AIFull committee markup of the FY2027 Financial Services and General Government bill

Appropriations Bill MarkupsHouse Appropriations · April 21, 2026 · 119th Congress

Transcript

Highlights

▶ 0:11:12Consideration of fy 27 financial services and general government bill. Uh, before we do, I've been asked just to remind you, if you're having meetings outside, there's rope lines and things. Try and direct you away from the doors just so members can get in and out. And it's a little quieter in here. So if you're meeting with constituents or whomever, uh, just please try and help us in that way if you possibly can. Um, with that, uh, the gentlelady from florida, miss wasserman schultz, is recognized for the purpose of an amendment.

▶ 0:11:43>> thank you, Mr. chairman. I ask unanimous consent to that. The member that the amendment be considered as read. >> uh, without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with. The gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. This is really an amendment that will determine whether any of us actually mean that we want to make america healthy again.

▶ 0:12:04My amendment strikes the long standing rider preventing the federal trade commission from finally releasing the interagency working group report on food marketed to children. This working group first convened in 2009 to develop nutrition standard recommendations for food marketed to marketed to children under 17. The mission was simple prevent unhealthy foods from being peddled to our children and instead encouraged them to eat healthy and address the youth obesity crisis.

▶ 0:12:33Unfortunately, results from this report were buried because republicans in congress included a rider in the fy 2012 fsg appropriations bill that prevented its release, and that rider still stands to this day, over a decade later. And these guidelines are needed now more than ever in our country. Today, over 20% of our children live with obesity. Let that sink in. That's 14 million kids. And we know children living with obesity are more likely to remain obese when they enter adulthood.

▶ 0:13:03It also greatly raises the risk for costly and sometimes deadly chronic conditions like diabetes, cardiovascular disease, stroke, and even cancer. That not only places more stress on kids, but it puts more financial strain on families, costing our nation over $13 billion annually in direct and indirect medical spending, thanks to horrific health care budget cuts by the republican majority.

▶ 0:13:26Coverage is costly, harder and harder to get, which makes treating chronic diseases tied to tied to childhood obesity even more punitive. But we know prevention is the best medicine, and releasing the interagency working group's report is a common sense step to help ensure our children aren't bombarded with ads for fatty foods and sugary drinks by the processed food industry. I'm a bit stunned that we have to make this ask isn't keeping processed foods out of our diets the maha mantra, especially for kids?

▶ 0:13:56The fact that this industry worked so hard for so long to hide these findings should alarm everybody, but I'm hopeful that the renewed bipartisan interest on healthy eating and chronic disease prevention will unlock these recommendations. My amendment also modifies the committee report to ensure the working group's report includes information on foods marketed to children that contain microplastics, toxic pesticides and other potentially hazardous substances substances.

▶ 0:14:24Scientists now find microplastics in our blood, our lungs and even in the placenta of fetuses. The research is still emerging, but early evidence suggests exposure to microplastics can lead to cardiovascular issues, metabolic disruption, and inflammation.

▶ 0:14:39As a cancer survivor who dramatically changed my own eating habits after researching the impacts of heavily processed foods, and as a jewish mother who still makes sure my three young adult children make the right choices and make healthy choices, I know every parent wants the same for their kids, so let's do right by our kids and finally require the ftc to do something basic and non-controversial. Or at least it should be. And that is released.

▶ 0:15:07The report that they've sat on for almost 15 years. We've seen the consequences of other industries, deadly industries that have hidden the true impact of their products. And it is horrifying. I can't think of a better way to help make america healthy again. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time. >> thank the gentlelady. The gentleman from ohio, Mr. joyce, is recognized to respond to the amendment. Thank you, Mr. chairman.

▶ 0:15:36I oppose this amendment. This amendment attempts to strip out a bipartisan legacy provision that has been enacted in law every year since 2014. The existing provision simply prohibits agencies from finalizing the obama administration's outdated nutritional guidance, unless it undergoes and passes a comprehensive and thorough review that reduces regulatory burdens and included a detailed cost benefit analysis.

▶ 0:15:58This amendment would require the ftc to publish and finalize 15 year old nutrition guidance within 90 days, effectively ignoring any new data and scientific information that has been gathered since then. I urge my colleagues to support the existing bipartisan legacy provision, and I oppose this amendment. Thank the gentleman, the gentleman from maryland. Mr. recognize and respond to the amendment.

▶ 0:16:24>> this is another amendment that seeks to give the american public information on what its government is doing. Simple as that. Uh. The ftc, like every other regulatory committee in our jurisdiction, has had no hearing before our committee. Zero zip.

▶ 0:16:51They have not been subjected to questioning about anything they do. Surely, surely the appropriations committee, uh, does not believe that's how we ought to operate. Surely the appropriations committee and each one of our subcommittees should feel a responsibility to question, learn, and act upon facts that they have adduced at hearings.

▶ 0:17:23That's what hearings are for. Uh, this is a pattern, of course, of objecting to disclosure of information. So I rise in support of this very important amendment. Parents are dealing with a lot of challenges, not the least of which are higher costs for necessities and gas as a result of president trump's tariffs. And your choice.

▶ 0:17:44And gasoline and tariffs have put them in a very tough position. Their government certainly ought to be telling parents, this is our best judgment on what who foods are healthy for you in the labor health committee? Uh, the secretary was asked a number of questions about make america healthy again.

▶ 0:18:13And then he was asked about, uh, the administration's policies on making more, uh, toxic air as a result of undermining regulations of coal and other toxic substances. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a pattern in the washington post.

▶ 0:18:36This morning, as I was reading my phone, we have one cdc delays publishing reports showing covid vaccine benefits. Now, you may disagree with that report, but that report was provided with taxpayer money, was done with taxpayer money, and the taxpayers ought to have that information available to them.

▶ 0:18:58The other story that I happened to read this morning, early this morning, trump fought to keep the ballroom fundraising contract secret. Here's what's in it. Uh. Apparently what we do is we draft reports, uh, and then if we don't like the results, we say, nope, we're not going to issue them.

▶ 0:19:25That's what the gentlelady from florida is saying. There is a report. It is available, should be available. This language, uh, refers back to the I'm not sure the chairman said 94 has been in the bill since 94. Is that accurate? Mr. chairman? Would you. 94 pardon? 2014 okay. 2014 that's why I was surprised at 94.

▶ 0:19:52Uh, because of course, we were in charge of congress and uh, that year, uh, in 2014, we weren't. Again, this language is to cover up. I hear so much talk about transparency and letting the public know what's going on. But here we have three instances where that's not the case.

▶ 0:20:12And very frankly, I was shocked when the secretary I know that's not our subcommittee in health and human services said that he had a condition precedent to his being appointed secretary. What was it that he would not deal with energy? No matter what the health consequences were, he would not deal with energy. And a member of our subcommittee is not here right now.

▶ 0:20:39Uh, ask that question and press him on that question. He said, no, that's not my expertise. That's not my jurisdiction. So in that context, I would hope that we could have an amendment approved unanimously by this committee said, you got information that's important for parents, uh, to have their children healthy, then we ought to let them peruse that and make their decision on whether or not they believe that information should be followed.

▶ 0:21:10I urge adoption of the amendment. >> thank you. Gentlemen. The gentlelady from connecticut, Mr. laura, is recognized to address the amendment. >> Mr. chairman, I rise in support of this amendment. Uh, two years ago, I led a bicameral letter urging the ftc to complete and release an updated version of its report, titled review of food marketing to children and adolescents.

▶ 0:21:39The ftc's last major report was published in 2012 using data from 2009, meaning the most updated data we have on food marketing to children is nearly 20 years old. We know that american children are not meeting the basic nutritional goals, and that companies aggressively market unhealthy food and sugary beverages to children.

▶ 0:22:02This aggressive marketing includes the food, beverage and restaurant companies that spend nearly $14 billion per year on marketing in the united states, with more than 80% of the advertising promoting unhealthy food choices. On top of that, they get a tax write off for these advertising practices that hurt our children's health earned them billions in revenue.

▶ 0:22:27So we face a dual obesity and diabetes epidemic. It is time we do our part to stop it. I will soon be reintroducing the stop subsidizing childhood obesity act, which would address the marketing of unhealthy foods by closing the tax loophole that companies use to advertise these products to children. I hope someone in this room will join me as a co-lead. There is no reason why this legislation shouldn't be bipartisan.

▶ 0:22:57This amendment would provide even more information to policymakers so that we can understand what other practices companies are using to pad their bottom lines at the expense of our children's health. Crucially, modern data would also include the impact of the rise of social media and influencer marketing, which has supercharged the food advertising industry.

▶ 0:23:22My colleagues on the other side of the aisle often claim they want to, quote, make america healthy again. End quote. What better place to start than holding accountable the system that pushes unhealthy food on our kids? In the most deceptive way? Congress must stop letting companies off the hook for negatively impacting children's nutritional health. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank you. Gentlelady.

▶ 0:23:49Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Gentleman from maryland is recognized. Thank you very much. Uh. >> look, I appreciate the comments. The fact of the matter is, is, you know, this committee knows for years I've been saying we have to stop the federal government subsidizing junk food. Now, I went to it through the snap program.

▶ 0:24:10But yes, these companies depend for the profits they get from those snap beverages, sweetened beverages that are sold and subsidized by the federal government. I'm not sure this is the right approach, but I'm glad we're talking about it. I'm glad we're talking about getting our children healthy food and not sending any messages from the government that, contrary to that, and I think that's what we've been doing over the years.

▶ 0:24:38So I want to I you know, I want to thank the gentlelady for bringing the topic up. We have to talk about is this, you know, this is titled junk food, but then it gets to a lot of other things. If it had been just about junk food, I might have bought into this. But then we went into all the other things at the end of this amendment. Um, we have to have that discussion yield back. >> thank you. Gentlemen, are there other members wishing to address the amendment?

▶ 0:25:03If there's no further debate, I'd recognize the gentlelady for one minute to close. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. This amendment is simple. We've got to bring transparency to the food marketed to our children and respectfully, to chairman joyce. Uh, this is not about obama era nutrition data. It is about junk food being marketed to our children.

▶ 0:25:30Um, it also directs the ftc to, to update their report and then publish it because our country's childhood obesity crisis continues to get worse. And it has deteriorated since the riders first inclusion over a decade ago. Chairman harris and I have discussed this issue over the years and look forward to working with you on this.

▶ 0:25:53You know, even beyond this amendment, our children are not piggy banks for the processed food industry to exploit at the expense of their health and well-being. Parents deserve to know what's in the food their children are eating and that is being marketed to them. They also deserve to know if these foods are filled with harmful substances like microplastics and pesticides. If we truly want to make america healthy again and keep america healthy, it starts with our children. It starts with prevention, and it starts with full unbridled transparency.

▶ 0:26:19The federal trade commission must be allowed to release the findings, update them, and release the findings of the interagency working group to protect the health and future of this country. I urge a yes vote, and I want to just underscore that it starts at the youngest stage of children's lives. If they start life obese, it is a vexing, difficult challenge, an obstacle that is in the way of that child for likely the rest of their life.

▶ 0:26:46And we have an opportunity to take steps towards eliminating and reducing that unhealthy, those unhealthy eating habits. Thank you so much. I yield back urge adoption. >> thank gentlelady. Uh, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from florida. All those in favor say aye. >> aye. >> all opposed? Say no. Can you the chair the nos have it. Roll call has been requested. Sufficient number of hands have been raised. The clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt.

▶ 0:27:18No, Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar, I. Mr. alford. Mr. alford, no. Mr. amodei. Mr. amodei no. Mrs. bice. Mr. bishop, Mr. bishop, I. Mr. calvert, Mr. calvert no. Mr. carter. Mr. case. Mr. cisco. Mr. cisco. No. Mr. klein. Mr. klein. No. Mr. cloud. Mr. clyburn.

▶ 0:27:49>> yes. >> Mr. clyburn, I. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. No. Mr. cole. >> no. >> Mr. cole. No. Mr. cuellar. Miss dean, miss dean, I miss delauro, Mr. lauro, I. Mr. diaz-balart, Mr. diaz-balart. No. Mr. edwards. Mr. lee. Mr. lee. No. Miss. Escobar. Mr. espaillat. Mr. espaillat, I.

▶ 0:28:20Mr. fleischmann. Mr. fleischmann. No. Miss. Frankel. Miss. Frankel, I. Mr. franklin. Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest. Mr. carter. Mr. carter, I. Doctor. Harris. Mrs. henson. Mrs. henson. No. Mr. hoyer. Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. ivy. Mr. ivy. I. Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce. No. Miss. Kaptur. Mr. lalota. Mr. lalota.

▶ 0:28:51No. Miss lee. Miss lee, I miss. Letlow. Mr. levin. Mr. levin, I miss malloy. Miss malloy no. Miss mccullum. Miss mccullum, I miss ming. Miss ming I Mr. mulliner. Mr. mulliner no. Mr. moore. Mr. morelli. Mr. morelli, I. Mr. van. Mr. newhouse. Mr. newhouse no. Miss. Perez. Miss perez, I miss. Pingree, miss.

▶ 0:29:23Pingree, I. Mr. pocan, Mr. pocan, I. Mr. quigley. Mr. reschenthaler. Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong. Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres. Mrs. torres, I miss. Underwood, miss. Underwood, I. Mr. valadao. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz, miss. Wasserman. Schultz. I. Mrs.

▶ 0:29:53Watson. Coleman. Mrs. watson. Coleman. I. Mr. womack. Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink. Mr. zink. No. Mr. shreeve. Mr. shreeve. No. >> does any member wish to record their vote or change their vote? Gentlemen from west virginia. I do not believe gentlemen is recorded. >> Mr. moore. >> no gentleman from north carolina. >> Mr. edwards. >> no gentleman from texas?

▶ 0:30:24>> no Mr. carter, no. >> gentleman from hawaii. >> Mr. case, I. >> gentleman from indiana. >> Mr. mervyn I. >> gentleman from pennsylvania. >> Mr. rosenthal. No. >> are there other members wishing to record or change their vote? Gentlelady from oklahoma. >> Mrs. bice votes no.

▶ 0:30:54>> are there any other members wishing to record or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tally.

▶ 0:31:37The eyes are 24. The nos are 30. The amendment is not adopted. Gentlelady from maine, miss pingree is recognized for the purpose of an amendment. >> amendment at the desk. I move to dispense with the reading. >> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her amendment. >> thank you very much, Mr. chair.

▶ 0:32:03My amendment also has to do with the release of a report, so I hope that we can come to an agreement on what is a very simple release of a report. And this amendment is about preserving our history. And I know there are many people in the room who care deeply about the history of this country, and particularly that history that is located here in washington. Many of us walk or drive past the william j. Cohen federal building every single day.

▶ 0:32:31It's right below the hhs building here on independence, and it is currently home to the voice of america. I bet many of you don't realize that it is the home of some of the most significant public art in american history. As part of the new deal, several federal programs paid artists to create works reflecting american life. It was right after the end of the depression, and it was an important way to preserve our history and also to help put people back to work.

▶ 0:33:01The cohen building is home to so many masterpieces that were funded by this program. It's often called the sistine chapel. Of the new deal. Murals in there have been created by such influential painters as ben shahn, seymour fogel, philip guston. But here's the problem this administration has put the cohen building on a list for accelerated sale. These murals cannot be removed. They're painted directly on the walls, integral to the structure of the building.

▶ 0:33:29And there are many, many people very concerned that a developer will come in with this prime real estate, tear it down two blocks from the capitol, demolish that building, including the priceless art inside. But it doesn't have to be this way. Before the cohen building went on sale, gsa did a feasibility study for what a renovation of the building could look like while preserving the murals. Once again, this study is taxpayer funded. It was done by federal employees and it was completed in january of 2025.

▶ 0:34:01But since then, it's released has been prohibited. No one has seen it, despite numerous requests, including from members of congress. So my simple amendment just says to gsa, please release the study, give us that opportunity to see how we can best preserve these murals. Everyone, including many outside parties and others, would benefit from seeing what experts at gsc think is possible to do with this building.

▶ 0:34:27I hope you will consider supporting this amendment and I hope as you do so, you will also think about some of the things we've witnessed in the last year and a half. I won't make any comments about this administration, because the administration and I may have slight differences on what we think is good taste or what should be done with historical buildings.

▶ 0:34:48But just ask yourselves, you don't have to answer this out loud, but when you heard that the east wing of the white house had been torn down almost overnight before you'd even heard about it, didn't you feel a little bit bad that no one consulted members of congress? No one consulted any agencies about what should be preserved or what was in there.

▶ 0:35:04Didn't you feel a little bad that you wouldn't get to walk down those steps again, like you had for so many christmas parties, bringing your family in there, looking at the decorations that suddenly it was just gone and that no one consulted you about the ballroom plans that will be built there next.

▶ 0:35:19Didn't you feel a little bad when you saw that the kennedy center suddenly had a name change, and that we don't know exactly how that building will be renovated, or the potential plans to paint the old executive office building white, or build a massive arch in the entrance to washington, D.C. these are big, complicated projects that are being done or proposed without the consultation of congress.

▶ 0:35:42And don't you feel like we should take a little more responsibility for the art and the history that is being changed without our say as co-equal branches? So this is an opportunity to just ask the administration to release a study before yet one more historic site is transformed. One more set of beautiful art is lost to everyone. That piece of our history no longer is preserved.

▶ 0:36:09All you have to do is vote yes and say just preserve. Just release this report. We may choose not to preserve this building. We may choose to put it back on the market, but at least we will know what gsa with taxpayer dollars thought was the best thing to do and how to best preserve these murals before they are gone to everyone forever. So I urge a yes vote on this and I yield back my time. >> thank. Gentlelady. The gentleman from ohio, Mr.

▶ 0:36:38Joyce, recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I appreciate the gentleman's amendment, but I oppose it. The building is one of the buildings recommended by public buildings reform board. Pbpb for disposal. The building has approximately $200 million in deferred maintenance. It's estimated the cost to modernize the building would cost over 590 million. The pr pbr estimates that disposing of the building will save 843 million.

▶ 0:37:08We need to make tough decisions now on what we can maintain in a cost effective way, and to start the disposal process for those buildings such as cohen, that will cost the taxpayer more in the long run. For these reasons, I oppose the amendment. >> thank you, gentlemen. The gentleman from maryland, Mr. torres, recognized to address the amendment again.

▶ 0:37:29>> as the gentlelady from maine observes, here's a report prepared at taxpayer expense, uh, on how something could be done, voted upon, um, passed, uh, and in this year, the report's availability was stifled. I don't know what's in the report. I don't know what it says. It may say what the chairman said.

▶ 0:37:56Uh, that, look, this is too expensive and we've got to get rid of this building. However, what is wrong with seeing the report? What are you afraid of? That we have the american people and the appropriations committee. This is under our jurisdiction, Mr. chairman, we haven't had a single hearing. Gsa has not been up here. What are we afraid of? Ladies and gentlemen?

▶ 0:38:28It's a report. It's prepared. This is not about spending more money for another report. It's done. And we continue. Apparently, the long, long, the path of cover up again. I don't know what's in the report. I have no idea. It may say the building ought to be torn down. We ought to do it tomorrow.

▶ 0:38:52The one of the articles that I said that the information on the removing the west wing of the white house, excuse me, the east wing of the white house, west wing might not be a bad idea. Just temporarily. Uh.

▶ 0:39:09The fact of the matter is that the president knew two months before he tore down he singly, solely alone, tore down a substantial portion of the white house without any consultation. Aren't we offended by that?

▶ 0:39:37It is not mar a lago north. It is the white house, the people's house. And yet we put our head in the sand and say, well, trump wanted to do it.

▶ 0:39:56And he's doing with a private sector money that is secret, not disclosed through the donors are some have been disclosed apparently voluntarily. I just do not get it. Appropriations committee, if we want to have any respect, not just in this administration, the next administration administration's.

▶ 0:40:21After that, then we will stop coddling this administration and the constituent agencies who refuse to give us information refused to testify. And, uh, we're in the dark. Is that what we want to be as an appropriations committee? We lament. Oh, well, they're not paying attention to us. Of course they're not paying attention to us. They have no consequences of not paying attention to us.

▶ 0:40:51This this lady's the gentlewoman from maine offers an amendment which is again saying, we have a report, we'd like to have the information. And we are saying, oh, no. We don't want the information. Can there be any conclusion other than we don't want the public to have the information? I urge support of this amendment.

▶ 0:41:23>> thank you. Gentlemen. The gentlelady from pennsylvania, miss dean's, recognized to address the amendment. >> Mr. chairman, and I, too, rise in support of the amendment. Uh, again, it is simply to release the paid for by taxpayer study about this building. I wonder in god's name, why would you not want that to happen? Why do we authorize these studies? Taxpayers pay for these studies.

▶ 0:41:53What are you hoping to cover up? Why don't you want to know what's in the report I commend to you. Take a look. I went online to take a look at some of the artwork in this building. I actually ask each of you to take a look. It is extraordinary. And I have to admit, uh, miss pingree, I'll be going to the building soon. If if it's not shuttered.

▶ 0:42:12Uh, because I want to make sure I get my eyes on this historic, gorgeous artwork that tells of a time in our country, a time of extraordinary economic and political challenge. Why would we not want to know what we could better do with this building? I'll end with this story. Uh, in my district, uh, we had a horrific fire in a 100 year old building.

▶ 0:42:41It was a really beat up building, to be very honest. It was a building that for decades people worked, uh, sps technologies. They worked in this factory. Generations of people from my hometown worked in this factory. Uh, whether it was the world war two war effort, uh, right through today doing really important work, but the building was not something you would think much of.

▶ 0:43:09Horrific fire. Fortunately, no one was hurt. But do you know what the manufacturer, the owner of this building, decided to do in honor of this legacy of a hundred years of family after family after family having a career there, they saved. They tore the whole thing down because it was a total loss.

▶ 0:43:31They saved signage that they could save, and they saved bricks just out of respect for what had happened there for 100 years. And in the redesign of the rebuild, which is magnificent, they are reusing that old signage and that original brick, unlike the east wing. I don't know what was saved there. Can you imagine the history, what you could have done if you were going to repurpose?

▶ 0:44:01I remember the gorgeous floors, the gorgeous woodwork, so much there. Why not make sure we know what the report says about this building, and do everything in our power to make sure we do not lose the historic, magnificent art? I commend you go online, take a look at the artwork. It's amazing. And it's american. >> gentlelady. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment?

▶ 0:44:30Seeing none, the gentlelady from florida, excuse me from maine is recognized for one minute to close florida. Everybody likes florida. >> it's a very big temperature difference. We share an ocean. It's all good. Um, thank you, Mr. chair. And just one more time. I know I am in a room full of people who care deeply about history. We work in history every day.

▶ 0:44:59We have the incredible privilege to be in the capitol building nearly every day of our working lives as we're members of congress, and we know how important it is to preserve the murals, the structure. I see many of you, uh, proponents of the things that come before our committee, the interior environment subcommittee, the battlefield monuments, the smithsonian museum, museums and libraries around the country, your local historical society.

▶ 0:45:24I know all of you care deeply about history. So to just blithely write off this huge part of american history, because we won't look at the study. And I understand Mr. joyce's point. This could be a very expensive building. Of course, we've got deferred maintenance. Of course we haven't taken care of it. We're the federal government, we're congress. We don't spend money where we should. We haven't respected this valuable monument, but we don't know what's in this report.

▶ 0:45:51It may say, here's a way to preserve these murals. Here's a way to reuse this building for some other public use. Here's a way to create a new museum that belongs in there to protect those. We don't know exactly what that is, but we should read the report before we let it go and be torn down. And I yield back and I urge you to vote yes. >> thank the gentlelady. The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from maine. All those in favor, say aye. >> aye. >> all opposed? Say no. No.

▶ 0:46:26Ayes have it. The eyes do have it. Does anybody requesting a vote? Not raise your vote has been requested. >> not sufficient number. >> o not sufficient numbers. So the chair will recount. Yeah, I think there is now sufficient number. So. Um the recorded vote has been requested.

▶ 0:46:55The sufficient number of hands have been raised and the clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar, I Mr. alford. Mr. alford no. Mr. amodei. Mr. amodei no. Mrs. bice. Mr. bishop, Mr. bishop, I. Mr. calvert Mr. calvert no. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. No. Mr.

▶ 0:47:25Case. Mr. eskamani. Mr. klein. Mr. klein. No. Mr. cloud. Mr. cloud. No. Mr. clyburn. Mr. clyburn, I. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. No. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cuellar. Mr. cuellar, I miss dean. Miss dean, I miss delauro, Mr. loro, I. Mr. diaz-balart, Mr. diaz-balart. No. Mr. edwards. Mr. edwards. No. Mr. lee. Mr.

▶ 0:47:55Ellzey. No. Miss. Escobar. Mr. espaillat. Mr. espaillat. Mr. espaillat, I. Mr. fleischmann. Mr. fleischmann, no. Miss. Frankel. Miss. Miss. Frankel, I. Mr. franklin. Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest. Mr. carter. Mr. carter, I. Doctor. Harris. Mrs. hanson. Mrs. henson. No. Mr.

▶ 0:48:25Hoyer, I. Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. iv. Mr. iv. I. Mr. joyce. No. Mr. joyce. No. Miss. Kaptur. I. Miss. Kaptur, I. Mr. lalota. Mr. lalota. No. Miss lee. Miss lee, I miss. Letlow. Mr. levin. Mr. levin, I miss malloy. Miss malloy. No, miss mccullum. Miss mccullum, I miss ming. Miss ming, I Mr. molenaar. Mr. molenaar. No. Mr. moore. Mr.

▶ 0:48:56Moore. No. Mr. morelli. Mr. morelli, I. Mr. mirvan. Mr. mirvan, I. Mr. newhouse. Mr. newhouse no. Miss. Perez. Miss. Perez, I miss. Pingree. Miss. Pingree, I. Mr. pocan, Mr. pocan, I. Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley, I. Mr. reschenthaler. Mr. reschenthaler. No. Mr. rogers. Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson, I. Mr. strong. Mr. strong. No.

▶ 0:49:29Mrs. torres. Mrs. torres, I. Miss. Underwood, miss. Underwood, I. Mr. valadao. Mr. valadao. No. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz, miss. Wasserman. Schultz. I. Mrs. watson. Coleman. Mrs. watson. Coleman, I. Mr. womack. Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink. Mr. zink, I. Mr. Mr. sharif. Mr. sharif. No. >> uh. Let's see. Sorry.

▶ 0:49:58I was wishing to, uh, record or change their vote. And the gentleman from arizona. >> Mr. cisco, votes. No. >> the gentleman from alabama. >> Mr. aderholt. No. >> gentleman from maryland. >> doctor harris. >> no gentleman from hawaii. >> Mr. case, I. >> are there other members wishing to change or record their vote? >> Mrs. >> by gentlelady from oklahoma.

▶ 0:50:31>> Mrs. bice votes no. >> there are others seeing none. The clerk. Wait a minute. Uh, as gentleman recorded. Okay.

▶ 0:51:03>> people writing. >> to. >> let me chat with.

▶ 0:51:38>> on this vote the age of 29. The nos are 31 and the amendment is not adopted. Gentleman from wisconsin, Mr. pocan is recognized for the purpose of an amendment. >> great. Thank you, Mr. chair. I have an amendment at the desk and I ask that it be considered read. >> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman's recognized for remarks on his amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. Um, this is actually a pretty straightforward amendment.

▶ 0:52:08It's saying that until vote, the director of omb comes before the full committee, uh, that we would withhold 70% of the funds. Um, we did try to negotiate in the manager's amendment, what we did in the milcon, which was 25% to have come before the committee that wasn't agreed to. And, and maybe it's better because in some ways we can have this full debate. Uh, this is pretty unprecedented times where we have an executive branch.

▶ 0:52:36And again, this isn't team red, team blue democrat versus republican. We have an executive branch taking away the funds that congress has approved us, both of us. Our institution has approved, whether it's impounding. And I kind of hate that term because it's so insider. Washington stealing the funds, canceling funds that we have through the process we have approved, which is what makes the appropriations committee relevant, right?

▶ 0:53:05Because we approve the bills and then congress approves the spending. And if one branch of government that doesn't have that authority, according to the constitution does that, then we are at a disadvantage. In fact, this entire process is more about fantasy congress than real congress, because we spent 93 hours last year, by the way, in this room with each other, marking up bills.

▶ 0:53:31And then if the executive branch just steals the funds, uh, well, that takes away our status as a co-equal branch of government. And it's reason I want to have you for the full committee is because these are unprecedented times. It's not just fsg where we have the problem, him not coming in front and talking about budgets that come before us, but literally it's every single one of our 12 bills.

▶ 0:53:58There have been funds that have been canceled, delayed, uh, or just outright stolen, including think about the last budget bill we passed unanimously. Milken. They stole $20 billion in funds throughout the va for 16,000 contracts for services go down each of our bills a-g many but 1 billion in local food purchasing assistance.

▶ 0:54:21Cj's impounded or delayed funding for noaa for violence against women grants, energy and water 24 projects for 3.7 billion for clean energy. Uh, dhs homeland security previously impounded. But again, why why do they previously impound? Don't we have those questions? We should be curious enough.

▶ 0:54:425 billion for disaster recovery money canceled and interior nea money, epa money, uh, in labor, health and human services, uh, liheap money and community service block grant money, either delayed or impounded. You can just go down the list of what's out here. We also had head start money, nih, samhsa, milken.

▶ 0:55:04I talked about, uh, national security state has $600 million for vaccines around the world. Polio vaccines, literally, uh, taking away two years worth of funding, not being released by a different branch of government after we've approved it as congress and t hud, uh, some money around, uh, the ev charging grant clawbacks, uh, that were canceled.

▶ 0:55:32So what this is really about is whether we as congress, not as democrats, not as republicans, but are willing to stand up for our powers. Otherwise, why do we spend 93 hours together? I love you, some of you, um, most of you. But 93 hours is a lot of time to spend together, to then have another branch of government to steal, impound, cancel, delay our funds.

▶ 0:56:00Um, so all I'm saying is let's withhold funding until we have him come before all of us because in a way, I mean, we have five minutes and fsg, I could ask five minutes just about fsg related items, but there's a lot of other things that they're doing that we need to figure out. And I just think this is one where it's pretty much down to whether or not we are going to stand up for congress or not.

▶ 0:56:30Don't forget, in the future, president ocasio-cortez could do things that you may not like, but if they're stealing the funding that you approved and we approved together, then we should stand up to that. But if we set the precedent that this is the new way congress is going to be treated, then as an institutionalist, what are we right? We really suggest this is a suggestion committee. That's not what the constitution says. Then we should change the constitution.

▶ 0:57:02But rather than change the constitution, we could just make sure that the appropriate person. This is still happening. You know, a year ago, I had a record number of calls, 300 calls a day. We got to 500 calls a day when they were taking funds. They're still taking the funds. We just don't have elon musk jumping in the air while they're doing it. So I just ask you to please take a hard look at this. I think it's important that we do something different than maybe how we always operate. There's a reason people don't always love congress.

▶ 0:57:29This would be doing something different and making sure we all get answers about the funds that are not going through that we've approved together, and I yield back. Mr. chairman. >> thank you. Excuse me. I thank the gentleman. The gentleman from ohio, Mr. joyce, is recognized to address the amendment. >> uh, thank you, Mr. polk. And and I oppose this amendment, but not because I don't or I disagree with you. I agree that he should come here, and you all should be testifying for him.

▶ 0:57:58We just happened to get our pushed up a little bit in the order this year, but it's not as though he's refused to come. And I told you last week in a hearing with the ranking member that he's going to come in. As a matter of fact, we've been in touch with him that they're going to come forward. So I like to give people the benefit of the doubt that when they say they're going to do something, they're going to come do that. If there's an issue with that, then we'll address it. But in the meantime, I would oppose your motion until, uh, Mr.

▶ 0:58:25Vogt is given the opportunity to actually appear before our committee. >> thank you. Gentlemen, the gentleman from maryland, Mr. hoyer, is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. >> uh. >> I must say, and I've had this discussion with Mr. khan, my dear friend, who's going to be probably the chair of this committee next year. Uh, that this is, uh, too high, 75%.

▶ 0:58:54Uh, we need the omb. We need an operating. I'm accused a lot of times, or perhaps not in a negative way, referred to as an institutionalist. I care a lot about this committee. I cared a lot about it when I served on it.

▶ 0:59:21And this committee, as you will ask, the ways and means committee, are energy and commerce, when I was majority leader, got priority to make sure that time was available in june for the bills to be on the floor so we could pursue regular order. I offered an amendment on a report language last year, and, uh, one of the more senior members of the committee got up and said, well, you know, this is just report language. And very frankly, the administration doesn't pay any attention to report language.

▶ 0:59:53This is why. Mr. vogt has, first of all, said that we need a more partizan appropriations process. He's getting that. That's not good for the committee. It's not good for the institution. Now, Mr.

▶ 1:00:14Vogt got $100 million in the reconciliation bill last time. There is talk about funding ice and border patrol for ten years in the reconciliation bill to come. I would hope the senior members of this committee, as well as the junior member, said, hell no.

▶ 1:00:43Now, it's not before our subcommittee for another subcommittee, but it is before the appropriations committee. And to allow the reconciliation process to be be operated in lieu of the appropriation committee is. I tell you, my friends, we are the authors of our own impotence.

▶ 1:01:06If we don't stand up. That has been made very clear. The administration has no intent of standing up. We have to fight about the border wall. President trump, during his first term wanted the border wall. We didn't want the border wall.

▶ 1:01:29And then when biden came in, it wasn't that if we had adopted the border wall, he was going to say, well, the appropriations committee said we were going to have the border wall, but we're not.

▶ 1:01:47Because if that's the case, then why are we spending those 93 hours to make judgments on what we believe pursuant to the constitution, pursuant to article one e are the priorities of this country. Why are we doing that? I asked my friend Mr. womack, and he and I are dear friends. I have great respect for him. Why the hell are we doing this? If, as Mr.

▶ 1:02:19Vote presumes under article one, that we have some power to suggest, but it is article two that gives the president to spend. If we appropriate $100 anywhere between 1 and 100. The authors of our own impotence. Now this. As I said to my friend Mr. puke, when he offered it 75%, I think, uh, is not an appropriate figure.

▶ 1:02:48I suggested 25%. Why? Because we just passed a 25% amendment. And Mr. carter, judge carter was for it. As a matter of fact, it wouldn't have happened without judge carter, and I applaud him for it to tell the administration, you have got to come before the appropriations committee, and Mr. Mr.

▶ 1:03:10Vote has not called me and said, gee, I'd like to come before the committee and the chairman of my subcommittee, whom I have a great relationship with, said in our. I don't refer to it a markup as our meeting. I did offer an amendment. I really, um, adventurous activity in the subcommittee. Uh, but I said to him, where's vote? He said, I can't guarantee that he'll be here.

▶ 1:03:39Let me tell you, we cut him 75%. He's going to get his rear end up here, as he should, as he has a responsibility to do in our committees. You know, we thank people for coming up here. They have a responsibility and duty to come up here. This is the appropriations committee. And very frankly, during my tenure, its authority has plummeted.

▶ 1:04:09But for this amendment, it's not going to pass. You know, that's not the senate's not going to take it. And ultimately, we're all going to suggest that it be removed, because that would not be the responsible thing to do to cut a hole. 75% agency. I thank the gentleman for his patience, and I think this is an important point, and I yield back the balance of my time. >> I thank the gentleman. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment?

▶ 1:04:36There's no further debate. The gentleman is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. You know, the concern I think we have is in. I think we have a great subcommittee, but we wanted to have doge come before us, and I know that the subcommittee chair tried to. And they never came. Yep. And now we see these doge bros, you know, with their deposition showing us why they never came. And, you know, Mr.

▶ 1:05:05Subcommittee chair, uh, you know, when we did ask, you said, I'm only human. I can't make him come. We have the power of subpoena. We can make him come. But the fact that it's even you had to say that that that he may not come before us all the more reason why we need to make sure that the person who's stealing the funds, that we're appropriating and making us irrelevant, has to show up to answer, at least for this.

▶ 1:05:33So just trying to give you the tools by sending a message that we're serious. Damn it. Together, we're serious. I understand we're not going to send that message today, but I do give you all the power we can to possibly get him before us. Thank you. >> thank you. Gentlemen, the question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from wisconsin. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed? Say no. >> no. >> the chair the nos have it.

▶ 1:06:03And the amendment is not agreed to. The gentleman from wisconsin, Mr. buchanan, is recognized for an amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. Um, so this amendment, we're in a kind of a unique situation. And again. The gentleman I haven't met before, the committee asked it be considered read. >> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman's recognized for remarks on his amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.

▶ 1:06:33So the situation that we have now, I'm asking you to try to think beyond it. Again, think about the institutions that were here. Uh, but this is an amendment that simply says, uh, you can't, uh, have a payout or a settlement with litigation with a sitting president. I am guessing our founders never thought this would come up. So it's not addressed.

▶ 1:06:59Um, and I'm not trying to make it about any current situation, but we do have to every now and then update statutes. I think, uh, a session or two ago, the statute said, uh, a president and their wife throughout the law. Well, someday a woman could be president, hopefully sooner than later. And that wouldn't be correct unless that woman was a lesbian. So we had to fix the language and we did. And occasionally you've got to do that.

▶ 1:07:29In this case, we, maybe our founders never thought of this. I never thought of this prior to about a year ago. Uh, but you should not be able to, uh, try to sue the government that you're in charge of running and have a person you've appointed making the decision whether or not you get the settlement, because that would be insane.

▶ 1:07:54Um, if I were to sue somehow congress or my office, and then I'm asking my chief of staff to make the agreement to settle, um, that doesn't make any sense. Right? And it doesn't make sense for any president with any agency that they could be suing to be able to sue, especially for $10 billion or 1 billion or for $1, uh, and then try to have a

▶ 1:08:25Settlement come out of there. That makes any sense. That's fair at all, uh, to us. So again, try to take any current situation out. I've done my best not to mention any current situation. Uh, but I think the reality is, um, every now and then we got to upgrade our statutes. And this is something that our founders didn't plan on. And maybe we need to fix this and try to take the politics out of it. And I would urge support for this amendment.

▶ 1:08:56>> thank the gentleman. The gentleman from ohio, Mr. joyce, is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. This language is broad and doesn't consider the impact on future presidents. I don't believe it's a business of the committee to remove any legal protections for our public. Officials are entitled to concerns with. The department of justice should be directed at. Our colleagues at cjs and I oppose the amendment.

▶ 1:09:26>> thank you. Gentlemen. The gentleman from maryland, Mr. hoyer, is recognized to address the amendment. >> I thank the gentleman, uh, yielding. I want to thank representative pocan for introducing this amendment. Never before in history, to the extent that I can determine, have we had a president so eager to siphon funding from the federal budget into his own bank account.

▶ 1:09:53Perhaps one of you will rise and say, oh, no. Here's a prior historic example. We also have never been in a position where the sitting president sues federal agencies and appoints officials who are able to settle these cases with him to his benefit. No, president that I have served with.

▶ 1:10:20Has treated the justice department as his personal lawyer. In fact, his personal lawyer is heading up the justice department. Does anybody care what we're doing with our government? Mr.

▶ 1:10:54Pokemon's amendment would prohibit any funds under this bill from using to pay a sitting president for settling lawsuits. He is the government in many ways, and Mr. vogt thinks he's the only government. If I sue somebody that I control who controls a lot of money and I say to them, settle this case with me.

▶ 1:11:24Now, that hasn't happened. But the specter of it exists. This amendment is essential to restoring trust in our government and ensuring the taxpayer's resources go to the benefit of taxpayers. Not to benefit president trump and his family. I yield back.

▶ 1:12:01>> thank the gentleman. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? The gentleman from maryland, Mr. ivy, is recognized. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise in support of this amendment. I actually have a bill that I coauthored with, um, congressman magaziner that takes a an approach to this on a different tack.

▶ 1:12:22It focuses on, uh, presidential the president or vice president having settlements with the private sector for similar kind of reasons. But this is even more egregious, it seems to me, um, it's really a fox guarding the henhouse kind of scenario, except there's no guarding at all because as you just heard from my colleague from maryland, there's no party in the middle of this that can take an objective view and block it with respect to the court or any other party and say, you

▶ 1:12:52Know what? This is too much of a the settlement amount is too large. Or even more importantly, he has absolutely no right to the settlement. Uh, any dollars. In fact, in some of these instances that I've seen so far, he ought to be paying attorney's fees to the federal government for, uh, frivolous litigation. I think it's important for us to make sure that we have arm's length decision making somewhere in this process.

▶ 1:13:17And we don't given the current situation, I think nobody really anticipated the president or the presidency, you know, seeking these kinds of settlements that would lead to personal enrichment. But here we are. And so I think it's important for us to make sure that we do everything we can to prevent that. Just it's important just from a good stewardship standpoint, to make sure that we do this so that people that the taxpayers money doesn't get used or misused in an inappropriate way.

▶ 1:13:47And with respect to, um, you know, removing powers from the, the presidency or the president, that's really not the goal. It's just to delay it. Um, until such point where he's a, he's a, a private citizen again, you know, statute of limitations on most of these don't run anyway.

▶ 1:14:06And I'm sure there's a way to, to state the statute of limitations if necessary or toll the statute of limitations if necessary, so that there can be a just day in court if the president or the former president at that point deserves it. But just to allow it to happen like this, I think is just an obvious, uh, risk to the public trust and to public funds. And so I urge support of the amendment. >> thank you. Gentlemen.

▶ 1:14:34Are there others wishing to address the amendment? If there's no further debate, the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. Just to clarify, I think when it was opposed by the subcommittee chair, you said it wouldn't affect future. It would affect future presidents. That's the whole idea. It's not just about this president. If we vote no, we make it just about this president.

▶ 1:14:59But the way it's written would affect all future presidents, including president ocasio-cortez and others. Right. So just understand that is actually what it says. Um, and also, as Mr. ivy said, it's still allows them to have a suit after they're not president, but the person they appointed either at doj or the irs or in the future could be labeled h or anywhere else. Hhs secretary.

▶ 1:15:28They can't have their appointee deciding whether or not the person who made their appointment gets a settlement, gets a little financial gain. So I hope we vote yes, so that we're not saying it is just about the current incident, but if we make it. No, I clearly um, unfortunately that's what it's about. So I would urge support and I yield.

▶ 1:15:55>> the question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from wisconsin. All those in favor say I. I all those I'll kind of add them all up. I'll do my best. All those in favor, uh, or all those opposed, say no. I, I think the nos have it gentleman has requested a vote. Sufficient number of hands have been raised. The clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt.

▶ 1:16:26No, Mr. aguilar, Mr. alford. Mr. alford no. Mr. amodei. Mr. amodei no. Mrs. bice. Mrs. bice no. Mr. bishop, Mr. bishop, I. Mr. calvert, Mr. carter. Mr. carter. No. Mr. case. Mr. case. I. Mr. eskamani. Mr. eskamani. No. Mr. kline. Mr. kline. No. Mr. cloud. Mr. cloud. No. Mr. clyburn. Mr. clyburn. I. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. No. Mr. cole.

▶ 1:16:58No. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cuellar. >> sue you. >> miss dean. Miss dean, I. Mr. by Mr. by Mr. diaz-balart, Mr. diaz-balart no. Mr. edwards. Mr. edwards, no. Mr. lee. Mr. lee no. Miss. Escobar, miss. Escobar, I. Mr. espaillat, Mr. espaillat, I. Mr. fleischmann. Mr. fleischmann no. Miss. Franco. Miss. Franco, I. Mr. franklin. Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest. Mr. guest. No. Mr.

▶ 1:17:31Carter. Mr. carter, I. Doctor harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson. Mrs. henson. No. Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. ivy. Mr. ivy. I. Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce. No. Miss. Kaptur. I. Miss. Kaptur, I. Mr. lalota. Mr. no. Miss lee. Miss lee, I miss. Letlow. Mr. levin. Mr. levin, I miss malloy. Miss malloy no. Miss mccullum.

▶ 1:17:59Miss mccullum I miss ming. Miss ming I. Mr. molina. Mr. molenaar no. Mr. moore. Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli. Mr. morelli, I. Mr. mervyn. Mr. newhouse. Miss. Perez. Miss. Perez, I miss. Pingree. Miss. Pingree, I. Mr. pocan, Mr. pocan, I. Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley, I. Mr. reschenthaler. Mr. rosenthaler.

▶ 1:18:31No. Mr. rogers. Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong. Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres. Mrs. torres, I miss. Underwood. Yes, miss. Underwood, I. Mr. valadao. Mr. valadao. No. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz, miss. Wasserman. Schultz, I. Mrs. watson. Coleman, Mrs. watson. Coleman, I. Mr. womack. Mr. womack. No. Mr. zinc. Mr. zink. No. Mr.

▶ 1:19:03Shreeve. Mr. shreeve. No. >> are there any members wishing to record their vote or change their vote? Gentlemen from indiana. >> Mr. mervyn, I. >> are there other members wishing to change or record their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tally. Oh, uh, Mr. calvert. >> it's not. >> recorded. >> gentlemen, is not recorded. >> Mr. calvert votes? No. >> are there any others? Tally.

▶ 1:20:29On this vote. The eyes are 26. The nose is 33. The amendment is not adopted. Obviously, we're beginning to vote, but we

▶ 1:21:00Think we have sufficient time to go ahead and try and do another one. So the gentlelady from florida. All right. Frankel is recognized for an amendment. If we have to suspend because of the vagus laurel lee will come back and resume. >> all right. Whatever. Uh. Uh, Mr. chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. I asked the reading be dispensed with. Thank you. Uh, before I get on with this very important amendment, which I want all of you to listen to. Do not leave.

▶ 1:21:34Yes, I did, I do have a remark for you. I've been writing down what I admire about you. Seriously. Your knowledge base. Amazing how you articulate it. Extraordinary. Your professionalism, your patriotism, your charisma and most importantly, his memory. Does he have an amazing memory? I think we all like to have what you're drinking. Really? You're fantastic.

▶ 1:22:01And it's just been such an honor to serve with you and Mr. joyce. Thank you. I like you, too. Not as much, but I do like you. So, uh, this is what my amendment does. It's not going to surprise you.

▶ 1:22:19It strikes the abortion writers in this bill that prohibit abortion coverage for federal employees, retirees, and their dependents under the federal employees health benefits program and ban the district of columbia from using its own funds to provide abortion services for low income residents on medicaid. And here we go again. My, my, my, how many times, Mr. hamadeh, this was for you and for guy.

▶ 1:22:45But listen, how many times do we have to keep saying that women, not politicians, should decide whether or or when to grow a family? It's. I cannot think of a more life changing decision, whether to bring a precious little person into the world.

▶ 1:23:15These writers that I moved to strike are not policy. They are punishment. Punishment for federal employees who simply want to make their own private health care decisions. Look around. There are a few of them right here, helping us every single day. And this is punishment for low income women in the district of columbia, denying them care even when the district of columbia is willing to use their own dollars. Think about it.

▶ 1:23:45We're not just restricting federal funds. We are reaching into dc's own budget saying, you don't get to decide, and this is just federal overreach at its worst. But let's be clear who these writers hurt the most women living, living paycheck to paycheck, women who cannot travel, women who are already struggling to make ends meet, now forced into impossible choices about their health, their families, and their futures.

▶ 1:24:14And folks, the majority of americans support reproductive freedom because it's about dignity, the right to make deeply personal decisions about without politicians interfering, it's about equality, because without control over our own bodies, women cannot fully participate in the economy or plan their futures.

▶ 1:24:39And, you know, I'm going to say this again, the reality is this decision whether or not to bring a child into the world, whether to start or grow a family, is that it's it's the most important policy decision that a family will make. It's about health care. It's about real health care guided by doctors, not dictated by the government. It's about freedom. The basic freedom.

▶ 1:25:05There is the ability to decide what's best for your own life. We must trust women. We must trust their families. We must trust doctors. Uh, not the politicians. Sorry about that, folks. Uh, and yet we're we're singling out federal employees and stripping away their options. And we're denying the district of columbia the right to spend their own locally raised dollars as they see fits. We all talk about supporting our workforce.

▶ 1:25:34We talk about respecting local control. But these riders do the exact opposite. They are cruel. They are intrusive. They are wrong. This amendment is about restoring fairness, about restoring autonomy. It's about restoring the fundamental promise that this country, your healthcare decisions, belong to you, not to the government. I move that we strike these. That's what this amendment does move to strike these provisions. All right.

▶ 1:26:02Final thoughts on this. I'm asking everyone to stand on the side of freedom, dignity and basic human rights. And I yield back. >> thank you. Gentlelady. The gentleman from ohio, Mr. joyce, is recognized to respond to the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. Uh. My my my.

▶ 1:26:29I must oppose this gentlewoman's amendment. Title six, seven, and eight include long standing provisions that uphold the sanctity of human life, protect religious and moral beliefs, and protect taxpayer dollars from being used for elective abortions. The hyde amendment has been in place every year since fiscal year 1984. Prohibitions on funding for abortions in dc date back to the fiscal year 1980.

▶ 1:26:55Removing these riders would set a dangerous precedent with respect to the role of the federal government and the use of taxpayer dollars with respect to the sanctity of life. Moreover, the outcome would be inconsistent with the posture this committee has taken for decades. I don't think that as a result, my colleagues on the other side want the. For these reasons, I will oppose the amendment. >> thank the gentleman. The gentleman from maryland, Mr. hoyer, is recognized to address the amendment. >> I thank the chairman. This is a different amendment.

▶ 1:27:24I support the gentlelady's amendment, and I want to thank her for her gracious and loving comments. She and I are very, very close friends and she is one of the most outstanding candor producing people that I have known in this house, and I thank her for her service.

▶ 1:27:50I say this is a different amendment because this is about conscience. This is not about. Issues on which we can make a determination based upon their practicality, their applicability, or something of that nature. I understand this is an issue on which there are deeply held moral commitments in one's mind, and one has to vote that way.

▶ 1:28:17I will vote, uh, because as I have for 60 years, starting in 1967 in the maryland senate, uh, that a woman ought to have this choice. But I understand there are legitimate reasons in people's minds why that is not right. And so we'll have to vote that way. I yield back. >> thank the gentleman.

▶ 1:28:46Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Uh, gentleman from alabama is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you. Chairman, I would just like to speak in opposition to the amendment. Uh, of course, as we all know from what's already been said, the amendment strikes the long standing funding provision, which responsibly ensures tax dollars are not used for abortion in violation of conscience of taxpayers.

▶ 1:29:11Um, and just let me share with you, marxist poll was found that a majority of americans, 54% oppose or strongly oppose abortions paid for by tax dollars, and this includes 34% of individuals who identify themselves as pro-choice. Um, I don't think we need to hide the fact that abortion is a brutal procedure.

▶ 1:29:37It ends the life of the unborn and should not be paid for or encouraged in any way by the us government. These protections are common sense. They're long standing there in place to protect life. And for that reason, I would urge a opposition to the amendment I yield back. >> thank the gentleman, the gentleman from georgia, Mr. clyde's recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. Um.

▶ 1:30:08>> let's go back to the founding document that created this nation, our declaration of independence. What does it say? And we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal and they are endowed by their creator. Their creator with certain unalienable rights, and among them are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Life is the very first right recognized by the declaration of independence that created this nation 250 years ago to secure.

▶ 1:30:41And it goes on to say, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men. That means it's the responsibility of government to protect and to secure life. So the question then is, when does life begin? Life begins at conception, that is, when so born or unborn, the government's responsibility is to protect life. So I urge a strong no vote on this amendment, and I yield.

▶ 1:31:11>> thank the gentleman. The gentlelady from nevada, miss lee, is recognized to respond to the amendment. >> uh. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. First of all, I want to recognize the ranking member. And, uh, thank you for your mentorship, your guidance, your friendship and your leadership. And you will be sorely missed when you're gone. Uh, this is a deeply personal issue for me.

▶ 1:31:38And, um, you know, I grew up in the catholic faith. I understand, uh, the negative, um, position with respect to abortion, but I also am a woman who had three miscarriages and two of them required a dnc. And so when you talk about the sanctity of life, I also want you to consider a woman's life.

▶ 1:32:11And, uh, you know, when I look at many of these employees who work for us and work for the federal government, these women who may be in a horrific position like I was, and to say to them, you do not get access to essential medical care. And I find it completely abhorrent.

▶ 1:32:41And I get it if you oppose abortion. But I also think that we owe it to the women who give their service to our country to have access to essential care when they need it. And for that, I support this amendment, and I urge you to. >> thank the gentlelady. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment?

▶ 1:33:07Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. >> thank you. I don't want to embarrass any of the young ladies that are sitting out in the audience, but they too are entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And I want them to stay alive. Yeah. And you don't know what kind of health care issue is coming up with them. They know and their doctors know.

▶ 1:33:36And not only that, they are earning their benefits. They are working and paying into a health care system and earning the benefits. And it is unfair to say a particular benefit is not going to they're not going to be allowed to use. And so I just want to say, I'm going to say this to the young ladies out there on both sides of the aisle.

▶ 1:34:02I don't know who's sitting where that you I promise you that we're going to continue to fight for your freedom of your, your reproductive freedom and your ability to have a good life. Uh, we are trusting you with so many decisions that you make for us every day. And we should trust you with your health care decisions. I urge everybody, uh, to vote for this amendment. >> good job. >> thank the gentlelady.

▶ 1:34:30The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from florida. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say no. No, the chair of the nos have it amendment. Has vocals been requested? Sufficient. Number of hands risen. The clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt. No, Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar, I. Mr. alford. Mr. alford no. Mr. amodei. Mr. amodei no. Mrs. bice. Mrs. bice. Mrs. bice, no.

▶ 1:35:04Mr. bishop, Mr. bishop, I. Mr. calvert, Mr. calvert. No. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. No. Mr. case. Mr. case. I. Mr. sigamani. Mr. eskamani. No. Mr. klein. Mr. klein. No. Mr. cloud. Mr. cloud. No. Mr. clyburn. Mr. clyburn, I. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. No. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cuellar. Miss dean. Miss dean, I. Mr. Mr. loro, I. Mr. diaz-balart. Mr.

▶ 1:35:37Edwards. Mr. edwards. No. Mr. ellzey. Mr. ellzey. No. Miss. Escobar. Miss. Escobar, I. Mr. espaillat, Mr. espaillat, I. Mr. fleischmann. Mr. fleischmann. No. Miss. Frankel. Miss. Frankel, I. Mr. franklin. Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest. Mr. guest. No. Mr. carter. Mr. carter, I. Doctor. Harris. Doctor harris. >> members are advised not to leave. >> Mrs. henson. Mrs. henson no. Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. hoyer, I. Mr.

▶ 1:36:10Ivy. Mr. ivy. I. Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce. No. Miss. Kaptur. Miss. Kaptur, I. Mr. nick lalota. Mr. nick lalota. No. Miss lee. Miss lee, I miss. Letlow. Miss. Letlow. No. Mr. levin. Mr. levin, I miss malloy. Miss malloy. No. Miss mccullum. Miss mccullum, I miss ming. Miss ming, I Mr. molinar. Mr. molenaar. No. Mr. moore. Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli. Mr.

▶ 1:36:40Morelli, I. Mr. mirvan. Mr. newhouse. Mr. newhouse no. Miss. Perez. Miss perez, I miss pingree. >> yes, it was. >> miss pingree, I. Mr. pocan, Mr. pocan, I. Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley, I. Mr. reschenthaler. Mr. reschenthaler. No. Mr. rogers. Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong. Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres. Mrs.

▶ 1:37:09Torres, I miss. Underwood, miss underwood, I. Mr. valadao, Mr. valadao no. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz, miss. Wasserman. Schultz. I. Mrs. watson. Coleman, Mrs. watson. Coleman, I. Mr. womack. Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink. Mr. zink. No. Mr. shreeve. Mr. shreeve. No. >> are there any members wishing to record a change of vote? Gentleman from florida. >> Mr. diaz-balart? No.

▶ 1:37:40>> gentleman from tennessee. Okay. Are there. There's a lot of people standing here. Gentleman from nevada? >> yes. Recorded. >> okay, gentlemen. Okay. Gentleman from members are advised not to leave again. Okay. Gentleman from indiana, I. >> Mr. van votes I.

▶ 1:38:07Yes, already recorded, I think. >> here's the situation we face. Uh, as the clerk is telling the vote, we have members that I know will be gone for the next vote unless we move immediately to the next vote. They have other commitments to make. They've advised me. So we're going to try and get one. We would have normally dealt with Mr. aguilar's by them, but you weren't here.

▶ 1:38:35So obviously, uh, you know, I just want to make sure that's going to be a very close vote. The members are all available. Uh, they can express their opinion on that. So when we're done, we'll move immediately to your amendment. Once we've dealt with that amendment, then we will immediately recess go. And I would ask you to come back as quickly as you can. Once the vote series is concluded. I'm sorry.

▶ 1:39:02Uh, we will advise the floor, but I suspect since this is a procedural vote, it's going to be close enough. They ain't doing anything with it until we show up. So they can wait on the appropriations committee with important. >> amen. >> on this vote. The eyes are 27. The nos are 35. The amendment is not adopted. Okay.

▶ 1:39:33Uh, we'll now move to the gentleman from california, Mr. aguilar, who's recognized for the purpose of an amendment. >> okay. That's good. >> Mr. chairman, I have an amendment at the desk, and I would like to ask that the reading be dispensed. >> without objection. The reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentleman is recognized for remarks on his amendment. >> thank you. Thank you, Mr. chairman. I want to thank you, and I want to thank the chair of the subcommittee, um, for their professionalism and their conversations with me about this bill.

▶ 1:40:02And as my colleagues have said too, I want to also thank Mr. hoyer for his commitment to this committee, this, uh, this subcommittee, the full committee, uh, the congress and the country. Um, steny hoyer been a leader and a mentor for years, and I appreciate his support and friendship. Um, steny also gave me the flexibility and the latitude to engage in a discharge petition, uh, in 2017 on this very issue, Mr.

▶ 1:40:33Chairman, um, the fundamental language in this bill, colleagues, it is unchanged. This is the same language that you have seen. This is the 10th time I have brought this issue to this committee. When democrats were in control, it was embedded in the in the base bill. Uh, when republicans have held the gavels, we have lost this vote, Mr. chairman. We have won this vote. We have even tied this amendment, um, once.

▶ 1:40:57Um, and I appreciate everyone's professionalism and their willingness to engage in this, in this conversation with me, there are nearly 500,000 individuals who have daca status. Whether you agree with our our immigration system or not, this the law of the land is that these individuals have a status and they have had a status for over a decade. The question before this committee and the language in this bill is very simple.

▶ 1:41:23Should these individuals who have daca status be allowed to work for the federal government right now? They are prohibited within the current laws. They are prohibited from being federal employees, whether that is park rangers in glacier national park or whether that is fema workers who show up to disasters in florida. They cannot work for the federal government.

▶ 1:41:49Some of you may also recall, I have a large branch bill that is similar language that allows individuals to daca status to work here. This is government wide, this is fsg. And so the fundamental policy discussion is should these individuals who know of no other country but the united states as their home, should they be allowed to work for the federal government? It's fundamentally that simple.

▶ 1:42:14Some of you have raised issues in the past whether we should do immigration in any form in an appropriations bill. What I would argue what I would argue to you is, uh, a poison pill is generally a policy rider that we disagree with. We call it a rider. When we agree with it, we call it a poison pill when we don't agree with it.

▶ 1:42:36Um, and let me give you a few examples of some writers that have been part of our base bills over and over and over again, they have become de facto policy because the congress of the united states has been unwilling or unable to address the underlying issue, whether it's h2b caps, which I would argue are immigration related, we have changed those caps in appropriations bills and those have lived on, or whether it is

▶ 1:43:06Nih funding. Um, and the overhead costs that the chair and the ranking member have worked on in the past, those were made. Those changes were made, if I recall, in 2017, and those have lived on as policy is de facto policy within the appropriations bill. That is the power of this committee. Colleagues, the power of this committee is we can embed language in an appropriations bill that guides the the one year that we have. And it has the potential to live on.

▶ 1:43:36If it is good policy and if the congress of the united states is dysfunctional and can't pass the underlying policy in and of itself. This is simple. This is language you have all seen before. Some of you have been supported, some of you have been opposed to it, some of you have been opposed to it and grabbed me in the elevator and said that you were supportive of it. Some of you have said that you wished it would have passed even when you voted against it. I don't, I don't care.

▶ 1:44:04What I care about is giving these individuals the ability. These individuals know of the united states as their only home. The fundamental question that you are voting on today is, should they be allowed to work for the federal government in any capacity? That's the question before us today. Mr. chairman, I thank you for the time. Uh, and I thank you for allowing me to bring this issue up. I yield back. >> I thank the gentleman, the gentleman from ohio, Mr.

▶ 1:44:34Joyce, is recognized to address the amendment. >> I truly appreciate the gentleman's annual amendment. I would just remind my colleagues that restrictions on employment in the federal government have been around long before daca. This includes limiting federal employment to us citizens. Legal permanent resident, a person who has refugee status or granted asylum who has indicated their intent to become an lpr or citizen, and a us national who owes allegiance to the united states.

▶ 1:45:01I appreciate that we're talking about children who have been in this country through no fault of their own, but this amendment deserves more than just an hour long debate. We should have our authorizing committees work with us, rather than just inserting a line in the fsg appropriation bill. >> thank you. Gentlemen. The gentleman from maryland, Mr. hoyer, is recognized to address the issue. >> I rise in strong support of this amendment.

▶ 1:45:26I think in the previous iterations of this amendment, which are frequent and appropriate in my opinion, I indicated I was sitting next to president trump during his first term. I was then majority leader of the house and sat next to the president. We talked about daca, and the president said to me, if you will send me a daca bill, I will sign it.

▶ 1:45:53That was for a path for us not just to work for this institution or for the federal government, but because at that point in time, at least, I can't read why he said that.

▶ 1:46:09But my presumption is because 80 some percent of the american public believes that these young people ought to be extended a path to citizenship and full inclusion in our country. I've met thousands of daca students, I'm sure, or not students, daca situated people.

▶ 1:46:35Uh, they're doctors, nurses, teachers, business people participating in every part of our society in a very positive way. And as the gentleman from california says, this is their country.

▶ 1:46:52They went to school in elementary schools and junior high school, high school colleges, medical school, uh, law schools, other professional schools. They're technicians, business people. And that is why I think the president said to me, you send me a bill, I'll sign it. And we participated with Mr. mccarthy and some others. Uh, Mr.

▶ 1:47:22Durbin and I and Mr. mccarthy and a member from the senate, and Mr. kelly, who was then chief of staff, general kelly, chief of staff of the armed forces, sat in that meeting with Mr. mccarthy and I.

▶ 1:47:40And it was clear that the president had indicated to him to me, he didn't say this to me, a sympathy to trying to resolve this matter, because he had empathy for these young people. And most of them are still pretty young. Some are middle aged at this point in time, which of course to me is pretty young.

▶ 1:48:05So I would urge that we extend this and we oversee the office of personnel management. Now, this is broader than just the house of representatives and the senate. The congress is an institution. It's broader. But we have authority over this. And I think this is an appropriate step for us to take. And it is a magnanimous, uh, step as well.

▶ 1:48:35And I would suggest that, uh, the hispanic community and others are looking very closely at this issue, feeling that these are individuals who came to america. That was not a choice to do anything violative of our laws. They did not have that option.

▶ 1:49:02And this is the right thing to do. It's the magnanimous thing to do. It's the thing that, very frankly, ronald reagan did in the 80s. Uh, let's do it again. Let's show that the heart of america is still open.

▶ 1:49:24Let's show the world that america still values this nation of immigrants. >> thank the gentleman. The gentlelady from florida, miss wasserman schultz, is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise in strong support for the amendment offered by my good friend, Mr. aguilar. I.

▶ 1:49:53Dreamers have been barred from public service or in most cases even serving our country, their country, in the military for far too long. This exclusion is clearly flawed and wrong, and treatment of dreamers has only gotten worse as the trump administration has halted processing, leaving hundreds of thousands without work authorizations, financial security or certainty. We've heard report after report of daca recipients being arrested, detained or deported by this administration despite following the law.

▶ 1:50:20That is shameful, and rejecting this amendment would add insult to injury. Since I was first elected, I've had the honor and privilege to represent dreamers, and I've had dreamers as interns and fellows in my office. I can personally attest, as nearly all of us could, dreamers are just as patriotic, dedicated and capable as any other person I've hired in my office or your own offices, if not more so. These are people who are every bit as american and who want to answer the call to serve their country in public service.

▶ 1:50:49They are also eligible to work in this country, and they pay taxes in this country. Why should they be excluded? The average daca recipient arrived in the united states at age seven, and has lived here for more than 20 years. Not only have they lived here for longer than in their country of birth, but that also means that many dreamers wouldn't even remember life before they arrived in the united states. The united states is their home. Our laws currently require that people working in the united states are lawfully present to live and work here.

▶ 1:51:18Well, daca protects provides protections that allow the recipient to live and work here. So what is the issue of dreamers are legally allowed to work for the united states. The treatment of dreamers in the federal government has nothing to do with protecting the institutions of government or fixing our immigration system. It is just another way to embed anti-immigrant extremism in our government. It is a dereliction of duty to turn away qualified applicants simply because they are daca recipients, leaving talented applicants behind in favor of any other candidate.

▶ 1:51:50We should break down barriers for employing qualified legal immigrants. It makes all of us better off, and it encourages people to pursue legal status in the united states. We should encourage dreamers to contribute to our country, not threaten to kick them out and separate them from the only country in communities that they know. This bill carries over a grievous mistake that we can fix, and brings us one step closer to ending the grave miscarriage of justice that has shut dreamers out for far too long. For all these reasons, I strongly support the gentleman's amendment and I yield back. >> gentleman.

▶ 1:52:20The gentleman from texas, Mr. cuellar, is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise in support of the gentleman's amendment. Look, this are the type of individuals that we want. Uh, they don't have criminal records. Uh, they're working, they got an education. And if there's anybody that we ought to allow in or the folks that have been here and they really don't know their own countries, I've talked to dreamers. If they go back to mexico or wherever they might be from, they don't know that country.

▶ 1:52:49The only thing they've known is the united states of america. You can't say, well, they broke the law. I mean, literally what happened was their parents brought them over. They brought them over here. And again, the only thing they know is the united states of america. And again, if we are going to be allowing anybody to come in, uh, those are the folks that don't have a criminal record. They're young. They're, you know, they provide a lot to our economy. They're, they're soldiers.

▶ 1:53:17Uh, they're nurses, they're teachers. They're, they're providing to our economy. So let's, please, I ask you to please consider supporting this amendment. This is something that I know in your heart it's the right thing to do. Uh, so I ask you to please protect the gentleman, uh, the, you know, the young men and women that have been here and ask you to support this amendment. Thank you. >> thank the gentleman, the gentleman from new york, Mr.

▶ 1:53:46Espaillat, is recognized to address the amendment. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise in support of this amendment. Uh, Mr. chairman, I want to commend the the gentleman from california for introducing this amendment. Again, this is an amendment that has been introduced ♪and passed, uh, in the past.

▶ 1:54:06Uh, it is a common sense amendment that says that daca has been a transformative aspect of the lives of a half a million young people, a half a million young people that are nurses, teachers, small business owners, home owners, and close to a thousand of them have been members of the armed forces.

▶ 1:54:32Now, here, that air are young people that don't have that are not U.S. citizens and yet are seeking to give up their lives and be part of the united states army. And the army recruited them because of their expertise in in the medical field or command of languages that was needed in the armed forces.

▶ 1:55:00And they they went there and they put their lives on the line, uh, for the, the only nation that they really know, in fact, uh, as was said by my colleague previously, some of them don't even speak the language of their native country. They have no connection whatsoever with family members or the towns or villages where their parents were born. They are americans, but for one thing, a piece of paper, a green card.

▶ 1:55:29And so these young people are also some of the most law abiding residents in the country. The numbers show that they abide by the law and far greater terms than the average american. And I might add, probably even that members of congress.

▶ 1:55:50And so what a great thing to do for america to give these young people a chance, an opportunity to, uh, be part of this great experiment. And, uh, they choose to work in, in federal employment, which is not a place where you're going to get, you're going to become a millionaire. It's a service.

▶ 1:56:16It's a public service that the nature of it, the mystique of it is that, uh, the public sector, you give back, you work. Yes. You get paid, yes, you get benefits, but you also give back. So these young people also want to give back. I believe that they are important to the future of our nation. In fact, I believe that they are an intricate part of our nation. And for that reason, I urge all my colleagues to vote in support of this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank you. Gentlemen.

▶ 1:56:46Gentleman from wisconsin. Mr. ro khanna is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. Um, unfortunately, there's a vote on the floor, but I don't give a damn. Um, because I think this is something that deserves the debate. We should have had the time for it. So I'm going to make the time for it. In fact, I should have debated this every year that Mr. aguilar has brought this up.

▶ 1:57:06Um, you know, we had an intern in our office who was a daca recipient and talked to her very much about how her life is affected every day and seeing daca recipients that now are getting deported in some cases. And then there's a lawsuit on it. All the rest. I mean, these are people who in many cases could have been here since two weeks old, two years old. They don't know the country that they have come from.

▶ 1:57:31They don't speak the language of the country they've come from, and they're here. And as all the other folks who've talked about this said, are important in many ways more important part of our society because they are living their life under this risk of what everyone has to deal with these days. If you look a little different or if you sound a little different, um, you might be at risk.

▶ 1:57:56But to allow people into our federal employment, I mean, if I have someone now as an intern, because we now pay, I can't necessarily do that. And that doesn't make any sense. So, you know, to rush a debate about this is a choice. Um, but I'm choosing to stand up and like I should have quite honestly, every single year. Uh, and I think we all should stand up for folks in our districts who are in the situation.

▶ 1:58:26But for us to, to not act on this in a way that respects the many, many constituents that each and every one of us has in our districts. Um, this is not about the immigration debate itself at all. This is about people who, uh, again, have been here virtually all their lives. And now suddenly we are making a decision to treat them very differently, I think, than they had signed up for.

▶ 1:58:54And, um, I hope more people will talk out about this. I don't want to make this a rushed debate because of a previous question. This is important. It's it's worthy of the respect of this committee and this congress. And, uh, I think it's something that is worthy of having a thorough debate about.

▶ 1:59:20And, uh, I know the subcommittee chair said it'd be an hour debate. We're not at an hour. I don't know if they'll wait for an hour, but I'm looking at the numbers and it hasn't moved for a while from 179 to 179. So I hope this is something that we can just do the right thing on. We did the right thing yesterday on a on a bill. We passed one of the 12 bills out unanimously because we did our jobs.

▶ 1:59:47And this is something we could do again, to show the importance of the committee that we're doing our jobs. So, um, I just urge everyone to not rush this, to give it the full consideration it deserves. Um, and, uh, I want to thank Mr. aguilar for introducing this and, um, I will yield back, Mr. chairman. >> thank the gentleman gentlelady from california, miss torres is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you. Chairman.

▶ 2:00:17The average daca recipient arrived in the us at age seven and has lived here more than 20 years, 20 years? Why? No fault of their own. Our government has failed.

▶ 2:00:39Failed them in many to approve their application and has kept their dream in a black box. It is unfortunate in my office right now. Within the last two weeks we have had a five.

▶ 2:00:59We have had 28 calls due to a five month backlog, a backlog created by this administration. These are public servants. They know no other country. This is where they grew up. They don't have a criminal record.

▶ 2:01:22They have a public service record, a long life long public service record of volunteering in their communities, in their church, in their school, doing any any job to help improve the quality of life for the people in their community, their neighbors, the least that we can do is ensure that the people that are so

▶ 2:01:53Committed to our country and have such great ethical work priorities that we give them an opportunity to fulfill their dreams. And if not now, then when? And with that, Mr. chairman, I urge my colleagues to finally support this amendment from my colleague, um, from california.

▶ 2:02:22Let's move forward. Let's not continue to be the speed humps and the walls in to the future of these young people that are as american as any one of our children. Thank you. >> thank you gentlelady. The gentlelady from texas, miss escobar is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.

▶ 2:02:46And before I get to the amendment, I want to join in the chorus of colleagues who are praising the ranking member, Mr. hoyer. I don't know if I'm going to speak on any other amendments. So this is my one opportunity to say thank you, steny, for your leadership and for how you have served our country, how you have served your colleagues, and for the friendship that I have.

▶ 2:03:15And I know many of us have really enjoyed. You will really, really be missed. I'm glad we have the rest of the year to work together, but seeing as this is your last markup, um, just or leading the last markup, really appreciate your service and thank you to my colleague Mr.

▶ 2:03:36Aguilar for bringing up this amendment to, um, the subcommittee chairman who mentioned that this is better debated in an authorizing committee. I am so eager to debate this in an authorizing committee. I am so eager for us to come together and talk about this as a congress.

▶ 2:04:01I am the coauthor of the only comprehensive immigration reform bill in the house right now, which is bipartisan. And the. I can tell you the american public is eager for congress to do its job on this issue and to bring some common sense reform to our outdated immigration system. But this amendment really is not about that broader debate.

▶ 2:04:30This amendment is about an opportunity that we have as appropriations members to send a message and to right a wrong. Miss torres, our colleague from california, talked about the average age that daca recipients are when when they come to this country, seven years old and there's over half a million daca recipients in the country, they're by some

▶ 2:05:01Estimates, there are as many as 800,000 in our country. And if you've ever. Betty and I were just talking about the stories that we've heard from daca recipients about when they discovered that they were not like all the other kids in their school, or all the other kids on the playground, the moment that they discovered that they're different because they were brought to our

▶ 2:05:31Country by their parents who were seeking a better life for them and the limitations that they live with, the discrimination that they live with, the struggles that they live with are pretty extraordinary.

▶ 2:05:48It creates a resiliency that I'm sure they would love to not have to create, but it creates an incredible resiliency among these young people.

▶ 2:06:02And when they want to serve their nation by serving here in the capital with us, despite the barriers that have been put in front of them, despite the discrimination they've had to endure, despite the obstacles that they want to come and serve. And as Mr. espaillat mentioned, it's not like it's buckets of money.

▶ 2:06:30You can ask any of the young people who sacrifice to come and work for us and with us. They do it for love of country. So I know we're not going to fix the broken immigration system here today in this committee.

▶ 2:06:47I hope anyone who's interested in a bipartisan common sense fix will come and talk to me or any of the co-sponsors in this room of the only bipartisan immigration comprehensive immigration reform bill we have. And I hope we get to that one day. I hope we get to that this congress.

▶ 2:07:09But what we can do today, right now, is open up the opportunity for those young people who want to come and serve their country by working with us and for us. Thank you, Mr. aguilar, for your persistence in bringing this forward. I'm proud to support this this amendment I yield back. >> thank you. Gentlelady, gentlelady from new jersey, miss watson coleman is recognized to address the amendment.

▶ 2:07:43>> little did I think I would. >> be speaking today, but I cannot not speak. First of all, let me say to steny hoyer, you've always been kind and a mentor and just true to your beliefs and a true democrat in the good times and the bad times. To representative aguilar, thank you for your steadfastness. If anybody doesn't know it, look at me. I'm a black woman in america, and I know what discrimination looks like.

▶ 2:08:12And this denial of individuals who've come from other countries, countries of color, countries of, um, torture and, and, and fear and everything necessary to, to make sure that the, the babies you have, the children that you can, you get them out and you get them to this place that says, give me your tired, your

▶ 2:08:42Poor, your masses yearning to be free to a, to a nation that says it's christian in, in, in so many respects, but fails to deal with jesus said in terms of dealing with your strangers and dealing with those who are least among us, this is backdoor discrimination because the people who are being denied, being denied the opportunity to do the work that they're qualified to do, are brown

▶ 2:09:13People. I know the president of the united states wants to whiten america because he somehow thinks that america was ever just white. It never was. It never is, and it never will be.

▶ 2:09:27And to deny these young people, and not so young people who've been here from the age of seven, even brought here, um, in swaddling clothes, even brought here in, um, just infancy to deny them the opportunity to work anywhere that they're capable, able and qualified to do so.

▶ 2:09:55Is it because they are not white and born in this country? That is discrimination. It ought to be disgusting to you all. It ought to be absolutely disgusting. It is hypocritical. And it's not about america making america great again. It's about trying to make it whiter. I support this amendment. I am happy to associate with this amendment. And if I miss a vote because of this amendment, then so be it.

▶ 2:10:27We'll survive that. But we need to survive this. I yield back. >> thank gentlelady. If there is no further debate, the >> a gentleman from california is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you. Thank you, Mr. chairman. >> and I want to thank all my colleagues for caring about this issue. Listening about this issue to my colleagues who supported and spoke in favor of this, I thank you.

▶ 2:10:56Um, again, back to we can't solve every immigration piece in this room. We understand that. Um, and I don't know if we trust the judiciary committee to solve all of these issues in the next couple months either. This is an opportunity for us to solve this issue. As I mentioned, the h-2b caps have been solved in this room before. I know maybe the ranking member cares about this issue.

▶ 2:11:22In 2014, the bloom in our rohrbacher, uh, writer was included. That ensures that doctors prescribing medical marijuana are not held responsible for decisions made. All of these have been done in this room.

▶ 2:11:37Um, and the fundamental question before this group will be asked to vote on now is whether you want young people who are brought here to this country at no fault of their own, to be penalized and to have roadblocks put in front of them that would only allow them to work for the federal government. That's the fundamental issue. I want to thank my colleagues for their indulgence. Um, and I appreciate I appreciate that we have all now missed a vote having this debate.

▶ 2:12:05Um, and thank you, Mr. chairman, I yield back. >> thank I thank the gentleman. Uh, the question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california. All those in favor say aye. >> aye. >> all those opposed say no. Thank you. The chair the nos have it. Roll call has been requested. A sufficient number of hands have been raised. The clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt, Mr. aderholt. No, Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar, I. Mr. alford. Mr. alford, no. Mr.

▶ 2:12:37Amodei. Mr. amodei no. Mrs. bice. >> no, not. >> Mrs. bice. No. Mr. bishop. Yes, Mr. bishop, I. Mr. calvert, Mr. calvert. No. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. No. Mr. case. Mr. case. I. Mr. eskamani. Mr. eskamani. I. Mr. kline. Mr. kline. No. Mr. cloud. Mr. cloud. No. Mr. clyburn. Mr. clyburn. I. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. No. Mr. cole. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cuellar.

▶ 2:13:07Mr. cuellar, I miss dean. Miss dean, I miss delauro, miss delauro, I. Mr. diaz-balart, Mr. diaz-balart. No. Mr. edwards, Mr. edwards. No. Mr. lee. Mr. lee. No. Miss escobar, miss. Escobar, I. Mr. espaillat, Mr. espaillat, I. Mr. fleischmann. Mr. fleischmann. No. Miss. Frankel. Miss. Frankel, I. Mr. franklin. Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest. Mr. guest. No. Mr. carter. Mr. carter, I. Doctor. Harris.

▶ 2:13:38Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson. Mrs. henson. No. Mr. hoyer. Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. ivy. Mr. ivy. I. Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce. No. Miss. Kaptur. Miss. Kaptur, I. Mr. lalota. Mr. loloda. No. Miss lee. Miss lee, I miss. Letlow. Miss. Letlow. No. Mr. levin. Mr. levin, I miss malloy. Miss malloy. No. Miss mccullum. Miss mccullum, I miss ming. Miss ming, I Mr. molenaar. Mr. molenaar. No. Mr. moore, Mr.

▶ 2:14:10Moore. No. Mr. morelli. Mr. morelli, I. Mr. mervyn. Mr. mervyn. I. Mr. newhouse. Miss. Perez. Miss. Perez. I miss. Pingree, miss. Pingree, I. Mr. pocan, Mr. pocan, I. Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley, I. Mr. reschenthaler. Mr. reschenthaler. No. Mr. rogers. Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong. Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres.

▶ 2:14:41>> Mrs. torres. >> Mrs. torres, I miss. Underwood, miss. Underwood, I. Mr. valadao, Mr. valadao, I miss wasserman. Schultz, miss. Wasserman. Schultz. I. Mrs. watson. Coleman, Mrs. watson. Coleman, I. Mr. womack. Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink. Mr. zink. No. Mr. shreeve. Mr. shreeve. No. >> does any member wish to record their vote or change their vote?

▶ 2:15:06Seeing none, the clerk will tally. I think that is correct. >> arkansas state. >> about doing the right thing. >> yeah.

▶ 2:15:47They're going to hold this one count. >> I have no idea. They've been notified them. >> I'm not sure. But there's only four people. >> on this vote. The I's are 30. The nos are 32. The amendment is not adopted. We'll reassemble after the vote series is done. Uh, so the committee is now in recess. Please return quickly after the vote series if you can.

▶ 2:16:16Thank you. >> oh, listen.

▶ 3:10:05Which is fine. And, uh, sorry again about what happened, but it was just timing. Trying to make sure everybody had an opportunity to vote and participate. On an important issue. So with that, the gentlelady from california is recognized for the purpose of an amendment. >> uh, thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise to offer an amendment and ask that the reading be dispensed with. >> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her amendment.

▶ 3:10:37>> thank you. My amendment, chairman, would prohibit the federal government from hiring or employing anyone, including included in president trump's pardon of january 6th. Insurrectionist individuals who violently forced entry and attacked our capitol police officers in a failed attempt to overturn the 2020 election.

▶ 3:11:04January 6th was a violent attack by a vicious mob trying to overturn a free and fair election. They set up a noose and gallows on the capitol grounds and called for the hanging of republican vice president pence and the killing of police officers. The same U.S.

▶ 3:11:27Capitol police that kept us safe here every day, five capitol police officers lost their lives as a result of the january 6th insurrection. More than 150 officers sustained injuries. Yet president trump, on the first day and the first hour of that day after being inaugurated, pardoned.

▶ 3:11:52More than 150 participants of the january 6th insurrection, including those convicted of violently assaulting police officers. Daniel d.j. Rodriguez plunged a stun gun onto the neck of U.S. capitol police officer michael fanone, causing the officer to suffer a heart attack and traumatic brain injuries.

▶ 3:12:21Rodriguez was sentenced to over 12 years in prison for attacking a police officer with a taser, and trump pardoned him. Patrick mccoy the third, used a stolen police riot shield to crush officer daniel hodges in a metal door frame, leaving the officer trapped, bleeding and unable to breathe.

▶ 3:12:46He was given a seven year sentence, but last week, trump's doj moved to throw out the seditious conspiracy conviction of 12 leaders of the proud boys and oath keepers, the far right extremist groups who coordinated the insurrection.

▶ 3:13:08For those pardoned, dozens had prior convictions or pending charges for crimes including rape, sexual abuse of a child, domestic violence manslaughter, production of child sexual abuse material and drug trafficking.

▶ 3:13:29Last week, david daniel, a man pardoned by donald trump, pled guilty to child sex, sexual abuse of multiple victims, one of them under the age of 12. And just this past march, andrew paul johnson, another insurrectionist, was sentenced to life in prison for child sex crimes.

▶ 3:13:54Johnson had promised hush money to one of his little victims, money he expected to receive from the doj. Moving to throw out the seditious convictions in april, david toxin was sentenced for possessing more than 100,000 child sexual abuse images and videos.

▶ 3:14:21His lawyer tried to argue that the case should be dismissed because of the pardon that trump gave him. That is despicable. Last october, nine months after trump's pardon, john banuelos was arrested on charges of kidnaping. And guess what? Yes. Sexual assault. He is accused of trapping his victim in his home, beating her, strangling and sexually assaulting her. January 6th.

▶ 3:14:52Ers belong in a prison, full stop. They have absolutely no right to be working in our federal government. We denied federal opportunities for young people obeying the law. Daca dreamers. But yet we give a license to continue to commit crimes to these january 6th ers.

▶ 3:15:16Friends of insurrectionists, hard working taxpayers dollars should never be funding the salaries of criminal sexual predators who try to overthrow our democracy. But that's already happened. Last summer, the trump administration hired jared weiss, a january 6th insurrectionist who was caught on police body cam footage urging rioters to kill police officers on the capitol grounds, calling the officers nazis and gestapo members.

▶ 3:15:46I urge you to support this amendment. We cannot continue to utilize hard working taxpayers dollars to pay, to pay these disgusting people that try to overthrow our government. And with that, I yield to the chair. >> thank you, gentlelady.

▶ 3:16:11Before we go on, I know many members will be aware of this, but we just lost one of our most valued colleagues. David scott, passed away. I know many of you obviously knew and worked with david. I actually should say chairman scott, distinguished chairman of the ag committee and just a remarkable guy. And I would ask, before we go on, we observe a moment of silence for him. No.

▶ 3:16:53Thank you very much. Very sad. Um, with that, uh, chair recognizes Mr. joyce to respond to the amendment. I oppose this amendment. Article two of the constitution provides the president of the united states with the sole authority to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the united states. The supreme court has interpreted this provision to include the power to grant pardons and commutations of sentences.

▶ 3:17:17Every president, except for william henry harrison and james garfield has used this unique authority, and they have no requirement to consult with anyone on such decisions. Hours before his administration ended, president biden set a precedent by parting individuals he determined were vulnerable. Regardless of our personal opinions on the actions of an individual. The constitution provides for this process, and the legal system upholds it. Nothing in the current law prevents convicted felons from working with the united states government, let alone persons who have had their sentences commuted. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.

▶ 3:17:46Thank you gentlemen. The gentleman from maryland, Mr. hoyer, is recognized to address the amendment. >> the question is not whether the president had the authority to do what he did. The question is, what did people do? What did these people who were either convicted or pled guilty and found guilty do? Mr.

▶ 3:18:21Chairman, january 6th, 2021 was one of the darkest days in the history of our country and of our institution. The president of the united states invited people to washington, D.C. for the express purpose of stopping the steal.

▶ 3:18:47He then proceeded to incite those people in front of the white house, the white house that he is now dismembering. He then, after inciting that mob, said, I want you to go down to the capitol, stop the steal.

▶ 3:19:16And a direct quote is fight like hell. This was not an act of a president of the united states to suggest that people involve themselves in petitioning their government. It was a incitement to destroy their government.

▶ 3:19:43Undermine the constitution of the united states, and to. Have the result, the loss of life by some officers. The in bed injury of others, and to send a message around the country that the constitution. Should be undermined by force.

▶ 3:20:13That is treason. And the rationalization of treason is a danger to our nation and an incitement to others to do the same.

▶ 3:20:35The president said that he would pardon some 1500 people who were found guilty or pled guilty, either by a jury of their peers or by a judge, or by their own admission.

▶ 3:20:55The president had said during the course of the campaign to the proud boys, stand back and stand by. Why did he pardon these people over the objections of some of his supporters?

▶ 3:21:22In my view, it is because he wanted them to stand by and stand back, and as a result, he pardoned them so that they would be out of prison. I don't think there's a previous example of this action by any president of the united states.

▶ 3:21:52This is an incitement to the extent that people can rationalize.

▶ 3:22:04Well, if he calls us again to washington, if he loses his hope to violate the constitution again and be elected a third time, or perhaps, as he said, if you elect me, you won't have to have another election. That's a quote. I don't know exactly what he meant by that, but it is ominous.

▶ 3:22:32And if we as a congress continue to pretend that was just another day in washington. We undermine our oath and our country.

▶ 3:22:47This amendment says we will not rationalize it by having people who pled guilty, found guilty, pardon or not serve in the institution that they threatened on january 26th. Excuse me, january 6th, 2021.

▶ 3:23:22But I fear that that group of 1500 people is going to watch this committee and see some 33 or 34 people say it was okay. We'll forget it. Come work with us.

▶ 3:23:44The lady's amendment simply says we are not going to rationalize insurrection. We're not going to stand by, stand back and stand by while this occurs.

▶ 3:24:06I urge us all to stand united and say this contact conduct is impermissible in america. You go to the ballot box. You debate, you resolve differences peacefully. Support this amendment. >> excuse me. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none.

▶ 3:24:32Oh, I'm sorry. Gentleman from new york. >> thank you, Mr. chair. And before I begin, I want to add my voice to those who've already spoken on behalf of the ranking member of the subcommittee on his extraordinary leadership and service to this country. Um, uh, he's been a great friend and a mentor to all of us.

▶ 3:24:58And, uh, just appreciate his passion and dedication and commitment to this country and his long service to the institution, which we care deeply about and to our country. So thank you, Mr. hoyer. I rise, um, just to add my voice to my friend and colleague, miss torres, who I have the privilege of serving committee on house administration, which has responsibility for federal elections under our jurisdiction. And, um, and to that of Mr.

▶ 3:25:26Hoyer's, you know, it's, it's remarkable for those of us and many of us in this room. We're here on january 6th and 2021. It's remarkable to recount those days and to think about the extraordinary events that unfolded, where people would come into this sacred citadel of democracy.

▶ 3:25:43The us capitol by force, breaking windows, pushing past police officers, leading to, as miss torres has recounted, the death of those charged with defending this place.

▶ 3:25:56On the day that we were going to certify the electoral college results and the idea that for 200 and at that point, 26 years or so under this constitution, we had observed the peaceful transfer of power from party to party, from literally the day that john adams turned the keys to the presidency over to thomas jefferson, first time a party had transferred authority.

▶ 3:26:22And we did it without a single bullet being fired, without a drop of blood. And that day was traumatic not only to those of us here, but traumatic to all americans. And then the notion that the president would offer a pardon, by the way, some of these pardons for some of the most violent acts you can imagine, some of these people were pardoned, have been since pardoned a second time for additional violations of law.

▶ 3:26:50These are people who the justice department has suggested should receive pardons for acts completely unrelated to january 6th. Uh, one, as far as, uh, commission of crimes, uh, in california, I mean, it's the insanity of the whole response, the notion that the president wants, first of all, to not even put any basis or have any faith in our democracy in the transfer of power, him even suggesting a few weeks ago that he regrets

▶ 3:27:21Not calling out the national guard in 2020 following his defeat. Can you imagine the national guard being called out because you didn't like the results of an election? It's astonishing.

▶ 3:27:35And yet we, many of us, sit and act as if this was a normal day, first of all, a normal day at the capitol, and secondly, a normal event that the president would call out a mob to attack the president's search for the vice president with the with the chant of hang mike pence, and we act as though it didn't happen. And the president would like to believe it didn't happen. He'd like to believe the 2020 election didn't happen. It's what, you know, my five year old grandson would do about something he didn't like. That happened just kind of, you know.

▶ 3:28:04But that's about the emotional maturity right now of someone who would have done this or would have issued, issued these pardons. But but ultimately, it's about this. What's the accountability going to be? We don't deny the president has the power and the constitution to issue pardons. So, okay, he doesn't want to hold them accountable. He's willing to look past it. He's willing to, in fact, encourage them perhaps to do something very similar. But what accountability will we hold these people to? This is the way we do it.

▶ 3:28:31This is the most meaningful thing we can do, certainly not the thing that will meet the moment, certainly not commensurate with what they did that day. But this is a small gesture to the american people that say, we remember, we understand, we recognize the danger and the fragility that our democracy went through on that day. Seems like a very small gesture. The least we could do is say they're not going to come back into employment. This government is not going to pay them for service after what they did.

▶ 3:28:58It seems an entirely appropriate response. I would encourage all of my colleagues to vote in the affirmative. I yield back, Mr. chair. >> thank you. Gentlemen, uh, are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you. Chair members.

▶ 3:29:18I'm not asking for us to block, uh, the president from pardoning anyone, including, um, these people that committed these horrific crimes. Cop killers, people that try to undermine our election.

▶ 3:29:45Government workers, federal workers are public servants who should be respected. And it is sickening to think that a violent insurrectionist, someone who was part of a violent mob, who urged the killing of our officers, was actually paid a federal employee paid by my constituents, hard working tax

▶ 3:30:17Dollars. We cannot allow that. And today I'm asking you to stand up for those public servants that come here every single day and ought to have the honor to work side by side with colleagues that respect the law, that respect public service, not sexual child predators.

▶ 3:30:44Please vote for the bill, and I yield back. >> thank you. Gentlelady. The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from california. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed? Say no. No, the chair of the nos have it. Hands have been raised. A few more, please. Sufficient number. The for a roll call. Vote. Clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt. No. Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar, I.

▶ 3:31:16Mr. alford, Mr. amodei, Mrs. bice, Mrs. bice. No. Mr. bishop, Mr. bishop, I. Mr. calvert, Mr. calvert. No. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. No. Mr. case. Mr. eskamani. Mr. klein. Mr. cloud. Mr. cloud. No. Mr. clyburn. Mr. clyburn, I. Mr. clyde. Mr. cole.

▶ 3:31:47Mr. cole. No. Mr. cuellar. Mr. cuellar, I miss dean, miss dean, I miss delauro, miss delauro, I. Mr. diaz-balart, Mr. diaz-balart. No. Mr. edwards, Mr. lee, Mr. lee, no. Miss. Escobar, miss. Escobar, I. Mr. espaillat, Mr. espaillat, I. Mr. fleischmann. Mr. fleischmann. No. Miss. Frankel. Mr. franklin. Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest. Mr. guest. No. Mr.

▶ 3:32:20Carter. Mr. carter, I. Doctor harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson. Mrs. henson. No. Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. ivy. Mr. ivy. I. Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce. No. Miss. Kaptur. I. Miss. Kaptur, I. Mr. lalota. Mr. lalota. No. Miss lee, miss lee, I miss. Letlow. Mr. levin. Mr. levin, I miss malloy.

▶ 3:32:47Miss malloy. No, miss mccullum. Miss mccullum, I miss ming. Miss ming, I. Mr. molenaar. Mr. molenaar. No. Mr. moore. Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli. Mr. morelli, I. Mr. mervyn. Mr. mervyn. I. Mr. newhouse. Mr. newhouse. No. Miss. Perez. Miss. Perez, I miss. Pingree, miss. Pingree, I. Mr. pocan, Mr.

▶ 3:33:19Pocan, I. Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley, I. Mr. guy reschenthaler. Mr. guy reschenthaler. No. Mr. rogers. Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong. Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres. Mrs. torres, I miss. Underwood, miss. Underwood, I. Mr. valadao. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz, miss. Wasserman. Schultz. I. Mrs. watson. Coleman. Mrs. watson.

▶ 3:33:50Coleman. I. Mr. womack. Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink. Mr. zink. No. Mr. sharif. Mr. sharif. No. >> any members wish any members wish to record their vote or change their vote? The gentleman from missouri. >> Mr. mark alford. >> no gentleman from georgia. >> Mr. clyde votes no. >> gentleman from nevada.

▶ 3:34:21>> Mr. >> gentleman from north carolina. >> Mr. edwards, no. >> gentleman from hawaii. >> Mr. case votes I. >> do. We have other members wishing to record or change their vote. Seeing none, the clerk will tally.

▶ 3:35:26On this vote the age of 27. The nos are 31. The amendment is not adopted. Gentlelady from california, miss torres is recognized for the purpose of an amendment. >> I rise to offer an amendment and ask that the reading be dispensed with. >> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her amendment. >> uh, chairman, my amendment would direct the federal trade commission to investigate surveillance pricing so families are not ripped off at the grocery store.

▶ 3:35:56Surveillance pricing is when retailers use digital tools and your data, like the location data on your phone, shopping history and other information to quickly change prices or offer different prices to people for the same goods and services.

▶ 3:36:13In december 2025, report revealed that instacart, for example, the largest online grocery market, used surveillance pricing without customers knowing anything. Grocery prices varied by as much as 23% for each item, from one instacart user to the next. After the report became came out, they were caught.

▶ 3:36:42Instacart stopped using that tool. But there are reports that the practice is coming to our grocery stores. Big grocery stores like walmart and kroger are already rolling out digital price tags, so-called electronic shelf labels that can change prices in an instant.

▶ 3:37:04Imagine if the price of eggs changing between the time that you enter the grocery store, to when you get to the aisle, or the price of milk going up, because the store knows that you're driving back from picking up your kids and you're in a hurry, americans are already struggling to afford groceries. Surveillance pricing means unexpected price hikes for our constituents, who are just trying to get by.

▶ 3:37:30Families should not have to worry about prices going up and down every minute or changing based on the data that is on your phone. My amendment directs the ftc to investigate, investigate predatory surveillance pricing and report back to us. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady, the gentleman from ohio, Mr.

▶ 3:37:57Joyce, is recognized to respond to the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I oppose this amendment. The ftc is already in the process of conducting a study on surveillance pricing, and adopting this provision would be duplicative and divert important resources resources from the commission's ongoing work. In addition, last year's house report included a provision directing the ftc to report to the committee on the state of retail competition in the united states. The specific focus on the grocery industry.

▶ 3:38:26This report will provide congress with important information on the factors inhibiting robust competition and how to lower prices for consumers. While I appreciate the gentlelady's amendment, the ftc is already doing important work in that area. I believe we should wait until we receive the forthcoming £0.06 report on surveillance pricing and the report on retail competition from the fy 26 bill before we require them to do a potentially duplicative study. For these reasons, I oppose the amendment. >> thank the gentleman. The gentleman from maryland, Mr. hoyer, is recognized to respond to the amendment.

▶ 3:38:57>> thank you, Mr. chairman. If they're already doing this research, then they won't have anything to duplicate. They can, uh, continue their study, come up with findings and submit it to us. Um. If they are doing the study, they're doing it because it's a problem. And they should be doing it. And this.

▶ 3:39:20Amendment will encourage them to continue to do it and to get us a copy of it. Mr. chairman, 10 p.m.

▶ 3:39:33When a child is sick and their parents are in need of cough sirup, the prices online in many instances are somehow at that hour drastically higher than the typically are during the day when urgent care and the drug stores are open. Those are facts. I don't think that's fair, and I think you'd be hard pressed to find any american that thinks it's fair.

▶ 3:40:00Dynamic pricing is a is dangerous to our free and fair marketplace of goods and services. It risks discrimination and unfair targeting of certain groups by manipulating the digital price tag, you get one price, I get another, somebody else gets another.

▶ 3:40:25American families need to know what the price of an item is, not have the item change its price based upon who is buying. Now. Nothing stops people from changing their prices. I don't know about your gas stations, but almost invariably they change the price at the same time.

▶ 3:40:45And if it's 3.99 at one station, I find it's almost 3.99 or 90 8 or 97 at every other gas station. They can do that. But having you go into the gas station and find out who you are, what you are, do you have a lot of money at that price at the pump going up or down, depending upon that?

▶ 3:41:13That's what the this amendment deals with. I want to thank the gentlelady from california for offering this amendment, which directs the federal trade commission. And if they're already doing. Hooray! To study the hazards posed by dynamic pricing, particularly. Yes, in the grocery stores. Why? Particularly in the grocery stores? Because families have to eat.

▶ 3:41:38And families have to have perhaps late at night medical services or prescription drugs or non-prescription drugs. And it shouldn't be higher at 3 p.m. Uh, or 3 a.m. Than it is at 3 p.m. Unless, of course, prices have been changed for everybody 24 hours a day.

▶ 3:42:07So I urge us to, even if we're sending a message, we're not good at sending messages anymore. But even if we're sending messages about this dynamic pricing, it is discriminatory. And I think we ought to send this message that the lady wants to send. And I think it's probably useless to urge us to vote all to vote I. But I'm going to do it anyway.

▶ 3:42:38Thank you, Mr. chairman. >> thank you. Gentlemen, are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Gentlelady from washington, Mr. perez is recognized. >> chair thank you, Mr. chair. I have spoken before about what it's like right now to raise a small child. Um, I've got a four year old and let me tell you, um, cough sirup is like $20 a bottle right now. The prices are just, they have gone through the roof. Um, and, and I can absolutely see the reality where you go at 3 a.m.

▶ 3:43:07And things cost more than they ought to because they know they can. Um, and let me tell you, if you're not as, um, sensitive to prices, um, they're, they're still coming for you. Your neck is still on the line. Um, just wait and see what happens to, um, your favorite, uh, you know, um, power tool supply store. My grandpa at grizzly, I think about him going into grizzly and buying a table saw or a bandsaw or some new bits. That is actually where a lot of this is happening.

▶ 3:43:33Also charging quilters more, shutting down craft stores, um, losing the, the tactical art, the tactile arts out of this country. Um, this, this is going to spread like wildfire and we have a chance to nip it in the bud now. And I urge you all to consider voting yes on this. And I thank the gentlelady for bringing this very important resolution to the floor amendment. I yield back. >> thank you. Gentlelady. Are there others wishing to address the amendment?

▶ 3:43:59Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you. Surveillance pricing is something that affects every single one of us in our constituents, and it's something that we need to investigate and understand before we see it at every grocery store. Uh, if the federal trade commission is already doing a report, they should say so. When we ask these questions, they should come to committee and answer some of these questions. But none of that is happening.

▶ 3:44:29So unless we ask them directly to provide this report to congress, we are never going to know if our constituents are being ripped off at the grocery store, online sales or anywhere else. And, you know, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. And thank you so much, um, steny, for all that you have done.

▶ 3:44:53Um, you can tell you continue to be the one and only member of congress that I've invited and welcome to my district. Uh, your, your pride, uh, program of making it in america, uh, resonated very, very loudly in my community where hard working individuals are not looking for a handout. They're looking for a good middle class job to help them get ahead.

▶ 3:45:20So thank you for all of the work and your service to our country. With that, I yield back, Mr. chair. >> thank you. Gentlelady. The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from california. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed? Say no. >> no. >> the opinion of the chair. The nos have it. >> I. >> know I said the nos have it. >> yeah. Right. Okay.

▶ 3:45:55>> just a few more hands up, please. Just, uh. Okay. Uh, roll call has been requested. Sufficient support has been demonstrated. The clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt, Mr. aderholt. No, Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar, I. Mr. alford. Mr. alford, no. Mr. amodei. Mrs. bice. Mrs. bice no. Mr. bishop, Mr. bishop, I. Mr. calvert, Mr. calvert. No. Mr.

▶ 3:46:25Carter. Mr. carter. No. Mr. case. Mr. case. I. Mr. eskamani. Mr. eskamani. No. Mr. klein. Mr. cloud. Mr. cloud. No. Mr. clyburn. Mr. clyburn, I. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. No. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cuellar. Miss dean. Miss dean, I miss delauro. I miss delauro, I, Mr.

▶ 3:46:58Diaz-balart. Mr. edwards, Mr. edwards. No. Mr. lee. Mr. ellzey. No. Miss. Escobar, miss. Escobar, I. Mr. espaillat, Mr. espaillat, I. Mr. fleischmann. Mr. fleischmann. No. Miss. Frankel. Mr. franklin. Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest. Mr. guest. No. Mr. carter. Mr. carter, I. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson.

▶ 3:47:30Mrs. henson. No. Mr. hoyer. >> yes. >> Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. ivy. Mr. ivy. I. Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce. No. Miss. Kaptur, I. Miss. Kaptur, I. Mr. lalota. Miss lee, miss lee, I miss. Letlow. Mr. levin. Miss. Malloy, miss. Malloy. No. Miss mccullum. Miss mccullum, I miss ming.

▶ 3:47:58Miss ming I. Mr. molinari Mr. mulliner no. Mr. moore, Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli. Mr. mervyn. Mr. mervyn, I. Mr. newhouse, Mr. newhouse no. Miss. Perez. Miss. Perez, I miss. Pingree, miss. Pingree, I. Mr. pocan, Mr. pocan, I. Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley, I. Mr. reschenthaler. >> no. >> Mr. reschenthaler. No. Mr.

▶ 3:48:30Rogers. Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong. Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres. >> no. >> Mrs. torres, I miss underwood, miss underwood, I. Mr. valadao. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz, miss. Wasserman. Schultz. I. Mrs. watson. Coleman. Mrs. watson. Coleman, I. Mr. womack. Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink. Mr. zink. No. Mr.

▶ 3:49:00Shreeve. Mr. shreeve. No. >> are there any members wishing to record or change their votes? The gentleman from california. >> Mr. valadao? No. >> the gentleman from nevada. >> Mr. amodei, votes. No. >> gentleman from new york. >> Mr. Mr. mervin votes I. >> the gentleman from florida. >> I'm sorry.

▶ 3:49:31>> Mr. levin votes I no. Mr. diaz-balart votes no. >> gentleman from new york. I believe the gentleman is recorded. >> Mr. morelli votes I. >> are there other members wishing to vote or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tally. >> okay, okay.

▶ 3:50:01That's what they want. Okay, fine.

▶ 3:50:45>> on this vote, the yeas are 27. The nos are 32. The amendment is not adopted. Gentleman from new york. Mr. sports recognizes the purpose of an amendment. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. chairman. Uh, first I want to join the chorus in, uh, would you gentlemen care to have the amendment read or. No, I dispensed the reading of the. Okay.

▶ 3:51:13Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with. The gentleman from new york is recognized for remarks on his amendment. Thank you, Mr. chairman. Uh, I want to join the chorus of acknowledgments for the distinguished gentleman from the state of maryland, uh, congress member steny hoyer, uh, who has been a caballero, a gentleman, always well dressed, well spoken, uh, always, uh, concerned about all of us.

▶ 3:51:42And somehow he found the time to mentor all of us as we came in. So I want to acknowledge that, um, and we will always remember him with fond memories and, uh, of course, not an empty suit either, as we've seen today. He brings it here and his ideas are heard and, and they're often eloquent and correct. So congratulations, steny. Mr.

▶ 3:52:13Chairman, earlier this year, the small business administration released a new rule that would change eligibility requirements for access to seven eight loans. It basically said that if you were a legal resident and you own a small business or a green card holder, as there are thousands of folks in all of our districts that are small business owners, uh, that are

▶ 3:52:43Legal residents and green cardholders, that if you were that person, you could not have access to a78 loan. What a horrible time to implement this rule.

▶ 3:52:57Precisely when the economy is hurting, where inflation continues to batter our pockets, when grocery stores and small businesses across the nation continue to find it hard to move forward, uh, they shut the door on the ability of legal residents and green card holders who are small business owners, not undocumented, but people that are here playing by the rules.

▶ 3:53:28And I suspect that unless you're a native american in this room, there is each one of us have a root going somewhere across the world, and probably each one of us has had a member of our family who's been a small business owner that have helped us get here today. All of us. Each I certainly did. My grandfather, my father was a on a gas station in in brooklyn.

▶ 3:53:58And so to say that, uh, the people that helped us get here should today, those individuals that are like them today should not access, uh, seven, eight loans. It's a travesty. I think it's, it's in some ways un-american.

▶ 3:54:15There is no evidence, credible or otherwise, that the sba or any other entity has shown that to show the large number of individuals in the us without legal authorization are receiving these loans or finances. So this is squarely, uh, hurting small businesses owned by legal residents and green card holders.

▶ 3:54:40The main purpose of the seven eight program is to provide creditworthy small business borrowers that demonstrate an ability to repay and who cannot find credit elsewhere. Access to these loans and loan guarantees. That is the purpose. And very often these businesses need that help.

▶ 3:55:03The citizenship status of a borrower has absolutely no bearing on their credit worthiness or their ability to repay. The sba is doing nothing except making it harder for small businesses to access capital. Now, Mr.

▶ 3:55:19Chairman, I understand there is an amendment that will be presented, uh, later, uh, an amendment that will ask for the justification for this exclusion. And that, in essence, will ask the sba to provide data showing how many businesses have defaulted on their loans, uh, and, uh, their credit worthiness.

▶ 3:55:47Now, I have no objection to that amendment. It should be a friendly amendment to my amendment. Surely I want to have that data too. But that amendment should not prevent these businesses, these small businesses that are legal residents that are owned by legal residents and green card holders, the ability to access these loan, uh, it's, it almost unmasks our ability to do bipartisan work here.

▶ 3:56:17I am asking for these small businesses to get access to seven eight loans, and an amendment is being presented asking for data showing what how many of them have defaulted in other data. I have no problems with that amendment. They should both be part of this amendment. And it is, uh, a clear a clear testimony of how difficult it is in this body to work together.

▶ 3:56:46So, uh, Mr. chairman, immigrant owned businesses routinely bring in millions and millions of dollars to our communities and help turn america's economic engine. They provide millions of jobs at a time when the president's tariff and trade policies are putting immense pressure on american small businesses. This is exactly the wrong thing to do.

▶ 3:57:15So I asked, Mr. chairman, that we consider this amendment. I'm open to a friendly amendment from my colleague, uh, so that we can work together both sides of the aisle in helping small businesses survive across this great nation. Thank you. And I yield back. >> I thank the gentleman. The gentleman from ohio, Mr. joyce, is recognized to respond to the.

▶ 3:57:45>> thank you, Mr. chairman. I oppose this amendment. The house small business committee passed a bill on the floor earlier this year that codified. Giving these loans to green card holders. We should encourage our colleagues in the senate to consider that legislation and pass it in a timely manner. This committee works together with our authorizing counterparts to fund their directives. We can't do that until a clear path is set forward. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. >> thank you. Gentlemen. The gentleman from maryland, Mr. hoyer, is recognized to respond to the amendment. >> uh.

▶ 3:58:17>> thank you, Mr. chairman. This is in the best interest of our country. I'll tell you a little story, and I'm not going to mention the name either of the restaurant or the gentleman in question, but I was at a, an event up in on long island, as a matter of fact.

▶ 3:58:38And he came up to me and he said to me, you know, uh, I was an illegal immigrant for 20 years in this country. It was irish. And he said, you know, I started this restaurant. And when he told me the name of the restaurant, which is not his name, but another name, uh, I said, well, I know that restaurant.

▶ 3:59:04He said, yes, I started that 25 years ago. Now it's one of the most successful restaurants in washington. Why do people come to america to make it. Uh, whatever their status is, they want it to be better. They want to improve it for themselves and their children. They come to america in many cases to make it.

▶ 3:59:32And they are some of the most courageous, innovative, entrepreneurial people in the world. That's why america was really so great, because people showed the courage to leave their home, come to america to make it, and they made it. Not only did they manufacture things, make things so things, grow things and sold them.

▶ 3:59:58But they made it. That's when you get a high five. We've made it. We've aced the test. We won the game. Uh, we got the job. And what this amendment says is, let us not shut off to people who are legally here.

▶ 4:00:20The opportunity to see them grow jobs in america, to employ people in america. You know, to buy things from people because they're making it in america. And therefore they have the ability to do what our economy does so well.

▶ 4:00:48Allow them to purchase goods that make their lives better and make the lives of those who produce those goods better. I was reading and I was a little late answering the call here. What a small percentage. It's either 2 or 4% of the 85,000 loans that this would affect, although there may be growth, which would be good.

▶ 4:01:16Uh, I don't know what it takes to get a yay vote on any of the amendments. I can't imagine that intellectually, everybody automatically thinks if it's offered on this side, it's a bad amendment or it threatens somehow the politics of this committee or the politics of the house. But I do get the sense that there's an order out vote no.

▶ 4:01:43Whatever it is, no matter what the merits of the amendment may be that the message is vote no. Now, frankly, I understand that on some things, as majority leader, I said vote no on the previous question because that turns over the floor to the other side, and you don't want to have the majority do that.

▶ 4:02:03With 435 people here, we're now down to 433, I guess, or 432, and each of us have been elected by individuals who voted for us to go up and use our judgment on the merits of pieces of legislation or proposals that come before us.

▶ 4:02:29This is a pretty simple, straightforward amendment. That says, let's grow america. Immigrants grew america. Let's give them an opportunity. They're legally here and they can create jobs here. The president, of course, wants to do that as well. And I forget the figure off the top of my head.

▶ 4:02:59But if you bring $5 million to the game. Oh, you're okay. But if you're in a garage and you put something together and you want to have a little stand and sell it, and you want to maybe even rent a little store. So you want an sba loan? No way.

▶ 4:03:18Said so I urge you to at least consider this amendment without necessarily saying the only vote is no. This is a good amendment. It's an american amendment. It's about opportunity. It's about entrepreneurialship. It's about doing what may has made our country great.

▶ 4:03:47Please support it. >> thank the gentleman. The gentleman from missouri is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, chairman. >> and I. >> appreciate my friend Mr. s efforts on this amendment. And Mr. hoyer, thank you for your argumentation there.

▶ 4:04:15But I want to explain why this is not just a no to be a no on this particular amendment. In addition, in addition to serving on this esteemed committee, I also had the privilege of being the chairman of the small business committee's oversight investigations and regulation subcommittee, the trump administration and house republicans have been very clear that we are not just putting america first, but we are putting americans first.

▶ 4:04:45And we have shown a consistent commitment to driving economic growth and job creation for citizens of the united states of america. And that's why administrator loeffler implemented citizenship verification across all of its loan programs. We on this committee, and particularly the f, s, g g subcommittee, kept the sba's lending authority each and every year.

▶ 4:05:08And at the same time, our great nation, small businesses, which are really the backbone of this country, 34 million small businesses in america are showing a record demand for the capital that is available each year in fiscal year 2025, largely under the biden administration, the sba approved a whopping 3358 loans for small businesses owned, at least in part, by foreign

▶ 4:05:41Nationals with a finite lending authority and record demand for capital. Thanks to republican's economic agenda. Why should we taxpayers back financing go to foreign nationals over us citizens? The answer is simple it should not. And that's why we're voting against this amendment.

▶ 4:06:02The limited resources of taxpayer backed sba financing must prioritize american citizens who are building businesses, who are investing in our communities, who are creating jobs here at home. Mr. hoyer and Mr. espaillat, I, I think all of us respect those who come from other countries, come here the right way and want to be part of the fabric of america.

▶ 4:06:28But when we have a limited capacity, as we do in these loan programs, american citizens must come first. That's why we're voting no. I think it's a very reasoned position on this amendment, and I appreciate your respect for our decision. And with that, I yield back. Thank you. >> thank the gentleman. Are there others wishing to speak on this amendment? Seeing none there as at the desk, an amendment and oh, I'm sorry.

▶ 4:07:00Excuse me. Gentleman from california is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. >> I just wanted to be brief. I wanted to thank Mr. espaillat for bringing this up and just underscore what Mr. hoyer said. Um, this is about opportunity.

▶ 4:07:17Many of us in this room will engage in political activity more than likely between now and november, and many of us will go back home and, and talk about the opportunities that we're trying to unlock for our friends and neighbors that we support business in our community, uh, that we support job growth, that we support employees and employers. Um, I don't know how we can do that without supporting an amendment that meets the goals that Mr. espaillat is talking about here.

▶ 4:07:47I'm not, I'm not aware of any liquidity crisis at sba. Um, although I'm happy to to yield to the chair of the subcommittee. If there if there is such a such a liquidity crisis, um, this is about unlocking opportunity here. Uh, and I'm happy to, to yield to the ranking member of the subcommittee. >> I appreciate the gentleman yielding and I appreciate the remarks of my good friend mark alford from missouri.

▶ 4:08:15This budget, you're going to be asked to vote on cuts. Small business administration, 22.3%. If there's limited money currently, you're going to make it more limited tomorrow.

▶ 4:08:35This amendment, again, is for legal residents of this country that we have given, have gone through the process and are legitimate. My point of the irishman that I talked about, he was not here legally, but he was at a time when people wanted to invest and grow america and small businesses.

▶ 4:09:06He got a loan and he now has and I don't want to mention his name or his restaurant, but one of the most successful restaurants in our capital. Uh, that's what we're talking about. And if we have a limited sum, then cutting it 22.3%, the ramifications of that, there'll be less loans, less growth, less employees, and you will not have helped either bring prices down or to make sure

▶ 4:09:36That people can afford the prices. I thank the gentleman for his comments. >> I want to thank the ranking member. This amendment is about opportunity and job growth. Um, that's fundamentally what what this is about. The ranking member talked about the line items in this in this budget that are being cut under the proposal that is in front of us. This gives us an opportunity to unlock jobs, create benefits for folks back home in our community.

▶ 4:10:04And I appreciate the the gentleman offering the amendment and I encourage and I vote. Thank you, Mr. chairman. >> I thank the gentleman. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? The gentleman from maryland, Mr. ivey, is recognized. >> thank you. >> Mr. chairman, and I too commend my my colleague, Mr. espaillat for bringing this amendment. Also, I appreciate the comments from my colleague, Mr. alford. Um, I think that's an important point. Uh, but let me say this.

▶ 4:10:33And in my district and as prince george's county, just a few miles from here, many of the entrepreneurs there are from other countries, uh, we have a lot of people from africa. Uh, india is another one, uh, who have been drawn there by nasa goddard and the scientific needs that, um, uh, that that community can provide. And they're doing it in an entrepreneurial basis. In fact, many of the absolute best jobs we have in prince george's county are provided by those companies.

▶ 4:11:02We also have a lot of people from south and central america who are also doing great work, too, um, in other sectors, uh, you know, restaurants, construction and the like, doing great work, uh, and have become a real backbone for our economy there. So I take the gentleman's point. Um, and I actually, when I started as a staffer here in 87, I worked on the small business committee.

▶ 4:11:27And one of the things that we focused on was trying to find ways to help small businesses, really small businesses get started and grow. And I realized credit and capital are keys to that. Um, but you know, saying no, just because somebody is got a green card is really kind of we're, you know, throwing the baby out with the bathwater, we could really employ a lot more people who are american in many instances. And these, these folks who own these companies are paying taxes into our coffers here.

▶ 4:11:57Um, and the next generation I've seen from, from many of them who've become american citizens and they're doing outstanding work. I think we really want to have them grow, pushing the talent away from the united states. And we're doing way too much of that right now. But it's really not the right way for us to go, especially in some of these science, engineering and high tech sectors. Let's take advantage of that. Uh, and so if there is a liquidity challenge, as Mr. aguilar said, with respect to sba, let's find ways to address that. And I appreciate Mr.

▶ 4:12:27Hoyer's comments about maybe putting some funding there. I think for most people here in this room, economic development and growth through private, entrepreneurial, entrepreneurial activity, we all support that. We all see the benefit of that as part of what makes america great. And some of those small businesses really turn into the giants that have been, uh, you know, leading the way for the united states over the years. I, you know, I think we should take advantage of what we've got. We got a lot of talent here.

▶ 4:12:57Let's let's help it rise. Let's help it make us better, make those communities better. We'll all rise up together. And so with that, I rise back. But I encourage support of this amendment. >> I thank the gentleman, the gentlelady from connecticut, Mr. lauraa, is recognized to address the amendment. >> I just I'll be very quick.

▶ 4:13:15I had no intention of speaking on this, but if we have if we don't have funds for the sba and for folks who are legal to be able to access the sba, um, they are on their way to becoming americans. It's the legal process that we go through to do that.

▶ 4:13:39But let me just reflect, if there's not enough money for sba, uh, we're talking about a 22% cut in the funding for sba. But I just take a look at, um, we have a, a trillion and a half dollars is being asked for, uh, for defense, uh, and for the next year and right now the defense has $1 trillion already, so it's $2.5 trillion.

▶ 4:14:09Let's take a look at ice and what they received from the last reconciliation bill. Uh, they've got there's one pending. It's, you know, $75 billion, um, you know, plus $10 billion in a slush fund. And then you've got another, which is pending. The senate just did this. There's another $70 billion.

▶ 4:14:31And the thing that we do not have the resources to invest in small businesses to help to grow our economy. I mean, that is that's that's very perplexing and puzzling that we would not focus on what are the resources that are necessary in order for us to be able to. We all say, in whatever form, that small businesses are the backbone of our country.

▶ 4:15:00I say that about the state of connecticut all the time. Well, if that is the case, then let us invest in small businesses. We can. There isn't a liquidity problem. We can't address that. And that this committee can't address that. And maybe what we ought to do is to say no to a 22% cut for the sba, I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady. Are there others wishing to address this amendment?

▶ 4:15:25Seeing none, the gentlelady from oklahoma is recognized for an amendment in the second degree. >> second degree? >> all right, Mr. chairman, I have a second degree amendment to the gentleman's amendment, and I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading. >> without objection, the reading of the second degree amendment is dispensed with. The gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her second degree amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.

▶ 4:15:52Let me start by saying to my colleague from new york, I believe this to be a friendly amendment. Uh, it was offered in good faith to try to, I think, provide data, uh, for us to be able to, uh, properly address the issue. And so I hope he knows that, um, this amendment ensures that the most qualified small business owners continue to have access to sba guaranteed loans.

▶ 4:16:15Um, you know, there is no secret that waste, fraud, and abuse have been rampant with agencies across federal government, including sba. If you just look at the paycheck protection program, better known as the pgp, it was rife with fraud, including access to loans by non us citizens. Uh, and I do ask unanimous consent, Mr. chairman, to insert an article about that particular fraud into the record. >> without objection.

▶ 4:16:45>> my second degree amendment would simply direct the sba to give us their justification for preventing access to sba guaranteed loans to foreign nationals so that we can better understand the reasoning and act from there, which is our job in congress. Uh, it was discussed yesterday that there was lots of, uh, language put forward, amendments put forward to put reports up. And I think this is exactly what we're looking at, is putting a report up to make sure that we have the data to be able to make the right decisions.

▶ 4:17:15And so with that, I would ask support of my second degree amendment, and I yield the balance of my time. >> I thank the gentlelady, the gentleman from maryland. Excuse me. Do you want to address this? Uh, the gentleman from ohio, uh, Mr. uh, joyce is your name. Joyce. I know Mr. joyce is recognized to address the issue. >> I've obviously made quite an impression on my chairman.

▶ 4:17:44I'll wear my name tag next time. Uh, I support the gentleman's amendment. This committee needs additional information from the sba to better understand the reasoning behind the changes made. We know the sba loan program has been rife with fraud, and this language will allow us to make informed decisions about the nature of the problem. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. >> I thank the gentleman gentleman from maryland. Mr. was recognized to address this second degree amendment. >> thank you very much.

▶ 4:18:13Uh, I think it may be friendly in intent, but it is belied by this. Language. Says in fiscal year 25, sba approved 3358 loans.

▶ 4:18:34To lawful permanent residence, comma, largely during the biden administration. Now, why is that language in there? That language, in my view, is that to make sure that everybody knows that trump did not do this in his first term, I don't know what he did. I haven't had enough time to find out. But the fact of the matter is that implies that somehow biden did something wrong.

▶ 4:19:04What biden did was to give the opportunities. Now, very frankly, I want all of you to know I think we have to have a rational immigration policy, and we have not had a rational immigration policy for a long time, and we ought to have that bill, uh, which has been talked about for.

▶ 4:19:33And then the amendment goes on to say 4%, not a hemorrhaging, I would say, of these funds to, uh, legal residents, a small percentage.

▶ 4:19:49And very frankly, I would suggest to you that if you look at the record, uh, one of the largest companies in this country, somebody who contributed some $270 million to the, uh, welfare of working people, uh, in his company. Mr. musk is from south africa.

▶ 4:20:15Now, I doubt that he got a small loan. I think he got a very big loan. No taxes. And wasn't that wonderful? Not so much because I agree with Mr. musk, but it is because he's created a lot of good jobs, a lot of good economic, and made us more competitive in international fields than we otherwise would have been with the gentleman. I would be glad to yield to my friend. >> thank you, Mr. hoyer.

▶ 4:20:44I would just offer up that, um, I hope my father is listening right now because I'm about to talk about him. Good. My father is an immigrant to this nation. He came here in 1970 and became a citizen in 1975, and in the early 2000, he took out an sba loan. And he is an employer. And so he does represent the american dream. And I think but I think he was a us citizen when he did that.

▶ 4:21:09And if I were to call him on the phone and I were to ask him, do you think that you should be a us citizen to be able to access these sba loans? He too would say, yes, we are not, uh, demeaning. >> the end of my time. I have three daughters of my own, and I hope if I call them, they will also agree with me. But my experience.

▶ 4:21:31But my experience has been it's not quite so consistent as apparently you have confidence that your dad would agree with you. But reclaiming my time, I understand what the woman saying that miss bice is saying. I'm glad your father had become a citizen by that point in time. But that's the point. Let's say he asked for that loan a week before he became a citizen.

▶ 4:22:01Apparently, he's been pretty successful. Is that accurate? I mean, I don't know your father and I don't know the background, but I think you make my point. He was an immigrant. He came here, he applied his talent, and he's been successful and supported his family. And that's what this gentleman's saying about his amendment 4%. This is not like we're hemorrhaging at 15 or 20 5 or 30%. That, uh, my friend Mr. alfred, and he is my friend.

▶ 4:22:29We have a great relationship and I'm proud of that. It's not like we're crowding out americans, and particularly when we're cutting it by 23% seems contrary to the assessment of the need that exists. But I appreciate the gentlelady's amendment, but it's sort of like I, I love the shark tank. I don't know anybody. Mark watches the shark tank, but unfortunately I'm out.

▶ 4:23:01>> yeah. Oh, that's funny. >> thank you. Gentlemen, the gentleman from new york, Mr. espaillat, is recognized to address the second degree amendment. >> thank you. Thank you, um. >> Mr. chairman, and and of course, I appreciate the gentlelady's aspiration that this amendment be a friendly amendment. Uh, but it's not because it shuts people out.

▶ 4:23:32Unlike, for example, the us armed forces, when you come as a legal resident, a green card holder, they don't shut you out. They say you can come in and serve the nation.

▶ 4:23:46In fact, uh, I have a, a constituent family in my district who saw their son, uh, staff sergeant ryan tejada, be killed in baghdad in 2003. And he was a, a legal resident, a green card holder. In fact, he was given his citizenship posthumously.

▶ 4:24:13And that there is no shutting the door on that. America says, come in in service. You can put your life on the line. If you're a legal resident, green card holder. And in this case, unfortunately, a staff sergeant was killed in baghdad. We just had tax day on the 14th of this month. I didn't see anybody say, oh, don't pay your taxes.

▶ 4:24:44You're a green card holder. In fact, millions of green cardholders pay their taxes. And they do that religiously because for you to become a us citizen five years later, you have to show a record of paying your taxes.

▶ 4:25:04So if you are a green card holder, business, small business owner, you're going to handle your books meticulously because the day you want to become a us citizen, you gotta show uncle sam that you have play by the rules. But yet the sba says today that you should not have access to a78 long. And so I.

▶ 4:25:34I appreciate the gentlelady's, uh, intention, but I don't think this is a friendly member at all. It shuts down the door. And in fact, if you look at the percentages, you're talking about 4% of the loans, not a whopping 50%, 25, 4% of the loans that are issued by sba.

▶ 4:26:00And if you look at the number of businesses, despite making up 14% of the population, 19% of the businesses with employers are immigrant run businesses in america. Any of us, I am sure, could walk down main street because this is a main street amendment. This is not a wall street amendment. There's plenty of those that happen here in this body. This is a main street amendment.

▶ 4:26:25If you walk around any of your neighborhoods, whether it is an iranian neighborhood in los angeles, very entrepreneurial community, or whether it is a portuguese restaurant in the ironbound district of newark, very good food or a mexican amendment, a mexican mexican community where you have great businesses as well.

▶ 4:26:51You're going to see that you have people paying their taxes, and the businesses are trying to hire local residents, including us citizens. So if we want to address the unemployment surge, the best way is to create jobs. And these small businesses are creating jobs.

▶ 4:27:11And yet the small business administration chooses to say no and slams the door at a critical time in our economy to small business owners that are legal residents and green card holders. I think this was a wonderful opportunity to have a bipartisan effort.

▶ 4:27:30Uh, and although some may interpret it as being a friendly amendment, I think it's mean spirited when you shut down the dreams of a small business owner. I think it's mean spirited. And so, Mr. chairman, I will ask that you, uh, and others vote against the amendment to the amendment and I yield back. >> I thank the gentleman.

▶ 4:27:59And are there others wishing to address the amendment? Gentleman from california is recognized. >> I'll be brief. >> Mr. chairman. Um, I wanted to make two points, uh, first to, to Mr. alford. Uh, I know when Mr. hoyer said he was a friend of yours. I don't want that used against you in the political context, so I want to clean that up. Um, only if it's in your best interest. You can be friends. Uh, potentially. >> I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my remark.

▶ 4:28:30>> I just want. >> to make sure everybody goes into this, uh, with the right spirit in mind. Um, as, as, as Mr. espaillat mentioned, we're talking 4%, but if we want to use the same standard, here are is this body, how would this body treat a restriction on lawful permanent residents serving in the military? Are we now are we americans first that only U.S. citizens can serve in the military?

▶ 4:28:54Maybe that's an amendment that that chairman calvert wants to wants to consider. Uh, this is this is ridiculous to close this door and close this opportunity. Lawful permanent residents, many of which, just like miss baez's father, are on their way to become U.S. citizens. What about that time period between 1970 and 1975 that she mentioned, where her father was an lpr and was working to become a us citizen?

▶ 4:29:22Should an individual in that scenario have a door closed on utilizing sba and creating jobs in their in their community? Uh, I don't believe that to be the case. I don't think that's what this body wants. Um, but if you're truly, you know, us citizens first, uh, lawful permanent residents can own property, they can receive assistance at public universities. Those are the benefits that currently are law. This is a slippery slope.

▶ 4:29:53If you want to close this door, you're closing doors that hurt our military, hurt our country and hurt our economy. Yield back. >> thank you. Gentlemen. The gentlelady from ohio, miss kaptur's, recognized to address the second amendment. No. Okay. Uh, then the gentleman from maryland, Mr. ivy, is recognized to address the second amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. With respect to the amendment, um, I'll just say two quick things.

▶ 4:30:22I hear the waste, fraud, and abuse issue come up frequently. Um, and the point I would make there is if we're really concerned about it and obviously it does exist and we need to stamp it out, increase the number of investigators that we have that are focused on sniff and sniffing this out. And at the department of justice, stop cutting back on the number of prosecutors who handle these kind of cases, especially the fraud division, which has been decimated in the past year and a half. Let's beef those up and let's have them go after this. These cases.

▶ 4:30:54Secondly, with respect to the sba and I had a chance to represent a number of companies and advise a number of companies who were trying to navigate their way through this process. Um, it's difficult for many of them to figure out all of the red tape and requirements that, you know, go with the federal, with doing work with the federal government, getting a loan from the federal government, meeting those requirements. And I know that my republican colleagues are very sensitive to the issue of red tape and bureaucracy.

▶ 4:31:23One of the things that would help that got cut was the sba had entities and departments that would help small business owners with technical assistance, and they would provide it for free. You could come in and get advice. Um, and it was tremendously helpful to many of these businesses because they didn't have the ability to go out and hire expensive lawyers who would provide the work and do provide that kind of advice and guidance for major corporations at $1,000 an hour or more.

▶ 4:31:51So let's do the whole piece of it. Let's make sure that if we if we're going to try and address that issue, I think, you know, getting the data collected is never a bad thing. And I think the extent there is waste, fraud and abuse out there, let's go after it. I think it's a important function for us to make sure we carry out.

▶ 4:32:10But, um, let's also see if we can help small businesses navigate the challenges that we all know that, that are faced by businesses in the united states dealing with, whether it's whatever type of bureaucracy you want to talk about or, you know, health care coverage or the like, let's help them instead of getting in the way.

▶ 4:32:30And let's use some of the resources that have been discussed earlier to help provide those kind of resources because we get it back, um, over and over again in tax revenue that we get in employment from these folks hiring. Many of them also do a lot of charitable work in the community. They're great givers through their, their places of worship and to their communities through other means. These are great citizens or soon to be citizens. Um, let's help them. Help us in that process.

▶ 4:32:59Last point on this, um, I've got a big family. Some of my, my kids have married people from overseas and watching them go through this process has been a real eye opener for me. And it takes years. I think pete, just Mr. just mentioned something about seven years. It can take even longer than that with people doing all the right things, coming to the country with all of the skill sets that are beneficial to the nation.

▶ 4:33:25Um, married to an american, uh, in some instances had american children here and it still takes years. There's no reason for us to force them to wait years and years and years before they can start a business and get the legal or the technical assistance and loan assistance that they need to have a thriving business that's going to benefit all of us in our communities. Let's expedite it. Let's facilitate it. Let's make it happen. And with that, I yield back. >> thank you gentlemen. I thank the gentleman.

▶ 4:33:54The gentleman from missouri, Mr. alford, is recognized. >> Mr. chair, I'll be very brief. I just want to correct the record. Mr. hoyer, the 22% cut in the sba funding is cuts in personnel right sizing.

▶ 4:34:10The sba under kelly loeffler, uh, making it more efficient, moving personnel out into the heartland, including kansas city, missouri, which I appreciate the s the seven a loan program is fully funded, but it is at a capacity where us citizens must come first in this. This has nothing to do with the loan program itself being underfunded.

▶ 4:34:39Otherwise I would certainly be fighting for more funding. Thank you very much. >> will the gentleman yield? Would you yield? >> yes. >> the only comment I would have to you. Why didn't you move the 22.3% resources over to the loan program? >> thank you very much. I yield back.

▶ 4:35:06>> I hesitate to ask, but are other members seek recognition to, uh, to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. And it has been brought up on several different occasions here. Only 4%? Only 4%. Do you know what the total number of sba loans approved last year was? $37 billion.

▶ 4:35:30So 4% is almost $1.5 billion. It seems reasonable to me that we would ask for a report to make sure that the data that we are wanting to change policy on makes sense. That's all this is.

▶ 4:35:51And I would just underscore that the amendment is more prudent, a prudent approach, uh, by better understanding the administration's reasoning for acting, uh, rather than just banning something. So with that, Mr. chairman, I ask my colleagues to vote in favor of the second degree amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time. >> thank you. Gentlelady. The question is now on the second degree amendment offered by miss bice. All those in favor, say aye. >> aye. >> all opposed? Say no. No opinion there of the chair.

▶ 4:36:20The ayes have it. >> under this. >> roll call has been requested. Sufficient number of hands have been raised. Clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt. Aye, Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar. No. Mr. alford. Mr. alford, I. Mr. amodei, Mr. amedee, I. Mrs. bice, Mrs. spice. I. Mr. bishop. Mr. bishop. No. Mr. calvert. Mr. calvert, I. Mr. carter. Mr.

▶ 4:36:54Carter. I. Mr. case. Mr. case. No. Mr. eskamani. Mr. klein. Mr. cloud. Mr. clyburn. Mr. clyburn. No. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. I. Mr. cole. Mr. cole, I. Mr. cuellar. Mr. cuellar. No. Miss. Dean. Miss dean. No. Mr. laura. Mr. diaz-balart. Mr.

▶ 4:37:28Diaz-balart, I. Mr. edwards, Mr. edwards, I. Mr. ellzey. Mr. ellzey. I miss. Escobar, miss. Escobar. No. Mr. espaillat. Mr. espaillat. No. Mr. fleischmann. Mr. fleischmann, I miss. Frankel. Miss. Frankel. No. Mr. franklin. Mr. franklin, I. Mr. guest, Mr. guest. I. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. No. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. I. Mrs. henson. Mrs. henson, Mrs. henson. Votes.

▶ 4:37:59I. Mr. hoyer. Mr. hoyer, I. >> chairman like a daughter. >> I made a mistake. Vote no. >> Mr. hoyer votes no. Mr. ivey. Mr. ivey no. Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce, I miss kaptur. >> no. >> thank you, miss kaptur. No.

▶ 4:38:30Mr. lalota. Mr. lalota, I miss lee, miss lee. No. Miss letlow. Miss letlow, I Mr. levin. Mr. levin no. Miss malloy. Miss malloy, I miss mccullum. Miss mccullum. No. Miss ming, miss ming. No. Mr. molina. Mr. molenaar, I. Mr. moore, Mr. moore, I. Mr. morelli. Mr. morelli. No. Mr. moran. Mr. moran. No. Mr. newhouse. Miss.

▶ 4:39:01Mr. newhouse, I miss perez. Miss perez, I miss pingree, miss pingree. No. Mr. pocan. Mr. pocan. No. Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley no. Mr. taylor, Mr. rosenthaler, 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. No. Miss. Underwood. No.

▶ 4:39:31Miss. Underwood. No. Mr. valadao. Mr. valadao. No. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz, miss. Wasserman. Schultz, I. Mrs. watson. Coleman. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz. Votes. No. Mrs. watson. Coleman. Mrs. watson. Coleman. No. Mr. womack. Mr. womack, I. Mr. zink, I. >> Mr. zink. I. Mr. sharif. Mr. sharif, I.

▶ 4:40:02>> well, my good friend from florida. No, she was misled by the distinguished ranking member. So we know, we know. >> I appreciate your sticking with me. >> uh, are there any are there any members wishing to record their vote or change their vote? Gentlelady from connecticut. Uh, I do not believe the gentlelady is recorded. >> Mr. roberts. >> no gentleman from arizona. >> Mr. cisco votes I. >> gentleman from virginia. >> Mr. klein, I.

▶ 4:40:32>> uh, the gentleman from mississippi just standing around. Or is he recorded? He's recording. Recorded. Okay. Very good. Uh, are there others wishing to be recorded or to change their votes? Seeing none, the clerk will tally.

▶ 4:41:32On this vote. The eyes are 34. The nos are 28. The amendment in the second degree is adopted. Uh, we will now return to the amendment offered by Mr. espaillat, as amended. Do any members seek recognition to speak on the amendment as amended? Okay. Um.

▶ 4:42:02>> you got a vote. >> on it. There seem to be none, but the gentleman is recognized for a minute to close. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. Thank you. >> all for this, uh, a robust debate. And, uh, I hope that this debate has created the possibilities for a future discussion about, uh, bipartisan work on this issue. And I look forward to, uh, members from both sides of the aisle working with me on that. And I yield back.

▶ 4:42:36>> I thank the gentleman. The question is now on the amendment offered by Mr. espaillat, as amended. All those in favor say I all those opposed say no. Opinion. The chair the ayes have it, and the amendment is accepted. Uh, gentleman from california, Mr. levin is recognized for the purposes of amendment. >> Mr.

▶ 4:43:04Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk, and I ask for unanimous consent that the reading of this amendment be dispensed with. >> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentleman is recognized for remarks on his amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. Before I begin, I want to also take a moment to thank my friend steny hoyer. Uh, he is one of the great statesmen and modern leaders of this institution. I'm a better member of congress from watching his example, as I know many of us are. So thank you, steny. Uh, colleagues, this is the simplest amendment you're going to see today.

▶ 4:43:34It's one sentence. It says, quote, none of the funds appropriated by this act shall be used to cancel or pause grant funding based on the perceived political leanings of the state in which the recipient is located. End quote. That's it. I want to speak directly to my republican colleagues for a moment, because I'm not here to score points. I'm here to ask you to protect something that we all swore an oath to protect.

▶ 4:44:04A federal judge recently found that this administration, quote, made grant termination decisions primarily, if not exclusively, based on whether the awardee resided in a state whose citizens voted for president trump in 2024. End quote, the judge ruled that this violates the fifth amendment's equal protection clause. That's not my characterization. That's a finding of fact from the federal bench. Now, I understand the politics of the moment that we're in.

▶ 4:44:33When your party holds the white house and holds both chambers, it's tempting to let the executive branch do whatever it wants, because most of what it wants is what you want. I get it, I've seen democrats make the same mistake, but there's an old saying, don't dig a hole. You're not willing to fall into. Every majority digs and every majority eventually falls. Think about what's actually happening here.

▶ 4:44:57The office of management and budget on its own authority is deciding which states get the money congress appropriated and which states don't, based on how those states voted. Not based on need, not based on merit, not based on the statutory criteria this committee wrote into law based only on the electoral map. So let that sink in. We, the appropriations committee, wrote the law.

▶ 4:45:22We decided where the money was to go and omb is overriding us. It's not a trump issue. It's not a rus vote issue. It's an article. One issue. The framers gave the power of the purse to congress for a reason. They understood that if the executive could spend or withhold money based on political favoritism, the legislator legislature would become decorative, would become irrelevant. That's exactly, sadly, the road that we're on.

▶ 4:45:53And here's the part I really want my republican colleagues to hear. The precedent that you let stand today is the precedent you live under tomorrow. I can't tell you when the next democratic president will be sworn in. None of us can. But one will be someday. It might be in three years. Might be in seven years, who knows? But when that day comes, every tool that you allow this administration to use will be sitting on the desk in the oval office waiting.

▶ 4:46:20So imagine disaster relief to any of your states getting held up because your state voted red. Imagine a highway project in your district sitting frozen because of your state's political preference. If that sounds outrageous to you, good. It should. And it's outrageous right now, too. The only difference is who's holding the shovel. So this amendment doesn't stop a single dollar from being appropriated, doesn't favor one party over the other.

▶ 4:46:50It doesn't tie the president's hands on policy. All it says is that the money we appropriate has to be distributed based on the law, not based on which way a state voted. If you believe in the constitution that we all swore to uphold, you should be able to vote for this. If you believe article one means something, you should be able to vote for this.

▶ 4:47:12And if you believe that one day there is even a remote possibility that you might be sitting in the minority watching a democratic white house do this to your constituents, you should definitely be able to vote for this. Don't dig a hole you're not willing to fall into. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank you, gentlemen. Mr. joyce of ohio is recognized to respond to the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.

▶ 4:47:42I oppose the amendment. I know there's a shared frustration regarding the administration's decision on the cancellation of grant programs. We should address these frustrations in oversight work and working with our authorizers. Issuing directives and appropriation bills is not the answer. I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment. >> thank you. Gentlemen. The gentleman from maryland, Mr. hoyer, is recognized to address the amendment. >> I think, as the gentleman said, it's pretty straightforward.

▶ 4:48:12Nobody in this committee would think that political affiliation was totally unknown to either party. The president has articulated this premise of partizan grant ownership on a number of occasions that season. One of his strengths or one of his weaknesses. He said, yeah, that's what I'm going to do.

▶ 4:48:42Like it or lump it, um, in the energy grants, some 63% went to red states out of the, uh, the infrastructure bill of the energy grants, 63% went to red states. Why? Because they had a need, uh, highway funding, uh, rural states have a lot of highways going long ways. They're big states, a lot of them.

▶ 4:49:11And smaller states don't have as much need. Uh, and what the gentleman is saying is when we appropriate x number of dollars, those dollars ought to be distributed towards the objective that america needs. Now, america's divided into 50 states and a jurisdiction that ought to be a state, the district of columbia.

▶ 4:49:38Uh, and that's all this amendment does, that we should distribute our resources based upon the needs of our country and the needs of our constituent states and localities. I think in that sense, it's a very good, honest, straightforward amendment, and I support it. >> thank you. Gentlemen. Any gentlelady from ohio is recognized to address the amendment.

▶ 4:50:08>> uh, thank you, Mr. chairman. Uh, let me just reread the 11 amendment. None of the funds appropriated by this act shall be used to cancel or pause grant funding based on the perceived political leanings of the state in which the recipient is located. Um.

▶ 4:50:30Prohibiting federal agencies from denying, restricting or canceling grant funding based on the applicant's perceived political ideology or viewpoints. Who, who, who defines that, um, politically driven funding decisions, strip resources from essential services that the american people depend on.

▶ 4:50:52So we supposedly act on the basis that federal grants have to be awarded on merit and community need. The way I look at the world, the federal government owes my region a lot of money because of what happened years ago with the passage of really bad trade agreements nafta, cafta, china, pntr.

▶ 4:51:15Uh, there's a lot of places in the country that got kicked in the gut over and over and over again because of those terrible agreements. Now in ohio, we're trying to catch up to all the damage. My whole career has been about catching up for the damage that was done.

▶ 4:51:33Uh, the department of health and human services here at the federal level, uh, failed to provide funding recently for the toledo public school system head start program, causing temporary of tg to chaos for tots. Wrong. That's wrong.

▶ 4:51:58No matter how you look at it, harming kids, not getting their education, throwing school systems into chaos, large school systems that have thousands of children is absolutely un-american. The trump administration canceled more than $100 million to the region.

▶ 4:52:16I represent, uh, in places like the city of toledo, grants that had already been passed by both chambers of congress, both houses of congress, uh, went over to the administration, they approved it, they awarded it, and then they took them back. Okay, so the federal government's kicking us again. We're used to it and we don't like it. We're still digging out of the industrial and manufacturing depletion. Depletion.

▶ 4:52:43Ours is the major city I represent is not a capital city. Okay. Doesn't have a lot of friends here in washington, pays costs a lot of money to get here, whether you drive or whether you go on an airplane. A lot of our people don't come here. And, uh, our manufacturing and workforce development programs rely heavily on federal partnerships, particularly for workforce development, where our people have been robbed for years, sending money into the federal government and not getting it back.

▶ 4:53:11So when millions of tax dollars that people paid in here don't come back home, especially for education and workforce development, uh, there's something very uneven about the way this country is performing, and there are fewer and fewer opportunities for ohio workers who don't happen to live in a capital city, uh, or a university town, um, or a financial center.

▶ 4:53:34So these cuts that are going on impact opportunity, public health and safety, for sure. And, um, I wanted to mention, and there's something called the manufacturing extension partnership that's over at the department of commerce. I don't know who runs that place. All I know is they cut the program out, cut the legs out from under people who were trying to reestablish some manufacturing. People talk about the defense industrial base. Well, I'll tell you what.

▶ 4:54:01If you lose all your tooling companies, if you lose your steel companies, if you lose all the manufacturing companies that we had before, you're not going to be successful. In fact, you're going to fail. And that's why china right now, if they dumped all their $10,000 cars into this country, we would wipe out our automotive industry tomorrow. Okay, so I'm angry because to underfund education cuts off the future to underfund workforce development to kill the manufacturing extension partnership is un-american.

▶ 4:54:31So I oppose I support the levin amendment, and I oppose those. And I'll end with this. Uh. I was educated in catholic schools, but our parents always paid the property tax for all the other schools. And I see that some people want to put catholic practices in public schools. That's not the way catholics perform. We go to our own churches and we believe in the public schools. So the people who have this funny conflation of thinking that you're going to do something special.

▶ 4:55:00Uh, no, to, to, to choose a religion is your own business. You don't want the government involved in that. So I really support the levin amendment, and I don't support the damage that the other side of the aisle is doing to the separation of church and state in this country. I yield back. Thank you. >> thank you, gentlelady. The gentlelady from minnesota, miss mccollum is recognized to address the amendment.

▶ 4:55:30>> thank you, Mr. chair. Um, I just did some quick research on, um, what other states besides minnesota were being affected by, uh, cuts. And these are cuts to health care on february 11th. Um, there were several states, four of us in total who had, uh, five year, uh, cdc grant cut.

▶ 4:55:54It was minnesota, california, illinois, and colorado weren't given any reasons. They were just cut. And what was happening in minnesota with these cdc grants wasn't going these grants weren't focused on the twin cities. They were focused on greater minnesota, pete stauber district, um, michelle's district, tom's district.

▶ 4:56:19Um, you know, brad's district and the 11 tribal nations that we serve there, we work together, minnesota department of health and the cdc. No explanation, no nothing. Just cut.

▶ 4:56:33So I support this amendment because I don't think it should in the future, if it would be a republican president and they disagreed with, uh, what you were doing or how you voted on the election to certify or anything like that, that that should happen to anyone.

▶ 4:56:52Five year grant in the middle of it just cut our state legislators, especially the state legislators, and I served on the health and human services committee when I was in the minnesota state house. That was baked into some of the work that we were doing for the minnesota department of health when we did our budget, just cut no explanation, no reason other than that it was minnesota. With that, I support the amendment and I yield back. >> thank you.

▶ 4:57:22Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none. Uh, if there's no further debate, the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. Colleagues, let me leave you with this. Every one of us took the same oath to the constitution, and that constitution gives the power of the purse to us, to this committee, to this congress, not to omb, not to the white house, to us.

▶ 4:57:48A federal judge has already ruled that withholding funds on the basis of political preference violates the fifth amendment of the united states constitution. That's not my opinion. That's a finding of fact from the federal bench. And a no vote on this amendment is a vote to let that unconstitutional practice continue on our watch, with our money in our name.

▶ 4:58:11So I'm asking you to protect your own district, because the next democratic president will come eventually. And as I said before, when they do every tool you hand, this white house will be sitting on the desk of that democratic president, pointed at your constituents, pointed at your grants, pointed at your roads, pointed at your hospitals, defend your districts, defend article one. Vote yes.

▶ 4:58:42>> for so long. >> the question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california. All those in favor say aye. >> aye. >> all opposed? Say no. >> no. >> the chair the nos have it. Roll call has been requested. Sufficient support has been shown. The clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt. No, Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar, I. Mr. alford. Mr. alford, no. Mr. amodei. Mr. amodei no. Mrs.

▶ 4:59:13Bice. Mr. bishop, Mr. bishop, I. Mr. calvert, Mr. calvert no. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. No. Mr. case. Mr. case. I. Mr. eskamani. Mr. klein. Mr. cloud. Mr. clyburn. Mr. clyburn. I. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. No. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cuellar.

▶ 4:59:44Mr. cuellar, I miss dean. Mr. laura. >> yes. >> Mr. laura, I. Mr. diaz-balart, Mr. diaz-balart. No. Mr. edwards. Mr. edwards. No. Mr. ellzey. Mr. ellzey. No. Miss. Escobar, miss. Escobar, I. Mr. espaillat, Mr. espaillat, I. Mr. fleischmann. Miss. Frankel. Miss. Frankel. I. Mr. franklin. Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest.

▶ 5:00:15Mr. guest. No. Mr. carter. Mr. carter, I. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson. >> Mrs. murphy. >> Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. iv. Mr. ivy. I. Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce. No. Miss. Kaptur. I. Miss. Kaptur, I. Mr. lalota. Mr. lalota. No. Miss lee. Miss lee. I miss. Ludlow. Mr. levin. Mr. levin, I miss. Malloy. Miss.

▶ 5:00:50Mccullum. Miss mccullum, I miss. Ming, miss ming I. Mr. molenaar. Mr. molenaar. No. Mr. moore. Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli. Mr. mervyn. Mr. mervyn, I. Mr. newhouse. Mr. newhouse no. Miss. Perez. Miss. Perez, I miss. Pingree. Mr. pocan, Mr. pocan, I. Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley, I.

▶ 5:01:21Mr. guy reschenthaler. Mr. guy reschenthaler. No. Mr. rogers. Mr. rogers. >> no. >> Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong. Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres. Mrs. torres, I miss underwood. I miss underwood, I, Mr. valadao, Mr. valadao no. Miss. Wasserman.

▶ 5:01:53Schultz, miss. Wasserman. Schultz. I. Mrs. watson. Coleman, Mrs. watson. Coleman, I. Mr. womack. Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink. Mr. zink. No. Mr. shreeve. Mr. shreeve. No. >> do any members wish to record or change their vote? Gentlelady from iowa. >> Mrs. henson? No. >> gentlelady from utah. >> miss malloy. >> no gentleman from arizona. >> Mr. cisco, no.

▶ 5:02:24>> gentlelady from pennsylvania. >> miss dean I. >> gentleman from tennessee. >> Mr. fleischmann, no. >> gentleman lady from oklahoma. >> Mrs. bice, no. >> gentlelady from maine. >> miss pingree, I. >> are there others wishing to record or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tally.

▶ 5:03:01>> laurel lee. Yes. >> let me just walk. >> oh, I'm sorry, I thought you said laurel lee is not. >> the gentleman from new york is not recorded. >> please refer to the affirmative. Thank you, Mr. chairman. >> Mr. morelli votes I.

▶ 5:03:32>> I'm sorry.

▶ 5:04:06>> for good. >> on this vote. The yeas are 28, the nose is 32. The amendment is not adopted. The gentleman from indiana, Mr. moran, is, uh. Is recognized for an amendment. >> I dispense the reading of the amendment. >> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the member is recognized for remarks on his amendment.

▶ 5:04:36>> northwest indiana is the largest steel producing hub in the country, maintaining a strong domestic steel industry and unionized workforce is vital for strengthening our economy, protecting american jobs, and defending our national security. Despite promises to bolster the american steel industry, the current administration has accepted tens of millions of dollars worth of donated foreign steel from his expensive ballroom project.

▶ 5:05:03Right after the president announced this donation, the administration also adjusted tariff policy in a way that benefits the same donor by cutting certain automotive steel tariffs in half. As vice chairman of the congressional steel caucus, I'm fighting every day to defend american steelworkers strengthened by american requirements and prevent unfairly traded steel products from being dumped on our shores.

▶ 5:05:26To truly support domestic producers and steelworkers government construction projects at iconic american buildings should only use american made steel, iron and manufactured materials. Accepting donations from foreign companies sends a mixed message to the american steel producers. American steel workers. It affects our economic strength, our steel capacity, and our national security.

▶ 5:05:52My amendment directs that all iron, steel, manufactured products and construction materials used in construction projects on the white house grounds be produced in the united states. This includes materials procured through appropriated funds and received through private donations. I urge the committee to support my amendment and stand up for domestic. The domestic steel industry in america and american workers. >> thank the gentleman. The gentleman from ohio, Mr.

▶ 5:06:20Joyce, is recognized to respond to the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I oppose the gentleman's amendment. I agree that we should prioritize the use of american made iron, steel and other materials in construction project, which is why these products are already covered under section 606 of this act, which requires compliance with the buy american act of 1933. This amendment will be duplicative and unnecessary. For that reason, I urge my colleagues to vote no on the amendment. >> thank the gentleman.

▶ 5:06:50The gentleman from maryland, Mr. hoyer, is recognized to address the amendment. >> well, in a body that says things again and again and again on the same subject. Duplicative. Not bad apparently. Um, this amendment says what the president of the united states says he wants. America first. I don't know that he says america only, although he acts that way a lot.

▶ 5:07:20America first would mean american steel. That's what this amendment says. Now we're going to have a second degree amendment for which I think probably most of the other side will vote. It is what I call a clever amendment. It takes Mr.

▶ 5:07:45Mervyn's directing them to do this to urging them to do this, otherwise known as the vote premise, not v o t e b o u g h t premise that what we do is suggest, urge, plead, prostate ourselves. Mr. mervyn's amendment says do it.

▶ 5:08:19What this is, I won't say that, but it's a pretend substitute for this bill because it says that we urge you to do this, but you're not required to do it. And very frankly, we know that they're already talking to foreign steel makers.

▶ 5:08:41Maybe they have business with other people as well. And then it says at the end to look like we're saying something. This includes any materials procured with funds made available by this act. Obviously, what the president said is we're doing it all with donated funds.

▶ 5:09:11Now, as I said earlier in the day, we've got a headline here in the washington post that trump fought to keep the ballroom funding fundraising contract secret. Judge told him, you can't keep it secret, so maybe we'll know whether. They can use american steel or not.

▶ 5:09:37And maybe we won't, because they have attempted to keep this very secret. So I would suggest a when we vote on the amendment, which is not a friendly amendment at all, but a amendment which will allow you to go and say, well, I voted to have american steel there. No you don't. You're urging doesn't have any legal effect.

▶ 5:10:09None. Zero zip. And then you say nothing in this bill, knowing full well there is nothing in this bill to fund this, nor did the president ask us. He didn't ask us for our by leave, I don't mean our subcommittee. I mean anybody. He just tore down significant part of the white house and said, we're going to do something else.

▶ 5:10:35And then we find in a story that occurred not too long ago that they're making deals with foreign steelmakers. So it's not a question of urging. They're not doing it, and they don't want us to know they're not doing it. So watering down this as a pretense that we're mandating steel be used from america won't wash, or as speaker.

▶ 5:11:05Right. You say that dog won't hunt. So I support the gentleman's amendment. Who's standing up? Not for his area. He's doing that as we all ought to, but he's standing up for the premise of america being first. When we spend this money, we have an authorized this money. We haven't played a role in getting this money, but it has gotten. Because the president of the united states asked for it in large sums.

▶ 5:11:34So, Mr. chairman, I would urge rejection of the second degree amendment and the adoption of the gentleman from indiana as amendment. >> thank you, gentlemen. The gentlelady from pennsylvania, miss dean's recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.

▶ 5:12:03And I thank Mr. mervyn for bringing this amendment forward. It seems like exactly what donald trump wants. After all, this is all about make it in america. So if you are choosing to tear down a hunk of the white house because you have a better idea, wouldn't you think everything in this thing would be showcasing the greatness of american manufacturing and craftsmanship and technology

▶ 5:12:34And you name it. It's all about making it in america. Mr. chairman, I rise in support of Mr. mervin's amendment. It adds report language directing that quote, all iron, steel manufactured products and construction materials, end quote, used for the white house complex must be domestically produced. Who could be against that? Mr. trump should be for this. This shouldn't be partizan. It should not be controversial.

▶ 5:13:02This administration has made increasing domestic manufacturing a priority. Bolstering domestic steel has been a featured part of the agenda. Tariffs on foreign steel, currently at 50%. You see the influence of tariffs here to prefer american steel.

▶ 5:13:22Yet according to a recent new york times article that I have right here, the reporting is, quote, the white house has secured tens of millions of dollars worth of donated foreign steel for Mr. trump's $400 million ballroom project, end quote. It reads that the white house has not disclosed details of the donation, but Mr.

▶ 5:13:45Trump said last october he had been offered a donation of steel for the ballroom, valued at $37 million, $37 million and of course, opaque don't want to show us it, but that is what he boasted of before. Further, it would appear that coinciding with this donation quote, the white house made adjustments to its tariffs that could benefit the foreign donor company. This whole affair is unethical.

▶ 5:14:15It's un maga, it's unpresidential. It's just plain bonkers. If my colleagues were serious about wanting to support domestic steel, they should join me. I invite you to join Mr. mervyn in this amendment. Vote yes, promote U.S. steel and will deal with the ballroom later I yield back. >> thank gentlelady.

▶ 5:14:44There's a at the desk. An amendment in the second or others. Okay, uh, there's at the desk an amendment in the second degree offered by Mr. guy reschenthaler gentleman. Is he here? The gentleman is recognized to explain his amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise to offer a second amendment to the gentleman's amendment, and I ask that the reading be dispensed with. >> Mr. chairman, the reading is dispensed with, and the gentleman is recognized to explain his amendment.

▶ 5:15:15>> thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. This amendment is really nothing more than just a veiled attack on the ballroom. I'm from pittsburgh and I can tell you that there's no president has been better for us steel production than president trump. I'll give you a good example. The nippon steel deal. This deal was going nowhere before president trump came in. This is a deal that's bringing in roughly $1 billion in the mon valley, honoring all the labor agreements that were in place.

▶ 5:15:42And it's going to greatly increase the amount of domestic steel production. This amendment currently at hand will not do anything to help the american steel worker. The underlying bill makes it clear that we support U.S. steel production. Chairman joyce made that clear. I associate myself with his remarks, so I offered the second degree amendment to just further reiterate our support for federal funds to be used for american steel production, and I urge its adoption.

▶ 5:16:14>> thank the gentleman. The gentleman from ohio, Mr. joyce, is recognized. Okay. All right. Gentleman from maryland. Mr. hoyer is recognized to address the amendment in the second degree. >> I already addressed the amendment, of course, and I suggest the gentleman from pennsylvania that it's nice to urge. Nothing in his amendment requires the use of U.S. products in this project. Nothing.

▶ 5:16:43Nothing in our bill requires that. If. I'm wrong on that, Mr. chairman, you can correct me, but I don't believe there is anything in that bill that requires. So it is, as I suggested before. We are the authors of our own impotence.

▶ 5:17:15We say we want steel used from america. Fine. We have the authority to say that. Mr. mervyn has put an amendment that gives us the ability to say that. And you want to substitute it for pablom with pablom. That doesn't do anything.

▶ 5:17:44And that last line in it, nothing in the. No funds in this bill would be spent on it. There are no funds in this bill because the president's gone off. And told us he was going to spend 300 million. Now it's 400 million. Of course, heavens knows what it will be at the end. And maybe a future president can tell us, I don't need your money. I'm going to get billions from this country.

▶ 5:18:15I'm going to get billions from the other country. Maybe russia and saudi arabia fall in that category. I don't need you. I can go off and fund anything I want, including tearing down part of the people's house we call the white house. Ladies and gentlemen of this committee, at some point in time, I won't be here.

▶ 5:18:41But at some point in time, I hope this committee stands up and says to any administration, and let me tell you, I've been on this committee. See that picture up there? Guy's name is david obey. He was one of the toughest chairmans with whom I've served. I think how you probably can agree with that. You were a chairman, a good chairman, david. Always tough and bio by god.

▶ 5:19:10When the administration wanted to do something like this, they said, Mr. obey, what do you think? Why? Because they knew he would say, this is our responsibility. I frankly think that it is a travesty. Uh, that we have, in effect, asked private sector companies that are doing business with the government of the united states of america on a daily basis. Hey, give us 400 million.

▶ 5:19:39It's a little bit like car muscling the communications companies. I won't go into that this time. And by the way, he hasn't come before our committee either. He's under our jurisdiction. So I urge rejection of the secondary amendment, passage of the mervine amendment. And let us say, Mr. president, you need to spend money on american products. >> I thank the gentleman.

▶ 5:20:09The gentleman from indiana, Mr. van, is recognized to address the amendment in the second degree. >> and so I'm co-chair of the steel caucus. Come from gary, indiana, uh, have committed the last six years to making sure that steel production is something that we take very seriously.

▶ 5:20:29People in my district, when they drive by something, the steel workers, the tradesmen, the ironworkers, the sheet metal workers take a great deal of pride in saying they helped build >> that, and they help build that with american steel. I personally don't believe in messaging bills. I am not a theatrical type of person. I believe wholeheartedly that the steel industry is worth fighting.

▶ 5:20:57It's worth fighting for and making sure that every ounce of capacity of steel that is made is made in america. And so when we talk about that, there is existing law that protects this. Why is there the contradiction that the acceptance of foreign steel for this project is accepted?

▶ 5:21:18So the law that the amendment that I am trying to pass is to make sure that we produce the most american steel capacity so that families in my community, in the nation, in gary and in pittsburgh are working and their families are working.

▶ 5:21:41So ultimately, there is a great difference between urging and directing, and to the point I want to work with my colleague from pittsburgh. He had mentioned the us nippon deal. We should hold nippon accountable for the investments that they are going to make in these steel producing manufacturing plants. Keeping their corporate headquarters in pittsburgh.

▶ 5:22:08But in the beginning of 2025, and as a candidate, president trump opposed the deal. And then in may of 2025, he absolutely embraced the deal. And we have billions of dollars of infrastructure going into plants in gary, indiana, and pittsburgh that are producing american made steel. So ultimately, what I'm trying to say is put your money where your mouth is.

▶ 5:22:35And if you're going to walk the walk and talk about america first, then let's use american steel in every project that we possibly can. And I yield back. >> thank the gentleman. Do any other members seek recognition to speak on the second degree amendment? The gentleman from maryland is recognized. >> thank you very much. And I want to thank the gentleman from indiana for bringing up a point that that we should, whenever possible, using america. I don't care whether it's food on snap.

▶ 5:23:05I don't care whether it's steel in this building, but my. But the way I read the underlying amendment and the secondary amendment is there not statute. It's committee report. They can do whatever they want with it. It's not statute. We are, in fact, not requiring the steel to be used. And perhaps the subcommittee chair would.

▶ 5:23:31If I yield you some time, if you can answer that question, my understanding is both of them are in committee report. So, in fact, do we statutorily require american steel to be used with the original amendment? >> that is my understanding as well. Is this just part of the report? >> okay. Thank you very much. I yield. >> my friend. Yield.

▶ 5:24:01>> you can answer that question too. I'll gladly yield some of my time. >> um. >> you remember I mentioned just a few, maybe an hour ago about how somebody had raised that issue in committee on an amendment I offered on report language. They said, really? They don't pay any attention to it. The gentleman may be correct, but the difference between urging and direct has meaning. And direct is saying, this committee tells you to do that. They don't have to do it.

▶ 5:24:33You're right. I agree with you. But by golly, if they don't do it, david obey would cut them 10% or 25% as you voted in that amendment, there would be. >> a recall my time. >> there'd be a consequence to that happening. >> I'll recall my time. >> reclaim it. >> yeah. The fact is, we're not providing funds for this. We're not providing public funds. So what are we going to do, withhold private funds? You can't do that.

▶ 5:24:59So and again, this is a great we should require whenever we're spending money from the federal government, we should require that we prioritize american products. But the fact of the matter is, we're not spending money from the federal government. That's why the report. Language is the only way we could do this. >> tell my friend that we are spending money for the operations of the white house. >> gentlemen, I think it's my time. >> it is. >> thank you very much. >> you're very welcome.

▶ 5:25:26>> and by the way, while I'm up, I do want to thank the gentleman from across the chesapeake bay for his service. Because you have the western shore of the chesapeake bay. I have the eastern shore, and we try to take care of the bay. And I appreciate what you've done over time. My only point is none of this requires it. It's committee report. Yeah. There's direct and there is urged. But in the end, it makes some difference. But it's not statutory difference. I yield back.

▶ 5:25:56>> do any other members speak recognition speak on the second degree? If not the gentleman, Mr. rosenthaler, is recognized for one minute to close on his second degree amendment. >> thanks, Mr. chairman, I appreciate it. And just to clarify the record, there was opposition to the nippon deal, uh, prior to the current agreement. The reason is, is because nippon was going to purchase us steel, uh, move the headquarters to tokyo or to japan rather.

▶ 5:26:24Uh, and we were going to lose the opportunity to have us steel as a domestic us steel producer. The reason why myself and others support the current deal is because it's a merger between the two and us. Steel is able to stay headquartered in pittsburgh, and the steel mills are still obviously producing steel in the united states. But I just wanted to clarify that. But I urge support for my second degree amendment, and I yield back. >> I thank gentlemen questions. Now, on the second degree amendment offered by Mr.

▶ 5:26:52Guy reschenthaler, all those in favor say aye. All those opposed say no. No opinion. The chair the ayes have it and the amendment is accepted. Okay, fine. Just give me another chance. Uh, roll call has been requested. Sufficient support has been shown. Uh, the clerk will call the roll on the russian second degree amendment. >> Mr. aderholt, Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar. No. Mr. alford.

▶ 5:27:25Mr. alford, I. Mr. amodei, Mr. amodei, I. Mrs. bice, Mrs. bice, I. Mr. bishop. Mr. bishop. No. Mr. calvert. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. I. Mr. case. Mr. case. No. Mr. eskamani. Mr. eskamani. I. Mr. klein. Mr. cloud. Mr. clyburn. Mr. clyburn. No. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. I. Mr. cole.

▶ 5:27:58Yes. Mr. cole. I. Mr. cuellar. Mr. cuellar. No. Miss dean. Miss dean. No. Mr. laura. No. Mr. laura. No. Mr. diaz-balart. Mr. edwards. Mr. edwards, I. Mr. ellzey. Miss. Escobar, miss. Escobar. No. Mr. espaillat. Mr. espaillat. No. Mr. fleischmann. Mr. fleischmann, I miss fraenkel. Miss fraenkel. No. Mr. franklin. Mr. franklin, I.

▶ 5:28:29Mr. guest, Mr. guest, I. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. No. Doctor. Harris, my. Doctor. Harris. I. Mrs. henson, Mrs. henson, I. Mr. hoyer. >> no. >> Mr. hoyer. No. Mr. iv. Mr. iv. No. Mr. joyce. >> yes, Mr. >> joyce, I miss. Kaptur. Mr. lalota. Mr. loloda, I miss li miss li no. Miss. Letlow. Mr.

▶ 5:29:02Levin. Miss. Malloy. Miss malloy, I miss mccullum. Miss ming. Miss ming, miss ming. No. Mr. molenaar. Mr. molenaar, I. Mr. moore, Mr. moore, I. Mr. morelli. No. Mr. morelli. No. Mr. mirvan. Mr. mirvan. No. Mr. newhouse. Mr. newhouse, I miss perez, miss perez. No.

▶ 5:29:32Miss pingree. Miss ping, miss pingree. No. Mr. pocan. Mr. pocan. No. Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley. No. Mr. guy reschenthaler. Mr. guy reschenthaler, 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. No. Miss. Underwood. Miss. Underwood. No. Mr. valadao. Mr. valadao, I miss.

▶ 5:30:04Wasserman. Schultz, Mrs. watson. Coleman. Mrs. watson. Coleman. No. Mr. womack. Mr. womack, I. Mr. zink. Mr. zink, I. Mr. shreeve. Mr. shreeve, I. >> are there any members wishing to record their vote or change their vote? Gentleman from florida. >> Mr. diaz-balart, I. >> the gentleman from california. >> yes. >> Mr. calvert, I.

▶ 5:30:34>> the gentleman from mississippi already voted. No. You just seem to be standing a lot. So. Gentlelady from florida. I do not believe gentlelady is recorded. >> Mr. schultz votes no. >> gentlelady from minnesota. >> miss mccollum. >> no gentleman from california. >> Mr. levin votes no. >> gentleman from alabama. >> reported as. >> Mr. aderholt, I.

▶ 5:31:05>> are there any other members seeking to vote or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tally. >> the amendment. I would like to correct. Yes, yes, because it urges at least.

▶ 5:31:56>> on this vote, the age of 31. The nos are 27. The amendment in the second degree is adopted. We now return to the amendment offered by Mr. mervine, as amended. I do anybody, any members, wish to speak to that? If not, gentleman is recognized for one minute to close. >> I just want to take. 30s Mr.

▶ 5:32:27Hoyer, um, you were the first phone call that I received when I was elected six years ago. Your commitment to made in america, your depth of knowledge and the dignity that you bring to the office is something that I admire and look to as a mentor, I thank you everything that you have done for domestic manufacturing, our country and this district, and your perspective of history and for sharing. Uh, with that, I urge you to vote for this amendment again.

▶ 5:32:54I'm standing up for the american, uh, steel industry and american jobs. I yield back and a voice vote, please. >> any member can call for a recorded vote, but I would reinforce the wisdom of your suggestion. Uh, questions now on the amendment offered by Mr. murvin. All those in favor, say aye. >> aye. >> all opposed? Say no. >> no. >> the opinion of the chair.

▶ 5:33:23The ayes have it, and the amendment is adopted. >> good job. >> uh, the gentlelady from washington. Is she here? Not here right now. >> the amendment. >> we'll move on, but we'll come back. But if somebody could alert her, it's time for her amendment to be coming up. >> lisa burgess owens.

▶ 5:33:57>> uh, gentleman from maryland. Mr. ivey is recognized for the purpose of an amendment. >> I thank you, Mr. chairman. I ask to dispense with the reading of the amendment. >> I thank the gentleman. The reading of the amendment is dispensed with. Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for remarks on his amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.

▶ 5:34:18Um, this amendment would restore collective bargaining rights for unionized federal employees affected by the march 27th executive order entitled exclusions from federal labor management relations program. This executive order basically extended the national security exemption to nearly all departments and agencies, and as a result, about 700,000 federal employees contracts have been voided.

▶ 5:34:46Um, in the wake of that administrative executive order. Uh, this is an amendment that parallels the language of h.r. 2550, which was offered by, um. Mr. golden. I think lead co-sponsors were joyce lalota and valadao, uh, from this committee. And it passed the house 231 to 195. Um, it's in the senate, but it hasn't moved.

▶ 5:35:12So we're asking, uh, to move this language just to make sure this moves forward. Um, and to, uh, restore these voting rights for these federal government employees. Uh, you know, I represent a district and Mr. hoyer shares another big part of it where we have, um, tens of thousands of federal government employees, many of whom were impacted, all of whom were impacted by that executive order.

▶ 5:35:38Uh, and these people are hard working, patriotic americans who dedicated their lives to serving the united states of america. Many of them are veterans who decided to continue their public service and patriotic activity by becoming federal government employees, uh, after they had left military service. Uh, and, you know, I think it's important to make sure we treat all these federal government employees fairly.

▶ 5:36:04One of the big attractions that, uh, brings people to the federal government. Yes. Patriotism to some extent, um, job security, but, you know, making sure for them that they have some sort of stability with respect to what kind of work environment they're going into. And that's been totally upset by things that have happened in the past year or so.

▶ 5:36:27Uh, and, you know, go back to this again, I've really been focused on the impact on science and technology in the united states, um, much of which is pushed forward by federal government employees at nasa and other agencies. And I know congressman strong has a strong interest in this as well because of the assets in his district.

▶ 5:36:50But, um, one of the issues that came out the other day, uh, in the washington post was an article entitled american science is rapidly shrinking. Uh, and there was another one that was brought to my attention by, uh, one of my former colleagues from the homeland security committee, a republican. And it's entitled what the chinese robot that ran half a marathon says about america. Now, I had to pick the marathon one because of our marathon champion, uh, over there from the other day.

▶ 5:37:18I'm still marveling at the fact that you could run a marathon in three hours, show up the next day in heels, no less. Um, and I commend you again for that effort, but, um, but seriously, on this point, um, let me read just a part of this. I know it's the washington post and everybody, we used to assume it was a liberal, uh, outlet, but it's more like the wall street journal these days.

▶ 5:37:45But in any event, uh, chinese firms have held roughly two thirds of the world's effective robotics patents, more than 190,000 of them as of 2024. The special competitive studies project, an initiative set up by former google ceo eric schmidt, sees the united states holding only a narrow edge in frontier innovation while lagging on industrial capacity and talent pipeline.

▶ 5:38:08The talent pipeline is being very much affected by what we're doing with respect to hiring and the treatment of our federal government employees, and it's certainly undermining our efforts to build and maintain recruitment and retention is being seriously hurt. Now, I'll finish with this. If china's running robots aren't scary enough, consider what's happening in the russia ukraine war.

▶ 5:38:30Last week, ukrainian president zelensky announced for the first capture of a russian held position exclusively by unmanned platforms. We're falling behind on all of these fronts and the military applications are critical. Uh, so I ask that we move forward with this language. It's bipartisan. It's been accepted by the house.

▶ 5:38:51We want to make sure that whatever the outcome of of this on the senate side, that we still have a chance to get this done so we can preserve the protections that we put in place, uh, to bring and retain top talent to the federal government workforce. So I urge, uh, support of this amendment. And with that, I yield back. >> thank you. Gentlemen. The gentleman from ohio, Mr. joyce, is recognized to address the amendment.

▶ 5:39:22>> yes. Thank you, Mr. chairman. I oppose this amendment. Labor relations, collective bargaining work should be done by the education and workforce committee and the oversight committee. Moreover, this issue is being litigated. We should let the courts do their work for those reasons. I oppose this amendment. >> thank. Gentlemen. The gentleman from maryland, Mr. hoyer, is recognized to address the amendment. >> I appreciate the chairman's remarks, but we do this all the time. None of the funds, which is not authorizing on the bill. It simply saying, and I.

▶ 5:39:48I tremble at the temerity of us to say you can't spend funds. Mr. vogt would not appreciate that at all. None of the funds can be spent to violate a contract. Now, very frankly, that's not necessarily the position of the president of the united states, that you can't violate contracts.

▶ 5:40:15Does he have the ability to do it because most contracts are at severable, at the convenience of the government, but people who do business with us and the unions themselves, who do business with us in terms of negotiating with the government.

▶ 5:40:38Had reached contracts, and those contracts will expire and the government will have to renegotiate. The unions will have to renegotiate, uh, and they don't negotiate, as you know, for wages, because that is still with us. We still make that decisions. And you turn down an amendment. Of course, I suggested to raise them by 3.1%.

▶ 5:41:04Uh, but this amendment simply says that we're not going to spend money to abrogate contracts that were entered into voluntarily by the government, voluntarily by the unions, that set the parameters of work, uh, and relationships between employer and employee for a specified period of time. But those contracts will expire. But that wasn't good enough for the president, so he simply abrogated them.

▶ 5:41:32And so people who presumably relied on the contract in some way or another to either come to work, stay at work and not leave work, and the president simply said, those contracts are no longer any good. As of march 26th, 2025.

▶ 5:41:54Uh, we don't say that they have to enter into a particular contract in the future, either the unions or the employer in this place, the government. Uh, all we say is these contracts should remain in effect. Uh, and if the gentleman will yield to me, you indicated this passed the house and who supported that? >> on this on. This committee? Joyce.

▶ 5:42:26>> joyce. Uh, were the three on this committee? Yes. Who, uh, co-sponsors with, uh, congressman golden? >> well, they made a good judgment at that time. Uh. I urge the committee to adopt this amendment. >> thank you. Gentlemen. The gentlelady from florida, miss wasserman schultz, recognized for remarks on the amendment. >> gentlemen.

▶ 5:43:01>> thank you to both of the chairman. 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 that simple. Anything less is a clear affront to the rule of law that undercuts our national credibility.

▶ 5:43:20And 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 ripping away the hard earned rights of federal employees. They're just the first in line.

▶ 5:43:45Trump and republicans want to gut unions and silence the voices of working people, so their billionaire corporate friends can get the final say. If 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 nonunion. Most importantly, it will mean higher costs and declining quality of government services for all americans.

▶ 5:44:12Anybody who has interfaced with a federal agency this year has encountered more delays and denials than ever. My constituents are furious, and I'm sure many of yours are, too. That's the direct result of project 2025 efforts to leave federal workers, quote, traumatically affected, unquote, according to omb director russ vought and the civil servants who have been pushed out or forced into retirement will not be replaced in their roles.

▶ 5:44:37You think people will line up to work at federal agencies once trump takes away all the benefits? After the way hard working career employees have been treated by unqualified and disqualified political appointees, there's apparently plenty of money to spend on signing bonuses for unvetted ice hires, but not enough to fulfill our promises to people who have dedicated their careers to serving the public at other agencies. Americans can't afford the consequences of the republican purge of public servants. That's why I proudly support this amendment.

▶ 5:45:07Commend the gentleman for offering it and yield back. >> oh my god. >> thank the gentlelady. Uh, is there any other members seeking recognition? Speak on the amendment. If there's no further debate, the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close on his amendment. >> thank you again, Mr. chairman. I want to emphasize this is not a partizan provision. Uh, the house floor vote was 231 to 195.

▶ 5:45:36So there was a good deal of republican support with respect to this legislation. And I'll close with this is um um, congressman golden's floor remarks. Um, just briefly, this majority includes democrats and republicans who recognize that collective bargaining is not a partizan issue. It's about fairness, dignity, dignity on the job and a voice in the workplace. I think that's very well put.

▶ 5:46:05I think it's an amendment that deserves bipartisan support. And I ask that you support this amendment. >> thank the gentleman. The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from maryland. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say no opinion of the chair. The nos have it. Recorded. Vote has been requested. Sufficient support has been demonstrated. The clerk will call the roll.

▶ 5:46:36>> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt. No, Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar, I. Mr. alford, Mr. Mr. amodei no. Mrs. bice. Mrs. bice. No. Mr. bishop. >> yes, Mr. >> bishop, I. Mr. calvert. Mr. calvert no. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. No. Mr. case. Mr. case. I. Mr. cisco. Mr. cisco. No. Mr. klein. Mr. klein. No. Mr. cloud. Mr. clyburn. Mr.

▶ 5:47:06Clyburn, I. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. No. Mr. cole. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cuellar. Mr. cuellar, I miss dean. Miss. Delauro. Miss delauro, I. Mr. diaz-balart, Mr. diaz-balart. No. Mr. edwards. Mr. edwards. No. Mr. ellzey. Miss. Escobar, miss. Escobar, I. Mr. espaillat, Mr.

▶ 5:47:38Espaillat, I. Mr. fleischmann. Mr. fleischmann. No. Miss. Frankel. Miss. Frankel, I. Mr. franklin. Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest. Mr. guest. No. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. Mr. carter, I. Doctor harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson. Mrs. henson. No. Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. iv. Mr. ivy. I. Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce. No. Miss.

▶ 5:48:09Kaptur. Miss. Kaptur. I. Mr. lalota. Mr. lalota. I miss. Lee, miss lee. I miss. Ludlow. Miss lee votes. No. >> no, no. Do you want to be I. >> miss lee. >> that's right. >> miss lee votes. I miss letlow, Mr. levin. Mr. levin, I miss malloy. Miss malloy.

▶ 5:48:39No, miss mccullum, miss mccullum, I miss ming, miss ming, I, Mr. molenaar. Mr. molenaar. No. Mr. moore. >> yes, Mr. >> morelli. Mr. morelli, I. Mr. mervyn. Mr. mervyn. I. Mr. newhouse. Mr. newhouse. No. Miss. Perez. Miss. Perez, I miss. Pingree. Miss. Pingree, I.

▶ 5:49:11Mr. pocan, Mr. pocan, I. Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley, I. Mr. reschenthaler. Mr. reschenthaler. No. Mr. rogers. Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong. Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres. Mrs. torres, I miss. Underwood, miss underwood, I. Mr. valadao.

▶ 5:49:41Miss. Wasserman. Schultz. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz. No. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz. I. Miss. Watson. Coleman, Mrs. watson. Coleman, I. Mr. womack. Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink. Mr. zink. No. Mr. shreeve. Mr. shreeve. No. >> are there any members wishing to vote or change their vote? The gentleman from california.

▶ 5:50:11>> Mr. valadao? No. >> gentleman from texas. >> Mr. ellzey? >> no gentleman from missouri. >> Mr. alford, no. >> gentlelady from pennsylvania. >> miss dean, I. >> are there other members wishing to change their vote or cast their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tally.

▶ 5:51:09On this vote. The yeas are 29. The nos are 31. The amendment is not adopted. Gentlelady from washington. Miss perez is recognized for the purpose of an amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I have an amendment at the desk and I ask that the reading be dispensed with. >> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her amendment. >> uh, thank you, Mr. chair.

▶ 5:51:34Um, one of the things that I talked about last year, but I think is worth repeating, is that of the couples in the lowest tax bracket in this country, only 23% of whom file their taxes for free. That means the vast majority of them are paying tax preparation services. The lowest income people in our country are paying for a service that they're required to fulfill.

▶ 5:51:57Um, working people often don't have the time, uh, to navigate burdensome filing processes, uh, and the money to pay somebody else to do it for them. And I will tell you, this is terrifying. Um, I have my husband and I have spent a lot of time looking at these forms and asking ourselves, what the hell are they asking us here? And I know that that is a very common experience in america today.

▶ 5:52:20Um, the underlying problem, um, the underlying bill prohibits the irs from developing or providing taxpayers with a free public electronic retirement return filing service, uh, option without approval from congress. The problem with that clause in the underlying bill we're voting on is that the irs has already developed a free filing service option, and people really like it. This was really popular in the states where it was rolled out.

▶ 5:52:50Um, mine was one of them, uh, many of you here also in 2025, it was rolled out. Um, and according to the g I o taxpayers who use this direct file service reported that it was an easier tax preparation method and that they, that they then which they had previously used. And 90% of respondents said that it increased their trust in the irs. Let me tell you and remind you, all that trust in congress right now is at 10%.

▶ 5:53:18It's at 10%. And this is one of the bills. This service is one that improved trust in the irs. You know how hard that is to do. This was a resoundingly popular and effective service that we've already paid for that we could, um, in this body, choose to, to provide again and save money for working americans who are trying to fulfill their patriotic duty to file their taxes.

▶ 5:53:45Uh, in 2025, uh, the direct file program saved $11.6 million for families and tax prep fees, not accounting for the time they saved or for the refunds they got, or the increase in refunds they got because they were their returns were, you know, properly filed. Um, this is, this was a good thing.

▶ 5:54:05So, um, if, if, uh, so, so this, this service was not pulled because of the cost to develop or administer, that was a sunk cost. Um, this wasn't, uh, this, this clause in the underlying bill was not about making services easier for our constituents.

▶ 5:54:26Um, but I will leave you with one question and this little factoid, uh, just yesterday, quarterly lobbying disclosures indicated that intuit, publisher of the popular, quote unquote, popular tax preparation software, turbotax, spent nearly $1 million last year in lobbying fees for this body. Um, just a little factoid. Um, filing your taxes is not optional. Uh, it's an american duty and you shouldn't have to pay tax preparers to fulfill it.

▶ 5:54:56Um, we shouldn't backtrack. One of the most popular services that we've developed in this body in recent memory, and I urge my colleagues to support the amendment. >> thank the gentle lady, the gentleman from ohio, Mr. joyce, is recognized to address the amendment. >> uh, thank you, Mr. chairman. I oppose this amendment. Congress did not give irs approval to move forward with the costly and unnecessary direct file program. I'm uncomfortable, and my colleague should be too.

▶ 5:55:24Given the irs sweeping control and authority to not only be the tax collector, but prepare and enforce her all at once. Estimates have shown the direct file program was more than 15 times more expensive than originally projected. These resources could have been spent more wisely to improve existing taxpayer services and improve core technology services. This amendment would strike a provision that simply requires the irs to carry out activities for which they've been authorized by congress. For these reasons, I oppose this amendment.

▶ 5:55:55>> thank you. Gentlemen. The gentleman from maryland, Mr. hoyer, is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you very much, Mr. chairman. Um, let me say, and you will have heard it here, uh, the analysis of this tax season is going to be a very negative one.

▶ 5:56:12Uh, we have totally untrained people who have been moved, large numbers of people who have been moved because the irs, uh, personnel were reduced so drastically, 20%, uh, in a short period of time with Mr. musk's chainsaw.

▶ 5:56:29Uh, and I'm just saying, you're going to hear it and it's going to be, uh, probably in three, four months where the analysis comes up. Uh, we're going to see that this tax season was not affected, uh, very efficiently, uh, on behalf of the american people.

▶ 5:56:55Number two, you're going to see that the services have been substantially undermined, that the call times and wait times, I should say, are going to be a lot longer, a lot less calls answered and service, uh, undermined when, when, when you say, Mr. chairman, that, uh, irs didn't ask us. Somewhat ironic. This administration doesn't ask us about anything. Uh.

▶ 5:57:21The fact of the matter, they didn't ask us. And I won't go through the litany of things they have done on their own. Um, but the direct file system essentially was a system that was to help those least able. Now you've all called and said, you know, I want some information.

▶ 5:57:46Well, hit two, and then two tells you to hit five, and then five tells you to hit nine. And these are folks, I don't do my own taxes. Now I have a very simple time. I've got three things on my, uh, places of income. That's it. I have no stocks or bonds, no investments that I'm making money from, etc. Etc. So I have a razor, but I can't do it because I want to make sure it's right.

▶ 5:58:17Now I could spend the time to do it. Uh, and mine's pretty cheap to do relatively speaking. Um, because it's simple, but we have a lot of people in this country don't fall in that category. After all, I have a, just like many of you, I have a degree. I have a graduate degree. Da da da da da ought to be able to fill it out, bang, bang, bang. And I'll tell you, I, I look at it and I say, what do they mean by that? What, what are they looking for? Um, and that's, that's us.

▶ 5:58:45My friend Mr. harris is laughing and he's got more degrees than the same number of degrees. But he's, he's a very well-educated guy. And we both look at that and say, geez, oh, flip, how do our constituents know what the heck is going on? So what irs did said, we're going to make sure you know what's going on because we're going to help you. And they didn't rush into it. They said we're going to have I think it was ten, but it may have been more ten states.

▶ 5:59:14Try it out, see whether it works. So it wasn't headlong. 94% of the people came back, said, thank god, somebody assuring me that when I filed my taxes. Right. And you guys are all afraid about these guys and guns coming to their doors and say, pay your taxes or else we're going to shoot you, apparently because of the gun thing.

▶ 5:59:36Uh, but the fact is that this is a system that says to people, you want to voluntarily pay your taxes, we're going to help you. Now, very few people think that we may tell them we're from the federal government. We're here to help you, that we mean it. In this case, they found out, we met it. One of the first things the administration did was to eliminate it. And there was a lot of lobbying about that.

▶ 6:00:05Now I pay for mine. And very frankly, I have the resources to pay for it. A lot of people don't have those. And then they say, well, we'll do it free for you. Aha. Bait and switch. I don't accuse everybody doing that. That's not the case. But there is a significant part of that. So. We're going to lose this just like we've lost all the rest.

▶ 6:00:34But direct file was a way to say to americans, you may be only paying $500, $1,000, $500 in taxes, but we're going to help you do it. So you're not worried that you're making a mistake. That's what they did. It was a success. We should not jettison. Please support this amendment. >> thank you. Gentlemen. The gentlelady from connecticut, Mr. laurel lee, recognized to address the amendment.

▶ 6:01:04>> thank you, Mr. chairman. And I just want to compliment the the gentlelady for this bill. I think we had a discussion about this in the last go round. I support this amendment and the direct file program. By the way, can I just just step back for a second? I just want to say hello to, uh, free dc. Thank you for being here, guys. You're great. So, um, americans collectively spend more than 7,000,000,000 hours, $133 billion, preparing taxes every year.

▶ 6:01:34The irs reports that the average taxpayer spends about 13 hours and $270 to prepare their taxes. Nearly every other advanced economy in the world has a free filing option. We are the outlier in the worst way. During the last administration, democrats created the direct file program, rolled out the pilot to 12 states, helping more than 140,000 americans file their taxes.

▶ 6:02:03In total, they claimed more than $90 million in refunds, all while saving roughly $5.6 million in tax filing fees. Um. Connecticut was supposed to join the 2025 tax filing season, but then the trump administration chose to stop the program, bowing to the multibillion dollar tax prep industry and their army of lobbyists. Let's talk. Turbotax is our colleague.

▶ 6:02:32Did h&r block they make a ton of money, uh, in this effort. And you know what? If anybody has not, uh, maybe the president thinks it's a hoax. Uh, our affordability is an issue. Talk to the american people. Don't talk to billionaires and the millionaires. Affordability is a big issue today. People live paycheck to paycheck. Why is it that we don't want to help families? How can we help them put money back in their pocket? That's what this is about.

▶ 6:03:00Um, it with regard to connecticut, I had direct file, uh, been an option. Connecticut taxpayers would have saved $87 million in filing fees. Why don't we want to help taxpayers? But heaven help us if we cannot help middle class, working class families with the filing costs. Unfortunately, they are not your buddies. Tesla and palantir. And actually, those guys don't have to pay any taxes. They're not doing it. These folks are paying taxes.

▶ 6:03:32And what we want to do is to add to their difficulty and say, hey, you got to go to these companies that are making a fortune when you can do direct file and you could be saving money and you could spend that money somewhere else, maybe buy groceries, maybe help pay the utility bills, maybe deal with rent and housing, you know, and, and prescription drug costs here. Look, americans overwhelmingly support a free tax filing option.

▶ 6:03:59We should join the rest of the developed world in providing an easy, free and reliable way for people to file their taxes. I encourage my colleagues to support this amendment. Thank you. And I yield back. >> thank you. Gentlelady gentleman from wisconsin. Mr. pocan is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman, and thank you, miss perez, for introducing this last year.

▶ 6:04:25We had this amendment up as well, and I think I took my five minutes and asked anyone on the other side of the aisle to give a reason why this was a good idea, and I believe the only conversations I had were with miss delauro and Mr. hoyer, because no one on the other side of the aisle wanted to argue on it. I did hear what our subcommittee chairman said. Um, and that sounds like something I might read in the intuit, you know, annual report as a reason.

▶ 6:04:53Um, but the reality is we've already paid that money out for the thing. So if it costs a little more, okay, but we've paid that money and now we're shelving the project. Are we trying to make the irs, the pentagon? You know, like I know they do that quite often and they failed eight audits. But we've got a program that works that saves people millions and millions of dollars. The average person, hours of their time.

▶ 6:05:21And, you know, I did a little research since last year. And it's not just that this was popular. I think it's already been said 94% of the people who use it said it's excellent or above average. 70% of people said they would use it if they were eligible and it wasn't rolled out across the country. That's a high. It's a big number of people that would use this.

▶ 6:05:42But the only thing that seems to make sense is I look at intuit and hr block, h&r block, and I look at how much they spend on lobbying the last two decades into it. $43.3 million. H&r block $42 million in one year, intuit made $12.7 billion.

▶ 6:06:02If you take that 20 years of lobbying and put that cost into one year's profit, the 12.7 billion, that's what's called 17 thousandths. To make it understandable, that means it cost them $0.17 for every thousand dollars they made. That is called a pretty freaking good investment, $0.17 per thousand.

▶ 6:06:32That's the only thing that makes sense. So if anyone has a different reason other than folks that make a lot of money off the people that were asking to pay their taxes, I would love to hear it once again. I will be glad to yield time to anyone who wants to explain why we've already spent the money on this program, why we are now shelving it and not allowing the american people to use it. It's popular.

▶ 6:07:02It saves money. It saves people time. So I will open it up for anyone who would like. I would be glad to yield time. If I'm missing it. I don't hear real well. Just go. Just raise your hand and I can see it. That's okay too. I'll. Anyone you know, if we really. Just think about it.

▶ 6:07:30If we honestly don't have a reason, why wouldn't we do this right? And I don't want to think it's because intuit spent $43.3 million on lobbying or the h&r block spent 42 million. But I can't think of any other answer why we wouldn't allow the american people to do this.

▶ 6:07:52You know, one of the things I love about marine sitting on the committee with her is she's common sense, pragmatic talks about people who bluntly are like us, who are not the richest people in the world who came here and what we need. And, you know, the people I know, uh, it's a lot of work. No one enjoys filling out our tax forms. They're complicated.

▶ 6:08:11But if we've put the money into it, this is our opportunity to let the american people have a little easier way to give us their money, our taxes that are due. So I got 58 seconds. I want to make sure I didn't miss anyone. I will yield as much time as I have left. No one. All right.

▶ 6:08:41Well, I, I just hope that we keep this in in mind as we take this vote, because this is one where I really I mean, we're throwing away the millions and millions of dollars that we put into putting this together to not help our constituents. It's really that simple. I urge a yes vote. And last chance, 22 seconds. All right, Mr. chair, I guess that's it, I yield back. Thank you. >> thank you gentlemen.

▶ 6:09:11Gentlelady from nevada. Miss lee is recognized to address the amendment. >> uh. >> thank you, Mr. chair. Um. >> this, uh, first of all, I think the gentlelady from washington for this practical amendment and this whole debate just reminds me of the saying snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

▶ 6:09:34I mean, my friends on the other side of the aisle past their won their purely partizan, big, beautiful bill projecting to refund the average american $1,000, when in fact it's about $350. You now have a tool that allows people to file their taxes and not spend money filing it.

▶ 6:10:00Do you know the average cost of for a taxpayer to file taxes? Just a simple tax form is 200 to $300. So that refund that you gave the american public is gone. You just handed it away to tax preparers.

▶ 6:10:23And when you're sitting there thinking about americans who are being crushed with housing costs, crushed with increased tax, gas prices, crushed with not being able to afford childcare, and you passed a bill to give them a tax refund.

▶ 6:10:45And now you're saying we're going to take it back because we don't want to basically make life simple for your average joe american who is filing their tax forms. And my friend from ohio, the chairman, um, I love you to death, but when you basically said one of your reasons for opposing this is that we are we spent too much developing it.

▶ 6:11:20It's, it breaks, you know, just it seems so nonsensical that we've already spent the money. We have the tool to make life more affordable for americans and we're just blowing it. And like I said, you know, congratulations, you're on your ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. And with that, I yield.

▶ 6:11:52>> excuse me, is there further debate on the amendment? Seeing none, uh, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close on her amendment. >> um, I don't think it's. You know, I'm not here to assume malfeasance or bad acting on any side, but I think it is, um, very, very easy, uh, deceptively easy to find yourself in sort of a social silo where you're not hanging out with people who are, um, struggling to file their taxes themselves, who are cussing the federal government, trying to

▶ 6:12:23Navigate these systems. Um, you know, maybe you grew up and your parents taught you how to do this stuff. Um, maybe you handle it for your kids. Maybe you've got a cousin who does it for you. Um, but I'm telling you that the vast majority of americans, um, do not feel grateful to us for having given them this great gift. They are angry. A that they're doing it, then they're angry.

▶ 6:12:44B we made it so complicated and c they're also angry, um, at yanking back, um, what the direct file program did, which was trying to make things right and fair by them providing a free filing service. I would love your support on this. Thank you so much for your, um, your consideration of the amendment. >> thank you. Gentlelady. The questions now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from washington. All those in favor say aye.

▶ 6:13:12All those opposed say no. Enthusiasm on both sides is overwhelming, but I think the nos have it. Roll call has been requested. Sufficient support has been demonstrated. The clerk will call the roll. Uh, just before you start, just so you know, we have two amendments left. We will obviously try to get at least one done. We'll kind of judge time. We don't have difficulties we had earlier.

▶ 6:13:38Uh, we will have to come back regardless to approve the six bills that we have allocations for. So just be aware of that. So once we do break, whether we've got one amendment that you will have to come back, come on back as quickly as you can. We'll get done as quickly as we can with that. Again. Clerk. Call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt, Mr. aderholt no, Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar, I. Mr. alford. Mr. alford no. Mr. amodei. Mr. amodei no. Mrs. bice. Mrs. bice no. Mr. bishop.

▶ 6:14:10Yes, Mr. bishop, I. Mr. calvert. Mr. calvert. No. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. No. Mr. case. Mr. case. I. Mr. eskamani. Mr. eskamani. No. Mr. klein. Mr. cloud. Mr. cloud. No. Mr. clyburn. Mr. clyburn, I. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. No. Mr. cole. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cuellar. Mr. cuellar. I miss dean, miss dean, I. Mr. miss. Delauro.

▶ 6:14:37I miss delauro, I, Mr. diaz-balart, Mr. diaz-balart. No. Mr. edwards. Mr. edwards. No. Mr. ellzey. Miss. Escobar, miss. Escobar, I. Mr. espaillat, Mr. espaillat, I. Mr. fleischmann. Mr. fleischmann. No. Miss. Frankel. Miss. Frankel, I. Mr. franklin. Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest. Mr. guest. No. Mr. carter. Mr. carter, I. Doctor.

▶ 6:15:08Harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson. Mrs. henson. No. Mr. hoyer. Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. ivy. Mr. ivy. I. Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce. No. Miss. Kaptur. Marcy kaptur. I. Mr. lalota. Mr. lalota. No. Miss lee. Miss lee, I miss. Letlow. Mr. levin. Mr. levin no. Mr.

▶ 6:15:40Levin votes. I miss malloy, miss malloy. No. Miss mccullum. Miss mccullum, I miss ming. Miss ming, I Mr. molenaar. Mr. molenaar. No. Mr. moore. Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli. Mr. morelli, I. Mr. mervyn. Mr. mervyn. I. Mr. newhouse. Mr. newhouse no. Miss. Perez. Miss. Perez, I miss. Pingree, miss. Pingree, I. Mr. pocan, Mr. pocan, I. Mr. quigley. Mr.

▶ 6:16:12Quigley, I. Mr. guy reschenthaler. Mr. rogers. Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong. Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres. Mrs. torres. Mrs. torres, I miss. Underwood, miss. Underwood, I. Mr. valadao. Mr. valadao. No. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz. I. Mrs. watson.

▶ 6:16:43Coleman, Mrs. watson. Coleman, I. Mr. womack. Mr. zink. Mr. shreeve. Mr. shreeve. No. >> do any members wish to record their vote or change their vote? Gentleman from virginia. >> Mr. klein votes no. >> gentleman from california. Oh. Did you. I'm sorry. Standing up. Let's see.

▶ 6:17:11Are there other members wishing to record or change their vote? I know there were quite a few that missed. Um, yeah. Here we go. How's the gentleman recorded, Mr. womack. >> Mr. womack? >> no gentleman from texas. >> Mr. ellzey? No.

▶ 6:17:42>> are there other members wishing to change or. Cast their vote? Looks like gabriel's bar. And gill is doing a good business today. Okay. The clerk will tally up while the clerk is doing that. Just looking ahead, uh, we have two amendments. My judgment is that Mr. harris will be pretty quick. Uh, so if we can, uh, Mr. president, we'll jump to that and come back.

▶ 6:18:12We're coming back anyway. >> I need to vote. >> well, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, but we had members that wanted to vote that could not stay. They were procedural votes. >> it's still voting. >> that is fine.

▶ 6:18:33Well, what I'm suggesting would actually save you time. We would get out of here quicker. So I'm going to make an executive decision on that. I think I have the authority to decide what amendments coming up. So the gentleman from maryland is recognized to. Well, we haven't finished. Let me just announce on this vote, their eyes are 28. The nose is 32. The amendment is not adopted.

▶ 6:19:02Uh, doctor harris is recognized for an amendment. >> thank you very much, Mr. chairman. I have an amendment at the desk, and I move that the amendment be considered read by. >> without objection, the amendment reading of the amendment is dispensed with. >> I don't. >> know if they have. >> a copy. >> do you have you distributed a copy of your amendment? >> yeah, yeah. It's one of the ones with the big late stamp on it, which which is a new thing this year. And I think Mr.

▶ 6:19:31Mervyns had a little late on it too, and better late than never, I guess. Oh well mine, mine did. I guess it was a message to me. Uh. >> I have it now, I have it. >> thank you very much. Uh. >> it is pretty brief because that's all. I will allow the gentleman to explain his amendment. >> thank you very briefly.

▶ 6:19:53We discussed this a little bit yesterday that because of the regulatory, uh, conditions for local small banks, uh, they are set to a $3 billion capitalization, including their holding company. Uh, that's again, the community banks are suffering. They just can't afford the regulations for the big banks, the too big to fail banks. This raises the limit. Yesterday it was 15 brought in at 12 today $12 billion. I think that's reasonable. I think that protects a lot of our local banks from the complaints.

▶ 6:20:23Probably all of you have heard that these local banks perform very important functions in our local communities. I don't want them to get taken over because of the regulatory burden of being considered, you know, treated like a large bank. So I would ask the body to approve the amendment and yield back. >> thank you. Gentlemen, gentlemen from ohio. Mr. joyce is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you. >> I appreciate the amendment from the gentleman from maryland in support. >> of mike.

▶ 6:20:52>> I appreciate the amendment from the gentleman from maryland and support its goals. As I said yesterday, we need to ensure that we are not creating a barbell banking system, but rather one that meets the needs of all banks big, regional and small. I appreciate the work doctor has done to consult with the authorizers on this amendment, and I'm happy to support it. >> gentleman from maryland. Mr. hoyer is recognized to address the amendment.

▶ 6:21:22>> well, I'm somewhat taken aback by the chairman's remarks. Uh, the my my chairman, uh, I'm surprised that unlike so many amendments that we were offering in the, you said were not within the ambit of our authority and were not appropriate. This is legislation on a bill. This is not none of the funds.

▶ 6:21:46This is this is authorizing authority or directive authority, uh, to reduce it. As I said, I'm sympathetic to the gentleman's amendment because I'm I've heard this from our small banks as well. And cdfi banks, but I will tell my friend that I'm with you. I think this figure may be too high. I don't know what the figure ought to be. Uh, I do know.

▶ 6:22:12However, having followed up from the first amendment, that there is some committee on the. There's some concern on the committee, at least on my side, that to the number they had suggested a figure 4 or 5 billion. I don't know whether that accomplishes the objective. And because of that, because, uh, this is legislation on a bill.

▶ 6:22:32Uh, I really think we at least ought to hear from the financial services committee as to what they think the proper level is, because I think the gentleman from maryland, as I said earlier, is correct. There is a problem and we ought to address it. I just don't know that this is the this figure may be too high. And that's what we hear from our side of the committee.

▶ 6:22:56So for that reason, uh, will be unable to support this amendment, notwithstanding the fact I think it is a problem. We ought to deal with it, but we ought to have more information. And I think the authorizing committee really ought to deal with it. >> uh, thank the gentleman. Uh, the gentlelady from minnesota is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you for yielding.

▶ 6:23:24I want to thank doctor harris for bringing this forward. And I don't know what the outcome of the amendment is going to be, but we've all heard from our community banks and from my community banks. I heard from my small businesses in particular. They're very concerned about what's going on. So this is going to help, uh, you know, with mortgages in my community, but it's really going to help our small businesses. I was just with them in minnesota last week too. They were asking for relief in this in this area.

▶ 6:23:50They were asking for it besides the banks and the banks hadn't put them up to it. They were just asking for it. So I thank the gentleman for bringing forward the amendment. I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close. >> uh, thank you very much. And, you know, to address the ranking member. Yeah, this is not a conventional way this should be done.

▶ 6:24:17We're doing a lot of stuff, not the conventional way right now, but this is something I just feel has to be done. A lot of the banks and the downstream recipients, the small businesses, the mortgage holders, they they are calling for this relief. So I would ask a support for the amendment. I yield back. >> thank the gentleman. The questions now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from maryland. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say no. >> no.

▶ 6:24:45>> in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the amendment is adopted. With that, we will, uh, the committee is in recess. Please come back right after. We'll deal with the one amendment we have left and then the allocations. >> jim.

▶ 7:37:15Give everybody a chance to get seated. Gentlelady from washington. Mrs. perez is recognized for an amendment. >> thank you. Thank you, Mr. chair. I have an amendment at the desk, and I ask that the clerk read the amendment. >> the amendment will be read. >> an amendment offered by miss perez in the appropriate place in the bill insert.

▶ 7:37:40None of the funds made available by this act may be used to implement, administer or enforce any action by a federal agency that would restrict access to mail in voting for eligible citizen voters in federal elections. >> gentlelady from washington. Gentlelady from washington is recognized to explain her amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chair.

▶ 7:37:58Um, I know that language can be a little bit confusing, but what this bill does is it says that none of the money that we are allocating today will be used to stop states who use vote by mail, um, from doing that. Um, I have never voted any other way. Washington state, we know that it is the gold standard. And I will also say as someone that, um, you know, has worked in the trades that most of us don't have time to stand around all day in a line waiting to vote.

▶ 7:38:27Um, if you're trying to pour concrete, if you're working on any kind of timeline, if you're trying to pay a mortgage, um, it's really, uh, not conducive to democracy in a representative body, um, being delivered here.

▶ 7:38:40Uh, if you're expecting people with young kids, um, with time cards, uh, to take the day off to vote, um, this amendment simply ensures that funding in this bill can't be used to implement, administer, or enforce any action by a federal agency that would restrict access to mail in voting for eligible citizens in federal elections. Um, as my colleague Mr. newhouse knows, uh, washington state has been using this for decades.

▶ 7:39:10Um, because you're so much older than me, dan, I think you can testify to that. Uh, uh, better than I can. Um, uh, mail in voting ensures that all americans, whether working shift jobs, raising young kids, or living in rural areas, have their ballots counted. Um, I also want to recognize these are the gold standard in election security.

▶ 7:39:32I, um, look, paper ballots, you know, on american made washington state grown paper, uh, where we grow trees for a living are the gold standard in election security. You cannot, you know, beam in with a satellite and mess with some numbers. Um, and people know that bad actors know that. Um, and actually, as a point of proof, um, I had two ballot boxes firebombed, uh, in the last election to try and destroy ballots. Spoiler alert it didn't really work. We were able to recover them.

▶ 7:40:01Um, but that shows you the lengths that you have to go and the scale, um, that it's just not feasible to influence in elections on a wide scale. Is it perfect? No. Um, but no voting system is, and this gets pretty dang close and we should not be impeding the rights and the access of, um, younger families of people working in the trades, rural americans from exercising their right to vote and doing so with paper ballots. Um, so thank you for your consideration of this bill.

▶ 7:40:31And with that, I will yield back. >> thank the gentlelady. And just to my friend, Mr. newhouse, now you know how they treat you when they know you're leaving. Uh, I recognize the gentleman from ohio, Mr. joyce, to respond to the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I appreciate my colleague's amendment. However, we are still obtaining information from the administration on the eo and its implementation.

▶ 7:40:53The usps is largely funded out of the postal service fund, a revolving fund, and the eo does not make clear how this will be supported, nor have we been asked to fund this eo or its directives. The fsg appropriation primarily focuses on mail for the blind and oversees voting. We do not fund usps operations. The appropriations meant to give the usps relief for specific mandated services that are provided for free.

▶ 7:41:18Given the unique structure and organization of the usps, implementation of the eo is really an issue that would be best discussed in authorizing committee setting. For these reasons, I oppose the amendment. >> thank you gentlemen. The gentleman from maryland, Mr. hoyer, is recognized to address the amendment. Here we go. >> well, for those of you who like to follow the president, he voted by mail ballot.

▶ 7:41:43Now, he said, I have a very important job. I can't leave the white house. And we know how infrequently he's at mar a lago. So it would have been impossible, perhaps, for him to vote, uh, in presence in mar a lago, or maybe he just didn't want to go out with the folks who vote. Uh, at the ballot box.

▶ 7:42:11Mail voting has been with us for a very, very long time. And if there had been fraud over the years of substantial. Our elections are largely run by volunteers. They may get paid for that day. They get paid a nominal sum for that day.

▶ 7:42:33But our elections are run by volunteers, mostly at the at the polling places, not so much in the central office. And therefore there are mistakes. But the good news in america there has been very little fraud. Has there been some. Of course there's been some fraud in the congress. There's been fraud in the senate.

▶ 7:42:59There's been fraud in the administration, not all administrations, because it's run by human beings. They're imperfect, and they try to get sometimes advantages that are not consistent with rules. But the fact of the matter is that.

▶ 7:43:21Numerous lawyers, accountants, election experts have looked at this system and think it is not one that has consequential misdeeds perpetrated in the course of an election. Those are the facts. And those were the facts.

▶ 7:43:44When the president alleged the election had been stolen and had some 60 cases heard in many multiple jurisdictions, some by trump appointed lawyers, some by biden or obama, or maybe even clinton lawyers, judges. And what we want to do is have more people voting, not less.

▶ 7:44:07And mail balloting as the president so amply demonstrated, is a way that if you have reasons that it's difficult for you to get to the polls, that you're out of town, or you simply don't want to be in the crush of a line that you have to wait in a half an hour, maybe because you just have trouble standing.

▶ 7:44:35Mail balloting has been a part of our election system for a long time, and some states use only mail balloting. It's oregon only and washington, washington only. Dan. Yeah, they only use that because it facilitates the ease with which people can get to the ballot box through the mail.

▶ 7:45:00Now, the president utilized that he was for it in one of the elections. You guys on your side of the aisle thought maybe this was okay. One of the reasons for that was you found out in ballots. We were we were ahead of the game.

▶ 7:45:20Uh, and in my district, certainly, uh, four years ago, uh, it's, I guess six years ago now, there were more republicans at the polls than there were democrats. And the democrats voted by mail a lot. This will preclude people from having easy access to exercising their franchise.

▶ 7:45:49And I think the president I'm surprised he's in mar a lago a lot. I'm surprised he didn't vote in person. If he wants to take the position that voting by mail should not occur. Talk is cheap. If you really think that's a bad system, then you ought not to use it yourself.

▶ 7:46:16And what the gentlelady is saying is we're not we don't want any money spent in this bill. And I'm. I was the author, by the way, of the election assistance commission. Bob ney and I from ohio. Bob ney from ohio, uh, from the administration house administration committee. When I was the ranking member, he was the chairman. Uh, we authored that bill to make sure that the hanging chads did not happen again and we had better technology, etc. Etc.

▶ 7:46:44So I would urge the adoption of this amendment in the conviction that we want to enable voters to have the easiest access to the ballot that they can have and express their opinions. That's what democracy is about.

▶ 7:47:05Uh, and I urge us to continue to commit to using that option that people want to use. And I yield back. >> thank the gentleman. The gentlelady from connecticut, Mr. laura, is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. And again, we thank the gentlelady for introducing this amendment.

▶ 7:47:34Uh, I want to start by noting first and foremost, uh, president trump, who has crusaded against mail in voting for years, calling it mail in cheating, quote, also votes by mail. He said that he can do it, quote, because I am the president, quote and quote, I have a lot of different things to do. End quote.

▶ 7:47:58Height of hypocrisy that a man who voted by mail himself is now trying to limit that right for everyone else. His reasoning is transparent to anyone with eyes he claims, with no evidence that it is because of rampant fraud and there is none.

▶ 7:48:17Now, I would ask my colleagues in california, in nevada, utah and washington state if they view their own election, um as mail in cheating, seeing as they were elected in states that allow where all elections to be conducted entirely by mail.

▶ 7:48:42In california, there are seven republicans, two are on this committee. Colorado for republicans, hawaii. No. Republicans. Nevada, one republican, one on our committee. Oregon, one republican. Utah for republicans. The entire delegation, one on our committee. Vermont. No. Republicans and washington, two republicans. Um, and one on this committee, uh, here.

▶ 7:49:11So the truth is that president trump's wants to limit access to the ballot box to keep himself and republicans in power that is anti-democratic and against the values that this nation was built on, values that have sustained our democracy for 250 years. This administration has an established track record of discriminating against states and local governments based solely on who they voted for.

▶ 7:49:44Last fall, the administration canceled $53 million in grants to organizations in my state working on clean energy projects, part of nearly $8 billion that was canceled for projects in 16 states. All states that voted for the president's opponent in the last election.

▶ 7:50:06The president has also withheld disaster relief from democratic states, approving only 23% of requests from states with democratic governors, 90% of requests from states with republican governors. This is political retaliation, pure and simple. We cannot allow the president to continue playing partizan games with our elections.

▶ 7:50:30The american people are stuck in a cost of living crisis, made worse by the reckless actions of this administration. President trump knows he has failed and that the american people will hold him and republicans accountable at the ballot box this fall. His attempts to escape this accountability, curtail the right to vote, will fail.

▶ 7:50:53And I ask my colleagues who are on this committee who are in states that have all of mail of voting, if they think that their elections were illegal and that whether or not that they really should be sitting in this institution, as a matter of fact, they should. They were elected. They were legally elected. That is the fact.

▶ 7:51:22And we should not lose track of that. We cannot curtail the right for people to be able to vote. It is a founding principle of this nation. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and I yield back. >> thank you. Gentlelady, the gentleman from california, Mr. levin's, recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. Mr.

▶ 7:51:50Speaker, I rise in support of this amendment, and I just want to start with some data from the heritage foundation. Hardly a liberal source. They maintain a database of proven voter fraud cases all across the country. Analysis of that database show that over decades and across literally billions of ballots, cast cases involving fraudulent mail ballots are extraordinarily rare, amounting to a tiny fraction of total votes.

▶ 7:52:16In utah, a state that conducts elections primarily by mail, a recent legislative audit reviewed more than 2 million ballots cast in 2023 and 2024 and identified two two out of 2 million that were problematic. Utah voters themselves have reported extraordinarily high confidence in the integrity of their elections. They've mailed ballots to voters for years. Nevada has done the same. They're not experimental systems.

▶ 7:52:42They're established systems that are used in democratic and republican controlled states. And let's be clear about who uses them. Active duty military stationed overseas, their families, seniors, voters with disabilities, rural americans who live far from a polling place, shift workers who can't leave a job during voting hours. So it's not about partizanship partizanship. It's about access.

▶ 7:53:05And in states all across the country, florida, arizona, pennsylvania, my home of california, tens of millions of voters, republican voters, democratic voters, they cast ballots by mail with virtually no problems anywhere across the country. That's a matter of public record. So this is just about preserving an option that states already administer under their own laws, and states use safeguard safeguards as they administer the laws.

▶ 7:53:31Signature verification, ballot tracking, secure barcoded envelopes, chain of custody procedures. These are standard practices across states that use mail in voting. And when state officials again, republican democratic officials testify, they consistently describe these systems as secure and workable. The leaders in this body have acknowledged that they say certain states handle it well. Certain states have strong systems in place.

▶ 7:53:58So the question then becomes one of consistency. And if a state system with these safeguards is considered secure in one place, it's difficult, if not impossible, to argue that the same safeguards are inherently insecure somewhere else. I think we should also be clear that mail voting is widely used, including by prominent public officials of both parties. As has been said ad nauseam, including the president of the united states himself. It underscores a basic point it's not a fringe practice.

▶ 7:54:27It's a mainstream method of voting that tens of millions rely on. So it comes down to a simple principle do we trust states to run their own elections using systems that they have built, that they have tested, that they have administered over time? Or do we continue down this road of trying to take away a lawful option that tens of millions of eligible voters use? I think we need to keep faith with the voters who depend on that option.

▶ 7:54:54We need to respect the role of the states in administering elections under the constitution. I yield support, I urge support, and I yield back. >> thank you, gentlemen, gentleman from new york. Mr. morelli is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I appreciate Mr. joyce's comments, but I do want to talk about the executive order which the president issued, which is unconstitutional, illegal, and is unserious.

▶ 7:55:23And I just would refer everyone to article one, section four of the united states constitution, 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. It's pretty clear the president of the united states has no role to play. Constitution says it.

▶ 7:55:49So an executive order from a president which purports to take on other responsibilities, duties and powers that the constitution doesn't give them is unserious. And actually, the executive order is unserious for so many other reasons. It calls on department of homeland security to use one database. It calls on the united states postal service to use another database which doesn't even exist.

▶ 7:56:12Um, the truth is that we need in this moment not to rely on an executive order, not to wait for someone to do an analysis of an executive order, which has as much force of law as my six year old grandson, gabriel, who might write an executive order and pass it off about elections because he doesn't have the power to do it. The truth is, president trump has demonized mail in voting for reasons that are entirely unclear.

▶ 7:56:40In fact, as people have said, he chose to utilize that himself even though he was in florida during early voting. For much of the time, early voting was going on. And for people who would say, well, the president can't go to a polling place, you know, security issues, etc. But somehow he did manage to find time to go to a ufc mixed martial arts championship bout. Um, apparently you can't mail that in, so you actually have to attend. Um, but but the truth is it's unserious. But it's, it's it's more than that.

▶ 7:57:07It's darker than that in that this is an attempt, by the way, he's done no research. He doesn't even know how many people are republicans vote by mail versus democrats. He's just gone off on trying to make sure he he cast aspersions on a form of voting because he has the emotional maturity of a five year old and simply cannot, cannot get to the point where he can acknowledge he lost the 2020 election.

▶ 7:57:34And many of us have been involved in politics, have lost elections, we've had friends lose elections. You accept the fact that that happens. And the truth is he simply can't accept it. So he's taken. Uh, my friends across the aisle party and taking you down a road where you don't even know where it will lead you to. The fact is, there's many rural voters in states like california and oregon and washington. Mr. chairman, the gentleman's out of order. Mr. chairman. The gentleman's out of order.

▶ 7:58:05>> so personality that's on the floor. >> well. Yeah, I'm happy to finish without, you know, suggesting anything about the president's mental state. Uh, I will say this. What we really ought to be worried about is 90 million americans did not vote in the last presidential election where voting age eligible us citizens.

▶ 7:58:30We care deeply about putting truth behind the words of the people, by the people, for the people. We would be desperately working to make sure every single american voted, whether by mail or by early vote or by in-person. The point isn't the manner in which you cast your vote. The point is to make sure you're able to cast your vote. I strongly support the amendment. Urge my colleagues to vote in the affirmative. I yield back my time. >> thank you. Gentlemen.

▶ 7:58:58The gentlelady from ohio, miss kaptur's, recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. And members. The amendment number two calls for no funding to be used to implement, administer or enforce any action by a federal agency that would restrict access to mail in voting for eligible citizen voters in federal elections.

▶ 7:59:21This amendment is needed because in march, president trump signed an illegal executive order which seeks to crack down on mail in voting by creating an approved list of absentee voters. The order also threatens to withhold federal funds to states who don't comply with the order. That's unconstitutional.

▶ 7:59:42So this is a threat to voting rights and could disenfranchize disenfranchize voters, the president believes, will vote for democrats or not support his agenda based on other collected data point and data surrendered by states? We see some of that happening in what he's done with the misallocation of grant monies. So this amendment will help prevent the disenfranchisement of voters who rely on this essential method of mail in voting to cast their ballots.

▶ 8:00:14We have a mobile population, people. I meet them all the time on airplanes. Uh, mail in voting is a convenience for them. Many work at home, uh, with the new electronic systems and so forth. Ohio secretary of state sends out absentee ballot applications to all households in ohio.

▶ 8:00:36Uh, so states are complying with the laws that the constitution allows them to pass and implement in 2024, nearly 1 in 3 americans voted by mail. 1 in 3 americans voted by mail. Older americans, particularly those aged 65 and older. And I took care of a mother and a brother in my life, and they were able to vote so long as they were coherent and it was so important.

▶ 8:01:05And that says nothing about our, uh, service members overseas who depend on mail voting to access the ballot. Voting by mail is one of the most widely used and trusted methods of voting in the united states. Every state offers it in some form. It's secure, reliable, and proven way for our citizens to make their voices heard so we shouldn't break what's working. Thank you. And I yield back support the president.

▶ 8:01:33>> thank the gentlelady gentleman from south carolina, Mr. clyburn is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you very much, Mr. chairman. Chairman, I don't know of anything that's more important to me than voting. I grew up in south carolina. My parents go back all the way to the slave ship.

▶ 8:01:57Uh, that brought them in my family into this country. I've lived with the history of voting in south carolina. I remember in the state had the democratic primary as a white only club. Can you imagine a white only club?

▶ 8:02:26And that was up until I was nine years old. I was nine years old when the courts declared that illegal. The first time I ran for office, I ran for office under something called the full slate law. That has nothing to do with partizan politics. That had to do with the fact that you had to vote for every office vacant.

▶ 8:02:56If a county had 11 representatives, which is the way I ran the first time from charleston county. 11 representatives, I was not allowed to vote just for myself and go back home. I had to vote for ten others in order for my vote to count, which meant my vote was actually neutralized.

▶ 8:03:24It was designed that way. We've always given the states the right to conduct the elections that's in the constitution. So why are we doing something up here that would impose a federal standard on the states who have decided over time, it's time for us to be fair.

▶ 8:03:50That's what they say in the south. To be fair. And now we're going to say we're going to spend money in order to be unfair. The greatness of this country. I agree with alexis de tocqueville when he says that we are great as a country, not because we are more enlightened than any other nation, but because we have always enabled to repair our faults.

▶ 8:04:19We found a fault with our voting system and repaired it. And here we are today saying we're going to use federal money to prevent a state that decided that the fair thing to do is to make sure that everybody get not just the right to vote, but to be able to vote.

▶ 8:04:44Someone asked me the other day, what kind of representation do you give your people? I said, triple a, triple a representation accessible, affordable and accountable. That's what this is all about. And I thank you very much for bringing this forward.

▶ 8:05:07I would hope that we will see it within ourselves to stop this charade and let this perfection that we're in pursuit of continue and not reverse it with a law like this. And I yield back. >> thank you. Gentlemen. Are there other people wishing to other members wishing to address the amendment?

▶ 8:05:30Seeing none, the gentlelady is one minute recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. Um, this is not a referendum on the president. I am begging us all to please put the knife down and back away. People where I live are sick of a partizan lens on everything. This is if if, if, if about anything. This is about this being a great country, a large country like I.

▶ 8:06:00I can understand that if you were raised in new york city, you might think that something's different. Why would you need vote by mail? But I'm telling you, this is a great country. This is a large country. Gas money is expensive. People do a lot of different things for a living, and states make rules that make sense. This is one of them. Not always, but this is one of them. And let's be prudent with our taxpayer dollars. Please, let's not go wasting it on something chasing a wild goose. We don't need to be doing that.

▶ 8:06:28We have another a lot of other things we ought to be doing. This is this is a great country. Um, this is a great, a great place. Uh, and it, and it is, and it is built and made more great by good representation, by ensuring that if you have got young kids, if you are working a job, if you are living rurally, if you don't invest money, you're voting, you're still informing the leadership of this country. And with that, I, I, I'm begging you to consider supporting this. With that, I yield back.

▶ 8:06:59>> thank you. Gentlelady. The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from washington. All those in favor, say aye. >> aye. >> all opposed? Say no. No. It the opinion of the chair, the nos have it. But vote has been requested. Sufficient support having been demonstrated. The clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt. No, Mr. aguilar. >> aguilar. Hey. >> Mr. aguilar, I. Mr. alford.

▶ 8:07:31Mr. alford. No. Mr. amodei. Mrs. bice. Mrs. bice. No. Mr. bishop, I. Mr. bishop, I. Mr. calvert. Mr. calvert. No. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. No. Mr. case. Mr. casey. Mr. eskamani. Mr. klein. Mr. cloud. Mr. clyburn. Mr. clyburn, I. Mr. clyde. Mr. cole. Mr. cole. No.

▶ 8:08:04Mr. cuellar. Mr. cuellar, I miss dean. Miss dean, I miss delauro, Mr. laura, I. Mr. diaz-balart, Mr. diaz-balart. No. Mr. edwards, Mr. edwards, no. Mr. ellzey. Mr. ellzey. No. Miss. Escobar, miss. Escobar, I. Mr. espaillat. Mr. fleischmann. Mr. fleischmann. No. Miss. Fraenkel. Miss. Frankel, I. Mr. franklin. Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest. Mr. carter. Mr.

▶ 8:08:33Carter, I. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson. Mrs. henson. No. Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. ivy. Mr. ivy. I. Mr. joyce. No. Mr. joyce. No. Miss. Kaptur. Miss. Kaptur, I. Mr. nick lalota. Mr. nick lalota. No. Miss lee. Miss lee, I miss. Letlow. Miss. Letlow. No. Mr. levin. Mr.

▶ 8:09:03Levin, I miss malloy. Miss malloy. No. Miss mccullum. Miss mccullum, I miss ming, miss ming, I Mr. molenaar. Mr. mulliner no. Mr. moore. Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli. Mr. morelli, I. Mr. mirvan. Mr. mirvan, I. Mr. newhouse. Mr. newhouse, I miss. Perez. Miss. Perez, I miss. Pingree, miss. Pingree, I. Mr. pocan, Mr. pocan, I. Mr.

▶ 8:09:35Quigley. Mr. quigley, I. Mr. reschenthaler. Mr. rosenthaler. No. Mr. rogers. Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong. Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres. Mrs. torres, I miss. Underwood, miss. Underwood, I. Mr. valadao, Mr. valadao no. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz, miss. Wasserman. Schultz. I. Mrs. watson.

▶ 8:10:05Coleman, Mrs. watson. Coleman, I. Mr. womack. Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink. Mr. zink. No. Mr. shreeve. Mr. shreeve. No. >> are there any members wishing to cast their vote or change their vote? Gentlemen from georgia. >> Mr. clyde, votes no. >> are there other members? A gentleman from new york. >> I. >> Mr. espaillat, a. >> gentleman from virginia.

▶ 8:10:37>> Mr. klein votes no. >> gentleman from texas. >> Mr. cloud votes no. >> the gentleman from nevada. >> Mr. amodei. No. >> are there other members wishing to cast their vote or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tally.

▶ 8:11:34On this vote. The eyes are 29. The nos are 32. The amendment is not adopted. Before we move into our. This is the last minute. So we're done with the amendments.

▶ 8:11:53We still have the allocations, but, um, my democratic friends might not know, my republican friends will know that we have a fantastic communications director on our side of the aisle. I stole her from Mr. womack years ago. Uh, took her to the rules committee, then liberated her from the rules committee and brought her here. Uh, and this is her birthday.

▶ 8:12:16I asked no democrat to participate in the birthday song you choose, but we wanted to have a chance to bring her in here in a surprise and, uh, actually give her the birthday song. I'm not going to tell you how old she is, but she's somewhere exactly between 30 and 40, so you get. So, my colleagues, this is your birthday song.

▶ 8:12:45It doesn't last too long. Hey. Thank you. My friend from maryland, Mr. hoyer. Is this the appropriate time to recognize you for what you were concerned with? >> oh, you want it in terms of the. >> I thought he wanted. >> to do it after the. >> is this. You want me to do it now, then? >> oh, no.

▶ 8:13:14We'll do it whenever you want to do it. >> um, I'm going to do it. >> do you want to do it now? Do you want to wait? >> I'll do it now. Um. >> let me just quickly. The gentleman asked for five minutes to address the committee. We certainly going to accommodate. >> thank you very much. >> so, gentlemen. >> for consideration. Um, and I'm going to have a few other words to say, but right now what I wanted to do, I've had this discussion with some few of you.

▶ 8:13:38Um, and as you all know, I'm very concerned about our committee bringing unity to our committee, not necessarily voting all the time, but unity of purpose in terms of making the status within this institution and within this government, dealing with the executive department a meaningful, important, critical component of how we make decisions.

▶ 8:13:59And if my interns or are you here, I'm going to have them hand out something to each one of you, because I think it's an important concept. And when you hear me talk, it may or may not have relevance. I'm a democrat. I'm a former leader. I'm an activist in my party. But I want you to read this, and I don't want you to necessarily read it now take it home.

▶ 8:14:24It's a two pages pretty short, and it's a speech that somebody who I do not think is accused of a rhino, of being a rhino, made. His name is newt gingrich. He made it in 1998. He made it after he and bill clinton reached a deal on a budget which resulted in that year in a balanced budget. We haven't had too many of those.

▶ 8:14:53I think, hopefully, that you will find newt's words, uh, at least instructive in terms of his experience from being a very confrontational, uh, tough, no nonsense. The other side is bad. We're good guy to what you will see in the speeches saying, look, the american people elected a lot of different kinds of people here.

▶ 8:15:19We have a lot of different kinds of ideas and we need to work together. So I wanted to hand this out to you. I keep it in my briefcase. Uh, again, it's 98. Uh, so it's some years old. It's 28 years old, but is relevant today. So I thank you for giving it attention. And I'll have some other words to say about the bill and the 302 b's.

▶ 8:15:43But and I thank the chairman for giving me this opportunity because hopefully it being newt gingrich, it being somebody who clearly was a real hard nosed opponent of the democratic party.

▶ 8:15:57And his reflections after having been here for 20 years, and in being speaker at that point in time, I guess for from 95 to 90 8 to 4 years, let's say, uh, and working with president clinton and with the democrats and republicans in the congress. So I thank the chairman for giving me this opportunity.

▶ 8:16:21And I hope you'll read it, uh, and reflect upon it and see if it has anything that you feel is relevant to our work today. Thank you. >> thank you, gentlemen, very much. Now we'll go back to our normal proceedings. Uh, so seeing no further amendments, I now recognize chairman rogers for the purpose of a motion. Mr. chair, I move to favorably. >> report to the house. >> the fiscal. Year 2027, financial.

▶ 8:16:50>> services and general government appropriations bill. >> questions now on the motion to favorably report the fiscal year 2027 financial services and general government appropriations bill to the house. All those in favor say aye. >> aye. >> all opposed? Say no. >> no. >> the opinion of the chair. The ayes have it. Roll call has been requested. Sufficient support has been demonstrated. The clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt. Aye, Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar.

▶ 8:17:22No. Mr. alford. Mr. alford, I. Mr. amodei, Mr. amodei, I. Mrs. bice, Mrs. bice, I. Mr. bishop. Mr. bishop. No. Mr. calvert. Mr. calvert, I. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. I. Mr. case. Mr. case. No. Mr. eskamani. Mr. klein. Mr. klein, I. Mr. cloud. Mr. cloud. I. Mr. clyburn. Mr.

▶ 8:17:54Clyburn. No. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. I. Mr. cole. Mr. cole. I. Mr. cuellar. Mr. cuellar. No. Miss. Dean. Mr. Mr. lauro. No. Mr. diaz-balart. Mr. diaz-balart, I. Mr. edwards, Mr. edwards, I. Mr. ellzey. Mr. ellzey. I miss. Escobar, miss. Escobar. No. Mr. espaillat. Mr. espaillat. No. Mr. fleischmann. Mr. fleischmann, I miss frankel.

▶ 8:18:27Miss. Frankel. No. Mr. franklin. Mr. franklin, I. Mr. guest. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. No. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris, I. Mrs. henson. Mrs. henson, I. Mr. hoyer. >> no. >> Mr. hoyer. No. Mr. iv. Mr. iv. >> no. >> Mr. iv no. Mr. joyce, I. Mr. joyce, I miss. Kaptur.

▶ 8:18:59>> no, thank. >> you, miss kaptur. No. Mr. nick lalota. Mr. nick lalota, I miss lee. Miss lee. No. Miss letlow. Miss letlow, I, Mr. levin. Mr. levin. No. Miss malloy. Miss malloy, I miss mccullum. Miss mccullum. No. Miss ming, miss ming. No. Mr. molenaar. Mr. molenaar, I. Mr. moore, Mr. moore, I. Mr.

▶ 8:19:30Morelli. Mr. morelli. No. Mr. mirvan. Mr. mirvan. No. Mr. newhouse. Mr. newhouse, I miss perez. Miss perez. No. Miss pingree. Miss pingree. No. Mr. pocan. Mr. pocan. No. Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley. No. Mr. reschenthaler. Mr. reschenthaler, I. Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers, I. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford, I. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson, I. Mr. strong. Mr.

▶ 8:20:01Strong. I. Mrs. torres. Mrs. torres. No. Miss. Underwood. Miss. Underwood. No. Mr. valadao. Mr. valadao. I miss. Wasserman. Schultz. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz. No. Mrs. watson. Coleman. Miss. Watson. Coleman. No. Mr. womack. Mr. womack, I. Mr. zink. Mr. zink, I. Mr. shreeve. Mr. shreeve, I. >> are there any other members wishing to cast their vote or change their vote?

▶ 8:20:31Gentlelady from pennsylvania. >> miss dean. >> no gentleman from mississippi. >> Mr. guest, I. >> are there any other members? Seeing? None. The clerk will tally. >> voted for. Voting. Debbie.

▶ 8:21:04You voted yes. Kumbaya. Stay home. Can you had some experience here, miss, in this committee you were expecting consistency. Thank you. Thanks for.

▶ 8:21:35>> on this vote. The yeas are 34. The nos are 28. The motion is agreed to. Uh, we'll next move to, uh, uh, the, you know, technical changes. I well, first I ask unanimous consent the staff be permitted to make technical and conforming changes to the bill. And the report just approved seeing no objection. So ordered. Three days. Three days without objection. So ordered.

▶ 8:22:04Okay, uh, our final order of business is consideration of the interim 302 b subcommittee allocation for fiscal year 2027. For our first six bills. These interim allocations will allow us to begin our work. As we move forward. The committee is prepared to do the hard work line by line and uphold the fiscal discipline and effective governance.

▶ 8:22:32Our fy 27 process will target resources where they are needed most. Reinforce the safety and security of the american people and invest in high impact missions. We will take every step to ensure strong stewardship of taxpayer dollars, charting a responsible fiscal path requires discipline and discretionary spending, while also acknowledging that mandatory spending is the primary driver of our long term debt.

▶ 8:22:59Both are part of the conversations republicans are having across committees of jurisdiction because of securing america's future. Prosperity is a goal we all share. So as we turn to our responsibility on discretionary side of the ledger today, these allocations not only demonstrate responsible governance, but they also represent our core commitments to advancing the american first agenda to strengthen our national defense, supporting the safety and security of the american people, fully funding

▶ 8:23:30Health care for our nation's veterans, and ensure that the government remains focused on its core mission. I look forward to a robust debate today, and I urge all members to support the 302 b allocations. That's my prepared statement. Let me add a couple of other things real quickly. Uh, these six bills are only about 20% of discretionary spending. So this is not much different than last year where we started with a small step that honestly, we can adjust.

▶ 8:23:59Uh, and remember, uh, these things are not final products. So we're going to do in the house, but the senate is going to do something else. And at some point down the road, we'll negotiate. I like to release all of these. Uh, we will release the rest of them. Our intention is to be able to do it immediately after the may recess. So we'll get them a lot quicker to you. So you can look at the totality. Uh, I've had broad discussions with my friend, the ranking member.

▶ 8:24:26So she has kind of a general idea, but we won't obviously the whole committee to see everything as quickly as we can. The, the military part of the situation is difficult, uh, to project right now. So that's why we're giving ourselves a little bit more time to see what happens and, and what additional information comes available. I will tell you, my goal is pretty much what it was last time.

▶ 8:24:54I want to get all these bills out of committee as quickly as we can, but I don't I don't look at any of them as final products. The reality is we are going to be in a negotiating posture, uh, at some point, both with the folks in this room and certainly our counterparts, uh, in the united states senate and with the president of the united states who has to sign these bills as they pass both houses and frankly, has the ability to sustain any veto. So everybody's got a role here.

▶ 8:25:22Uh, my hope would be at the end of this process, whenever it is, could be the end of fiscal year, could be the end of the calendar year, um, that we arrive at what we did last time. That is something that is bicameral, bipartisan, and that will have members of both sides of the aisle feel comfortable voting for what the proportions will be. Who know? But, uh, this is the beginning of the process.

▶ 8:25:46The one thing I will guarantee you is if we sit around and wait on everybody else to do what they're supposed to do, we will be sitting here five months from now. I'm not going to let that happen. We're going to move product and that will help force action. I think the other places that we need it, as I said earlier, and I'll just go through this, look, this is pretty simple stuff. We should have a budget committee resolution that passes the floor of the house. If that ever happens. I'll mark to that.

▶ 8:26:16It just hadn't happened in five congresses. No matter who is in control. Uh, and I've told our friends and they have worked very well with the chairman arrington, and I know he's doing his best. I said, don't give me something that just passes out of committee. If it can't get across the floor of the house, then I can't possibly write 12 bills to that number, that top line number, which is the most important thing for us as this committee.

▶ 8:26:42The second thing would be, I would tell you, if the president and the leaders of both parties and both chambers came to an agreement, I'd mark to that number, because we can pass that number up. And frankly, if the that didn't that didn't happen last time may not happen this time.

▶ 8:26:57But if that were to happen, that's that would be the mark if, since republicans control for the time being, both chambers, if there were an agreement between the speaker and the majority leader, I would mark to that number, uh, we don't have any of those three things right now, but, uh, we were able to work together last time, moving things through and eventually get to top lines that I thought were reasonable and that the majority of both

▶ 8:27:28Houses thought were reasonable and that the president was willing to sign in all but one case. And honestly, the disputes we have on the department of homeland security are not appropriations disputes. We aren't disagreeing about the amount of money being spent or what have you. They are policy disputes, frankly, are things I think, for the most part ought to be settled outside this committee elsewhere. Uh, but that's neither here nor there.

▶ 8:27:53We'll continue to struggle with that, because I would hope we can find common ground on that and come to an agreement, but we are going to move this process forward. Uh, and as I think I reported to you last time, uh, I do talk pretty extensively with our senate counterparts. I know the, the ranking member does as well. And we talk together quite a bit. Uh, so, uh, you know, the senate's request was pretty simple. They said, I said, what can we do to help you guys?

▶ 8:28:20Not that we don't have our own problems. And they said, just move bills. That'll create pressure for us to move bills. And they will move it in their process and their way. And my guess would be their numbers will come in higher than ours at the allocation level, because they usually start with the idea they got to get to 60. And guess what? We somehow magically negotiate between where we're at and they're at, come out with something that can go. So, you know, I'm just being as candid with you as I can.

▶ 8:28:50That's the way I see it unfolding right now. It could change. So, uh, again, don't take these numbers as coming down from mount sinai in stone. They're going to change. Uh, but we have to have some place to start and we want to get you the complete picture as rapidly as we can. So early may, we will come back and we will have for you based on, you know, the information that we've received, where we're going to be on the other 80% of the allocations, which is prime. You know, we all know the drill here.

▶ 8:29:19This is going to be a defense labor h, uh, kind of, uh, discussion and debate, uh, probably the rest of the way. And that's okay. And, uh, I take some comfort in the thought that the ranking member and I have gotten to the point many times over the years in labor h bill. And we never started the same place. We somehow got to the same place and we're able to pass the products that were bipartisan, bicameral.

▶ 8:29:46Our friend, uh, patty murray was always part of that process in the eight years we did it. And frankly, susan collins is a superb legislator in her own right and a good person to work with. So, uh, we'll, we'll see where we go from here, but that's where we're at. It gives you sort of a framework to at least evaluate these first six and to think about the process that's going on ahead of us.

▶ 8:30:09So I'd now like to recognize the ranking member of the full committee, my good friend, for her remarks. >> thank you very much, Mr. chairman.

▶ 8:30:21And just before I make my remarks, I just would like to say on that last vote that we took on, uh, miss perez's vote, but my thought is that probably my colleagues who are in, um, states that have, uh, mail in voting that maybe they're going to send a note out to your constituents that I'm not going to accept any of your vote if it's a mail in vote, you know, think twice about, you know, what we do in that in that regard.

▶ 8:30:51Uh, but I want to start by saying I agree. I, uh, with my really very good friend, tom cole, um, that we should get all 12 bills through the committee, uh, particularly pleased at what happened in the last go round, 11 out of 12.

▶ 8:31:08Um, and we're still deliberating on, on homeland, but 11 out of 12 bills, uh, I was stopped by one member of the, um, actually the other side of the aisle and who said to me, we were discussing something, he said to me, don't you know how to compromise? Well, we wouldn't have had 11 out of 12 bills if neither of us knew, uh, you know, that we didn't know how to compromise.

▶ 8:31:39Um, and the value of that, uh, what we did the last go round, and I think it's instructive as to where we go in the future, uh, here. Um, is that I take my position and I know that tom cole takes his position on the appropriations committee, and I believe that people who want to sit on the appropriations committee understand it's, uh, it's centrality, uh, to the

▶ 8:32:10Federal government. For my part, I believe it is the soul of that. I get in trouble with my friends on ways and means, but this is where it's the nerve center. Without it, the government does not function. And so I'm committed.

▶ 8:32:25I am committed day in and day out, to make sure that the strength of this committee, its centrality to our government, is maintained. And I am willing and will continue to fight for that every single day, and will not have others who think.

▶ 8:32:52That this power of the purse belongs elsewhere. That we are not going to allow that to happen.

▶ 8:33:08And I believe that's where tom cole and I come down in these efforts, which is why we were clear about what we were doing in the last go round and that in the absence of passing appropriations bills, that we could have all had a wonderful sabbatical to what you want to do, because the relevance of this committee will have been squandered.

▶ 8:33:36None of this in this room want to squander the relevance of the appropriations committee. And so I will work hard to get that done. I might say that with regard. And I want to get the bills done by july 4th. We can do that. We can do that. We're moving and we'll get it done. And that's everybody working together as we have.

▶ 8:34:02But in order to do our job, and for me to deal with my job. I believe that we do need to see all 12 allocations. I think it's important that that happen. And again, I thank the chairman.

▶ 8:34:28But, you know, recently the president said that he instructed the white house budget director, russ vought, to quote, uh, I'm quoting I don't make this up. God help me. You couldn't make it up. Don't send any money for daycare. End quote. The president went on to say, and I quote, we are fighting wars.

▶ 8:34:50We cannot take care of daycare, end quote, before adding, and again, a quote, it is not possible for us to take care of daycare, medicaid, medicare, end quote programs, which he later referred to as, quote, little scams.

▶ 8:35:11In case anyone may have forgotten, the president previously said during an interview on fox news that, quote, medicare, medicaid, none of that stuff is going to be touched, end quote. That was before his one big, beautiful bill cut more than $900 billion to medicaid.

▶ 8:35:33I understand the unprecedented political moment we are in, but we cannot lose sight of the simple truth that the president of the united states wants to spend more taxpayer dollars on open ended, costly foreign wars, while making drastic cuts to domestic programs that provide food, education, and medicine to the american people, the president

▶ 8:36:03Said. The quiet part out loud, the policy priorities he articulated in those comments are laid down in the funding allocations we are considering today. The agricultural allocation cuts non-defense spending by $1.1 billion in commerce, justice, science.

▶ 8:36:23They cut $1.9 billion from non-defense funding while increasing defense spending under that subcommittee by $600 million, financial services at $600 million. Cut to non-defense fund funding, state and foreign operations, a $2.7 billion cut. We have only received six of the 12 allocations. That is the problem in and of itself.

▶ 8:36:48But across the six allocations we have so far, the non-defense spending, the cut is $2 billion and increase defense spending by $100 million in the in the in the agencies that deal with that.

▶ 8:37:08And that is before we even get to the pentagon budget, $1.5 trillion, which public reporting and the president's own comments make clear that this is an astronomical increase.

▶ 8:37:22I do not believe that child care, medicare and medicaid are, quote, little scams, and I do not believe we must spend so much money on foreign wars that we have to cut public services for americans here at home to pay for them. So I will encourage my colleagues to reject the proposed allocations.

▶ 8:37:44I also want to express my strong opposition to considering allocations for only six bills, which represent less than a quarter of total discretionary funding. And I take, you know, the goodwill of the chair saying, we'll know something in in early may, but the purpose of our committee is to have one body that examines all potential trade offs. We cannot make those determinations if we do not know the allocations for all 12 bills.

▶ 8:38:14For example, we do not know the total allocation yet for the labor hhs bill last year, the republican majority proposed to cut the labor hhs bill by $24 billion.

▶ 8:38:30And this year, the cbo is predicting a $17 billion shortfall in the pell grant program, the signature federal program that helps students attend college who otherwise could not afford to. How is this republican majority planning to address this shortfall if we do not have a total top line? How do we.

▶ 8:39:02Propose an amount to allocate for any one bill? We cannot make informed choices, informed decisions if we only have half of the information necessary to vote on subcommittee allocations. It is the way we have tried to proceed in the past and have, and it's the way we need to try to proceed in the future.

▶ 8:39:31We cannot pit one subcommittee against another. We cannot provide substantial amounts in one area, thereby shortchanging other critically important areas that make a difference in the lives of the people that we represent, and help to create their opportunity for their success and their future for themselves

▶ 8:40:02And their families. So, Mr. chairman, I say to you, with all the goodwill in my heart to propose and to move forward, I cannot vote for these allocations. I will encourage my colleagues to vote no. I thank you, and I yield back. >> I thank gentlelady and now recognize the gentleman from maryland, Mr. hoyer, for any remarks he cares to make. >> thank you very much, Mr. chairman.

▶ 8:40:30I'll be brief because I share the views of our ranking member, Mr. laurel lee. I said at the start of this that we were doing it backwards, that we put the cart ahead of the horse. What I mean by that, where this process is supposed to work and the chairman is absolutely right, hasn't worked on either side. Uh, democrats couldn't get a budget done. Republicans can't get a budget done. Um, but that's the way it's supposed to start.

▶ 8:40:57And so what happens is we have to make up a number, as the chairman said, we had to mark to something, um. The problem is, uh, the first two committees that you've just heard and we've just considered had had no.

▶ 8:41:17302b that's why I offered an amendment in committee to add 1.8 billion, uh, which is less than, uh, is needed, but it was the 75 number that we had adopted previously.

▶ 8:41:32Um, the next thing you do, you have to set a number and then you have to take from that number, which is generically called the 302 a and transit transits to 12 component parts of a 302 b, the 12 subcommittees.

▶ 8:41:56The problem with doing it the way we're doing it is none of us on 11 subcommittees essentially know what we're going to have. Mr. calvert has a different, uh, advantage because normally his 302 is the first number. Um.

▶ 8:42:16My subcommittee, I believe, as the ranking member is underfunded by at least $6 billion. And that's a drop in the bucket to the numbers we're talking about.

▶ 8:42:34But it is the difference between what I think is a number that will allow the committee, the, excuse me, the treasury department to perform at least adequately some of the duties that we have given to them. But without knowing what the 302 a is, and then dividing it into 12 302 b allocations, I can't effectively argue. And, Mr.

▶ 8:43:04Chairman, I don't know that there was any forum in which me to argue, uh, that my committee needs x number. Every other committee come in, say I next need x number. That number presumably would be more than we have a 302 a for whatever the 302 a4. And then we'd have to somehow negotiate and see what our priorities are. But the way we're doing it, first of all, again, we put the cart before the horse.

▶ 8:43:32We didn't have a 302 b, we had a number that was given to us. Or given to Mr. joyce. Um, and so we marked to that number, uh, I was for going beyond that numbers, you know, $1.8 billion above it, which would have been less, uh, in terms of a baseline than we've had now, you can disparage the baseline,

▶ 8:44:02But very frankly, on defense, Mr. calvert has to deal with all the time because the budget of 2026, you cannot purchase the same things, uh, that you need at the 2026 budget. Why? Because the cost went up. That's what baseline is all about.

▶ 8:44:20Baseline simply says, you have a budget, uh, and you can purchase, uh, 25 goods at 26 prices, uh, which are a cost of living adjustment above that. That's, that's inflation.

▶ 8:44:36We all understand that, uh, but we can't do it the way we're doing it because we don't know what the allocations are going to be and what the trade offs are, uh, between defense and labor health are the two biggest bills and all the rest of us. So, Mr. chairman, I want to thank you for your very thoughtful recitation of the problem that confronts us. And it is very difficult.

▶ 8:45:04As majority leader, we had to I had to decide what we were going to put on the floor as a number. And so we deemed it, as you pointed out, because, uh, we couldn't get the budget through. So we had to have a number, but that and that number was voted upon in the house. We don't have that yet either on either side, but, uh.

▶ 8:45:30I would urge us to try to come to grips with and explain to the leadership of the house, uh, that we have to have some semblance of order in terms of knowing what the appropriations committee has to mark to whatever it is, and then have some debate and discussion within the committee as to how to allocate that. Hard choices have to be made. And so that would be the observation I would make.

▶ 8:46:00And if you would allow me to do it because I didn't do it at the end, I want to thank kim bates betts, mike patterson and alex jones and james gawlikowski of the republican side for their work, their pleasure to work with. Uh, we don't work enough together. I want to work more together because I want to know what those 302 a's are and what I can argue about what my allocation, our allocation could be.

▶ 8:46:26But having said that, and on the minority side, matt smith is a clerk. Philip quinn, hershey's. My. And arnel nalalion, who is, uh, the two people that helped me on my bills. I know all of us are advantaged to have staff work with us who are much more able than their pay reflects.

▶ 8:46:48And very frankly, members, you know, my view is you are worth more than your pay reflects and I'm always working on it. Thank you. >> what an obvious play for popularity. I mean, come on.

▶ 8:47:09Uh, but just quickly before I went, because I want to recognize my good friend from minnesota, but, uh, number one, thanks, both of you for what you had to say and, and message received. Um, we will have the other numbers here in comparatively short order. If I could have done them all at once, I would. But they're going to be here right after we get back. And, uh, just please know that, uh, and my friend from maryland mentioned he likes to argue. You're going to get your wish.

▶ 8:47:39Uh, you know, you're going to have your opportunity. If that makes you happy, you're going to be the happiest guy on the committee. Uh, but the and. Well, and that's fair. Uh, because nobody's better at my friend. But I tell you one other thing. There's a wonderful, um, saying, uh, that there are wonderful, quote, wonderful churchill quote, uh, particularly dark moment in the second world war. And he said, uh, uh, the future is uncertain, but the past should give us hope.

▶ 8:48:08And I would just tell all of you, just don't, uh, there's a reason why 11 out of 12 of these bills got done in both chambers and signed by the president, and all 12 got through. And the final argument we're having over the last bill is not an appropriations argument. It is an argument on policy. Other things like that, trust, what have you. But it's not an appropriations argument.

▶ 8:48:36Uh, so and this will be a more difficult year. It's an election year. Uh, and that's just the reality of it. And people are going to want to wait and to see what happens in the election before they make a lot of other final decisions. But I am really comfortable because of what we did last time. Look, if my friend the ranking member and I've mentioned this to you before, and my friend the majority leader and my friend Mr. clyburn, uh, had not made an and 20 other had not made some decisions.

▶ 8:49:05We'd be sitting here right now with total government shutdown in the middle of military action. That was a bipartisan accomplishment to avoid that. Uh, and it just meant there's enough trust and goodwill on the committee to work across the line. That was not a reconciliation deal. It was an appropriations deal. And, uh, again, uh, for almost everything, it even worked in the united states senate. So that's what we're going to work toward.

▶ 8:49:33We'll see where we end up. Uh, and, uh, look, I know everybody approaches this, I think honestly, with goodwill and intention to try and get the job done because what the ranking member said is true. Uh, you know, this is the power of the purse is here. The constitution puts it here. And for any of you, you may not agree with where we end up and that's fine.

▶ 8:49:56But any of you that think we're going to end up exactly where the administration is, didn't look at what the omb proposals were last year, what the initial proposals from the republican side were in this committee, and then where we ended up. And by the way, the president supported all those proposals at the end, to his credit, we would not have had the bill had he not helped us get the rule. Uh, and that's just the truth.

▶ 8:50:22Uh, and because no rule, no bill, uh, and that bill got there. So again, I expect lots of twists and turns along the way. I don't have any tricks to play. You'll kind of see what we're doing. Uh, you know, the general broad roadmap. You've walked it before, uh, and we'll just see where we end up. But at the end of the day, anybody that number one thinks we can't do it, hasn't thought about the past and haven't thought about what we've gotten through.

▶ 8:50:49And anybody that thinks everybody is in stone or can't move didn't look at last year, uh, because we did move on both sides, you know? Uh, so I don't think what we've got in front of us is beyond the ability of this committee to accomplish or on or beyond the ability of this congress to get done.

▶ 8:51:09Uh, but I will certainly grant you these are unusual times and difficult circumstances, and we are not moving, uh, in quite the way I would like, I would like to have a budget resolution that passed the floor of the house. I just don't think that's likely. I would like to have an agreement between the president and the leadership of both chambers of congress on both sides of the aisle, but that doesn't appear likely at this moment either.

▶ 8:51:39Uh, I would love it if there was a speaker in house agreement, but you can see we have big differences on dhs right now between the majorities in each chamber. So you got to kind of navigate it that the best way you can. And we'll be transparent with you about that and honest with you about what the challenges are. But again, we got there once almost all, and I think we'll get the rest of that done, hopefully in relatively short order. And I think this committee is capable of doing that again.

▶ 8:52:09But, uh, if it doesn't work, it won't be because we weren't honest with one another or we couldn't bargain with one another and we didn't deal. And last point I'll make probably saying more than I should. Again, these decisions have worked best because most of them have been moved down to the ranking members and the cardinals.

▶ 8:52:28Uh, you know, in each of these 12 subcommittees, we have very few things come up because on both sides of the aisle, we trusted our people in the committees to come to a deal. You guys know one another, you know the issues better than anybody else in your jurisdiction, and your staff knows it better than anybody else.

▶ 8:52:50And every step, it moves up that chain, even to us at the at the four corners, it's less informed and more political. Uh, and if it gets out of here through the leadership level on both sides, it's all political and, and not very well informed, not because they don't have great staffs, but their staff. Our staff works appropriations. They know it better.

▶ 8:53:13I guarantee you no speaker staff, no, uh, minority leader staff is anywhere good as good on these issues. And so if we can keep the key bargains down at that level, you saw a pretty good example of it yesterday, uh, when judge carter and miss wasserman schultz, uh, came to an agreement. I mean, it was like, it was kind of a miracle. I wasn't expecting it that soon. I kind of thought they'd eventually get there.

▶ 8:53:41But, you know, that's the goal is to try and get to something that's workable on each side that can pass. And, and again, I know the senate well enough that they ever get to 60 over there. I lose 30 on my side. So it's not like, you know, we're not going to end up in the same places. If this succeeds, there's going to be as there was, uh, you know, a lot of legitimate give and take. So again, more than you want to hear. My friend from minnesota, uh, asked for recognition. So gentlelady is recognized for any comments she cares to make.

▶ 8:54:13>> thank you, Mr. chairman. Um, once again, we're stuck in this pattern, and, um, it's been a problem, as you said, for the four appropriation cycles. And I appreciate your comments. I know this is not how you want to have things go. Um, it moves much smoother and believe it or not, I was here at a point when I got elected to congress where we did have the allocations, and we did know what was moving forward.

▶ 8:54:38And the appropriations committee, um, passed a lot of bills bipartisanly off the floor because of the way that the, it started out from the beginning. Not your fault, Mr. chair. Totally get it. The ranking member said it said it best though. However, some of us still have to, uh, stand up and speak on behalf of our constituents in a process. We want you to be able to get back to. So, um, six bills. That's what we're being asked to consider. And we know we're going to fund the rest of them.

▶ 8:55:08Right. But I'm just going to talk about the defense bill for a minute. Now. I'm not worried about our allocation. I'm not. And, uh, people in my district are worried that it's too big. And we have work to do when passing audits and doing better oversight and everything in defense, they're absolutely correct. And I'd like to get back to working and focusing on that now. Um, I think the request is going to be very close to the president's. Um, but here's my concern.

▶ 8:55:38That's before we even get to a supplement, which the chairman and I, when we were at the pentagon last week said, hey, what's the buzz? What's happening with the number? We didn't hear anything. And then we also hear that there might be another reconciliation bill floating around. So that could even be more money for defense. And, um, we are at war. Um, Mr.

▶ 8:56:02Chair, and that's something that we take very seriously, but this is a war that congress had no input in, and we haven't been able to see a plan or really know how this war is going to affect the bottom line of our national security, and not just the money in our national security, but our national security and standing in the world.

▶ 8:56:21Um, but I believe when we short change domestic policies, it is my strong belief that we also start short changing our national security in the end. And that goes to the education, health and labor bill, which I know you and the ranking member will do your best to get the most dollars going in the right vision. But I want to let you know why I feel so strongly about this. And those of you who serve on the defense committee, you hear me? Start most of them.

▶ 8:56:51Most of the committee meetings talking about this. We've got engineering, we have math, we have science, we have cyber, we have computer programing, and they're all cut in the president's budget. And every single one of those jobs and the schooling that's necessary for them, whether it's an apprenticeship program, whether it's more money into and we say steam in minnesota because we include the arts in the stem. That all has to do with our next generation of leaders.

▶ 8:57:21Coming up, the apprenticeship programs for the building trades, for the people who are doing the welding on our submarines, for the people who are coming up and designing what the future is going to be like as we're watching warfare change. All of that requires a highly educated group of people, our citizens, our future. Um, and what do we see happening in k-12? Will we see the cuts there?

▶ 8:57:46And then we see the cuts happening at the grants and the universities that we talked about that earlier on some of the things that the administration just, you know, arbitrarily cutting because of what state you live in, that's a serious issue. Workforce is a serious issue for the defense committee right now. We talk about it all the time.

▶ 8:58:06And without workforce, it even costs more, um, to build the submarines, to build the airplanes, to build the equipment that our warfighters need. And whether you're a private first class or the chairman of the joint staff, you want a well-rounded, well educated workforce. And then to daycare. I have yet been on a military base, and I know some of you have traveled with me where daycare hasn't come up.

▶ 8:58:38Daycare is a problem on our military bases. We don't have enough people going in to even supply us the need that that we have on our basis. And we're trying to be creative in solving that and working with with parents. So when it comes to medicaid and medicare too, if you're worried about your parents being taken care of and you're off being deployed, that's a worry on those families too.

▶ 8:59:06So it's all interconnected to our national security, our economic security. And for many of our soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines and guardians, their personal security. So, um, I don't know how these cuts are going to turn out at the end, but I am concerned about what happens in the other bills, especially in the bill that the two of you are in charge of. So considering that this is a partial state, it's a it's a not a coherent approach at this time.

▶ 8:59:34And it's not transparent enough for me to make an informed decision at this time. I'll be voting no at the allocations. But mister chair ranking member delauro, I look forward to working with you. And as always, my chair, Mr. calvert. With that, I yield back. >> thank gentlelady and gentlelady from florida. Miss wasserman schultz is recognized for remarks she cares to make. >> thank you. Thank you, Mr. chairman. I'm going to rearrange the deck chairs here.

▶ 9:00:03Um, I know, uh, the bill is, uh, has passed out of committee and it passed out 58 to nothing. And that's something that I know judge carter and I are both very proud of. Um, but I still rise to oppose these allocations because they're not real. They were by circumstance made up out of whole cloth because we had to mark to something.

▶ 9:00:30And I feel for the chairman, um, this is not your bill, Mr. joyce. So just note for that, for the record, um, I feel for the chairman, um, but we in the bill, we're the only subcommittee of the six under consideration yesterday to receive an increase in our allocation compared to current funding. And that's a positive step.

▶ 9:00:56Um, the defense portion though, of our allocation was severely underfunded. And I mentioned that in our remarks yesterday. Um, we have a huge, huge milken problem. The military isn't asking for enough. We aren't providing enough funding. 30% of their infrastructure is in fair or poor condition. And our allocation was more than $9 billion less than what the president requested for military construction.

▶ 9:01:24So the president asked for $9 billion more than we had provided in our bill. But it's impossible to understand how the majority's funding decisions were even made for military construction, because we don't know what the defense subcommittee top line will be. And the massive increases in defense programs that appear to be on the way will come naturally with a commensurate milcon need.

▶ 9:01:49And it's no way to prudently plan and budget by underfunding one portion of the defense budget severely, while massively increasing the rest of it, and then not being able to have having an even further gap in the infrastructure deficit.

▶ 9:02:12Um, we, uh, on the va side, we always need more funding, but I know every increase that we get in nondefense dollars means less fund funding for other domestic programs that veterans rely on when they come home. And as our economy stalls and prices rise, those needs just grow. That includes domestic programs at the departments of agriculture, housing and urban development, labor and education.

▶ 9:02:36I can't support cuts to these programs, especially with the deep cuts to snap medicaid, medicare that americans are now facing. And if you look past milcon va, I'm deeply concerned by the impact that the cuts to our other bills will have to. Services and programs that our country relies on. Mr.

▶ 9:02:53Chairman, when we're being asked to cut the office of terrorism and financial intelligence at the department of treasury, as our brave service members wage a war with the leading state sponsor of terror, something is deeply wrong for my florida constituents. Slashing the small business administration as unemployment climbs. We're losing jobs, and costs for entrepreneurs are skyrocketing. That's like trying to put out a fire with jet fuel. Mr.

▶ 9:03:18Chairman, the administration has not finished their part of the group project to use a little kid analogy, and that's not isolated to my subcommittee. It's true across the board, agency heads haven't testified. Staff and member questions have been left unanswered. The full justifications and details, as we've talked about for the first two bills, for many of these budget requests are m I a nobody in this room, especially after dosage, believes this administration can be trusted with a blank check.

▶ 9:03:47I can't turn around and tell my constituents, don't worry about the money. President trump is good for it because he's not. I oppose these allocations because they are both insufficient and utterly incomplete. I hope we can do better. I am confident that we will do better as as we progress. But at this moment, I'm not able to support the 3o2 b's and I yield back. >> thank gentlelady. Gentlelady from florida. Miss frankel's recognized for whatever remarks she cares to make. >> thank you. Thank you very much.

▶ 9:04:15I'll just first say amen to my colleague, uh, debbie wasserman schultz and rosa, your remarks and of course, betty's remarks. Um, and I want to speak as the ranking member of the national security department of state and related programs and just say that, first of all, we have a really fine chairman, Mr. diaz-balart, and a really good bipartisan committee.

▶ 9:04:39Uh, and but I want to I want to first start by telling you what drew me to this committee. I have said this before. I have a son, my only son, who I'm very proud of, who served eight years in the marines. He was a captain, and he had a tour both in afghanistan and in iraq. And I can tell you that during those times, it was agonizing for me.

▶ 9:05:07Uh, you every night, you just wait. You're afraid that someone's going to knock on your door. Uh, he's home and he's safe. But I will tell you this. When I ran for congress, uh, I did have a mission, and my mission was, uh, to keep any, uh, any other person's child from ever going to war. And that's what drew me to this committee. It used to be called s fobs because it's about soft power.

▶ 9:05:35And I'm, I'm not against a strong military. I like a strong military. Uh, but bombs and drones, they they respond to threats. Uh, they don't prevent them. It's soft power that prevents them. It's our diplomats defuzing conflicts before they explode. It's global health programs stopping outbreaks before they reach our shores.

▶ 9:06:03It's food aid and development assistance that reduces desperation, that fuels extremism and mass migration. It's strong alliances, so we don't face threats alone. Every dollar, every dollar we invest in diplomacy and development is a down payment on stability and helps avoid far more costly military intervention later.

▶ 9:06:30And it is quite stunning to me that, uh, the president's budget is asking for a 44% increase, uh, $440 billion just in this budget, while everything else, just about everything else is being downgraded.

▶ 9:06:49So what I want to say is that, uh, when we, when we retreat from soft power, uh, and I know we have members of this, this committee who know this well, uh, we don't save money, we create vacuums and adversaries like china are ready to fill in and they are filling in. Uh, so, uh, we should not have a choice between strength and restraint. We have to be smart as well as strong.

▶ 9:07:18And, uh, if we want to have a safer america, a more prosperous america, a more stable world, we need both. We need the strength of our military and the power of our leadership. And for that reason, uh, and the many articulate reasons of my democratic colleagues today, I am sad to say that I will be voting no on this, uh, allocation. I yield back. >> thank gentlelady.

▶ 9:07:47Are there others wishing to make comments on the allocations? Gentlelady from ohio is recognized. >> thank you. First of all, Mr. chairman and ranking member delauro, thank you so very much for your strong natures and your desire to, um. Achieve regular order in a very disordered world right now.

▶ 9:08:13I wanted to make a comment as a member of, of, um, our leadership on the budget committee because I've had a chance now to sit through all the hearings that we've had thus far. And I've served on the budget committee over a number of years. I have never seen an administration that is so fast and loose with the numbers. We're not exactly dealing with a very squared off group of folks over there.

▶ 9:08:38And, um, uh, there really isn't a budget. Uh, we had russell vote before the committee a few weeks ago and, um, it really wasn't a presentation. It was kind of a tennis match back and forth on both sides of the aisle.

▶ 9:08:57And, uh, I find it hard to move forward if I look at the trump administration, uh, take tariffs, the president said that some of those would be rebated. We don't know how much in tariff money he has over there. Secretary, treasurer is now telling us whoever, whoever got it, uh, now there are articles in the paper that, um, it's going to go to some corporations that file with the department of treasury.

▶ 9:09:23I was thinking that some of those tariff dollars would be spent to, uh, for programs under our jurisdictions and to pay down some of the debt, but it's very rubber numbers. Um, the, um, administration meanwhile, is rescinding programs that have already been, uh, passed by this congress. One of those that really affects us in the midwest is the manufacturing extension partnership at the department of commerce. And all of a sudden it vaporized.

▶ 9:09:53But we have an administration that talks about building up the defense industrial base and trying to restore steel and, uh, automotive and so forth, uh, in this country. But they're hiding their expenditures and they're not telling us what they're doing with some of the revenues that are coming in. So we don't really have a budget from the administration. I wouldn't want to have to bet my life on what's in it, because I don't really know who has it.

▶ 9:10:22Um, so I guess my point is we are trying to create something of regular order in here when we have complete disorder on the other side of pennsylvania avenue. I will also say that in terms of a, I'm on the defense subcommittee, uh, in trying to ask questions of a department that has taken us to war, the manner in which questions are not answered and the dismissive manner of the highest

▶ 9:10:53Individuals in that department, I find deeply concerning, uh, the, uh, we read that 1 trillion, 500 billion that's going to be maybe the defense ask, I don't know. Um, but I'm saying to myself, uh, not so much as a member of this subcommittee, but I look at these sovereign wealth funds that the president talks about in some of his sons and so forth, what they're investing in and who they're talking to.

▶ 9:11:24I'm thinking, hey, wait a minute, you're going to tax my people for a war that I didn't vote for. Go to these friends who are going to benefit in the oil industry. I mean, this has to go to some of the highest levels of governance in this country, and I don't have charge of it all. Um, we know we're going hundreds of billions of dollars into debt because of this war and it's undeclared and we don't have a budget for it. So it's really breathtaking what is occurring.

▶ 9:11:53And I want to be a party to efforts to try to structure this for the nation in this committee. And I have such high respect for the members who, um, are chair, ranking member, all of the cardinals, you know it better than the administration and, uh, the chief person in charge up the street, Mr. vo, uh, has not sent us the proper paper. We don't have anything to work from.

▶ 9:12:19So we are trying to be creative, but I just wanted to place those remarks on the record. I was very proud of some of our committees last year, when we were able to get our legislation to the floor and move it through, and maybe we can do that again, but I have never seen in my career anyway. Maybe I missed it, you know, maybe I missed something along the way. I have never seen such an irresponsible executive branch when lives are at stake.

▶ 9:12:47And for us from ohio, three of the 12 killed came from ohio, wouldn't you know it? And so these these issues remain on my mind. I hold them closely to my heart. But the way we cannot get answers from the executive branch, and we are trying to create a structure for the federal government of this country that will function. And we aren't we don't have really faithful dance partners from the other side of pennsylvania avenue.

▶ 9:13:16And when you see all the cabinet secretaries leaving, you're wondering who's in charge, who's in charge up there. So this really is a serious time. Just know for our committee on energy and water, we know how to compromise. We know how to work together. My time is up. But just know that, uh, we have a serious national challenge here we can't solve alone, but we somehow have to move our bills forward. Thank you all. >> thanks. Gentlelady. Gentlelady from new york. Mr.

▶ 9:13:45Ming is recognized for any comments you care to make about the allocations. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I to rise in strong opposition to the interim 302 b allocations. We should not be considering these allocations on a piecemeal basis. We need to see the house majority's proposal for all of the subcommittee allocations.

▶ 9:14:05In particular, we need to see the allocation for defense relative to fiscal year 2026, compared to allocations for the various non-defense subcommittees. The defense subcommittee allocation isn't listed in here, and the largest nondefense appropriations bill, labor h, is also not yet listed.

▶ 9:14:26At a time when our constituents are struggling with the cost of gas, groceries, housing and health care, we should be prioritizing funding that meets the needs of average americans. We need to see how the majority proposes to balance these priorities across the government and in particular across outside of the pentagon.

▶ 9:14:49We should not agree to these six subcommittee allocations, some of which including the commerce justice science subcommittee allocation, already appear to be inadequate compared to the need. I urge a no vote. >> thank gentlelady. Are there any others wishing to make comments, gentlemen? Gentleman from new york is recognized. >> thank you. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.

▶ 9:15:14I also oppose, uh, these 302b allocations. Uh, this committee is responsible, obviously, for setting funding across the full scope, not piecemeal approach. Uh, we are proceeding without a budget resolution, without enforceable top line and without key budget information, uh, families across the country in my district and yours are facing real economic pressure.

▶ 9:15:41And the programs they rely on should not be subject to incomplete processes, an increase of just over one half of 1% in the legislative branch bill will not adequately address our aging facilities and growing security needs. We should be doing more. Uh, we should be doing this work right away. Uh, this is not a complete plan. It is not a responsible plan, and I will not support it, I yield back.

▶ 9:16:11>> thank you, gentlemen, or any other members wishing to comment. If not. >> give me a quick. Just give me the. >> okay. Seeing no further amendments or comments, I now ask my good friend Mr. aderholt from alabama to make a motion. >> uh, Mr.

▶ 9:16:40Chairman, I move to adopt the interim suballocation of the budget allocation for fy 2027. >> all those in favor say aye. >> uh. >> all those opposed say no opinion. The chair the ayes have it, and the allocations are accepted. >> okay. Let's go. >> I will do it. But remember when I asked that? Please respond quickly. Of course we'll do it. Uh, the roll call has been requested, and the clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt, Mr. aderholt.

▶ 9:17:11Aye, Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar. No. Mr. alford. Mr. alford, I. Mr. Mr. ahmadi, I. Mrs. bice, Mrs. bice. I. Mr. bishop. Mr. bishop. No. Mr. calvert. Mr. calvert, I. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. I. Mr. case. Mr. case. No. Mr. cisco. Mr. cisco. I. Mr. klein. Mr. klein, I. Mr. cloud. Mr. cloud. I. Mr.

▶ 9:17:41Clyburn. Mr. clyburn. No. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. I. Mr. cole. Mr. cole. I. Mr. cuellar. Miss. Dean. Christine. No. Miss. Delauro. Mr. lauro. No. Mr. diaz-balart. Mr. diaz-balart, I. Mr. edwards. Mr. lc. Mr. ellzey. I miss. Escobar, miss. Escobar. No. Mr. espaillat. Mr.

▶ 9:18:12Espaillat. No. Mr. fleischmann. Mr. fleischmann, I. Mr. frankel, miss. Frankel. Miss. Frankel. No. Mr. franklin. Mr. franklin, I. Mr. guest. Mr. guest. I. Mr. harter. Mr. carter. No. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. I. Mrs. henson. Mrs. henson, I. Mr. hoyer. Mr. hoyer. No. Mr. iv. Mr. iv. No. Mr. joyce. Mr.

▶ 9:18:45Joyce, I. Miss. Kaptur, miss. Kaptur. No. Mr. Mr. nick lalota, I miss lee, miss lee. No. Miss. Letlow. Miss. Letlow, I. Mr. levin. Mr. levin no. Miss malloy. Miss malloy, I miss mccullum. Miss mccullum. No. Miss ming, miss ming. No. Mr. molenaar. Mr. molenaar, I. Mr. moore, Mr. moore, I. Mr. morelli. Mr. morelli. No. Mr.

▶ 9:19:16Mirvan. Mr. mirvan. No. Mr. newhouse. Mr. newhouse, I miss perez, miss perez. No. Miss pingree. Miss pingree. No. Mr. pocan. Mr. pocan. No. Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley. No. Mr. rosenthaler. >> I don't know. What do. >> we have somebody coming over to the office. >> Mr. reschenthaler, is he here? >> no. >> Mr. rogers, Mr.

▶ 9:19:44Rutherford, Mr. rutherford, I. Mr. simpson, Mr. simpson, I. Mr. strong, Mr. strong, I. Mrs. torres. Mrs. torres. No. Miss. Underwood, miss. Underwood. No. Mr. valadao. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz. No. Mrs. watson. Coleman. Mrs. watson. Coleman. No. Mr. womack. Mr. womack, I.

▶ 9:20:16Mr. zink. Mr. zink, I. Mr. shreeve. Mr. shreeve, I. >> are there any other members wishing to vote or change their vote? Gentleman from texas. >> Mr. cuellar votes no. >> gentleman from north carolina. >> Mr. edwards, I. >> are there other members? Some of you are standing.

▶ 9:20:44Some of you are not. Looks like clark will tally.

▶ 9:21:18>> no. Yours. >> on this vote. The I's are 32. The nos are 2028. The motion is agreed to. I ask unanimous consent that the staff be permitted to make technical and conforming changes to the report. Just approved. Seeing no objection, so ordered three days without objection. So ordered.

▶ 9:21:46There being no further business, the committee stands adjourned.

Title

Full committee markup of the FY2027 Financial Services and General Government bill

Purpose

The House Appropriations Committee held a full committee markup on April 21, 2026, to consider amendments to and report the Fiscal Year 2027 Financial Services and General Government (FSGG) appropriations bill, followed by a vote on interim FY2027 subcommittee funding allocations (302(b)s) for six of the twelve annual bills. Democrats offered numerous amendments on issues including food-marketing transparency, GSA building disclosures, OMB accountability, abortion-coverage riders, DACA employment, January 6 pardons, SBA lending, steel sourcing, community-bank regulation, IRS Direct File, and mail-in voting, nearly all of which were rejected on party-line roll calls; the underlying bill was reported favorably 34-28. Begins at▶ 0:11:12.

Who spoke

• Chairman Tom Cole (R-OK), presiding: Managed recognition and roll calls throughout▶ 0:11:12; closed by describing the interim allocations as a starting point subject to negotiation with the Senate and White House▶ 8:22:04.

• Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL): Offered the FTC "food marketed to children" report-release amendment, citing 20% childhood obesity and $13 billion in annual costs▶ 0:11:43▶ 0:12:33; later gave MilCon-VA ranking-member remarks opposing the allocations as underfunded▶ 9:00:03.

• Rep. David Joyce (R-OH), FSGG Subcommittee Chairman: Opposed nearly every Democratic amendment on procedural or policy grounds, including the FTC report▶ 0:15:36 and abortion riders▶ 1:26:02, and moved the bill's underlying provisions.

• Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD): Spoke repeatedly on GSA disclosure, OMB impoundment ($20B cited from VA MilCon)▶ 0:16:24▶ 0:53:58, mail-in voting, and SBA/steel amendments; announced this was his last markup as ranking member of the FSGG subcommittee▶ 4:04:15.

• Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), Committee Ranking Member: Supported the FTC report amendment▶ 0:21:10; closed by opposing the interim allocations, citing the president's "little scams" comment about Medicaid/child care▶ 8:30:21.

• Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-ME): Offered an amendment to force release of a GSA feasibility study on preserving murals at the Cohen Building before its sale▶ 0:31:37▶ 0:32:31.

• Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI): Offered an amendment to withhold 70% of OMB funds until Director Vought testifies, citing $20B+ in impounded funds▶ 0:51:38▶ 0:53:58, and a related amendment barring funds for presidential litigation settlements▶ 1:06:03.

• Rep. Glenn Ivey (D-MD): Supported Pocan's settlement-bar amendment, comparing it to a "fox guarding the henhouse"▶ 1:12:01; also backed the SBA green-card-holder loan amendment▶ 4:10:33.

• Rep. Lois Frankel (D-FL): Offered the amendment striking FSGG abortion-coverage riders▶ 1:21:00▶ 1:22:19; later gave State-Foreign Ops ranking-member remarks criticizing a proposed 44% State Department increase amid domestic cuts▶ 9:04:15.

• Rep. Susie Lee (D-NV): Shared her own miscarriage/D&C experience in support of the abortion amendment▶ 1:31:11▶ 1:32:11.

• Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-CA): Offered the DACA federal-employment amendment for the 10th consecutive year▶ 1:39:33▶ 1:40:33; also spoke supporting the SBA loan amendment▶ 4:07:00.

• Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-NY): Supported the DACA amendment▶ 1:53:46; offered his own amendment to restore SBA 7(a) loan eligibility for legal permanent residents▶ 3:51:13.

• Rep. Norma Torres (D-CA): Offered amendments barring federal employment for pardoned January 6 defendants▶ 2:00:17▶ 3:10:37 and directing FTC investigation of grocery "surveillance pricing"▶ 3:35:56.

• Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-TX): Supported the DACA amendment, describing barriers faced by Dreamers▶ 2:02:46.

• Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ): Called DACA employment restrictions "backdoor discrimination"▶ 2:07:43.

• Rep. Joe Morelle (D-NY): Supported the January 6 pardons amendment▶ 3:24:32 and later argued the president's mail-in-voting executive order is unconstitutional under Article I, Section 4▶ 7:55:38.

• Rep. Mark Alford (R-MO): Opposed the SBA loan amendment, citing 3,358 loans to lawful permanent residents in FY25 and prioritizing U.S. citizens▶ 4:04:15.

• Rep. Stephanie Bice (R-OK): Offered a successful second-degree amendment requiring SBA to justify its exclusion of foreign nationals before restoring loan eligibility▶ 4:15:52.

• Rep. Mike Levin (D-CA): Offered an amendment barring funds from politically motivated grant cancellations, citing a federal court finding on state-based terminations▶ 4:43:04.

• Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH): Supported the Levin amendment, citing a canceled Toledo Head Start grant and manufacturing-extension-partnership cuts▶ 4:50:08.

• Rep. Betty McCollum (D-MN): Supported the Levin amendment, citing unexplained CDC grant cuts to Minnesota and three other states▶ 4:55:30; later criticized the incomplete allocations' effect on defense workforce/education funding▶ 8:54:13.

• Rep. Frank Mrvan (D-IN): Offered an amendment requiring domestic steel for White House construction, citing donated foreign steel for the ballroom project▶ 5:04:36.

• Rep. Guy Reschenthaler (R-PA): Offered a successful second-degree amendment softening Mrvan's "direct" language to "urge"▶ 5:15:15.

• Dr. Andy Harris (R-MD): Offered an amendment raising the community-bank regulatory capitalization threshold to $12 billion▶ 6:19:02.

• Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-WA): Discussed SBA lending impact on small manufacturers▶ 3:42:59; offered amendments to preserve the IRS Direct File program▶ 5:51:13 and to protect mail-in voting▶ 7:37:15.

• Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC): Opposed the mail-in-voting restriction, recounting South Carolina's history of a "white only" Democratic primary▶ 8:01:33.

• Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-AL): Moved adoption of the interim 302(b) subcommittee allocations▶ 9:16:40.

• Chairman Hal Rogers (R-KY): Moved to favorably report the FSGG bill to the House▶ 8:16:50.

Key moments

• Wasserman Schultz's amendment to force FTC release of a decade-old report on food marketing to children, citing 20% child obesity and $13B in costs, failed 24-30▶ 0:12:33▶ 0:31:37.

• Pingree's amendment to release a GSA study on preserving the Cohen Building's New Deal-era murals failed 29-31; Joyce cited $200M in deferred maintenance versus $843M in projected savings from disposal▶ 0:36:38▶ 1:51:38.

• Pocan's amendment to withhold 70% of OMB funding until Director Vought testifies failed on a voice vote; Hoyer said the administration had impounded roughly $20 billion across VA MilCon contracts alone▶ 0:53:58▶ 1:06:03.

• Frankel's amendment striking FSGG abortion-coverage riders failed after Susie Lee described her own miscarriages requiring a D&C in opposition to the riders▶ 1:22:19▶ 1:31:38.

• Aguilar's DACA federal-employment amendment triggered an unusually long, cross-partisan debate that delayed a floor vote series before failing 30-32▶ 1:39:33▶ 2:15:47.

• Torres's amendment barring federal employment for pardoned January 6 defendants failed 27-31; Frankel cited specific pardoned individuals later convicted of child sexual abuse▶ 3:12:46▶ 3:35:26.

• Espaillat/Aguilar's SBA loan amendment for legal permanent residents passed as amended, 34-28, after Bice's second-degree amendment required SBA to justify its exclusion policy▶ 4:35:56▶ 4:41:32.

• Levin's amendment barring politically motivated grant cancellations, citing a federal judge's finding on 2024-vote-based terminations, failed 28-32▶ 4:44:04▶ 4:58:42.

• Mrvan's domestic-steel-for-White-House-construction amendment passed after Reschenthaler's second-degree amendment softened its "direct" language to "urge"▶ 5:04:36▶ 5:26:52▶ 5:32:27.

• The committee favorably reported the FSGG bill 34-28 and adopted interim 302(b) allocations for six FY27 bills 32-28, with Democrats objecting that Defense and Labor-HHS allocations remained undisclosed▶ 8:21:35▶ 9:21:18.

Metadata

Official title	Fiscal Year 2027 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Bill, Fiscal Year 2027 Financial Services and General Government Bill, and Interim Subcommittee Allocations
Committee	House Appropriations
Chamber / Congress	House · 119th Congress
Date	April 21, 2026
Type	Markup
Witnesses	(none listed in event metadata)
Video	youtube
Transcript	938 caption blocks · 58,938 words · 9:21:53 runtime
Event	Congress.gov 119215