miss Mallaloy. No. Miss. McCullum. Hi.
▶ 5:08:25Miss McCullum. I Miss Ming.
▶ 5:08:27Miss Ming. I Mr. Molinar. No.
▶ 5:08:29Mr. Molinar. No. Mr. Moore. Mr. Moore. No. Mr. Morelli. Hi.
▶ 5:08:34Mr. Morelli. I Mr. Morvan. Hi.
▶ 5:08:36Mr. Murvan. I Mr. New House.
▶ 5:08:38Mr. New House. No. Miss. Perez. Miss. Perez. I. Miss. Pingri.
▶ 5:08:43Miss Pingri. I Mr. Pokean. Mr. Pokean. I Mr. Quigley. Mr. Quigley. I Mr.
▶ 5:08:51Mr. Rashenthaler. No. Mr. Rogers. Mr. Rogers, no. Mr. Rutherford, Mr. Rutherford, no. Mr. Simpson, Mr. Simpson, no. Mr. Strong, Mr. Strong, no. Mrs. Torres,
▶ 5:09:02Mrs. Torres, I Miss Underwood,
▶ 5:09:05Miss Underwood, I Mr. Ballo. Miss Wasserman Schultz, Miss Wasserman Schultz. I Mrs. Watson Coleman. Mrs. Watson Coleman. I Mr. Wac Mr. Wack. No. Mr. Zinci. Are there any members wishing to record or change their vote? Gentle lady from The gentle lady is not recorded.
▶ 5:09:28Mr. Loro I.
▶ 5:09:31Are there any other members wishing to record or change their vote?
▶ 5:09:38The gentleman is not recorded.
▶ 5:09:42Mr. Zinci. No.
▶ 5:09:44Are there any other members wishing to record or change their vote? The gentleman from California wish to record a vote. No.
▶ 5:09:55Mr. Valado, no.
▶ 5:09:56Gentleman from Hawaii.
▶ 5:09:59Mr. Case I.
▶ 5:10:04Cruz seems to be straggling in on this vote. Are there any others? I don't want to close it too soon
▶ 5:10:10at all. Uh, gentleman from Alabama and the gentleman from
▶ 5:10:19Mr. Adder Holt. No,
▶ 5:10:20gentleman from Nevada. Is he recorded?
▶ 5:10:26All right. Seeing no other members wishing to record or change their vote, the clerks will tally.
▶ 5:11:03On this vote, the eyes are 27, the nose are 33. The amendment is not adopted. Are there further amendments and discussions? I see there are a gentleman from Texas, Mr. Quayar, is recognized for an amendment.
▶ 5:11:19I have an amendment at the desk and I respectfully ask that we dispense with a
▶ 5:11:23Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman's recognized for remarks on his amendment.
▶ 5:11:29Chairman, this is the uh amendment that I'll offer and withdraw. But uh let me um first say that under article 1 section 9 clause 7 of the constitution uh congress has the power of the appropriations. Uh we appropriate but we also have the power to provide oversight once we provide those dollars.
▶ 5:11:50I would venture to say that if you look at the uh websites that every agency has and I took out some of the um uh some of the websites that talk about performance measures that I would say that under the 2010 law that we passed where it calls for a performance plan where it calls for measures uh that none of us have looked at that you know uh this is something that I did a little bit after the 2010
▶ 5:12:21law that we passed but after that we don't get to see the performance measures and I can say that even in the subcommittees none of us well I shouldn't say none but I would say most of us have not seen those performance measures so if we are going to do our job by providing oversight that is if you provide $1 how do we know that that $1 is getting the best bang for the do uh for that dollar that we provided uh what this amendment does is is
▶ 5:12:51basically looks at those measures and make sure that we have the right measurements. Make sure performance measure. It looks at any outdated uh duplicative rules and regulations. Looks for cost savings and doesn't have any gotcha type of language. It's very straightforward uh what our uh responsibility as members of Congress.
▶ 5:13:16If you look at some of the measures uh that we have here, the agencies are the only ones that put those measures before. So think about it, uh they're actually measuring themselves. So they do they provided any performance that looks at at the um uh at the results. A lot of them are measurements of activities.
▶ 5:13:41uh if you look at some of them specifically and I don't want to call any of the agencies out but if you look at it the measures the quote key measures that they have is how much money that they put in a program seriously that's a light item that is not a measurement uh how much money they spend on a per on a program is not a performance measure they're not measuring activity I mean they're not measuring results they're just putting nine items
▶ 5:14:11and say, "Yeah, we we met 100% of that amount that we put in." So again, members, I I would ask that somewhere down the line, and I'm going to offer and withdraw this amendment, but somewhere down the line, we have to go back to article one uh section 9 clause 7 and say we appropriate, but we also provide the oversight, which is our job.
▶ 5:14:35Uh a lot of times when we look at the uh what we provide oversight is what comes out in the newspaper in the media or there's a problem over here then we focus on that but we're not doing the systematic performance uh uh measurement of results like we should be doing.
▶ 5:14:52All we're asking is that those measures are provided to us uh periodically so we can look at them and then decide if that's the right measure and how much of a level of a measurement we should have. Uh with that uh Mr. Chairman I offer and withdraw my amendment.
▶ 5:15:13I thank the gentleman. The gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Pokean is recognized for an amendment.
▶ 5:15:20Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk. I would ask that it be um considered.
▶ 5:15:26Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman's recognized for remarks on his amendment.
▶ 5:15:32Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um so, I have an amendment uh that would restore collective bargaining rights for some federal workers that have lost it under uh this administration's illegal actions against those workers. Um, I think many of us on Monday uh spent Labor Day uh either visiting something that was celebrating workers or a labor festival in our districts. And uh this is at the core of of workers rights is the ability to collectively bargain.
▶ 5:15:59The rights to bargain for your salary, for your benefits, for your safety conditions and other aspects of work. And this has been um integral to the the workplace workplaces that we have in federal government. and the progress that we have in in having those services offered for our constituents.
▶ 5:16:19Unfortunately, with this administration taking right out of project 2025, uh they illegally got rid of collective bargaining rights for many thousands and thousands of federal employees. Union representation is essential to ensure that there's fair treatment, workplace safety, and due process for federal workers, of which, by the way, a third of federal workers are also veterans.
▶ 5:16:45Uh this is something that we're directly attacking veterans and their ability to have a wage to support their family when the president does something like this that's illegal. Uh this would simply uh make sure that we have real collaboration between management, employees like we have always had. that has worked well.
▶ 5:17:05Um, but any further attacks on employees rights really accelerates the hollowing out of our vital public institutions and these federal employees have dedicated their lives to public service. So, um, this amendment simply restores those rights. If you went to a labor festival and you meant it, uh, you vote yes. Um, because we need to make sure those workers have their rights again. Um but regardless, this is something that I think we all know uh has worked well within federal government.
▶ 5:17:35Uh this change has been disruptive and uh it would make the best sense, I think, Mr. Chairman, to uh have us move forward and and pass this amendment. I yield back.
▶ 5:17:48Thank the gentleman. Uh the chairman of subcommittee, Mr. Joyce, is recognized to respond to the gentleman's amendment.
▶ 5:17:55Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The president has used his authority granted to him under the Civil Service Reform Act to end collective bargaining agencies with missions related to national security. In doing so, the president is acknowledging the important work that these agencies do and seeks to ensure that these agencies do that work efficiently. For too long, Americans have dealt with government agencies in the national security space that have had lackluster performance. Instead of focusing on their mission, these agencies instead focus on collective bargaining.
▶ 5:18:22This action will ensure Americans can trust the vital government services will not be impacted by labor A gentleman uh from Maryland, Mr. Hoyer, is recognized to respond to the
▶ 5:18:43Well, I'm in favor of the amendment. I'm in favor of the amendment. An adversely impacting um labor uh is not adversely impacting our national security. I would ask the a rhetorical question of the chairman. Can he tell me what agency is not involved in national security?
▶ 5:19:09And I say that rhetorically because I believe the president would opine uh that every agency has an impact on the national Uh we had that debate when this was initially discussed and previously this president had talked about uh the national security and exempting people from the right to organize.
▶ 5:19:32The right to organize and bargain collectively um is is a common uh fact in almost every democracy in the world. Not in not not in non-democracies but in democracies.
▶ 5:19:47Uh it gives working men and women many of whom voted for your side of the uh the right to have the ability to ensure a wage and working conditions that are sustainable to a quality of life.
▶ 5:20:11using agencies which are clearly not DoD, clearly not CIA or other national security agencies um to justify undermining labor rights and the right to organize, the right to bargain collectively is a roose. pursued by those who do not believe in collective bargaining.
▶ 5:20:41And for that reason, I strongly support the gentleman's amendment and urge that it be adopted.
▶ 5:20:48Thanks, gentlemen. The gentle lady from Florida, Miss Werman Schultz, is recognized to respond to the amendment.
▶ 5:20:58Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I I rise in strong support of this amendment to protect the collective bargaining rights of more than half a million American civil servants. When the United States government signs a contract, it ought to respect the terms. It's really simple. Anything less is a clear affront to the rule of law that undercuts our national credibility.
▶ 5:21:20And there's nothing more critical to workers rights than the ability to unite in solidarity and negotiate collectively with their employer, especially under this administration, which has been eager to break promises to our federal workforce and flagrantly violate the law binding contracts ratified by the workforce are essential. And it's clear to me that this administration won't be satisfied with just ripping away the hard-earned rights of federal employees. They're just the first in line.
▶ 5:21:45Trump and Republicans want to gut unions and silence the voices of working people so their billionaire corporate friends always get the final say. We're just coming out of the Labor Day weekend. And while my Republican colleagues may think that's just an occasion for grilling hamburgers or online shopping, it's actually a day to commemorate the role of organized labor in improving conditions for all American workers.
▶ 5:22:07If we allow this administration to arbitrarily vacate their obligations to civil servants who dedicated their lives to our country, undermining their retirement, health care, child care, and more, it will harm all workers, union or non-union. Most importantly, it will mean higher costs and declining quality of government services for all Americans. You think people will line up to work at Social Security and the VA once Trump takes away all the benefits for employees now that they've canled union contracts that were negotiated and signed.
▶ 5:22:38Americans can't afford the consequences of the Republican purge of public servants, which is why I proudly support this amendment and thank the gentleman for offering it and I yield
▶ 5:22:48Thank you, gentle lady. Gentle lady from Minnesota is recognized to address the
▶ 5:22:54Thank you, uh, Mr. Chair, Monday was Labor Day, and Labor Day means that workers can organize to do a couple of things. Make sure that they have safe working conditions. Make sure that they're paid a fair wage and that everybody is paid a fair wage regardless of gender or race or creed. All those things used to happen in this country. and to have uh the ability to negotiate for benefits.
▶ 5:23:25When we have a labor union at a federal level, a state level, or a local level, it allows the public and us to see how employees are being treated. It gives them an opportunity to vent their grievances, especially with us as members of Congress. this thing about a national emergency.
▶ 5:23:45You know, we write waiverss into laws and there's waivers sometimes in contracts so that in case of a national emergency or a national disaster or something that's going on that's really going to impact our nation that that there's a way in which things can happen. Just think of every time that there's a a chance that something could happen with the railroad workers, president can intervene. Usually it gets settled before that, but the president can intervene. I served on a city council.
▶ 5:24:15I served on a state legislature. We never once through our unions and our police and our fire department ever worried that a crime victim wouldn't have help or that a fire wouldn't get put out. Let's vote for um this amendment and let's let's protect an open democracy in which workers can organize and we can know what's going on at a federal level. I yield back.
▶ 5:24:44Thank gentle lady. The gentleman from Indiana is recognized. Mr. Mvin Murvan, excuse me, is recognized to address the
▶ 5:24:52The Trump administration has repeatedly attacked collective bargaining rights for our dedicated federal workers. In my district, I have heard countless stories from federal workers who have lost their jobs, are afraid of being fired, and face intimidation and uh daily at work. For example, I heard from Lisa, who along with her entire division at the CDC disease intervention and response branch in the division of the STD prevention, received a riff notice that leaves her unemployed.
▶ 5:25:19Instead of being able to work at a job she loves to promote public health, Lisa, who uh was fired only a year before her retirement age, is now struggling to make ends meet. Unions have historically given federal employees the tools to fight for fair wages, safe working environments, access to affordable health care plans, and sound retirements. I'm strongly opposed to the president's executive order that strips away these collective bargaining rights for federal workers.
▶ 5:25:44The anti-worker action does not stop here, but poses further threats to workers across the country. I've spent my entire career as an elected official believing that every worker should have the ability to form and join a union. I will continue fighting every day to protect collective bargaining for all workers in Indiana's first congressional district. I support this amendment to prevent the implementation of this harmful executive order and urge the committee to work together to ensure that every worker has the right to collectively bargain.
▶ 5:26:15And with that, I yield back.
▶ 5:26:17Thank the gentleman. Gentle lady from Texas, Miss Escobar, is recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 5:26:24Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I I rise to support this pretty simple amendment. In my view, we as my colleague from Minnesota just mentioned, we literally just celebrated Labor Day and I hope that all of us have had the opportunity to visit with many of the unions that we all have in our districts.
▶ 5:26:48I visit with the unions in my district on a regular basis and this is such an easy amendment to support. When you look at what unions have accomplished, the 5day work week, that's because of unions. The 40-hour work week, that's because of unions. Hardworking Americans getting time off, that's because of unions. So, unions are as American as you can get.
▶ 5:27:19And I will tell you in in speaking with a lot of my own union members when they bring up issues, the only thing that really gives them hope that they will have a fighting chance at working in a harassmentfree workplace or a safe workplace is the representation that they get from their union leaders and the ability for their union leaders to sit down with an employer and raise issues.
▶ 5:27:49They generally feel like they are fighting the big fight just to get some pretty fundamental things. But there's power in numbers. And that's what's so wonderful about unions. If we care about work hardworking Americans, if we care about the working class, we should want to empower them so that they can fight for safe workplaces, for fair wages, for harassment free environments.
▶ 5:28:19It's really, really easy. This is an opportunity for us in a bipartisan way to tell American workers, we stand with you. We we know you feel like a little guy, but we are with you. Congress is with you. I enthusiastically support this amendment because I enthusiastically support our unions.
▶ 5:28:46Thank the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Ivy, is recognized to address the
▶ 5:28:52Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I join in what my colleagues have said previously, especially with respect to the positive impact that unions have brought. This executive order strips 445,000 US workers of their union rights uh, in one fell swoop. And it's Yeah, I know there's a comment about national security a little earlier, but you know, we we've got people in unions that are doing janitorial service work who've been stripped of their union rights.
▶ 5:29:21Clearly, they're not doing any kind of national security work and there are thousands of people across the board who were doing the work that obviously has nothing to do with national security. Now, I'll say to my colleagues, this is another one of those where Congress walks away from uh the obligation it would have to if you want to empower the president to do something like this, that's one thing, but we haven't done that. So, with respect to contracts, because it is a contract and as my colleague from Florida pointed out, that ought to be respected.
▶ 5:29:48um where we do regular procurement contracts at the federal government level. We wrote in there the opportunity for the government to terminate for a convenience. That's a term that's used as a state of art. We can terminate the agreement if we want to do it. If we decide it's in the best interest of the United States to terminate that contract, you might have to pay damages for having done it if it's done unfairly, but there's still the power to do that.
▶ 5:30:12We did not require that kind of language to be written into these collective bargaining agreements and it's not there and that's the obvious reason that the president's using this fake workaround by calling everything a national uh security issue uh to try and get around that. Last point I'll make is this.
▶ 5:30:31One of the things that this sort of union protection provides is it allows people like say for example USDA investigators the ability to know that if they come forward and raise the issue that something's not doing being done correctly the messenger doesn't get shot that that sort of information could can get used to correct the problem whether it's VA office for example and perhaps there are ongoing cases with respect to caregiving issues where that's not being addressed in the right Okay, we
▶ 5:31:01don't want to discourage the ability of people to come forward and do that, but that's exactly what we're doing by stripping them of the union rights. And when you look at that in the context of what's being done to, for example, Department of Justice prosecutors who've been forced out and FBI, for example, who've been forced it out of their positions because of cases they worked on previously. Well, if it's going to happen to them, it's going to happen to folks like this, too.
▶ 5:31:27And it won't be lost on other federal workers who are looking around and seeing that everything's being put at risk. They're being stripped of any kind of protections to do the job that they might want to try and do to continue in public service. Why would we take that away? Why don't we want to have that continue provide those protections so we know we're getting the best services and the best information? Because sometimes we need to hear the bad information. Sometimes we need to hear the bad news because if you don't know there's a problem, you can't fix the problem.
▶ 5:31:57So, I hope you'll support this amendment. I think it makes sense. Certainly, all the things that unions have done to protect people's rights. Absolutely. But just because this makes sense for protecting the American people and making sure that we get the benefit of the work that they do from the position and the skills that they have, which is all that we really want from these sorts of services. And with that, I yield back. Thank gentlemen. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment?
▶ 5:32:32If not, then the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close on his
▶ 5:32:38Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um I I think Mr. Ivy said a lot what I was just going to say, which is look, this is not national security positions. I want to ask the subcommittee chair to be put in an awkward spot and answer what national security position at Interior or the EPA or the FDA or Treasury or USDA or the FCC or many of these agencies that clearly this would apply to because he was a very decent person today with a decent vote and I appreciate that. Thank you.
▶ 5:33:06Um but I do think uh this is against uh everything that collective bargaining rights are about. They're they're bargained between management and labor. one person, any one person, a president, a king, a demagogue, anyone cannot singularly get rid of these. Um, this isn't Russia or China. This isn't Turk Menistan. And yet, luckily, we're not Trumpistan yet. Uh, but, uh, for now, we should respect the workers who work for the federal government, and you do so by supporting this amendment. And I yield back.
▶ 5:33:36I like that.
▶ 5:33:39I like I thank the gentleman and uh questions now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin. All those in favor say I.
▶ 5:33:51All those opposed say no.
▶ 5:33:54Opinion of the chair. The nos have it. Roll call has been requested. Sufficient support has been shown. U. So a recorded vote is ordered. The clerk will call the
▶ 5:34:06Mr. Adhalt.
▶ 5:34:08Mr. Aguilar.
▶ 5:34:10Mr. Aguular. I Mr. Alford. Mr. Alford. No. Mr. Ammedday. Mr. Amade. No. Mrs. Bice. Mrs. Bice. No. Mr. Bishop.
▶ 5:34:20Mr. Bishop. I. Mr. Calbertt.
▶ 5:34:22Mr. Calbert. No. Mr. Carter.
▶ 5:34:25Mr. Carter. No. Mr. Casease.
▶ 5:34:27Mr. Casease. I. Mr. Sisammani.
▶ 5:34:29Thank you,
▶ 5:34:31Mr. Klein. Mr. Klein. No. Mr. Cloud.
▶ 5:34:34Mr. Cloud. No. Mr. Klyber.
▶ 5:34:36Mr. Klyurn. I Mr. Clyde.
▶ 5:34:40Mr. Cole.
▶ 5:34:41Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Quayar.
▶ 5:34:44Mr. Quaar. I. Miss Dean. Miss Dean. I. Mr. Deloro. Mr. Loro. I. Mr. Diaz Bolard. Mr. Diaz Balart. No. Mr. Edwards. Mr. Edwards. No. Mr. Elzie. Mr. Elz. No. Miss. Escobar. Miss Escobar. I. Mr. Espayat. Mr. Fleshman. Miss Frankle. Miss Frankle. I Mr. Franklin. Mr. Franklin. No. Mr. Gonzalez. Mr. Gonzalez. No. Mr. Guest. Mr. Guest. No. Mr. Harter.
▶ 5:35:15Dr. Harris. Mrs. Henson. Mr. Hoyer.
▶ 5:35:22Mr. Hoyer. I Mr. Ivy.
▶ 5:35:24Mr. Ivy. I Mr. Joyce.
▶ 5:35:27Mr. Joyce. No. Miss Captor.
▶ 5:35:29Mr. Loa. Mr. Loa I Miss Lee Miss Lelo Miss Llo No Mr. Lean Mr. Leven I Miss Malloy Miss Mallaloy no Miss McCullum
▶ 5:35:44Miss McCullum I Miss Ming Miss Ming I Mr. Molinar Mr. Molinar no Mr. Moore Mr. Moore no Mr. Mlli
▶ 5:35:54Mr. Melli I Mr. Morvan
▶ 5:35:56Mr. Morvan I Mr. New House
▶ 5:35:59Mr. Mr. New House. No. Miss Perez. Miss Perez. I Miss Pingri. Miss Pingri. I Mr. Pokean. Mr. Pokean. I Mr. Quigley. Mr. Quigley. I. Mr. Rashenthaler.
▶ 5:36:11Mr. Rashenthaler. No. Mr. Rogers. Mr. Rogers. No. Mr. Rutherford. Mr. Rutherford. No. Mr. Simpson. Mr. Simpson. No. Mr. Strong.
▶ 5:36:21Mr. Strong. No. Mrs. Torres.
▶ 5:36:24Mrs. Torres. I. Miss. Underwood.
▶ 5:36:27Mr. Underwood. I. Mr. Valido. Mr. Valido. No. Miss Wasserman Schultz. Miss Wasserman Schultz. I Mrs. Watson Mrs. Watson Coleman. I Mr. WAC. Mr. WAC. No. Mr. Zinci.
▶ 5:36:40Mr. Zinci. No.
▶ 5:36:41Does any member wish to record or change their vote? Gentleman from Maryland.
▶ 5:36:48Dr. Harris. No.
▶ 5:36:50Gentleman from California.
▶ 5:36:52Mr. Harter. I.
▶ 5:36:53Gentleman from Arizona.
▶ 5:36:56Mr. Sisammani. No. Gentleman from
▶ 5:36:59Mr. Adder Holt. No.
▶ 5:37:03Are there any other members wishing to record or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tell it.
▶ 5:37:49On this vote, the eyes are 26, the nose are 31 and the amendment is not adopted.
▶ 5:37:58Gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Pokean is recognized for an amendment.
▶ 5:38:04Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I have an amendment at the desk and I'd ask unanimous consent to be considered.
▶ 5:38:08Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman is recognized for remarks on his amendment.
▶ 5:38:14Thank you. Um so this amendment, speaking of Trumpistan, um for that matter any president, uh we should not allow someone to be able to enrich themselves uh or do things that are bluntly unamerican uh while in office. And this amendment directly uh looks at a number of issues. uh we were so concerned about tackling waste, fraud, and abuse.
▶ 5:38:37And yet we're seeing a lot of waste, fraud, and abuse when it comes to this White House uh right now specifically in a number of areas. Uh one, uh this amendment would make sure that uh there can be no financial benefit by any organization owned by the president or any commercial entity in which the president or the president's family has an immediate financial interest. Not exactly controversial.
▶ 5:39:03kind of stretching the law perhaps and how it's currently uh done, but we should stand up for that for any president. Uh this would also make sure that uh no money is expended at any properties owned by the president or their immediate family. Uh we've seen that unfortunately abused uh during this current administration, but uh there's no reason for our tax dollars to go to uh someone who's going to have a self-interest as a president in this.
▶ 5:39:33Uh this would also not allow renaming of federal properties after a president or their immediate family while they're in office. They're clearly not it's something we don't do. Um we usually wait until someone's out of office or sometimes not even on this planet. uh but certainly doing it right now uh is something that you see in third world countries in some cases. Uh this also makes sure that we're not doing a construction of a ballroom because there is a process that has to happen to do that.
▶ 5:40:03But to have a waste of taxpayer dollars going to some gold gilded ballroom would make no sense. And finally, uh, this would say that you can't, uh, produce, fly, or display any banners with the likelihood over a federal government facility that has a likelihood of the president's portrait or likeness. I know Chairman Mao and others in history have used this. Um, currently the president is using this.
▶ 5:40:29Uh, this is something again that goes beyond what the United States of America as a democracy has been about. So, none of these are are outrageous. These are all what we've always considered the normaly of the United States presidency. Um, and we shouldn't allow those things to happen. Look, I I we have given up so much power already just in this last year for Congress.
▶ 5:40:56It's time that we take some of those powers back and just having any normaly would be nice. uh but normaly when it comes to not spending taxpayer dollars or not allowing a president or their family to financially benefit from being in office should be a complete no-brainer.
▶ 5:41:13It should be easy to do and I would hope that uh we could pass this amendment and try to show uh that Congress at least cares enough about the American taxpayer that we don't want to waste money and we don't want to slip down a a slippery slope to some of these countries that certainly have never looked like America before. And I yield back.
▶ 5:41:38Thank the gentleman. The gentleman from Ohio, the chairman of subcommittee is recognized to respond to the gentleman from Wisconsin's amendment.
▶ 5:41:45I oppose this amendment.
▶ 5:41:49Succinct and to the point. A gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hoy is recognized to address the amendment. We could quibble with some of this, of course, parse words, but the very fact is if this were a Biden presidency, an Obama presidency, or a Clinton presidency, and they were doing the same things
▶ 5:42:19that this president is doing, every one of you on the other side of the aisle would vote. die. you might consider is this simply a transactional issue or an issue of values and property. I suggest it's the latter and I urge you to vote for it.
▶ 5:42:51Thanks, gentlemen. the ranking member of the full committee. Mr. Cl is recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 5:42:59Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment which requires the president to uphold the trust placed in him by the American people and cease using the power of his office to enrich himself and his family. Holding the highest elected office in the United States of America is a tremendous responsibility. Unfortunately, President Trump has never taken that responsibility seriously.
▶ 5:43:23The sheer scale and brazenness of the corruption in this administration is staggering, even by the standards he set during his first term, during which foreign government officials spent over at the Trump International Hotel in Washington DC um uh alone, according to a 22 2022 report from the House Oversight and Reform Committee. as he did in his first administration.
▶ 5:43:52President Trump has made no secret of the fact that US and foreign government officials who stay at properties owned by his family often receive special treatment. The Committee for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a citizen group, has cataloged 28 instances of cabinet officials visiting Trump properties and 30 instances of foreign government officials visiting Trump properties.
▶ 5:44:19Just this July, President Trump opened a new golf course in Scotland during a five-day European trip designed to promote his family's business interest. And he hosted the prime minister of the UK at the new property. And it is not just physical properties that he is promoting. President Trump is eagerly cheerleading his family's new cryptocurrency venture at every opportunity.
▶ 5:44:46Trump launched his own cryptocurrency just days before entering office. Hosted a dinner at his Virginia property for the 20 220 holders of the so-called memecoin with the top 25 holders receiving a private tour of the White House and even more exclusive meeting with the president.
▶ 5:45:06I wonder how many more stories we will hear like the story of Justin's son, a crypto trader who was charged in 2023 with market manipulation, but received a pause in legal proceedings against him after he purchased $30 million in crypto from the Trump family company, becoming the largest holder of the president's cryptocurrency.
▶ 5:45:31At every turn, he is using the power of the presidency to either promote or actively patronize his family's businesses to auction off access to the Oval Office, or to boost his own image and ego with the White House ballrooms and giant portraits hung on the side of buildings. This should not be a partisan issue. Everyone who works in the federal government goes through ethics training. Our interns here on Capitol Hill cannot accept so much as a hamburger and fries.
▶ 5:46:00Yet, the president continues to act like he can mix business and government with no consequences. Make no mistake, the world and the American people are watching and they see a quote for sale sign on the White House lawn. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and I yield
▶ 5:46:21Thank gentle lady. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Gentle lady from Illinois. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just really wanted to stand and associate my comments with ranking member Deluro and uh Mr. Pokean who offered the amendment. This is a really sad and extraordinary time when we have a president who requires such constant affirmation and attention that this type of amendment would even be necessary.
▶ 5:46:50And I thank my colleagues for offering it. I yield
▶ 5:46:54Thank are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentleman's recognized from Wisconsin is recognized for one minute to close.
▶ 5:47:05Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, I just want to reiterate this isn't just about this president. It's about any president. Um I know we haven't had to have this conversation perhaps with other presidents, but there could be a future president uh you know, who is equally wealthy on the Democratic side who owns things that can profit from it. Um look, we are kind of sliding down. If you've ever seen the movie Idiocracy, I mean, we're clearly on that slide right now.
▶ 5:47:32Um, that could be a future president and we need to protect the not from any individual, but from any potential individual as well. So, I would hope that you would consider voting yes for this amendment because it is the right thing to do. And I yield
▶ 5:47:48Thank the gentleman. The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin. All those in favor say I.
▶ 5:47:55I. All those opposed say no.
▶ 5:47:59Opinion of the chair of the nose have it. Gentleman has requested re recorded votes. Sufficient number of hands having risen. A recorded vote is ordered. The clerk will call the role.
▶ 5:48:12Mr. Adder Holt.
▶ 5:48:14Mr. Adder Holt. No. Mr. Aguilar.
▶ 5:48:16Mr. Aguilar. I. Mr. Alford.
▶ 5:48:20Mr. Alford. No. Mr. Ammeday. Oh, you're Mr. Ammedday. No. Mrs. Bice.
▶ 5:48:33Mrs. Vice. No. Mr. Bishop.
▶ 5:48:35Mr. Bishop. I Mr. Calbertt.
▶ 5:48:38Mr. Calbert. No. Mr. Carter.
▶ 5:48:40Mr. Carter. No. Mr. Casease. Mr. Casease. I. Mr. Ciscomani. Mr. Klein. Mr. Klene. No. Mr. Cloud. Mr. Cloud. No. Mr. Klyurn. Mr. Klyber I Mr. Mr. Cole
▶ 5:48:58Mr. Cole no Mr. Quayar Miss Dean Miss Dean I Mr. Luro
▶ 5:49:05Mr. Luro I Mr. Diaz Balard
▶ 5:49:08Mr. Diaz Bolard No Mr. Edwards Mr. Edwards No Mr. Elzie Miss Escobar Mr. Espayat Mr. Espayat I Mr. Fleshman Miss Frankle Miss Frankle I Mr. Franklin Mr. Franklin no Mr. Gonzalez Mr. Gonzalez no Mr. Guest Mr. Guest No Mr. Harter Dr. Harris Mrs.
▶ 5:49:37Henson Mr. Hoyer
▶ 5:49:41Mr. Hoyer I Mr. Ivy Mr. Ivy I Mr. Joyce Mr. Joyce no Miss Captor Mr. Loa, Miss Lee, Miss Lee. I Miss Lllo, Miss Lelo. No, Mr. Lean. Mr. Leven, I Miss Mallaloy. Miss Mallaloy. No, Miss McCullum. Miss McCullum. I Miss Ming. Miss Ming. I Mr. Molinar.
▶ 5:50:06Mr. Molinar. No. Mr. Moore. Mr. Moore. No. Mr. Morelli.
▶ 5:50:11Mr. Morelli. I. Mr. Mvan. Mr. New House. Mr. New House. No. Miss Perez. Miss Perez. I Miss Pingri. Miss Pingri. I. Mr. Pokean. Mr. Pokean. I Mr. Quigley. Mr. Quigley. I. Mr. Rashenthaler. Mr. Rashenthaler. No. Mr. Rogers. Mr. Rogers. No. Mr. Rutherford. Mr. Rutherford. No. Mr. Simpson. Mr. Simpson. No. Mr. Strong.
▶ 5:50:41Mr. Strong. No. Mrs. Torres. Hi.
▶ 5:50:44Mrs. Torres. I. Miss. Underwood. Hi. Miss Underwood I Mr. Valado Miss Wasserman Schultz Miss Wasserman Schultz I Mrs. Watson Coleman Miss Watson Coleman I Mr. Wac
▶ 5:50:59Mr. Zinci
▶ 5:51:00Mr. Zinci no
▶ 5:51:03Are there any members wishing to record their vote or change their vote? Gentleman from Texas.
▶ 5:51:09Mr. Elzie no.
▶ 5:51:11Gentleman from Arizona.
▶ 5:51:13Mr. Ciscomani no. Gentleman from
▶ 5:51:17Mr. Harter. I
▶ 5:51:18gentleman from Maryland.
▶ 5:51:21Dr. Harris. No.
▶ 5:51:22Gentle lady from Texas.
▶ 5:51:24Miss Escobar. I.
▶ 5:51:26Gentleman from Missouri.
▶ 5:51:27Mr. Alford. No.
▶ 5:51:30Are there any other members wishing to change or record their vote? Gentleman from Arkansas.
▶ 5:51:36Mr. Wac. No.
▶ 5:51:40Are there any others wishing to change or record their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tell it.
▶ 5:52:35In this vote, the eyes are 25, the nose are 30, and the amendment is not Gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Pokean is recognized for an amendment.
▶ 5:52:48Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I have an amendment at the desk. I'd ask that unanimous consistent consent be considered read.
▶ 5:52:54Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman's recognized for remarks on his amendment.
▶ 5:53:00Thank you. So, this is amendment on Doge. And I'm going to do this on the honor system, but I'm going to ask you a question. And if you can't answer it, you have to vote for this. Who is the current Doge administrator? Do you know? Raise your hand. Don't look it up on your phone. No. No. No. No. Amy Gleason. I didn't know it either until today, so I'm not going to act like it's something I knew.
▶ 5:53:26I'm going to give you credit that you've got some language in here um that says the committee directs the administrator of Doge. apparently Amy Gleason uh to submit quarterly reports to the House and Senate committees on appropriations on the number of hires for Doge, including the use of detailees and transfers to and from an agency for personnel. But that tells us basically nothing about Doge and our job is to have oversight, fiscal oversight over those committees.
▶ 5:53:53Um and Doge has been well dodgy in getting information that we need. Um, we had a situation where uh the dairy business innovation initiative was being affected by something Doge was doing. We wanted to get some answers. We called the USDA and they told us they didn't have the information. So, we went to the Doge website to get a hold of someone because we had no contacts.
▶ 5:54:18And there's no contact information um on the Doge website, just believe it or not, an ex account. I know you're probably surprised, but you remember Elon was around at the time. Uh that's what you had. So uh we had no way of contacting anyone at Doge. So we called the White House lays on and they had uh no response and then we tried calling the general white house line directly and a staffer asked if we could call back in 10 minutes and they'd hopefully get us some contact info after calling back.
▶ 5:54:45They said they didn't even have a name or number for a Doge contact and they didn't have any idea how we could get a hold of them. Look, we're members of Congress and this is an agency doge that's doing a lot of things that are affecting our constituents right now.
▶ 5:55:01And at minimum, uh, we should have some additional information that I'm requesting in this amendment about who works there, what savings they're they're saying they have, uh, how do we get a hold of people, and like the most basic 101 that we have with every other federal agency that we have oversight over.
▶ 5:55:22even our subcommittee chairman uh who I respect I know wanted to get Doge in front of us and we couldn't get Doge to come in front of the subcommittee that has the jurisdiction oversight over Doge look I the take Elon Musk out because I think he's out right now with you guys. we should have some real responsibilities with Doge. We should know who's there.
▶ 5:55:45We should be able to contact people there and we should have the most basic of information when we're spending millions of dollars of taxpayer dollars and affecting people through cuts and things that Doge is doing. And you know, all I really know is there's a bunch of very young folks who work there. One person who recently unfortunately was beat up um here in DC. But that's what we know about Doge. And none of us knew who the Doge administrator was when I asked the question.
▶ 5:56:14So, I would hope that this is an amendment that we might be able to move forward with. There's absolutely nothing partisan. When you read it, you can tell it's just getting the most basic information that we have on every other agency that we have oversight over. And we shouldn't be afraid to do that. And if we are, man, we got to have a whole different conversation. So, um, Mr. Chair, I would hope that this is something that maybe we could accept.
▶ 5:56:43It really is the bare minimum of what we should have as information to members of Congress and um I I hope this is something we can do together and I I yield my time back.
▶ 5:56:56Thank the gentleman. The chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Joyce is recognized to respond to the amendment. Uh thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Uh the chair is opposed. me. Gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hoyer is recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 5:57:21Though I was compelled by the intellectual argument that the chairman subcommittee chairman made, I nevertheless will ask, ladies and gentlemen of the appropriations committee, if we don't pass this amendment, there's not an executive in the federal government that ought to listen to us at I thank the chairman for trying
▶ 5:57:51to get Doge to come, i.e. specifically Elon Musk, not forget about Musk. Musk probably more than any American other Donald Trump has had a my view an adverse impact on this country over the last eight months.
▶ 5:58:10He hasn't testified before a single committee of the Congress of the United We asked him, I think the chairman I I talked to the chairman, he said he was trying to get him and I take him at his word uh that we got no response. Have we lost any selfrespect for ourselves, for the appropriations committee, for the House of Representatives, for the Congress of the United States?
▶ 5:58:43You're all I know I sound like a scold and I apologize for that but I believe in this institution. I believe the founders were correct that they didn't want a King George and we are their instrument not to have a King George.
▶ 5:59:14I hope you're finding the answer to this on your iPhones. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment?
▶ 5:59:33Seeing none, the gentleman is recognized from Wisconsin's recognized for one minute to close.
▶ 5:59:39Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I I'm not going to debate this long. I'm just going to say if you didn't know who Amy Gleason was uh before 15 minutes ago. Um vote yes. We We should have the most basic information about a committee or a commission that we um should have oversight over. That's all this is doing. There's no gotchas. Read it. Take the extra 40 seconds here and read it. There's nothing in here but saying we should have the contact information, know who's there, and know what savings are happening.
▶ 6:00:10And if we don't do that, article one of the constitution, I guess, is pretty meaningless. So, um, again, Amy Gleason, if you didn't know her 15 minutes ago, please vote yes. I yield back.
▶ 6:00:28Thank gentlemen. The questions now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin. All those in favor say
▶ 6:00:34All those opposed say no.
▶ 6:00:37Any chair of the nose have it
▶ 6:00:40and the amendment is not agreed to. Gentleman from California, Mr. Aguilar is recognized for an amendment.
▶ 6:00:55Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk and would ask that the reading be dispensed with. Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman is recognized for remarks on his amendment.
▶ 6:01:06Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, and appreciate the work that Mr. Joyce and Mr. Hoyer have put into this bill. Today, I'm offering an amendment that would allow recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, the DACA program as we know it, to be eligible for employment within the United States federal government. The positive impact of DACA recipients on our economy cannot be overstated.
▶ 6:01:30Throughout the country, there are more than 500,000 DACA recipients in the United States who contribute nearly$16 billion to our economy. At one point, DACA recipients numbered over 800,000. This population is declining, but the need to solve this issue is not. There are doctors, law enforcement officers, teachers, and business owners in our communities.
▶ 6:01:58Most importantly, they love our country just as much as we do. These young men and women are living in the only country that they have ever called home. Many dreamers want to give back to the nation that they call home and dedicate their lives and careers to making this country a better place.
▶ 6:02:17They deserve the same opportunities as other young people, including the chance to pursue a career in public service in our federal Denying DACA recipients the opportunity to serve their nation through public service stands in stark contrast to our nation's core values.
▶ 6:02:37These individuals should be eligible for employment in positions like disaster assistance specialists at FEMA, nurses at Indian Health Services, food safety workers at USDA, park rangers within our national park By extending eligibility to DACA recipients for positions like these, our federal government, from Congress to the judiciary to the executive branch, will benefit from allowing the truly best and brightest
▶ 6:03:07individuals and applicants to serve our country. This amendment is not an immigration bill, Mr. Chairman, but it is a common sense change to give dreamers the opportunities they deserve and our nation the workforce that it needs. They deserve the opportunity to be eligible for federal employment to help shape this country that they call home. I urge support of this amendment and I yield back. Thank you.
▶ 6:03:36The chair of the uh acting chair of the full committee will recognize the chair of the subcommittee.
▶ 6:03:48And I don't mean to make light of your argument. Uh, I appreciate what you have to say, but unfortunately I'm going to oppose your amendment. Mr. Hoyer is now recognized. Amen. Midextrous.
▶ 6:04:10I don't really think there's much purpose in talking about the merits of a bill or an amendment at this point in If there's no further debate, the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close. Mr.
▶ 6:04:36Chairman, and I want to thank uh ranking member Hoyer for his support, and I want to thank our colleagues. Mr. Chairman, we voted on a similar amendment within the legislative branch bill um before our August work period and in a bipartisan way, members of this voted to extend the ability to hire individuals with DACA status within the legislative branch.
▶ 6:05:04so our congressional offices can hear from and learn from and benefit from individuals with DACA status. Uh what I would ask is that the same arguments apply on why we should do this.
▶ 6:05:21If we want to be able to benefit from individuals serving in our own personal offices, shouldn't the federal government also be allowed to benefit from the opportunity for them to apply this amendment? Mr. Chairman, I've seen it all. We have um I've lost this amendment um with a voice vote. I have won this amendment with a voice vote.
▶ 6:05:48uh it was embedded in in the bill in the base text when we were in the majority. Uh this is something that I've carried for seven years because it's the right thing to do. Uh my hope is that members within this committee understand that this is still the right thing to do and in a bipartisan way that we extend our support for this and that we send a clear message even when there is chaos and dysfunction under this dome.
▶ 6:06:18We can get something done that provides opportunity to people. That's what this is about. the opportunity for individuals to serve this federal government that we are all privileged to be a part of. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman.
▶ 6:06:34I urge an I vote from all of our colleagues questions now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California. All those in favor say I.
▶ 6:06:57All those opposed say no.
▶ 6:07:01Opinion of the chair. No have it. Roll call has been requested. Sufficient support is shown. Uh roll call is ordered. The clerk will call the role.
▶ 6:07:11Mr. Aderhalt.
▶ 6:07:13Mr. Adherol. No. Mr. Aguilar. Mr. Aguular. I. Mr. Alford. Mr. Alford. No. Mr. Ammedday. Mrs. Bice. Mrs. Bice. No, Mr. Bishop. Mr. Bishop. I Mr. Calbertt. Mr. Calbert. No, Mr. Carter. Mr. Carter. No, Mr. Casease. Mr. Casease. I Mr. Sisammani.
▶ 6:07:35Mr. Sisammani. I Mr. Klene.
▶ 6:07:37Mr. Klene. No, Mr. Cloud. Mr. Clyurn. Mr. Clyde. Mr. Cole.
▶ 6:07:47Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Quayar.
▶ 6:07:50Mr. Quayar. I. Miss Dean. Miss Dean. I Mr. Loro. Mr. Loro. I Mr. Diaz Bolard.
▶ 6:07:59Mr. Edwards.
▶ 6:08:01Mr. Edwards. No. Mr. Elzie. Mr. Elzie. No. Miss Escobar. Mr. Espayat. Mr. Espayat. I. Mr. Flechman. Miss. Frankle. Miss. Frank. I. Mr. Franklin. Mr. Franklin. No. Mr. Gonzalez. Mr. Mr. Gonzalez. No. Mr. Guest. Mr. Harter.
▶ 6:08:27Mr. Harter. I Dr. Harris. Dr. Harris. No. Mrs. Henson. Mr. Hoyer.
▶ 6:08:35Mr. Hoyer. I. Mr. Ivy.
▶ 6:08:37Mr. Ivy. I. Mr. Joyce.
▶ 6:08:40Mr. Joyce. No. Miss Captor.
▶ 6:08:43Mr. Loa.
▶ 6:08:44Mr. Loa. No. Miss Lee. Miss Lee. I. Miss. Let Miss Llo. No. Mr. Leven. Miss Mallaloy. Miss Mallaloy. No. Miss
▶ 6:08:57Miss McCullum. I Miss Ming. Miss Ming. I Mr. Molinar. Mr. Molinar. No. Mr. Moore. Mr. Moore. No. Mr. Morelli.
▶ 6:09:06Mr. Morelli. I Mr. Mvan. Mr. New House.
▶ 6:09:12Mr. New House. I Miss Perez. Miss Perez. I Miss Pingri. Miss Pingri. I Mr. Mr. Pokean. I Mr. Quigley. Mr.Wigley. I Mr. Rashenthaler. Mr. Rashenthaler. No. Mr. Rogers. Mr. Rogers. No. Mr. Rutherford. Mr. Rutherford. No. Mr.
▶ 6:09:34Mr. Simpson. No. Mr. Strong. Mr. Strong. No. Mrs. Torres. Mrs. Torres. I. Miss. Underwood. Miss. Underwood. I. Mr. Mr. Valido. I Miss Washerman Schultz. Miss. Washerman Schultz. I Mrs. Watson. Coleman. Mrs. Watson Coleman I Mr. WAC Mr. WAC No Mr. Zinci
▶ 6:10:03Are there members wishing to record their vote?
▶ 6:10:07I'm sorry.
▶ 6:10:08Okay, Mr. Zinci. No.
▶ 6:10:10There members wishing to record their vote or change their vote. Gentle lady from Texas.
▶ 6:10:16Miss Escobar. I. Gentleman from
▶ 6:10:21Mr. Lean. I
▶ 6:10:22gentleman from Indiana.
▶ 6:10:24Mr. Van. I
▶ 6:10:26gentleman from Georgia.
▶ 6:10:28Mr. Clyde. No.
▶ 6:10:30Gentleman from Mississippi.
▶ 6:10:32Mr. Guest. No.
▶ 6:10:33Gentleman from Arizona. I I thought gentleman voted. I wasn't sure. Gentleman from Florida.
▶ 6:10:40Mr. Diaz Bart. No.
▶ 6:10:43Are there others wishing to record or change or vote? We had a lot of movement so it' be easy to miss somebody here. Not the clerk will tally
▶ 6:11:46gentleman from Texas recorded
▶ 6:11:52Mr. Cloud. No. Mr. Zinci, how are you recorded?
▶ 6:12:18Thank you. They I believe the gentleman's record is yes, but let me check.
▶ 6:12:45Gentleman is recorded as yes. uh gentleman from South Carolina.
▶ 6:13:09Mr. Klyber I
▶ 6:13:15Are there any other members wishing to vote or change their vote? Clerk will tally.
▶ 6:14:21plug in. On this vote, the eyes are 30 and the nose are is this 29 or 29? So, the amendment is adopted.
▶ 6:14:39Gentle lady from Florida, Miss Frankle is recognized for an amendment.
▶ 6:14:43Well, thank you. That that was good because I Mr. Chair, this room was become very very quiet and I'm not really sure whether we all need what do you call that? Smelling salts or some kind of energy drink. All right. But that was a good vote. Uh Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk and I ask that the reading be dispensed with.
▶ 6:15:04Thank you.
▶ 6:15:05Without objection, the reading of the amendment dispensed with. The gentle ladies recognized for remarks on her amendment. My amendment strikes the provisions in this bill that prohibit the use of funds for abortion care by the District of Columbia and for federal employees nationwide. Now, first I'm going to start and say as as both as a mother and a grandmother, uh I can tell you, I'm sure most of you here who have children or grandchildren can tell you, uh it's one of life's greatest joys.
▶ 6:15:36Uh there's nothing more powerful than holding your baby for the first time or watching his or her first step or uh get their little sticky gooey hug and kiss, right? Kisses uh seeing uh that they as they grow and discover who they really are. A parenthood brings love. It brings pride and purpose. And being a grandparent is much more awesome. Um it's also an enormous responsibility to be a parent.
▶ 6:16:05Uh it means a diaper change, food on the table, roof overhead, health care, safe schools, uh and parents that give the time and attention that children deserve. So I want you to imagine this to the young women in this room. As you leave today, I'm going to stand out there. I'm going to have a basket and I'm going to give each one of you a newborn baby. Each one of you is going to do that.
▶ 6:16:34Now, you might say, "Well, that's a little shocking." It is shocking, but I want to tell you something. In Trump's America, every woman of childbearing age must be ready to be a mother at a moment's notice.
▶ 6:16:54I still some of you are shaking your heads uh because you know that adding a child to someone's life changes the family budget, the ability to work, the dreams you can pursue. These are life shaping consequences that ripple outward, not just for parents and children, but for entire communities.
▶ 6:17:15And that's why no one should be forced into that responsibility without preparation, without choice, without the ability to decide what is right for them and their family. Yet, that's exactly what these restrictions do. These anti-abortion restrictions do. They force people into parenthood whether they are ready or not.
▶ 6:17:42And that's why the decision of uh whether and when to have a child must remain with the individual, not with And keep in mind that these abortion restrictions are not standing alone. Republicans are also slashing family planning services.
▶ 6:17:59So, not only does this bill restrict or obstruct people from assessing abortion care, Republicans are reducing funding for contraceptives, for uh preventive care, the very tools that families plan and help plan families plan and thrive. And what is the result going to be?
▶ 6:18:19It's going to mean un more unplanned pregnancies, more financial hardship, and more children born into circumstances where parents are not ready to provide the stability that every child deserves. It's not just an attack on individual freedom. It's bad policy for families, bad policy for children, and bad policy for our communities. Hey, listen. Wealthy families all going to have the options.
▶ 6:18:47It's the working people, the teachers, the nurses aids, the legislative aids sitting in this room who are going to pay the price. Every child deserves to be wanted, loved, and raised in a family prepared for the responsibility. Every parent deserves the dignity to make their own personal decisions. And every community is stronger when families are supported, not coerced.
▶ 6:19:16And so, colleagues, I'm just going to respectfully suggest this, that we should be building a future where children are born into homes ready to welcome them, not writing laws that force families into crisises. And so, I urge you, I urge you, join me in striking down these harmful restrictions and res and let's have the trust and put the trust where it belongs, in the American people. And I yield back.
▶ 6:19:46Thank the gentle lady. The gentleman from Ohio, the chairman of the subcommittee is recognized. Respond to the amendment.
▶ 6:19:53Well, my my my dear friend Lois Frankle, I unfortunately have to oppose this gentle Hman's amendment.
▶ 6:20:07Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, a gentle lady from Illinois is recognized to address the amendment. Mr.
▶ 6:20:25Chairman, while the president toys with deploying the National Guard into Chicago and barrels toward a government shutdown, Republicans in Congress are marching forward with dangerous and radical legislation that will further limit our access to life-saving reproductive healthcare. This bill is packed with extreme policy writers that ban abortion access, deny coverage to federal employees, and force the government to track and collect data on doctors, nurses, and other healthcare providers.
▶ 6:20:53My colleagues on the other side of the aisle try to justify these regressive policies by saying they're decades old and pass every year. But as a nurse, I can tell you that our healthc care policies shouldn't be stuck in the past. With every year they hang on, these writers put more lives in America at risk. It's no secret that this administration has an extreme anti-choice, anti-freedom agenda that aims to ban abortion nationwide.
▶ 6:21:22We know the playbook because it's laid out right there in Project 2025. Attack science, cut health care, deny our right to control our own bodies and our future. Then they say they're doing it to quote protect women. But in reality, we know that restricting access to reproductive health care doesn't protect women. It holds us back. It impoverishes us. It dehumanizes us.
▶ 6:21:48And especially for black and brown women, but really at this point, every single American woman, it kills us. America already has the worst maternal mortality rate of any developed nation. And post jobs, it's getting even worse. The data is devastating and shows that limiting health care makes outcomes worse, not better for women. So, I strongly support this amendment.
▶ 6:22:14I thank my colleague, Miss Frankle, for offering it, and I urge my colleagues, if they really want to protect women, to do the same. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield
▶ 6:22:26Thank the gentle lady. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentle lady is recognized for one minute to close. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I said it before, I'll say it again. Women, not politicians, not the politicians in this room, should should be the ones who decide when or whether to start or grow a family. And with that, I say, please vote for this amendment.
▶ 6:22:55And I yield Thank the gentle lady. The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentle lady from Florida. All those in favor say I.
▶ 6:23:06All those opposed say no.
▶ 6:23:08Opinion chair the nos have it.
▶ 6:23:12And the amendment is not agreed to. A gentle lady from California, Miss Taus is recognized for an amendment.
▶ 6:23:27Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise to offer an amendment and ask uh for the reading to be dispensed with.
▶ 6:23:33Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentle ladies recognized for remarks on her amendment.
▶ 6:23:39Thank you uh chairman. My amendment would prohibit the federal government from hiring or employing anyone who was included in President Trump's pardon for January 6 insurrectionist who violently attacked the US capital on January 6. January 6 was not a protest.
▶ 6:24:03It was a violent, desperate attempt to destroy our democracy and an attack on the rule of law and our law enforcement. Five Capitol police officers lost their lives as a result of the January 6 with over 150 officers sustaining injuries while defending the Capitol.
▶ 6:24:31And yet on the very first day in office, the president pardoned more than 1,500 individuals charged or convicted for being a part of the January 6 These are not law-abiding citizens. These are people who killed our officers, who injured our officers.
▶ 6:24:59They included those who were convicted of violently assaulting police officers. For those pardoned, dozens of defendants had prior convictions pending charges for crimes including sexual abuse of a minor, domestic violence, production of child sexual
▶ 6:25:30abuse and drug trafficking. These individuals do not deserve leniency. They deserve accountability and they absolutely have no place in working in our federal government. Our taxpayers dollars should not be funding the salaries of criminals who try to overthrow our democracy.
▶ 6:26:00But that is what's happening in this administration where a former January 6 writer Jared Weise was hired and is now working as a senior adviser for Trump's Department of Justice. The guy who tried to kill our officers is now working for DOJ. Look at this. August 7th, 2025. This is an NPR article.
▶ 6:26:31This video shows Department of Justice official urging January 6 riers to kill cops. This guy right here, he told those riers to kill cops.
▶ 6:26:55He also as our Capitol police officers were being attacked, he referred to them as Nazis, called them the Gustapo. Not only was this caught on police body cams, he also admitted to saying that in his trial, which conveniently ended when Trump pardoned him.
▶ 6:27:21The federal government should not be racing to the bottom, hiring people who attempted to kill our law enforcement officers and attempted to kill our Republican vice president by hanging him. The federal government should not be employing people who tried to overthrow our democracy and attack our institutions. And I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. And I yield back.
▶ 6:27:52Thank gentle lady. The gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Joyce, is recognized to address the amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I uh oppose this amendment.
▶ 6:28:06Gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hoyer is recognized to address the amendment to say If the shoe were on the other foot, surely surely no one in this committee would justify the pardoning of people who committed treason.
▶ 6:28:38who led to the injury of over a hundred perhaps 200 people who led to the deaths the officers to which the sponsor we have not gotten so low that we rationalize I will tell you as somebody who was not
▶ 6:29:08on the floor but was with both Republican leaders from the Senate and the House and Democratic leaders from the House and the Senate that there was universal outrage and condemnation of all of the leaders that had been taken out of the Capitol.
▶ 6:29:36I have heard so little from people and their outrage at the actions of this president in criminal elements in our society. Who committed a crime seen by all. who were tried.
▶ 6:30:06Many pled yes I did that as the gentle lady said. And yet this Congress has remained I don't mean each one of us individually, but the Congress has done nothing to respond to this Why
▶ 6:30:37should anybody in this country who disagrees with the policies of this country and comes to the capital and is violent breaks into the capital and puts at risk the lives of all within.
▶ 6:30:56all within Now, this amendment could have been more precise. I understand that.
▶ 6:31:19And an individual was cited But I will vote for this amendment with conviction to say this was not acceptable in our society, in our country, in our community.
▶ 6:31:55I thank the gentle lady for offering the so that we have an opportunity to say to America, this is not our country. This is not acceptable. This will not be sanctioned.
▶ 6:32:22We will speak out and say that we are a nation of laws. And when the president of the United States invites people to the capital of the United States, speaks to them and urges them to go down and stop the steel which did not occur and fight like hell.
▶ 6:32:52That is incitement to violence. That is in and of itself a crime. Let us not whimper in our seats and failed to condemn this outrageous taken by so many in contravention
▶ 6:33:23of our democracy. vote yes.
▶ 6:33:31Gentleman from excuse me, gentle lady from Pennsylvania is recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 6:33:42Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise in support of the Torres amendment and I thank the gentle lady for bringing it forward. We must never be complicit. We must never forget what happened on January the 6th.
▶ 6:33:55I have a feeling there are still many of us in this room who were there on that day who heard the strange announcements from the floor telling us to sit down, prepare to lie down, get your gas masks out from under your seat, put your gas masks on, and wait for instructions to get the heck out of here. I bet many of you were in that scared crowd, not knowing what was going to happen, fleeing for our lives.
▶ 6:34:24among the people fleeing the very vice president of the United States. And what did the president do? The sitting president do unlike what he's done recently with DC. 187 minutes calls no one. Doesn't even call his vice president say are you all right? Do you need help? Should I send the National Guard? What can I do to help you all? Said nothing. Come on.
▶ 6:34:53The pardons issued day one by this he had every right to do. He has the pardon power. But we should not be complicit. We should not use the power of appropriations to say it's okay what the president did in pardoning these criminals who in were insurrectionists attacking the capital ultimately maming and killing and forever harming police officers.
▶ 6:35:21Not to mention the horror to the staff, the terror to all of us. The president pardoned them all in order to whitewash history. The president pardoned them all to pardon himself for the record. Let us not be complicit. The hypocrisy is so staggering. We're all in favor or some are all in favor of the National Guard here in DC.
▶ 6:35:49And yet this same man couldn't lift a finger to help any one of us. Vote yes.
▶ 6:36:02Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Gentle lady from Minnesota is recognized. Chair, I wish this amendment had been written differently, and I discussed it with um the offer of the amendment, but you know, normally when a pardon's granted, even at a federal level, there's a five-year waiting period. There's a review and the consequences of the action are truly reviewed.
▶ 6:36:26So, the spirit in which this is to offer, this is being offered to for us to have an affirmative vote to say that the pardons in our opinion never should have taken place. And with that spirit, I will vote for the amendment.
▶ 6:36:42Other members wishing to address the Seeing none, the gentle lady's recognized for one minute to close. is going to be a lockown
▶ 6:37:08This is the notice that we received to evacuate that we were going to be locked down. Some of you in this room were very You were at the bottom and you had the luxury to be walked out. Some of us in this room didn't have a choice and we had to crawl from one side of the balcony to the other.
▶ 6:37:38I had to figure out how to put on a face mask, a gas mask that an African-American officer put on me before he put his on. I had to tell him to put his on because he was the only one with a gun upstairs to protect us. But he was thinking about everyone else but himself.
▶ 6:38:05Yet we can't even put a plaque on the But we are giving these people that tried to take over our government to kill the vice president to kidnap and kill members of Congress in the US Senate. We're giving them jobs in law enforcement. We know their background.
▶ 6:38:38We can't call ourselves above this trash that is being directed to direct and advise our Department of of Justice. They do not belong in the FBI. They do not belong at DOJ. They do not belong at US Marshalss. They certainly do not belong working for ICE and they do not belong receiving a taxpayer funded paycheck.
▶ 6:39:10They belong in prison. Our officers deserve to be decorated for the work that they did, for their bravery. I urge you to think above what the White House says and think about the future of this country and what you want to leave behind for your children and grandchildren. I urge you to vote yes.
▶ 6:39:35Thanks gentle. Question is now on the amendment offered by the gentle lady from California. Those in favor say I.
▶ 6:39:43All those opposed say no.
▶ 6:39:45No. Painting the chair the nose habit and the amendment is not accept. Oh, hands have been raised. Sufficient number of hands have been raised to have a recorded vote. The clerk will call the
▶ 6:40:00Mr. Adhalt.
▶ 6:40:02Mr. Adderhalt. No. Mr. Aguilar.
▶ 6:40:05Mr. Aguilar. I. Mr. Alford.
▶ 6:40:08Mr. Ammedday.
▶ 6:40:10Mr. Ammeday. No. Mrs. Bice.
▶ 6:40:12Mrs. Bice. No. Mr. Bishop.
▶ 6:40:15Mr. Bishop. I. Mr. Calbertt.
▶ 6:40:17Mr. Calvert. No. Mr. Carter.
▶ 6:40:19Mr. Carter. No. Mr. Casease. Mr. Casease. I Mr. Ciscomani.
▶ 6:40:25Mr. Klene. Mr. Cloud. Mr. Klyurn.
▶ 6:40:32Mr. Klyber. I. Mr. Clyde.
▶ 6:40:35Mr. Clyde. No. Mr. Cole. No.
▶ 6:40:37Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Quayar. Miss Dean.
▶ 6:40:43Miss Dean. I. Mr. Deloro. Mr. Diaz Bolard. Mr. Diaz Bolard. No. Mr. Edwards. Mr. Edwards. No. Mr. Elie. Mr. Elie. No. Miss Escobar. Miss Escobar. I. Mr. Espayat. Mr. Fleshman. Miss. Frankle. Miss. Frankle. I. Mr.
▶ 6:41:05Mr. Franklin. No. Mr. Gonzalez. Mr. Gonzalez. No. Mr. Guest.
▶ 6:41:11Mr. Guest. No. Mr. Harter.
▶ 6:41:13Mr. Harter. I. Dr. Harris.
▶ 6:41:16Dr. Harris. No. Mrs. Henson. Mr. Hoyer.
▶ 6:41:20Mr. Hoyer. I Mr. Ivy.
▶ 6:41:23Mr. Ivy. I. Mr. Joyce.
▶ 6:41:26Mr. Joyce. No. Miss Captor. Mr. Loa. Miss Lee. Miss Llo.
▶ 6:41:35Miss Llo. No. Mr. Levan. Hi.
▶ 6:41:38Mr. Levan. I Miss Mallaloy.
▶ 6:41:40Miss Mallaloy. No. Miss. McCullum. Miss McCullum. I Miss Ming. Miss Ming. I Mr. Molinar. No.
▶ 6:41:49Mr. Molinar. No. Mr. Moore. Mr. Moore. No. Mr. Morelli.
▶ 6:41:54Mr. Morelli. I Mr. Morvan.
▶ 6:41:57Mr. Morvan. I Mr. New House. Miss. Perez. Miss. Perez. I Miss Pingri. Miss Pingri. I Mr. Pokean. Mr. Pokean. Mr. Pokean. I Mr. Quigley. Mr. Quigley. I Mr. Rashenthaler.
▶ 6:42:18Mr. Russianthaler. No. Mr. Rogers. Mr. Rogers. No. Mr. Rutherford.
▶ 6:42:24Mr. Rutherford. No. Mr. Simpson. Mr. Simpson. No. Mr. Strong. Mr. Strong. No. Mrs. Torres.
▶ 6:42:32Mrs. Torres. I. Miss. Underwood. Miss. Underwood. I. Mr. Valido.
▶ 6:42:39Miss Wasman Schultz.
▶ 6:42:41Miss Wasman Schultz. I Mrs. Watson
▶ 6:42:44Mrs. Watson Coleman I Mr. Wac Mr. WAC No Mr. Zinci
▶ 6:42:49Mr. Zinci no
▶ 6:42:53Are there members wishing to record their vote or change their vote? Gentleman from Arizona.
▶ 6:42:59Mr. Ciscomani. No.
▶ 6:43:01Gentleman from Missouri.
▶ 6:43:02Mr. Alford. No.
▶ 6:43:04Gentleman from Virginia.
▶ 6:43:06Mr. Klene. No.
▶ 6:43:07Gentle lady from Connecticut.
▶ 6:43:10Mr. Deloro. I
▶ 6:43:12uh gentleman from New York.
▶ 6:43:14Mr. Loa. No.
▶ 6:43:16Are there others wishing to change or record their vote?
▶ 6:43:23Seeing none, the clerks will tally.
▶ 6:43:58on this vote. The eyes are 24, the nose are 30. The amendment is not adopted.
▶ 6:44:06Gentleman from Cal Gentle Lady, excuse me, from California, Miss Taus is recognized for an amendment.
▶ 6:44:12I want a recorded vote.
▶ 6:44:14Oh, we've just had that.
▶ 6:44:16Oh, yeah. Sorry. Um, I rise to offer an amendment and ask that the reading be dispensed with.
▶ 6:44:23Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentle lady's recognized for remarks on her amendment.
▶ 6:44:29Thank you, chairman. I was dreaming of a better day when we can come together on some, you know, basic things. Um, I promise you this amendment will not be that hard. Uh, this amendment will only prohibit federal agencies from withholding information and delaying in by the Government Accountability Office or the GAO. The GAO is our nonpartisan independent watchdog.
▶ 6:44:59It and does crucial work for Congress for Republicans and Democrats. This committee has the power of the purse and the GAO follows Congress direction to conduct audits. Audits on waste, fraud, and abuse. 95% of their audit work is mandated or requested by us.
▶ 6:45:27GAO's fundamental goal is to make sure that taxpayers dollars are spent properly and not being abused or This has been the case or the norm whether it was President Trump, President Biden, President Obama or the Bush administration. Since 2002, GAO's investigations have resulted in more than $1.5 trillion in savings.
▶ 6:45:57And for every $1 that we invest in GAO results in a a $123 of savings. Its work is especially important now when we have an administration that does not care about Congress statutory or constitutional authorities.
▶ 6:46:20Through OM and other agencies, the Trump administration has illegally withheld funds, including for things like cutting funding for food banks in our for school-based mental health services in my district, the lunch programs, and life-saving cancer research.
▶ 6:46:43It is no wonder that the GAO is investigating at least 39 instances of the Trump administration violating the law by freezing or cancelling funds this committee has appropriated. It is no surprise that as a result committee Republicans voted to pass a bill that would cut the GAO's budget by half.
▶ 6:47:07It is easier to hide corruption when you stop the people who investigate waste, fraud, and abuse from doing their jobs. A White House official has even said that they will cooperate with GAO only when it does not unbburden That is illegal and unacceptable. That is why I urge support of this amendment.
▶ 6:47:35And if we want to tackle waste, fraud, and abuse, then we must make sure that the GAO can do its job I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and I yield back.
▶ 6:47:51Thank gentle lady. The chairman of the full committee, gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Joyce is recognized to respond to the
▶ 6:48:04I appreciate my colleagues amendment, but I move to oppose it.
▶ 6:48:10Gentlemen from Maryland, Mr. Hoy is recognized to address the amendment. If we oppose this amendment, we wash our hands of responsibility for anything that happens. Mr. Chairman, I would urge you this amendment is not a partisan amendment.
▶ 6:48:32It simply says uh that people have to do what they're supposed to do and that is fair it out fraud, waste and abuse, fair it out wrongdoing, fair it out perhaps criminal behavior. Um and it applies to I would think every administration. This is not directed at any one person.
▶ 6:49:01this president or any one uh wrongdoer that may be known that hasn't been investigated. This is simply saying we want to do what you have said. I don't mean you personally but has been said including all of us that we need to fair it out wrongdoing. We need to make sure things are done right for the taxpayer not only fiscally but ethically and legally.
▶ 6:49:31So I would urge the chair to to reconsider on this because I think it is uh and maybe my perception is wrong somehow this is deemed to be partisan asking an agency to do its job. So, I I would respectfully uh suggest that this is a bipartisan amendment that ought to be approved by all of us.
▶ 6:49:57Certainly, any of you who are chairs of committee, you want things fared out when you make a request and get to the bottom of alleged wrongdoing. So, I rise in strong support of the ladies amendment. I think it's good for this committee. I think it's good for the Congress. I think it's good for the American people.
▶ 6:50:21Thank gentlemen. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment?
▶ 6:50:26Seeing none, the general lady is recognized for one minute to close.
▶ 6:50:30Uh, thank you, chairman. I know many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle truly care about ensuring our taxpayers dollars are spent effectively. As a matter of fact, every two years we go to our voters and recommmit to ensuring that we are addressing waste, fraud, and abuse.
▶ 6:50:51If that is the case, then I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this amendment to ensure that the federal government cooperates with the GAO so that the GAO can continue to do its work and root out waste, fraud, and abuse. And with that, I urge your support once again. and yield back.
▶ 6:51:14Thanks, gentle lady. The questions now on the amendment offered by the gentle lady from California. All those in favor say I.
▶ 6:51:21All those opposed say no. Opinion of the chair, the nos have it and the amendment is not agreed to. Well, that's why I was looking over there. So that that's all right. suffic sufficient number of hands have been raised and recorded vote is ordered the clerk will call the poll but I would just ask you let us know okay Mr. Adder Mr. Aguilar
▶ 6:51:51Mr. Aguilar I Mr. Alford Mr. Alford no Mr. Amday Mr. Ammeday no Mrs. Bice Mr. Bishop
▶ 6:52:02Mr. Bishop I Mr. Calvert
▶ 6:52:04Mr. Calbertt. No. Mr. Carter.
▶ 6:52:07Mr. Carter. No. Mr. Casease. Mr. Case. I. Mr. Sisammani. Mr. Klene.
▶ 6:52:15Mr. Klene. No. Mr. Cloud.
▶ 6:52:18Mr. Klyurn.
▶ 6:52:21Mr. Klyber. I. Mr. Clyde.
▶ 6:52:24Mr. Clyde. No. Mr. Cole.
▶ 6:52:27Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Quayar.
▶ 6:52:30Mr. Quayar. I. Miss Dean. Miss Dean. I. Mr. Loro I
▶ 6:52:35Mr. Loro I Mr. Diaz Bolard Mr. Diaz Bolard No Mr. Edwards Mr. Edwards no Mr. Miss Escobar Miss Escobar I Mr. Espayat Mr. Fleshman Miss Frankle Miss Frankle I Mr. Franklin Mr. Franklin no Mr. Gonzalez Mr. Gonzalez no Mr. Guest Mr. Guest no Mr. Harter. Mr. Harter.
▶ 6:53:05I Dr. Harris. Dr. Harris. No. Mrs. Henson. Mr. Hoyer.
▶ 6:53:12Mr. Hoyer. I Mr. Ivy. Mr. Joyce. Mr. Joyce. No. Miss Captor. Mr. Loa. Mr. Loa. No. Miss Lee. Miss Llo. Miss Llo. No. Mr. Levan. Mr. Levan. I. Miss Mallaloy. Miss Mallaloy. No. Miss McCullum. Miss McCullum. I Miss Ming.
▶ 6:53:41Miss Ming. I Mr. Molinar.
▶ 6:53:43Mr. Molinar. No. Mr. Moore.
▶ 6:53:46Mr. Moore. No. Mr. Morelli.
▶ 6:53:49Mr. Morelli. I. Mr. Murvan.
▶ 6:53:52Mr. Morvan. I. Mr. New House. Mr. New House. No. Miss Perez. Miss Perez. I. Miss. Pingri. Miss. Pingri. I. I Mr. Pokean Mr. Pokean I Mr. Quigley Mr. Quigley I Mr. Rashenthaler Mr. Rashenthaler no Mr. Rogers Mr. Rogers no Mr. Rutherford Mr. Rutherford No Mr. Simpson Mr. Simpson no Mr. Strong Mr. Strong no Mrs. Torres
▶ 6:54:19Mrs. Torres I miss Underwood Miss Underwood I Mr. Valado Mr. Valido no Miss Wasserman Schultz Miss Wasserman Schultz I Mrs. Watson Coleman Mrs. is Watson Coleman. I Mr. Wac Mr. Wac No Mr.
▶ 6:54:35Mr. Zinci no
▶ 6:54:38Are there are there those wishing to vote or change their vote? Gentleman from Alabama
▶ 6:54:43Mr. Adhalt no
▶ 6:54:45gentleman from Arizona.
▶ 6:54:46Mr. Sisammani no
▶ 6:54:48gentleman from Texas.
▶ 6:54:50Mr. Else no
▶ 6:54:51gentle lady from Oklahoma.
▶ 6:54:53Mrs. Bice no
▶ 6:54:54gentleman from Maryland.
▶ 6:54:56Mr. Ivy I. Are there others wishing to record their vote or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerks will tally.
▶ 6:55:54On this vote, the eyes are 25. The nodes are 32 and the amendment is not adopted. Gentleman from Hawaii, Mr. Casease, is recognized for an amendment.
▶ 6:56:05Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have an amendment at the desk and ask unanimous consent that the reading be dispensed with. Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman's recognized for remarks on his amendment.
▶ 6:56:16Thank you again and I would note that my current intention, if there's any general understanding of the situation we're facing, is to withdraw this amendment after some discussion. Uh Mr. Chair, my amendment focuses on one of the most effective and efficient tools in our federal arsenal to jumpstart economic sustainability in our lowincome and marginalized communities. And I refer to the community development financial institutions or CDFIs.
▶ 6:56:44CDFIs emerged in 1994 on a bipartisan basis to provide financial services in urban and rural areas underserved by traditional financial institutions. They included loans and financial education and other tools that were unavailable as a practical matter to these communities.
▶ 6:57:04The CDFI model, a public private partnership implemented through appropriations to the CDFI fund, is not a permanent dependency or subsidy, but instead initial repayable funding utilized to start and grow businesses, create jobs, build and improve housing, and provide tax revenues, and much more. In my Hawaii alone, there are 11 certified CDFIs.
▶ 6:57:32In FYI 2022, they made 935 loan originations totaling 132 million all repayable to communities that were not able to access traditional financing. In fact, many of us and the general lady from Pennsylvania, Miss Dean, this morning spoke to her CDFIs actually carried us through the depths of COVID when institutions and communities could not access access this funding.
▶ 6:58:01This committee has consistently supported the CDFI funds most recently in the current fiscal year with 3252 24 million into the CDFI fund in the continuing resolution. Yet to date, although the end of the current fiscal year approaches in just a few days, the executive branch has not allotted 90% of our appropriation to the fund.
▶ 6:58:25The only allotment is 35 million for As a result, Treasury and the CDFI fund cannot act on many applications for several CDFI programs. In February, for example, applications for the block guarantee program closed. In March and April, applications for the financial assistance and technical assistance and housing assistance closed.
▶ 6:58:51The fund has not solicited applications for the bank enterprise assistance, capital uh magnet, and small dollar loan funds. These are all legitimate programs that we have used for decades now to assist these communities. Now, we can and should debate CDFI funding going forward in FY2026 and beyond.
▶ 6:59:12And in fact, in this bill, one of the faults of this bill, which causes me to vote against it at the end of the day, is a substantial reduction in CDFI funding, where the majority has reduced CDFI funding by $47 million from what we have today. But we should expect already appropriated funding in 2025 to be properly allotted to the CDFI fund to assist these communities.
▶ 6:59:40This is not nor should it be a partisan issue. In fact, on July 29th of this year, 26 senators, 13 Republicans and 13 Democrats, wrote to the Office of Management and Budget emphasizing the importance of the CDFI fund and requesting quote a spending plan outlining timetables for the obligation of all discretionary funds.
▶ 7:00:06My amendment would require OM to make available to Treasury the full allotment of FY2025 already appropriated, already enacted CDFI funding so that we can continue this important work in the current fiscal year. I am hopeful that my majority colleagues will express similar support for the full funding of community development financial institution funding. I yield back.
▶ 7:00:36Back to gentlemen. The gentleman from Ohio, the chairman of the subcommittees recognized to respond to the amendment.
▶ 7:00:44Well, I I appreciate my colleagues amendment. I agree that we should always look to improve our processes and procedure. Uh however, I believe this amendment is better suited for consideration by the budget committee which has jurisdiction over the budget. And uh if in fact he's going to u continue and not withdraw this then I would have to oppose it.
▶ 7:01:08Gentleman from Maryland. Mr. Hoyer is recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 7:01:13We've been talking about the power or lack of power of the appropriations committee and the congress as it relates to spending. Uh I am told that there are somewhere in the neighborhood 290 290 million that are being sequestered. Now of course uh or impounded if you would prefer that word.
▶ 7:01:42Uh here we are 28 days before the end of the fiscal year and the money is still not spent which we appropriated to help people particularly economically disadvantaged uh people and enterprises. It seems to me therefore that the gentleman's amendment says spend it.
▶ 7:02:06Now, they could come back to us and say there's nobody to spend it on or the applications we've gotten are uh not appropriate, not worthy of our support. But they haven't done that. They have exercised what uh Mr. Vote believes very sincerely that the appropriations product are suggestions to the president of the United States.
▶ 7:02:35And it is his contention under article two he does not have to spend any of that money if in his judgment it is inappropriate. Very frankly this president went through a traumatic experience and we went through a traumatic experience for doing exactly with Mr. Zalinski.
▶ 7:03:01ladies and gentlemen of the appropriations committee, if we want to be respected, if we want to be listened to, if we want all of this is a waste of if in fact they don't have to do what we vote on that we spend hours here, we're going to be here probably I don't know another four hours or so. Uh, and if we're going to have at the No, I hope it's two hours.
▶ 7:03:29But if we're at the end of the day going to be in a position where Mr. Vote or the president of the United States or both say, "Well, that's very nice, but we're not going to do it." Then if you don't think you're wasting your time, I think I'm wasting my time.
▶ 7:03:48If that's the case, if that's the position we take that they do not have to do things we pass house, senate, conference on the floor in same uh language and send it to the president of the United States and he signs it or if he vetos it, we override his veto and then somebody tells us I don't have to do it.
▶ 7:04:18The next process is grossly, maybe irreparably I I urge support of the amendment.
▶ 7:04:32Thank gentlemen. Gentle lady from Minnesota is recognized to address the
▶ 7:04:38and thank you for uh yielding me the time. I rise in support of Mr. cases amendment for unlocking the funding for the CDF5 fund which is currently has been pointed out being held by the office of budget management. Now I represent Minnesota's fourth district and it was home to uh the Minnesota State Fair, three of the largest in the country along with Ohio and Texas and it wrapped up on Monday.
▶ 7:05:02Our fair sh uh showcased our nations and our state strengthened mining, agriculture, environmental science and innovation. And it's a great get together. It's a get together where our small businesses showcase their products. And yes, they learn from one another. The fair celebrates the unique, innovative small And I wish we were doing that here today.
▶ 7:05:27Instead, this bill includes a partisan writer that blocks the SBA from collecting data on leading uh lending women to women and minorityowned businesses. That's not streamlining government. For centuries, women and people of color were locked out of property ownership, credit, and business Congress had to pass a law like the women's business ownership act of 19 of 1988 just to level the plane
▶ 7:05:57field for women to be able to get support to be able to get loans. Those barriers, they haven't vanished. They still shape who has access to capital today. So by refusing to collect this data, Republicans are turning a blind eye to inequity and denying the tools for all of us to help fix that. Not only is this a disservice for inspiring entrepreneurs, it's a disservice to our main streets all across this country.
▶ 7:06:25We should be closing gaps and growing an economy that reflects America's diversity, not dragging progress backwards. In my neighborhood, we celebrate small businesses along Selby Avenue like Nah's Coffee Cafe, Lipstein, and Golden Time. Now, I didn't list them all because I'm planning on yielding back some time, Mr. Chair. But without specialized help, these u many women and minority owned businesses like the ones I trade at, as my grandmother would say, just would not exist.
▶ 7:06:57undermining those opportunities weren't enough. The bill also threatens another critical source of capital, the Community Development Financial Institution Fund. This bill delivers $47 million to the CDF fund. It's an essential program that creates economic opportunities in distressed urban and rural and yes, tribal communities. For 30 years, the CDFI has proven to be a model of a public private partnership.
▶ 7:07:24For every $1 awarded, the CDF fund spurs eight dollars in private investment, levering capital, growing small businesses to develop housing, expand financial services, yes, and create jobs. This program is a powerful return on the federal government investment. If the CDFI is cut, businesses will not open, fewer housing units will be built, and fewer jobs will be created.
▶ 7:07:54But compounding, the Office of Management and Budget is holding FYI25 funds signed into law. $290 million is stalling progress and creating more uncertainty for all of our communities. Every day that OM withholds these dollars is another day that a storefront doesn't open, a housing unit isn't built, and a job is not created.
▶ 7:08:21The president and OM may call the CDIF fund unnecessary, but our communities call it essential. We must be supportive of the CDFI, and I want to thank Congressman Casease for having allowed this discussion to happen. I yield back.
▶ 7:08:40Thank the gentle lady. Are there other members wishing to address the Seeing none, the gentleman from Hawaii is recognized for one minute to close.
▶ 7:08:51Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, to the uh respected uh subcommittee chair's comment, I don't think this is a budget matter whatsoever. I think this is a matter for the appropriations committee. We appropriated the money. We ought to be able to expect that the money
▶ 7:09:08I was wrong.
▶ 7:09:09You were wrong.
▶ 7:09:10Oh my gosh.
▶ 7:09:12Is that okay? Um, what were you wrong about, Mr.
▶ 7:09:18Okay. All right. Then I accept your argument that in fact this is a matter for the appropriations committee, not for the budget committee. And this is where we are today in the appropriations committee. And I think we have a right to expect that our money is spent once we appropriate it.
▶ 7:09:35Um and the obviously um this is part of of a much larger debate that we have had repeatedly um over the course of um this appropriation season when and how we are going to uh provide for our appropriations and to enforce them.
▶ 7:09:52Um, despite the relatively underwhelming support for the amendment, um, I'm going to withdraw it as I promised because I I'm going to take a little bit of a chance that enough of you believe as I do that CDFI monies are good for our communities, including yours, and that you will find a way to join your Republican majority colleagues in the Senate, in expressing some concern to the OM that money's already appropriated that will help these communities should actually
▶ 7:10:22be spent. With that, I withdraw my amendment.
▶ 7:10:33Don't take me there. I thank the gentleman very much. Uh and the gentleman's recognized uh for another amendment, I believe.
▶ 7:10:48Thank you, Mr. Chair. have an amendment at the desk and ask unanimous consent that the reading be dispensed with.
▶ 7:10:55Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman's recognized for remarks on his amendment.
▶ 7:11:01Mr. Chair, this amendment addresses a big picture question that has been on full display both generally and in this committee for several years now and I would note through various presidencies and various congresses. And it is a question with which I hope and believe all of us as members of Congress are asking. And the question is this.
▶ 7:11:25Is our budget and appropriations process working optimally and as our constitutional founders intended? And I hope you also agree that this is a rhetorical question because of course it is not and we obviously need help in sorting it out. This amendment offers an explicit instruction to Congress's own oversight body, the Government Accountability Office or GAO, to do just that.
▶ 7:11:54And I'd like to read from the specific proposed committee report language that I am offering today. The committee reaffirms that Congress's control over spending is one of its most fundamental and consequential constitutional While existing statutes governing budget execution, such as the Anti-Deficiency Act and related provisions, were designed to protect Congress's power of the purse by promoting fiscal discipline and orderly execution of appropriations.
▶ 7:12:23These frameworks were created more than a century ago and may not fully reflect the needs and structures of today's government. The committee therefore needs to examine modern budget execution processes and consider whether current structures require modernization and adequately protect Congress's prerogatives under article one.
▶ 7:12:43Accordingly, the committee directs the GAO to conduct a comprehensive review of budget execution laws and practices to assess how well current frameworks safeguard Congress Congress's constitutional role and to identify potential improvements or reforms that could strengthen accountability, transparency, and compliance with appropriations law or any other appropriate modernization reforms that will improve the ability of agencies to ex execute appropriations.
▶ 7:13:13in a timely and predictable matter matter unquote. And by the way, the cited statutes century old or more governing budget execution are indeed ancient. The Anti-Deficiency Act 1870, the Miscellaneous Receipts Act, whatever that is, 1849, the Budget and Accounting Act, 1921.
▶ 7:13:40Even the Congressional Budget Empowerment Control Act of 1974, often GAO is the proper agency to do so.
▶ 7:13:59Of course, again, it is our oversight agency, but beyond that, the GAO, as we all know, identifies high-risk areas in the federal government that it believes need to be addressed to improve our federal government. And the GAO, in fact, has already identified budget execution as one of its high-risk areas in dire need of reform.
▶ 7:14:27My amendment doesn't mandate any policy or legislative outcome. It just focuses on equipping our committee, whoever runs our committee, with the facts and recommendations so that we can make informed decisions and have reasonable expectations of the executive branch, whoever runs the executive branch about how to best uphold our article one funding responsibilities.
▶ 7:14:55This is an appropriate study. This is an appropriate effort. It should be bipartisan. It should stand the test of time. I urge adoption of my amendment. Yield back.
▶ 7:15:08Thank the gentleman. The gentleman from Ohio, the chairman of subcommittee is recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 7:15:16Um my comments that I had made the on your previous amendment would apply better to this uh amendment. apologize for that. But unfortunately, I still oppose this amendment. Uh and the uh grl has been procured and is uh taking up residence in her normal spot if anybody's hungry.
▶ 7:15:41Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Troy, is recognized to address the amendment. ized by the fact that I am strongly for this amendment because I think it again raises the question that we have repeatedly addressed and and sadly repeatedly defeated.
▶ 7:16:00uh and that is uh the expectation that I think we this committee ought to have that the laws that we pass will have and are not suggestions but are laws that we are responsible for passing under article one of the constitution for the proposition to continue to exist that no article two confers upon the president and
▶ 7:16:30those who work for him like OM to substitute their judgment for the representatives of the people the Congress of the United States is I think improper and as I said earlier uh suggests that we are if we don't adopt that proposition that our laws mean something then we're spending a lot of uh not accomplishing much.
▶ 7:17:01I think the gentleman's amendment is a fair and and uh amendment speaking to our And I'm I'm sorry that the chairman thought uh that it was not worthy of um because I think he believes that we are the law and that's what the constitution says. We are the law, not a suggestion.
▶ 7:17:28So I urge us to adopt this not in a partisan fashion but in a united fashion that the appropriations committee believes that when we act, we mean it. It's not a suggestion. As I thank the gentleman. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Uh, gentle lady from Connecticut, ranking member of the full committee is recognized. Mr.
▶ 7:17:58Chairman, I I I rise in support of this amendment. It gets at the heart of what it is that we are doing here. What do we spend hours and hours, we deliberate, we go through these bills? You know, the appropriations process is a very special uh special process. It's a special committee.
▶ 7:18:17It is the only piece of legislation um that exists where there needs to be the bipartisan biccameal acceptance of the directives, the priorities that members bring that reflect what their constituents uh have asked them to bring forward and the and the services that we provide to the American people.
▶ 7:18:42It's the only piece of legislation that needs that kind of cooperation in order to get a signature by the president because we all know what happens if that doesn't occur that the government shuts down. There isn't another piece of legislation. There isn't another effort in and and the the entire lexicon of of bills, laws, and everything what that we produce here. This is a very special special effort that goes into an appropriations process.
▶ 7:19:11And what has happened here, as I said in my opening statement, is the office of management and budget, the director has orchestrated a lawless upheaval of the entire federal government. And it is based on his uh own debunked views of government and where the power should and remove the congress, remove the appropriations pro process as established in the constitution from
▶ 7:19:41uh making the decisions of the power of the purse in this institution. My god, why do we all want to gravitate to this committee to be on it as one of the most important committees that is here? And I would would tell Ways and Means appropriations hell of a lot more important than Ways and Means. I know Richie Neil would not be happy about that, you know, or or or others. But it is about the appropriations committee.
▶ 7:20:07And what vote has done, he's decided that his views, his priorities are superior. They're superior to the priorities that we come up with that our directives the lawful decisions of the Democratic and Republican representatives in the United States It is us. He is slapping us in the face.
▶ 7:20:35He is turning his back on this process. And even my god, in the midst of everything that we're trying to do is to get bills across a finish line and to try to do something by September 30th, what does he do? He comes forward with a pocket recision. Not only did we vote on the piece the last time, which won by only one vote, but Congress had a vote. This time, he says, "The hell with you.
▶ 7:21:00We don't even need your vote, and we're going to take the money away." My god, why do we want to ex allow someone to do that? He doesn't care about the laws. And as I just said, he has upended and he wants to upend what has historically been a bipartisan appropriations process where Republicans win some, Democrats win some, we each lose some, but we reflect
▶ 7:21:31the priorities directed to us by the American people. uh and it's been said here again it's governing by illegal empowerment by reconciliation and by recision and again it is eliminating eliminating the appropriations committee as it is set out in the constitution of the United States and you know my god I will just say I want to say thank you to the to the to the to the to the gentleman and
▶ 7:22:01and really getting to the heart of what we should be doing and raising this issue. We should all be standing up and fighting for the power, the existence, if you will, its existence at the moment, my friends, and we need to think very, very carefully about that. And with that, I yield back my time and I say thank you to the gentleman from Hawaii for introducing the amendment.
▶ 7:22:28Thank gentle lady. Are there other members wishing to address the Before we close, the chair will recognize himself so I can address the amendment shortly. First, I want to thank my friend for bringing the amendment. It's a thoughtful amendment. It's a well-considered amendment. I support my chairman, so I will be opposing the amendment, but it's a fine amendment. It's worth the debate and worth the discussion. I would argue we don't need to study. I would argue we just need to do our job.
▶ 7:22:56Uh, and that's what we're trying to do. First thing for us as a committee and this should have happened earlier but we talked about schedule is get our bills out. We're not going to agree on the bills at this stage. That's not this is not the time not the way the house works and it's a different body as a filibuster operates in a different manner. There will come a time when we can agree. We'll do a real negotiation.
▶ 7:23:22Um I don't think that's likely to happen between now and September 30th. can begin and it should begin but I don't think we can finish it that fast. So, as I've said, some of you have commented on this.
▶ 7:23:35I mean, you know, if we can get a few things going and moving and the ranking member and I have talked about this, I've talked about in the Senate and get a little more time and get the process going, then I think we have a reasonable chance at arriving at what I think we all want, which is a negotiated bipartisan appropriations deal. I will tell you this that will involve the president of the United States because he has to sign it.
▶ 7:24:04You know, this committee does not exist in Other parts of Congress have to work and do their jobs. We can't do our job by ourselves. The Senate has to do their job. Uh and quite frankly uh you know the reality is uh you know we have to do our job in the house and we don't have a top line right now because budget committee didn't produce a top line and Congress didn't pass a top line.
▶ 7:24:29So we've operated by a top line that that we've had to impose here but is certainly not going to be the final top line. Uh so I would just tell you you can wait for studies and they would be valuable and useful. Uh, but I'd rather the study be about why we didn't get it done last year and why we did get it done this year. We, you know, I think we were very close to getting it done, closer than most people realize last year, but we stumbled into a CR.
▶ 7:24:58Uh, and that's what we need as a committee to get out of. And I will just tell you the commitment I will make to my friend who I know is a very very serious member uh, and a good friend. Uh, you know, we're going to get our work done here in committee. That's the first thing we are in discussions now uh with the administration with the Senate about how to proceed.
▶ 7:25:20We don't have any final goal or deadline but I would prefer to get this done sooner rather than later and I don't want another CR. So, um, study's probably a good idea, uh, after we're successful, but the way to be successful is get a deal done. And that's what we need to do. And that will call call for, you know, considerable compromise on all sides. It's just the reality.
▶ 7:25:48But my friends should also remember we are the majority in the House. We are in the majority in the Senate, and we do have a Republican president. So, I think those things will all weigh heavy in the final decision. But it also takes Democrats to finish in both bodies. You know, we can't win in the Senate. It's got a filibuster. It's got to be bipartisan. It's bipartisan there inevitably has to become bipartisan here at some point.
▶ 7:26:13So, anyway, I just I want to thank my men my friend for his thoughtful amendment and his thoughtful comments and for his focus on what's a very real issue that we need to get these things done. And I want to thank my friend, the ranking member, and other friends on this committee because I know they're very serious about doing the same thing. Uh, but please don't have any illusions that we cavalerely are surrendering the power. But the best way to keep the power in the Congress, article one power, is to do our job.
▶ 7:26:43And the first thing in that is to get these bills out of committee. I don't expect our friends at this point to help us do that. but then to sit down and negotiate a deal that can pass both bodies and be acceptable to the president of the United States because if it's not acceptable to him, it won't happen any more than if it's not acceptable to the Senate. It won't happen. If it's not acceptable to the House, it won't happen. You know, this takes everybody sitting around the table uh and coming to agreement.
▶ 7:27:11I know we can do that because I've done it with my friend before uh both in the majority and the minority on one of the most difficult bills there is and that's labor age and we managed to do it over and over and over again. So uh I don't give up hope on that at all and uh I know my friend doesn't either and let's just keep working the process and the commitment I'll make to him is we will work it as hard as we can. We'll find as much common ground as we can uh and uh you know we'll just keep going.
▶ 7:27:40But I last thing I want is what I know my friend doesn't want is another CR. That's a bad outcome for Congress. That's a bad outcome for this committee and we're going to try and avoid that. Well, with that, I yield uh back to my friend for uh one minute to close.
▶ 7:27:59Mr. Chairman.
▶ 7:27:59Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize my friend from Illinois gotten up. Mr. Quley's recognized to address the amendment. I would have withheld my remarks and I know that because I was not trying to I I preferred to speak last on that matter.
▶ 7:28:12No, and I apologize. It just what you said struck me because I think everyone in this room has respect for you and believes you and trusts you. And I often say if it was just the people in this room, we'd never have a shutdown. But I think with respect, you're missing the main point and that is why should we trust this president with a spending bill because it takes 60 votes in the Senate to pass it and 50
▶ 7:28:42to rescend it. So the belief in this last weeks that we were in our district was don't trust Why would you trust them, fool me once is the mentality out there.
▶ 7:28:59So how are you going to come to a deal which is complicated enough and then have some language in it that says but we really really mean it this I think that's the fundamental problem absolutely this is the bottom line would be a compromise painful as we've done in the past to all of us. That's the nature of it.
▶ 7:29:24But as I've said, when I got sworn in on a special election, first person to talk to me was Mark Kirk, my colleague at the time from Illinois, who said everything that gets done here that's any good gets done in the middle. Absolutely accurate. But even if we do that, none of us believe that the president won't try to change it a week later, a month later, six months later.
▶ 7:29:51So, we're at a point when we're trying to do something that our constituents believe in. We're willing to take heat to pass it in a compromise and then we get nailed because the president changes his mind and again goes after more recisions. So, we can figure some magic way to pass something where the president can't do that. maybe all that you're talking about, which is tough enough in and of itself to do uh is possible.
▶ 7:30:22But unless we get to that point where we can really really mean it this time, I think all of this work will be uh to no avail. But I respect what you're trying to do and would love to work with you if we can get past that point. Thank you.
▶ 7:30:40Well, I thank the gentleman and I look forward to working with the gentleman. We've done it before. We're certainly going to have the opportunity to do it again. With that, I'd recognize uh the author of the amendment for one minute to close.
▶ 7:30:52Thank you, Mr. Chair. And um now I do understand the subcommittee chair's comments about uh being mistaken in the prior uh one. And I also understand your uh side comment there, Mr. Chair. Don't get him started again. So, we won't go down that road again. Uh that particular amendment is POW, as we say in Hawaii. And I appreciate your comments, uh uh Mr. Chair. Um, I don't think any of us fundamentally disagree with you on wanting this process to work and wanting not to get into a CR situation.
▶ 7:31:21We don't doubt your bad fa I mean your good faith uh on trying to achieve that. But I would say to the subcommittee chair's comment that this is um really a budget matter. No, it's not. Uh this this this particular amendment goes to the of our appropriations laws. How are they executed by the executive branch? How does the exe executive branch carry them out? And do we care about that at all?
▶ 7:31:48I think we should care and I think we need some help in order to figure out exactly how to care over time. So, I regret the opposition, but perhaps there's going to be another day when we can revisit uh and work together to actually improve the actual execution of our appropriations laws once enacted. I yield back. Questions now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Hawaii.
▶ 7:32:17All those in favor say I. I.
▶ 7:32:20All those opposed say no.
▶ 7:32:23Opinion of the chair of the nose have And the amendment is not agreed to but the debate was appreciated. Uh gentle lady from Illinois, Miss Underwood is recognized for an Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk under wood one and I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
▶ 7:32:45Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentle lady's recognized for remarks on her amendment.
▶ 7:32:51Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My amendment is simple. It says the Office of Management and Budget does not get a penny of tax dollars until the federal government releases the full records on Jeffrey Epstein. Jeffrey Epstein's crimes were horrific. The American people have a right to know who enabled him, who covered for him, who may still be shielded by government files. OMB, the Office of Management and Budget, is charged with implementing the president's policy vision.
▶ 7:33:20If they can come to Congress asking for taxpayer dollars to execute that vision, then the American people can demand transparency in return. Just this morning, Epstein survivors gathered in front of the Capitol to call on Congress to do the right thing. Lisa Phillips said, quote, "We are here demanding accountability and justice. Congress must choose.
▶ 7:33:44Will you continue to protect predators or will you finally protect survivors?" Right now, today, in this moment, we can answer that call for justice. We can choose to protect survivors because justice should not depend on wealth or connections. This is not about politics. This is about accountability and restoring public trust.
▶ 7:34:10President Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi have the power to release all the all the files now. But what are they trying to hide? Survivors and the American public deserve the truth. Until the Epstein files are made public, confidence in the system will remain shaken and victims will continue to wonder what truths are being buried. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. No more secrecy, no more delays.
▶ 7:34:38Thank you and I yield back.
▶ 7:34:42Thank gentle lady. Uh the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Joyce of Ohio is recognized to respond to the amendment.
▶ 7:34:48Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I oppose this amendment because just I believe it's premature at this time. The Department of Justice just released documents and records in August to Congress. Committee on Oversight and Government Reform released 33,000 documents publicly yesterday and will continue to issue subpoenas for records and depositions. As for allowing the Metropolitan Police Department, US Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia to review and investigate, that should be done in conjunction with the Department of Justice, Congress should not be dissitating a course of an investigation. For these reasons, I oppose these amendments.
▶ 7:35:21Thank gentlemen. Uh are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Gentle lady from Florida, Miss Wasman Schultz, recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 7:35:34Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise in strong support of this amendment and respectfully to uh to the chairman of the subcommittee. um those 33,000 documents um nearly all had previously been released and been public. So I mean this amendment is important because as we saw just this week, some of Jeffrey Epstein's survivors have finally been able to be heard in this body.
▶ 7:36:03Decades after their their abuse, they still are seeking justice and transparency. And they're doing it amid a governmentwide cover up of the EP Epstein files and feeble factf finding hearings taking place in the basement of Congress. I mean so far none of us should have any confidence I know I don't in the ongoing investigation so-called investigation being conducted by the oversight committee.
▶ 7:36:26This is just obfiscation and delay, kicking the can down the road, doing as much as possible to to prevent transparency and to actually get to the bottom of this. And that's why I'm proud to work alongside one of these courageous women, Courtney Wild, a Florida native whose bravery and determination should inspire us all. Courtney went to court against the US government to fight for all the victims who were left in the dark about Epstein's lenient plea deal.
▶ 7:36:56She fought for decades only to be left without true justice. Yet she is still she is still here this week on Capitol Hill fighting for the truth alongside numerous other brave and courageous survivors. The immense strength of survivors like Courtney is the type of courage I hope my colleagues across the aisle can soon find on this issue. Because these survivors deserve transparency.
▶ 7:37:20They deserve justice and they deserve a government who fights for them, not one who panders to the powerful abusers who've been shielded from accountability. Despite bold promises of transparency from this administration, all these survivors have received is more coverup. In the end, it's all so incredibly triggering and disheartening for them.
▶ 7:37:39I just attended a roundt discussion with numerous of the survivors and just the conversation about what happened to them and the struggle that they are continuing to deal with brought them and all of us to tears. And that's why we must take action now. And this amendment does that. Speaker Johnson already stalled a vote on these files in July.
▶ 7:38:07And right as we speak, he's trying trying to kill a bipartisan push for true transparency. But the public doesn't want more Epstein files, cover-ups, and misdirection. They want answers. And since Trump has made it clear that he will not release these files on his own, even though he has the power to do so, it is up to Congress to act. We must stand for what is right and use every tool we have to force the Justice Department to release any and all files related to Jeffrey Epste and his associates.
▶ 7:38:36And this amendment does just that. It creates an accountability measure to ensure the Trump administration can't just ignore the multiple bipartisan calls for the Epstein files release. Do we really want to have the environment that existed that allowed this horrific incidents over many years of human and sex trafficking of teenage girls to be allowed to occur again? I know I don't.
▶ 7:39:04I know as a mom of girls in their 20s, I want to make sure that no one's child is ever put through what Epstein put them through. And it als this amendment also makes sure to protect the survivors by explicitly stating that any documents that are released should protect the identity of those victims. The truth can and must come out and we can do it without revictimizing these survivors who deserve the space to heal on their own terms.
▶ 7:39:32There's no reason to vote against this amendment unless you want to be complicit in the Trump administration's governmentwide cover up of Epstein's horrific crimes. I know I won't be. So, please stand with survivors by supporting this amendment. I urge all of my colleagues to have the heart and the courage to vote yes. I yield back.
▶ 7:39:51Gentle lady, are there other members wishing to address the amendment? A gentle lady from Pennsylvania is I'll be brief, but I do want to rise in support of the gentle ladies amendment, and I don't see how anybody could vote against it. After all, let's think about this.
▶ 7:40:09There are uh the number is apparently more than a thousand victims uh of this horrific sex trafficking, uh rape, molestation, uh moving young girls around. Uh if you have children, if you have grandchildren, wouldn't you want everything out in the light of day? Uh it is on Congress.
▶ 7:40:33We should stand up to this responsibility and demand uh the full release of the Epstein files. It is not premature, Mr. Chairman. In fact, I think we're a little behind. 20 years this has gone on. 20 years these girls and now women are seeking justice. Sadly, this administration doesn't want transparency. We know that. They don't want the names revealed of who was involved. I don't know why that is.
▶ 7:41:02I don't know who would be on the list. But the only way that these victims, survivors, get justice is full transparency and prosecution. Because after all, it's not just Mr. Epstein who is now deceased and Ms. Maxwell, who were the only people guilty of trafficking a thousand girls and women. There are others. There are others who participated. Why would we want them to remain in the shadows in the dark without justice?
▶ 7:41:31I support this amendment and I don't see how everyone couldn't and I do have some hope because this has become bipartisan. We saw the movement uh these past few weeks. We saw the scurry to get out of here uh by the speaker because he didn't want to deal with it. But we saw the movement. Republicans and Democrats want justice for these victims and want perpetrators uh prosecuted. I urge a yes vote. Thank you. I yield back.
▶ 7:41:58Thank you, gentle lady. Gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hoyer is recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 7:42:03Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Why not? Why not? We all know that this language will not survive the process and go to the president as a bill. But what this language is a is a very strong message.
▶ 7:42:28Now, we've had three extraordinary women speak on this I rise as the father of three daughters, the grandfather of two granddaughters, and the great grandfather of three young great grandchildren.
▶ 7:42:54Americans are a gasast at the unwillingness of the Congress and the government to say this is who did what.
▶ 7:43:14We urge women to report as difficult as it is sexual committed against them. And we urge them to do so. But it's very tough for them to do that. But we urge them to do for it for one reason.
▶ 7:43:42A lot of reasons, but for one The next victim, the next victim will be the victim of the perpetrator you're not exposing. So we grieve for those who were abused, but let us act to protect those who may be abused in the future. This is timely.
▶ 7:44:17And our votes are going to mean we either want the perpetrators exposed, whoever they are, or we don't. So don't hide behind the we can't cut OM because that will never survive. We all know that. Nor in my opinion, very frankly should it.
▶ 7:44:40But this ought to pass to send a very strong united bipartisan message. We are not going to hide or rationalize the behavior either of Epstein or any of the and I would hope we will all say amen.
▶ 7:45:09Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? There no further debate. The gentle lady is recognized for one minute to close.
▶ 7:45:19Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I heard Mr. Joyce's comments about the documents that were released. The Department of Justice did release a limited amount of files, but unfortunately that release continues the White House coverup, which it appears this committee would be part of today. The Department of Justice released 33,000 pages of documents, 97% which were already public.
▶ 7:45:41The new documents included less than a thousand pages of flight locations of the Epstein plane from 2000 to 2014 and is currently being reviewed. That is not enough. We have the power today to do something.
▶ 7:45:56In casting our vote, we have the power to provide clarity, transparency, to offer these brave survivors who testified in front of our gorgeous United States capital earlier today to let them know, listen, it really appears that the White House cover up is intended to, you know, include the interview between Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanch and the sex trafficker Gain Maxwell, who is desperately seeking a pardon from the Trump administration
▶ 7:46:26and cannot be trusted. We have the power today to take action to clear our names and our consciences and make sure that transparency is offered to the American people. And yes, we can take that action today by withholding funds from OM and letting this White House know which side of justice we stand on. I yield back.
▶ 7:46:49Questions now on the amendment offered by the gentle lady from Illinois. All those in favor say I.
▶ 7:46:54I. All oppose say no.
▶ 7:47:00Well, I'll issue my opinion and then you can ask for the recorded vote. The opinion of the chair of the nose have
▶ 7:47:06Mr. Chairman,
▶ 7:47:07recorded votes been requested. Sufficient show of hands uh has been uh demonstrated and recorded voters ordered. The clerk will call the role.
▶ 7:47:17Mr. Adhalt.
▶ 7:47:19Mr. Aguilar.
▶ 7:47:21Mr. Aguilar. I. Mr. Alford.
▶ 7:47:24No. Mr. Alford. No. Mr. Ammeday. Mrs. Bice. Mr. Bishop.
▶ 7:47:33Mr. Bishop. I. Mr. Calbertt. Mr. Carter.
▶ 7:47:39Mr. Carter. No. Mr. Casease. Mr. Casease. I. Mr. Sisammani.
▶ 7:47:45Mr. Sisammani. No. Mr. Klene. Mr. Klene. No. Mr. Cloud. Mr. Klyurn. Mr. Mr. Cloud. No. Mr. Klyurn.
▶ 7:47:58Mr. Klyber. I Mr. Clyde.
▶ 7:48:00Mr. Clyde. No. Mr. Cole.
▶ 7:48:03Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Quayar.
▶ 7:48:06Mr. Quay. I Miss Dean.
▶ 7:48:09Miss Dean. I Miss Deloro.
▶ 7:48:11Mr. Deloro. I Mr. Diaz Bolard. Mr. Diaz Bolard. No. Mr. Edwards.
▶ 7:48:17Mr. Edwards. No. Mr. LZ. Mr. Elzie. No. Miss Escobar. Miss Escobar I Mr. Espayot Mr. Fleshman Miss Frankle Mr. Franklin Mr. Franklin no Mr.
▶ 7:48:35Mr. Gonzalez no Mr. Guest Mr. Guest no Mr. Harter
▶ 7:48:40Mr. Harter I Dr. Harris Dr. Harris no Mrs. Henson Mr. Hoyer
▶ 7:48:47Mr. Hoyer I Mr. Ivy
▶ 7:48:49Mr. Ivy I Mr. Joyce,
▶ 7:48:52Mr. Joyce, no. Miss Captor, Mr. Loa, Miss Lee, Miss Lee, I. Miss Llo,
▶ 7:49:02Miss Lllo, no. Mr. Leven, Mr. Levan, I Miss Malloy. Miss Mallaloy. No, Miss
▶ 7:49:10Miss McCullum. I Miss Ming. Miss Ming. I Mr. Molinar. Mr. Moore. Mr. Moore, no. Mr. Morelli, I
▶ 7:49:24Mr. Morelli, I Mr. Murvan,
▶ 7:49:26Mr. Morvan, I Mr. New House.
▶ 7:49:29Mr. New House, no. Miss Perez, Miss Perez, I Miss Pingri,
▶ 7:49:35Miss Pingri, I Mr. Pokean,
▶ 7:49:38Mr. Pokean, I Mr. Quigley,
▶ 7:49:40Mr. Quigley, I, Mr. Rashenthaler,
▶ 7:49:43Mr. Russianthaler. No, Mr. Rogers. No,
▶ 7:49:46Mr. Rogers. No, Mr. Rutherford. Mr. Rutherford. No. Mr. Simpson. No.
▶ 7:49:52Mr. Simpson. No. Mr. Strong. Mr. Strong. No. Mrs. Torres.
▶ 7:49:58Mrs. Torres. I. Miss. Underwood. Miss Underwood. I. Mr. Valido. Mr. Valado. No. Miss Wasserman Schultz. Miss Wasserman Schultz. I Mrs. Watson Coleman. Mrs. Watson. Coleman. I. Mr. Wac. Mr. Wac. No. Mr. Zinci.
▶ 7:50:15Mr. Zinci. No. Are there any members wishing to record their vote or change their vote? The gentleman from
▶ 7:50:24Mr. Calbertt, no.
▶ 7:50:26Gentleman from Nevada.
▶ 7:50:29Mr. Amade. No.
▶ 7:50:30Gentle lady from Oklahoma.
▶ 7:50:34Mrs. Bice. No.
▶ 7:50:35Gentleman from Michigan.
▶ 7:50:38Mr. Molinar. No.
▶ 7:50:40A gentleman from Alabama.
▶ 7:50:42Mr. Adderhold. No.
▶ 7:50:44Gentleman from Arizona. I do not believe. Yeah. Gentleman is recorded as a no.
▶ 7:50:52Gentleman from New York.
▶ 7:50:53Mr. Loa. No.
▶ 7:50:56Are there other members wishing to record or change their vote? Gentle lady from
▶ 7:51:05Miss Frankle votes I.
▶ 7:51:08Are there others? Seeing none, the clerk will tally.
▶ 7:51:47On this vote, the eyes are 26, the nose are 33. The amendment is not adopted.
▶ 7:51:58Gentle lady from Illinois, Miss Underwood's recognized for an amendment.
▶ 7:52:01Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. Underwood 2. Um, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
▶ 7:52:08Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentle lady's recognized for remarks on her amendment.
▶ 7:52:14Well, Mr. Chairman, it appears the committee was not interested in withholding funds from OMB. But perhaps the committee might be interested in taking action to disclose the flight logs because this amendment is really straightforward. No funds from this act or any other act can be used to prevent the release of the flight logs, the visitor logs, the flight manifests, or any other guest records tied to Jeffrey Epstein's residences or private plane. These records are not trivial.
▶ 7:52:41They are central to understanding the scope of Epstein's critical network. Flight logs in particular show where Epstein and his associates traveled, who accompanied him, and who may have participated in or facilitated his crimes. They can reveal patterns of abuse, connections to powerful individuals, and attempts to evade law enforcement. Without access to these records, investigations are incomplete, and justice is obstructed.
▶ 7:53:11For too long, secrecy and influence have shielded those implicated from accountability. The American people deserve transparency. Victims deserve to know that those who enabled Epstein are being investigated. Courtney Wild, a survivor of Epstein's abuse, said it best this morning. Quote, "This is about justice against the rich and powerful who have stolen something from these women. Let's be clear, this is not a political issue. This is not about left or right.
▶ 7:53:40this is about She's absolutely right. We have a chance to set politics aside and choose humanity today. This amendment ensures that taxpayer funds are not used to hide the truth. Federal dollars should never be used to protect the rich and powerful from scrutiny. This is about accountability, transparency, and the integrity of our justice system. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
▶ 7:54:10Let's let the records be released. I yield back.
▶ 7:54:16Uh the chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Joyce, is recognized to respond to the amendment.
▶ 7:54:22I oppose the amendment.
▶ 7:54:28I oppose the Sorry, I I blinked and I missed it. Uh, gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hoyer is recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 7:54:42I don't see how a vote against this amendment can be seen by the American public as anything but a cover up and therefore I support it strongly.
▶ 7:54:57Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentle lady is recognized for one minute to close.
▶ 7:55:05Well, Mr. Chair, I just want to remind my colleagues that they have another chance to do the right thing and they have another chance to vote yes, to release these flight logs, the flight manifests, the information, to share the information with the American people. See, the thing about what we do here in Congress and particularly on the appropriations committee is sometimes things are real complicated. Sometimes things are very nuanced and it takes a whole hour at our town hall to explain what it is that we're working on.
▶ 7:55:31But guess what colleagues, our constituents understand this so much so that your constituents more than mine, your constituents have been demanding the flight logs. They have been on the internet, their favorite little website, X asking for the flight logs and we have an opportunity to be responsive to them today. I think that that would just be a really wonderful bipartisan breakthrough for the American people and I urge a yes vote. I yield back.
▶ 7:56:03Questions now on the amendment offered by the gentle lady from Illinois. All those in favor say I.
▶ 7:56:10All those all those opposed say no.
▶ 7:56:14Opinion of the chair. The nos have it.
▶ 7:56:16Mr. Chair,
▶ 7:56:17roll call has been requested. Sufficient number of hands have been raised. Recorded vote is ordered. The clerk will call the role.
▶ 7:56:25Mr. Aderhalt. Mr. Adder Halt. No. Mr.
▶ 7:56:29Mr. Aguilar. I. Mr. Alford. Mr. Alford. No. Mr. Amade.
▶ 7:56:35Mrs. Bice. Mrs. Bice. No. Mr. Bishop.
▶ 7:56:38Mr. Bishop. I. Mr. Calbertt. Mr. Calbertt. No. Mr. Carter.
▶ 7:56:43Mr. Carter. No. Mr. Case.
▶ 7:56:47Mr. Case. Mr. Case I Mr. Sisammani Mr. Sisammani no Mr. Klene Mr. Cloud
▶ 7:56:57Mr. Klyurn
▶ 7:56:59Mr. Klyber I Mr. Clyde
▶ 7:57:01Mr. Clyde No Mr. Cole no
▶ 7:57:03Mr. Cole no Mr. Quayar
▶ 7:57:07Mr. Quayrar
▶ 7:57:10Mr. Quayar I Miss Dean
▶ 7:57:14Miss Dean I Mr. Lauro Mr. Loro I Mr. Diaz Bolard. Mr. Diaz Bolard. No. Mr. Edwards. Mr. Edwards. No. Mr. Elzie. Mr. Ellie. No. Miss Escobar. M. Escobar. I. Mr. Espayat.
▶ 7:57:28Mr. Fleshman. Miss. Frankle.
▶ 7:57:32Miss. Frankle. I. Mr. Franklin. Mr. Franklin. No. Mr. Gonzalez. Mr. Gonzalez. No. Mr. Guest. Mr. Harter.
▶ 7:57:42Mr. Harter. I. Dr. Harris. Mrs. Henson, Mr. Hoyer,
▶ 7:57:50Mr. Hoyer, I Mr. Ivy,
▶ 7:57:52Mr. Ivy, I Mr. Joyce,
▶ 7:57:55Mr. Joyce, no. Miss Captor, Mr. Loa,
▶ 7:58:00Mr. Loa, no. Miss Lee,
▶ 7:58:03Miss Lllo, Miss Llo, no. Mr. Lean,
▶ 7:58:07Mr. Leven, I Miss Mallaloy,
▶ 7:58:09Miss Mallaloy, no. Miss McCullum.
▶ 7:58:13Miss McCullum. I Miss Ming.
▶ 7:58:15Miss Ming. I Mr. Molinar.
▶ 7:58:17Mr. Molinar. No. Mr. Moore.
▶ 7:58:22Mr. Morelli.
▶ 7:58:24Mr. Mr. I. Mr. Mvan.
▶ 7:58:26Mr. Murvan. I. Mr. New House. Mr. New House. No. Miss Perez. Miss. Perez. I Miss Pingri. Miss. Ping. I. Mr. Pokean. Mr. Pokean. I Mr. Quigley. Mr. Quigley. I, Mr. Rashenthaler. Mr. Rashinthaler. No, Mr. Rogers. Mr. Rogers. No. Mr. Rutherford. Mr. Rutherford. No. Mr.
▶ 7:58:48Mr. Simpson. No. Mr. Strong. Mr. Strong. No. Mrs. Torres.
▶ 7:58:53Mrs. Torres. I. Miss. Underwood.
▶ 7:58:56Miss. Underwood. I. Mr. Valido. Mr. Valido. No. M. Washerman Schultz. Mrs. Watson Coleman. Mrs. Watson. Coleman. I. Mr. Wac. Mr. Wac. No. Mr. Zinci.
▶ 7:59:10Mr. Zinci. No.
▶ 7:59:12Are there members uh wishing to record their vote or change their vote? Gentle lady from Nevada.
▶ 7:59:20Miss Lee I.
▶ 7:59:21Gentleman from Maryland.
▶ 7:59:24Dr. Harris. No.
▶ 7:59:25Gentleman from Texas.
▶ 7:59:28Mr. Cloud. No.
▶ 7:59:29Gentleman from West Virginia.
▶ 7:59:33Gentleman from Mississippi.
▶ 7:59:35Mr. Moore. No. Mr. Guest. No. Gentle lady from Florida.
▶ 7:59:40Miss Washerman Schultz. I
▶ 7:59:42gentleman from Tennessee.
▶ 7:59:44Mr. Fleshman. No.
▶ 7:59:47Are there other members? Uh, gentleman from Nevada.
▶ 7:59:52Mr. Amade. No.
▶ 7:59:54Gentleman from Virginia.
▶ 7:59:57Mr. Klene. No.
▶ 7:59:59Are there other members wishing to record a change of vote? I don't want to miss anybody. Uh, okay. The clerk will
▶ 8:00:49On this vote, the eyes are 26, the nose are 34, and the amendment is not The gentleman from California, Mr. Lean, is recognized for an amendment.
▶ 8:01:05Chairman, I have an amendment at the
▶ 8:01:08It's only It's only one sentence. So,
▶ 8:01:10would the gentleman want it read or want to dispense with?
▶ 8:01:14I I want this read. Gentlemen want the clerk will read the amendment.
▶ 8:01:18And if she reads it, maybe you'll listen to her.
▶ 8:01:23All our members would be wise to An amendment offered by Mr. Levven at the appropriate place in the bill. Insert the following section blank. None of the funds appropriated by this act shall be used in contravention to the Empoundment Control Act as amended and the Anti-Deficiency Act as amended. The
▶ 8:01:42gentleman is recognized for remarks on his amendment.
▶ 8:01:45Thank you. I wanted her to read that and not me because when I read it, nobody seems to care. But I what I what I want to say is I know it's been a long day. I appreciate uh the chairman. And I appreciate everybody for their patience through this. Uh but this I feel is a very serious matter and I just ask for uh your to indulge me for just a few minutes and I hope you care as I do because I think that this really impacts us all. Again, it's the simplest amendment you'll see today.
▶ 8:02:14It just reinforces what's on that plaque right there. And Mr. Chairman, I'm really happy that plaque is still there. Nobody's tried to take it down. No money shall be drawn from the treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law. Article one section 9 clause 7 most single most important sentence in the constitution for this committee. If you look at the logo of this committee which mr chairman I think that house creative services or whoever designed that logo they did a great job. Article 1 section 9 clause 7 is in the logo of this committee.
▶ 8:02:44So what's it mean? Well, it means among other things that we as the Congress, as the appropriators, we're the ones who decide where the funds will go or not go. That's it. And in 1974, the Empowerment Control Act built on that. And it's the law of the land. The Anti-Deficiency Act, which says the president can't spend money without consent of Congress, is the law of the land. So, this should be as easy as it gets.
▶ 8:03:09I think we all would agree that these laws and the words on that plaque are essential to protecting the separation of powers and Congress's power of the purse. We all worked really hard to become members of Congress, right? Every single one of you worked really hard to get here and to join this committee. We all worked really hard to join this committee because we wanted to have a say in in how taxpayer dollars are spent or not spent.
▶ 8:03:35And we can disagree and we do disagree all the time about which programs deserve funding. But I think we all can agree that it's up to us us in Congress to make that choice. This isn't a partisan thing. My friends on the other side of the aisle, I just ask you to think about this for a second. It doesn't matter the subject of today's debate around the pocket recisions.
▶ 8:03:59uh it matters that tomorrow's debate is going to be about something else and then the day after that or the year after that will be about something else. But one thing won't change that we as the Congress have the power of the purse, not the president. So I'll give you one example and my friend Mr. Quay gave me a hard time earlier this morning when I gave this example. I don't love the billions of dollars in fossil fuel subsidies that the United States appropriates every year.
▶ 8:04:26You might think that that's great, but we as a Congress debate, we vote, and we decide. And in the case of the seven years I've been here, we've decided to provide a lot of subsidies for the oil and gas industry. What's to stop a future president from deciding, you know what, I don't agree from a policy perspective with those subsidies and to unilaterally make that decision that they are going to freeze those funds.
▶ 8:04:52The precedent that we are creating right now with what Russ vote wants to do creates those circumstances so that down the road a president will freeze or cut something that you don't like and you right now are implicitly saying that that's okay. So I ask you to consider the day when the shoe is on the other foot when a future Democratic president decides to zero out funding for something you fought for and you won in this chamber.
▶ 8:05:19something that you feel is important to your district and your constituents. This is not a partisan question. It's a constitutional question. And our responsibility is to defend the institution of the Congress, not to weaken it. My friends, I fear that if we give this power to this degree, to this administration, this is unprecedented. It really is. Every executive wants more power. There's no question about that.
▶ 8:05:46But giving the president the unilateral ability to pick and choose without the proper uh empoundment process or recisions process that we just went through recently the 45day clock giving them cart blanch. My friends don't do this. Please consider the good of this institution and vote yes on this amendment. Thank you Mr.
▶ 8:06:09Thank gentleman for his remarks. The gentleman from Ohio. The chairman of the subcommittee is recognized to respond to the amendment.
▶ 8:06:16I appreciate my colleagues wanting to limit the power of the president. The president's interest in testing uh empowerment authority is not new and that authority is reflected in the congressional budget and impeachment control act of 1974 which sets out the expedited procedures for both deferring and rescending budget authority. The administration has followed that process sending recision uh packages to the Congress.
▶ 8:06:39So, uh, while I understand that sometimes there's disagreements between the executive and the, uh, legislative branch, those are best decided in the judiciary, and I will oppose this amendment.
▶ 8:06:53Gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hoy is recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 8:07:03Said what I've said a few times today, uh, and I'm still there. This is an institutional issue, not a political issue. And we let down our institution if we don't tell the executive that we expect them to follow the law. Is that too much to ask? I support this
▶ 8:07:27Thank gentlemen. Gentle lady from Florida, Miss Wasserman Schultz, recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 8:07:35Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I I rise in strong support of the amendment offered by my friend Mr. Leaven and I saved my uh very strong feelings about the abuse of our prerogative here as appropriators for this amendment's debate. Um when the heck are we going to stand up for ourselves?
▶ 8:07:59When the heck are we going to come together and stand up for the co-equal branch of government and our express authoritative responsibility to for the power of the purse? Why why are we all not pushing back Once upon a time there was a saying.
▶ 8:08:23I served in this body on this committee when the culture of this committee was that there were Democrats, Republicans, and appropriators and and there are still fumes that exist in that regard and and they play out regularly.
▶ 8:08:37But if there's anything that we we should be demonstrating that we are neither Republicans nor Democrats but appropriators, it is on this issue, the impoundment of funds, the recision of funds unilaterally without consultation and without authority.
▶ 8:08:54And I I mean that saying originated, our culture originated because appropriators understood that this process of funding our government could only work if members on both sides worked together and honored article 1, section 9, clause one. You can read read it right up there yourself. No money shall be drawn from the treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law and a regular statement in account of the receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time.
▶ 8:09:23That clause is the root of why appropriators are unique in the Congress because our job is not our job is essential not just to the functioning of our government but also to our democracy. Congress is to check on the executives's ability to spend money. For decades that process has been a bipartisan one so that no one administration at one time, no matter what party leads it, can abuse their temporary position for their own gain.
▶ 8:09:50In 1974, Congress reasserted our role in controlling the purse, both in terms of the money that could be spent, but also ensuring that the money we appropriate is used how Congress intended. So, Mr. Leven's amendment makes total sense. In fact, I would have probably gone farther and and taken another step and said that no money can be spent on any presidential or vice presidential travel until the Trump administration comes into compliance with the Empowerment Control Act of 1974.
▶ 8:10:19Because why should the Americans foot the bill for JD Vance's birthday kayaking trip when the American people are struggling to make make ends meet and this White House continues to hold up funding and freeze programs appropriated by Congress that serve and protect American families? I I mean why did each of us want to be on this committee, the most powerful at least once the most powerful committee of any?
▶ 8:10:44because we wanted to make sure that we had the ability to improve and impact people's lives through the resources that we spend here. Because at the end of the day, this bill, these bills, these 12 appropriations bills, these are the only bills that have to pass. That's what I tell colleagues when they inquire about what happens here in this room on the appropriations committee.
▶ 8:11:08We have the power of the purse and we have the only power that exists because our bills have to pass or the government shuts down. Mr. Leven's amendment is spoton. Congress should not fund lawbreaking, especially when those very actions are chipping away at Congress's constitutional role. I know many of my Republican colleagues agree, but so far you have not spoken up. Let me be clear. The Trump administration's contempt for the congressional appropriations process is wrong and it is illegal.
▶ 8:11:39It has nothing but contempt for good government ethics and bipartisan work in Congress. So why should we foot the bill for their unlawful acts? We should not. And I urge all of my colleagues to vote yes for common sense and good governance and to stand up for our constitutional authority that you all know is being trampled upon by this administration. I yield back the balance of my time.
▶ 8:12:05A gentle lady from Minnesota, Miss McCullum's recognized to address the
▶ 8:12:10Thank you.
▶ 8:12:11Reprogramming, which I can only speak for the Department of Defense and some of the services saying, well, we want agile funding. You don't need to do the reprogramming. So, there's a slippage that's starting to happen there. I can only speak to my committee. There is the reconciliation process we went through and then there is the empowerment process which we are living through which is illegal. With that, I'd like to yield the remainder of my time to Mr.
▶ 8:12:40I uh I thank my friend and colleague uh from Minnesota and I thank my friend and colleague from Ohio as well. I appreciate what he said uh about letting the courts decide. I I worry uh that this is so fundamentally different um that if we punt right now, if we just kind of turn a blind eye to this that we so erode the power of this institution, we're not ever really going to be able to get it back.
▶ 8:13:07And I think it's different what's happening now than what happened under Nixon. Uh and I I just thought I would very briefly touch upon this. So, past presidents of both parties have tested the boundaries of executive power. In the early 1970s, President Nixon tried to withhold funds that Congress had explicitly appropriated. Congress responded, unlike now, Congress responded then in 1974 by passing the Empowerment Control Act.
▶ 8:13:35This was a broadly bipartisan measure that set out a clear process. a clear process that if a president wants to cancel or delay spending, he has to send a recision request to Congress. Congress has to approve it. If Congress says no, the president just doesn't get his way because he wants to. It's up to Congress to make that final determination. And that has been the president for 50 years.
▶ 8:14:04Every administration since, Republican and Democrat alike, has followed that law. It was upheld by the Supreme Court on a 7-2 decision in 1975. Presidents may have not liked every line item that we have sent them. But they respected the system. They respected you. They respected all of us in this committee because they understood that the power of the purse rests here, not at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. The power of the purse rests here.
▶ 8:14:35And what Russ Vote is attempting now is very different. And let me explain. A pocket recision is not a request to Congress at all. It's an attempt to simply run out the clock to withhold money until the fiscal year ends and then claim that the authority to spend those dollars has expired.
▶ 8:14:56And the GAO has already said clearly that this maneuver is illegal under the Empowerment Control Act. Again, that's not me saying that. That's the GAO saying that. It's not even a gray area. It's a direct violation of the law and Congress's constitutional role. If we allow this to stand and we just say, "Well, the courts will figure it out," then I would offer to you no appropriation is safe.
▶ 8:15:24Today, the target again might be something where you agree with what the president is doing. Tomorrow, it inevitably will not be. It will be something that you want to advocate to protect, but you have allowed the president that the president unilaterally in the OM can act however they choose and you've allowed it to happen. It could be subsidies that you fought for that I might disagree with, but you strongly advocate for.
▶ 8:15:53Again, we fight it out. We debate. we have discussion and then a vote is taken and then it becomes the law when it's signed by the president. So again, what I can't respect, what none of us should tolerate is a president unilaterally shredding article one of the constitution. And again, the amendment before us, it does not create new law.
▶ 8:16:17It simply reaffirms existing law that the executive branch must follow the Empowerment Control Act and that Congress controls the power of the purse. A no on this is saying very plainly that you support the executive branch breaking the law. There's no ifs, ands, or buts about it. That cannot be the message that we send as this body. Our duty here is not partisan. It's constitutional.
▶ 8:16:43So let's stand together, defend the institution of Congress, and uphold the rule of law. And I yield the balance of my time.
▶ 8:16:53Thank the gentleman for his comments, and I could I couldn't agree with him more. The decision needs to be made. When we have laws signed into law as appropriation laws, are they respected or not? In the previous Trump administration during the government shutdown, I've got examples of what took place in the Department of Interior that the inspectors, GAO, and the rest said were all illegal.
▶ 8:17:20Are we going to give that a rubber stamp today? I yield back.
▶ 8:17:26Thank gentle lady, the gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Klyurn's recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 8:17:32Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I stand in strong support of this amendment. I yield the balance of my Thank you, gentlemen.
▶ 8:17:39Thank the gentleman for yielding. Uh the subcommittee chairman said that we ought to leave this to the judiciary to the courts to resolve. The courts have resolved it. Supreme Court's treatment of the claim that there is presidential empowerment power is well summar summarized by Justice Scalia, that famous left-wing justice. What's that?
▶ 8:18:07President Nick, he said this and I quote, "President Nixon, the Mahatma Gandhi of all impounders asserted at a press conference in 1973 that his quote constitutional right close quote to impound appropriated funds was absolutely clear." Our decision two years later in train versus city of New York in
▶ 8:18:381975 proved him wrong. So there is no doubt what the constitutional law in this case is. Justice Scalia, a very very respected on frankly both sides of the aisle for his extraordinary intellect and courage uh in speaking his mind and what he thought the law was. So I uh urge the adoption of Mr.
▶ 8:19:08Leven's thank gentlemen. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentleman's recognized for one minute to close.
▶ 8:19:24Thank my colleagues again uh for listening. I just want to close by reminding us why the framers gave Congress the power of the purse in the first place. James Madison wrote in Federalist 58 that this power is, and I quote, the most complete and effectual weapon and quote the people have against overreach by the executive. If we surrender that, we surrender the very foundation of representative government. It's not about today's policy fight.
▶ 8:19:52It's about whether we in this body will defend the Constitution we swore an oath to uphold. A no vote is not just a policy disagreement. It is a green light for the executive to break the law and dismantle the separation of powers. Not just now, but in future years, in future decades. My friends, we're appropriators. That's why we fought so hard to be here. Let's guard this institution's authority for the next generation. Let's not fail in that duty. One last time, I urge an I vote.
▶ 8:20:27I thank the gentleman. The questions now in the amendment offered by the gentleman from California. All those in favor say I.
▶ 8:20:35All oppose say no.
▶ 8:20:38The opinion of the chair knows have it. Roll call has been requested. sufficient uh show of support is uh there. So uh a rule recorded votes ordered. The clerk will call the role.
▶ 8:20:51Mr. Aderhalt,
▶ 8:20:52Mr. Adder Halt, no. Mr. Aguilar.
▶ 8:20:54Mr. Aguilar. I Mr. Alford. Mr. Alford. No. Mr. Ammeday.
▶ 8:20:59Mr. Ammeday. No. Mrs. Bice. Mr. Bishop.
▶ 8:21:05Mr. Bishop. I. Mr. Calbertt.
▶ 8:21:07Mr. Calbert. No. Mr. Carter.
▶ 8:21:09Mr. Carter. No. Mr. Casease. Mr. Casease. I Mr. Sisammani. Mr. Sisammani. No. Mr. Klene. Mr. Klene. No. Mr. Cloud. Mr. Cloud. No. Mr. Clyurn.
▶ 8:21:22Mr. Klyber. I Mr. Clyde.
▶ 8:21:24Mr. Clyde. No. Mr. Cole.
▶ 8:21:26Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Quayar.
▶ 8:21:29Mr. Quayar. I. Miss Dean. Miss Dean. I Mr. Loro. Hi.
▶ 8:21:33Mr. Loro. I Mr. Diaz Bolard.
▶ 8:21:37Mr. Edwards. Mr. Edwards. No. Mr. LZ Mr. Elz No Miss Escobar Miss Escobar I Mr. Espayot
▶ 8:21:49Mr. Flechman Miss Frankle
▶ 8:21:52Miss Frankle I Mr. Franklin
▶ 8:21:55Mr. Franklin no Mr. Gonzalez Mr. Gonzalez no Mr. Guest
▶ 8:22:00Mr. Guest no Mr. Harter
▶ 8:22:02Mr. Harter I Dr. Harris
▶ 8:22:04Dr. Harris no Mrs. Henson
▶ 8:22:07Mr. Hoyer
▶ 8:22:08Mr. Mr. Hoyer. I Mr. Ivy.
▶ 8:22:11Mr. Ivy. I Mr. Joyce.
▶ 8:22:13Mr. Joyce. No. Miss Captor. Mr. Loa.
▶ 8:22:18Mr. Loa. No. Miss Lee.
▶ 8:22:20Miss Lee. I. Miss. Let
▶ 8:22:23Miss Leello. No. Mr. Lean.
▶ 8:22:25Mr. Lean. I Miss Mallaloy.
▶ 8:22:27Miss Mallaloy. No. Miss. McCullum.
▶ 8:22:30Miss. McCullum. I. Miss Ming. Miss Ming. I. Mr. Molinar. Mr. Molinar. No. Mr. Moore. Mr. Moore. No. Mr. Morelli. Mr. Morelli. I Mr. Murvan. Mr. Mvan. I Mr. New House. Mr. New House. No. Miss
▶ 8:22:48Miss Ping. Miss Perez. I Miss Pingri. Miss Pingri. I Mr. Pokean. Mr. Pokean. I Mr. Quigley. Mr. Quigley. I Mr. Rashenthaler. Mr. Rashenthaler. No. Mr.
▶ 8:23:05Mr. Rogers. Mr. Rogers. No. Mr. Rutherford. Mr. Rutherford. No. Mr. Simpson. Mr. Simpson. No. Mr. Strong. Mr. Strong. No. Mrs. Torres.
▶ 8:23:18Mrs. Torres. I. Miss. Underwood. Hi.
▶ 8:23:21Miss. Underwood. I. Mr. Valido. Mr. Valado. No. Miss Wasserman Schultz.
▶ 8:23:27Miss Wasserman Schultz. I Mrs. Watson
▶ 8:23:30Mrs. Watson. Coleman. I. Mr. WAC. Mr. WAC. No. Mr. Zinci.
▶ 8:23:35No. Mr. Zinci. No.
▶ 8:23:38Are there other members wishing to record their vote or change their vote? The gentleman from Tennessee.
▶ 8:23:46Mr. Fleshman. No.
▶ 8:23:47Gentle lady from Ohio.
▶ 8:23:50I would just add
▶ 8:23:52Don't leave Chuck. I would just ask you to applaud our two members, the chairman, the ranking member who are doing double duty and managed to get back here to vote while they're on the And I I regret that you're doing having to do this, but I'm going to do what every member does. I'm going to blame it all on leadership. If they would have just let us do our work earlier, we would not have this problem, but thank both of you for what you're doing.
▶ 8:24:23Okay. You bet. Thank you. Gentle lady from
▶ 8:24:28Mrs. Bice. No.
▶ 8:24:30The gentleman from Florida who's absent Also, no.
▶ 8:24:35Mr. Diaz Bolard, no.
▶ 8:24:38We have other members wishing to record the vote or change the vote.
▶ 8:24:45Seeing none, the clerks will tally.
▶ 8:25:28On this vote, the eyes are 27, the nose are 34. The amendment is not adopted. Gentle lady from Pennsylvania, Miss Dean's recognized for an amendment.
▶ 8:25:42I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk and I too ask for a reading of my amendment since it is a single sentence.
▶ 8:25:49Gentle ladies entitled. The clerk will read the amendment.
▶ 8:25:53Amendment offered by Miss Dean at the appropriate place in the bill. Insert the following section blank. None of the funds made available by this act may be used by the Department of Treasury to withhold, redact, or delay the release of records, including suspicious activity reports relating to the Epstein Maxwell case to Congress.
▶ 8:26:12Gentle lady's recognized to explain her
▶ 8:26:14Thank you. I thank you very much, Chairman Cole. I rise in support of my amendment which states that none of the funds made available to the Treasury Department by this bill can be used to prevent the release of financial records. After all, here we are marking up the financial services and general government appropriations bill, including suspicious activity reports, SARS, relating to the Epstein Maxwell case to Congress. Colleagues, enough is enough.
▶ 8:26:42It is past time that we have the full transparency into the financing of the Epstein horrific sex trafficking network. We quite simply need to follow the money. This is something that has already been bipartisan in its support. And I invite through this amendment further bipartisan support. Senator Widen, for example, for years has been investigating the financing of Epstein's sex trafficking network.
▶ 8:27:08And over this past weekend, as part of his committee's investigation, Oversight Chairman James Comr sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Besson requesting that the department produce certain SARS relevant to his investigation. This information is critical for effective congressional oversight. We need to understand the scope of the operation to secure justice for the victims and to hold those involved accountable.
▶ 8:27:34It is our duty after all to seek justice and to prevent further harm. As Mr. Hoyer said, you don't traffic a thousand children over the course of many years and just arrest two people. That just simply doesn't happen. There are perpetrators out there who probably have gone on to injure other children and women. We know Mr. Epstein and Ms.
▶ 8:28:02Maxwell were not the only criminals in this case. Numerous prominence prominent businessmen were financially connected to Epstein in ways one can only describe as abnormal. We need to know if these transactions raised alarms and if not what went wrong so that we can prevent something like this from ever happening again or happening right now. Additionally, the girls and women they were criminally assaulted. They were raped. They were trafficked. They were molested.
▶ 8:28:32They were groomed. They deserve full honesty, transparency about what happened to them. And they deserve a chance to heal if possible and where possible. I commend the victims and the survivors and the survivors families for their strength in coming forward and coming here. May they lead us out of this dark period.
▶ 8:28:55I'm sad to say that I fear my amendment will not seek uh will not gather the positive support from my Republican colleagues. I sincerely hope you will join me on this amendment. Let's get the SARS. Let's not allow uh for the SARS to be uh blocked by our own Congress, our own government, by our own acts as appropriators. I want to read a little more of what one of my colleagues here was reading today.
▶ 8:29:23Victims of Jeffrey Epstein gave emotional accounts of sexual abuse on Wednesday here at the Capitol. They spoke at the steps of the US Capitol and called for lawmakers to release more files about the convicted sex offender. One women woman, Lisa Phillips, said the group had begun compiling a confidential list of Epstein associates who they say were involved in abuse.
▶ 8:29:46quote, "We will confidentially compile the names we all know were regularly in the Epstein world." End quote. She said, "It will be done by survivors and for survivors. Let's stand with survivors as members of Congress. Let's stand with them and make sure everyone is treated to justice." And I ask for support for my amendment.
▶ 8:30:15Gentleman from Ohio, Miss Joyce, chairman of the subcommittee, is recognized to respond to the amendment.
▶ 8:30:21I appreciate the gentleoman's amendment. Uh I certainly don't think any anyone here supports money laundering or using financial system to facilitate illegal activity. The oversight in uh uh government reform committee has released documents yesterday. They're in a process, as you just pointed out, of continuing to pursue those documents. And uh one thing, you know, I just want to sort of set the record straight.
▶ 8:30:45Uh having been a prosecutor for uh 25 years and having as a co-chair of this uh uh caucus against sexual violence. Um you know, this first started in 2006. Uh he was convicted in 2008. He went to prison. He was out in nine. He's arrested again in 2019 and committed suicide allegedly or did. I'm not sure.
▶ 8:31:12That's part of what you all would imagine was a conspiracy. But where the hell was the outrage then? These kids have always been the same and it's they don't deserve what's happened to them. They don't deserve any of the treatment that they got and they don't deserve to be played like they're some type of of game here. they these kids should be taken care of and the work should be done. No, it's inappropriate to say that somehow by uh people here are not doing their job or don't care about victims. That's the wrong part.
▶ 8:31:41This has gone on for decades and nobody's done a goddamn thing about it and it's not fair to blame either side.
▶ 8:31:49Would the gentleman yield?
▶ 8:31:52Would the gentleman yield?
▶ 8:31:55The gentleman did not yield. So, the gentle lady will please sit down. The gentleman from
▶ 8:32:01the gentleman from
▶ 8:32:03Believe me, I've been there.
▶ 8:32:04I'm sorry. The gentle lady's out of order. Please sit down.
▶ 8:32:07The gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hoyer, is recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 8:32:14It is appropriate that we get emotional. It would be appropriate for a lot of us to get angry. will recognize that the prosecutor who gave the sweetheart deal to Epstein is now in the Trump administration.
▶ 8:32:37Talking about outrage, this amendment is another amendment that will send a message that we want full disclosure. Why the victims will feel better. There's no doubt about that.
▶ 8:32:58But the why, as I have said, is to protect those who may be victims in the future of the people that are being My friend, Mr. Joyce is was a former prosecutor.
▶ 8:33:16I am sure that he talked to victims and said to them, "If you don't testify, the next victim is going to be somebody who the perpetrator left free assaults. I practice a lot of criminal law in my life. Not for a long time.
▶ 8:33:46If you're not desiring to hide something, then what is the harm with having this information in the public sphere? It's always the right time to do the right thing. You may be correct.
▶ 8:34:05I think and as I've said, some people swept this under the rug and as a result of it being swept under the rug and a short-term sentence being applied, uh, more victims, I'm convinced, became victims. So, this is the right time because it's always the right time to do the right thing. That may be a trit saying, but it is absolutely true.
▶ 8:34:35And these amendments are are they embarrassing a political hot? Yes, they are. Frankly, as has been said, more because of the activity on the MAGA side of the ledger than our side of the But whoever is concerned about this, whoever is asking us for this it's the right thing to do. And right now is the right time for us to say it.
▶ 8:35:05I yield back.
▶ 8:35:07Thank you. The chair recognizes Miss Wasserman Schultz.
▶ 8:35:12Been recognized.
▶ 8:35:14Thank you. I I thank the gentleman for recognizing me. Um because I think it needs to be made very clear that there are some of us who have spent years trying to make sure that justice was served, that the survivors were able to make sure that they got information released.
▶ 8:35:36Um, I I would ask unanimous consent to enter into the record this article from Politact, which is a fact-checking a a a reputable fact-checking media outlet. Uh, the the headline reads, "Have Democrats always been interested in Epstein case transparency.
▶ 8:35:54We looked back." Well, I will scroll down to the se the relevant section that says Democrats began to seek records about Epstein after the Miami Herald's late 2018 investigation into the case.
▶ 8:36:08And that is the point at which the Miami Herald did a massive Pulitzer Prizewinning expose where most of the facts that we know today came out, including the sweetheart deal that the US attorney in Miami, Alex Aosta, that let this sex trafficker who raped get off with a slap on in the effing
▶ 8:36:41They cut a deal with him to plea to state misdemeanors. State misdemeanors. They let him leave the jail cell after spending the night in the evenings and go to his cushy office to work on work release every day.
▶ 8:37:02Meanwhile, we just heard from the young women who experienced and were his victims and the victims of his that some of them even once he was in where he ended up committing suicide were were still being victimized by him.
▶ 8:37:24At one point, one woman described that she was in a jail cell with him and he was still abusing these girls and these women. I'm going to try to remain calm, although I am certainly not calm right now. No one should dare suggest that there weren't Democrats actively and consistently fully engaged.
▶ 8:37:53This article mentions Lois Frankle, myself, and others who never stopped trying to get these survivors justice, and we owe them that justice right now. these files should be released because the accompllices, by the way, much of the deal that was cut, the sweetheart deal that got him the slap on the wrist, much of that deal also shielded his This is and has always been and continues to be a massive cover up
▶ 8:38:24that that that Donald Trump and his cronies never want to see the light of day. Don't play into it. There are Republican members that I know believe that these survivors deserve their the justice and their day in court that they never got because Alex Acasta and a whole bunch of other people who were part of the crony rich guy situation that existed in South Florida protected
▶ 8:38:54pro protected a whole lot of rich people who were allowed to rape and sexually abuse and traffic teenage girls. It's an outrage. And and yes, I I'll close by adding that. And what did Donald Trump do?
▶ 8:39:14He rewarded the former US attorney that led the deal cutting on this with a cabinet position, made him the secretary of This is revolting. spare me the accusations or the suggestions that Democrats haven't stayed fully engaged in this. We have there's documentation.
▶ 8:39:38I filed legislation that I would urge find me a Republican colleague who will join me in the Courtney Wild Crime Victims Reinstatement Act to make sure that we can ensure that this never happens again. That a sweetheart deal can never be cut like this again. That no one ever gets off like Jeffrey Epstein and his accompllices did with a slap on the wrist.
▶ 8:40:03I've had bipartisan Republican support for this bill for years and now deafening silence. I know there's got to be someone with a spine to step up and allow the victims to make sure that the crime victim rights crime crime victim's rights act that is federal law that they never were allowed to have exercised because of the sweetheart deal that was cut that we make sure that that injustice never occurs again. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
▶ 8:40:33Thank you. Gentle lady from Florida is ready to address the
▶ 8:40:36unanimous consent request was agreed.
▶ 8:40:39Thank you. And you know a little less emotional uh recital of some of the facts. I just a lot of what happened happened in my hometown in in Palm Beach County. And actually it was the police chief in Palm Beach County that actually brought the whole Epstein matter to light. So I can assure you that I was very involved from the from the from day one when we found out out about this.
▶ 8:41:07But just to uh reinforce what uh my colleague uh Debbie was Moses has has uh in in 2019 the Democratic Women's Caucus called for an oversight hearing to be held in Palm Beach County.
▶ 8:41:24Carolyn Maloney was the chair of the committee and she agreed to do that and we were about to do that when we were contacted by the justice department who were about who I guess were in the either the beginning or the middle of their prosecution of Maxwell and they told us that we would not be allowed to bring any victims to testify because of the potential of they of
▶ 8:41:54a later cross-examination and they asked us not to have a hearing. That's that's what happened when the Democrats were in charge. And so we respected that. There was really nothing we could do about it because obviously we wanted uh Maxwell to be prosecuted. Uh Jackie Spear and Debbie Wasim Schultz with myself, we proposed legislation because the victims were never notified of of the plea deal.
▶ 8:42:22And let me say it wasn't just a Acasta in Miami. Our prosecutor in Palm Beach County, Barry uh if you would read the and I ask I suggest everyone read the transcript of the grand jury uh proceedings that Mr. Krish had his his uh attorneys undertake. Uh those that transcript was made available by a lawsuit by the Palm Beach Post.
▶ 8:42:51It is the most disgraceful, uh statement or grand jury of facts you will ever read. The prosecutors called two of the girls two and treated them like they were prostitutes. It's shocking. And that's why Mr. Epstein got charged just with with soliciting a prostitute. That was what he was charged with and procuring prostitution.
▶ 8:43:21And that wasn't even and then to make it worse, they sentenced him in the we call the light jail in Palm Beach County. And he got not one cell, he got two cells, which I actually at some point got to visit after he had gone.
▶ 8:43:38But uh he had one cell where he could sleep and one cell where he could work and then every day he was allowed out to go to his office where uh we're fairly certain he continued his activities. So a a lot of bad stuff has happened. I don't know you know how and why, but I do feel this and I I think all of us should agree with this. It it is survivors who deserve the justice.
▶ 8:44:08It is it is the survivors who deserve to know the facts and you know what do they say let the chips fall where they fall and that's how I feel and just to correct the record and thank you so much for giving us that
▶ 8:44:24Thank gentle lady gentle lady from Texas Escobar is recognized to address the
▶ 8:44:31You thank you Mr. Chairman. Um, and I want to thank the gentle women from Florida for correcting the record and offering a little truthtelling during this discussion.
▶ 8:44:48And I'm gonna I'm gonna ask my colleague, the gentle lady from Pennsylvania, if she wants some time because it was so unsettling to hear the accusation that Democrats have not cared. There was no outrage. I I hope you saw the the outrage. Sorry, I don't read lips.
▶ 8:45:08Um, but I will but I will say I will say it it is it was one person who made it a campaign promise and it's the president of the United States to release all this information and today he called it a hoax. He called it a hoax.
▶ 8:45:29On the same day that these courageous women, some who were previously unnamed, some who had never come forward before, came forward to share their stories, we owe it to them.
▶ 8:45:49But I I will say being a relatively new member to this body, a relatively new member of Congress given the t the uh lifespan of the typical member of Congress, I think many of us are still considered relatively new.
▶ 8:46:05What is most frustrating to me about this governing body is that people love to talk about what hasn't happened in the past when we have the power to do something right So regardless of whatever happened in the past, the the bottom line is each one of us in one of the most powerful governing bodies in the country in the world, we have power today, right now.
▶ 8:46:35The decision is whether we choose to use it or not. I'd like to yield to my colleague Maline Dean.
▶ 8:46:44I thank the gentleoman for yielding. I thank you for your comments. I associate myself with your comments. And to the gentle women from Florida, thank you for your work on this for years and thank you for just correcting a piece of the record. There's so much more to it than that. Mr. Chairman, I understand that you are upset that this lays upon our table. I wish it didn't. I wish people long ago.
▶ 8:47:13I I would ask you to allow me to complete my statement. I think the gentleoman a moment ago spoke to that nonsense. This lays at our table now. The victims were here today. I wish they didn't have to be here. But for you to suggest that we were somehow using them, these women came forward. Some have come forward in the past. Some with the courage and the pain on their faces.
▶ 8:47:42It's so disrespectful that someone would say, "Well, dog on it, you didn't deal with it." People have tried to deal with it for a long time. I wish the Department of Justice had dealt with it. I wish Florida had dealt with it. I wish he had not been given that sweetheart deal. And I wish that the names had not been covered up of who participated. Remember the attorney general? She had the list on her desk and then it evaporated. It is known who is in that list.
▶ 8:48:11This Department of Justice knows who's in that list. Mr. Trump knows a lot about what happened in this. Somebody's trying to cover it up. 33,000 pages that were released, we all know are a drop in the bucket compared to what actually uh is known and has been investigated when there's a thousand victims. It's not just two people who were culpable. We show no other predators. There's no other names being revealed.
▶ 8:48:40There's a lot of people who know an awful lot. There was tremendous depth of But I want to end with this. This is entirely about the victims. And you revictimize them when you say, "Well, you didn't do enough and you didn't do enough and why didn't you do something that year?" It's on us. It is on us to do something about it. We are Congress.
▶ 8:49:06And I suggested to you, she said, "Survivors will do it for survivors. Let's stand with the survivors. Let's not leave it on them. Let's not say, "Okay, DOJ failed. This administration failed, Congress failed." Why would we want to be in these jobs if we don't seek justice for victims so grievously harmed? Think if this was your daughter. I have four granddaughters.
▶ 8:49:32Think if it was one of yours, would you be content saying, you know, you know what? They didn't do enough four years ago, so I don't really care about this. This is entirely about the victims, and they have been lost I don't know why you sit contentedly allowing them to be lost. I ask for support for my amendment. I yield back to the gentle lady with great thanks.
▶ 8:50:02Gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Ivy is recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 8:50:08I I've tried pretty hard to stay out of the Epstein stuff. I I really have and I I had no intention of speaking today. Uh but the subcommittee chair, I I got to tell you, the the statement that you made was shocking and disappointing. Not just because it really steps on the feelings and the sensitivities of of the survivors who brought them. They came forth on their own. I I didn't ask them to come here today.
▶ 8:50:39I didn't even know they were coming till I read about it in the paper. Um, but you know, the fact that you would like say that after having been a prosecutor like I was, having walked women through this, gone through this with them, seen awful results in some instances, and it doesn't get any worse than this, right? Uh, and here they're still being attacked. They've gone through all of these things where they some of them came forward, nobody believed them, apparently.
▶ 8:51:08And then you're going to sit there and say, "Well, you know, where were the Democrats?" Look, if you want to do something about this as a former prosecutor, as someone who at least said that you care about what happened, you've got a chance to do it now. Where are you going to go from here, Mr. Subcommittee Chairman? I see you talking to the full committee chairman. You can ignore me if you want. I don't think you really can, though.
▶ 8:51:34If you really believe what you said, if you really stand for what you did as a prosecutor for two and a half decades, now is the time to demonstrate it. Show something that demonstrates how awful this was and that we have the ability and the capability and really beyond responsibility. This is like the ultimate duty.
▶ 8:51:59I think it if you were ever a prosecutor and if you ever prosecuted cases like this, it doesn't get any harder or more demanding than this and it shouldn't. So if you if you still feel that way, if you still believe what you said you believed, now is the chance to show it. And with that, I yield back.
▶ 8:52:21Are there other members wishing to address the amendment?
▶ 8:52:27gentleman from Nevada. airman for the time. Um, like Mr. Ivy, you probably have to have your head examined to want to stand up and say anything at this point, but wouldn't be the first time for me. So, let's just go ahead and take a whack at it, huh? I want to put a a thought forward because we've talked about duty all day long and stand up for Congress and all that other sort of stuff.
▶ 8:52:55And many of you served in state legislators and other deliberative bodies, city councils or whatever. A and I want to say I I just want to say a word Now I speak only for myself. So nobody can nobody leave the room and say amate said you should have done this or you didn't do that or whatever.
▶ 8:53:19But I will tell you, as just a consumer of information on this committee, when something like this comes up and the first time somebody's talked to me about it, as a guy who's got a vote on the is in this room with all this running, fine. It's America. It's your absolute right to do it.
▶ 8:53:39But I can tell you this, in my experience on this committee, whether it's old or young or just, you know, whatever, I've worked with people on that side of the room. I can look around on many things where we were able to come to some agreement because we went to them before the committee meeting or the markup and said, "Hey, here's what I'm trying to do. What do you think?
▶ 8:54:07Tell me your thoughts, you know, all this stuff. There's there's Democrats, there's Republicans, and there's appropriators. Well, guess what? If you talk to me, you might find that you're having a discussion between appropriators. But when it's on this with the cameras running and everybody's on their talking points, and we've all got them, so don't take that as a But it's when you talk to me in here for the first time and you say, "Come on, let's go.
▶ 8:54:34We're swinging for the fences and we want you to It's like I'll just say speaking only for myself. It's much more effective with me when you say, "Hey, here's an amendment I'm planning on bringing in financial services. You like it? You don't like it?" And listen, sometimes say, "Hey, ma'am, sir, I don't like that amendment very much." Well, what would you do to change it? Well, here it is. That's the way it worked.
▶ 8:55:01At least in the old school backward places where I've got experience, it's like I got a problem with soand so. Well, you either need to go talk to her or him and work it out or see what you can agree on. You can still offer the amendment to swing for the fences, but can you find something you agree on to put in the manager's amendment or that maybe the the subcommittee chair when I was in the minority would say, you know what, I'm not going to say much. That doesn't that isn't happening in my experience this time.
▶ 8:55:30So you can talk about Democrats, Republicans, and but when we come into this room, there's a heck of a lot of talking points with the cameras running. And guess what? Everybody has a ball making their points. But if we really want to be back to appropriators and we really want to exercise our will as a committee, we need to start talking to each other before the full committee markup and god forbid before the subcommittee markup. Thank you.
▶ 8:55:56Good evening and God bless Are there other members wishing to address the amendment?
▶ 8:56:08Uh, gentle lady from New Jersey, Miss Watson Coleman.
▶ 8:56:11I love it when you say young lady from New Jersey. I love it when you say the young lady.
▶ 8:56:16Well, gentle lady's recognized.
▶ 8:56:17Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If you didn't know, because maybe you were someplace that you had no idea what was happening in the news. So if you didn't know, you know now.
▶ 8:56:34So now's a time where you have to make a decision about where were you going to stand as men, as fathers, as mothers, as husbands and wives, as human freaking beings. Where are you going to be now?
▶ 8:56:55This devastation that has been revealed on a level unlike ever before is one of the worst, most disgusting things we've experienced in this country. How you going to hide from it? You cannot hide from it. You cannot hide behind not knowing beforehand because that's a crap.
▶ 8:57:20You cannot hide behind any kind of policy procedure or what should have been done yesterday instead of today. accept responsibility and the blessings you have this day to do something about it so that it doesn't happen to my 14-year-old granddaughter and it doesn't happen to yours because nobody nobody is immune from this
▶ 8:57:50stuff. And if you were white and you were cute and you were having some problems at home, which you all may have experienced right now in your families, your kids were the targets. They were the targets.
▶ 8:58:07So when you think about this moment and what you should do in this moment, whenever you get to write a wrong, whenever you get to stand up for righteousness, whenever you get to execute your duties that you say you have in this third juncture of government that's supposed to have some power and some
▶ 8:58:39and some purpose. Well, you got that chance right now. So, stand up like men and women who believe in humanity and stopping the ugly, the evil, and the mean, and the demonic that's taking place in this Epstein mess. Because you can, if you want to be an appropriator, appropriate appropriately. I yield back.
▶ 8:59:08Are there other members wishing to address the amendment?
▶ 8:59:13Seeing none, the gentle lady is uh recognized for one minute to close.
▶ 8:59:21I thank the chairman and I thank everyone for the give and take on this incredibly painful issue. And as painful as it might have been for us in this brief conversation, we have no idea the pain, the pain that these victims endure day after day, year after year.
▶ 8:59:41So let's elevate them and their courage, elevate their stories so that they may heal, so that they may own their stories, and let's partner with them for justice. As uh Steny offered us, and I was jotting it down just as you said it, Mr. Hoyer, the time is always right to do what is right. Doesn't matter if I did it wrong yesterday. Today I have a chance to get it right. I ask for a yes vote and I yield back.
▶ 9:00:09Thank you, gentle lady. The questions now on the amendment offered by the gentle lady from Pennsylvania. All those in favor say I.
▶ 9:00:16All oppose say no.
▶ 9:00:19Any of chair knows have it. A roll call has been requested. Sufficient show of support has been noted. The recorded vote is ordered and the clerk will call the role.
▶ 9:00:32Mr. Aderhalt.
▶ 9:00:33Mr. Adterholt. No. Mr. Aguilar. Mr. Aguilar. I. Mr. Alford. Mr. Alford. No. Mr. Ammedday. Mr. Amade. No. Mrs. Bice. Mrs. Bice. No. Mr. Bishop. Mr. Bishop. I. Mr. Calbertt. Mr. Calbert. No. Mr. Carter. Mr. Carter. No. Mr. Casease. Mr. Casease. I. Mr. Sisammani. Mr. Sisammani. No. Mr. Klein. Mr. Klene. No. Mr. Cloud.
▶ 9:00:58Mr. Cloud.
▶ 9:01:02Mr. Klyber.
▶ 9:01:04Mr. Klyber. I Mr. Clyde.
▶ 9:01:06Mr. Clyde. No. Mr. Cole.
▶ 9:01:09Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Quayar.
▶ 9:01:11Mr. Quayar. I Miss Dean.
▶ 9:01:14Miss. I. Mr. Deloro. Hi. Mr. Loro. I Mr. Diaz Bolard.
▶ 9:01:18Mr. Diaz Bolard. No. Mr. Edwards. Mr. Edwards. No. Mr. LZ. Mr. Else. No. Mr. Miss Escobar. Miss Escobar. I Mr. Espayat. Mr. Espayott. I Mr. Flechman. Mr. Flechman. No. Miss. Frankle. Miss. Frankle. I. Mr. Franklin. Mr. Franklin. No. Mr. Gonzalez. Mr. Gonzalez. No. Mr. Guest. Mr. Guest. No. Mr. Harter. Mr. Harter. I. Dr. Harris.
▶ 9:01:46Dr. Harris. No. Mrs. Henson.
▶ 9:01:49Mr. Hoyer.
▶ 9:01:51Mr. Hoyer. I. Mr. Mr. Ivy. Hi.
▶ 9:01:53Mr. Ivy. I Mr. Joyce. No.
▶ 9:01:55Mr. Joyce. No. Miss Captor.
▶ 9:01:58Miss Captor. I Mr. Loa. No.
▶ 9:02:01Mr. Loa. No. Miss Lee.
▶ 9:02:04Miss Lee. I. Miss. Let
▶ 9:02:06Miss Lllo. No. Mr. Levan.
▶ 9:02:08Mr. Levan. I Miss Mallaloy.
▶ 9:02:10Miss Mallaloy. No. Miss. McCullum. Miss. McCullum. I. Miss Ming.
▶ 9:02:15Miss Ming. I. Mr. Molinar. Mr. Molinar. No. Mr. Moore. Mr. Moore. No. Mr. MrI Mr. Morelli I Mr. Morvan Mr. Mvan I Mr. New House Mr. New House No Miss Perez Miss Perez I Miss Pingri Miss Pingri I Mr. Pokean Mr. Pokean I MrWigley Mr. Quigley I Mr. Rashinthaler Mr. Rashenthaler no Mr. Rogers Mr. Rogers no Mr. Rutherford Mr.
▶ 9:02:45Rutherford no Mr. Simpson Mr. Mr. Simpson.
▶ 9:02:50Mr. Simpson.
▶ 9:02:51Mr. Simpson. No. Mr. Strong. Mr. Strong. No. Mrs. Torres.
▶ 9:02:56Mrs. Torres. I Miss Underwood. Miss Underwood. I Mr. Valido. Mr. Valido. No. Miss Wasserman Schultz.
▶ 9:03:06Miss Wasserman Schultz. I Miss Wasserman Schultz. I Mrs. Watson Coleman.
▶ 9:03:18Mrs. Mrs. Watson Coleman.
▶ 9:03:20Mrs. Watson Coleman. I Mr. WAC. Mr. WAC. No. Mr. Zinci.
▶ 9:03:25Mr. Zinci. No.
▶ 9:03:28Are there any members wishing?
▶ 9:03:34Sorry. Are there any members wishing to record their vote or change their vote?
▶ 9:03:53Well, seeing none, the Kirk will tally.
▶ 9:04:29On this vote, the eyes are 28, the nose are 33, and the amendment is not Gentleman from uh m Indiana, Mr. Marvan is recognized for an amendment.
▶ 9:04:46I have an amendment at the desk. Uh and I ask the reading be dispensed with.
▶ 9:04:50Without objection, the reading the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman is recognized for remarks on his amendment.
▶ 9:04:56Established through the bipartisan infrastructure law, the affordable connectivity program helped provide discounted internet access to over 23 million households that made modest incomes across the country. This included over 425,000 households in the state of Indiana, over 45,000 in Indiana's first congressional district. Before funding ran out in June of 2024, the program was abruptly cancelled.
▶ 9:05:24This successful bipartisan program lowered costs and provided vital access to affordable broadband for seniors, families, veterans, and students. This provided connectivity for the students to access educational resources for rural rural communities to receive needed internet services and for seniors and veterans for teleaalth services and for working Americans to access job training tools.
▶ 9:05:51I have heard countless stories from my constituents about the positive impact this program had their had on their lives by lowering costs and expanding necessary internet access. Cancelelling this program simply left working families, seniors, veterans, and rural communities stranded with higher costs and no reliable broadband access.
▶ 9:06:12Instead of letting this valuable program permanently disappear, we should work together to find a solution to restore the ACP and continue expanding access to affordable high-speed internet. My amendment would direct the e the Federal Communication Commission, the FCC, to find funding solutions to restore the ACP and provide those recommendations to Congress so that we can take action at at a time when so many families are struggling.
▶ 9:06:41This program lowers costs and ensures that working families, veterans, and farmers don't get left behind. I urge the committee to support my amendment to help our communities gain access to reliable, affordable broadband. With that, I yield back.
▶ 9:06:55I thank the gentleman. Uh the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Joyce, the chair of the subcommittee is recognized to respond to gentleman's amendment.
▶ 9:07:04Uh well, I appreciate the amendment from my friend. Uh I must oppose it.
▶ 9:07:13You'll have to take that conversation offline. Uh, gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hoyer, is recognized to respond to the amendment.
▶ 9:07:23I have I live in St. Mary's County, Maryland. all but one of the officials are There are five county commissioners. I had a not a town meeting but a meeting with people about this program.
▶ 9:07:46Three of the five Republicans were there and they urged me to make sure that this program was funded. St. Mary's County is relatively rural. We've got a large base in there, some 22,000 people. So, but it's a rural county. uh and and they're conservative Republicans.
▶ 9:08:11I'm sure they all supported the president, but they urged me uh to make sure this program was funded because so many people in this rural county had been connected uh to the internet through this program.
▶ 9:08:29Um, and so I rise in strong support of this because I know it has overwhelming bipartisan support perhaps not in this house but um in the country.
▶ 9:08:43uh and this is report language um urging them to find ways and means to do a program that has made a big difference in a lot of rural particularly but there's some metropolitan deserts as well uh that have been served uh so I would urge support of this um and if they can find a way and maybe they can't it would be good for the
▶ 9:09:13country. Now, you remember I said at the outset that I find my Republican colleagues to be in many ways what I call the yo-yo You're on your own. You're on your own. And we have a lot of people in this country who can't afford to be on their They're working.
▶ 9:09:43These Republican county commissioners, the three out of the five, the majority of them, the two two others weren't told me family after family after family that they knew personally who were advantaged by this program and that it made a difference to them uh to their children uh and to please please Mr.
▶ 9:10:12work to get this program funded. All Mr. Murvan is saying is look at it, see if we can do it. It's a good Support this amendment.
▶ 9:10:29Thank the gentleman. Are there other members wishing to address the Seeing none, the gentleman from Indiana is recognized for one minute to close. So, uh, prior to coming to Congress, I was a township trustee and I took care of the most vulnerable populations, 180,000 of them.
▶ 9:10:49And so, when I read from the paper and I talk about some people don't have access to job opportunities, some veterans don't have access to health care, some seniors in rural areas don't have access to health care. Those are real people's lives that are impacted. And so I don't want to interrupt people eating popcorn, but this is pretty simple. And so respectfully, we're all sitting here.
▶ 9:11:13We're all a little chippy on what's going on, but this is a simple thing asking for report language to tell us a program that proved successful for vulnerable populations, seniors, and veterans. And so I'm just asking if this can't be done, then we find a way in the future to take this seriously because you cannot ignore those populations and think we're going to have a United States of America. I thank you for your time.
▶ 9:11:45Thanks, gentlemen. The questions now uh offered Oh, excuse me. The questions now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Indiana. All those in favor say I. I. All those opposed say
▶ 9:11:58Opinion of the chair. No have it. Gentleman's requested a roll call. Sufficient number of hands have been raised. Roll call vote. Recorded vote is ordered. The clerk will call the role.
▶ 9:12:10Mr. Adder Holt. Mr. Aguilar. Mr. Aguular. I Mr. Alford. Mr. Alford. No. Mr. Ammeday. Mr. Ammeday. No. Mrs. Bice. Mrs. Bice. No. Mr. Bishop.
▶ 9:12:23Mr. Bishop. I Mr. Calvert. Mr. Calbert. No. Mr. Carter.
▶ 9:12:28Mr. Carter. No. Mr. Casease. Mr. Casease. I. Mr. Sisammani. Mr. Klene. Mr. Klene. No. Mr. Cloud. Mr. Klyber. Mr. Klyber. I. Mr. Clyde.
▶ 9:12:43Mr. Clyde. No. Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Quayar.
▶ 9:12:48Miss Dean.
▶ 9:12:50Mr. Lauro.
▶ 9:12:52Mr. Loro. I. Mr. Diaz. Balart. No
▶ 9:12:55Mr. Diaz Bart. No, Mr. Edwards. Mr. Edwards. No, Mr. Elie. Mr. Elie. No, Miss Escobar. Miss Escobar. I Mr. Espayat. Mr. Espayat. I. Mr. Flechman. Mr. Fleshman. No. Miss Frankle. Miss Frankle. I. Mr. Franklin. Mr. Franklin. No. Mr. Gonzalez. Mr. Gonzalez. No. Mr. Guest. Mr. Guest. No. Mr. Harter. Mr. Harter. I. Dr. Harris. Dr. Harris. No. Mrs. Henson. Mr. Hoyer.
▶ 9:13:25Mr. Hoyer. I Mr. Ivy.
▶ 9:13:27Mr. Ivy. I Mr. Joyce.
▶ 9:13:31Mr. Joyce. No. Miss Captor.
▶ 9:13:33Miss Captor. I Mr. Loa. Mr. Loa. No. Miss Lee. Miss Llo. Miss Llo. No. Mr. Leven. Mr. Lean. I. Miss Mallaloy. Miss Mallaloy. No. Mr. M. Miss. McCullum. Miss. McCullum. I. Miss Ming. Miss Ming. I Mr. Molinar. Mr. Molinar. No. Mr.
▶ 9:13:58Mr. Moore. No. Mr. Morelli.
▶ 9:14:00Mr. Morelli. I Mr. Morvan.
▶ 9:14:06Mr. Mvan. I. Mr. New House. Mr. New House. No. Miss. Perez. Miss Perez. I Miss Pingri. Miss Pingri. Miss Pingri. I. Mr. Pokean. Mr. Pokean. I Mr. Quigley. Mr. Quigley. I Mr. Mr. Rogers. Mr. Rogers. No. Mr. Rutherford. Mr. Rutherford. No. Mr. Mr. Simpson. I Mr.
▶ 9:14:36Strong.
▶ 9:14:39Mr. Strong. Mr. Strong. No. Mrs. Torres.
▶ 9:14:48Mrs. Torres. I. Miss. Underwood. Miss Underwood. I Mr. Valado. Mr. Valado. No, Miss Wasserman Schultz. Miss Wasserman Schultz. I Mrs. Watson
▶ 9:15:02Mrs. Watson Coleman. I Mr. Wac. Mr. Wac. No. Mr. Zinci.
▶ 9:15:06Mr. Zinci. No.
▶ 9:15:08Are there any members wishing to record their vote or change their vote?
▶ 9:15:13The gentleman's record is an I.
▶ 9:15:17Off. I on. No. Mr. Simpson.
▶ 9:15:19Gentleman from Alabama. Mr. Mr. Adder
▶ 9:15:22Mr. Adder Holt. No.
▶ 9:15:24Uh, gentleman from Arizona.
▶ 9:15:26Mr. Ciscomani. No.
▶ 9:15:28Gentleman from Texas.
▶ 9:15:29Mr. Quay. I.
▶ 9:15:31Gentle lady from Nevada.
▶ 9:15:33Miss Lee. I.
▶ 9:15:36Are there other members wishing to change or record their vote? Clerk will tally.
▶ 9:16:19On this vote, the eyes are 27, the nose are 32. The amendment is not adopted. Uh, gentle lady from the state of Washington, Miss Perez, is recognized for an amendment.
▶ 9:16:33Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I was promised grul for dinner, so I'm pretty disappointed with the lasagna that was Uh before the gentle lady gets to her concerns about the menu, would you like your amendment read or
▶ 9:16:50I I ask that the reading of the amendment be
▶ 9:16:52Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentle ladies recognized for remarks on her amendment.
▶ 9:16:58Thank you. Um I'm I represent uh one of the states that did have uh the IRS direct file um uh available to us and people freaking love it. Um I I think it's hard for a lot of folks to understand the sort of stress of worrying about complying with tax code. Um but for working families, it's a real stressor. And when you look at the data, you will see that um 70 Yeah.
▶ 9:17:2477% of people who pay to have their taxes I'm sorry 77% of Americans uh in the lowest tax bracket pay to have their taxes prepared. Folks are held captive by a Byzantine tax code and then made uh a surfdom of those same companies that lobby to keep the tax code Byzantine. Um this is you you should not need to hire a Ivy League accountant to prepare your taxes in this country.
▶ 9:17:53Um, it's a it's a civic duty, right, to to help build your roads, to help support your schools. Um, I work to pay my taxes. And you know, the idea that folks in the lowest tax bracket are paying exploitative fees when there's a system in place that people like um that is working well. 90% of respondents who use direct file said it increased their confidence in the IRS. Friends, we are reaching a crisis point of confidence in our government.
▶ 9:18:20And when we find a program that that increases confidence, um we should we should support that. We should move forward with it. We've already invested to make this uh software. And um I I urge my my colleagues to support this amendment to ensure that direct file uh is still available to Americans who choose to use it. And with that, I'll yield back. I apologize.
▶ 9:18:50Uh the gentleman, the chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Joyce from Ohio, is recognized to respond to the amendment.
▶ 9:18:57Well, I appreciate the amendment. I must oppose it.
▶ 9:19:03The gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hoyer, is recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 9:19:07I appcate I need to turn my mic on all the time. And for those of you who missed that pearl, I said because I appreciate it, I'm going to support it. I had the same experience in my district. I'm sure if you ask anybody who participated in direct file, they're going to say, "Wow, thank heavens. I didn't worry about it. They got it done.
▶ 9:19:38Probably didn't owe a lot of money. Maybe I got probably got some back, but it was a service. I hate to repeat it. Yo-yo, you're on your own. You're on your own. That is a policy that we're pursuing. This serves average working And Maria, I've had the same experience in my district.
▶ 9:20:08I went by and met the people who were the adviserss, trained to be the adviserss. They're almost all simple, relatively simple returns, but people are concerned, want to make sure they get it right. Our system is an 85% plus voluntary system.
▶ 9:20:28Now, I say that and every time I say that, I make it clear that uh most have uh their taxes taken out every week or every bi-weekly or every month, but this is a service. We flatfunded service services in this bill.
▶ 9:20:52Uh but the fact of the matter is that taking direct file away from people undermines their confidence and ability to do what they think is right in making sure they pay properly their taxes. Now I don't I hope it's not you talk about my friend Mr. Amiday talked about lobbying.
▶ 9:21:17I hope it's not because there are some people who provide a service for which they expect compensation. That's reasonable. But that doesn't mean people who are really scraping by. And I I've heard this working people's talk a lot in the last year uh in this campaign. You got a lot of working people voted for you.
▶ 9:21:43This is about people who are not wealthy people. Why don't we give them some help? We gave them some help. It was a pilot program. It grew and it's now a broader program. It's available in Maryland as it is in Washington state and many of your other states. It it doesn't cost a lot.
▶ 9:22:12relatively speaking to the trillions of dollars to in tax cuts we gave to the wealthiest Americans. Now, yeah, some something fell off the table from time to time and other people got it, but mostly twothirds of the people who got it were pretty wealthy. So here, the average working person, matter of fact, as Marie said, the average working person pays to get their taxes done. Why don't we give them a little help?
▶ 9:22:41Don't let's leave them on their own. Let's say you got to do this, but we're going to help you do it. You got to pay your taxes. It's a crime not to pay your taxes, and we're going to help you do it. We're going to facilitate it. We're going to make it easier for you, and we're going to give you more confidence. Vote for this amendment. It's a good
▶ 9:23:07Thank gentlemen. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Bokehan's
▶ 9:23:15Thank Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know, I appreciate the brevity from our subcommittee chair to keep this moving, but this one deserves an explanation. Like, I really can't think of a valid reason to not want this. We've already paid for the program largely to have this out there. It's got, as Miss Press said, a 90% favorability rate by the people using it.
▶ 9:23:39Why would we want to pe when people are paying their taxes so that we can fund the government, would we want to make it more difficult and they have to go and either buy software or subscribe to software or go to see someone do their taxes when we're requiring it. We're requiring them to pay their taxes. So, I appreciate that. I oppose it. I need a reason. And if you don't want to, anyone who wants to give a strong reason, I just need to know why I wanted this in Wisconsin. We desperately tried.
▶ 9:24:10We said expand to my state, please. Because people wanted this. And I cannot think. Well, I can think of one reason, and I don't want to say it, but into an H&R block. I'm sure some of you have some nice evening beverages and maybe meals with, but that is the only reason that I can possibly imagine.
▶ 9:24:32So, if that's not the reason, please someone explain why we wouldn't want to help taxpayers just simply be able to file their taxes to fund the government to do their civic duty like this one. I really I don't want to think that's the only reason, but I really I've thought about this. I wanted it expanded in my state. What could be any other reason why we wouldn't want to do this?
▶ 9:25:03So, if someone wants to, I'll be glad to yield time if someone would like to answer that. I will gladly yield time. is there.
▶ 9:25:24Really? Just if you're going to vote no, I would be curious what the reason is
▶ 9:25:32to vote no just so I could try to explain it because people back home want this and we don't even have it expanded. So really anyone I will yield time to absolutely anyone who wants to answer this like if you can't raise your arm all the way just wink or something or or give me a little head tilt. I just anything. It might be good to stand. My watch told me it was time.
▶ 9:26:02Even if you just need to get that on your watch.
▶ 9:26:05You never even to do it. They did it. I I don't think he's watching you right now. I mean, if that's what you're worried about.
▶ 9:26:14Oh, he is
▶ 9:26:16really So, anyone subjected to another
▶ 9:26:24anyone on this side of the room know who's going to vote yes
▶ 9:26:28on the amendment?
▶ 9:26:29It works. People love it.
▶ 9:26:32It works and people love it. I love it.
▶ 9:26:35That's what I
▶ 9:26:36when 90% is pretty high, right? I mean, you know, people win with
▶ 9:26:41like a little over 50% in office and we consider it a mandate. 90% is like a mandate squared. So,
▶ 9:26:48I got a minute and 27 seconds left. Um, if anyone
▶ 9:26:54takes away the profit motive,
▶ 9:26:55wants to try to take this up. Takes away the profit motive. I'm hearing
▶ 9:26:58folks who are making
▶ 9:26:59I know, but I don't want to believe that. Um,
▶ 9:27:02you're on your own
▶ 9:27:02ranking member. I really
▶ 9:27:04You're on your own as a policy.
▶ 9:27:06You're on your own as a policy. Yeah, but I I don't want to believe that either. I I want to believe there's a good, solid, valid reason. And I know we've had a whole day of amendments, but this one I'm just completely puzzled by. So, I've got 57 seconds left.
▶ 9:27:21If anyone has a 56 second answer, If the problem is the time is not enough, you could go ahead and stand and get five minutes because then you could have a more full answer. I would understand that if that's the issue. And you know, I apologize if I'm not giving you enough time, but um it does feel good to stand, I got to say. So, all right.
▶ 9:27:50Well, I'm going to let it go. Um
▶ 9:27:55that's all right. I'm not going to I want to yield back time because I think that's a courtesy I'm going to try to offer. So, um, I hope we support this amendment because it is the right thing to do and I yield back. Thank you.
▶ 9:28:08I thank the gentleman for the 10 seconds. He yielded back. Uh, are there other members wishing to address the amendment?
▶ 9:28:17There's no good reason to oppose it.
▶ 9:28:19Seeing none, if there's no further debate, the gentle ladies recognized for one minute to close. So, thank you,
▶ 9:28:27Chair. This program costs about $24 million to operate uh to develop it. It costs about $10 million to operate. This is one of the biggest bangs you can get for your buck in terms of a progressive tax strategy. People who are paying in, you know, it's one thing I think about the people that I I talk to, you know, running daycarees and stuff and they tell me about the cottage industry of compliance businesses they have to pay to run their business. We've created that with a Byzantine tax code.
▶ 9:28:53This is a really powerful tool for us to um help people keep their money. That this is this if you're worried about the deficit, if you if you believe in people's agency, if you believe that we ought to do a better job of running a federal government, please support this and I yield back. Thank you. I'll 10
▶ 9:29:15Thank gentle lady. Um question is now on the amendment offered by the gentle lady from Washington. All those in favor say
▶ 9:29:24as oppos
▶ 9:29:30the enthusiastic nos appear to have it.
▶ 9:29:34Oh my god.
▶ 9:29:38Gentle lady has asked for recorded vote. Sufficient number of hands uh having shown support. Recorded vote is ordered. The clerk will call the role.
▶ 9:29:48Mr. Adder Holt.
▶ 9:29:50Mr. Adder Holt. No. Mr. Agular
▶ 9:29:53Mr. Aguilar I Mr. Alford Mr. Alford No Mr. Ammedday Mr. Ammeday no Mrs. Bice Mrs. Bice No Mr. Bishop Mr. Bishop I Mr. Calvert Mr. Calvert no Mr. Carter Mr. Carter no Mr. Case Mr. Casease I Mr. Sisammani Mr. Sisammani no Mr. Klene Mr. Klene no Mr. Cloud Mr. Klyurn
▶ 9:30:18Mr. Klyurn I Mr. Clyde Mr. Cole.
▶ 9:30:24Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Quay.
▶ 9:30:28Mr. Quayar. I. Miss Dean.
▶ 9:30:30Miss Dean. I Mr. Loro. Hi.
▶ 9:30:33Mr. Loro. I Mr. Diaz Bolard. Mr. Diaz Bolart. No. Mr. Edwards.
▶ 9:30:38Mr. Edwards. No. Mr. Ellie. Mr. Ellie. No. Miss Escobar. Miss Escobar. I. Mr.
▶ 9:30:45Mr. Espayott. I. Mr. Flechman.
▶ 9:30:48Mr. Fleshman. No. Miss. Frankle. Miss Frankle. I Mr. Franklin. Mr. Franklin. No. Mr. Gonzalez. Mr. Gonzalez. No. Mr. Guest. Mr. Guest. No. Mr. Harter. Mr. Harter. I Dr. Harris. Dr. Harris. No. Mrs. Henson. Mr. Hoyer.
▶ 9:31:06Mr. Hoyer. I. Mr. Ivy. Mr. Ivy. I. Mr.
▶ 9:31:11Mr. Joyce. No. Miss Captor.
▶ 9:31:17Miss Captor. Miss Captor. I. Mr. Mr. Loa. Mr. Loa. No. Miss Lee. Miss Lee. I Miss Llo.
▶ 9:31:28Miss Llo. No. Mr. Levan. Mr. Levan. I Miss Mallaloy. Miss Mallaloy. No. Miss Miss McCullum. I Miss Ming. Miss Ming. I Mr. Molinar. Mr. Molinar. No. Mr. Moore. Mr. Moore. No. Mr. Morelli.
▶ 9:31:45Mr. Morelli. I Mr. Morvan. Mr. Morvan. I. Mr. Mr. New House. Mr. New House. No. Miss Perez. Miss Perez. I Miss Pingri. Miss Pingry.
▶ 9:31:59Miss Pingri. I. Mr. Pokean. Mr. Pokean. I Mr. Quigley. Mr. Quigley. I. Mr.
▶ 9:32:07Mr. Rogers.
▶ 9:32:13Mr. Rogers. No. Mr. Rutherford. Mr. Rutherford. No. Mr. Simpson. Mr. Mr. Simpson. No. Mr. Strong. Mr. Strong. No. Miss. Torres.
▶ 9:32:23Mrs. Torres. I. Miss. Underwood. Miss. Underwood. I. Mr. Valido. Mr. Valado. No. Miss Wasserman Schultz. M. Wasserman Schultz. I. Mrs. Watson. Coleman. Mrs. Watson. Coleman. I. Mr. Wac. Mr. Wac. No. Mr. Zinci. Mr. Zinci. No.
▶ 9:32:42Mr. Clyde.
▶ 9:32:43Mr. Clyde.
▶ 9:32:45Okay. Uh gentleman's recognized
▶ 9:32:50Mr. Clyde. No,
▶ 9:32:52I'm sorry. Excuse me. Question. We had moved on and I was in deep discussion with my friend the uh subcounty chair. So does any member wish to vote or change their vote? Gentleman's
▶ 9:33:08Mr. Clyde votes no. Are there other members wishing to vote or change their vote?
▶ 9:33:18Seeing none, clerks will tally.
▶ 9:33:54On this vote, the eyes are 28, the nose are 32. The amendment is not adopted. Gentle lady from state of Washington is recognized for an amendment.
▶ 9:34:05Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so I I live in Washington state and I have never voted
▶ 9:34:10lady like dispense with that. Yeah. Thank you.
▶ 9:34:13Without objection, the reading of the amendment dispensed with and the gentle lady's recognized for remarks on her
▶ 9:34:18Thank you. I'm going to need a shot caller to remember to ask for that. Um, so I live in Washington state. I have never voted any way except for vote by mail and I don't think it's a coincidence that many states in the west rely on this and have for a long time. Um gas is expensive. We work for a living. The idea that you can just like knock off work if you're trying to pour concrete. Uh you're not going to knock off work to stand all day in line to cast a ballot.
▶ 9:34:45Um, we're also, you know, we're a big paper producing state and, uh, if you support logging, if you support the woods, um, we know that ballots are the gold standard. Paper ballots are the gold standard in election security. And, um, I've been privileged to have a lot of great conversations with, um, Republican colleagues in the West who, um, have used this or who use it and and recognize that it's got it's it's got a real place.
▶ 9:35:08um you know um it's it's got a fully auditable paper trail for election records and it aligns with the election assistance commission's guidance for secure elections. Um so this amendment is very simple. All it does is say that a state cannot be penalized from receiving the election security uh because of their use of vote by mail. And places where it's working well don't penalize us for that choice.
▶ 9:35:35upholding the state's authority to execute um a an election securely with paper products. Um and you know, I would I would love to work with the chair on this. um uh you know, if you if you support states, if you recognize that people who work for a living deserve to have their ballot counted, also if you if you support logging in the paper industry, um if you have uh concerns about people uh in rural communities or people with physical disabilities that prevent them from standing in line all day, please support this
▶ 9:36:05amendment. Um and I urge a yes.
▶ 9:36:10Thank gentle lady. The gentleman from Ohio, chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Joyce is recognized to respond to the amendment. I appreciate my colleagues amendment and recognize Washington state is one of eight states that conducts elections entirely by mail. But this is an issue in which I disagree. We have an election day and states accommodate voters through absentee ballots and early voting. The Constitution gives Congress the authority to set its own parameters for federal election and this this amendment would inhibit that authority.
▶ 9:36:41Are there other members wishing to address the uh the amendment? The gentle lady from Ohio, Miss Captors, recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 9:36:50Thank you uh very much, Mr. Chairman, and I rise in support of the gentle lady's amendment very strongly. Uh I'm a big supporter of mailin ballots and uh not everything has to be electronic these days. I if I look at the state of Ohio in the 2024 election, nearly a million Ohioans actually voted uh with absentee ballots by by mail. Uh we had a recent special election. We had 84,000 people vote by mail.
▶ 9:37:19But I'll tell you, you know, not everything in Ohio's fair and square. So, uh what they do is if you want to vote by mail or if you want to drop your absentee ballot in a box, here's what Ohio does. If you have a county of half a million people, there's one drop off box. If you have a county in Ohio with 10,000 people, there's one dropbox. That's about as offkilter. Uh it gives you a sense of what it's like to be in politics in Ohio.
▶ 9:37:50And the other thing they do in Ohio is gerrymandering. They love if they could do it every year. I am uh living testimony to what gerrymandering is all about. And so they not only changed where your precinct is, right? So it my house uh what they did the latest one now for this next gerrymander, they divided my street in half right down the middle. You know, it's like a joke. So my church is out of my my my church is still in my precinct.
▶ 9:38:19The graveyards are not in the precinct. I mean, it's really some We need a comedy. We need a comedy about Ohio Jerry Manu. The one thing we can be sure of is the post office
▶ 9:38:30that when that letter goes in there and it's postmarked and uh you can mail it. Uh you have a greater confidence if you think I trust the Ohio Board of Elections, you are crazy. And so uh at least the mail, we can track the mail and can we be we can be sure. The other thing I want to say is we have a lot of senior citizens in Ohio.
▶ 9:38:53Now, I know Shelley Pingry says she has more per capita than we do, but I remember when my brother got sick and he couldn't leave the house anymore. And uh the mailin ballot was his salvation. And he was he voted to the day he died. And there are millions of people like my brother and they have a right to vote and they have a right to place it in the mail. And as far as I can recall, the US mail, when you become a letter carrier, and I was one, um, you take an oath.
▶ 9:39:24You take an oath for that job. We have to take an oath for this job. There's a whole lot of people that don't have to take an oath for their jobs, but uh there's a special um
▶ 9:39:34uh importance that goes with that and with carrying those letters to the boards of election around uh the state of Ohio. So, you say, "Well, Ohio, you know, maybe they want to go to electronic." Well, Ohio's a little bit old-fashioned in some ways. We still have people that ride horses there. And uh I think that for uh mail-in voting, it goes to every post office. No matter how small the town, a little town like AI or N Ohio, they have a postmaster. They have mailboxes.
▶ 9:40:03In the small towns, their vote counts. in the big towns. I wish the state of Ohio were more fair to us and they would put more dropboxes if people want to drop their uh uh ballot in a one of those outside boxes that they uh that they arrange. But I I think the gentle lady's amendment is very it's fair to every American and no matter where they live, no matter what their physical condition is.
▶ 9:40:29and uh I totally support what she's proposing and I would ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support the amendment. Thank
▶ 9:40:40Thank gentle lady. The gentleman from New York, Mr. Morelli is recognized for comments on the amendment.
▶ 9:40:47Uh thank you uh Mr. Chairman. I want to thank uh the gentle lady for advancing the amendment. uh just briefly because I made some comments uh in opening remarks about the situation we find ourselves in. You know, 65% of age uh eligible Americans voted in the presidential election. That means a third of every person in the United States who could have voted chose not to.
▶ 9:41:13I would think that the Congress should be more concerned about the third of all Americans who didn't vote rather than continuing to try without any evidence to scare people into believing that elections are not safe and secure. And of that 154 roughly million Americans who voted in the last presidential election in 2024, 45 million voted by mail. 45 million people.
▶ 9:41:40And I have not in the years that I've been engaged in government have not heard anyone um broadly claim that there's widespread fraud among people who vote by mail. I've never heard that before. It's brand new. Well, I was going to get to that. Thank you. You want the microphones or you can carry on again?
▶ 9:42:00Um so I found it startling that the president who I as I indicated earlier has no role in the constitution in voting that's done by the states uh time man or place set by the states and congress us uh may intervene but it doesn't give a role to the president who's continued to say without evidence uh that there's fraud in all manner of elections. So this is really distressing.
▶ 9:42:26I would think that we would focus all of our energies in making certain that every single American citizen exercise the franchise. That is what uh makes this democracy so extraordinary, so exceptional. Um and we will lose it if we spend all our time trying to exclude people from exercising the franchise instead of embracing it.
▶ 9:42:49That's truly how how we will maximize um the amazing power of this democracy is have everyone participate and as my friend Mr. Pokean nudges me uh I said a few weeks ago publicly when the president uh was opining that there's widespread fraud without of course any evidence because we live in an evidence-free zone around the White House these days.
▶ 9:43:12So, just say things with no evidence, um, nothing to point to which suggests that you're possibly even close to being right or that there's any reason for you to be concerned about this. But when the president takes advice from Vladimir Putin on elections, this is a very, very dark day in America. I don't care if you're a Republican, a Democrat, a progressive, a conservative, it doesn't matter to me.
▶ 9:43:35I will say this, we all benefit and our communities all benefit when every single American votes and participates in this democracy and we don't take advice from dictators about how to run democracy in America. So I strongly urge support of the amendment and with that, Mr. Chair, I yield back.
▶ 9:43:52Thank the gentleman. Are there other members wishing to address the
▶ 9:43:58gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hoy is recognized. Speak to the amendment.
▶ 9:44:02Hold on a second. I've got a quote that I want to give to all of you. I'm sure you'll be very impressed with the quote and I'm sure it will compel you to vote yes. I'm lobbying you,
▶ 9:44:24Mr. Amade.
▶ 9:44:27Yeah. Well, former President Trump announced a major change in a longheld position, and it's one that could boost his numbers at the B ball ballot box this fall. with little fanfare. In a post on Truth Social last Friday evening, this is 24, Trump urged supporters to use early and absentee voting methods.
▶ 9:44:58Quote, "Absentee voting, early voting, and election day voting are all good said your leader. "Stick with him. Republicans must make a plan, register and vote. Now, that was of course yesterday and who knows what today is or what tomorrow will be.
▶ 9:45:28We found a great deal of flexibility in our esteemed president.
▶ 9:45:34Ladies and gentlemen, you're on your own. if you're if you're You know, it's a recurring theme and I I know I'm trying to get that to be a theme, too, because I find so often the option is not to help people unless they're rich, you can give them a big tax cut and we can give them smaller government. Those are the two themes.
▶ 9:46:05Donald Trump just over a year ago said this was not a bad option. It's a good option. A lot of people use it and it facilitates rather than makes more difficult exercising the franchise. But you're going to vote no. Mail it in.
▶ 9:46:46I'm sorry.
▶ 9:46:50You want me to speak more?
▶ 9:46:53No, I'm on my feet. No, I always enjoy listening to my friend and I mean that quite sincerely. Uh are are there any other members who wish to address the amendment? The gentleman from Nevada is recognized.
▶ 9:47:08Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Uh thanks to my colleague from Washington State who actually did really lobby me earlier in the day. Other than the instant gratification from Maryland, but what the heck? And I remember when the president said that, that's all great.
▶ 9:47:24What I think is missing here is and and I don't know this doesn't apply to every state but does in mine that bit where every registered voter got mailed a ballot whether they asked for one or not and I'm just speaking for myself all the other folks on this side are much smarter but it's like let me tell you what um not that I'm afraid to do something stupid as you well know but I'm not voting for something that doesn't say quit mailing them out to everybody with no whatever you do you take the time in Maryland
▶ 9:47:54or any place else to say, "I want to vote absentee. I'm an early voter." Register, comply with those precoid rules, so there's some way to go that's legit stuff instead of just mail it to the whole registered voter list is something that I think has to be covered in this. So, while I agree all of that stuff, it's like
▶ 9:48:18Yeah. And and so you got to have something about cleaning up the rolls or let me put it this way. You don't have to do anything for my yes vote on my return volley on the lobbying thing is I want a protection in there so it's not like everybody got mailed a ballot in Yeeha wild west east south north whatever so with Mr. Pokean's thing it's like can you tell me why that's why thank you and good evening
▶ 9:48:43will my friend yield
▶ 9:48:45uh I yielded back but if I can get it back Mr. Chairman. Sure.
▶ 9:48:50Well, I can get somebody to yield to me.
▶ 9:48:52Oh, go ahead.
▶ 9:48:54I want you on my
▶ 9:48:59fair enough.
▶ 9:49:01What the president of the United States is saying, as I understand it, is if you have vote by mail, we're going to penalize you. If you have that alternative, state legislature votes on it, people speak that we're going to penalize them because it's not done the way the president now wants it done.
▶ 9:49:29My friend, there are a lot of countries that do
▶ 9:49:35It ought not be it ought not to be one of them. We are going down some ugly, dangerous paths in this country. We're investing in other country companies now.
▶ 9:49:52We're going to be an Conflict of interest doesn't count Ladies and gentlemen, the president of the United States threatens people either do it or I'm going to withhold money. I'm going to penalize you. I'm going to do something that hurts you.
▶ 9:50:14It's your time, sir.
▶ 9:50:15Are you okay?
▶ 9:50:19That was cruel.
▶ 9:50:24I thank the two gentlemen. Uh, gentle lady from Connecticut is recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 9:50:30Thank you. I I had no intention of speaking on this, but I just had a very recent example before I left Connecticut to come here. There is a primary uh in in in in my my community. The election is on uh uh Tuesday the 9th. I'm I'm going to be here. We're going to do Labor HHS on Tuesday the 9th. So I voted. My husband is is in in gone to Greece for work there.
▶ 9:50:59And so we both put the the ballots in the box here. So now what you were saying is it that if I don't show up to vote as the elected leader in that area, you think about all of us here because there are states that you got Nevada, Utah, California, Washington, um, uh, Vermont, they have universal mail in voting that if you don't show up that day, I'm speaking for all of us, some newspaper
▶ 9:51:29is going to write, "Well, Delloro, Congresswoman Deloro didn't find the time to vote in the local election in new in New Haven, Connecticut. I mean, what the hell are we talking about here? I understand that the president just moved the space center from Colorado because bail and voting. What What in God's name is going on? You know, I I understand that there's been problem with absentee ballots. If there are, people should clean that up and do whatever they need to do.
▶ 9:51:56But you're going to deny people, millions of people all over the country, from exercising their right to vote because they do it through what is a legal process that the state has made a determination on and casting that vote. I mean, think about Let's not we can have disagreements, but but but let's not put in ourselves in jeopardy. I could see the headline in the New Haven Register.
▶ 9:52:27Deloro doesn't vote in local election. Hell, because I have to be there in person. Otherwise, Mr. Chairman, I wouldn't be here for the Labor HHS uh meeting on Tuesday. So, thank you. I yield back.
▶ 9:52:41I want to thank the gentle lady. I want to sure if she wants to go home to vote, I'll defend you to the last bullet in the clip. I'll be there for the meime.
▶ 9:52:50in the meantime, Lady,
▶ 9:52:52I would I would rather have you here kind of.
▶ 9:52:55Uh but I will defend you if you're ever under attack for not voting.
▶ 9:53:00And um and uh look, I I this has been an interesting debate. Uh I will just add I'll recognize myself for a minute, then I'm going to go to my friend Miss Dean from Pennsylvania who wants to speak to the amendment. But this is all very interesting, but at the end of the day, the states decide how they're going to order their own affairs. Yes. And that's pretty traditional in the United States. I don't see anything that's going to change it. We can all have a lot of opinions. That's fair enough.
▶ 9:53:26I personally was attacked in my last election for voting by absentee because I never vote on election day since I've been in office because guess what? I'm campaigning someplace.
▶ 9:53:36Uh so uh we all go through this, but uh again, in the end, I I trust states to know what works for them and to make their own decisions. With that, gentle lady from Pennsylvania wanted to address the amendment and I'll recognize her to make what other comments she cares to.
▶ 9:53:50And I'll be brief, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for your comments. Uh, I rise in support of this amendment and I thank the gentle lady for bringing it forward. Uh, we all know that voting by mail is secure, it is convenient, and it is inclusive. And that's what really is the basis of the question here. Do we want more people included in our electoral process or we do we want fewer people? Uh this is something that helps all people access their right to vote.
▶ 9:54:21We should be doing anything we can to support it and never get in the way of what state and local governments are doing. I'll just offer a strange perspective. I came back from a Kodell. It was both bipartisan and biccameal Kodell that included Australia. Australia has compulsory voting. So you know what their participation rate? More than 90% of Australians vote. They don't find it a burden. They think it's inclusive. They've been doing it for more than a hundred years.
▶ 9:54:50And I I'm not an expert on it. Apparently the data shows that it winds up making the electorate more centrist. So you avoid these hard edges of left and right. So I offer that as a consideration. Do we want more people voting or fewer? I vote for more. That's why I'm voting for this amendment. Uh to make sure that we make voting by mail as easy as possible because we know it's secure.
▶ 9:55:17And to everybody else's point, this is up to the states and local governments. I thank the lady
▶ 9:55:26and gentleman from Florida's recognized to address the
▶ 9:55:29Thank you, M. Mr. I'll try to be brief. Look, I this has been a very interesting debate, but but I just also think that sometimes reflecting on some reality points is important. Uh I I don't let let me reflect my inner judge Carter and tell you a story. Uh I'm not going to do him justice, but but look, uh I in the city of Miami, which is not a small place, a number of years ago, there was a race for the mayor of Miami. Uh the person won the election.
▶ 9:55:58he was certified, swore in as mayor. Uh and then a court determined that the fraud in absentee ballots, it was demonstrated that there was so much fraud that the court actually took out the mayor who had been sworn in and the person who came in second was actually then sworn in mayor. Now, let me tell you why I tell you that factual statement.
▶ 9:56:26the concept that absentee ballots I I I say I I think it's a great thing if done right to avoid fraud. But the concept that there is never any fraud in elections and absentee ballots are absolutely never going to be uh fraudulent is just not factually correct. I think that the sponsor of the amendment has, you know, is is doing it in good faith.
▶ 9:56:53And her and I talked also and I explained to her, I said, "This is the problem. There are, if you have safeguards, fine, but if you don't, anybody who thinks that absentee ballots, voting by mail for some magical reason is never going to be really has no idea of some basic lessons of history." Again, reflect. Yes, Mr. Mr. Chairman of course
▶ 9:57:20uh just just to reinforce his points and I say this look as somebody that totally believes states should make their own decision and do they want to be all male that fine by me that's none of my decision but there was a commission chaired by of all people former president late President Carter and James Baker on this issue and it made the point uh that actually fraud was most common in absentee ballots and I can just tell you from in my state that is true.
▶ 9:57:48I had we had a former speaker of the house that ended up having to go to jail because he committed fraud trying to elect his own father in absentee thing. I'm not saying that happens widely or happens in your and again I would not presume to tell people in the state of Washington what to do or Oregon or you know they have their systems they're those are great states. So uh but to my friend's point u that's actually the easiest place for fraud to happen.
▶ 9:58:17doesn't mean it happens on a vast scale or tips elections. I just make the point. You'll back to my friend. Thank you.
▶ 9:58:23Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And and again, I'm I'm not saying that absentee ballots I I I think they can be really useful and they can be a great if done correctly like anything else. But again, it's just this kind of La La Land feel that for some, you know, that absentee or everything that can be done in election uh will be done without fraud. It's just not based on history. and absentee ballots. Unfortunately, and again, in Florida, we now have you can vote by mail and it's done correctly and it's done securely.
▶ 9:58:51It can be done, but I think we just have to be aware of that there have been circumstances if not done right. And again, that's just what history shows us. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
▶ 9:59:03Thank you. Gentle lady, excuse me, gentle lady from Florida is recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 9:59:10Chairman, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I I do want to point out a couple of facts that are important to uh illustrate my friend from Miami's story. The election that he's talking about was 27 years ago it it was also long before Florida eventually migrated to no excuse vote by mail.
▶ 9:59:38That in 1998 was absentee balloting where fa fraud was quite a bit more likely, although still very rare because you had to have an excuse to be able to vote by mail and because there was the ability to really kind of have someone else collect many many many vote, you know, absentee ballots and turn them in.
▶ 10:00:06So there is nothing like that that is comparable today. Um we have had vote by no excuse vote by mail balloting in Florida for more than 20 years. And I'll just point out that the independent studies that have been done that show that the percentage of mailin ballots that are fraudulent is something on the order of to 0.0025%. 025%.
▶ 10:00:36So it is the the rarest of the rare instance now in 2025 for us to have fraudulent uh never mind rampant but any fraud whatsoever that is detectable certainly nothing that would warrant the tossing out of an election result. So I just thought that maybe an update in terms of the information was important.
▶ 10:01:01I yield back. Thank the gentle lady. The gentleman from Idaho, Mr. Simpson's recognized to address the amen.
▶ 10:01:09Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And now for a further update. This is just something from five years ago. I had a staff person here who graduated from high school in Connecticut, was registered to vote. She was 18.
▶ 10:01:24Went to school in Utah. Then she came to work for us. She worked in V or she lived in Virginia. The election in 200, what was it? 20. She got a ballot mailed to her from Connecticut, a ballot mailed to her from Utah, and a ballot mailed to her from She could have voted three times. Unfortunately, she was or fortunately, she was an honest person. Not lately.
▶ 10:01:54All I'm saying is Mr. Amade is right. Clean up the mess. destroy the system
▶ 10:02:00and then let's and then let's talk about
▶ 10:02:03I yield back.
▶ 10:02:06Are there other members wishing to address the amendment?
▶ 10:02:11Seeing none, the gentle lady is recognized for one minute to close.
▶ 10:02:14Thank you. And I sincerely appreciate the depth of engagement um on this. This I think is one of the most important um issues that comes to us and you know in cases where uh there are what 27 years ago when you have you know if it's a narrow thing um might be more vulnerable let's not penalize states for moving towards a more secure system let's not say that we are going to hold the the keys to their those citizens having their voice heard um this is uh one of the mo and
▶ 10:02:44and and I would point out um had had your staff staffer uh voted it would have been a felony and she would have been caught. That is one of the beautiful things about vote by mail is that it it is auditable. It is got a a secure chain and you know I think saying that states um you know they they do have a a responsibility to have the most um secure system they can to have those checks to build the most secure system.
▶ 10:03:11um and we should not withhold support from them in their pursuit of those more secure uh reform systems. And so I I sincerely appreciate the engagement on this and with that I urge support and yield back.
▶ 10:03:26Thank the gentle lady. The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentle lady from Washington. All those in favor say I. I.
▶ 10:03:33All oppose say no. No. The opinion of the chair, the nose have it. A roll call has been requested. Sufficient show of hands is uh visible. Uh recorded votes ordered. The clerk will call the role.
▶ 10:03:51Mr. Aderhalt.
▶ 10:03:53Mr. Adherol. No. Mr. Aguular. Mr. Aguilar. I. Mr. Alford. Mr. Alford. No. Mr. Ammedday. Mr. Ammedday. No. Mrs.
▶ 10:04:05Mrs. Bice. No, Mr. Bishop.
▶ 10:04:07Mr. Bishop. I Mr. Calbertt. Mr. Calbertt. No, Mr. Carter. Mr. Carter. No, Mr. Casease. Mr. Casease. I Mr.
▶ 10:04:16Mr. Sisammani. No, Mr. Klene. Mr. Klene. No. Mr. Cloud.
▶ 10:04:22Mr. Klyber.
▶ 10:04:24Mr. Klyurn. I. Mr. Clyde. Negative.
▶ 10:04:26Mr. Clyde. No. Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Quayar.
▶ 10:04:31Mr. Quayar. I. Miss Dean.
▶ 10:04:34M. Mr. Loro.
▶ 10:04:36Mr. Loro. I Mr. Diaz Bolard. Mr. Diaz Bolard. No. Mr. Edwards.
▶ 10:04:41Mr. Edwards. No. Mr. Ellie.
▶ 10:04:43Mr. Else. No. Miss Escobar.
▶ 10:04:48Miss Escobar.
▶ 10:04:49Miss Escobar. I. Mr. Espayat.
▶ 10:04:52Mr. Espayott. I. Mr. Fleshman. Mr. Fleshman. No. Miss. Frankle. Miss. Frank. I. Mr. Franklin. Mr. Franklin. No. Mr. Gonzalez. Mr. Gonzalez. No. Mr. Guest. Mr. Guest. No. Mr. Harter. Mr. Harter. I Dr. Harris.
▶ 10:05:07Dr. Harris. No. Mrs. Henson.
▶ 10:05:11Mr. Hoyer.
▶ 10:05:14Mr. Hoyer. I Mr. Ivy. Mr. Ivy. I Mr. Joyce. Mr. Joyce. No. Miss Captor.
▶ 10:05:20Miss Captor. I Mr. Loa.
▶ 10:05:22Mr. Loa. No. Miss Lee. Miss Lee. I. Miss. Let Miss. Let no. Mr. Levan. Mr. Leven. I. Miss Mallaloy. Miss Mallaloy. No. Mr. McCullum. Miss McCollum. I Miss Ming. Miss Ming. I Mr. Molinar. Mr. Molinar. No. Mr. Moore. Mr. Moore. No. Mr. Morelli. Mr. Morelli. I Mr. Morvan.
▶ 10:05:47Mr. Burvan. I Mr. New House. Mr. New House. I Miss Perez. Miss Perez. I Miss Pingri. Miss Pingri. I Mr. Pokean. Mr. Pokean. I Mr. Quigley. Mr. Quigley. I Mr. Russianthaler. Mr. Rogers. Mr. Rogers. No. Mr. Rutherford. Mr. Rutherford. No. Mr. Simpson. Mr. Simpson. No. Mr. Strong. Mr. Strong. No. Mrs. Torres. Hi.
▶ 10:06:14Mrs. Torres. I. Miss. Underwood. Miss. Underwood. I. Mr. Valido. Mr. Valido. No. Miss Washerman Schultz. Hi. Miss. Washerman Schultz. I Mrs. Watson
▶ 10:06:24Mrs. Watson Coleman. I. Mr. Wac. Mr. WAC. No. Mr. Zinci. Mr. Zinci. No. Are there any members wishing to record their vote or change their vote? Gentleman from Pennsylvania.
▶ 10:06:38Mr. Russianthaler. No.
▶ 10:06:39Certainly. Gentle lady from
▶ 10:06:42I do not believe the gentle lady is
▶ 10:06:45Miss Dean. I
▶ 10:06:48Are there any other members wishing to record or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerks will tally. amendments like
▶ 10:07:26get down there has two.
▶ 10:07:28Well, three, you got to put on yours.
▶ 10:07:31Your motion
▶ 10:07:32on this vote. The eyes are 29, the nose are 32. The amendment is not adopted.
▶ 10:07:40Gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Ivy's recognized for an amendment.
▶ 10:07:44Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk and I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of the
▶ 10:07:50Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman's recognized for remarks on his amendment.
▶ 10:07:56Thank you, Mr. chairman. I I'm aware of the the lateness of the hour. In fact, my staff's urging me on to uh to move quickly. Also, it's my uh 37th wedding anniversary. So, uh
▶ 10:08:12Okay, I'm giddy. I had a college classmate I ran into a little while ago and he said, "You're still married? I never imagined you'd be married longer than me." So,
▶ 10:08:24I don't know what that means. Yeah, you do. Yeah, you do. Um, you know, we've talked a little bit about the impact on government employees tonight. Um, certainly we mentioned earlier 444 uh,000 that are losing their collective bargaining rights. Um, I've
▶ 10:08:476,800 plus that have already been laid um 25,000 on probation and are vulnerable. In fact, I think the court's already ruled that the the administration can lay them off. 7,000 plus that are in limbo limbo. Uh nearly 6,000 veterans have been fired. This amendment is aimed at stopping the bleeding with respect to the riffs. And you know, I have a lot of government employees in my district for sure.
▶ 10:09:15Although 20% are in our the Washington DC area, 80% are across the country. But but we talked a little bit about two things already, so I won't go into it too much length, but one is the role of Congress. The the massive reorganization of this government that that's being undertaken right now is virtually unprecedented. And when we've had reorganizations in the government Congress always played a role in making sure that it happened.
▶ 10:09:44In fact, usually they they made votes uh and the president worked with the Congress to make that move forward. But as uh one of the justices said, presidents have worked with Congress rather than around it when seeking to significantly reorganize agencies that comprise the executive branch. We don't have that going on right now. The current executive administration, President Trump, is working around Congress to to get this reorganization done.
▶ 10:10:12I think it's important to make sure that Congress continues to play a role, not just because of the institutional competence piece, not just because of the checks and balance and separation of powers, but also there's a vital function that these government employees play that the federal executive branch plays in making sure that the u the government moves smoothly and that we have a great country that that that runs um in the right way. Uh, and we've had that for decades now.
▶ 10:10:42We've had outstanding work from public employees. Uh, some of them have gotten laid off. I ran into one in my district. He had a PhD in neurobiology. Uh, his job was to um to do inspections work and clinical trials with respect to Parkinson's disease. He got laid off in the middle of the clinical trial. I ran into another guy who was a mechanical engineer. He had a PhD as well.
▶ 10:11:10his job was to inspect new medical devices to make sure that they work correctly. I don't know if we don't have people that are doing that now. Hopefully, there's somebody there. And we do know that some of the layoffs have resulted in recalls later. Uh they did them so quickly they didn't realize they were sending people out that they were actually still going to need to keep keep doing the work. U but it's clear that it hasn't been done in an organized way. It hasn't been done in a coordinated way and it's been done in an overly expensive way, too.
▶ 10:11:39The Senate uh Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations released a report uh just in July that's called the $21.7 billion blunder analyzing the waste generated by Doge. And the point that they're making is because they did these layoffs so quickly and so recklessly. It it led to a giant increase in the cost that was going to come out of that.
▶ 10:12:03um when I you know I guess the Doge concept was to actually save funding but they squandered the money in the way that they did this. This amendment is aimed at at stopping that making sure that we continue to have Congress play a role in what's going on. Making sure that we deal with issues like whether it's schedule F and schedule G issues whether it's the union busting piece that's going on
▶ 10:12:25uh as well. I guess that's in the courts too. But let's get our role back in this to make sure we're controlling what's happening, that it's going in the right way, and that we're absolute ab absolutely sure that it's being done in the way that's best for the American people. So, I urge you to vote yes on this amendment. And with that, I yield
▶ 10:12:43Thank you, gentlemen. Without speaking to the merits of the amendment, I'll just make the observation like everybody on this committee who happens to be married or everybody in this business, you have an extraordinarily patient spouse. Uh with that, uh I'd recognize the chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Joyce from Ohio for his remarks on the
▶ 10:13:05Uh thank you very much, sir. And I oppose this amendment. The president is the head of the executive branch and as such has broad authority over it. The president's February executive order instructed OPM to begin a governmentwide reduction of force or rift process of which Supreme Court upheld in July. Notably, the Supreme Court's decision did not eliminate employee rights, including requiring criteria for conducting riffs, written notification windows, and the rights of employees to appeal such decisions.
▶ 10:13:31This administration has stated would take steps federal to make the federal government workforce more efficient, a goal we should all support. I yield back. I thank the gentleman. Are there other members wishing to speak to this amendment? Seeing none, the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close.
▶ 10:13:55Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Well, I I again lateness of the hour. By the way, my wife is um understanding about me being in politics because she's an elected official, too. So, uh uh you know, misery loves company, I think. But, you know, I I I appreciate the fact that um you know, it's a late hour, but this is an important piece. What's happening with our federal government with the executive branch is I think very damaging especially on the science and tech front.
▶ 10:14:23We're pushing people out of those positions uh in almost a random fashion and it's going to undermine our ability to compete moving forward with respect talked about the China competition earlier today uh with respect to AI quantum computing and the like. We need to make sure that we have that kind of talent staying in the executive branch and that we can attract it in the future.
▶ 10:14:44And riffing them is a way to really strongly and quickly discourage people from coming and believing they can start and have careers here in the federal government and continue to serve the public um and their country in that way. And with that, I yield back.
▶ 10:14:59Thank the gentleman. The questions now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Maryland. All those in favor say I.
▶ 10:15:06I. All oppose say no.
▶ 10:15:09Opinion of the chair of the nose have it. Gentlemen has requested a roll call vote. Sufficient show of hands to support it. A recorded votes order. The clerk will call the role.
▶ 10:15:20Mr. Adhalt.
▶ 10:15:22Mr. Adderhalt. No. Mr. Aguilar.
▶ 10:15:24Mr. Aguilar. I. Mr. Alford.
▶ 10:15:27Mr. Alford. No. Mr. Ammedday.
▶ 10:15:30Mr. Amade. No. Mrs. Bice.
▶ 10:15:32Mrs. Bice. No. Mr. Bishop.
▶ 10:15:34Mr. Bishop. I. Mr. Calbertt. Mr. Calbertt. No. Mr. Carter. Mr. Carter. No. Mr. Casease. Mr. Casease. I. Mr. Siskamani. Mr. Sisammani. No. Mr. Klene.
▶ 10:15:47Mr. Klene. No. Mr. Cloud.
▶ 10:15:50Mr. Klyurn.
▶ 10:15:52Mr. Klyber. I. Mr. Clyde.
▶ 10:15:54Mr. Clyde. No. Mr. Cole. No.
▶ 10:15:56Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Quayar.
▶ 10:15:58Mr. Quayar. I. Miss Dean.
▶ 10:16:00Miss Dean. I. Mr. Lauro. Hi. Mr. Loro. I. Mr. Diaz. Balard. Mr. Diaz Bolard. No. Mr. Edwards. Mr. Edwards. No. Mr. Elzie. Mr. Elie. No. Miss Escobar. Miss Escobar. I. Mr. Espayat. Mr. Espayat. I. Mr. Fleshman. Mr. Fleshman. No. Miss. Frankle. Miss. Frank. I. Mr. Franklin. Mr. Franklin. No. Mr. Gonzalez. Mr. Gonzalez. No. Mr. Guest. Mr. Guest. No. Mr. Harter. Mr. Harter. I. Dr. Harris. Dr. Harris. No. Mrs. Henson.
▶ 10:16:31Mr. Hoyer.
▶ 10:16:33Mr. Hoyer. I. Mr. Mr. Ivy. Hi.
▶ 10:16:35Mr. Ivy. I Mr. Joyce.
▶ 10:16:38Mr. Joyce. No. Miss Captor. I
▶ 10:16:40Miss Captor. I Mr. Loa.
▶ 10:16:44Miss Lee.
▶ 10:16:46Miss Lee. I. Miss. Let Miss. Let No. Mr. Leven. Mr. Levan. I. Miss. Malloy. Miss Mallaloy. No. Miss. McCullum. Miss. McCullum. I. Miss Ming. Miss Ming. I. Mr. Molinar. Mr. Molinar. No. Mr. Moore. Mr. Moore. No. Mr. Melli. I
▶ 10:17:04Mr. Morelli I Mr. Murvan Mr. Murvan I Mr. New House Mr. New House no Miss Perez Miss Perez I miss Pingri Miss Pingri I Mr. Pokean
▶ 10:17:15Mr. Pokean I Mr. Quigley
▶ 10:17:18Mr. Quigley I Mr. Russianthaler Mr. Russianthaler no Mr. Rogers Mr. Rogers no Mr. Rutherford Mr. Rutherford no Mr. Simpson Mr. Simpson no Mr. Strong
▶ 10:17:31Mr. Strong no Mrs. Torres.
▶ 10:17:34Mrs. Torres. I Miss Underwood. Miss Underwood. I Mr. Valido.
▶ 10:17:39Mr. Valido. No. Miss Washerman Schultz.
▶ 10:17:41Miss Washerman Schultz. I Mrs. Watson Coleman. Mrs. Watson Coleman. I. Mr. Wac. Mr. WAC. No. Mr. Zinci.
▶ 10:17:48Mr. Zinci. No.
▶ 10:17:50Are there any members wishing to record their vote or change their vote? Gentleman from New York?
▶ 10:17:56Mr. Loa? No. Are there any other members wishing to record their vote or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tally.
▶ 10:18:42On this vote, the eyes are 28, the nose are 33. The amendment is not adopted. Gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Ivy's recognized for an amendment.
▶ 10:18:54Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
▶ 10:18:57and I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of the amendment. Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with. The gentleman's recognized for remarks on his amendment.
▶ 10:19:06Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I was a prosecutor for 12 years uh for federal and aid elected in the state. Um so it might be a little ironic that I'm offering this amendment to increase uh salaries and funding that goes to pay federal public defenders and uh CJA panel attorneys. But I think it's critical to do that because of the right to counsel issue and because of the critical role that u public defenders play in the criminal justice system at the federal level.
▶ 10:19:33I think it's pretty clear right now that um the funding has run short. I think there's a $77 million shortfall if I understand correctly. And what that's meant is that some of these lawyers who have worked and done the uh and submitted their vouchers to the court have not been paid. And so the amendment uh would address that and put in enough money so that those payments could be made to cover those attorneys who've done that work.
▶ 10:19:58Uh the concern that if if we don't do this, and this is raised by several federal judges, I picked uh Republican appointees to to make sure that it's uh clear this is a bipartisan point. These are lawyers who are making a sacrifice by doing this work at all and then they're not getting paid on top of that. It's difficult. That was the US District Judge Kathy Cyel. Uh, judges Robert Conrad and Amy St.
▶ 10:20:24Eve, who I I think were both Trump appointees um said that these are payments for constitutionally required legal work that has already been performed, but that will be left unpaid for months simply because we cannot afford to make the payments. Faced with such a long delay in receiving payment, these attorneys and their experts could decline to accept future CJA appointments by the court, potentially creating unlawful delays in the constitutional right of defendants to speedy and fair trial.
▶ 10:20:53So, what they're saying there is basically everybody's got a sixth amendment right to be represented by council in a criminal case. U and the case will not go forward in absence of that attorney being assigned. these lawyers aren't getting paid and they weren't getting paid that much to start with. And as they see that they're not going to get paid, fewer and fewer are going to accept the positions either as federal public defenders or the CJA appointment panel.
▶ 10:21:22And what that will mean going forward is one, cases are going to go slower. You know that you can't rush one through. If they don't have an attorney there, you have to wait. That means it takes longer for justice to get done. And in criminal cases, we don't want it to take longer for justice to get done. You want whatever the justice is going to be to be done quickly. And if they're convicted, it needs to be uh sufficiently punitive to make sure that the point gets across that this conduct is not going to be tolerated.
▶ 10:21:52And some of the cases where you have CJ appointee lawyers are very serious cases uh because you can get conflicts and you have to go to the CJA panel. So this isn't just, you know, minor cases were the ones that get the federal public defenders or CJA. They get the most serious cases that are in the court system right now. U depending on the situation.
▶ 10:22:14So it's a very serious thing and I'm hoping that we can address this to make sure we don't create problems going down the road and slow down the court system, which is already pretty slow. But if we make it even slower, you run into speedy trial issues and other things that could lead to very serious problems. And we can't just, you know, push it through without paying attention to it because as Justice Scalia really was uh outstanding in pointing out, there's a Sixth Amendment right to counsel that has to be respected.
▶ 10:22:43It's a fundamental cornerstone of the rule of law and our criminal court system. So with that, I ask uh my colleagues to support this amendment so these people can get paid who've done the work and we can make sure that the court system runs smoothly. I yield back.
▶ 10:22:59I thank the gentleman. the gentleman from Ohio, the chairman of subcommittee and Mr. Joyce recognized to respond to the amendment.
▶ 10:23:07Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, it might surprise you, Mr. Ivy, but I started in the federal defenders office, worked in Kahaga County or Cleveland and major felonies and then became the public defender in a small county and thought I could do more for uh, people by becoming prosecutor and ran as prosecutor and got elected and was there for a long period of time. Uh, I like to refer to ourselves when we were in the public defenders office as the best lawyers money couldn't buy.
▶ 10:23:35It was painful though to listen to folks come in and say that they don't want no public defender. They want a real lawyer and uh, you know, because I realize and appreciate how hard they work on the absolute worst cases the system can dredge up. But I have to oppose this and I share your concerns. But I'm sure you're aware every member of this committee is that federal funding situation that we currently face. Ensuring that the judiciary can continue to fill its full fifth amendment obligations is of critical importance.
▶ 10:24:03This is why while having to make tough funding decisions across all our accounts, Defender Services saw an 8.2% increase over FY25 levels in this bill. I look forward to working with my colleagues to continue to find the and fund the judiciary's needs.
▶ 10:24:20Thank gentlemen. The gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hor is recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 10:24:24Thank you very much. I rise in support of this amendment. Uh it obviously exceeds the 302B, but as you heard the chairman say, the big chairman say a little earlier, we have no budget. So there is no budget number that is legally our target because we have not adopted a budget.
▶ 10:24:48There was a skinny budget to to because that was necessary for you to get the reconciliation bill done because you have to have a budget of whatever type we did that you did that uh and uh but there is no budget. Uh so there is money for this. Mr.
▶ 10:25:05Wulmarmac was chairman of this committee and I've had the great honor and not only my great honor is be his friend but the second great honor was serving with under him uh as chairman of the Last year we we did it right. The Senate did not do it right. Uh and as a result the Senate was underfunded the public defender system. So what I would say Mr. Mr. chairman.
▶ 10:25:34Both chairmans we're going to spend
▶ 10:25:37we're gonna Well, yeah.
▶ 10:25:40He's pretty upset over there.
▶ 10:25:43No, I He was chairman at that time last
▶ 10:25:48I'll refer to Warmway.
▶ 10:25:49My My My point is we're going to spend this money. Why? Because the Constitution requires us to spend this money. Um and as all of you know, particularly those of you who are lawyers, uh criminal cases come before civil cases. So, not only do you back up the criminal cases, but you also back up civil cases because uh the criminal cases have priority because the constitution requires a speedy trial.
▶ 10:26:13Uh as a result, we're going to spend this money whether we spend it today or we I say spend it make a appropriation for it today or or we do it in in in the days to come. But it's going to have to be done. Uh I think the question is just when do we do it?
▶ 10:26:31Uh and uh now is as good a time as any because you have to do this uh because you have to have counsel provided as Scolia said and as the Supreme Court has ruled a long time ago. Uh and as a result, Mr. Chairman, I think we're going to spend this money just when we're going to do it. And I and I thank the gentleman for his because we have to do this. There's not an option.
▶ 10:27:01I thank the gentleman. As I'm sure my friend from Maryland, Mr. Ivy, knows I have a plethora of prosecutors up here. So, the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Carter, is recognized.
▶ 10:27:14I'm not a prosecutor.
▶ 10:27:22county commissioners all the way up to to Congress seem to decide we don't need lawyers. But without a defense lawyer, you don't get a trial,
▶ 10:27:34That that's that's just as simple as you can make it. Or anybody, you don't have to be a lawyer to listen to what I'm saying. We have no choice. We have to fund the lawyers. If they haven't been paid, the dang sure ought to be paid. They've done the job. They need to get paid. If you can't do it here, we got to do it in when we have our conference.
▶ 10:27:58But otherwise, we are neglecting our judiciary and neglecting justice the federal level. So, I I am going to vote for this Uh, gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Quigley's recognized to address the amendment. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, after days like this, I look around the portraits in this room and I notice none of these appropriators are smiling.
▶ 10:28:31And I'm thinking that the exceptions I'm thinking that the exceptions are that
▶ 10:28:38No, I just recognize that there's a few, but it's probably because when the portraits are taken, they were no longer
▶ 10:28:46But I was a criminal defense attorney, not a public defender. Highest conviction rate in the county. Thank You know, I told that joke when I was FSG uh to the Supreme Court justices and they didn't get it, which tells me a few of them actually practice law in courts, but that's beside the point.
▶ 10:29:06Uh when I became a Cook County Commissioner, uh the first thing we had to do was to settle something called the Ford Heights 4 case, which is an example of what happens when you don't have really good quality defense teams.
▶ 10:29:22uh they managed to convict the wrong four people, put them on death row uh several times close to being uh uh put to death by the state and they realized they got the wrong four and besides the trauma to them in the justice system, it cost Cook County $36 million. It happens all the time. So, you want really good people defending because both sides of this this antagonistic fight that takes place in courtrooms is for a reason. It's to evoke justice.
▶ 10:29:53But something else I want to point out that Mr. Ivy was getting to is prosecutors know if there's no defense attorneys or you have to wait for them, their cases aren't getting better with age, right? Witnesses memories aren't getting better. Uh the case isn't solidifying with age. When they're ready, they're ready. So, uh it's not justice delayed as justice denied.
▶ 10:30:18if if you really think these folks are guilty, uh the quality of both sides falls apart if you go longer um than you should. And I I think it's instructive for us to remember that this is a balance and we have to make sure it's funded in a balanced way as well. And I appreciate uh Mr. Ivy's amendment.
▶ 10:30:41Thank gentlemen. Gentle lady from Texas, Miss Escobar is recognized for comments on the amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before I was in Congress, I served in county government. I served as a county commissioner in El Paso, and then I served as the El Paso County Judge, which is the um essentially the head of county government, the county executive, and we had to fund indigent defense.
▶ 10:31:09And I had early on in in my uh public service career in county government, we had members of the commissioner's court who would say, "Well, we can't afford to pay this, so let's not pay this." We have no choice. We ha if we are going to administer justice, if we're going to adequately fund the administration of justice, we have to pay these lawyers.
▶ 10:31:37we have to fund this line item. What we learned was the more that you delay justice, as my colleagues have mentioned, there are consequences. Consequences at the county level, for example, people sat in the county jail for a lot longer. And it meant higher costs. It also meant that people victims of crime also did not have access to justice.
▶ 10:32:06So there are real costs to not doing this, but there are also costs to the people who want to see justice done and served. This is one of those uh issues that is pretty fundamental for government. We have to do this.
▶ 10:32:26If you all haven't received outreach from lawyers in your districts, I would be My team and I have certainly heard from the defense bar in my district. We've also heard but that the judges will also attest to the fact that Congress needs to do its job and fund this.
▶ 10:32:52So I I am delighted to to know that there is bipartisan support for this amendment. I would really really encourage um other colleagues to join in that bipartisan support. This is not a shouldave. This is a musthave. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
▶ 10:33:15Thank gentle lady. Gentleman from Florida, Mr. Ruford's recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 10:33:20Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I could ask um Chairman Joyce, did did I understand you to say that the their budget was increased almost 10%.
▶ 10:33:32Uh yes, it's 8.2.
▶ 10:33:358 8.2. Okay. I just want to make sure I heard that correctly. Thank you.
▶ 10:33:39No problem. Are there any other members wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, Chair will recognize himself. And I want to thank the gentleman from Florida for making the point. This budget is higher than it was. It is increased and we do have uh a U conference ahead of us and if we need to make adjustments there opportunity to do that. Gentleman from Georgia uh is
▶ 10:34:10Thank you. So this is almost a $200 million increase with no offset. Um, I think that says enough right there. With the $ 37 trillion debt, we don't need to be adding more money without an offset, and I yield.
▶ 10:34:27Are there other members wishing to address the amendment?
▶ 10:34:30Seeing none, the gentleman from Maryland is recognized for one minute to close.
▶ 10:34:34Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I I appreciate it. Thank you, Judge, uh, for your support. Uh, I think the bipartisan support here is very helpful. Uh, my understanding is that this is I appreciate the 8.2 2% increase moving forward. My understanding is this is covering the backlog of what's been uh expended already or uh incurred already. So you had lawyers that did the work, did the trials, did the motions, did all the work in court, but haven't gotten paid. Their investigators and the like haven't gotten paid.
▶ 10:35:03I my understanding is that this is aimed at covering that. So, uh, I encourage all of you all to, uh, consider the importance of the, uh, right to counsel, the impact that it could have if, you know, we have lawyers that that are saying like, I'd love to do this work, but I can't afford it. I can't afford not to get paid. I've got a family to feed. I got to keep a roof over our heads.
▶ 10:35:24And the one last point I'll make, and my congress uh my colleague from Illinois kind of touched on this, but one of the fastest ways to get a criminal conviction reversed is an ineffective assistance of council finding. And the more serious the case gets, the higher that standard becomes. Let's pay these guys. Let's pay the people for the work that they've already done. Let's make sure that we're attracting people so that there's a good job that's done. It's got to be an adversarial system. It's got to be a competitive system.
▶ 10:35:53That's the way it was designed and uh it's not perfect but it's worked pretty damn well for a couple hundred years now. I encourage you uh to support the amendment.
▶ 10:36:03I thank gentlemen. The questions now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Maryland. All those in favor say I.
▶ 10:36:10All those opposed say no.
▶ 10:36:13opinion of the chair. The nos have it. Gentleman has requested a recorded vote. Sufficient number of hands have risen. The recorded vote is ordered. The clerk will call the role.
▶ 10:36:24Mr. Aderhalt.
▶ 10:36:28Mr. Adhalt. No. Mr. Aguilar. I.
▶ 10:36:30Mr. Aguilar. I. Mr. Alford. Mr. Alford. No. Mr. Amade.
▶ 10:36:34Mr. Ammedday. No. Mrs. Spice. Mrs. Bice. No. Mr. Bishop.
▶ 10:36:39Mr. Bishop. I. Mr. Calbertt. Mr. Calbertt. No. Mr. Carter. Mr. Carter. I. Mr. Casease. Mr. Casease. I. Mr.
▶ 10:36:48Mr. Sisammani. No. Mr. Klene. Mr. Klene. No, Mr. Cloud.
▶ 10:36:54Mr. Clyurn.
▶ 10:36:56Mr. Klyurn. I Mr. Clyde. Mr. Clyde. No, Mr. Cole.
▶ 10:37:00Mr. Cole. No, Mr. Quay.
▶ 10:37:03Mr. Quayar. I Miss Dean.
▶ 10:37:07Miss Dean. I Mr. Loro. Mr. Loro. I Mr. Diaz Bolard. Mr. Diaz Bolard. No. Mr. Edwards. Mr. Edwards. No. Mr. Ellie.
▶ 10:37:17Miss Escobar. Miss Escobar. I Mr. Mr. Espayot. Hi.
▶ 10:37:21Mr. Espayot. I Mr. Fleshman.
▶ 10:37:24Mr. Fleshman. No. Miss Frankle.
▶ 10:37:27Miss. Frankle. I Mr. Franklin. Mr. Franklin. No. Mr. Gonzalez. Mr. Gonzalez. No. Mr. Guest.
▶ 10:37:34Mr. Guest. No. Mr. Harter.
▶ 10:37:36Mr. Harter. I Dr. Harris.
▶ 10:37:39Dr. Harris. No. Mrs. Henson. Mr. Hoyer.
▶ 10:37:44Mr. Hoyer. I. Mr. Ivy.
▶ 10:37:46Mr. Ivy. I. Mr. Joyce. Mr. Joyce. No. Miss Captor. I Miss Captor. I Mr. Loa. Mr. Loa. No, Miss Lee.
▶ 10:37:55Miss Lee. I Miss Latlo. Miss Lllo. No, Mr. Leven. Hi.
▶ 10:38:00Mr. Leven. I Miss Mallaloy. Miss Mallaloy. No. Miss McCullum.
▶ 10:38:08Miss McCullum. I Miss Ming.
▶ 10:38:10Miss Ming. I Mr. Molinar. Mr. Molinar. No. Mr. Moore.
▶ 10:38:15Mr. Moore. No. Mr. Morelli.
▶ 10:38:18Mr. Morelli. I Mr. Mr. Murvan. Mr. Murvan. I Mr. New House. Mr. New House. No. Mr. Perez.
▶ 10:38:25Miss Perez. I Miss Pingri. Miss Ping. I Mr. Pokean.
▶ 10:38:30Mr. Pukin. I Mr. Quigley. Mr. Quigley. I Mr. Russianthaler. Mr. Russianthaler. No. Mr. Rogers. Mr. Rogers. No. Mr.
▶ 10:38:40Mr. Rutherford. No. Mr. Simpson. Mr. Simpson. I. Mr. Strong. Mr. Strong, no. Mrs. Torres, Mrs. Torres, I Miss Underwood,
▶ 10:38:53Miss Underwood, I Mr. Valado,
▶ 10:38:56Mr. Valado, No. Miss Wasserman Schultz, Miss Wasserman Schultz, I Mrs. Watson Coleman, Mrs. Watson Coleman, I Mr. Wac, Mr. Wack, No. Mr. Zinci, Mr. Zinci, no.
▶ 10:39:07Are there any members wishing to record their vote or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerk's telling.
▶ 10:39:21I'm sorry,
▶ 10:39:22Mr. LZ. I'm sorry. Did Are you recorded,
▶ 10:39:26Mr. LZ? No,
▶ 10:39:28that's No, you're not recorded or no on the vote.
▶ 10:39:34Okay, that's good. Just want to be clear. Are there any other members uh wishing to record their vote or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerks will
▶ 10:39:55So, we going back.
▶ 10:40:00No, you want to n On this vote, the eyes are 30, the nose are 31. The amendment is not adopted. Seeing no further amendments, I now recognize the chairman ameritus.
▶ 10:40:30Distinguish Mr. Rogers for a motion.
▶ 10:40:33Mr. Chair, I move to favorably report to the House the fiscal year 2026 financial services and general government appropriations bill.
▶ 10:40:44Questions now on the motion to favorably report to the House the fiscal year 2026 financial services and general government appropriations bill. All those in favor say I.
▶ 10:40:56I. All those opposed say no.
▶ 10:40:59The opinion of the chair the eyes have it. Roll call.
▶ 10:41:03Roll call has been requested. Sufficient number of hands have been raised. Uh, roll call is ordered. The clerk will call the role.
▶ 10:41:12Mr. Aderhalt.
▶ 10:41:14Mr. Adder Holt. I Mr. Aguilar.
▶ 10:41:17Mr. Aguular. No. Mr. Alford.
▶ 10:41:20Mr. Alford. I. Mr. Ammedday. Mr. Ammedday. I Mrs. Bice.
▶ 10:41:25Mrs. Bice. I Mr. Bishop.
▶ 10:41:27Mr. Bishop. No. Mr. Calbertt. Mr. Calbertt. I Mr. Carter
▶ 10:41:32Mr. Carter I Mr. Casease
▶ 10:41:35Mr. Casease No Mr. Sisamani
▶ 10:41:38Mr. Sisamani I Mr. Klene
▶ 10:41:41Mr. Klene I Mr. Cloud Mr. Klyurn
▶ 10:41:48Mr. Klyber No Mr. Clyde
▶ 10:41:50Mr. Clyde I Mr. Cole
▶ 10:41:56Mr. Cole
▶ 10:41:59Mr. Cole I Mr. Quayrar.
▶ 10:42:03Mr. Quay. No. Miss Dean. Miss Dean. No. Mr. Loro. Mr. Loro. No. Mr. Diaz Bolard.
▶ 10:42:10Mr. Diaz Bolard. I Mr. Edwards. Mr. Edwards. I Mr. Elzie. Mr. Elsie. I Miss Escobar. Miss Escobar. No. Miss Espayat. Mr. Espay. No. Mr. Fleshman. Mr. Fleshman. I. Miss. Frankle. Miss. Frank. No. Mr. Franklin. Mr. Franklin. I. Mr. Gonzalez. Mr. Gonzalez. I. I Mr. Guest. Mr. Guest. I Mr. Harter. Mr. Harter. No. Dr. Harris.
▶ 10:42:36Dr. Harris. I Mrs. Henson. Mrs. Henson. I Mr. Hoyer.
▶ 10:42:43Mr. Hoyer.
▶ 10:42:44Final vote in
▶ 10:42:48Mr. Hoyer. No. Mr. Ivy.
▶ 10:42:50Mr. Ivy. No. Mr. Joyce.
▶ 10:42:54Mr. Joyce. I. Miss Captor. Miss Captor. No. Mr. Loa. Mr. Mr. Loa. I Miss Lee. Miss Lee. No. Miss Latlo. Miss Latlo. I Mr. Levan. Mr. Levan. No. Miss Malloy. Miss Mallaloy. I Miss McCullum. Miss McCullum. No. Miss Ming. Miss Ming. No. Mr. Molinar. Mr. Molinar. I. Mr. Moore. Mr. Moore. I. Mr. Morelli. Mr. Morelli. No. Mr. Morvan. Mr. Murvan.
▶ 10:43:24No. Mr. New House. Mr. New House. I. Mr. Miss. Perez. Miss. Perez. No, Miss Pingri. Miss Pingri. No, Mr. Pokean. Mr. Pokean. No, Mr. Quigley. Mr. Quigley. No, Mr. Rashenthaler. Mr. Rashenthaler. I Mr. Rogers. Hi. Mr. Rogers. I Mr.
▶ 10:43:42Mr. Rutherford. I Mr. Simpson. Mr. Simpson. I Mr. Strong.
▶ 10:43:52Mr. Strong. Mr. Strong. I Mrs. Torres. Mrs. Torres. No Miss Underwood. Miss Underwood. No, Mr. Valido. Mr. Valado. I Miss Wasserman Schultz. Miss Wasserman Schultz. No, Mrs. Watson Coleman. Mrs. Watson Coleman. No. Mr. Wac. Mr. Wack. I. Mr. Zinci.
▶ 10:44:13Mr. Zinci. I
▶ 10:44:18Are there any members uh who wish to record their vote or change their vote? M gentleman from Texas.
▶ 10:44:35Mr. Cloud I Now that almost all the members are gone, I'll tell you how proud I am of you all.
▶ 10:45:25Nice job as always. Let me do this and go ahead.
▶ 10:45:45Okay. On this vote, the eyes are 35, the nose are 28. The motion is agreed to. I ask unanimous consent that staff be permitted to make technical and conforming changes to the bill and as approved. Seeing no objection, so
▶ 10:46:04Three days. Without objection, so ordered. Uh there being no further business, the committee stands adjourned.
▶ 10:46:14We're here by ourselves.
▶ 10:46:16I think that's the way it's going to be in the end anyway.