▶ 0:13:09Meeting of the appropriations committee to order. And I want to welcome everybody to our fifth full committee markup for fiscal year 2027. Today's markup will cover commerce, justice, science, and related agencies. As with our previous markups, it's my intention that we'll complete our work on this measure today. So I just it's going to be a long obviously hearing. We have lots of amendments. That's fine.
▶ 0:13:34Uh, but do count on things today because we will be on the floor tomorrow with milcon va and we don't want to be in session here while we're having members managing bills and debating on bills. I mean, it's just difficult to manage. Very unfair to the the members in question. So again, it's just one of those days. We're going to have a long day and, uh, be, uh, be together well into the evening, I suspect. So with that, I will begin.
▶ 0:14:03Our first order of business today is consideration of the commerce, justice, science and related agencies appropriations bill for fiscal year 2027. I'll now recognize chairman rogers to present the bill. Thank you, chairman cole.
▶ 0:14:31We would not be taking up this bill without your leadership. The hard work and focus that you bring to this committee is commendable. It's a long process. 12 bills through each respective subcommittee. Then on to full committee. That's no easy task. And you do it, sir, with expertise.
▶ 0:14:56I want to thank you for your continued leadership, but also like to thank ranking member ming, ranking member delauro and all members of this committee. Additionally, I'd like to thank the majority and minority staff for their hard work.
▶ 0:15:16The work that happens in this committee is vitally important to our communities, and it would not be possible without members ideas and dedication. Today, we are continuing our work by taking up the fiscal year 27 commerce, justice, science and related agencies bill, including nasa.
▶ 0:15:43The agencies funded in this bill impact the american people every day. That's why I am proud to present to you this legislation that furthers the successes of the trump administration in the last 16 months, and refocuses federal agencies to ensure our government is working on behalf of americans, not against them.
▶ 0:16:14The bill before us today provides a total discretionary allocation of 77.3 billion, a $670 million decrease in spending below the fiscal year 26 enacted level. Fentanyl and other opioids continue to poison our constituents and ravage communities.
▶ 0:16:39Too often, families and the dreams of our youth are destroyed by these and other drugs. To counter this devastation, this bill increases funding for dea within the department of justice.
▶ 0:16:57Dea has brought multiple cartel leaders to justice, and with the additional resources provided in this bill, the e can build on those hard earned successes. This bill also continues strong funding for other federal law enforcement components that are working to secure our nation.
▶ 0:17:25Moreover, from increased funding levels for the byrne jag formula program to the cops hiring program, this legislation puts our state and local law enforcement first. The men and women in blue who protect our families and neighborhoods every day are fully supported in this bill.
▶ 0:17:49The bill also allocates $30 million to the department of justice's new national fraud enforcement division to advance president trump's efforts to combat fraud. With this investment, those who attempt to deceive the american people and steal their hard earned money will finally face the consequences.
▶ 0:18:15The fiscal 27 bill also provides strong funding for the national weather service for much needed weather forecast and warning enhancements to keep our people safe when severe storms strike. This is especially important to me, as this week marks one year since an ef four tornado killed 19 people in my district.
▶ 0:18:47Building on the success of artemis two, which launched flawlessly on the 1st of april, splashed down on april 10th, the fiscal 27 bill maintains strong funding for nasa to ensure america remains the leader in space exploration. It's a pivotal time for human space exploration and national security.
▶ 0:19:16This bill sets nasa on a path to return american astronauts to the moon before china, and ensures american maintains the competitive edge and advantage.
▶ 0:19:30The legislation also protects and restores constitutional rights, including by reining in and refocusing the atf and fully supporting the department of justice's new second amendment section. Overall, the provisions and funding levels in the bill protect everyday americans and ensure our nation can thrive.
▶ 0:19:58Importantly, as we continue to celebrate national police week on capitol hill, there is no better bill to advance through full committee. And that's what we're going to do today. With that, Mr. chairman, I yield back. Thank the gentleman for his remarks. I'd now like to recognize the ranking member, uh, miss meng of new york, for remarks on the bill. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 0:20:28I would first like to thank the appropriations committee staff for all of their hard work on this bill. Uh, bob bonner, jamie weiss, nora fe and fe cobb and tom and rebecca from my individual office. I also want to thank my democratic colleagues on our subcommittee, congress members ivy morelli, dean mervyn, and ranking member delauro. Mr. chairman, I know that you and I share many of the same priorities.
▶ 0:20:56However, I must strongly oppose this appropriations bill. It turns its back on struggling communities and hard working americans, weakens our ability to fight crime and jeopardizes our nation's competitive edge. I want to be clear the billions of dollars in cuts in this bill are not just numbers on a page. They are choices and they are the wrong choices.
▶ 0:21:22As written, this bill abandons our fundamental responsibility to keep americans safe and our economy strong. At a time when americans are worried about gun violence and hate crimes, this bill delivers a devastating blow to law enforcement agencies and programs that protect them.
▶ 0:21:43We cannot claim to protect public safety, prioritize public safety while simultaneously gutting the agency responsible for policing illegal firearms. Yet the bill before us today decimates funding for the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives, which would lose more than 1000 personnel who work with our state and local law enforcement to keep illegal guns off our streets, catch
▶ 0:22:14Dangerous criminals and prevent gun crimes. The bill also contains numerous policy writers that would make it more difficult to keep dangerous guns out of the hands of criminals, and more difficult for local law enforcement to quickly trace many of the guns that are found at crime scenes.
▶ 0:22:34The legislation before us today leaves our communities more vulnerable to violence by zeroing out community violence intervention and prevention grants, as well as hate crime prevention and prosecution grants. And the justice department's community relations service, which for more than 60 years has worked honorably to help mediate and end community conflicts across our country, is eliminated.
▶ 0:22:59I believe that all of this is the wrong approach for the cjs appropriations bill. We should also be doing much, much more to address the cost of living crisis that is hurting american families. But this bill sharply cuts funding for the agencies and programs that create jobs, boost american small businesses and advance our economy.
▶ 0:23:27Economic development administration grants are cut by 36%. Abandoning rural and distressed communities desperately in need of economic help and well-paying jobs. The bill slashes funding for the minority business development agency, taking away opportunities from american entrepreneurs.
▶ 0:23:47It cuts funding for the international trade administration by nearly 25%, weakening efforts to help american businesses expand exports and fight unfair trade practices by other countries. Moreover, the legal services corporation, which provides basic civil legal assistance to the poorest american families, seniors and veterans, is cut by more than half.
▶ 0:24:13Under this funding level, nearly 3 million fewer people will receive help with their legal problems, including 6400 in my district alone. This bill abandons our most vulnerable constituents who can't afford a lawyer when they're facing eviction, seeking safety from domestic violence or denied benefits that they've earned.
▶ 0:24:37Perhaps most shortsighted of all, this bill invests in the scientific research that drives american innovation, technological leadership, and economic competitiveness. For decades, the united states was a destination for the world's top researchers to come and to do their best work. Now we are beginning to lose our own scientific talent to opportunities overseas.
▶ 0:25:04As a result of this administration's attacks on science and universities. This bill would not only would only compound these problems, it cuts the national science foundation by more than $1.7 billion, abandoning the next generation of scientists and engineers. At exactly the moment, our competitors are investing more in theirs.
▶ 0:25:29This bill also cuts nasa's science account by nearly $1.3 billion, including a huge cut to earth science, and it significantly cuts noaa climate research activities as well. This bill also makes huge cuts to the national institute of standards and technology, which has helped american industry overcome technical challenges, develop new manufacturing techniques, and advance the cutting edge of new technologies.
▶ 0:25:58I disagree with this bill's approach. As I have said repeatedly, I believe we should be doubling down on the investments in science that grow our economy and incentivize advancements that improve life for all americans. I'm also very concerned that this bill weakens the transparency measures that were enacted as part of the fiscal year 26 appropriations act and contains numerous extreme and unnecessary policy writers.
▶ 0:26:28Finally, I will note that our subcommittee hearing with the acting attorney general is scheduled for next week. The department of justice is the largest component of this bill, but members of our our committee have not had the opportunity to publicly ask questions of the acting attorney general or the fbi director. Before we consider the department's budget. This is bad for our work on this committee and bad for transparency and accountability to american taxpayers.
▶ 0:26:56I thank the chairman for his work on this bill, but given its serious shortcomings, I cannot support it. I urge my colleagues to oppose this legislation and come back to the table to produce a bill that actually delivers for the american people. We should be investing in public safety, economic opportunity and american innovation. Those are not partizan priorities. They are our responsibility, and they should be our shared goals as americans. Thank you very much. >> thank the gentlelady for comments.
▶ 0:27:26I now recognize myself for remarks on the bill. Thank you, chairman rogers, and thank you to ranking member ming, ranking member delauro, and certainly to all our members who are here today. Our full committee markups continue today with consideration of the fiscal year 2027. Commerce, justice, science and related agencies bill.
▶ 0:27:45The scope of this legislation demonstrates the breadth of american leadership itself, from law enforcement, protecting our communities to the scientists and innovators shaping the next century of discovery. We're investing in the institutions and capabilities that keep the united states safe, competitive, and forward looking. And while washington often speaks about these topics in terms of accounts and allocations, the missions funded through this bill are anything but conceptual or distant.
▶ 0:28:14That reality is underscored by this markup taking place during the national police week. Here in D.C. and across the nation. We're reflecting on the men and women in blue who willingly placed themselves in harm's way to help others. This legislation reinforces their duty with targeted support for federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement.
▶ 0:28:37It bolsters funding for byrne, jag and cops grants, uh strengthens efforts to combat fentanyl and violent crime, and provides the resources necessary for law enforcement agencies to continue protecting our citizens. Whether confronting cyber hackers or transnational crime, or supporting a justice system rooted in the rule of law. This measure reinforces the simple reality that safe communities are the foundation of a strong nation.
▶ 0:29:06In the front lines of american service do not end in the streets. In fact, they extend into new frontiers of exploration, modernization, and discovery beyond earth itself. As artemis astronauts visited with the cjs subcommittee just yesterday, they reminded us of something important. America is still a nation that builds, explorers, invents, and pushes beyond what others think is possible.
▶ 0:29:32It's why we continue to support innovation and nasa in this legislation, because making history means leading it. This also means safeguarding the ingenuity that propels us forward. At a time when communist china and adversaries are aggressively targeting U.S. research and emerging technologies. We are reinforcing necessary safeguards.
▶ 0:29:56We defend american innovation from theft, reinforce export controls, and invest in critical capabilities that will define the future, including artificial intelligence and advanced manufacturing. All of these priorities are upheld without government waste and bloat. We reiterate president trump's efforts to right size government and confront bureaucratic overreach, securing savings for taxpayers and protecting the constitutional rights of americans.
▶ 0:30:26Each investment in this bill is tied to a clear purpose. Safer neighborhoods, stronger institutions, and a more secure and competitive nation. Chairman rogers has spent his career fighting for these objectives, and as we work to report this measure out today, we are reminded that what it will ultimately deliver a nation that backs law enforcement, a nation that leads in discovery, and a nation that fosters economic growth and community strength.
▶ 0:30:55I want to thank chairman rogers, ranking member meng, and both the majority and minority staff for their hard work. I look forward to advancing this legislation today. With that, I yield back. I now recognize my very good friend, the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. law of connecticut, for her opening remarks. >> thank you very much, Mr. chairman and chairman rogers and ranking member meng. Thanks so much, and thanks for your your work.
▶ 0:31:19Let me also say a thank you to the committee staff, to bob bonner, nora fay, jamie wise, fay, cop on the minority side and their counterparts in the majority, bob yaver, liz porter, chris eckhardt, nick mitchell and mike miller. Thank you for your hard work. I oppose the bill we are considering today. It fails to meet the moment that americans are facing.
▶ 0:31:39While american families struggle to afford basic goods and services, this bill weakens our economy, cuts off support for the middle class, for working class and the vulnerable. While gun violence continues to terrorize our communities. Bill, this bill makes it harder to get illegal guns off the streets and hold those criminals accountable.
▶ 0:32:00And while other countries increase their investments in scientific innovation and the technology of the future, this bill pares back our commitments to develop, educate, and employ the next generation of american leaders through severe cuts to stem education and science programs. This bill doubles down on the failed trade policies of the trump administration.
▶ 0:32:21Since he took office, the president has imposed, withdrawn, reimposed and then been forced to remove by the supreme court a series of haphazard, harmful and extremely costly tariffs throughout 2025. These tariffs cost american families upwards of $1,700 in higher prices. These tariffs were imposed on american businesses for the sake of boosting domestic manufacturing in america.
▶ 0:32:48But from february of last year through february of this year, the united states lost over 88,000 manufacturing jobs. That's more than 100 manufacturing jobs per day. A fact, I might add, that secretary ludwig was unaware of when I asked him about it during his testimony last month. The trump economy is hurting the working class, and this bill before us today does nothing to change the track of this country, the track that it's on.
▶ 0:33:16In fact, it would make our problems worse by cutting $144 million in funding from the economic development administration programs. This bill reduces investments that create jobs and revitalize distressed local communities, rural communities in particular, from 2018 to 2024, the eda created a retained more than 727,000 jobs, spurred more than $80 billion in private investment.
▶ 0:33:45We should be increasing our investment in programs like this, not scaling back support when the american people need it most. This bill cuts $142 million in funding from the international trade administration, which fights trade, unfair trade practices in other countries and supports american businesses trying to expand their exports. Unfair trade practices were another reason given for trump's tariffs.
▶ 0:34:10Yet the republican proposal is to take resources away from a crucial agency that combats these same tactics. There were over 44,000 gun deaths in 2024, 67% of all homicides in this country involve a firearm. This bill impedes efforts by nonpartisan, nonprofit groups that work to help keep communities safe from gun violence.
▶ 0:34:35Groups like the ethan miller song foundation and newtown action alliance in connecticut, they conduct important work to get guns off the streets. They partner with local law enforcement to organize voluntary buybacks. This includes the work of my constituent, kristen song, who organized the guilford gun buyback program in 2018 after she and her husband, mike, lost their son, ethan, to an unsecured firearm.
▶ 0:35:01This bill also defunds the atf, significantly weakening, weakening our ability to track illegal arms dealers, run down gun smugglers, and catch dangerous criminals who put american lives at risk. This bill proposes a more than $280 million cut to atf's budget, which would force the agency to reduce their workforce by more than 1000 positions.
▶ 0:35:24These officers work around the clock to keep us safe, but the republican proposal is to put them out of a job. This bill undermines public safety by slashing critical justice department grant funding, including a $50 million cut to the juvenile justice programs. It completely eliminates support for community violence intervention and prevention.
▶ 0:35:49Hate crime prevention, law enforcement, de-escalation training, and police community relations grants. These are proven tools that local law enforcement agencies rely on to prevent violence, build trust, and keep our community safe. The bill also decimates the legal services corporation, cutting its funding by more than half. The legal services corporation works.
▶ 0:36:13Their work helps veterans seniors who are victims of financial exploitation, people with disabilities, renters who are facing eviction or living in unsafe housing conditions, and victims of domestic violence. Earlier this month, my republican colleagues, alongside democrats and the american people, celebrated the remarkable success of the artemis mission. This was a groundbreaking achievement the furthest manned spaceflight from earth in human history.
▶ 0:36:41Chairman rogers called it, and I quote, a testament to remarkable innovation and public private partnerships, end quote. Chairman cole correctly noted that this mission, and I quote, starts with vision, but is delivered by deliberate, sustained funding, end quote. I could not agree more, but this bill does not do that.
▶ 0:37:02It includes significant cuts to nasa's science, aeronautics and education initiatives, and it cuts $1.8 billion from the national science foundation, undermining efforts to support basic scientific research, cutting edge technology development and stem education. This is at a time when, for the first time in history, the latest data shows that china has surpassed the united states in total research and development investment.
▶ 0:37:29These cuts are a failure to invest in our future. We need to ensure that the next generation of world class engineers, inventors, researchers and technicians are educated and employed here in the united states. These cuts hurt that effort. We ought to invest in the safety of our communities, the resilience of our economy, and the future of our country. This bill fails on each one of those accounts.
▶ 0:37:56I encourage my colleagues to oppose this measure, and let's work on a bipartisan basis to craft a bill that meets this moment. I thank you, and I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady for her remarks. I would the chair will always be generous with the clock. I would ask people it's going to be a long day. So if we can stay within the limits, that would be very, very helpful. Um, you still have general comments on the bill. Uh, the chair recognizes the gentleman from alabama, Mr.
▶ 0:38:27Strong, for general comments on the bill. >> thank you, chairman cole, chairman rogers, ranking member delauro, ranking member ming, for the work that you've done on this bill, uh, and your continued leadership. I thank the staff for all their hard work as vice chairman of commerce, justice and science subcommittee. I'm proud to stand strong in strong support of this fiscal year 2027 bill.
▶ 0:38:49This bill right sizes and reinforces spending an essential defending the american people, keeping our nation competitive and safe, and advancing american superiority in space and science. It takes key investments to secure the future of the space launch system, the human landing system, and nuclear thermal propulsion. I'm proud of the role that north alabama and marshall space flight center play in reinforcing america's leadership in space and strengthening national security.
▶ 0:39:17This bill also provides support for the department of justice to confront evolving national security threats to combat violent crime, and stop the flow of deadly fentanyl into communities. Uh, in my district, the fbi redstone stands at the forefront of law enforcement, innovation, and national security. Whether it's counting emerging uas threats or preventing cyber intrusions, the work being done at redstone is helping keep communities across the country safe.
▶ 0:39:45This bill strengthens and the capability that keeps america secure, competitive and ahead of our adversaries. North alabama is proud to help lead that mission. Thank you, chairman rogers and chairman cole for your leadership. I urge my colleagues to support this bill. I yield back. >> thank the gentleman for his remarks. Gentlelady from ohio. Miss kaptur is recognized for remarks on the bill. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. Chairman. Ranking member. Delauro. Chairman rogers. Ranking member.
▶ 0:40:15Ming, thank you for moving this important commerce justice state legislation forward. Uh, the cjs bill presents an opportunity to make america safer, more bountiful, and better prepared for the future.
▶ 0:40:30Yet the bill before us today cuts $1.2 billion from hardworking americans, makes families less safe, and attacks one of our true advantages american innovation and enterprise based on science technology, especially in the industrial arts. Let me reference and focus on the hollings manufacturing extension program.
▶ 0:40:56It's nicknamed mep manufacturing extension partnership, named after the former senator from south carolina, fritz hollings. This lesser known but effective mep program is a national network of centers, business development centers that provide custom services to small and medium sized manufacturers to improve production processes, upgrade technologies of manufacturers, improve their capabilities by
▶ 0:41:29Upgrading their technology, and launch and facilitate product innovation. People talk about the defense industrial base and improving manufacturing in america. Well, that's what this program is supposed to do. In my region alone, products have been launched as new brands and improved brands, and have gone on to national acclaim just in the food sector. We're so thrilled because a product called willy salsa, I own no stock in it, but has just been approved to go into a winn dixie for we in the north.
▶ 0:42:00That's a big deal. And mep centers across our country have worked with more than 154 000 emerging businesses and manufacturers to help create and retain more than 1.5 million jobs and create new jobs. Today, the network consists of over 1440 trusted advisors and experts across 460 mep center service locations nationwide that help manufacturers out today.
▶ 0:42:30These centers have helped create get ready, $148.7 billion in new sales. That's a win win the way I look at it, and 31.6 billion in cost savings. In a word, this program works. Imagine if you're a food manufacturer, you got to label your product, but the labels have to be made in a certain way so they're not toxic. That may not seem like a big deal to you, but it's a big deal to a company that wants to be successful.
▶ 0:42:59Yet despite this effectiveness for our economy and the way this program helps those manufacturers be better, last year, very curiously, the department of commerce and they really, really need to tell congress why they did this, suspended funding for the manufacturing extension partnership program without any warning, without releasing any audit report or findings to justify such an extreme action.
▶ 0:43:25This has left state and local governments scratching their head, because many of these programs are managed through the states. Uh, local firms are totally in the dark and I might say very upset, forcing immediate, indefinite pauses in technical assistance for manufacturers across states like my own ohio and others. This harmful decision makes no sense. The return on investment for american taxpayers is indisputable.
▶ 0:43:51For every federal dollar invested in these programs, they generate 25 times or more income. As I recall, we spent hours and hours in markups, hearings, and floor time, only to have this administration literally fire people. And programs like this get left in the lurch. What a mistake.
▶ 0:44:13This choice by the administration has led to, in my own region, the center for innovative food technology in toledo, ohio, to lay off all their employees and completely shut down and reduce their operations. Eventually, uh, they are looking at being forced to close. They're trying to get their footing for how to help all these companies without being connected to the department of commerce. And we're losing budding manufacturers and new product development across our region.
▶ 0:44:43Stopping mep funding was a draconian move. I could say plenty about who did it over there. Mr. lutnick. Uh, he he lost touch with the street. He lost touch. He was a big shot in new york city. Uh, in one of those investment firms. But the effects on small business and success stories like willi salsa and grady's barbecue sauce, it really hurts. These companies.
▶ 0:45:07These new brands came as a result of the northwest ohio's collaborative kitchen operated by sift, not only allowing these brands to grow and prosper, but to become shining examples of new businesses, uh, in places that desperately, believe me, need new businesses. It stifles creativity. What a mistake. We cannot permit the executive branch to impound appropriated funds simply because they think it would be fun.
▶ 0:45:33I guess this sets a dangerous constitutional precedent and undermines the important work being done in community after community after community, keeping people newly employed and promoting what we call the american dream. I have many other reasons I could complain about this bill, but I urge my colleagues to reconsider this work instead. For a bipartisan package that helps the american people, I cannot in good faith vote for this bill as it stands now, and I yield back. Thank you.
▶ 0:46:03>> thank gentlelady for her remarks. Gentleman from indiana. Mr. shreeve is recognized for remarks on the bill. Well. We'll give him another chance later, I guess. The gentleman from georgia, Mr. bishop, is recognized for remarks on the bill. Thank you. Mr. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. Um, I remember delauro, chairman rogers, ranking member.
▶ 0:46:31Ming, I rise in opposition to the fy 27 commerce, justice, science and related agencies act. Uh, in a moment when working families are already facing rising costs, growing uncertainty and shrinking support, this bill does not offer relief. Uh, it pulls the rug out from under them. The constitution vests congress with the power of the purse. As part of our article one responsibilities.
▶ 0:46:58It's our job to ensure that taxpayer dollars serve the public interest by protecting the vulnerable, advancing opportunity, and upholding justice. Unfortunately, the bill before us today fails those tests, but I'm pleased that the bill does not include the draconian cuts proposed by president trump in his budget.
▶ 0:47:21It nevertheless includes provisions that I fear will make our streets less safe, prevent low income americans from having their day in court, and adversely impact local downtown revitalization and business development projects, and make our nation less competitive.
▶ 0:47:38In science, for example, it makes little sense to slash funding for the atf and juvenile justice grants when so many americans all across the country are concerned about gun violence and crime in our communities, it makes little sense to underfund the U.S. census bureau, which will hinder its efforts to conduct an accurate, cost efficient count in 2030.
▶ 0:48:02And it makes little sense to cut by $55 million funding for the equal employment opportunity commission when americans are still experiencing discrimination in the workplace and a widening gender wage gap. I'm especially concerned about the.
▶ 0:48:58$272 million cut to the legal services corporation legal aid organizations funded by legal services corporation serve every congressional district in the country, including mine. Our constituents turn to these offices when they have nowhere else to go and cannot afford a lawyer. Their value is widely recognized, and support for this work has long been bipartisan. The legal services corporation is the single largest funder of civil legal aid in the united states. If these cuts are enacted, it would take legal services back decades, despite the fact that more and more americans are now eligible for civil legal aid, this massive reduction means millions fewer people would receive the legal assistance they need.
▶ 0:49:26That includes hundreds of thousands of children and seniors, as well as tens of thousands of veterans and survivors of domestic violence who will be left without representation in life altering civil cases. Gutting this program means abandoning millions of americans and undermining one of the most fundamental principles of our democracy equal justice under law. Another provision I'm deeply concerned about is the 73% cut to the minority business development agency. Mbda is the only federal agency dedicated to supporting minority owned businesses that have long faced structural barriers to accessing capital, securing contracts and scaling operations. The mbda helps to secure billions of dollars in contracts and capital for minority business enterprises.
▶ 0:49:55Whether it's a small construction company landing its first federal contract, a local bakery securing the loan it needs to grow. This support makes all the difference in the world. We should be doing more to open doors to minority owned businesses, not making it harder for them to get in the room. The economic development administration is another casualty of this bill, which, for the proposed $144 million cut.
▶ 0:50:19The eda is a vital partner for communities recovering from economic hardship, especially in rural and underserved areas. It funds projects that improve essential infrastructure, like upgrading water and sewer systems in georgia and expanding broadband access to all of our rural communities. It also supports workforce training that helps prepare americans across the nation for good paying jobs and growing industries. I've seen firsthand how these investments help strengthen local economies and improve lives.
▶ 0:50:48Cutting this funding now would slow down progress and leave many hard working americans further behind. Finally, I strongly oppose the bill's 23% cut to the national science foundation, which would greatly weaken the foundation of american scientific leadership in the world.
▶ 0:51:06Again, I'll vote against this bill, and I urge my colleagues to join me in opposition and to come together on a bipartisan basis to provide the funding necessary in this bill to provide for the needs of all americans. With that, I yield back. >> thank the gentleman for his remarks. Gentleman from georgia. Mr. clyde is recognized for remarks on the bill. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise to give my very strong support for the fiscal year 2027 commerce, justice, science appropriations bill.
▶ 0:51:35The bill before us today is fiscally conservative. By right sizing federal agencies and refocusing programs and operations on their core missions. Additionally, this bill invests in the fight against deadly fentanyl, provides robust funding for state and local law enforcement, and protects americans constitutional rights.
▶ 0:51:53I'm particularly proud of the work that chairman rogers and I have done to include provisions that secure our god given second amendment rights, the declaration of independence, the birth certificate of our nation proclaims that all men are endowed with certain unalienable rights. Among them are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and that government exists to secure. To secure those rights.
▶ 0:52:15And the second amendment is the practical guardian of those god given rights, ensuring that free citizens retain the ultimate means to defend their lives, their families and their liberty. When the department of justice defends unconstitutional gun regulations in the atf is weaponized against law abiding americans, the government has betrayed its founding purpose. House republicans understand that restoring the second amendment is not merely a policy matter, it is a fulfillment of this nation's oldest and most sacred promise to its people.
▶ 0:52:44In that spirit, this bill rightfully repeals every biden era atf rule that infringed on lawful gun owners, including the atf's pistol brace rule, the privately made firearms regulations, and the universal background check requirement.
▶ 0:52:59Furthermore, this bill includes my amendment offered last year to eliminate the registration requirement for suppressors and short barreled firearms under the draconian national firearms act, congressional republicans and president trump delivered the biggest second amendment victory in over 90 years by eliminating the nfa transfer and manufacturing taxes for short barreled firearms and suppressors in the one big, beautiful bill. Now, our intent behind this action was to remove both the taxation and registration requirements for these firearms.
▶ 0:53:26After all, those two requirements are inseparably linked. Without the nfa tax, there is no foundation for nfa registration. Unfortunately, the doj is currently ignoring this congressional intent and defending this nfa registration in court while litigation is ongoing, american tax dollars should not be used to fund invalidated nfa requirements.
▶ 0:53:50Simply put, the national firearms act as unjustly subjected american gun owners to unconstitutional infringements on our second amendment freedoms for over nine decades. When I came to washington, I promised to not only protect my constituents second amendment rights, but to restore what has been lost. In addition, this bill takes meaningful strides in reforming and reducing the size and scope of the bureau of alcohol, tobacco and firearms. The atf has long operated as an agency at war with the very industry and citizens it regulates.
▶ 0:54:18But now I must commend president trump for the new leadership at atf, which gives us hope and I appreciate the newly senate confirmed director cicada and the new chief counsel. This bill would impose lasting cultural and operational reform by refocusing the agency's resources on genuine criminal enforcement against violent criminals, rather than regulatory harassment of law abiding gun owners and federal firearms licensees.
▶ 0:54:44The fy 27 cjs bill cuts the atf budget by $285 million, representing an 18% cut from fiscal year 26. This bill also includes important policy riders that would shut down the atf's 1 billion plus record gun registry, prohibit mandatory background or buyback programs, and defend red flag laws.
▶ 0:55:05I was a proud champion to a provision in the bill report that codifies president trump's fy 27 budget request for a $1.4 million to establish the second amendment rights section within the department of justice's civil rights division.
▶ 0:55:21This new section will be dedicated to protecting americans constitutional right to keep and bear arms by monitoring state and local laws, regulations, policies and practices for unlawful infringements and pursuing enforcement actions where necessary. While the biden department of justice wanted to charge service disabled veterans with felonies for attaching a stabilizing brace to their firearm, the trump doj is already delivering meaningful second amendment victories through its new second amendment rights section.
▶ 0:55:52Gun owners across the country are already reaping the benefits. The civil rights division at doj has sued multiple blue state and local jurisdictions for unconstitutional gun laws. I look forward to ensuring this office has the resources and the authority it needs to continue defending the second amendment rights of all americans. I thank chairman rogers. I thank chairman cole for these important second amendment protections that this bill advances, and I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back 12 seconds. >> I thank the gentleman.
▶ 0:56:21I hope others follow your example. Uh, with that, the chair recognizes the gentlelady from minnesota for remarks on the bill. Chairman. >> I rise currently to oppose this bill, and our job in this committee is to make investments that meet the needs of the american people. The choice we make reflects our values and our commitments.
▶ 0:56:47There is one choice that has been made in this bill that I support, and that is the funding for justice in indian country. In the interior appropriations subcommittee, we've been focusing on addressing the missing and murdered indigenous women in a truly nonpartisan way. I want to thank chairman simpson and ranking member pingree for the work that they've done on that. The doj is an important source of funding to get this work done.
▶ 0:57:13The continued strong support in this bill for the tribal set aside for crime victims fund on research and violence against women also is vitally important. The manager's amendment also ensures that nasa has the ability to manufacture the next generation of space vehicles using solid state friction stir welding, and that's an important new, um, entry into how we can make this equipment work better and smarter for all of us.
▶ 0:57:43So I want to thank the chair and the ranking member for working with me on that. But there's other choices in this bill I could not support. The bill cuts overall funding for the national science foundation by $1.8 billion. I cannot support a bill that follows the trump's administration lead on dismantling american scientific research and innovation. Investments today in basic science will guide our nation's future advances in quantum computing, clean energy, and other fields that could transform our economy.
▶ 0:58:13The development of early disease detection tools and devices that could improve our nation's health dramatically. Research in areas from cybersecurity to space to weather will not only strengthen our national security, but our economic security as well. This bill diminishes all of that by the cutting that's in here.
▶ 0:58:34And as we celebrate 250 years of our nation's governed by the rule of law, this bill makes a 50% cut to the legal services corporation, which supports justice for all americans, especially those in the low income area.
▶ 0:58:50In my district alone, this cut would mean 6000 people would lose access to health protection through legal assistance, help with their homes to protect those and their families, their ability to have their fair day in court will disappear. So currently, this bill is written as simply does not meet the needs of our nation. And I hope we can work together to improve this bill and others for the american people. I thank you, Mr.
▶ 0:59:18Chair, and I'm yielding back two minutes and 14 seconds. >> what a virtuous competition. Thank the gentlelady for her remarks and her brevity. Nice try. The gentleman from indiana, Mr. shreeve, is recognized for remarks on the bill. >> thank you, Mr.
▶ 0:59:44Chairman and chairman rogers and ranking member meng for your important work on this bill. For too long, scammers have stayed ahead of us, and this bill. Will meaningfully address this fast growing problem.
▶ 1:00:02Industrial sized scams centers, most of which are anchored in other parts of the world, including southeast asia, um, have weaponized ai and the pace is only quickening. They spoof trusted agencies and built sophisticated criminal organizations. While our response, our U.S. responses remain fragmented.
▶ 1:00:26According to our own ftc, fraud costs our citizens an estimated $196 billion in 2024, and this is a massively underreported problem. And 81 billion of that is estimated to come from our seniors.
▶ 1:00:45From my seat on my my now former seat on the foreign affairs committee, I worked to organize a bipartisan effort, uh, founded the congressional stop scams caucus to take meaningful enforcement steps to turn the tide on this fast growing problem. This bill. Directs our department of justice to establish a victim restitution program. So these funds may be returned to the americans who were robbed.
▶ 1:01:13It establishes coordinated task force among state, federal, and local law enforcement, along with the private sector. And it requires our fbi to develop a national strategy to combat scams. It requires long overdue modernization of the ic3 system, so reports do not sit in a backlog while investigations go go cold.
▶ 1:01:42These are concrete reforms, and they'll better protect my constituents in indiana and all of yours. This bill fights back. I urge my colleagues to support this. Mr. chairman, I yield back two minutes and 49 seconds. >> love it. Keep at it. I thank the gentleman for his remarks. Gentlelady from florida, miss wasserman schultz, is recognized for remarks on the bill. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:02:11I want to start by noting my deep pride in the hard working men and women of nasa and everyone who contributed to the success of the artemis mission just this month, just last month. I'm proud that florida is home to the space coast, a fast growing aerospace industry, and the future of nasa missions to the moon, mars, and beyond.
▶ 1:02:29In spite of that pride, I unfortunately must rise in opposition to this funding bill for a range of issues, including the unacceptable cuts to nasa's science, aeronautics and education initiatives at a time when life is becoming less and less affordable for families, communities and communities are facing rising threats, and the rule of law is under attack, and this bill fails to meet the moment. President trump has destroyed the independence of the department of justice and inverted its mission.
▶ 1:02:58What was once the last line of defense against organized crime has become trump's personal criminal defense team and personal vengeance lawyers. He has spent the last year and a half openly converting the doj into a political weapon against his opponents and a shield against accountability for his brazen corruption. He has pardoned transnational drug traffickers, crypto terrorists, terrorist financiers and fraudsters who stole billions from seniors and teachers.
▶ 1:03:23He put over 1000 january 6th terrorists back on american streets, dozens of whom have already been rearrested for violent crimes. Trump has seemingly sold many of these pardons. Yes, sold them to the wealthy and well-connected while overseeing the systematic dismantling of anti-corruption efforts at doj. Meanwhile, trump, his family members and his billionaire friends keep getting richer while everybody else suffers the consequences of trump's failed economic policies.
▶ 1:03:51This bill does nothing to address trump's tariffs, which are an illegal tax on the things that every american family buys. It does nothing to address the unsustainable cost of living. To the contrary, parts of this bill will genuinely make things worse for americans. Small business businesses kneecapped by trump's tariff and gas price hikes now have to swallow cuts in this bill to the agencies that promote their products to global markets. Make it make sense.
▶ 1:04:16Manufacturing jobs are in decline, and the programs that keep us growing and competitive are being left in the dust. People with cancer or chronic diseases whose premiums have tripled denied access, will be denied access to high tech medical care. As we slam the door on imported mris and other diagnostic equipment. And while americans take items out of their grocery carts and ration prescriptions, the doj is committing in broad daylight the largest criminal cover up in history.
▶ 1:04:46Congress had to pass a law to compel president trump to release the epstein files, and still, the majority of documents have not been released to the public. I've gone twice to view the unredacted files at doj. Both times I've identified potential coconspirators, whose names are still redacted, and victims whose information is unredacted. Hundreds of epstein affiliates have been revealed despite the trump administration's best efforts to shield them, and zero have been held accountable.
▶ 1:05:16Here's a stat for you if somebody abused women and girls with jeffrey epstein, they are literally more likely to be hired by trump's administration than prosecuted by it. And there's been a lot of talk about how this president is tough on crime. I'm sure there will be more, but I, for one, think it is bad to divert thousands of fbi agents from disrupting from disrupting trafficking rings and drug cartels, to deputize them against law abiding immigrants.
▶ 1:05:40I think that before president trump launched his strategic disaster of a war against the leading state sponsor of terror, he maybe shouldn't have replaced career counterterrorist specialists with political cronies and sycophants. I think we shouldn't condition funding for local law enforcement based on whether they spend their time staffing ice detention camps. And I think that when anti-semitic attacks and political violence are surging, perhaps we should include more than $0 of funding for preventing hate crimes, which is what this bill does.
▶ 1:06:07These are the kinds of things we're supposed to address in this bill. Our fundamental freedoms and the rule of law are under attack. How is it that my colleagues, who used to at least pretend to care about the constitution when president biden was in office, now pretend that article one simply doesn't exist. This bill does nothing to fend off trump's attacks on the separation of powers, free speech, equal protection, voting rights or privacy. Those are in the constitution, too. But this bill and report mentioned guns, firearms and the second amendment more than 90 times.
▶ 1:06:36The only other amendments worthy of mention in this report are, quote, soil amendments. I can only conclude that besides guns, the rest of our bill of rights is treated worse than dirt. I cannot explain why millions of mostly black and hispanic americans are denied representation in voting rights in my state and across the south, and this bill only seems to care about protecting trump and appeasing the gun lobby. This bill doesn't just misplace our resources and attention. It misses the point entirely.
▶ 1:07:01The trump administration treats our laws and our constitution with venomous contempt, and the supreme court is more interested in disenfranchizing my constituents than putting a check on these abuses. It's up to us. As appropriators, we must step in and hold the line. And this bill does nowhere near close enough in its current form. I cannot support this bill, and I yield back. Thank you, Mr. chairman. >> thank gentlelady for her comments. The gentleman from texas, Mr. cuellar, is recognized for remarks on the bill. Thank you, Mr. chairman. I want to thank you.
▶ 1:07:32>> and the ranking member and the staff in particular. I want to thank chairman rogers and ranking member miss meg also and their staff for working on this bill. Look, we do understand this bill needs a little bit more work to do, and at the end of the time, it will be a bipartisan bill. We all know the the drill here. But I do want to talk about a couple provisions that I worked with the chairman and the ranking member and other members that I think will be good.
▶ 1:07:58The first one has to do with fighting organized crime, cargo and retail theft. And I appreciate the inclusion of the language where we get the federal law enforcement, doj and other folks to work with state and local law enforcement to address the issue, uh, of, um, cargo theft and supply chain fraud, investigating prosecuting those cases are important.
▶ 1:08:26Uh, the bill also dedicates $2 million to stand up this task force to make sure that we go at the areas where we find the highest, uh, cargo theft, um, and make sure that we go after them. Look, we know that this cargo theft doesn't work in isolated areas. Uh, we're looking at organized crime, drug trafficking, illicit financing. Uh, and it requires a coordinated effort.
▶ 1:08:54Uh, so I thank the chairman, the ranking member, for adding this particular language. I also want to thank him for including the language to combat organized animal cruelty. Uh, and in particular, I want to say that the language, uh, that directs them to go, uh, and increase efforts to investigate and dismantle, uh, dog fighting and cockfighting operations.
▶ 1:09:19Uh, it's important, especially work with usda and federal and state local law enforcement. Again, it's also documented that illegal animal fighting, drug trafficking, and money laundering is it's all tied in together. So I want to thank, uh, the, the committee for adding that. The other area that I want to add also is the area with, um, ai standards and small business innovation.
▶ 1:09:43Uh, this bill directs the national institute of standards and technology to advance voluntary consensus standards for artificial intelligence and genetic ai systems working across, uh, the industry, academia, and of course, government, uh, clear standards to reduce risk and lower barriers to adopt, uh, is important. And I want to say thank you for that.
▶ 1:10:10It also directs the nist to coordinate with sba to develop a and get practical ai resources for small businesses, uh, to, and make sure that they're updated on a regular basis. Uh, this again, is important to make sure that we keep up with ai standards.
▶ 1:10:31Finally, the last area that I want to say thank you to the chairman and the ranking member, uh, the inclusion of the $84 million for school safety program under the stop school violence act. Uh, this, again, uh, is important to make sure that we provide training on warning signs.
▶ 1:10:50Uh, and, uh, you know, the violence that we see that includes also, uh, the violence, the suicide, the mental health crisis intervention, and the prevention, which is so important. I think we've seen case after case of school violence, uh, that those preventive steps are important, especially when it comes to mental health crisis intervention. So I want to say thank you on that. We got to keep our schools safe.
▶ 1:11:17Uh, so chairman and ranking member to all the staff, I want to say thank you. Uh, we need a little bit more work to do. It will be a bipartisan bill, but I want to thank you for this first step. So with that, I yield the the back of my time. Thank you, Mr. chairman. >> thank you. Excuse me. I thank the gentleman for his remarks. Uh, just quickly, I think probably everybody knows, but there is lunch available, uh, across the hall. Thank you, Mr. chairman, for the hearty meal.
▶ 1:11:45You'd expect to get through a long markup. Five guys, uh, hamburgers and fries. Pretty good stuff with that. Uh, the gentlelady from new jersey, miss watson coleman, is recognized for remarks on the bill. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise in opposition to this bill as it's currently configured. This bill kneecaps the department of justice from doing what it's supposed to do, protecting the american people from criminals.
▶ 1:12:14Yet again, we have trump priorities increasing hardship and decreasing protections for everyday americans. Thanks to proposed funding cuts, it will be harder for law enforcement to prevent gun and drug trafficking and transnational crime. It will also be harder for the underserved to access legal services.
▶ 1:12:37Instead, money is being poured into a war that americans did not ask for, that congress did not approve. It is incredibly misguided. In the first quarter of this year, all 50 states experienced shooting deaths and the nation faced 94 mass shootings, compared to 69 in quarter 1 in 2025.
▶ 1:13:00Meanwhile, federal drug prosecutions have fallen to their lowest level in decades. But this is not because of more effective enforcement. No, it is because resources were shifted so that ice can deport people. The result? Thousands of people were wrongfully detained, families were torn apart, and people have died, all while drug trafficking continued and drug conspiracy charges fell.
▶ 1:13:31While I'm on this topic of immigration, this bill also eliminates funding for the legal orientation program, which received 27.5 million last year and helps educate non-citizens facing immigration court proceedings regarding legal and courtroom processes. By intentionally not helping to educate non-citizens on the legal process.
▶ 1:13:57This only stifles their ability to have proper representation and defense, and it makes it easier for officials to prevent them from building a life here for themselves and their families and our communities. Judges have already ruled more than 10,000 times against ice, a 9 to 1 ratio. It is not a secret that many of these cases were wrongful prosecutions. This funding cut is an abomination.
▶ 1:14:29Time after time, the gop has claimed to stand for something while doing the opposite. When it comes to step up to the plate. And since trump took power, my republican colleagues have sought to do the following cut funding for traditional violence prevention programs, cut hundreds of law enforcement jobs, endorse or allow immigration officials to conduct violent and discriminatory operations, cut
▶ 1:15:00$200 million for legal services and engage in specious discrimination complaints in the equal employment opportunity commission. These moves are not emblematic of a so-called law and order administration. Instead, they have caused chaos in our communities. So once again, I find myself asking, how do these moves make life better for the american people? I yield back, thank you. >> I thank the gentlelady for her remarks.
▶ 1:15:30Gentleman from new york, Mr. morelli, is recognized for remarks on the bill. >> thank you. Uh. >> thank you, chairman. >> kohl. Ranking member delauro, thank you to the subcommittee chair, uh, mister rogers, and to ranking member grace meng. And thank you to all the staff. I know whether we might agree or disagree on the final product, how much time and effort is put in and want to just express my appreciation.
▶ 1:15:59Um, it is, however, with, um, deep concerns that I rise today over the measure before us and urge members oppose the legislation before us. The bill does one thing very clearly. It cuts investments that help american communities grow, stay safe, and local companies to compete. The bill would cut $144 million from the economic development administration, which means less support for small businesses, less support for local manufacturers, fewer jobs, fewer opportunities.
▶ 1:16:28And these are not just abstract numbers. We have lost 89,000 manufacturing jobs since this administration took office last january 80th 9000. These cuts would only mean fewer economic opportunities and diminishment of investment in local industries, while allowing global competitors like china to gain ground.
▶ 1:16:50The bill reduces funding for the national science foundation by $1.8 billion, jeopardizing critical research into cancer detection, medical devices and life saving drug development, slowing down the innovations that improve and save lives. The bill makes staggering cuts to nist, the national institute of standards and technology, and the national oceanic and atmospheric administration's research accounts.
▶ 1:17:14These agencies help power the scientific breakthroughs and weather forecasting systems americans rely on literally every single day. At a time when communities are facing more floods, more storms, more natural disasters, which are also more intense. The bill cuts the very research that helps keep people safe and prepared. The hypocrisy is truly astonishing, and it doesn't end there.
▶ 1:17:39The trump administration constantly talks about public safety, but the bill cuts the atf by $285 million. Hundreds of positions could be lost, which means fewer agents which are investigating gun traffickers, fewer resources targeting violent criminals, fewer tools to stop illegal guns from reaching our streets.
▶ 1:18:00On top of these cuts, the bill completely eliminates community violence intervention and prevention grants, hate crime prevention grants, community policing, development grants, and more. All programs that have bipartisan support and are proven to reduce violence and crime in our country.
▶ 1:18:16You cannot claim to support law enforcement while cutting the very programs law enforcement uses to keep communities safe, and I'd be remiss if I did not mention the administration's dismantling of the organized crime drug enforcement task force. This was the centerpiece of the department of justice's strategy to combat transnational organized crime and reduce the availability of illicit narcotics nationwide. But at the whims of this administration, it was eliminated without cause.
▶ 1:18:45The recklessness of this administration is out of control. Even dismantling the bipartisan agency task force championed by ronald reagan, the anti-crime. This anti-crime initiative was one of the most successful tools we had to combat drug trafficking and transnational crime, widely supported by democrats and republicans for decades. And president trump tore it down anyway. He's no longer just attacking democratic priorities.
▶ 1:19:11He's actively getting rid of common sense public safety programs, and we must do everything we can to stop him. Once again, I appreciate chairman rogers and the majority working with me to include safeguards, ensuring funds, continue supporting investigations into drug trafficking and transnational organized crime. But the fact that we even have to fight for this should alarm every single person in this room. Lastly, while the department of justice received $1.5 billion increase in funding, I rise with serious concerns about how they're allocating the money.
▶ 1:19:40The department of justice is now spending its time and money carrying out president trump's cruel immigration agenda. At the same time, the administration is diverting more than $100 million away from programs that help vulnerable americans, including trafficking crimes and survivors of sexual assault. So while the administration endlessly touts reducing corruption, fraud, and waste, what they're really doing is creating more delays, more confusion and more dysfunction.
▶ 1:20:08It's simply unacceptable, which is why I appreciate the committee's inclusion of oversight language requiring accountability for these delays in funding decisions. Because congress controls the power of the purse, not the administration. Our job is to allocate resources. Our job is oversight, our job is accountability. And most importantly, our job is to speak up when policies hurt the people we represent. This bill cuts investments, rely. Americans rely on. It weakens public safety. It undermines innovation, and it moves this country in the wrong direction.
▶ 1:20:40I urge my colleagues to reject it. And, Mr. chairman, with that, I yield back. Sir. >> I thank the gentleman for his remarks. Gentlelady from pennsylvania. Miss dean's recognized for remarks on the bill. >> thank you, chairman cole. Chairman rogers, ranking member delauro, ranking member. Meng. Uh, and thank you to the talented committee staff on both sides. Uh, today, I rise in opposition to this bill.
▶ 1:21:07This bill harms our economy and small businesses, makes america less safe by cutting programs our local law enforcement agencies rely upon and further erodes our nation's scientific leadership. I.
▶ 1:21:20Since taking office, president trump has illegally imposed the highest tariff rates on the american family since the great depression, when the supreme court struck down his tariffs as illegal, unconstitutional in february, president trump continued imposing his illegal tariffs on americans through section 122 of the trade act, which just last week was ruled unlawful by the us court of international trade.
▶ 1:21:46Every day my constituents tell me about the affordability crisis these illegal tariffs have created. Americans are struggling to afford groceries, gas, rent, medicine. This is not the time to legally impose depression era tariffs. I also hear from small businesses in my district about their struggles navigating the economic uncertainty these illegal tariffs have caused. Businesses need certainty and predictability.
▶ 1:22:14This chaotic tariff policy is everything but that instead of addressing the affordability crisis created by these tariffs, this bill guts programs that so many small businesses rely upon to keep prices down. This bill cuts the economic development administration by $144 million below fy 26 level, greatly reducing our investment in programs that creates jobs, helps small businesses thrive and revitalize distressed communities at the local level.
▶ 1:22:45This bill cuts the international trade administration by $142 million below fy 26, reducing our investment in the primary agency tasked with promoting american exports and fighting the unfair trade practices of other countries on science. This bill erodes our nation's leadership position in science by cutting programs designed to cultivate our next generation of scientists.
▶ 1:23:11For example, this bill cuts, inexplicably nasa's stem engagement program by $59 million below fy 26 levels and eliminates two of nasa's four stem initiatives. Baffling to me on safety, this bill makes america less safe by eliminating programs that so many of our local law enforcement agencies have relied upon.
▶ 1:23:34This bill cuts the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives, the atf, by $285 million compared with fy 26. Atf works with local law enforcement agencies to prevent and prosecute violent crime and illegal gun trafficking, as is. This funding level would force atf to reduce its already limited workforce by hundreds of positions.
▶ 1:24:03That makes our communities less safe and takes away our promise of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Crimes are inherently more violent when guns are involved, and this bill strips resources that local law enforcement agencies rely upon to keep illegal guns off our street. And in a time when antisemitism is rising, this bill completely eliminates funding for the hate crime prevention grants.
▶ 1:24:29At a time when we know that community violence intervention programs are working, this bill eliminates funding for community violence intervention and prevention grants. Despite their evidence of efficacy. This bill actually defunds the police. Surprising to me because that is not something this majority party likes to run on. On cruelty.
▶ 1:24:52Finally, I'm disheartened to see the cruelty behind the massive cuts to the legal services corporation, which provides legal assistance to the poor, to underserved communities without access to counsel. This bill funds lsc at 272 million below below fy 26, which was already too low. In closing, Mr. chairman, americans are struggling to afford groceries, gas and rent, and this bill only exacerbates these problems.
▶ 1:25:23But we have only to listen to our president who said yesterday, and I quote, as he was on his way to china, he said, I quote, I don't think about americans financial situation at all. I don't think about anybody. End quote. I hope you all will join me in opposing this bill and I yield back. >> thank you, gentlelady, for her remarks. The gentleman from maryland, Mr. hoyer, is recognized for remarks on the bill. >> thank you very much, Mr.
▶ 1:25:54Chairman. First, let me say the chairman says regularly and correctly that this is the first step. That's the good news. The good news is it's not the last step. And the good news is this bill will change very substantially before it is sent to the president, if, in fact, it is. And I want to thank the ranking member of our subcommittee, miss meng, for her outstanding work. Uh, I want to thank Mr.
▶ 1:26:21Rogers for his leadership in so many critical areas, particularly dealing with drug abuse in our country that cost the lives of so many. Like most of the appropriations bills before this committee, this one short changes those critical national priorities, uh, limiting the positive impact the federal government can have and should have on improving the lives of americans.
▶ 1:26:47We'll hear a lot today about the effects of president trump's illegal tariffs on our working families, and how this bill makes dangerous cuts to the agencies that could help alleviate their pain. But I want to take a few moments first and make sure the committee fully understands the impact of cuts to science research at nasa.
▶ 1:27:08In this bill, very frankly, the extraordinary progress that we have made in the space program has led to extraordinary innovation and inventions and better technical abilities for not only america, but for the entire world.
▶ 1:27:27The crew that took artemis around the moon inspired us just as the first step for mankind did when we first landed on immune. These people inspired the people of this nation and billions around the world who look each night at the moon and dream of where humanity might go over generations to come.
▶ 1:27:53As their capsule slipped behind the waning moon, beyond the reach of earth's communications, its four occupants were hard at work. They spent their time on the far side of the moon, observing landscapes never before seen by human eyes, capturing more than 12,000 photographs and high definition videos, and transmitting more than 480gb of lunar data back to the earth before they even splashed down in the pacific.
▶ 1:28:24Nasa scientists, including many at goddard space flight center in the district of Mr. iv, were already sifting through this data and using it to develop a better understanding of the moon. Mr. chairman, it was the scientists at nasa goddard who developed the communication system used on artemis orion spacecraft and the data transfer system that sent its findings back to earth. Now, that was for that mission.
▶ 1:28:51But the ramifications of the research and what we learned are for the entire world and for creating jobs here in america. Goddard also produced the james webb telescope, which is sending us back, jaw dropping images of the universe back to the very, almost beginning of time. This is part of america's unique contribution to advancing human knowledge and exploration.
▶ 1:29:20Cost of cutting this funding will be far greater than $1.3 billion. It will come with costs to what our nation represents and to what we as human beings.
▶ 1:29:33The latest in a chain of explorers over the generations are trying to achieve during this time on earth, just as I hope we will reconsider the dangerous cuts this bill makes to other science and research agencies like noaa, nist and national science foundation, and the number of programs that every member of this committee that has spoken.
▶ 1:29:59Reference that help americans at a time of tough economic stress for them. Our science programs do not only send humans into the moon, but they make a difference for our economy here on earth. They mean the world to millions in our country who use scientific discoveries and research every day, even without knowing it.
▶ 1:30:24For noaa in particular, whose national center for weather and climate prediction predicts the funding, excuse me, predicts dangerous storms, other catastrophes that may. We are subject to by natural disasters. At the same time, this bill also removes critical tools for law enforcement. It's so interesting that we are cutting crime fighting.
▶ 1:30:48We're cutting, getting after tax evaders, and we are cutting other regulatory agencies at a time when we talk about making sure people follow the rules, people follow the rules because the referee is on the field. You take the referee off the field, not so much.
▶ 1:31:09This bill slashes economic development assistance, particularly for rural communities, which is sorely needed to make the painful impacts of the trump tariffs and rising gas prices from the president's war of choice, referred to by the gentlelady from new jersey. So, Mr. chairman, I believe that we must do better in this bill. The good news, ladies and gentlemen, is I want to congratulate chairman rogers, as he did last year.
▶ 1:31:40Essentially, he and the committee rejected the draconian cuts proposed by the administration. And while this bill is not as good as I would like it, it is better than the administration proposed, by far. And I have great confidence that mister rogers, the chairman of this committee, and the ranking member, miss meng, will reach.
▶ 1:32:03As the gentleman from texas said, a bill that can and hopefully will receive bipartisan support. But at this point in time, mister chairman, I'm going to oppose this bill because I think the cuts in it undermine america's competitiveness and undermine america's future. I yield back. >> thank the gentleman for his remarks. Are there any other members wishing to make general comments on the bill?
▶ 1:32:31Seeing none, uh, I would like to recognize chairman rogers to offer a manager's amendment. Thank you, Mr. chairman. I have an amendment at the desk. Rogers. Number one, I would ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of the amendment. Without objection, the reading is dispensed with and the gentleman is recognized to explain the amendment. Mr.
▶ 1:33:00Chairman, this manager's amendment contains technical and non-controversial changes to bill and report language agreed to by both sides of the aisle. I urge the adoption of this amendment and I yield back. Thank the gentleman. The gentlelady from new york, miss ming, is recognized to address the manager's amendment. >> I rise in support of the chairman's amendment. The amendment accommodates changes from both sides of the aisle and makes a number of technical corrections. I ask my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back.
▶ 1:33:32>> thank the gentlelady. Do any other members seek recognition to speak to the amendment? Yes. The gentleman from texas, Mr. cuellar, is recognized. >> yes, sir. Uh. >> quickly, I just want to say, uh, Mr. chairman, thank you so much. Uh, two items, uh, one has to do with immigration judges to make sure that we work on the backlog. So I want to say thank you so much for putting that amendment. Uh, and then the second amendment, uh, has to do with the performance budgeting. As you know, Mr.
▶ 1:34:03Chairman, we've added this on different amendments. All we're trying to say, hey, let's look at rules and regulations that are outdated. Uh, let's see how we can get the best bang for the dollar. So with that, I want to say thank you, you guys. >> thank the gentleman. Any other members seek recognition to address the amendment? Seeing none, I recognize chairman rogers for one minute to close. Thank you, Mr. chairman. I ask for favorable consideration of this amendment and I yield back. I thank the gentleman. The question is now on the amendment. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed say no.
▶ 1:34:33The opinion of the chair. The ayes have it. The amendment is adopted. Uh, gentlelady from connecticut. Mr. was recognized for purposes of an amendment. >> Mr. chairman, I have an amendment at the desk, and I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with. >> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her amendment. >> thank you so much, Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:34:58My amendment would provide $30 million for the department of justice public integrity section, which was created in the wake of the watergate scandal to prevent corruption by public officials and prosecute corruption. When it does occur, the public integrity section works hand in glove with federal prosecutors to advise them on corporate corruption cases.
▶ 1:35:20That includes, uh, consulting on how best to pursue charges and build the strongest case, helping to write court filings and reviewing evidence. While they often assist other offices in their work, the public integrity section has pursued charges independently, bringing cases all the way through to trial and conviction. They are career, nonpartisan prosecutors who are experts in their field, and law enforcement who have brought public corruption cases.
▶ 1:35:53Um, uh, and those who have brought those cases have found their services to be indispensable. Last year, the trump administration decimated the public integrity section, reassigning the vast majority of their staff and forcing out career nonpartisan attorneys who have prosecuted corruption by both democrats and republicans over the years.
▶ 1:36:17When the trump administration took office, there were 36 attorneys dedicated full time to investigating and prosecuting political corruption at the public integrity section. By september of last year, there were only two left. That is a 94% reduction. Is that because there has been a 94% decline in political corruption, or is it because this is not a priority for this administration?
▶ 1:36:42Might it be because they see an advantage in having fewer people looking into corruption at the highest levels of government? A key function of the public integrity section was to prevent political appointees from pursuing politically motivated prosecutions. But the trump administration has torn down those guardrails, and we are seeing the effects of that decision play out in real time.
▶ 1:37:07This administration has launched investigations and filed, in my opinion, meritless charges against several of the president's perceived enemies. They recently fired newly filed new charges against former fbi director james comey. After their previous indictment fell flat, they filed damages against new york attorney general letitia james, whose charges were also dismissed.
▶ 1:37:32They even launched an investigation into federal reserve board chair jerome powell, an investigation, which they also recently dropped. We learned from news reports over the weekend that president trump personally ordered the department of justice to pursue investigations of his political opponents. It's a brazen abuse of power. It weakens the rule of law, and which countless post-watergate reforms were designed to prevent. Reforms like the creation of the public integrity section.
▶ 1:38:01The american people are sick and tired of a system where the rich and powerful get to play by a different set of rules than the rest of the country. They are right to be reviving the public integrity section, providing the resources and staff necessary to prosecute. Political corruption is a small but meaningful step toward earning back the trust that the american people have understandably lost in our political system. I encourage my colleagues to support this amendment. I thank you, and I yield back.
▶ 1:38:32>> thank gentlelady for her remark. The gentleman from kentucky, Mr. rogers, is recognized. Respond to the amendment. Thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise in opposition to this amendment, which carves out 30 million for the public integrity section within justice's criminal division.
▶ 1:38:57I'm proud that the house cjs 57 bill maintains a strong appropriations for the department of justice litigating components. The fiscal 27 cjs bill provides a healthy top line for the general legal activities account, which covers everything from the civil rights division of the criminal division.
▶ 1:39:25Already, the fiscal 27 cjs bill and report provide strong levels for child exploitation and the trade fraud task force. This amendment would force the criminal division to cut into its share of the general legal activities. Top line more than may be necessary to achieve the mission of the public integrity section.
▶ 1:39:54For these reasons, I oppose the amendment. Urge my colleagues to do the same, and I yield back. Thank the gentleman, the gentlelady from new york, Mr. ming, is recognized to respond to the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise in strong support of this amendment. The doj's public integrity section has been a highly respected organization, a career public service servants since its founding 50 years ago. But over the past 16 months it has dwindled down to almost nothing.
▶ 1:40:23This amendment ensures that this office has the resources it needs to help prosecute public corruption wherever it exists. The public integrity section has operated through its history in a nonpartisan manner, providing valuable advice and assistance to federal prosecutors. It has helped hold public officials of both major parties accountable and prosecute them. This amendment is not a partizan matter.
▶ 1:40:49It should be broadly supported by all of us who have the honor of serving in the united states government, and I urge its adoption. Thank you, and I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady for her remarks. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Gentleman from maryland is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I want to rise in support of my colleague's amendment, uh, to restore the funding for the public integrity section.
▶ 1:41:18The public integrity section is one of the most important departments in the department of justice, because it goes to the heart of making sure that we root out and prosecute elected officials at the federal and state level who misuse their public office in a way to personally enrich themselves, or in other ways that that abuse the trust that the public has given them. I think it's important for us to make sure that we're doing everything we can to root that out.
▶ 1:41:47Certainly, there's a crisis of confidence among people across the country with respect to the federal government and state governments as well. They see people personally enriching themselves in the federal government and getting away with it. We've got to make sure we root that out. The trump administration's reduction of the public integrity section from, I believe it was about 30 to 2 two prosecutors. Now is a frontal assault on the ability to prosecute bribery across the country.
▶ 1:42:15The section had been a warehouse or a storehouse of information, institutional knowledge and the like, so that when their offices, U.S. attorney's offices, who were in the the 96 across the country, the districts across the country who spotted bribery by elected officials, they were able to seek out guidance and expertise from prosecutors who were in that section.
▶ 1:42:40And in some instances, those prosecutors came out and became parts of the teams that led those prosecutions, and that includes governors and senators and members of congress. But it's also true for state and local officials as well, who crossed the line, because sometimes you have challenges with respect to putting prosecutions together at the state and local level. Local district attorneys offices, for example, might not have the ability to put wiretaps in place. In fact, the vast majority of them do not.
▶ 1:43:08But you might need that to to bring one of these cases and root out that kind of corruption. The public integrity section was the lead arm in doing that for the department of justice. So I think it's important for us to support this language. I know there's a challenge or questions about the funding issue, but $30 million is not that much for the people who were doing this work. And we need to bring them back so that they can continue to do it.
▶ 1:43:33And then lastly, apparently, the department of justice and the trump administration need some kind of message from us that says we think it's important to prosecute bribery and corruption at the highest levels of government and make sure that people are held accountable. And that includes incarceration, where it's appropriate. And sometimes it includes restitution and the like. We've got to make sure that we're doing everything possible to get that done.
▶ 1:44:00We frequently hear arguments about waste, fraud, and abuse and why we should, um, you know, prevent, I think, legitimate programs from being put in place or fully funded. If we're really serious about that, let's make sure we don't fire the 18 igs across the federal government on your first day in office. Let's make sure they stay there and they're well funded and can do their work, and they're insulated from political influence.
▶ 1:44:28And let's make sure that if they find corruption and found that in the referral to the department of justice, we actually have the prosecutors with the experience and the ability to prosecute those cases and hold those criminals who just happen to be in public office. Let's hold them accountable. And with that, I yield back. >> thank the gentleman for his remarks. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, chairman rogers is recognized for one minute close.
▶ 1:44:57Oh, excuse me, I apologize. My friend. Uh, my good friend, the ranking member is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. Public service is a public trust, my friends. It's not a means for private gain. In order to restore the trust in our system that the american people have lost. And in fact, and indeed, they have lost it. We must hold those who accountable, whether whomever they are.
▶ 1:45:24The party affiliation does not make any difference here. People who have abused their office to enrich themselves, persecute their enemies. This is. We cannot continue to allow this to happen. And that was what, uh, and what is the public integrity section at doj is all about? So restoring that section is an important step to rebuilding this trust and securing accountability in our system. I urge my colleagues, I encourage you to support this amendment. Thank you.
▶ 1:45:54And I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady for comments. The questions now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from connecticut. All those in favor say I. I all those opposed say no. Oh, the chair the nos have it roll call is requested. Sufficient number of hands of kind of close have been raised. >> raise your hands.
▶ 1:46:18>> uh, but actually it is not enough technically, but I don't want to we're going to have this vote. I don't want to delay it. So. But if you would please get more of your members here so we can move quickly because it's going to delay the roll call. Uh, with that, uh, seeing sufficient show of support clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt, Mr. aguilar, Mr. alford, Mr. alford. No. Mr. amodei. Mrs. bice. Mrs. bice.
▶ 1:46:51No. Mr. bishop. Yes. Mr. bishop, I. Mr. calvert, Mr. calvert. No. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. No. Mr. case. Mr. cisco. Mr. cisco. No. Mr. klein, Mr. klein. No. Mr. cloud. Mr. clyburn, Mr. clyburn I. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. No. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cuellar, miss. Dean. Miss.
▶ 1:47:24>> delauro I, Mr. >> I, Mr. diaz-balart, Mr. diaz-balart. No. Mr. edwards, Mr. edwards. No. Mr. ellzey. Mr. ellzey. No. Miss. Escobar, Mr. espaillat, Mr. fleishman, Mr. fleishman. 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. No.
▶ 1:47:55Mrs. henson. Mr. hoyer. Mr. iv, Mr. iv I. Mr. joyce. 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.
▶ 1:48:20Miss mccollum, miss mccollum, I miss ming, I miss ming I Mr. mulliner, Mr. mulliner. No. Mr. moore, Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli, Mr. morelli, I. Mr. mervyn, Mr. mervyn I. Mr. newhouse, miss. Perez, miss. Perez, I miss. Pingry, miss. Pingry. I Mr. pocan, Mr. pocan, I Mr. quigley. Mr.
▶ 1:48:49Quigley I Mr. rosenthaler. Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. shreve, Mr. shreve. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong, Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres. Mrs. torres, I miss. Underwood, Mr. valadao. Miss. Wasserman.
▶ 1:49:19Schultz, miss. Wasserman. Schultz, I. Mrs. watson. Coleman, Mrs. watson. Coleman. I. Mr. womack, Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink, Mr. zinc. No. >> are there members wishing to vote or change their vote? Gentleman from alabama, Mr. >> aderholt no. >> gentleman from texas. >> Mr. cloud, no. >> gentlelady from pennsylvania. >> miss dean, a. >> gentleman from hawaii. >> Mr. case, a. >> gentleman from maryland. >> Mr. hoyer, a.
▶ 1:49:50>> gentleman from california. >> Mr. aguilar I. >> another gentleman from california. >> Mr. valadao, no. >> gentlelady from texas. >> miss escobar, I. >> are there other members wishing to vote or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tally.
▶ 1:50:43On this vote. The eyes are 25, the nose are 29. The amendment is not adopted. I now recognize chairman rogers to offer a republican en bloc amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. >> I have an amendment at the desk. Rogers. Number two, I would ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of. Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman is recognized to explain the amendment. Mr.
▶ 1:51:13Chairman, this amendment includes important additional provisions and report language associated with the bureau of prisons and the second amendment. I would like to thank my republican colleagues for working on these additional items, and I urge the adoption of this amendment, and I yield back.
▶ 1:51:42Thank the gentleman. The gentlelady from new york is recognized to address the amendment. >> I rise in opposition to this amendment. Unfortunately, this amendment adds to the list of controversial provisions of this bill. It will move us further away from the bipartisan compromise that we will need to pass a bill that truly serves the american people. I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment. Thank you, and I yield back. >> thank you.
▶ 1:52:08Any other members seek recognition to speak on the en bloc amendment? Seeing none, chairman rogers is recognized for one minute to close. Thank you, Mr. chairman. I ask for favorable consideration of this amendment. I yield back. I appreciate that stirring closed questions now on the amendment. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. All those opposed say no. >> no. >> the opinion. The chair the ayes have it.
▶ 1:52:36And the amendment is adopted. Gentlelady from connecticut. Mr. lawrence recognized for an amendment. >> Mr. chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. And I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with. >> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her amendment. >> thank you so much, Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:53:04My amendment would instruct the international trade commission or the itc to produce a report on the economic impacts of president trump's tariffs. The president's trade wars have been a disaster for american consumers, american businesses and international relations. In one fell swoop, they have managed to alienate our allies, empower our adversaries, and force american families to foot the bill.
▶ 1:53:28A report from the yale budget lab found that president trump's tariffs cost the average american family more than $1,700 in higher prices. Americans continue to struggle with the cost of living crisis, which president trump refuses to even acknowledge, much less address. Gas prices have gone up by more than 40%. We just got new inflation data that shows prices have increased by the highest rate since 2023.
▶ 1:53:54The american people need relief, but president trump's trade policies have offered families nothing but higher costs for the basic necessities of everyday life. A report from the national association of home builders estimated that the trump tariffs on materials used to build new housing increased costs by $10,900 per home, $10.9 thousand.
▶ 1:54:22The president's trade war was waged under the pretense that it would lead to a resurgence in american manufacturing. That is a goal that I share, and I'm sure many of you share as well. Excuse me, excuse me. That is not the effect that these tariffs have had. Um, on the campaign trail.
▶ 1:54:48President trump promised that and this is a quote, what we are putting forward is the most pro-american manufacturing and jobs policy. This plan will bring jobs and growth into our country at levels never seen before, creating millions and millions of new manufacturing jobs, end quote. In reality, between february of 2025 and february of this year, american manufacturers shed more than 88,000 jobs.
▶ 1:55:13That is more than 100 manufacturing jobs lost per day. But these are only scattered data points. We still do not know the full picture of the harm these tariffs have caused. The american people deserve transparency. This type of independent investigation, analysis and report are part of the reason the itc exists in the first place. It is one of its core statutory responsibilities.
▶ 1:55:38I believe that based on what we know so far, the that president trump's tariffs have had a disastrous impact on our economy. But I know that my republican colleagues disagree, and maybe they are right if they are confident in their assessment of the value of these tariffs, I do not see why they would oppose this amendment if they are correct in their analysis. The report will reflect that. I encourage my colleagues to support this amendment. Thank you, and I yield back. >> I thank the gentlelady for her remarks.
▶ 1:56:08The gentleman from kentucky, chairman rogers, is recognized to respond to the amendment. Thank you, Mr. chairman. The house bill includes targeted funding increases for trade agencies to ensure the administration has the resources they need to enact a trade agenda that opens new market access for american producers of all sizes and reverses decades long barriers
▶ 1:56:38To U.S. exports and international markets. The trade deficit has fallen 24% since last april, and we're seeing record investment in the U.S. that spurring job growth in communities across the nation. This amendment is a distraction that seeks to co-opt federal resources to produce a biased report.
▶ 1:57:07I can't support an amendment that would waste taxpayer dollars and interfere with the administration's attempts to enforce trade agreements and build on hard earned trade wins. I oppose the amendment, urge my colleagues to do the same, and I yield back. Thank the gentleman for his remarks. Gentlelady from new york. Mr. ming is recognized to respond to the amendment.
▶ 1:57:37>> thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise in strong support of this amendment. One of the itc's important statutory responsibilities is to conduct investigations and provide independent, expert analysis of trade policy to congress and the president as lawmakers and the branch with the constitutional power to set trade policy. It's our responsibility to know the facts. We need an objective analysis of the impact this administration's tariff policies are having on our american businesses and consumers.
▶ 1:58:07So far, the evidence we've seen has been troubling. Small and medium sized businesses are telling us they can't plan because the rules change week to week. American families are paying more for groceries. U.S. manufacturers are facing increased costs on imports and retaliatory tariffs on their own exports. In 2025, the trade deficit in goods hit a record high, and more than 80,000 manufacturing jobs were lost after getting a boost from historic investments under the biden administration.
▶ 1:58:37Spending on U.S. factory construction has been falling since the beginning of last year. This administration is telling a different story, and if the administration and my colleagues believe these policies are delivering for the american people, then an independent analysis would only strengthen that case and make us all better informed. We, as legislators should want this information.
▶ 1:59:00At the same time, if itc's independent analysis shows that the tariff policy is hurting american businesses and consumers, we should want to know that too. It's our responsibility to be informed so that we can exercise our authority and act in the best interests of the american people. I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will support this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank gentlelady for her remarks. The gentlelady from ohio is recognized, miss kaptur, to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:59:30I rise in very strong support of the delauro fair trade amendment. Why do we want to keep the american people in the dark about why their prices are rising on almost everything under the tariff policy by the trump administration is probably one of the most curious historical events ever to face the country. What we do know is tariffs have raised prices by about 7%, above what might have been projected.
▶ 1:59:58And when we look at the related costs that families are paying just for gasoline, it's over $1,500 extra a year. It's a lot of money. And believe me, you don't want to come to my district and talk to all the truck drivers that have to buy diesel. It's, uh. It's skyrocketing. I just heard from a united states steelworker from a northwestern ohio refinery. And that to import canadian sour crude, they're now paying an extra 10% tariff.
▶ 2:00:29We are connected. The canadian economy and the us economy and the great lakes nation are connected. And when, uh, we sneeze, you know, uh, uh, they have pneumonia and vice versa. Uh, we're directly connected. The president is knowingly passing the 10% tax. Uh, though he fails to admit it along to consumers at a time when our gas and diesel prices are already skyrocketing.
▶ 2:00:54The united states has lost at least 89,000 manufacturing jobs. And we just had a defense hearing yesterday. They're talking about restoring the defense industrial base. Well, you don't do that by eliminating 89,000 manufacturing jobs and 124 000 in the transportation and warehousing sectors have been lost, according to groundwork collaborative.
▶ 2:01:18The delauro amendment is a step in the right direction to help us know the truth in an objective way toward gaining much needed clarity on the impact of the trump administration's tariff policies. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank you, gentlelady, for remarks. Gentleman from wisconsin. Mr. buchanan is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I hope this is something that we could support.
▶ 2:01:48And it's not whether you support tariffs or don't support tariffs, it's whether you want to know what impact tariffs is actually having. I just had a hallway meeting with someone who told me, uh, it's a specialized industry. They had a piece of equipment they had to buy that only came from france. And when it was coming over, if it landed on a friday, uh, it was one price.
▶ 2:02:11If it landed on saturday because of the tariffs being implemented, a different tariff, because they constantly were changing in the last year, it would have been $2 million instead of $1 million. They literally paid the pilot $20,000 to make sure he could get it there on friday instead of saturday, to avoid the extra million dollars that they would have had. And I had another manufacturer in my district who has a very specialized medical product. Uh, half of their market is china.
▶ 2:02:40And because of retaliatory tariffs at the time this was last year, they went through a very extensive four month process because we found out a way that at the airport, you could be a free trade zone, and they found a way to take their product and have it sit at the airport waiting for where tariffs would be on any given day, to then send them out when tariffs were reduced, because otherwise it would affect their sales in china, something that was sourced over
▶ 2:03:1170% in the state of wisconsin, much less the rest of the country. So there's a lot that we don't know about how tariffs impacted small businesses. That's what I spent my entire life doing. It might be worth our curiosity to find out which tariffs worked and which tariffs didn't, because there were a lot of different tariffs that were thrown out in the last year. So this isn't saying tariffs are good. Tariffs are bad. This is saying our tariffs good. Which tariffs are good. Which ones are bad.
▶ 2:03:37And if we don't have that intellectual curiosity certainly under the constitution we have the power tariffs. How would we ever know how to use them effectively. So I would hope that this is something that's very common sense and we could support. And I yield back, Mr. chair. >> thank gentleman for his remarks. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 2:04:02And I would just say that I want to say a thank you to my colleagues for for speaking up, but I think it's important to know. And I just looked up this information and I say it to the chair of the subcommittee, the trade deficit in physical goods, which has been president trump's focus as he has sought to use tariffs to restore the us manufacturing sector, actually grew in 2025. So that's a fact of life. Um the itc is an independent agency.
▶ 2:04:33And I would just say I buy comments made by Mr. pocan. Why, why should we be afraid of a study of, of, of information. That's all I'm asking for is more information. We need to know in depth and detail the true impact of the president's tariffs. What has been the effect on american consumer, on businesses and on the economy as a whole. We'll all hearing from small businesses, we're all hearing from farmers.
▶ 2:05:00We're all hearing, you know, let's get some real serious data, uh, and from an independent outlet here, uh, if my republican colleagues believe these tariffs have had a net positive on the, on the country, then I would be I would expect you would eagerly support this amendment. Democrats believe that these tariffs have been harmful to the american people. Republicans do not.
▶ 2:05:23Let's allow an independent analysis to determine who is, um, uh, who is accurate, uh, and to what degree. Uh, I think, um, the, the, the, the american people deserve to know the full scope of how this policy has impacted our country. And instead of being anecdotal, let's move from, from factual information and have that discussion. I encourage my colleagues to support this amendment. I thank you, and I yield back.
▶ 2:05:55>> thank the gentlelady. The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from connecticut. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say no. >> uh. >> the chair, the nose. Have it. The roll call has been requested. >> please raise hands. >> could those of you at this table be troubled to raise your hand? Thank you very much. Seeing sufficient support for the amendment, the clerk is ordered to call the roll.
▶ 2:06:25>> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt. No. Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar, I, Mr. alford, Mr. alford. No. Mr. amodei, 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. cloud. No.
▶ 2:06:56Mr. 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. 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, Mr.
▶ 2:07:26Fleischmann. No. Miss. Frankel. Mr. franklin, Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest, Mr. guest. No. Mr. harter. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson. Mr. hoyer, Mr. iv, Mr. ivy. I. Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce. No. Miss. Kaptur. Mr. lalota. Mr. lalota.
▶ 2:07:57No. Miss lee. Miss lee, miss lee, I miss. Letlow, Mr. levin. Mr. levin, I miss molloy, miss molloy. No. Miss mccollum, miss mccollum, I miss ming, I miss ming I Mr. molenaar, Mr. molenaar. No. Mr. moore, Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli. Mr. mervyn, Mr. mervyn I, Mr.
▶ 2:08:27Newhouse, Mr. newhouse. No. Miss. Perez, miss. Perez, I miss. Pingry, miss pingry I Mr. pocan. >> pocan. >> Mr. pocan, I Mr. quigley, Mr. quigley I Mr. reschenthaler. Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford, Mr. rutherford. >> rutherford. >> mister. Rutherford. No. Mr. shreve, Mr. shreve. No. Mr.
▶ 2:08:58Simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong, Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres. Miss. Underwood, 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. >> are there members wishing to vote or change their vote? Gentleman from california.
▶ 2:09:29>> Mr. harter, I. >> gentlelady from ohio. >> miss kaptur, a. >> gentleman from texas. >> thank you. >> Mr. cuellar. I. >> uh, gentleman from maryland. >> Mr. hoyer, I. >> gentleman from new york. I did not believe the gentleman is recorded. >> Mr. morelli, I. >> gentlelady from florida. >> miss frankel, I. >> gentleman from nevada.
▶ 2:10:01>> Mr. amodei. No. >> are there other members wishing to vote or change their vote? Seeing none, clerk will tally.
▶ 2:10:44On this vote. The eyes are 26. The nos are 32. The amendment is not adopted. Gentlelady from new york. Mr. ming is recognized for purposes of amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I have an amendment at the desk. I request unanimous consent that the amendment be considered as read. >> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her amendment. >> thank you, chairman, ranking member delauro and chair rogers.
▶ 2:11:13I rise to speak in support of my amendment. In my district in queens, new york, I have heard from numerous small business owners trying to navigate the tariff refund process, and I know I'm not alone. I believe small businesses and all of our districts across the country, they don't have lawyers on retainer or dedicated compliance teams like large corporations do, nor should they. So far, about a third of applicants have been denied their refunds due to technical errors when filing a claim.
▶ 2:11:44Many small businesses have reached out to my office to tell me that they don't know if they're eligible or where they would even file a claim. Our american small business owners work long days, nights and weekends. It's often a struggle from one invoice to the next. They don't have the time or resources to navigate customs or trade law to address this case. Casework issue.
▶ 2:12:06My amendment very simply directs the department of commerce to strengthen engagement with our american small businesses and to conduct outreach and provide technical assistance and answer questions to those that may be entitled to refunds of duties or import surcharges.
▶ 2:12:23Some may say that customs and border patrol, not the commerce department, should provide this assistance, but the commerce department has existing connections to american businesses through the office of public engagement, the international trade administration and other bureaus. Small businesses already turn to commerce on trade and tariff issues, and we should ensure that commerce is engaging with them to address any tariff related questions they may have.
▶ 2:12:51I will also share that I hope to work with my colleagues to provide even more direct assistance to small businesses through cbp and the homeland security appropriations markup. I think we should be taking every measure we can to help make our small businesses whole. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank you. Gentlelady.
▶ 2:13:12The gentleman from kentucky, chairman rogers, recognized to respond to the amendment, this amendment would utilize the existing knowledge of the commerce department and its bureaus in working with small businesses. Small businesses are the backbone of our communities, and this bill makes it easier for them to succeed and grow. I urge a yes vote on this amendment. I yield back. Thank the gentleman.
▶ 2:13:41Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I was going to say I appreciate the thoughtful debate, but I'll just. >> say thank you. I urge my colleagues to vote yes and look forward to working together, to getting constituents the help that they may need. Thank you. I yield back. >> I thank the gentlelady. A win is always better than a thoughtful debate.
▶ 2:14:11Questions now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from new york. All those in favor, say aye. All opposed? Say no. The opinion of the chair. The ayes have it and the amendment is adopted. Gentlelady from new york is recognized for the purposes of an amendment. >> Mr. chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. I request unanimous consent. That amendment be considered as read.
▶ 2:14:41>> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her amendment. >> thank you, chairman, ranking member delauro and chair rogers. I rise to speak in support of my amendment. Currently as written, this bill provides flat funding for the census bureau. This is $521 million below the president's budget request and is totally insufficient for the work that the census bureau must do in fiscal year 27, especially to prepare for the 2030 decennial census.
▶ 2:15:10The census bureau is the nation's leading statistical agency. It collects and publishes demographic and economic >> data that informs key decisions made by the executive branch and congress, as well as the private sector and academic researchers. It ensures the equal representation of every person to do this work in fiscal year 27. The census bureau needs more resources, not.
▶ 2:15:34It needs resources to modernize, improve counts, and reach historically hard to reach populations, including young children, native americans, and people whose first language is not english, amongst others. In the year 2030, our census bureau should be able to achieve this. My amendment would increase funding for the bureau simply to match the president's budget request and provide the bureau with the resources. They've told this committee that they need. I will not be calling for a vote on this amendment.
▶ 2:16:02As I said in my opening statement, I'm opposed to the deep cuts this bill makes across agencies, and I'm opposed to the cut the majority has made to the census bureau to pay for other priorities of theirs. This bill is not only short sighted and inefficient, but it would also be disastrous for our government and for every person who trusts the government to allocate funding for safe roads and bridges, first responders, health care, veterans programs and for schools.
▶ 2:16:29The importance of a complete and accurate census cannot be overstated. This committee must provide the census bureau with the resources it needs. Thank you, and I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady. I just want to clarify the gentlelady withdrawing the amendment or. >> yes. >> I am. >> okay. I thank the gentlelady. And we'll move to the next amendment.
▶ 2:16:53Gentlelady from minnesota, miss mccollum is recognized for the purpose of amendment. >> 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. >> Mr.
▶ 2:17:23Chair, I'm offering this amendment to confront our relationship between federal law enforcement and our state and local law enforcement. Minnesota has deteriorated during operation metro surge. This amendment was simply prohibit federal agencies from blocking state law enforcement access to the scene of a potential state crime. When crimes involve a federal agent.
▶ 2:17:46It would require that our state law enforcement officials be allowed to conduct joint investigations and collect the evidence that they need. It would not would not prohibit federal agents from collecting all the same evidence and being right there alongside the state investigators. This would restore the best practice of a collaboration that ensures that we can pursue justice for our communities at both the federal and the state level.
▶ 2:18:11And this was standard operating procedure. Um, this is from the state of minnesota lawsuit filed in march against the department of justice about withholding evidence, quote, for decades, federal and state authorities have cooperated in significant criminal investigations before january 2026, when serious incidents occurred in minnesota that affected both state and federal interests.
▶ 2:18:41State agents and federal investigators worked collaboratively sharing information, coordinating investigation steps, and ensuring that both sovereign rights had access to evidence to assess the evidence evidence necessary to fulfill their perspective responsibilities. This included in the the investigations of the shooting by federal officers. And the cooperation is not merely customary.
▶ 2:19:08It reflects the basic structure of american federalism, under which the states retain primary authority to investigate and enforce violations of their own criminal law. Now, the bureau of minnesota apprehensions, referred to as the bca, led investigations recently in 2019 and 2020, with federal officers involved shootings.
▶ 2:19:33With the support, with the total cooperation of the federal authorities, local, state and federal law enforcement agencies have worked closely together on investigations ranging from federal rico prosecutions against gang members to the mass shooting that took place this august, where two children were murdered while attending mass at the church of annunciation, their first day of school.
▶ 2:19:57The routine practice is there to conduct cooperative investigations, which is important. It's important for the victims and it's important for all of us. This practice was totally shattered by operation metro surge. On january 2026, federal immigration agents shot and killed renee good and alex pretty and shot and wounded julio sosa.
▶ 2:20:22Salsas in the scenes that took place at good and so-so salsa shootings. Federal agents seemed eager. They were agreeing to work together with the bca, but then later they were told to stop and total control of all the evidence was shut off to the bca. After the shooting, the federal agents physically, physically blocked state investigators from even accessing the crime scene.
▶ 2:20:51These three shootings are just the most prominent examples of potential violations of state law involving federal agents. Whenever a federal officers have asked, acted unlawfully and committed unauthorized acts, or acted improperly in their duties, they are not covered by immunity under the supreme supremacy clause, and the state has the authority to investigate. But that authority was undercut when the federal government withholds evidence and bars access to crime scenes.
▶ 2:21:22Now, mister chair, I'm going to withdraw this amendment because I'm working on some legislation, and this affects each and every one of our states. And so, um, at this time, I would just like my colleagues to know we need to protect states rights. And if it happens in my state, it could happen in yours. With that, I yield back. >> I want to make absolutely sure we were doing some things up here. The gentlelady did withdraw the amendment. Is that correct? I thank the gentlelady.
▶ 2:21:52We'll move to the next amendment. And I believe there's an effort to negotiate what was scheduled next. Mr. buchanan, are you ready? Okay. The gentleman from wisconsin, Mr. buchanan, is recognized for purposes of an amendment. >> Mr. chairman, I have amendment at the desk, and I'd ask that it be considered. >> read without objection. The reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentleman is recognized for remarks on his amendment. >> great. Thank you very much, Mr. chairman.
▶ 2:22:20So this is an amendment, um, that I'm guessing most of you don't know much about. Um, and that's a problem because I and by most of us, I mean all of us don't know much about it because there's been very little discussion about it. Um, the president issued a directive called nspm7 just rolls off the tongue.
▶ 2:22:43Um, and that directive essentially sets up a process to go after domestic terrorism, but it has no definition of domestic terrorism. So the language leaves it completely open to interpretation. That's not based on law.
▶ 2:23:01Um, but it certainly mentions certain areas that would be considered domestic terrorism that I think you would agree would be direct violations of the first amendment, as well as several other amendments potentially in its application. Um, it talks about, uh, going after groups that would have anything that's anti american. That's a pretty loose interpretation. Anti-capitalism, pretty loose interpretation. Um.
▶ 2:23:32Anti-christianity. Um, I don't know judaism is that. Anti-christianity. I don't know, pretty loose interpretation. Uh, and this is not in any way defined by congress or in statute. So what's happening is you've essentially set up a process where, uh, there are these, these, um, agencies that are going to be going after and finding this.
▶ 2:23:57So while at first I think there were 3700 nonprofits that signed a letter against this directive because it could impact them. If someone gives money to a group or if someone is affiliated with a group and they could be prosecuted, if this is under this very, very, very loose interpretation of what is anti-capitalism or anti-american.
▶ 2:24:18The problem is just I think yesterday sebastian gorka, uh, said that tucker carlson or nick fuentes, not necessarily people I follow, but could also be applicable, uh, gone after under this directive that almost no one knows what it's about.
▶ 2:24:36So the real problem is, you know, we have free speech if you have any libertarian tendencies whatsoever, this should make the hair on your back or your hair on your arms go up a little bit because you're wondering why the government would have this set up, uh, especially when there's no definition. Now, the intention was when charlie kirk was killed. Assassinated. Uh, this was, uh, why this supposedly came up.
▶ 2:25:04But I would argue, uh, someone could argue charlie kirk speech could have fallen under this category, or others could have fallen under this category. And that's a looseness that I don't know if any of us should be comfortable with, because right now, it's one person in charge. Another time in the future, it could be another person in charge. But do we really want to have something so loosely interpreted, uh, that people could actually be thrown in jail for this?
▶ 2:25:33You know, I remember at one time in our history, there was something called a tea party, you know, and that was political speech. And that was a way of fighting back, uh, by the founders of this, this country. And for us to now say that that could be anti-american or anti capitalism or whatever else is a real slippery slope that I think we should be very, very careful about.
▶ 2:25:57So, um, we simply are asking, uh, very simply that no funds be, uh, be allowed to, to use this based on first amendment rights to go after someone on their first amendment rights. And there are other amendments that would be equally applicable, uh, that could be affected by this. But this is something that I would hope, uh, would be a no brainer. Um, these joint terrorism task force is a joint mission center that's to go after this. But again, we have approved nothing.
▶ 2:26:28There is no definition of this, but this certainly is is almost rewriting parts of the constitution without having anyone involved other than a simple directive. And now you're asking people to make it apply without a definition. So I would just encourage folks to say, let's protect the constitutional rights that people have, uh, whether it be tucker carlson's or whether it be, uh, so-called antifa. Um, I'm the only antifa.
▶ 2:26:57I know there's a drag queen named antifa. Um, but nonetheless, uh, whatever it is that you're going after, um, we should do it with actual definitions. I don't think we have actual definitions in the law. And I would encourage us to support this amendment, and I yield back. Mr. chairman. >> thank the gentleman for his remarks. The gentleman from kentucky, chairman rogers, recognized to respond to the amendment. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 2:27:24I rise in opposition to this amendment, which unnecessarily blocks funds for targeting or investigating organizations or individuals based solely on their lawful and constitutionally protected first amendment rights. While we all support the first amendment and the freedom of speech, this provision is simply unnecessary.
▶ 2:27:48The justice department, under this administration, simply does not target people on the basis of their constitutionally protected speech alone. I oppose the amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same, and I yield back. I thank the gentleman gentlelady from new york. Mr. ming is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 2:28:15I rise in support of this amendment, which simply says that the justice department must not target people for criminal investigations based on the exercise of the first amendment. They don't like. We may not like what some people say or how they say it. We may not worship the way that they do. We may get mad and even offended when they assemble, but in the us, they have the right to do all of this and they have the right to not prosecuted when they do. This is the first amendment a constitutional right?
▶ 2:28:46Unfortunately, this administration has not consistently respected this right. I encourage a yes vote on this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank you, gentle lady, for her remarks. Gentlelady from minnesota. Miss mccollum is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chair. I had constituents who were legally taping and documenting, not interfering with some of the arrests that were happening.
▶ 2:29:10I had grandmothers and grandfathers who were volunteering outside of schools, uh, because parents and kids were afraid to bring their kids to school. The kids were afraid they would sometimes be people dressed in full fatigues with rifles on them outside of a school grade school. And if someone, um, didn't like what they were doing, one of our federal agents, they would come up, they would take their picture and they would say, I've got your picture.
▶ 2:29:39You're a political terrorists. I know where you live. And we're watching you. So I support the gentleman's amendment because I think we all want law enforcement to be able to do their jobs effectively, but we want them to do it the right way.
▶ 2:29:56And when we have constituents out there, just making sure that law enforcement, whether it's state, local, federal, county, I don't care, is doing their job the right way and recording something to be turned around and called a terrorist by someone to say, I know where you live. We're watching you. I support the gentleman's amendment. My constituents deserve to be treated with respect when expressing their first amendment rights.
▶ 2:30:26>> thank you, gentlelady, for remarks. Are there others wishing to address? The gentlelady from maine is recognized. >> thank you, Mr. chair. >> I want to rise in support of this amendment by representative pocan. You know, this amendment rests on a very basic american principle. The federal government should not use taxpayer dollars to spy on, investigate, or target americans solely because they are exercising their first amendment rights.
▶ 2:30:52I think for all of us in this committee on both sides of the aisle, this should not be controversial. The first amendment is critically important. It protects our right to speak, to protest, to organize, to worship, to associate with others, to observe government activity and criticize those in power. And those rights do not disappear just because the administration finds someone's views inconvenient or politically uncomfortable.
▶ 2:31:18If someone breaks the law, law enforcement already has the tools to investigate and respond. But this government should not be building files on americans, monitoring organizations, or longer are launching criminal investigations based only on lawful speech, political beliefs, donation advocacy, or association. This is the kind of government overreach everyone should reject.
▶ 2:31:46Do we really want to hand the federal government a blank check to label lawful dissent as a national security threat? Civil liberties organizations and experts have warned that the administration's national security presidential memorandum number seven uses vague domestic terrorism language that could be used to target nonprofits, activists, donors, organizations based on speech and beliefs the administration does not like.
▶ 2:32:17Just as my colleague and friend from minnesota said, maine had an ice surge that was inappropriately called catch of the day. And during that time, maine citizens were subject to some of the same kind of treatment.
▶ 2:32:31We heard from people who were lawfully driving their car behind ice officers to see where they were going, um, only to find out that the ice officer followed them to their own driveway, got out of the car when the person got home and said, now we know where you live and we know who you are. We had another case that actually went to court where someone was tagged in the same way they were legally taping what was going on through their cell phone. And the person said, I've got your picture too.
▶ 2:33:00And you're now on our domestic terrorism watch list. These were just advocates and citizens, people who lived in our community who were disturbed about what was going on, but they were lawfully pursuing their first amendment rights.
▶ 2:33:14Congressman perkins amendment advances some basic principle that I put into a bill based on that called the stop ice intimidation act, and that just says federal agencies should not be allowed to use public money to punish, monitor or intimidate people for exercising their constitutional rights. This amendment protects the first amendment. It protects americans from unconstitutional investigation, and it makes clear that dissent is not domestic tourism tourism.
▶ 2:33:45But we like tourism maine. But let me be clear. This amendment makes it clear that dissent is not domestic terrorism. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank gentlelady for remarks. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 2:34:12Um nspm7 is an overly sweeping directive that imposes an orwellian thought policing. Uh. It blurs the line between actual criminal conduct and constitutionally protected speech and protest. This isn't left right on the spectrum. This is up down on the spectrum, totalitarian versus democratic with a small d.
▶ 2:34:33Do we really want to say that someone can override our constitution with a simple directive and decide what anti-american or anti-capitalism, or whatever other loose terminology that's not defined into law means?
▶ 2:34:48And should tucker carlson be under the same situation as someone who's a protester at an ice facility, that's the core of being america is being able to speak out, being able to use your first amendment rights, and no single directive should override that. And I would encourage people to support this amendment. And I yield back, Mr. chairman. >> thank the gentleman. The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from wisconsin. All those in favor say aye.
▶ 2:35:16All opposed? Say no. The chair the nos have it. Roll call. 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, Mr. amodei. No. Mrs. bice. Mrs. bice. No. Mr. bishop. Mr. bishop, I. Mr. calvert, Mr.
▶ 2:35:46Calvert. No. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. No. Mr. case. Mr. case I Mr. cisco. Mr. cisco. No. Mr. klein. Mr. cloud. 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, miss.
▶ 2:36:14Delauro, 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, Mr. fleischmann. No. Miss. Frankel, miss. Frankel, I. Mr. franklin, Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest, Mr. guest. No. Mr. harter, Mr. harter, I. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson.
▶ 2:36:46Mr. hoyer. Mr. iv, Mr. iv. I. Mr. joyce, miss. Kaptur, I miss. Kaptur, I Mr. Mr. loloda. No. Miss. Lee. Miss lee, I miss. Ludlow, Mr. levin, Mr. levin, I miss. Molloy, miss. Molloy. No. Miss mccollum, miss mccollum, I miss ming, I miss ming I Mr. mulliner, Mr. mulliner. No. Mr.
▶ 2:37:19Moore, Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli, Mr. morelli, I. Mr. van. 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. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. shreeve, Mr. shreeve. No. Mr. simpson.
▶ 2:37:50Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong, Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres. Mrs. torres, I miss. Underwood, 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. >> other members wishing to vote or change their vote. Gentleman from indiana.
▶ 2:38:24>> Mr. mervyn I. >> gentleman from virginia. >> Mr. klein. No. >> gentleman from ohio. >> Mr. joyce? No. >> a gentleman from maryland. >> Mr. hoyer. I. >> uh, gentleman from texas. >> Mr. cloud. No. >> are there other members wishing to record or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tally.
▶ 2:39:28On this vote. The ayes are 27. The nos are 32. The amendment is not agreed to. The gentleman from california, Mr. aguilar, is recognized for the purpose of amendment. >> Mr. chairman, I have an amendment at the desk and ask that the clerk dispense with the reading. >> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentleman's recognized for remarks on his amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 2:39:51I have an amendment here, and I do want to read a portion of it, but it will prohibit the bureau of prisons from spending $152 million to reopen alcatraz island. Uh, this is the actual alcatraz island, not another one that has been in the news.
▶ 2:40:11And given that moniker, none of the funds available by the act or any other act may be used to plan, design, modify, demolish, construct, or revitalize for the use of bureau of prisons as a correctional facility, or to transfer to the department of justice. Any facility on alcatraz island. The president has it in his head that we need a show to show that we are tough on crime. Mr. chairman, this does nothing to meet to meet that issue.
▶ 2:40:39This is turning a popular tourist attraction into a maximum security prison, the $152 million that the president's requested isn't even the full amount that will be needed to reopen alcatraz beyond the year, nor will the administration give us the data that's necessary to figure out what the long term costs will be.
▶ 2:41:03Not only would this transform, uh, and be an egregious waste of taxpayer dollars, it would take away much needed funding that the bureau of prisons needs to run and manage facilities that it has in its portfolio, the bureau of prisons. Right now, Mr. chairman, has a $4 billion backlog of maintenance at its facilities across the nation. California currently has 12 facilities managed by the bureau of prisons.
▶ 2:41:28We don't need to spend tens of millions of dollars more turning a historical landmark into another prison, which closed in the 60s for real reasons. They had to barge in in the 60s, they had to barge in a million gallons of water every day. That's one of the reasons why it closed. Uh, we already have overdue prisons that need repairs and upgrades.
▶ 2:41:57Let's spend these dollars more appropriately to upgrade the what we have and to address the backlog that exists. This is a common sense amendment that would prevent $150 million from turning this tourist attraction into a prison. There are much more efficient ways to spend these dollars. I'm not concerned with with addressing that. Um, we can, we can do this in a meaningful and reasonable way.
▶ 2:42:26Uh, and I think prohibiting the use of funds for alcatraz would do just that and allow us to focus on the resources that desperately need attention within the bop portfolio. Uh, urge adoption of the amendment. Mr. chairman, I yield back. >> thank the gentleman for his remarks. Gentlelady from new york is recognized to address the amendment. >> Mr. chairman, I support this amendment, but I'm disappointed that it needs to be offered.
▶ 2:42:52The president's budget proposes 152 million just to start the planning and design work that would be needed to bring alcatraz back into the federal prison system, even though it is not needed and the bop cannot afford it. This is by no means the full cost of restoring alcatraz to a maximum security facility. The actual cost of restoring the prison to a facility capable of feeding, housing and detaining hundreds of prisoners will be substantially higher.
▶ 2:43:22The bop has a $4 billion maintenance backlog. A third of bop institutions are over 50 years old, two thirds are over 30 years old, even after it spends the 2 billion provided in the reconciliation. Bop will not fully address this backlog.
▶ 2:43:43This maintenance backlog makes bop facilities worse for the tens of thousands of correctional officers, health workers, educators and others who earn their living doing difficult work and often dangerous conditions. They deserve our support so that they can get home safely to their families every night. Instead, we're spending hundreds of billions of dollars on reopening alcatraz from every angle. Reopening alcatraz makes no sense.
▶ 2:44:11I urge a yes vote on this amendment. >> thank the gentlelady for her remarks. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close. >> I want to thank. I want to thank. >> member for her comments on this.
▶ 2:44:32This is pretty simple, colleagues, and I'm not going to belabor the point, but the fundamental question is, should we turn a tourist attraction into a prison when we have billions of dollars in backlogs? This amendment would simply prohibit that, would focus the resources on where it's needed, and to ensure that this tourist attraction stays a tourist attraction and all of you can visit with your families. It's a little bit of a novelty. Uh, it's cute, but it is it is not meant to be a functional prison.
▶ 2:45:02Um, I appreciate the committee and the ranking members support and would encourage an I vote. Thank you, Mr. chairman. I yield back. >> thank the gentleman for his remarks. 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 to. Sufficient number of hands have been raised. Clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt.
▶ 2:45:33No. Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar. Aye. Mr. alford, Mr. alford. No. Mr. amodei. Mr. amodei. No. Mrs. bice. Mrs. bice. No. Mr. bishop. Mr. bishop. Aye. Mr. calvert. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. No. Mr. case. Mr. cisco. Mr. cisco. No. Mr.
▶ 2:46:00Kline, Mr. kline. No. Mr. cloud. Mr. clyburn, Mr. clyburn. Aye. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. No. Mr. cole. 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. edwards. No. Mr. ellzey. Miss.
▶ 2:46:27Escobar, 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. harter, Mr. harter. I. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson. Mr. hoyer, Mr. hoyer I Mr.
▶ 2:46:53Iv, Mr. iv I Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce. No. Miss. Kaptur, miss kaptur, I. Mr. lalota. Mr. loloda. No. Miss lee, miss lee. I miss. Letlow, Mr. levin, Mr. levin, I miss. Molloy, miss. Molloy. No. Miss mccollum, miss mccollum, I miss ming, I miss ming I Mr. molinari, Mr. molenaar. No. Mr. moore, Mr. moore. No. Mr.
▶ 2:47:25Morelli. Mr. moran, 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. rosenthaler. Okay. Mr. rogers. Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. shreeve, Mr. shreeve. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr.
▶ 2:47:54Strong, Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres. Okay. Mrs. torres, I miss underwood. >> you're up next. >> I just called underwood. >> I'm sorry. >> I'll get to you in a second. Okay. Mr. valadao, Mr. valadao. No, no. Miss wasserman schultz, miss wasserman schultz, I Mrs. watson. Coleman, Mrs. watson. Coleman. I. Mr. womack, Mr. womack. No. Mr. zinc. Mr. zinc.
▶ 2:48:24No. >> are there any members wishing to vote or change or vote? Gentleman from california. >> Mr. calvert votes no. >> gentleman from texas. Uh, I'll let you flip a coin. >> laredo, texas. Shall we vote. >> Mr. chair? Votes. Aye. >> other gentleman. >> Mr. cloud votes no. >> gentleman from hawaii. >> Mr. case votes aye. >> are there any others.
▶ 2:48:56>> Mr. morelli? >> oh, I'm sorry, gentleman from new york. Gentleman is not recorded. >> Mr. morelli votes I. Uh, he has. >> are there any other members wishing to vote or change their votes? Seeing none, the clerk will tally.
▶ 2:49:51Vote. The eyes are 27. The nos are 31. The amendment is not adopted. The gentlelady from florida, miss wasserman schultz, is recognized for the purposes of amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. Um, first, I want to thank Mr. moore of west virginia for working with me on revising this amendment so that we could really take a step forward on something that I think is important to us all, and that's ensuring that crime victims rights are upheld. >> gentlelady. Like the.
▶ 2:50:21>> but of course, I would first like to ask that the amendment be considered as unanimous. Without unanimous consent, that it be considered as read. >> without action. The reading the amendment is dispensed with. >> non voting jumped again. >> and the gentlelady is recognized. >> for a little wound up today. Thank you, Mr. chairman. So again, I want to thank Mr.
▶ 2:50:41Moore of west virginia for working with me to advance what I know is important to all of us, and that is to really make sure that we can allow victims of crime to have their rights enforced.
▶ 2:50:55The crime victims rights act that passed in 2004 is one that has very express direction on how crime victims rights should be handled, particularly when the decision is being made about plea deals, about the final outcome of, uh, of crimes, um, and sentencing.
▶ 2:51:17And so I'm rising today to offer this amendment that would begin to address those gaps in the current doj procedures and the legal ambiguities that denied jeffrey epstein's victims justice, and let him walk free with a secret, secret sweetheart plea deal, but without any opportunity for the victims to be afforded their day in court as the cvra requires. Um. Courtney wild fought for years to and continues to fight to make sure that what happened to the epstein victims never happens to anyone again.
▶ 2:51:46She was sexually abused by jeffrey epstein in florida when she was a 14 year old girl, and when U.S. attorney alex acosta and others gave epstein a sweetheart plea deal in 2008, instead of throwing him in jail, courtney was blindsided. That sweetheart deal allowed epstein to plead to state prostitution charges, and he spent 13 months sleeping overnight in a cell but returning to his penthouse for 12 hours a day.
▶ 2:52:11The original crime victims rights act of 2004 was meant to protect the rights of all victims, to have their voice heard in court and to receive timely notice of any major development in the defendant's case, including a plea deal. That's what the law was supposed to do. But epstein's victims, like courtney, were never told about this backroom deal until it was already in effect. Instead of providing a tool for victims, the cvra became another weapon for shielding predators from accountability and for everyday.
▶ 2:52:41Since for nearly two decades, courtney has been fighting to restore the vra's original purpose. Just yesterday, courtney testified before our democratic colleagues on the house oversight committee at their hearing in palm beach county. And please listen to what she said, she said. I came here to ask for one simple thing to make sure this never happens again. Think about that. We have the power to prevent this kind of injustice from being repeated.
▶ 2:53:03Any victim of a crime is despicable, as epstein's trafficking of young girls deserves to have their day in court to speak out against a plea deal or non-prosecution agreement. I have long fought for reforms to the cvra, not just to secure justice justice for epstein survivors, but to prevent other crime victims from being victimized again by the justice system.
▶ 2:53:22But in place of a change in the law, which is what my bill, the courtney wild reinforcing crime victims rights act, would do alongside lois frankel, we can start by having a clear picture of whether current doj policies are upholding the intent of the original cvra to protect all victims, and this amendment would provide us with an important with important answers so we can expand protections for crime victims through every avenue possible. Because all survivors deserve transparency. They deserve justice.
▶ 2:53:49No survivor should have to tell their story over and over again. Like many of the epstein survivors, under immense scrutiny from the public, just to get the justice that they should have been afforded under the law in the first place. As she continues to fight for justice, I'm in awe of courtney's unwavering determination and the bravery she and other epstein survivors have shown. Her efforts have put a spotlight on these ambiguities in current law, and we know more survivors, more than just epstein. Survivors also fight for the same right.
▶ 2:54:17Time and time again, victims are provided only vague information that a plea is under consideration without any awareness of any deals, terms, timing or the possibility of restitution. These victims then lose the opportunity to advocate for agreements that reflect their needs and interests, just like epstein's victims. These examples show us that unless the law is clarified to require meaningful and timely consultation on pleas, victims will continue to be marginalized at some of the most consequential stages of criminal cases.
▶ 2:54:44My colleague miss frankel and I have been backing courtney's fight since 2019, and courtney wild has fought it even longer than that. Now we need to take action. Nobody who is abused by a predator like jeffrey epstein or anyone, should be victimized once again by our laws. This is a small step, but a first step towards courtney's plea to make sure this never happens again. I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment, and I appreciate, again Mr. moore's cooperation, and I yield back. >> I thank the gentlelady for her remarks.
▶ 2:55:11Gentleman from west virginia is recognized to address the amendment. >> okay. Thank you, Mr. chairman, and thank you to miss wasserman schultz for working with me on this amendment. I'll keep it very brief. Urge all my colleagues to support and I yield back. >> uh, man. Chairman's favorite. No question about it. Uh, gentleman from kentucky, mister rogers is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you.
▶ 2:55:42>> Mr. chairman. I support the wisely crafted amendment by the gentleman from west virginia and the gentle lady from florida. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. Yield back. Thank. Gentleman gentlelady from new york. Miss ming is recognized to address the amendment. >> I too rise in support of this amendment.
▶ 2:56:01As my colleague from florida has said, this amendment will close a loophole that has been such a source of pain and frustration for many victims of epstein, who are denied their rights under the crime victims rights act in zero eight and then denied restitution by the 11th circuit in 2020. But while this amendment attempts to respond to the pain and suffering of epstein's victims, this amendment is not only about the epstein case. It is also an opportunity to prevent future injustices.
▶ 2:56:30This amendment requires the doj's inspector general to do a top to bottom review of how doj is implementing the crime victims rights act and give us and the department recommendations for how to better serve crime victims. There's no cost to this provision. It does not alter the total amount of spending in the bill, but it has the potential to make all the difference for victims of crime. With that in mind, I urge all my colleagues to support this amendment. >> thank the gentlelady for her remarks. Are there other members wishing to address amendment?
▶ 2:56:59Gentlelady from florida is recognized. The gentlelady. I'm sorry. Frankel. Florida is recognized. >> thank you. >> and thank you, representative wasserman schultz, for the amendment. And to our colleagues on both sides of the aisle for support. And I want to make a comment because, uh, what happened in florida with this case to me was such a miscarriage of justice and so outrageous that I think it's important to, to lay it out.
▶ 2:57:28So, so that the world knows, uh, as was recited, congress passed the crime victims rights act to ensure that victims are treated with dignity, informed of critical developments in their cases, and given a voice in the justice process. But in one of the most famous cases in modern history, these rights were effectively denied.
▶ 2:57:52In the epstein case, federal prosecutors negotiated a secret non-prosecution agreement behind closed doors while survivors were kept completely in the dark, they were not notified, they were not consulted, and they were not given the opportunity to object before the deal was finalized. This was not just a failure of communication. This was a failure of justice.
▶ 2:58:21Survivors in this case were failed twice, first by a serial predator and then by a system that protected wealth, power and privilege over vulnerable young women and girls. Uh, I was at that field hearing yesterday when we heard from a number of survivors, and courtney wild was one of them.
▶ 2:58:46And, uh, who's been fighting so hard with perseverance and courage to make sure we get this law right. Uh, they told us how they came forward as children, told the truth, cooperated with law enforcement, and still watch powerful people cut deals behind closed doors. We heard how survivors were treated like they did not matter.
▶ 2:59:10And we heard about the pain of learning that the government had secretly negotiated away justice without informing the young women whose lives had been shattered. Uh. There was one truth echoed throughout the hearing. The survivors were exposed and the powerful were protected. And that's why this report, this is so important.
▶ 2:59:34And this directive, which has been explained by representative wasserman schultz, uh, because it addresses one of the most disturbing loopholes exposed by the epstein cases when prosecutors negotiated pretrial agreements or non-prosecution deals before charges are formally filed. So I just want to say we can all together make sure that this never happens again.
▶ 3:00:00And I, uh, thank all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for support of this amendment. I hope everybody here does that, too. And I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady for her remarks. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close. Gentlelady. Oh, I'm sorry, I did. The gentleman from maryland wish to address the. An important mission to be sure.
▶ 3:00:27Uh, questions now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from florida. All those in favor say aye, I all those opposed say no. The amendment is adopted. Gentlelady from florida, miss wasserman schultz is recognized for the purpose of an amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be considered as read. >> without objection.
▶ 3:00:54The reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her amendment. >> got it straight this time. Thank you, Mr. chairman. Um, I have a feeling this one might not go as smoothly, but, uh, I'm going to give it a shot. Uh. I rise to speak in strong support of my amendment to prevent people that are convicted of domestic violence being granted access to murder weapons by the trump administration.
▶ 3:01:17In a country where one third of women and one quarter of men are victims of intimate partner violence at least once in their lifetime, the issue of domestic violence cuts deeply. Every year, 556 women are killed by a partner with a gun, and that's an average of one woman every 15 hours. And that devastating total is at risk of rising. Instead of standing up for the most vulnerable among us, the trump administration wants to make it easier. Yes, easier for convicted violent criminals to own a firearm.
▶ 3:01:47Former attorney general bondi already restored gun rights to several people with violent criminal histories, including convicted domestic abuser mel gibson. Let me be absolutely crystal clear rearming convicted domestic abusers is as dangerous as it is nonsensical. These individuals have proven themselves to be willing to direct physical violence against their families and their partners, allowing these convicted abusers to legally obtain extremely deadly weapons will turn more domestic violence incidents into murders.
▶ 3:02:17The mere presence of a firearm is a key factor that turns abusive partners into cold blooded killers. When a male abuser has direct access to a gun, the likelihood the violence he commits against his partner will become fatal increases by over 1,000% 1,000%. It's absolutely absurd to me that we would allow any policy choice that makes it 1,000% more likely. It sounds like an exaggeration, but it's not that an abused wife will be shot dead in her home.
▶ 3:02:44Importantly, arming domestic abusers doesn't just endanger their family members or their friends. It puts us all at risk. According to a secret service threat assessment, 41% of people who carried out a mass attack had a history of domestic violence, and 60% of mass shootings over a six year period involved an aggressor with a history of domestic violence. The last thing we need is more guns and bullets in the possession of people predisposed, predisposed to violence.
▶ 3:03:11And gun violence is not limited to just fatal interactions. Abusers frequently brandish their firearms to intimidate, silence, harass or threaten their partner. That's the unfortunate reality for thousands of people across the country, and failure to take action now will make this a reality. For thousands more. Access to firearms for dangerous criminals should not outweigh the safety of domestic violence survivors. The fact that we even need to have this conversation in the first place is utterly insane. My amendment is simple.
▶ 3:03:40It simply states that no funding from this bill may be used to restore the gun rights of individuals convicted of misdemeanor or felony domestic violence. We should not want our tax dollars spent on giving known violent criminals guns. Hopefully we can agree on that. I urge my colleagues to stand by domestic violence survivors and prevent more women from being victimized by supporting this amendment. Thank you. I yield back the balance of my time. >> thank the gentlelady for her remarks. The gentleman from kentucky, chairman rogers, is recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 3:04:10>> thank you, Mr. chairman. The second amendment provides protections and I oppose any infringement upon this constitutional right. I am proud that the us house or the bill maintains strong second amendment protections. I oppose the amendment, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. I yield back. >> thank the gentleman. Gentlelady from new york. Mr. ming is recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 3:04:39>> I rise in strong support of this amendment. All of us should be able to agree unequivocally. Domestic abusers should absolutely not be allowed to own firearms. I commend my colleague and urge the adoption of her amendment. Thank you, and I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentlelady from florida is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 3:05:06This simply says that if you have committed and been convicted of domestic violence, either a misdemeanor or a felony, that we aren't going to spend funds in this bill allowing doj to restore your right to hold a have a firearm, um, that that is an infringement on the second amendment. It is already against the law, already against the law.
▶ 3:05:26But yet you we've had we have had doj officials restore the firearms access to the people who have been convicted of domestic violence, who we know have a much higher likelihood of eventually killing a victim. Why would you do that? To suggest that that is a violation of the second amendment is so grossly exaggerated and overstated and outrageous. It's breathtaking to me.
▶ 3:05:51Um, so I hope that cooler heads will prevail and we will protect victims of domestic violence from being eventually killed by their abusers, which happens far too often in this country. Thank you, I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady for remarks. Questions now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from florida. All those in favor say aye. >> aye. >> all opposed? Say no. Thank you. Chair. The nose. Have it. Roll call has been requested. Sufficient support has been demonstrated.
▶ 3:06:21The 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. No. Mr. bishop. 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. cloud. Mr.
▶ 3:06:46Clyburn, 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, I 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.
▶ 3:07:18Espaillat, I. Mr. fleischmann, miss frankel, miss. Frankel, I. Mr. franklin, Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest. Mr. guest. No. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. I. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson. Mr. >> hoyer I Mr. iv, Mr. iv I Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce no. Miss kaptur, I miss kaptur, I Mr. nick lalota.
▶ 3:07:46Miss lee, miss lee, I miss. Letlow. Mr. levin, Mr. levin, I miss molloy, miss molloy no miss mccollum, I miss mccollum, I miss ming. Mr. molinari, Mr. molenaar. No. Mr. moore, Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli, Mr. morelli, I. Mr. van, Mr. newhouse. Miss.
▶ 3:08:14Perez, miss. Perez, I miss. Pingree, miss pingree, I Mr. pocan. Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley, I. Mr. reschenthaler, Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. shreeve, Mr. shreeve. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr.
▶ 3:08:42Strong, 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. Coleman, Mrs. watson. Coleman. I. Mr. womack, Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink, Mr. zink. No. >> are there any members wishing to vote or change their vote? Gentleman from tennessee.
▶ 3:09:13>> Mr. fleischmann. >> no. Gentleman from virginia. >> Mr. klein, no. >> gentleman from texas. >> Mr. cloud, no. >> gentleman from wisconsin. >> Mr. pocan, a. >> gentleman from indiana. >> Mr. van I. >> gentlelady from new york. >> Mr. for me is that I. >> miss ming I. Mr. >> gentleman from washington, Mr. >> newhouse no.
▶ 3:09:44>> are there others wishing to vote or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tally.
▶ 3:10:23On this vote. The yeas are 28. The nos are 31. The amendment is not adopted. Gentlelady from florida. Miss frankel is recognized for the purpose of an amendment. >> hello. Thank you, Mr. chair. Thank you, Mr. chair. I have an amendment at the desk. Can I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed?
▶ 3:10:52>> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with. The gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her amendment. >> well, here goes another triple m. You know what that means. My my my, uh, this this amendment strikes section five, seven, eight of the bill, a provision that blocks enforcement of the eeoc's 2024 rule clarifying that abortion care falls within the pregnant workers fairness act's
▶ 3:11:24Protections for pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions. The pregnant women's fairness act passed with bipartisan support because no woman should be punished out of her job. Push, I'm sorry. Pushed out of her job for a medical condition related to pregnancy. And the eeoc rule simply carries out that promise. And make no mistake, this matters to millions of women.
▶ 3:11:51This fairness, uh, act because, uh, every year, millions of women work while navigating pregnancy, childbirth recovery, and reproductive health care decisions. And the law was meant to ensure that they are treated with dignity, with fairness and basic humanity in the workplace. Uh, but a section five, seven, eight here creates a dangerous workplace exception.
▶ 3:12:18It seems that singles out one category of medical care, and that is abortion, and says those workers deserve fewer protections. Actually, no protections, fewer rights, and less dignity on the job. And that is just plain wrong because no woman, no person, should ever have to choose between their health and a paycheck.
▶ 3:12:42And no worker should fear losing her job because she needs time for medical care to recover. Under the law was designed for common sense accommodations, a water break, a temporary lifting, restrictions, time off for recovery or flexibility for medical appointments. Yet this provision in this bill says that if the medical care involves abortion, suddenly those protections disappear.
▶ 3:13:08Uh, a woman could be denied leave, denied flexibility, or punished at work simply because someone disapproves of her personal decision, even if it is legal. Where she is. Uh, we we live in a democracy where we pride ourselves on personal freedom.
▶ 3:13:28So I ask my colleagues, do you really want to force women to continue pregnancies against their will or punish them by ending one, by threatening their job and economic security? Because that's exactly what the provision in this bill does. And that is not workplace fairness. It is simply political punishment. And let's be clear, we've said this over and over again.
▶ 3:13:56Abortion is a medical procedure unlike any medical procedure. It can require follow up care, recovery, time travel, or multiple appointments, especially in states where women are forced to travel long distances or navigate a burdensome restrictions just to obtain legal care. And listen. This amendment doesn't require anybody in this room to agree with abortion. It doesn't require anyone to support abortion.
▶ 3:14:25At its core, it is about whether women can support themselves and their families without sacrificing their health, safety and economic security. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank gentlelady for her remarks. The gentleman from kentucky, chairman rogers, recognized to respond to the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 3:14:49The fiscal 27 house bill takes serious steps forward to protect unborn human life. The bill includes the long standing hyde amendment for the department of justice that prevent taxpayer funds from funding abortions.
▶ 3:15:10This amendment, which was which does not follow congressional intent, would strip a provision from the bill and take a step back from the progress that this bill makes in order to protect unborn lives. I oppose this amendment. Urge my colleagues to do the same, and I yield back. >> thank the gentleman, the gentlelady from new york, Mr.
▶ 3:15:40Ming, is recognized to address the amendment. >> Mr. chairman, I strongly support this amendment. I support women and their right to make the health care decisions that are best for them. Women must be able to make these decisions with their doctors and loved ones in privacy. Through the bipartisan pregnant workers fairness act, congress put laws in place to prevent discrimination against pregnant women and ensure that their workplaces make accommodations for them and the various potential medical conditions related to pregnancy.
▶ 3:16:10Section 578 of this bill undermines that protection and is an insult to the american women congress stood up to protect through the pregnant workers fairness act. I thank my colleague for offering this amendment to strike this harmful and unnecessary provision and urge a yes vote, I yield back. >> thank you, gentlelady, for her remarks. Gentleman from georgia. Mr. clyde is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 3:16:37Chair rogers, I rise to support chair rogers in opposition to this amendment, which seeks to preserve an unlawful abortion mandate imposed through an eeoc rule. Congress passed the bipartisan pregnant workers fairness act to provide support and accommodations for pregnant women in the workplace, not to create a federal abortion mandate. The legislation congress enacted in 2022 did not include abortion.
▶ 3:17:00In fact, both republican and democrat sponsors made clear during consideration of the bill that abortion was specifically, explicitly not part of the legislation. Yet the biden administration's eeoc ignored that clear congressional intent and issued a final rule requiring employers to accommodate employees seeking elective abortions. While the pregnant workers fairness act granted the eeoc authority to implement the law, it did not authorize the agency to rewrite it.
▶ 3:17:30Abortion was never included in the statute, and elective abortion is not a medical condition related to pregnancy. It is the intentional murder of an innocent unborn child. Mr. chairman, congress wrote this law, and now congress must clarify what it intended. We cannot allow unelected bureaucrats to impose this illegal and deadly overreach that congress never authorized. I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment, and I yield back. >> thank the gentleman for his remarks.
▶ 3:17:59Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you. Here's an idea. I got a good idea. How about keeping women alive? How about allowing women who go to work to be able to support themselves and their families without compromising their health? That's what this is about.
▶ 3:18:25Because when you fail to accommodate a woman for a personal medical decision, you could be leading to her morbidity or to her death. Uh, this is a very common sense amendment that I have here. Let's support the women of america. Let's keep them alive, and let's keep them healthy. And let's keep them able to support themselves and their families. And with that, I urge the support of this amendment. I yield back. >> I thank the gentlelady for her remarks.
▶ 3:18:54Questions now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from florida. All those in favor say aye. I all those opposed say no. No opinion. The chair the nos have it. Recorded vote. Recorded vote 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, Mr. amodei. No. Mrs. bice. Mrs. bice. No. Mr. bishop.
▶ 3:19:26Mr. 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. cloud. 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. diaz-balart. No. Mr. edwards.
▶ 3:19:58Mr. edwards. No. Mr. ellzey. Mr. ellzey. No. Miss. Escobar, miss. Escobar I. Mr. espaillat, Mr. espaillat I. Mr. fleishman, Mr. fleishman. No. Miss. Frankel, miss. Frankel, I Mr. franklin, Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest, Mr. harter, doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. hinson. Mr. hoyer, Mr. hoyer, I, Mr. iv, Mr. joyce.
▶ 3:20:29Mr. joyce. No. Miss. Kaptur marcy kaptur I. Mr. Mr. lalota. No. Miss. Lee, miss. Letlow. Mr. levin. Mr. levin. I miss. Molloy, miss. Molloy. No. Miss mccollum, miss mccollum. I miss ming, miss ming I. Mr. molinari, Mr. mulliner. No. Mr. moore. Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli, Mr.
▶ 3:21:00Morelli I. Mr. moran, 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. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. shreeve, Mr. shreeve. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr.
▶ 3:21:27Strong, 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. Coleman, Mrs. watson. Coleman. I. Mr. womack, Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink, Mr. zink. No. >> are there any members wishing to vote or change or vote? Gentlelady from iowa. >> Mrs. hinson? No.
▶ 3:21:58>> gentleman from mississippi, Mr. >> guest, no. >> gentleman from virginia. >> Mr. kline, no. >> gentlelady from nevada. >> miss lee I. >> gentleman from indiana. >> Mr. van I. >> gentleman from maryland. >> Mr. iv. >> a gentleman from texas. >> Mr. cloud no. >> gentleman from california. >> Mr. harder I.
▶ 3:22:34>> are there any others wishing to vote or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tally.
▶ 3:23:11On this vote. The yeas are 27. The nos are 33. The amendment is not adopted. A gentleman from new jersey, a gentlelady, excuse me from new jersey, miss watson coleman is recognized for an amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. >> I have an amendment, and I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of it.
▶ 3:23:39>> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with. The gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her amendment. >> thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. chairman. The equal employment opportunity commission was created by this body when it passed the civil rights act of 1964, with the goal of ensuring that all workers have access to living wage jobs without fear of discrimination.
▶ 3:24:06My amendment would require the eeoc to fully investigate all discrimination complaints it receives. It would also require the agency to report how it is complying with that mandate.
▶ 3:24:18The law requires employers to focus on job related criteria when deciding who to hire, fire, and promote, instead of focusing on deceptively neutral but harmful criteria that are not actually needed for the job, like requiring a college education or a credit score, or passing physical ability tests, its scope goes well beyond protecting gender or race based discrimination, including
▶ 3:24:49Religion, age, disability, sex, and sexual orientation as well. This manner of discrimination, known as disparate impact, has been recognized by the supreme court since 1971, with congress codifying it by amending title 6 in 1991.
▶ 3:25:08Yet since taking office, donald trump and his allies have waged a wrongheaded crusade against any policy that allows marginalized, marginalized communities to earn a seat at the table. From firing black officials to criminalizing inclusion, inclusion initiatives and, most recently, pushing states to wipe out minority representation in congress.
▶ 3:25:34Now, the eeoc is ignoring federal employment laws and refusing to help workers facing discrimination. That includes the dismissal of a case challenging unlawful employment practices at sheetz that discriminated against black and latino workers. In fact, chair andrea lucas has even explicitly directed the agency to prioritize claims from able bodied white men.
▶ 3:26:04The absurdity of that is just beyond discussing. These decisions are hurting communities across america who are already dealing with the weakened job market and face increasing discrimination on a daily basis on so many aspects of their life. America is at its best when it places value in a diversity of minds and backgrounds.
▶ 3:26:29Instead, the agency is setting america back by abandoning its duty, all in service of a divisive political agenda. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this amendment. I thank you for the opportunity to present it, and I yield back. >> I thank the gentlelady for her remarks. The gentleman from kentucky, chairman rogers, recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise to oppose this amendment as well.
▶ 3:26:58Settled supreme court precedent. That disparate impact by itself does not establish a claim of intentional discrimination. This amendment tries to require the eeoc to. Nevertheless, Mr. >> chairman, could you bring the mic a little closer here? >> I'm sorry.
▶ 3:27:20This amendment tries to require the eeoc to nevertheless treat disparate impact as. If it does establish such a claim. I oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same, and I yield back. >> thank you. Gentlemen. Gentlelady from new york. Mr. meng is recognized to address the amendment. >> Mr. chairman, I rise in support of this amendment.
▶ 3:27:47Disparate impact is an established legal framework that has been affirmed by courts and was codified in statute in the civil rights act of 1991. This framework allows workers to challenge employment practices that may appear neutral but have a discriminatory effect.
▶ 3:28:03These protections are still important today, when employers are increasingly using artificial intelligence and algorithmic tools to make hiring decisions, monitor performance, assign work, and evaluate productivity.
▶ 3:28:21Unfortunately, the administration is walking away from disparate impact enforcement across the government, weakening a wide range of protections from fair housing to equal employment opportunity and leaving little recourse for americans facing harmful, discriminatory policies. The eeoc must carry out its mandate and fully investigate all cases of impact based discrimination in american workplaces. I urge a yes vote on this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady.
▶ 3:28:49Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentlelady from new jersey is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. The eeoc actions, or lack thereof, is another example of trump's inability to make life better for every american, except for those of his buddies or people that look like him.
▶ 3:29:15The damage will reverberate well beyond discrimination. Americans are struggling to find work, struggling even more to earn a living wage, and this callousness will hurt us. It will hurt american pockets, and it does nothing to fix an economy where inflation now outpaces american paychecks. For the first time in many years.
▶ 3:29:38Just yesterday, he said that he does not consider the financial impact of this war of choice in the middle east when negotiating a peace deal and based on his policy since day one, it doesn't appear that he considers the american taxpayer under any circumstances. Many people rely upon this. Many people have a right to work in this country free of discrimination.
▶ 3:30:02And I would ask my colleagues if you would please support me and support the people of the united states of america that are something other than just white men. I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady for comments. The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from new jersey. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed say no. Can you chair the nos. Have it. Roll call has been requested.
▶ 3:30:32Sufficient support has been demonstrated. Clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt. No. Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar. Aye. 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. case. Mr. case I. Mr. Mr. kline, Mr. kline. No.
▶ 3:31:03Mr. cloud, 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. diaz-balart. No. Mr. edwards. Mr. edwards. No. Mr. ellzey. Mr. ellzey. No. Miss. Escobar, miss. Escobar I. Mr. espaillat, Mr. espaillat I. Mr. fleishman, Mr. fleishman.
▶ 3:31:35No. Miss frankel, I miss. Frankel, I Mr. franklin, Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest. Mr. harter, Mr. harter, I. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. hinson. Mr. hoyer, Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. iv. Mr. joyce. Marcy kaptur. Miss. Kaptur I. Mr. lalota. Mr. nick lalota. No. Miss. Li. Miss. Letlow. Mr.
▶ 3:32:09Levin, Mr. levin, I miss. Molloy, miss mccollum, miss mccollum, I miss ming, I miss ming I Mr. molinari, Mr. molenaar. No. Mr. moore, Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli, Mr. morelli I. Mr. van. Mr. newhouse, Mr. newhouse. No. Miss. Perez, miss perez, I miss. Pingry, miss pingry I Mr. pocan, Mr. pocan, I Mr. quigley. Mr.
▶ 3:32:41Quigley I. Mr. reschenthaler. Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. shreeve, Mr. shreeve. No. Mr. simpson, Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong, Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres, I Mrs. torres, I miss underwood, miss underwood, I Mr. valadao, Mr. valadao. No. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz, miss. Wasserman. Schultz. I. Mrs. watson. Coleman. >> yes. >> Mrs. watson. Coleman. I. Mr. womack, Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink.
▶ 3:33:17>> are there any members wishing to vote or change their vote? Gentleman from arizona. >> Mr. cisco? No. >> gentlelady from nevada. >> miss lee I. >> oh gentlelady from oklahoma. >> Mrs. bice. No. >> gentleman from texas. >> Mr. cloud. No. >> are there others wishing to record or change their vote?
▶ 3:33:51Seeing none, the clerk will tally. >> by the way. >> gentlelady from iowa. The gentlelady is not recorded. >> Mrs. henson votes no. >> gentleman from mississippi. >> Mr. guest votes no. >> the gentleman from maryland recorded.
▶ 3:34:24>> Mr. ivey votes I. >> hamburgers from five guys are good gentleman from ohio. >> Mr. joyce votes no. >> are there others wishing to record or change their vote? >> he's. >> seeing none again. The clerk will tally again. On this vote.
▶ 3:35:01The eyes are 26. The nos are 31. The amendment is not adopted. The gentlelady from new jersey, miss watson coleman, is recognized for the purpose of an amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I have an amendment to offer and to withdraw.
▶ 3:35:27And I'd like to seek unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of the amendment. >> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with. The gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. This bill seeks to cut $272 million from legal defense services corporation. My amendment would ensure that the lsc gets the funding that it needs.
▶ 3:35:51Cuts to the lsc would have devastating consequences for underserved communities, stripping resources from families that already struggle to defend themselves and reach the justice that they deserve. The lsc, which was founded by congress over 50 years ago, is the single largest provider for grant funding, training and technical assistance to civil legal aid programs geared specifically towards underserved communities.
▶ 3:36:19It helps millions of people every year. Republicans say that they want to cut waste, fraud and abuse. But the lsc is one of the most efficient services that we fund. Thanks to its work. We save money in the long run for every dollar we contribute in funding, taxpayers get $7 back and increase economic activity as well. Economic activity that is sorely needed right now. This does not meet the criteria to be on the chopping block. Block.
▶ 3:36:51The lsc is headed by a bipartisan board of directors, and the president appoints the board. The work that it does is in the service to all americans, and all of us have constituents who have benefited from it. While we may disagree on many issues, this should not be one of them. In fact, this should be one we coalesce around. I'm willing to work with my colleagues to support robust funding for legal services.
▶ 3:37:16Let's show the american people that we still unify in service to our constituents, and I thank you very much, and I yield back. >> thank you. >> I thank the gentlelady, the gentleman from kentucky, Mr. rogers, is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 3:37:44This amendment is performative and unnecessary. I oppose the amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same. I yield back. >> thank the gentleman gentlelady from new york. Miss ming is recognized to address the amendment. >> Mr. chairman, I know that my colleague will be withdrawing this amendment, but I do want to express my support for restoring funding for the lsc.
▶ 3:38:10Legal services are fundamental to our justice system's integrity and the rule of law. They ensure low income and working class families can get help with the most basic civil legal problems. This is not performative. These issues are life changing for so many of our constituents, and we know how important it is for them to have proper legal representation. The bill we are considering today cuts funding for lsc in half.
▶ 3:38:35In my community alone, that would mean 6400 fewer people would get help, such as children facing instability at home, domestic violence survivors seeking legal protections to escape abuse, veterans struggling to access benefits, and seniors facing eviction. They would all go without assistance. The investment we make in lsc every year helps make sure that our most vulnerable constituents have a fair shot when faced with hardship.
▶ 3:39:05It also saves taxpayers money by resolving legal issues early and reducing the burden on shelters, health care systems, social services and law enforcement. I thank my colleague for offering this important amendment, and I hope we can work together as this process continues to provide strong funding for lsc. Thank you, Mr. chairman. I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady, the gentleman from georgia. Mr. bishop is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 3:39:31I rise in strong support of the amendment to restore funding for the legal services corporation. As I noted earlier, the legal services corporation plays a vital role in communities across the country, providing legal help to people who otherwise would not have access to it.
▶ 3:39:49By funding the program, we ensure that people can stay in their homes, and survivors of domestic violence can get the protection they need, but veterans can access the benefits that are earned and that seniors are not left to navigate housing or health care issues on their own. In georgia's second congressional district, I've seen firsthand how deeply this cut would impact my constituents.
▶ 3:40:14Nearly 5000 people would lose access to crucial legal services in my district alone. Among them are more than 1300 children, over 400 survivors of domestic violence, and more than 100 veterans and their families. Without this funding, many will be left without the support they need to address critical legal challenges. The legal aid organizations in my state are already doing everything they can with limited resources.
▶ 3:40:43A cut like this would only make their job harder and leave more people behind. We need to make sure that access to justice isn't just available for the wealthy. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment at the proper point in this process.
▶ 3:41:04I hope that we will, as a congress, restore the funding to fully fund the legal services corporation, to make sure that families, veterans and seniors can continue to get the legal help they need when it matters the most. With that, I yield back. >> thank the gentleman for his remarks. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close.
▶ 3:41:39>> thank you. >> Mr. chairman. First of all, I want to, um, uh, acknowledge that my colleagues have proposed this legislation, this bill, which has even a smaller cut, uh, to legal services than was originally proposed. And that's moving in the right direction. I think this is vitally important for the 6.4 million people that have used it before for the issues which are coming before us even today.
▶ 3:42:06And I look forward to working with my colleagues to see if we can boost this up just a little bit. And with that, I withdraw my amendment and thank you for the opportunity to present it. >> thank the gentlelady. Gentleman from. Gentlelady from california, miss torres is recognized for an amendment. >> I thank you, chairman. I rise to offer an amendment and ask for the reading be dispensed with.
▶ 3:42:34>> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her amendment. >> thank you. Chairman. My amendment would prohibit preferential treatment for narco traffickers or child traffickers by the federal bureau of prisons or any other agency funded by this act. Why is that important?
▶ 3:42:59Well, this is why this, members is a picture of honduran former honduran president, narco traffickers. One orlando hernandez, former honduran president juan orlando hernandez, who in 2024 was convicted by an american jury for trafficking 400 tons of cocaine between 2004 and 20 and
▶ 3:43:332022 into our country. Juan orlando hernandez ran a violent, cartel backed and an empire that trafficked hundreds of tons of cocaine into the us. He stole our taxpayers dollars and terrorized communities across the us in central america.
▶ 3:43:58During his presidency, hernandez turned the honduran government into a tool of violence and complete corruption. Hernandez deployed police and military forces trained by U.S. forces to protect cocaine shipments, used death squads to intimidate opponents, and openly branded he branded drugs with his initials while profiting from the deaths of americans right
▶ 3:44:28Here at home. Orlando hernandez turned honduras again into a narco state. His violent regime is responsible for 1.1 million honduran refugees fleeing to our southern border seeking protection.
▶ 3:44:48Donald trump pardoned this narcotrafficker, signaling to the world that power and money can shield criminals from justice, and that american victims lives do not matter.
▶ 3:45:02Adding insult to this great injury, after hernandez was pardoned, the federal bureau of prisons and the trump administration rolled out the red carpet for him on the day hernandez was supposed to be released. As customary, ice put a detainer on him.
▶ 3:45:27Hernandez was to be turned over for deportation, as he is a convicted drug trafficker, but instead instead the federal bureau of prisons scrambled to stop his deportation. And they didn't simply stop there.
▶ 3:45:49Despite their budget, staffing challenges, trump's federal bureau of prisons paid not with their own personal money, not with juan orlando hernandez money, but with our hard earned taxpayers dollars. They paid a specialized four man tactical team over time, not regular time.
▶ 3:46:14Over time, they paid them overtime to take juan orlando hernandez from his prison cell in west virginia to a luxury hotel in downtown new york city, funded by our hard working tax dollars and. And what happened to the $8 million fine that the judge ordered juan orlando to pay? I have no idea.
▶ 3:46:42And neither do you. These actions can never be allowed to happen ever again. There should never be preferential treatment for narco leaders, whether they are pardoned or not. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady for her remarks. Gentleman from kentucky, chairman rogers recognized respond to the amendment.
▶ 3:47:17>> thank you, Mr. chairman. This amendment is performative and unnecessary, so I oppose the amendment. Urge my colleagues to do the same, and I yield back. >> thank the gentleman. The gentlelady from new york is recognized to address the amendment. >> Mr.
▶ 3:47:37Chairman, I support this amendment, which ensures that the department of justice does not play favorites when it comes to prisoners who have committed some of the worst felonies imaginable. The former president of honduras was moved by bop officers from his prison in west virginia to the waldorf astoria hotel in new york city. After he was pardoned. He had served less than four years of a 45 year sentence.
▶ 3:48:04This was a man who allowed drug traffickers to export more than 400 tons of cocaine into the united states, yet he was pardoned and then driven over 350 miles at the expense of your constituents to a five star hotel on park avenue. We must put a stop to this egregious waste of taxpayer dollars. This is a great amendment. It is not performative. It is important.
▶ 3:48:36I encourage my colleagues to support this amendment. >> thank the gentlelady. Are there others wishing to address amendment? Gentleman from maryland is recognized. >> I thank the gentlelady for her amendment. I'm not sure what is meant. Maybe the chairman would want to educate me on this, that the amendment is performative.
▶ 3:49:00I'm not sure what the meaning of that is applied to an amendment, unless it's performative in the sense that none of the funds would be spent to coddle criminals. I will tell you this. The reason I rise, though, is. I am confounded by the silence.
▶ 3:49:24With reference to the pardon of criminals. I don't understand why so many of us remain silent in the face of people who are responsible for the loss of life of policemen.
▶ 3:49:51And think that pardoning them is okay. Or coddling people who have committed crimes against teenagers are coddled. Mr.
▶ 3:50:16Chairman, I don't know why anybody would oppose this amendment. Um, I think it speaks to a very important issue, and that is accountability. And here we have somebody who, uh, is a narco trafficker.
▶ 3:50:35I know the chairman of this subcommittee is very concerned, and I share his concern, and I share great admiration for all the work he's done. To try to undercut, uh, drugs coming into this country and hurting and killing our children and our families.
▶ 3:51:06Pardon? Should be for those who have a justifiable reason for, uh, being. Having lessened their penalty because they're sorry, they're wrong, they didn't mean it or whatever. I don't see a reason for this.
▶ 3:51:31And frankly, I don't see a reason for pardoning, uh, the perpetrators of crimes on january 6th. And that's why I rise. Really, when 1500 or 1400 of them were pardoned. I saw no outcry from the party who claims to be the party of law enforcement. It claims to be the party of law and order, claims to be the party of strong reactions to crimes.
▶ 3:51:56And by the way, my presumption, unfortunately, is after the vote. I'm not going to understand that either. I yield back. >> thank the gentleman. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you.
▶ 3:52:23Chairman, I think that we can agree that the red carpet treatment that the trump administration rolled out for juan orlando hernandez should never be allowed to happen again.
▶ 3:52:37The only thing performative here today is that we failed to see the faces of our children, of our parents, of our neighbors, all of those american victims of overdose caused by this former president. He stole american lives. He stole american money.
▶ 3:53:06Today, we have an opportunity to say no more. This is not your neighborhood drug dealer that sells a dime or a nickel of weed. This is a hardcore criminal. I urge you to vote in support of this amendment, get our heads out of the sand and vote in support of this amendment. And I yield back.
▶ 3:53:37>> thank the gentlelady. The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from california. All those in favor say aye. >> aye. >> all those opposed say no. Can you? The chair the nos have it. Roll call has been requested. Sufficient demonstration. Support clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar. Aye. Mr. alford, Mr. alford. No. Mr. amodei. Mr. amodei. No. Mrs. bice. Mr.
▶ 3:54:10Bishop, Mr. bishop. Aye. Mr. calvert, Mr. calvert. No. Mr. carter. Mr. case. Mr. case I, Mr. cisco. Mr. cisco. 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, Mr.
▶ 3:54:35Lauro, Mr. lauro 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, miss frankel, miss frankel, I. Mr. franklin, Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest, Mr. harter, Mr. carter. I. Doctor.
▶ 3:55:06Harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson. Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. hoyer I Mr. iv, Mr. iv I Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce. No. Miss. Kaptur, miss kaptur, I Mr. nick lalota. Mr. nick lalota. No. Miss lee. Miss. Letlow. Mr. levin, Mr. levin, I miss. Molloy, miss. Molloy. No. Miss mccollum, miss mccollum, I miss ming, I miss ming I Mr.
▶ 3:55:37Molinari, Mr. mulliner. No. Mr. moore. Mr. morelli. I Mr. morelli, I Mr. moran, Mr. moran, I Mr. newhouse, miss. Perez, miss. Pingree, miss pingree, I. Mr. pocan, Mr. pocan. I. Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley I. Mr. reschenthaler. Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr.
▶ 3:56:05Shreeve, Mr. shreeve. 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. Coleman. I. Mr. womack, Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink, Mr. zink. No.
▶ 3:56:34>> members wishing to vote or change. Gentleman from texas. >> Mr. carter votes no. >> gentleman from west virginia. >> Mr. morneau. >> gentleman from mississippi. >> Mr. gastineau. >> gentleman from alabama. >> Mr. aderholt. No. >> gentlelady from nevada. >> miss lee, a. >> gentleman from virginia. >> Mr. klein, no. >> gentleman from tennessee. >> Mr. fleischmann, no. >> gentlelady from the state of washington.
▶ 3:57:05>> miss perez, a. >> gentlelady from pennsylvania. >> miss dean, a. >> gentlelady from oklahoma. >> Mrs. bice. No. >> are there others wishing to vote or change their vote? Not political tally. A gentleman from washington. >> Mr. newhouse? No. >> are there others wishing to change or record their vote again? Seeing none. Clarksville tally. While we're waiting.
▶ 3:57:31It doesn't look like there's a stampede going to get to the floor right now. Uh, so we're going to try at least one more we have to suspend during. We will, but it's, uh. I don't know, it's been like that.
▶ 3:58:00Either that or the maybe the frame is frozen. Yeah. Thank you. On this vote, the age of 27, the nos are 31. The amendment is not agreed to. Gentlelady from california. Miss torres is recognized for the purpose of an amendment. >> uh, 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. >> thank you. Chairman.
▶ 3:58:30This amendment requires the department of justice office of the pardon attorney's website to include the amount of restitution or fines that are still owed by convicted individuals at the time that they are pardoned or have their sentences commuted.
▶ 3:58:48President trump's pardons to wealthy friends, donors and criminals are not only wrong, but they hurt american victims and leave taxpayers holding the bag. His pardons have forgiven financial crimes that came with hundreds of millions in punishment.
▶ 3:59:07In total, his pardons over two terms have reportedly wiped out nearly $2,000,000,002 billion in victim repayment and taxpayer recovery for medicare, tax fraud and much more. This is money that hasn't gone to victims of crime to compensate for their loss. It is money the federal government was owed that it will never get back.
▶ 3:59:36As a result of these pardons also, um, mean major cuts to the crime victims fund a crime as criminal penalties pay into this fund to help survivors of crime with counseling, housing assistance, legal aid and compensation.
▶ 4:00:00The money is passed down to state and local programs, including domestic violence shelters, rape crisis centers, and child abuse treatment programs, victims of gun violence and their families rely on this funding to reimburse medical expenses, funeral costs and low and lost wages.
▶ 4:00:22These pardons also give a signal to criminals and fraudsters that if you cozy up to the administration and the president, you will be free to victimize and steal money from hard working american taxpayers. Trump signed into law massive cuts to health care, raising insurance costs and forcing hospitals to close, all in the name of tackling waste, fraud and abuse.
▶ 4:00:51Meanwhile, he has pardoned individuals convicted of more than 2 billion in health care fraud cases. Let me give you just two examples. In may 2025, trump commuted the sentence of a florida healthcare executive, lawrence duran, who was convicted of orchestrating what was the largest therapy related medicare fraud scheme in history.
▶ 4:01:17Duran stole $205 million from medicare and was sentenced to 50 years in prison. He's out loose now. In november of 2025, trump pardoned joseph schwartz, a former owner of a collapsed nursing home chain who committed medicaid fraud and stole $38 million in taxes.
▶ 4:01:44He reportedly paid a trump aligned lobbyist $960,000 to advocate for his pardon. Pardons are up for sale. Those are just two of the over 70 fraudsters that trump has pardoned over his two terms. If any president pardons an individual, the american public deserves to know how much criminals have or haven't paid.
▶ 4:02:15And I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and yield back. >> gentlelady. The gentleman from kentucky, mister rogers, is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. This amendment is misguided. Uh. I oppose it and urge my colleagues to do the same and yield back.
▶ 4:02:46>> thank the gentleman. The gentlelady from new york is recognized to address the amendment. >> Mr. chairman, I support this amendment, and I thank my colleague for offering it. It's an important step in ensuring transparency in the pardon process. Although the pardon attorney is required to maintain a website naming people pardoned by the president and the crimes for which they are being pardoned, there is an important part of the picture missing.
▶ 4:03:10We don't see if these individuals owed fines or restitution as part of their sentence. This amendment would fix this. As my colleague has noted, in 2025, the 23 people pardoned by president trump owed a total of 298 million to victims and to the government. And yes, former president joe biden pardoned two people who owed the government more than 100,000.
▶ 4:03:36So the american people deserve to know whether any of these people actually repaid the government before they were pardoned. It's not a partizan issue. It's it is about transparency so that taxpayers have all of the information. When powerful people who owe a massive debt to the government and or to their victims are granted a pardon, I urge support for this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady for her remarks. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Gentleman from maryland.
▶ 4:04:08>> thank you, Mr. chairman. I support the amendment. Just a couple of quick points. Um, pardons do wipe away billions of dollars. And in this instance the trump administration, 2 billion have been eliminated. Uh, as was mentioned a moment ago, though, the the restitution would go to the, the victims of the frauds in this instance, uh, the fines would go to the american, uh, treasury that is used for some of the things that we've just cut or are about to be cut in
▶ 4:04:39These bills that we'd like to finance, like supporting victims of crime. With respect to, um, the argument that they can get the money in civil court. Uh, and miss, miss torres mentioned that, um, Mr. schwartz, who was pardoned, owned, owed 39 million in fraud.
▶ 4:04:59People had tried to get the civil, um, findings and judgments against him had been successful in those, but he was able to evade paying them by securities activity, circuitous activities. The beauty of criminal restitution is people can't duck that. And in order to have gotten out under normal circumstances, he would have had to pay the restitution in advance.
▶ 4:05:21Typically, the way this would go is the pardon office at the department of justice would have gone through these sorts of matters to make sure that, for example, restitution and fines had been paid. Um, as you know, with the trump administration, he skips that process entirely and issues the pardons. And in some instances, the department of justice finds out about it. And the media, just like the rest of us do. But the bottom line is these people who were defrauded deserve the chance to get the money that was stolen from them.
▶ 4:05:49The way he's issued these pardons means they don't get it. The american people deserve to get the fines that these people were supposed to pay, so we could use them for programs to protect and help survivors of crime. The way it's been done, they don't get it. At least let's make the information public so that they know the impact of what these pardons have done. Uh, I supported this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank you, gentlemen, for his remarks. Are there others wishing to address the amendment?
▶ 4:06:16Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you. Chairman, I don't know if, uh, there's another way to rectify, um, to make things a little better for victims of these crimes, of these people who have been pardoned.
▶ 4:06:39But it doesn't matter if it's a democrat or a republican, we ought to demand transparency if we're going to allow for this behavior to continue and for these pardons to continue, and for the hard work of our law enforcement officers to be erased with a signature, then at the very least, we should know what was the fine, how much has been
▶ 4:07:11Paid, and how much do they owe to our government, to our victims? I don't think that that is a hard ask. It started for me. It started with juan orlando hernandez. I wanted us to take over a mansion that he owns in florida, and to utilize that for the his victims that came to our southern border, he should have to pay, at the very least, an $8 million.
▶ 4:07:40Has that been erased? I have no idea. I don't have an answer for you because there is no place where I can get that answer. And when our government refuses to be transparent, we must demand transparency. I ask for your support for this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady. The questions now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from california. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say no. The chair the nos have it.
▶ 4:08:14And the amendment is not adopted. With that we will. Well, I will be more than happy. But I did call for it. So, uh, roll call vote has been requested. Sufficient support has been demonstrated. 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. No. Mr.
▶ 4:08:41Bishop, Mr. bishop, I. Mr. calvert, Mr. calvert. No. 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. >> I have Mr. >> clyburn, Mr. clyburn I. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. No. Mr. cole.
▶ 4:09:12No. 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. edwards. No. Mr. lee. Mr. lee. No. Miss. Escobar, miss. Escobar, I Mr. espaillat, Mr. espaillat, I. Mr. fleishman, Mr. fleishman. No. Miss. Frankel, miss. Frankel, I Mr. franklin. Mr. guest, Mr. carter, Mr.
▶ 4:09:41Carter, I. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson. Mr. hoyer, Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. iv, Mr. iv. I. Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce. No. Miss. Kaptur, miss. Kaptur, I Mr. loloda. Mr. loloda. No. Miss lee, I miss lee, I miss.
▶ 4:10:10Letlow, Mr. levin. Miss malloy, miss malloy. No. Miss mccullum, miss mccullum, I miss ming, miss ming, I, Mr. molinari, Mr. mulliner. No. Mr. moore, Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli, Mr. morelli, I. Mr. moran, Mr. moran, I Mr. newhouse, Mr. newhouse. No. Miss.
▶ 4:10:36Perez, miss perez, I miss pingry, miss pingry I Mr. pocan, Mr. pocan, I Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley I. Mr. reschenthaler. Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. shreve, Mr. shreve. 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.
▶ 4:11:07Wasserman. Schultz. >> many votes. >> Mrs. watson. Coleman. Mrs. watson. Coleman. I. Mr. womack, Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink, Mr. zink. No. >> are there any members wishing to record their vote or change their vote? Gentleman from mississippi. >> Mr. guest. >> no. Gentleman from california. >> Mr. levin, I. >> gentlelady from florida. >> miss wasserman schultz, I.
▶ 4:11:39>> Mr. gentleman from florida. >> Mr. franklin? No. >> are there other members wishing to vote or change their vote? Yeah. I'm seeing none. Clerk will tally.
▶ 4:12:24On this vote the age of 27. The nos of 32. The amendment is not adopted. We will take a recess. Uh, and please return as quickly as you can. We're making good progress, but we still have a very long way to go. Committee is now in recess.
▶ 5:10:58Actually is today. So he deserves.
▶ 5:15:25Committee will come to order and obviously it'll take us a little bit, but we're going to go ahead and keep moving. Gentlelady from california, miss torres is recognized for an amendment. >> I thank you, 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. >> thank you.
▶ 5:15:49The economic development administration helps local governments in their long term recovery after disaster strikes. It is not just homes that need to be rebuilt after a storm or a wildfire. Businesses and local economies also need our assistance.
▶ 5:16:09My amendment would provide 4.3 billion in economic assistance through the eda for states with major disaster declarations in 2025 and 2026, including my home state of california. The january 2025 wildfires in los angeles displaced over 100,000 californians, including small to medium sized businesses.
▶ 5:16:37Independent estimates place total economic damage between 250 and 275 billion, far exceeding what insurance can cover. California's initial request was more than a year ago, and there have been two bipartisan letters signed by every member from the california delegation to leadership and the white house asking for help with recovery. Yet we we are still waiting.
▶ 5:17:06The administration has not brought up a single request for the over $34 billion that california needs, nor have they sent up a single supplemental request for the over 30 states, tribes and territories with major disasters declared since january 2025. The only supplemental that I have been hearing about is for the president's war in iran and funding for his ballroom.
▶ 5:17:34There shouldn't be a mention of any supplemental that does not include disaster aid for the los angeles wildfires and any other state that has suffered from a natural disaster. California is a generous donor state. We pay $275 billion more in federal taxes that it receives in federal funding.
▶ 5:18:03We never withhold our taxes to the federal government, and every program and agency in this government and in your communities that the federal government subsidizes is subsidized by california taxpayers. When hurricane harvey hit in 2017, I voted twice to fund disaster aid for texas and other states that president trump signed into law.
▶ 5:18:32Not a single democrat voted against these measures. When hurricane helene and milton hit in 2024. President biden and congress worked together to pass 100 billion in aid. And again, not a single democrat voted against these measures. Natural disasters don't look at state boundaries or political parties. And when it comes to helping our fellow americans, we shouldn't either.
▶ 5:18:58And while this amount is from california's request, the language in the amendment allows any community in any state that has had major disaster declaration in 2025 or 20 2026 use these funds. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment and I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady for her remarks. Gentleman from kentucky. Mr.
▶ 5:19:26Rogers is recognized to respond to the amendment. This amendment would increase the funding level of eda by a staggering $4.3 billion. Eda is funded in this bill at around 323, 323 million.
▶ 5:19:52Any increase, let alone one of this size, would violate the committee's allocation levels. And for that reason, I oppose this amendment. Urge my colleagues to do the same, and I yield back. Thank the gentleman gentlelady from new york, Mr. recognized to address the. >> Mr. chairman, I rise in support of this amendment. Congress last passed comprehensive disaster supplemental funding in 24.
▶ 5:20:22Since then we have seen devastating disasters across the country, from wildfires in california to severe storms and tornadoes in kentucky, west virginia and washington, to winter storms in tennessee and montana. These communities are still waiting for congress to do its job and help them. Disaster supplementals have long included funding for disaster assistance.
▶ 5:20:45Eda disaster grants provide flexible funding to support longer term economic recovery and resiliency efforts. Disasters are not partizan. This funding is needed by communities across the country. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady for her remarks. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized. Oh, I did somebody. Okay, sorry.
▶ 5:21:15Um, gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you. Chairman. Families lost their homes. Small business owners who worked their entire lives and put their entire savings into their stores lost everything. This amendment would be one step in the right direction to help. Not just my home state of california, but all states whose local economies have been wrecked by a natural disaster.
▶ 5:21:46With that, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank the 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 opinion. The chair the nos have it roll call has been requested. Could I have some hands, please? And sufficient support has been demonstrated.
▶ 5:22:16The clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt, Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar, I, Mr. alford, Mr. alford. No. Mr. amodei. Mrs. bice. Mrs. bice. No. Mr. bishop. Mr. calvert, Mr. calvert. No. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. No. Mr. case. Mr. cisco. Mr. cisco. No. Mr. kline, Mr. kline. No. Mr.
▶ 5:22:48Cloud, 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, I miss delauro, I Mr. diaz-balart, Mr. edwards, Mr. edwards. No. Mr. ellzey. Mr. ellzey. No. Miss. Escobar, miss. Escobar, I Mr. espaillat, Mr. espaillat, I. Mr.
▶ 5:23:18Fleischmann, Mr. fleischmann. No. Miss. Frankel, miss. Frankel, I. Mr. franklin, Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest, Mr. guest. No. Mr. harter, Mr. harter, I. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson. Mr. hoyer. Mr. iv, Mr. ivy. I. Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce. No. Miss. Kaptur, miss. Kaptur, I Mr. nick lalota. Mr. nick lalota. No. Miss.
▶ 5:23:44Lee, miss. Letlow. Mr. levin, Mr. levin, I miss. Malloy. Miss. Malloy. No. Miss mccollum, miss mccollum, I miss ming, miss ming, I. Mr. mulliner, Mr. mulliner. No. Mr. moore, Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli. Mr. van, Mr. newhouse, Mr. newhouse. No. Miss.
▶ 5:24:14Perez, miss perez, I miss pingree, miss pingree, I Mr. pocan. Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley, I. Mr. reschenthaler, Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. shreeve, Mr. shreeve. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong, Mr. strong, Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres. Mrs.
▶ 5:24:47Torres, 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. >> do any members wish to vote or change their vote? Gentleman from florida. >> Mr. diaz-balart. No. >> gentleman from alabama. >> Mr. aderholt? No.
▶ 5:25:18>> the gentleman from georgia. >> Mr. bishop, a. >> gentleman from wisconsin. >> Mr. poe, can a. >> gentleman from hawaii. >> Mr. case, a. >> gentleman from indiana. >> Mr. van I. >> the birthday boy from texas. >> Mr. cloud? No. >> a gentlelady from nevada. >> miss lee I. >> our gentleman from maryland.
▶ 5:25:48>> Mr. hoyer, a. >> gentleman from. Gentleman from california. >> Mr. valadao. No. >> are there others wishing to vote or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tally.
▶ 5:26:43On this vote. The yeas are 27. The nos are 31. The amendment is not adopted. The gentleman from new york, Mr. espaillat, is recognized for the purpose of an amendment. Chairman, I have an amendment in the desk and asked for to dispense this reading. Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman's recognized for remarks on his amendment. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 5:27:09Ranking member, I am proud to offer this amendment which strikes section 543 from the legislation. As you know, section 543 prohibits funds from being used to implement, administer, apply or enforce the atf's 2022 ghost guns rule. This 2022 rule was critical.
▶ 5:27:31It provided a definition to these unassembled firearms and framed a policy tracking and reporting structure. The use of unassembled firearms, untraceable ghost guns continues to plague many of our communities.
▶ 5:27:51Within my district in new york city and across cities from los angeles, miami law enforcement officials continue to come across hundreds and thousands of ghost guns annually compared to regular firearm ghost guns. Kits are very cheap and often cost only 100 to $200. They are also easy to get online. You know what? What that means? That means generally the kids and teens can find these kids.
▶ 5:28:23They can afford them, they're getting them, and they're killing each other and other folks with them. You go to a furniture store and you can assemble a dining set, but when you get one of these kits, you assemble a nine millimeter weapon that kills other people. I am proud to offer this amendment. I encourage my colleagues to support it. Thank you, and I yield back. >> thank the gentleman for his remarks.
▶ 5:28:51The gentleman from kentucky, mister rogers, is recognized to address the amendment. Thank you, Mr. chairman. This amendment would undo serious efforts to protect and restore second amendment rights by instituting long overdue reforms to reverse biden era gun control. For that reason, I oppose this amendment, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. And I yield back.
▶ 5:29:25Thank the gentleman gentlelady from new york. Mr. bing is recognized to address the amendment. >> I rise in strong support of this amendment. Section 543 is an extreme policy writer that would make americans less safe. It would prevent the atf from regulating ghost guns, which are untraceable firearms that any member of the public can build from kits or separate pieces. Ghost guns have been used in school and mass shootings, acts of domestic violence, domestic terrorism and police shootouts.
▶ 5:29:53This policy rider would endanger law enforcement. It would allow anyone to purchase all the pieces needed to easily assemble a gun. And because these guns can't be traced, they make it harder for police to solve crimes and catch criminals. I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will join me to make this common sense change, to protect our communities and strengthen our law enforcement. Thank you, and I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady, the gentleman from georgia, Mr. clyde, is recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 5:30:24>> thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise today in strong opposition to this amendment to strike section 543 of the bill, which prohibits funds for the bureau of alcohol, tobacco and firearms explosives rule entitled definition of frame or receiver and identification of firearms. I commend chairman rogers and chairman cole for including section 543 to protect law abiding gun owners from atf's unlawful overreach and. And to defend the right of everyday americans to manufacture their own privately made firearms, a right long recognized.
▶ 5:30:53Under the second amendment, which goes back over 250 years, literally to the very founding of our country during the previous administration's gun grabbing regulatory campaign, the atf issued the frame or receiver rule, fundamentally redefining what constitutes a firearm and a frame or receiver. Under the gun control act of 1968.
▶ 5:31:11Most troublingly, the rules expanded definition of a firearm can now encompass unfinished parts that law abiding americans have traditionally used to manufacture, not assemble, but manufacture their own privately made firearms.
▶ 5:31:27Furthermore, atf unilaterally broadened the definition of a frame or receiver to include almost any part that could become one a firearm, a sweeping and unprecedented expansion that far exceeds the plain text of the statute. If you can redefine the definition, then you can do almost anything. Atf exceeded its lawful authority in promulgating this rule, unilaterally rewriting statutory definitions without additional congressional authorization.
▶ 5:31:56Moreover, this rule's practical effect would be to lay the groundwork for a de facto national gun registry, something the atf is expressly prohibited from facilitating, both in the bill before us and under existing law, specifically, the firearm owners protection act of 1986. My colleagues across the aisle frequently invoke our article one authority and the importance of congressional oversight over the executive branch.
▶ 5:32:21Section 543 in the bill presents a clear and concrete opportunity to do exactly that, using the power of the purse to reject a regulation promulgated without clear statutory authority from congress. Blocking this provision would be an abdication of that very oversight responsibility. I urge my colleagues to oppose this misguided amendment and stand up for our constitutional rights and that of their constituents. Vote no, and I yield back. >> thank the gentleman for his remarks.
▶ 5:32:50Gentlelady from florida, miss frankel is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you. Thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise in strong support of this amendment, which is one of several amendments the democrats have offered today, uh, to reduce gun violence. And let me just start by saying, what about the constitutional right for our children to stay alive?
▶ 5:33:13Uh, gun is now the leading cause of death for children and teenagers in the united states. These are missed birthdays. They're missed graduations, futures are stolen, and families are shattered forever. Behind every headline is a parent who still sets the dinner table. For somebody who will not ever come home again.
▶ 5:33:40And this is pain that's not limited to one city or one state. It's happening all across our country, in schools, in movie theaters, parking lots, neighborhoods, homes. And we know their names. Nicole hockley lost her little boy, dylan, murdered in his elementary school at sandy hook in connecticut. Fred guttenberg lost his daughter, jamie, in the horrific high school shooting in parkland, florida.
▶ 5:34:10Melissa wiley lost her daughter, jennifer, in a mass shooting at school by her daughter's ex-boyfriend, and sandy phillips lost her daughter, jessica, in the mass shooting at a movie theater in aurora, colorado. And our own colleague lucy mcbath lost her son, jordan, who was shot and killed over loud music, playing in a car. Parents in every corner of america live with this grief.
▶ 5:34:41Birthdays become heartbreak, holidays become reminders, bedrooms stay untouched. Voicemails are safe forever. To hear the voices of a child. And we owe all these families more than just prayers and thoughts. We owe them action. This amendment will not erase the grief of these families.
▶ 5:35:02But it says, as congress is finally willing to confront this crisis with the urgency that it deserves, because no parent in america should endure the agony of burying a child because of gun violence. I urge the adoption of this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank you, gentlelady, for remarks. Are there others wishing to address the amendment?
▶ 5:35:25Seeing none, the gentleman is recognized or excuse me, is recognized for one minute to close. Gentleman. >> thank you. >> Mr. chairman. Again. Ghost guns, unfortunately, are the guns of the future. Uh, they don't have a a traceable number.
▶ 5:35:50Uh, you're not able to determine who assembled them or where they came from. Uh, they have no registry. No, we have no ability as a society to track who uses them in an illegal and violent way. And they're readily available for young people to assemble right in their homes.
▶ 5:36:11They get them by mail, they they're assembled and they have a deadly weapon, a nine millimeter or semi automatic weapon, uh, that shows up in far too many neighborhoods, far too many street corners in shootings. Uh, and the result is the same death. So I believe that these guns should be regulated like other guns are regulated.
▶ 5:36:38And that, in fact, uh, this was, uh, put into motion administratively in previous years. And it was undone. The result has been, uh, chaos and death in many of our districts. I ask for my colleagues to consider this amendment and vote in support of it. I yield back. >> gentleman for his remarks.
▶ 5:37:05Questions now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york. All those in favor, say aye. All opposed? Say no. The chair the nos have it roll call has been requested. Sufficient support has been demonstrated. Clerk, call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt. No. Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar. Aye. Mr. alford, Mr. alford. No. Mr. amodei. Mrs. bice, Mr. bishop, Mr. bishop, I. Mr.
▶ 5:37:36Calvert, Mr. calvert. No. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. No. Mr. case. Mr. cisco. Mr. klein, Mr. cloud. Mr. cloud. No. Mr. clyburn, Mr. clyburn. I. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. No. Mr. cole. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cuellar, miss. Dean, miss. Dean I. Mr. Mr. laura I. Mr. diaz-balart, Mr. diaz-balart. No. Mr. edwards.
▶ 5:38:07Mr. 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. harter, doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson. Mr. hoyer, Mr. hoyer, I Mr. iv, Mr. iv, I Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce. No.
▶ 5:38:38Miss. Kaptur, miss kaptur, I Mr. nick lalota. Mr. nick lalota. No. Miss lee, miss lee. I miss. Letlow. Mr. levin, Mr. levin, I miss. Molloy, miss molloy. No. Miss mccollum, miss mccollum, I miss ming, I miss ming I Mr. molinari, Mr. molenaar. No. Mr. moore, Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli, Mr. morelli I. Mr. van. Mr. newhouse, Mr. newhouse. No.
▶ 5:39:09Miss. Perez, miss perez, I miss. Pingree, miss pingree, I Mr. pocan, Mr. pocan, I Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley, I. Mr. guy reschenthaler. Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. shreeve, Mr. shreeve. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong, Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres. Mrs. torres. I miss. Underwood, miss underwood, I. Mr.
▶ 5:39:37Valadao, 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. >> are there any members wishing to vote or change their vote? Gentlelady from oklahoma. >> Mrs. bice? No. >> gentleman from mississippi. >> Mr. guest, no. >> gentleman from arizona. >> Mr. cisco? No.
▶ 5:40:09>> gentleman from hawaii. >> Mr. case, a. >> gentleman from california. >> Mr. harter, I. >> are there others wishing to record their vote or change their vote? Mr. gentleman from indiana. >> Mr. mervyn I. >> seeing no others clerk, will tally.
▶ 5:41:15On this vote. The eyes are 27, the nose are 30. The amendment is not adopted. Gentleman from new york. Mr. is recognized for the purpose of an amendment. Chairman. >> I have an amendment at the desk and asked to dispense this reading. >> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentleman's recognized for remarks on his amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. Ranking member, I'm proud to offer this amendment, which I intend to withdraw.
▶ 5:41:45I will open by thanking you, ranking member meng and our colleagues on the committee for working together to deliver support for nasa's goddard institute for space studies at large, including those based in new york. The g. Iss team in new york has been working on fragmenting settings across the five boroughs.
▶ 5:42:08Often time it is in dilapidated spaces donated by local institutions. This dynamic further strains the g. I s team's ability to conduct their critical climate change research, which includes deeply important research on weather patterns. This also makes little sense, as a long time facility at armstrong hall is under lease until 2031, and it's not being used.
▶ 5:42:37I look forward to working with you, Mr. chairman, and with my fellow new york ranking member grace meng, to ensure that the gsgiss team in new york city are allowed to return to their armstrong hall facility. Thank you, Mr. chairman, and I withdraw my amendment, and I yield back. >> thank the gentleman for withdrawing. The gentleman from new york, Mr.
▶ 5:43:06Is recognized for purposes of amendment. Thank. >> thank you, Mr. chairman, again. Uh, thank you, ranking member. I have an amendment at the desk and ask to dispense this reading. >> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman's recognized for remarks on his amendment. >> Mr. chairman, I'm proud to offer this amendment, which will prohibit the law enforcement agencies from using funds to purchase our personal data from shady data brokers.
▶ 5:43:37This legislative text stems from the. The fourth amendment is not for sale act. I would address, uh, I would I would like to address the data broker loophole. I will commend congresswoman lofgren from the great state of california for leading that legislation to passage in the house in 2023, when it received overwhelming bipartisan support.
▶ 5:44:02I also want to thank her and senator wyden for assisting with this amendment. Simply put, our law enforcement officials should not be buying our personal information yet. Fbi director patel proudly testified in front of the us senate in march that the bureau continues to purchase this data.
▶ 5:44:24The fbi, dea, atf and marshals have important work to do ahead of them which would not be impacted by this legislation. They will retain their ability to obtain personal data information b or other lawful means, including pursuant to warrants, subpoenas or court orders as described in the last section of my amendment.
▶ 5:44:48I strongly encourage my colleagues to support this amendment, which provides all of us the basic protection against big brother purchases of our private data. Thank you so much, Mr. chairman, and I yield back. >> I thank the gentleman for his remarks. Gentleman from kentucky. Mr. rogers is recognized to address the amendment. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 5:45:12This is an important issue as the digital age presents novel questions surrounding privacy and the fourth amendment. In fact, as the fisa reauthorization continues to be worked for a long term solution, this issue is currently being debated in other settings, and we need to let the authorizers do their job.
▶ 5:45:41For these reasons, I oppose the amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same, and I yield back. Thank the gentleman. Gentlelady from new york is recognized to address the amendment. >> miss me? >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise in support of this amendment. Npr reported earlier this year about a whole industry of data brokers who buy up vast quantities of electronic information from cell phone apps and web browsers and sell it to advertisers.
▶ 5:46:10They then use this data to target ads shown to consumers. The same industry also sells that data, including bulk cell phone location data, to police departments and federal agencies in ways that can reveal personal information and intimate details about individuals, all without a warrant. This amendment would put an end to this practice and require federal agencies to obtain a warrant before acquiring such information.
▶ 5:46:36This is a common sense pro-constitution pro-privacy amendment and I urge its adoption. Thank you, and I yield back. >> thank you, gentle lady, for remarks. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Gentleman from texas is recognized. >> thank you chairman. >> thank you, chairman, I. I support this amendment, and I think it's important that we do as well.
▶ 5:46:58You know, even as we in congress are discussing fisa, we've seen the bad abuses, uh, in our intelligence agencies over the past several years. We should be working to clean that up. Never did congress authorized the purchase of data. And it is important that we not give intelligence agencies a workaround from warrants and protections, even as we're debating whether or not what kind of protection should be on fisa, at least there is a process.
▶ 5:47:27Uh, this goes outside of a process to collect data. Now, some would say, well, shouldn't law enforcement agencies have the same, you know, purchase capabilities and insurance company? Well, insurance company can't put you in jail. Um, and, and it's so important that we, our first priority here is to protect the rights and securities and liberty of the american people and the freedoms that are enshrined in our constitution that we understand to be inalienable and a gift from god.
▶ 5:47:56And, and the idea that that intelligence agencies could perhaps, you know, buy up data on who purchased firearms or location data on, on where, what clubs you went to, or what houses of worship you went to or, uh, data on, you know, other things that you bought. You know, it's, it's just something that the federal government should have to go through a process, a warrant process to be able to get that kind of information.
▶ 5:48:26They shouldn't be able to buy up data and then scan facial recognition, recognition technology and throw this all in their database without some sort of process, uh, that where there's a burden of proof attached to it. And so our jobs are our first priority, our first priority. We, our job to keep the american people safe is an important priority. That is why the, you know, we do so much to support, um, the department of war and, and everything that's happening in our law enforcement.
▶ 5:48:53But our first job is to keep the american people free and we have to continue to do that. And so I support this amendment and I encourage adoption of it. Thank you. Chairman, I yield back. >> thank the gentleman for his remarks. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. >> uh. >> thank you to my colleagues.
▶ 5:49:19I believe that this amendment has, uh, bipartisan support, as was just stated. Uh, it doesn't tie up the hands of law enforcement. What it does do is it allows for law enforcement to have to go through a process to get access to this data, uh, that will guarantee all of our rights, our fourth amendment rights. Uh, and I urge all my colleagues to do this.
▶ 5:49:44This is a common sense action and amendment, and I hope that you can all support it. I yield back. >> thank the gentleman. The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say no. >> no. >> the chair of the nos have it. Roll call has been requested. Sufficient support has been demonstrated. Clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt.
▶ 5:50:14No. 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. carter. Mr. carter. No. Mr. case. Mr. case I Mr. cisco. Mr. cisco. No. Mr. klein. Mr. cloud. Mr. cloud I. Mr. clyburn, Mr. clyburn. Mr. clyburn I. Mr.
▶ 5:50:50Clyde. Mr. clyde. I. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cuellar, miss. Dean, miss. Dean. I. Miss. Delauro, miss. Delauro, 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, Mr. fleischmann. No. Miss. Frankel.
▶ 5:51:21Mr. franklin. Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest. Mr. guest. No. Mr. harter, Mr. harter, I. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. I. Mrs. henson. Mrs. henson. No. Mr. hoyer, Mr. hoyer I. Mr. iv, Mr. iv I Mr. joyce. Miss kaptur, miss kaptur, I Mr. nick lalota, miss lee, miss lee, I miss.
▶ 5:51:51Letlow, Mr. levin, Mr. levin, I. Miss. Molloy. Miss mccollum, miss mccollum, I miss ming, miss ming I, Mr. molinari, Mr. molenaar. No. Mr. moore, Mr. moore, I Mr. morelli, I Mr. morelli, I. Mr. mervyn. Mr. newhouse, Mr. newhouse. No. Miss. Perez, miss. Perez, I miss. Pingree, miss. Pingree, I.
▶ 5:52:22Mr. pocan, Mr. pocan, I. Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley I. Mr. guy reschenthaler. Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. shreeve, Mr. shreeve. 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.
▶ 5:52:52Wasserman. Schultz. I. Mrs. watson. Coleman, Mrs. watson. Coleman. I. Mr. womack, Mr. womack. No. Mr. zinc. Mr. zinc. No. >> are there any members wishing to vote or change their vote? Gentleman from texas. Gentleman. >> Mr. cuellar I. >> sorry gentleman from indiana. >> Mr. murvin I. >> where oh. Gentlelady from florida. >> miss frankel, I.
▶ 5:53:22>> are there others wishing to vote or change their vote? Not. The clerk will tally. Gentleman from ohio. >> Mr. joyce. No.
▶ 5:54:20>> and this vote. The yeas are 32. The nos are 25. The amendment is adopted. Gentlelady from illinois. Miss underwood 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 the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 5:54:43I rise today to offer an amendment to protect the equal employment opportunity commission's ability to protect the civil rights of american workers. Every year since 1966, the eeoc has collected basic demographic data from employers. The agency depends on that data to investigate workplace discrimination.
▶ 5:55:03This information has been critical to the federal government's ability to enforce civil rights laws for the past 60 years, and yet, the eeoc has still not announced the opening of the 2026 data collection cycle. In fact, its contract for data collection expired in september of 2025, so the agency is far behind schedule to complete this important work. Unfortunately, I don't think that that's an accident.
▶ 5:55:32After all, project 2025 dictates that ending this demographic data collection should be a priority for the trump administration. It's a key step in their plan to keep chipping away at our civil rights until there are none left. I'll be honest, I never thought it would happen this fast. I'm still reeling from the supreme court's decision to rip apart the voting rights act and drag us back to jim crow.
▶ 5:55:58Not all of the attacks are civil rights, or as dramatic or as obvious as what's happened over these last two weeks. Sometimes it's death by a thousand cuts. Title vii of the civil rights act of 1964 requires employers to keep records relevant to the determinations of unlawful employment practices. That's exactly what this demographic information is.
▶ 5:56:24My amendment would ensure that the eeoc fulfills its civil rights mission and collects the data it needs to enforce the law and to protect american workers. Eeoc chair lucas has made alarming comments about her plans to dismantle voter I'm sorry, worker protections under title seven, not to mention that she said she intends to remove protections for workers undergoing fertility treatments under my pregnant workers fairness act, so it is clear that we cannot leave it up to
▶ 5:56:55Her to decide whether american workers are protected. Congress needs to make it clear what's required, and that's what this amendment does in the debate for the last amendment, our colleague Mr. cloud just said, quote, our first priority is to protect rights and freedoms of the american people. That's what this amendment does.
▶ 5:57:13And so I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this amendment for the sake of protecting american workers and ending this administration's assault on civil rights, I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady for her comments. The gentleman from kentucky, Mr. rogers, is recognized to respond to the amendment. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 5:57:36This amendment would reinstate the ill advised diversity provisions advocated for during the last administration. The trump administration is working hard to eliminate dei policies, and I'm proud the 27 house bill is in lockstep with that priority.
▶ 5:58:03I oppose this amendment, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. I yield back. Thank the gentleman gentlelady from new york, miss mims, recognized to respond to the amendment. >> Mr. chairman, I strongly support this amendment. The eeoc's long standing data collection requirements are not a burden on businesses. They are a highly effective tool for the government to monitor employment practices and identify patterns of discrimination and potential violations of the law.
▶ 5:58:32I thank my colleague for this amendment and I support its adoption. Thank you, and I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentleman is. The gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close. >> Mr. chairman. >> Mr. chairman, I certainly appreciate the opportunity to bring this amendment before the committee today, and I understand Mr.
▶ 5:58:58Rogers comments about the philosophical and ideological differences that we might hold, the different values that we share around diversity, equity and inclusion. However, we're talking about federal law, and under federal law, as established under the civil rights act of 64, this data collection is required. And so what we are simply trying to do is to prohibit funds for use being used to rescind the ability for the eeoc to follow federal law.
▶ 5:59:24I urge my colleagues to really reflect on what we're doing here today, and to stand with us and vote yes on this amendment. I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady for her comments. Questions now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from illinois. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say no. >> no. >> chair, the nos have it roll call has been requested. Sufficient support has been demonstrated. The clerk will call the roll.
▶ 5:59:55>> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt. No. 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. klein. Mr. klein. No. Mr. cloud. Mr.
▶ 6:00:26Clyburn, Mr. clyburn I. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. No. Mr. cole. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cuellar, Mr. cuellar. I miss dean, miss. Dean, I miss. Delauro, Mr. 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.
▶ 6:00:57Franklin, Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest, Mr. harter. Doctor. Mr. harter, I. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson. Mr. hoyer, Mr. hoyer, I. Mr. iv. Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce. No. Marcy kaptur. Marcy kaptur. I Mr. nick lalota. Miss lee, miss lee.
▶ 6:01:28I miss. Letlow. Mr. levin, Mr. levin, I miss. Molloy, miss. Molloy. No. Miss mccollum, miss mccollum. I miss ming, miss ming I. Mr. molinari, Mr. molenaar. No. Mr. moore, Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli, Mr. morelli I. Mr. moran, Mr. moran I Mr. newhouse, Mr. newhouse. No. Miss. Perez. Miss. Pingree, miss. Pingree, I. Mr. pocan, Mr. pokemon I Mr. quigley. Mr.
▶ 6:02:00Quigley I. Mr. guy reschenthaler. Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. shreeve, Mr. shreeve. 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. Coleman, Mrs. watson. Coleman. I. Mr. womack. Mr.
▶ 6:02:33Zink, Mr. zink. No. >> members. Excuse me. Any members wish to record a vote or change their vote? Gentleman from california. Did you get it? >> I'm sorry. There was multiple. Mr. aguilar, I. >> gentleman from maryland. >> Mr. iv, I. >> gentleman from new york. >> Mr. lalota no. >> gentleman from california. >> Mr. calvert, I. Mr.
▶ 6:03:01Calvert, no. >> gentlelady from iowa. >> Mrs. henson, no. >> gentleman from mississippi. >> Mr. guest, no. >> gentleman from texas. >> Mr. cloud, no. >> gentlelady from state of washington. >> miss perez I. >> gentleman from arkansas. >> Mr. womack no. >> are there others wishing to vote, record their vote or change their vote?
▶ 6:03:31Seeing none, the clerk will tally.
▶ 6:04:10The nose. Are 33. The amendment is not adopted. The gentleman from new york, Mr. morelli, is recognized for the purpose of an amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I have an amendment at the desk and move to dispense with its reading. >> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with. The gentleman from new york is recognized for remarks on his amendment. >> thank you, sir. Um, Mr. chairman, uh, colleagues, this amendment is about one simple thing. Transparency.
▶ 6:04:38Right now, um, alcohol, tobacco and firearms is moving in the wrong direction. And congress deserves to know how these changes are affecting public safety. Uh, the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives already struggles to meet the required inspection rate for gun dealers. In fact, most gun dealers are only inspected once every decade. Think about that. Business is selling deadly weapons receive less oversight than products like food, water, or consumer goods.
▶ 6:05:07Congress deserves to know why accountability is getting weaker instead of stronger, and it's only getting worse. The trump administration pushed staffing cuts in early retirements that reduced the number of atf agents and investigators responsible for enforcing gun laws.
▶ 6:05:23At the same time, atf revoked nearly 70% fewer gun dealer licenses for serious violations in the years 2024 to 2025, and there are reports that agents are being pulled away from gun trafficking investigations and reassigned to immigration enforcement. And atf recently announced dozens of policy changes at once that could further weaken oversight of the firearms industry and make it harder for law enforcement's ability to combat gun crime.
▶ 6:05:53Illegal guns continue to flow into our communities, while the agency responsible for stopping it is being weakened and the consequences are real, more guns end up in the hands of criminals. Communities become less safe, law enforcement has a harder job, and more families lose loved ones. Oversight matters. Facts matter. Public safety matters. This amendment does not stop atf from doing its job.
▶ 6:06:19It simply requires transparency for what they're doing. It directs atf to provide the united states congress with detailed information about gun dealer inspections violations, enforcement actions, and staffing changes that have occurred over the last two years. This is our responsibility as members of congress. You wouldn't think you'd have to make an amendment to ask them to do this, but here we are. I would urge my colleagues to support the amendment and urge a yes vote. With that, Mr. chair, I yield back, sir. >> thank the gentleman.
▶ 6:06:48The gentleman from kentucky, chairman rogers, is recognized to address the amendment. Thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise in opposition to this amendment. The fiscal 27 bill already facilitates cooperation between the department of justice and federal firearms licensees to rectify violations.
▶ 6:07:13This language seems to have the same goal, except with a much heavier hand in regulating licensees. For these reasons, I oppose the amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same. Yield back. Thank the gentleman. The gentlelady from new york, Mr. big, is recognized to address the amendment. >> Mr. chairman, I strongly support this amendment.
▶ 6:07:37The industry investigators at the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives comply with regulation and avoid illegal gun sales. They serve as the first line of defense and help ensure that firearms are not diverted to the criminal market. My colleagues amendment would give more transparency to the work of atf and its industry operations investigators.
▶ 6:08:00This information is important for this committee to conduct oversight and provide needed support to our federal, state and local law enforcement officers as they fight the criminal trafficking of firearms. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. Thank you, and I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none. The. Oh, excuse me, gentleman from georgia. Mr. clyde's recognized.
▶ 6:08:32>> thank you, Mr. chairman. >> um, first, I would indeed agree. >> that federal firearms licensees are are the first line of defense when it comes to, um, ensuring that firearms stay in the hands of law abiding people. And therefore, I commend the atf's most recent announcement on rule making. But atf already reports on their actions regarding federal firearms license inspections. I have seen them and I have read them. So I find this amendment to be unnecessary and additional paperwork.
▶ 6:09:02Burden on the industry operations investigators and I yield back. >> thank the gentleman. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you. Thank you, Mr. chair.
▶ 6:09:20I would simply remind people it's sort of interesting that, uh, the trump administration and others have gone to extraordinary lengths to ultimately cost the local and state governments billions and billions of dollars to track down, uh, voter fraud and, uh, people who are not U.S. citizens from voting, even though there's no evidence any of that happens.
▶ 6:09:44But you'd be willing to spend tens of billions of dollars to change the rules, to stop something that's not happening from happening. But we won't even ask atf to give us a report back on the reductions in staffing and the missed inspections at places where now you could wait a full decade for a gun dealer to have an inspection. And we simply want information. I would urge people, this is common sense. It makes sense. Those reports are not forthcoming, and that's why this amendment is necessary.
▶ 6:10:13With that, I'd urge a vote in the affirmative on the amendment, and I yield back. Mr. chair. >> I thank the gentleman for his remarks. The questions now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say no. Any. The chair the nos have it. 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.
▶ 6:10:45Amodei, 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. cisco. No. Mr. klein, Mr. klein. No. Mr. cloud. Mr. clyburn. >> no. >> Mr. clyburn I. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. No. Mr. cloud. Mr. cloud. No. Mr. cole. No. Mr.
▶ 6:11:17Cole. No. Mr. cuellar, 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. harder, doctor. Harris.
▶ 6:11:51Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson, Mr. hoyer, Mr. hoyer, I, Mr. iv. Mr. joyce. Mr. joyce. No. Miss. Kaptur, miss kaptur, I Mr. nick lalota, miss lee, miss lee, I miss. Letlow, Mr. levin, Mr. levin, I miss. Molloy, miss. Molloy. No. Miss mccollum, miss mccollum. I miss ming, miss ming I. Mr. molinari, Mr.
▶ 6:12:23Molenaar. No. Mr. moore. Mr. morelli, Mr. morelli, I. Mr. moran, Mr. mervyn I. Mr. newhouse, Mr. newhouse. No. Miss. Perez, miss. Perez, I miss. Pingry, miss pingry. I Mr. pocan, Mr. pocan, I Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley I Mr. rosenthaler. Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. shreeve, Mr. shreeve. No. Mr.
▶ 6:12:52Simpson, 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. Coleman, Mrs. watson. Coleman. I. Mr. womack, Mr. womack. No. Mr. zinc. Mr. zinc. No. >> any members wishing.
▶ 6:13:19To vote or change their vote? Gentleman from california, Mr. >> calvert. No. >> gentleman from new york. >> Mr. lalota. No. >> gentleman from west virginia. >> Mr. moore, no. >> gentleman from california. >> Mr. harder, I. >> are there others wishing to cast their vote or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tally. Oh two late arrivals.
▶ 6:13:49A gentleman from mississippi. >> Mr. castano. >> gentlelady from iowa. >> Mrs. henson, no. >> gentleman from maryland. >> Mr. iv, I. >> are there others wishing to cast or change their vote? Clerks will tell.
▶ 6:14:45This vote. The yeas are 27. The nos are 33. The amendment is not adopted. Gentleman from california. Mr. levin is recognized for the purpose of an amendment. >> chairman, 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's recognized for remarks on his amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 6:15:09I'd like to draw the committee's attention to the alarming use of nearly $2 billion of american taxpayer funds to pay foreign owned companies that actually keep our constituents utility bills artificially high across the country. Right now, as families open their electric bills month after month, they're increasingly facing impossible decisions to pay to keep the lights on or to put food on the table.
▶ 6:15:32Electricity bills have risen 34% over the past five years, including more than 6% in the past year alone, significantly outpacing inflation. Today, nearly 80 million americans are struggling to pay their utility bills month after month, as electricity demand from data centers and manufacturing rises faster than new power supply can be built. We're increasingly at risk of dual crises of energy affordability and grid reliability.
▶ 6:16:01A decline in grid reliability threatens national security, public health, economic competitiveness, and during heat waves and cold snaps human lives. Right now, we need all the energy we can get on the grid.
▶ 6:16:16And yet the administration has decided that instead of deploying more energy, we should provide foreign companies with billions of taxpayer dollars without any sort of consideration from this committee to stop developing projects that would have helped bolster grid reliability and bring down costs. That's right. The administration administration has circumvented the appropriations process to pay nearly $2 billion out of the department of justice judgment fund.
▶ 6:16:44That's why we're talking about this in cjs and not in interior, because it's out of the doj judgment fund to entice companies to walk away from offshore wind projects in new york, new jersey, north carolina, california and more deals like this could be coming. The projects in new york and new jersey would have powered more than 2 million homes. The one in north carolina would have powered 300,000 homes, and the project in california would have powered 1.1 million homes.
▶ 6:17:13These cancellations are a massive loss at a moment of unprecedented energy demand growth and will make our grid less reliable. But don't just take my word for it. The grid operators themselves in the northeast, new york and mid-atlantic have all said that offshore wind helps them solve the reliability challenges they are facing. Now, I want to be clear that these cancellations will also hit many of our constituents right in their pocketbook. Since offshore wind has a low operating cost, the wind blows for free.
▶ 6:17:41After all, it can bid into the electricity market at the low end of the cost curve. So when you have offshore wind on the grid, it pushes out the higher cost resources and lowers the system wide price of electricity. The result of deploying more offshore wind is lower costs for our constituents. The offshore wind projects that have been canceled won't just hurt those of us from coastal states like new york, north carolina, new jersey and california.
▶ 6:18:06When you add offshore wind, for example, to the system in pjm, it lowers the system wide price, including in ohio, west virginia, kentucky, pennsylvania, indiana and tennessee. Any future cancellations in pjm will leave these states facing higher costs and a less reliable grid. These project cancellations are a bad deal for our constituents, as both taxpayers and as ratepayers, and they're a bad deal for all of us as americans. Since these buyouts were likely unlawful.
▶ 6:18:35I am deeply concerned by this new playbook to kill off energy projects using the judgment fund. Regardless of what your preferred energy sources are, we all should be able to agree that no administration should have the ability to negotiate backdoor deals to circumvent this committee, with companies to abandon projects that are in the pipeline that our country needs at this moment.
▶ 6:18:58And if you stand for, quote, all of the above energy, end quote, you should be as upset about this as I am. So my amendment would block these payouts for the next fiscal year so that we in this committee and the american people can understand the legal authority under which these deals are being struck and the full impact that these cancellations will have on grid reliability and costs for our constituents. Thank you, Mr. chairman. I yield back.
▶ 6:19:29>> thank the gentleman for his remarks. Gentleman from kentucky, chairman rogers is recognized to respond to the amendment. Thank you. >> chairman. >> this amendment would tie the hands of the administration and limit their discretion, even when it's in the best interest of both parties.
▶ 6:19:52I can't support an amendment that hamstrings the administration in ending taxpayer support for projects that were only viable, with wasteful and endless government subsidies. For that reason, I oppose the amendment, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. Yield back. Thank the gentleman, the gentlelady from new york, miss ming, is recognized to address the amendment. >> Mr. chairman, I rise in support of this amendment.
▶ 6:20:20The idea that while gas prices are approaching $5 and more per gallon, the united states government would pay foreign companies not to invest in energy producing projects here at home, and instead shift to a scheme to export. Lng would be absurd to most americans, but that is exactly what's happening. The trump administration is forcing U.S.
▶ 6:20:45Taxpayers to pay $1 billion to total energies, so that total stops work on two large wind energy production facilities that would have put low cost electricity into the power grids in the northeast and mid-atlantic, and instead builds an lng export terminal to move american natural gas and send it overseas. The result is that we will lose four gigawatts of planned electricity generation from the east coast, which is enough to power more than a million homes.
▶ 6:21:17Construction jobs will be lost, turbine maintenance jobs will be lost in exchange for this job loss and diminished energy production. We will also spend $1 billion so that this company can sell american natural gas abroad. If the president thinks this is the art of the deal, I have a bridge in a neighboring county that I would like to sell to him. This amendment will correct this fatally flawed policy and protect taxpayer dollars in the process. I urge its adoption.
▶ 6:21:49>> thank the gentlelady for remarks. Gentlelady from connecticut, Mr. lawrence recognized to address the amendment. >> Mr. chairman, I rise in support of this amendment, which prohibits funds from being used for settlements designed to cancel offshore wind projects. I never thought that with the cost of living skyrocketing across the country, that the president would be pursuing a policy of driving up electric bills.
▶ 6:22:14Yet that is exactly what's happening with the series of politically motivated lawsuits from the trump administration against renewable energy projects and wind projects. In particular, the trump administration is paying $1 billion to total energies, a french company which was leasing land for wind projects off the coast of north carolina and new york, which together would have generated four gigawatts of clean energy
▶ 6:22:46To power 1.3 million homes. In what is effectively a quid pro quo total agreement to invest money into fossil fuel projects. Instead. This is nothing more than a pay to play scheme designed to shift tax dollars to the pockets of fossil fuel executives, and which will only drive up the cost of energy by chilling investment and disrupting electric grid supplies.
▶ 6:23:15President trump has repeatedly tried to halt offshore wind construction and repeatedly lost in court. Shortly before christmas, the interior department halted construction on five major offshore wind projects on the east coast, citing vague national security concerns. Developers and states sued, and the federal judges allowed all five projects to move forward.
▶ 6:23:40One of those projects was critical in my state revolution wind, a major renewable energy project in new england. Connecticut is counting on revolution wind to meet nearly 5% of our electric distribution company load. Starting next year, it will save new england customers as much as $500 million by 2028, and iso new england and new england grid operator is counting on the project to ensure regional reliability.
▶ 6:24:09Yet president trump has twice issued stop work orders on this project, claiming that it presents some unclear national security threat. I have joined the connecticut congressional delegation in fighting back against these orders, and the president once again lost in court. Revolution win is delivering power with more capacity still to come online.
▶ 6:24:33But the president's meddling still caused expensive delays, jeopardizing future projects and wages for construction workers. Attacking these projects drives up the cost of living, as new reports have shown that renewable energy is now cheaper and more cost effective for electricity generation than fossil fuels.
▶ 6:24:53The investment bank lazard found that without any government subsidies or new wind energy project has an average cost starting at $37 per megawatt hour, compared to $48 for a new natural gas plant. That means lower electric bills. Additionally, these renewable energy sources are abundant. They're secure and environmentally sustainable compared to fossil fuels.
▶ 6:25:18President trump's war in iran has shown how fragile the global supply of fossil fuels can be, as nearly 20% of the world's oil has been bottled up in the strait of hormuz. We should be investing in our renewable energy supply chain at home and not weakening it. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank you, gentlelady, for her remarks. The gentlelady from maine, miss pingree, is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chair.
▶ 6:25:46And I want to thank my colleague from california for submitting this amendment. You know, I have to believe in any other time, any other administration, we would all be agreeing on this. Very simply. This administration has convinced us that these kind of scams are okay to do. And so somehow now we don't speak up and fight back about them anymore. It's pretty simple what we're talking about here.
▶ 6:26:11Uh, energy prices are skyrocketing, and everyone knows that in the state of maine, it's up 20% just in the last year. So we need more sources of affordable domestic energy to power the grid. And offshore wind is one part of that equation. We used to always say all of the above and all of the above is always a good idea. And Mr. levin was talking about how critically important it is to have.
▶ 6:26:45Sources like wind, where you don't have to pay for the inputs anymore, built the facility. Um, and it can happens that this president hates wind. I don't know why I don't completely understand it, but we can all go back to the days when he hated having offshore wind in the viewscape of one of his scotland golf courses, and he just hated it and did everything he could to fight against it. He has some sort of esthetic disagreement with it.
▶ 6:27:06So with all these offshore projects in the pipeline, this administration filed a lawsuit, tried to fight back or decided to, um, no longer allow them. And what happened was, um, in that lawsuit, you had to go down into a skiff to look at this national security data, which they said was the important concerns of why they reject, why they weren't allowed. Um, and it only turned out that the courts could read that and they said no.
▶ 6:27:34And they allowed these windmills, windmills to go ahead. Um, so then their next idea was, well, let's just pay everybody off. So as you've heard so many people say, we're paying off foreign companies now to the tune of nearly $2 billion and using the judgment fund to do it. At the same time, we're requiring them to invest in lng exports that will send american produced natural gas to other countries. So how does any of this make sense? How is it a good use of taxpayer dollars?
▶ 6:28:02And why is we why are we as the appropriations committee going along with it? It just doesn't make any sense. It's just us using a slush fund to bribe them. And this is not how that fund should be used. Um, when the chair opposed this, he said this would tie the hands of the administration. Well, I just want to remind all of us we're the appropriations committee. That is our job to tie the hands of the administration. We're congress. We have the power of the purse. What the hell, people? We got to fight back.
▶ 6:28:30And this is an important way to do it. So I wholeheartedly support this amendment. I encourage all of you to do the same and tie the hands of the administration and make sure that we do not support this wasteful government subsidy. I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? The gentleman from maryland is recognized. >> thank you very much, Mr. chairman. Let's set the record straight on offshore wind.
▶ 6:28:57It is simply the highest levelized cost of energy of any generation in the united states short of home, rooftop, rooftop solar, which is absolutely the highest cost. We had no problem apparently paying total energy, billions of dollars in production tax credit subsidies.
▶ 6:29:20But now when we attempt to remove the subsidies and therefore make these projects unviable, because none of these offshore wind projects are viable without the $93 billion in tax subsidies and subsidies that were going to be paid to offshore wind companies, and some will be paid because there is some offshore wind that's already in production. But to say that there is no cost once they're installed, that's nonsense. There's what's called a production tax credit.
▶ 6:29:50They get a tax credit, a subsidy from the federal government for every kilowatt generated by those windmills. That's not no cost. That's cost to the american taxpayer. Construction jobs. Yeah, we got a problem. Americans apparently don't construct much offshore wind, so we actually pay foreign companies to bring their ships in to construct offshore wind. Yeah, there's some there's some construction jobs.
▶ 6:30:17Most of them are not off the shore of maryland. Us wind holds the leases. It's an italian billionaire's company. We were more than happy to pay a subsidy to the italian billionaires to produce and invest in that in that project. But now, when we may be negotiating with them to give up on their leases because they're not economically viable anymore, now, that's a problem.
▶ 6:30:44The fact of the matter is, it's incredibly good use of taxpayer dollars. Instead of paying $93 billion in offshore wind subsidies to pay some to buy those leases back, it was a fool's errand to do offshore wind. I will tell you, off the shore of the off my coast, take a look at a map and look at where the nearest place to washington, dc is off the coast. It's delaware and maryland.
▶ 6:31:10You put up those windmills, you will. You will create physical changes. Physics changes under sea that. The department of defense does not understand how that will interact with the detection of submarines off our shore now. And by the way, those windmills actually delayed the detection of incoming weapons. Now, how do I know that?
▶ 6:31:37Because sweden canceled 12 of their 13 offshore wind projects on the coast of sweden facing russia. Why? Because their detection of offshore missiles was going to be prolonged from 1 minute to 2 minutes, and they canceled 12 of 13 projects.
▶ 6:31:54I want the us department of justice to be negotiating with us, wind off the coast of maryland, because I want the mid-atlantic to be safe. I want the the energy to be produced. We talk about, well, we're shipping off. We're shipping off our natural gas. Yeah.
▶ 6:32:15That's because states like maryland foolishly limited the amount of natural gas generation, electricity generation that they could they could have they did it through renewables, through renewable, renewable energy limits, or I should say standards. It's time that we ended offshore wind. It's a bad idea.
▶ 6:32:35And if this is what it takes the administration to go and spend a small percent of what we were willing to spend on offshore wind subsidies to buy these leases back have at it. I yield back. >> thank you. Gentlemen. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Gentlelady from illinois is recognized. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I support the amendment, and I would be delighted to yield to my colleague, Mr. levin of california.
▶ 6:33:06>> I thank my dear friend from illinois. Uh, look, I hear the talking point that wind and solar are too expensive, and that total energy deal is somehow a wise use of taxpayer funds. I want to walk through the actual numbers because the facts tell a different story. So every year, the financial firm lazard publishes what is considered the gold standard analysis of what it costs to generate a megawatt hour of electricity from every source. You can google it yourself. This is not an advocacy group.
▶ 6:33:35Lazard is a wall street firm that advises power companies and investors. Their 2025 report finds that onshore wind cost between 37 and $86 per megawatt hour, and utility scale solar cost between $38 and $78. Combined cycle natural gas comes in between 48 and $109. New nuclear comes in between 141 and $220.
▶ 6:34:03Gas peaking plants between 149 and $251. Lazard's conclusion this is lazard. Does google it honestly. Please google it unsubsidized. Google it yourself. Disagree with them, not with me. Their conclusion and their own words is that unsubsidized wind and solar have been the lowest cost sources of new electricity in america for the last ten years.
▶ 6:34:28Running the eia energy information administration, which is part of the federal government, as you know, confirms the same ordering independently. So does the international energy agency globally. It's not my opinion. That's what the financiers who actually write the checks have concluded. Now on to total energy administration is telling you this deal proves offshore wind doesn't work. And I want you to listen carefully to what actually happened.
▶ 6:34:53The trump administration paid total energies roughly $1 billion of your money, our taxpayer dollars to walk away from two offshore wind leases off the coast of new york and north carolina. That money is going to be reinvested in a liquefied natural gas export terminal in texas, which exports gas to europe and asia. So think about it. Your tax dollars just paid a french oil company to stop building american electricity, and the gas that's being redirected to is being shipped overseas.
▶ 6:35:23That's not energy dominance at all. That's paying a foreign company to take american power off the grid so they can sell fuel to our competitors. And here's the part that should make you mad. At least it made me mad. The administration tried to halt offshore wind by executive order. Federal judges struck those orders down five times. So instead of accepting the court rulings, they decided to write $1 billion check. The carolina project, as I said, would have provided enough power for 300,000 homes.
▶ 6:35:51The new york project, nearly a million homes. We just paid to make sure that power never gets built. At a time when electricity demand is surging because of data centers in ai, the honest trade off here, offshore wind, because I heard a little murmuring here, offshore wind is more expensive than onshore wind and solar today. Lazard put it at 72 to $140 per megawatt hour, with dominion's virginia project coming in at $91.
▶ 6:36:17It's higher than gas, but it's lower than new nuclear. It's the kind of project where costs come down once you build a domestic supply chain, which is exactly what the previous administration was trying to invest in and what prior republican administrations supported until this one, killing this now strands billions of dollars in port upgrades, turbine manufacturing that american workers were counting on.
▶ 6:36:41So the next time someone tells you wind and solar are expensive, ask them why wall street, the federal eia, the international energy agency all reach the opposite conclusion. Ask them why, if offshore wind is such a bad deal, the administration had to pay a french oil company $1 billion of your money to make it go away. And with that, I yield back to my friend from illinois. >> well, I think our colleague just really broke it down so spectacularly.
▶ 6:37:09I associate myself with his comments, and I yield back. >> I thank the gentlelady and gentleman. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close. >> I have. >> incredible respect. >> for my friend, the chairman and his many decades of service. I do want to point out a couple of things that he said. One was mentioned by my dear friend miss pingree.
▶ 6:37:38Tie the hands and limit the discretion of the administration. I agree that's what we're supposed to do here. I've only been in congress eight years. I've only been on this committee one year. But I think we're not a rubber stamp around here. If we see something that we disagree with, we ought to have the right and it's our responsibility to to stand up and say so. And it shouldn't matter whether you got a republican or a democrat in the white house. Number two, I heard the term wasteful and endless government subsidies. As I see it.
▶ 6:38:06That's what the administration is doing right now by paying these companies off to kill the wind projects. And I want to address one more thing about this deal. It's even worse in some ways than I mentioned. When you dig into the details of the settlement agreements that total energies the french company has entered into with the administration, it's clear that total is not actually required to make any new investments in american infrastructure at all to get their money back.
▶ 6:38:32The settlement agreements actually allow them to simply submit receipts for the oil and gas investments that they've already made, including money spent as far back as last november. It's just not a prudent use of taxpayer dollars to use the judgment fund like an atm, pay foreign companies billions of dollars without getting anything in return for the american people. Thank you, Mr. chairman. I yield back. >> thank the gentleman for his remarks. The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california. All those in favor say aye.
▶ 6:38:59All those opposed say no. Thank you, chair. The nos have it. 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. Aye. Mr. alford, Mr. alford. No. Mr. amodei. Mr. hamadeh. Mr. hamadeh. No. Mrs. bice. Mrs. bice. No. Mr. bishop, Mr.
▶ 6:39:31Bishop, I, Mr. calvert, Mr. calvert. No. Mr. carter, Mr. carter. No. Mr. case, Mr. case I Mr. eskamani. Mr. eskamani. No. Mr. kline. Mr. kline. No. Mr. cloud. Mr. clyburn, Mr. clyburn I. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. No. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cuellar, miss. Dean. Miss. Dean, miss. Dean I. Miss.
▶ 6:40:03Delauro, Mr. lauro, 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. fleishman, Mr. fleishman. No. Miss. Frankel, miss. Frankel, I Mr. franklin, Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest, Mr. guest. No. Mr. harder, Mr. harder, I. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson. Mrs. henson. No. Mr. hoyer, Mr.
▶ 6:40:35Hoyer I Mr. iv, Mr. iv, 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. Mr. levin, Mr. levin, I miss malloy, miss malloy. No. Miss mccollum, miss mccollum. I miss ming, miss ming, I, Mr. molinari, Mr. molenaar. No. Mr. moore, Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli, Mr. morelli, I. Mr.
▶ 6:41:06Van. Mr. mervyn I. Mr. newhouse, Mr. newhouse. No. Miss. Perez. Miss pingree, I miss pingree, I. Mr. pocan, Mr. pokemon I Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley I. Mr. reschenthaler. Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. shreeve, Mr. shreeve. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong, Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres.
▶ 6:41:38Mrs. torres, I miss. Underwood, miss underwood, I. Mr. valadao, Mr. valadao. No. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz, miss. Wasserman. Schultz. I. Mrs. watson. Coleman. Mrs. watson. Coleman. I. Mr. womack, Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink, Mr. zink. No. >> are there any members wishing to vote, cast a vote or change their vote? Gentleman from california. >> he's voted.
▶ 6:42:09>> gentleman from california. >> he's voted. >> has voted. Okay. I'm sorry. Gentleman from texas. >> Mr. cloud. >> no gentleman from tennessee voted yes. >> yes he. >> has. >> yes. Okay. Seeing no others, the clerk will tally.
▶ 6:43:06On this vote. The yeas are 26. The nose is 33. The amendment is not adopted. >> can you please ask her to designate which amendment? Okay. >> a gentlelady from pennsylvania, miss dean, is recognized for purposes of an amendment. And would the gentlelady just designate which one? >> so this is my number three that we're moving up to the first position. >> all right. Thank you. Gentlelady is recognized to present her amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 6:43:35I do have an amendment at the desk. It was formerly number three. And I ask that the amendment please be read. >> okay. Amendment will be read. >> an amendment offered by miss dean of pennsylvania in the report on page 49, following the paragraph titled availability pay insert the following redacting survivor and victim personally identifiable information.
▶ 6:43:56The committee is concerned that doj has not fully removed or redacted survivor and victim personally identifiable information. Pii from the publicly released documents as required by the epstein files transparency act. Not later than 30 days after the enactment of this act, doj shall ensure that survivor and victim pii is removed from its website.
▶ 6:44:20Doj is further directed to report within 60 days of the enactment of this act on steps taken to meet this directive. >> gentlelady is recognized to explain her amendment. >> thank you very much. I rise today in support of my amendment that directs the department of justice simply to comply with the law and remove survivors personally identifiable information from its website, as required by the epstein files. Mr. chairman, it is my understanding that this is agreed to. Uh.
▶ 6:44:47And if that is so, uh, I will offer no further remarks, but I wanted to get confirmation if that is actually so. >> uh, we're in agreement. >> we are in agreement. >> yes. >> I thank you, chairman. On behalf of the survivors, I'm very, very thankful. And I yield back. >> the amendment is accepted.
▶ 6:45:19Uh, is there any further debate any any members wish to address? If not, the gentlelady does have one minute to close. >> I close only by saying thank you. Thank you. On behalf of the survivors, I thank you. >> okay. The questions now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from pennsylvania. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed say no. Opinion of the chair. The ayes have it and the amendment is adopted. >> question.
▶ 6:45:49>> uh, the gentlelady from pennsylvania is recognized on amendment. And again, if she would clarify which amendment. >> okay, now this one is my second amendment, but it's marked number one for clarification. And thank you. >> do you want the amendment read? >> thank you. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk, and I move that the reading be dispensed with. >> the reading of the amendment is dispensed with without objection, and the gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her amendment. >> thank you.
▶ 6:46:17Chairman, I rise today in support of my amendment to provide funds for the department of justice's community violence intervention and prevention initiative, cvip, which this bill proposes to eliminate. Community violence intervention strategies are proven and effective. They are a method of reducing violent crime by giving states, localities, and local law enforcement the resources, tools and freedom they need to address their specific needs on the local level.
▶ 6:46:44Cvip programs, uh, prevent violent crime before it occurs by identifying high risk individuals and engaging with them in targeted, community centered interventions with people they know and local organizations they trust. The department of justice launched the community based violence intervention and prevention initiative in 2022.
▶ 6:47:08For those of you who were here, you know that it was part of the bipartisan safer communities act, and this legislation was passed in direct response to a series of mass shootings, including those horrific mass losses in uvalde and buffalo. In my home state of pennsylvania, cvip has proven to be an effective method at reducing violent crime since 2022, when the bipartisan safer communities act was signed into law.
▶ 6:47:37Homicide rates across pennsylvania are down 35%. It is remarkable. It is working. We did something good, folks, by passing that bill. Let me repeat, 35% in the city of philadelphia. It's down even more than that. This program clearly works. And yet, despite this clear evidence, the bill proposes to eliminate the program. Why would we do that? These statistics are readily, readily available.
▶ 6:48:05They're available for your cities and states. Uh, but I hope we can change minds and make sure this is refunded. So instead of arguing with anybody, I'm going to end by making an appeal to everyone in this room who identifies as a federalist or an advocate for states rights.
▶ 6:48:24When I think about a federalist approach to reducing violent crime and what it looks like, I do not envision sending masked federal agents into our cities to carry out military style operations on civilians. Rather, I envision programs like the community violence intervention and prevention programs that give states, localities, and local law enforcement resources and tools, and the freedom they need to address their specific needs, their specific communities at the local level,
▶ 6:48:55The community violence intervention prevention is proven, it is cost effective, and it is reducing and preventing crime in our communities. I want to extend my and end by extending an open invitation for any of my colleagues across the aisle to discuss this program with me, either now or in private, about the effectiveness of the program. I look forward to working with all of you to fund this program in the final bill. Thank you, chairman, and I yield back.
▶ 6:49:25>> thank the gentlelady for remarks. Gentleman from kentucky. Chairman rogers is recognized to respond to the amendment. Thank you, Mr. chairman. I'm proud of that. The house bill maintains strong support for state and local law enforcement, including increasing funding for the burn j, a g and cops hiring grant programs.
▶ 6:49:54This amendment directs funds toward the community violence prevention intervention program, a progressive grant program championed by the biden administration. Further, as drafted, this amendment does not properly offset spending in the bill. It is. For these reasons, I oppose the amendment.
▶ 6:50:23Urge my colleagues to do the same, and I yield back. Thank the gentleman for his comments. Gentlelady from new york, Mr. ming is recognized to address the amendment. >> I rise in support of this amendment. The community violence intervention and prevention initiatives approach to interrupting cycles of violence has proven to be one of the most reliable and cost effective ways to reduce community violence, and I believe my colleagues like to save money by disrupting cycles of violence.
▶ 6:50:49This program reduces gun violence, homicides, arrests, and incarceration. Importantly, these programs improve community police relations. This is a common sense solution to violence and crime that we should all support in our communities. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady for remarks. Are there others wishing to address the issue?
▶ 6:51:16Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close. >> I thank you. Darn. I thought we might get agreement on this one too, Mr. chairman. Uh, we were just asking for a continued funding. Uh, not through another program, but continued funding of this program. Um, it is something that actually helps local law enforcement, reduces the burden on local law enforcement. And in terms of the argument that there is not a proper offset, I would disagree. The proper offset is the saving of lives.
▶ 6:51:48Homicide down 35% in my state, down 50% in my city of philadelphia. That's a massive offset. I urge consideration and a positive vote. >> thank the gentlelady. The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from pennsylvania. All those in favor say aye. >> aye. >> all those opposed say no. No opinion. The chair the nos have it. Roll call has been requested.
▶ 6:52:16Sufficient support has been demonstrated. Clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt. No. Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar. Aye. Mr. alford, Mr. alford. No. 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. case I Mr. eskamani. Mr. eskamani. No. Mr. klein, Mr. cloud. Mr.
▶ 6:52:49Cloud. 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 miss. Delauro, miss. Delauro, I. Mr. diaz-balart, Mr. diaz-balart. No. Mr. edwards, Mr. edwards. No. Mr. ellzey. Mr. ellzey. No. Miss. Escobar, Mr. escobar I Mr. espaillat, Mr. espaillat I Mr. fleischmann, Mr.
▶ 6:53:19Fleischmann. No. Miss. Frankel, miss. Frankel, I Mr. franklin, Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest, Mr. guest. No. Mr. harter, Mr. harter, I. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson, Mrs. henson. No. Mr. hoyer, Mr. hoyer I Mr. iv, Mr. iv, I Mr. joyce, Mr. joyce. No. Miss kaptur marcy kaptur I Mr. nick lalota. Mr. nick lalota. No. Miss lee, miss lee. I miss.
▶ 6:53:50Letlow, Mr. levin, Mr. levin, I miss malloy, miss malloy. No. Miss mccollum, miss mccollum, I miss ming, I miss ming I Mr. molinari, Mr. molenaar. No. Mr. moore, Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli. Mr. moran, Mr. mervyn I, Mr. newhouse, Mr. newhouse. No. Miss. Perez, miss. Pingree, miss. Pingree, I. Mr.
▶ 6:54:19Pocan, Mr. pocan, I Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley I. Mr. rosenthaler. Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. shreeve, Mr. shreeve. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong, Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres. Mrs. torres, I miss underwood, I miss underwood, I Mr. valadao, Mr.
▶ 6:54:50Valadao. No. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz, Mrs. watson. Coleman, Mrs. watson. Coleman. I. Mr. womack, Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink, Mr. zink. No. >> are there other members wishing to vote or change their vote? Gentleman from virginia. >> Mr. kline? >> no. Gentleman from new york. >> Mr. morelli, a.
▶ 6:55:20>> gentleman from nevada? No. >> Mr. amodei? No. >> one from california. Gentleman from california. >> he's recorded there. Okay. >> well, there's lots of gentleman from california there. Have you all voted? Okay. Very good. Gentlelady from florida, gentlelady from washington. >> miss perez, I. >> are there others? It's kind of confusing to people.
▶ 6:55:48I mean, happy to have you stand up. Okay with that clerk will report or tally. Excuse me.
▶ 6:56:29On this vote the a the eyes are 28 and the nose are 33. The amendment is not agreed to. We're going to try for one more. And if we have to stop, we will. Uh, gentlelady from pennsylvania. Miss dean's recognized for the purpose of amendment. >> thank you. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk, and I move that the reading be dispensed with. >> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with. The gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her amendment. >> thank you very much, Mr. chairman.
▶ 6:56:58I rise today in support of my amendment. This is now number two. Just to be very clear, the third of mine, uh, which is, uh, take a look at page 130. It will strike section 561 from the bill. I offer this amendment in support of public safety and in support of victims of gun violence. Section 561 would limit atf's ability to carry out its demand to program.
▶ 6:57:23To be clear, atf confirmed last year that the demand to program was shut down, suspended, I suppose. Nonetheless, this rider is in the bill, so I want to address it. Atf's demand two program was created in the year 2000 to improve law enforcement's ability to trace guns used in crimes by imposing additional reporting requirements on firearms dealers whose guns have been traced to criminal activity.
▶ 6:57:52The demand two program works by reestablishing a chain of custody for used firearms sold to licensed ladies. >> yes, there's a lot of conversation going on. The gentlelady deserves to be heard. Gentlelady is recognized. >> I thank you, chairman. That's very thoughtful of you.
▶ 6:58:11As I said, the program was created in 2000 to improve law enforcement's ability to trace guns used in crimes by imposing additional reporting requirements on dealers whose guns have been traced to criminal activity. The demand two program works by reestablishing a chain of custody for used firearms sold back to licensed dealers to ensure those guns can be traced so that the state and local law enforcement can track down leads and put criminals behind bars.
▶ 6:58:38Without this program, more than 100,000 guns annually would not have been traceable. Crime is inherently more violent. As you all know, when a gun is involved and the demand two program makes america safer by keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals. Since the year 2000, atf has regarded a demand to a demand to designation as an important indication that a seller might be a popular destination for criminals to purchase firearms.
▶ 6:59:07Let's be clear how this works. Under the current guidelines for demand. Two a firearm dealer is subject to this program only. Only if within a single calendar year, at least 25 of that dealer's firearms are recovered in crimes, and those guns were sold within the past three years, 25 in a year gun sold in the past three years.
▶ 6:59:32I want to emphasize just how difficult it is for any gun dealer to be subject to this program. After all, only 2% of gun dealers in the united states are subject to the program. 2%. In fact, more than 80% of gun dealers in the united states do not have a single firearm traced to their store. In any given year, 80% don't even have one. So 25 is quite a lot. I emphasize this point for a reason.
▶ 7:00:00If you have a firearms dealer in your district subject to demand two or you know someone who has been subject to this program, it's important to understand the public safety risk they pose when they discuss this program, and just how difficult it is to be in this demand to the rider would drastically change the perimeters of the demand to program by allowing certain high volume dealers to get around these numbers, especially those with current government contracts.
▶ 7:00:28That's a way of diluting the reporting requirements. So how does this niche program like demand two that only 2% of firearm dealers are subject to make its way into this bill? I don't know why is there bill language to change the parameters of a program atf ended last year? I don't know.
▶ 7:00:51To me, this reads as if this were written by a firearms dealer, not someone serious about making communities safer. I urge my colleagues, please support this amendment, but more importantly, I want to leave you all with a message the next time a demand.
▶ 7:01:10Two firearms dealer discusses federal gun policy with you, I hope you now understand the public safety risk that poses just how hard it is to be among the 2% of gun dealers that are subject to this program, because their guns keep showing up in crimes, and this is only a reporting requirement of those dealers. Those dealers, they are not the dealers we should use as models speak to the other 98% of gun dealers. Thank you, I yield back.
▶ 7:01:41>> thank you. Gentlelady. Gentleman from kentucky, chairman rogers is recognized to respond to the amendment. Thank you, Mr. chairman. For far too long, the federal government has pushed the boundaries of law abiding citizens, especially when it comes to the second amendment. I'm proud that the house bill maintains strong second amendment protections under the biden administration.
▶ 7:02:10America witnessed an atf that regulated, through political impulse. This amendment would once again jeopardize this hallowed protection by striking a second amendment protection in the bill. I oppose the amendment, urge my colleagues to do the same, and I yield back. Thank the gentleman, the gentlelady from new york is recognized to address the amendment.
▶ 7:02:41>> Mr. chairman, I strongly support this amendment. The demand letter to program is an important tool to help law enforcement fight gun violence. This program has aided atf's law enforcement efforts by helping identify lax business practices amongst firearms dealers. It has provided us with invaluable data on who is supplying crime guns. Section 561 of this bill weakens what is a key law enforcement tool. This writer should be struck from the bill. I urge adoption of this amendment.
▶ 7:03:12>> thank gentlelady for her remarks. Gentlelady from connecticut, Mr. lawrence recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise in support of this amendment before the trump administration halted it. Atf's demand letter to the program put firearm dealers on notice.
▶ 7:03:31If a large quantity of firearms sold in their store are recovered by law enforcement in connection with a crime and subjects them to additional reporting requirements from atf to receive a dl2 dealers had to have sold at least 25 guns that were recovered in a crime during the past calendar year, and have a low quote. Time to crime.
▶ 7:03:58Time to crime is the amount of time between the retail sale and recovery by law enforcement. Atf considers a low time to crime as a potential indicator of gun trafficking. In other words, if a lot of guns from the same dealer end up at the crime scenes in a short amount of time, that is reasonable grounds to ask a few questions. This is not a blanket requirement. Doesn't apply to all gun dealers in 2024.
▶ 7:04:26In a 2024 study of more than 1500 gun stores, only 2% of america's gun dealers met this threshold the last time national trace data was available. It showed that about 5% of dealers transferred 90% of recovered crime guns. Those 2 to 5% of dealers are connected to the vast majority of recovered criminal weapons.
▶ 7:04:56A demand to finding was an important indication that a seller might be a popular destination for criminals, or the target of so-called straw purchasers who use surrogates to buy guns. This is exactly where our law enforcement resources should be concentrated. Tracking the worst offenders, prioritizing cracking down on straw purchasers who evade the law in order to acquire guns.
▶ 7:05:22Demand to help our law enforcement officers focus on the worst offenders, and helps law abiding gun dealers who work hard to comply with the law. It should be resumed and its standards should not be lowered. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and I yield back. >> thank you. I thank the gentlelady for her remarks. Are there others wishing to address the amendment?
▶ 7:05:50Seeing none, the gentlelady from pennsylvania is recognized. Excuse me, the gentleman from georgia. Mr. clyde's recognized. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise in opposition to this amendment. What section 561 actually does is to level the reporting requirements between large federal firearms licensees and the smaller dealers by tying reporting to a percentage of firearms sold, as opposed to a flat number that disadvantages the larger dealers versus the smaller ones.
▶ 7:06:19I believe this amendment is a win win for both atf and the ffl dealers, and it would help atf focus their resources on actually on on firearm trafficking and make them more efficient and more effective, and I yield. >> I thank the gentleman. The. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 7:06:48I have to admit to you, this amendment does nothing, absolutely nothing to interfere with anyone's second amendment rights. Not one thing. So that is a false argument. Let's not fall for it. Just because you hear the word gun. Let's not do that. Any responsible, federally licensed firearm dealer wants to be a part of tracing crime, crime, guns. That's what responsible dealers do.
▶ 7:07:16They don't want to be a part of this pipeline of guns that are found at crime scenes. They want to help law enforcement to reduce gun violence in this country, to save lives, to spare families, to spare children when children are shot and killed every single day in crimes. Wouldn't you, as a firearm dealer, want to be a part of solving that and tracing them back? That's all this does.
▶ 7:07:42And sometimes somebody just wants to be relieved of those reporting requirements. It has no place in this bill. I ask and urge my colleagues to reject it. >> thank, gentlelady. The questions now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from pennsylvania. All those in favor say aye. >> aye. >> all opposed, say no. No opinion of the chair. The nos have it roll call has been requested.
▶ 7:08:12Sufficient support has demonstrated. The clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt. No. Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar. Aye. Mr. alford, Mr. alford. No. Mr. amodei, Mr. amodei. No. Mrs. bice. Mrs. bice. No. Mr. bishop. Mr. bishop, I. Mr. calvert, Mr. calvert. No. Mr. carter, Mr. carter. No. Mr. case. Mr. case I. Mr. Mr. no. Mr. kline. Mr. kline. No. Mr. cloud. Mr. cloud. No. Mr. clyburn, Mr. clyburn I. Mr.
▶ 7:08:44Clyde. Mr. clyde. No. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cuellar, miss. Dean, Mr. I. Mr. Mr. 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. Mr. frankel, miss. Frankel, I. Mr. franklin, Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest, Mr. guest. No. Mr.
▶ 7:09:14Carter. Mr. carter. I. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson. Mrs. henson. No. Mr. hoyer, Mr. hoyer I Mr. iv, Mr. iv, I Mr. joyce, Mr. joyce no. Marcy kaptur marcy kaptur I Mr. nick lalota. Mr. nick lalota. No. Miss lee, miss lee I miss. Letlow. Mr. levin, Mr. levin, I miss. Molloy, miss. Molloy. No. Miss mccollum, miss mccollum, I miss ming, miss ming I. Mr. molinari, Mr.
▶ 7:09:44Molenaar. No. Mr. moore, Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli. Mr. van. Mr. van I, Mr. newhouse, Mr. newhouse. No. Mr. perez, miss. Perez, I, Mr. pingree, miss pingree, I Mr. pocan, Mr. pocan, I Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley I. Mr. reschenthaler. Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. >> yes. >> Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. shreeve.
▶ 7:10:15Mr. shreeve. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong, Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres. Mrs. torres, I miss underwood, Mr. 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. >> are there others wishing to vote or change their vote? Those of you who can leave. But just very difficult right now.
▶ 7:10:46So give me a signal if you've not been recorded. Gentleman from new york. Gentleman is not recorded. >> Mr. morelli, I okay. >> are there others wishing to vote or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tally. >> did you make any other stops? I checked in the bathroom.
▶ 7:11:15In 33. >> on this vote, the eyes are 27. The nose are 33. The amendment is not adopted. Votes have now been called. The committee will now stand in recess.
▶ 7:11:43Please return promptly at the conclusion of the last vote, so we can continue consideration of our bill pretty close to getting done.
▶ 8:04:47Reconvene. Uh, gentlelady from texas is recognized for purposes of an amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I guess the. Pizzas far more compelling than my amendment might be, but I'll give it my best shot. Uh, I have an amendment at the desk, and I ask for unanimous consent 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, Mr. chairman.
▶ 8:05:15My amendment strikes section 580 of the bill, which currently prohibits the atf from recording, digitizing, or maintaining any record of records of a federally licensed firearm dealer that has gone out of business. When a ffl business is permanently discontinued.
▶ 8:05:37Federal law requires business records to be delivered to the attorney general or another ffl within 30 days. This ensures that records from dealers that shut down are delivered to atf, so they can be digitized and searched. If there is a trace from a crime involving a firearm, that goes back to a dealer that has closed. Crime.
▶ 8:06:04Gun tracing is incredibly important to law enforcement, allowing them to develop investigative leads and tie firearms to a suspect by identifying the last known sale of a firearm. Without these types of investigative leads, state and local law enforcement would be greatly hindered in being able to solve firearm related crimes.
▶ 8:06:26And without this transfer and digitization of an ffls records, there is no way for law enforcement to trace a firearm that is purchased from a dealer that has now closed under the current digitized system. It takes the atf an average of 7 to 10 days to complete routine traces, and an average of 12 to 14 days for non expedited traces under a paper record system.
▶ 8:06:54This trace timeline would increase exponentially. Section 580 shuts down a major tool in solving crime for no reason, making crime gun tracing even more burdensome and time consuming. Instead of utilizing modern technology to search digital photographs of records, atf would have to sort through hundreds of millions of physical boxes of records from thousands of discontinued and revoked ffls across the country.
▶ 8:07:27When atf was required to keep paper records, they had to store most of them in shipping containers across their parking lot because storing them inside led to the floor of their installation collapsing. This amendment would at best delay and at worst entirely prevent gun tracing for firearms purchases from now out of business dealers, undermining law enforcement's efforts to solve gun crime.
▶ 8:07:55I want to emphasize, Mr. chairman, this is not an amendment that would impede anyone's second amendment rights. This truly is an amendment that is intended to support law enforcement. If anyone has ever been the victim of a crime in this room, I have been. We depend on law enforcement. We depend on their ability to solve these crimes.
▶ 8:08:24And by passing my amendment, this would actually help law enforcement and make their ability to solve these crimes even stronger. Um, I also want to address any concerns that that the atf could potentially use the digitized records from out of business ffls to create a firearms registry, that there's zero risk of that happening because section 560
▶ 8:08:55Of this very same bill already prohibits that. I ask for support for my amendment, and I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady for her remarks. And the chair recognizes the gentleman from kentucky, chairman rogers, to respond to the amendment. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 8:09:14As I said earlier, I'm proud that the house bill maintains strong constitutional protections for the second amendment. The previous administration overregulated law abiding citizens. This amendment would once again jeopardize this hallowed protection by striking a provision in the bill.
▶ 8:09:40I oppose the amendment, urge my colleagues to do the same, and I yield back. Thank the gentleman for his remarks. Gentlelady from new york. Miss ming is recognized to address the amendment. >> I rise in strong support of this amendment. Section 580 is yet another extreme policy rider that has nothing to do with appropriations and no place in this bill. I will remind my colleagues that atf is prohibited by law from maintaining a national gun registry.
▶ 8:10:10Congress has also mandated that federal firearms licensees must give transaction records to atf upon going out of business. When atf receives out of business records, they are scanned into images. These images have to be manually searched. This is not a gun registry.
▶ 8:10:27This rider will not only prevent atf from using this system for future records, it would also require atf to purge existing records that are used today to trace criminal guns and support state and local law enforcement crime investigations. In 2024, atf received an average of more than 1700 trace requests per day. Our local police rely on this tracing work.
▶ 8:10:53All this rider would do is make it easier for criminals to commit gun crimes, and harder for law enforcement to catch them. I support this amendment to strike the rider and urge my colleagues to vote yes. >> are there others wishing to address the amendment? Gentleman from georgia. Mr. clyde's recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 8:11:16I rise today in strong opposition to this amendment to strike section 580 of the bill, which prohibits funds to record, digitize or maintain any recording of out of business records or any out of business records delivered to the attorney general. This important funding prohibition would effectively shut down the atf's illegal searchable gun registry, which maintains firearm transaction records commonly referred to as form 4473.
▶ 8:11:41Gun owners should be able to exercise their second amendment rights privately and without infringement from the federal government. And yet, atf's collection of out of business records jeopardizes america's second amendment freedoms by allowing the government to access a plethora of records related to who, where and what types of firearms are owned by americans. This is not only wrong and deeply concerning, it is blatantly illegal.
▶ 8:12:05The firearm owners protection act explicitly prohibits the establishment of any federal database, registry or system that tracks firearm or their owners firearms or their owners. The out of business records collected under current law are in direct violation of this prohibition. If you go read the firearm owners protection act, it specifically says that they may not record. And that's exactly what is happening here. They're being digitally recorded.
▶ 8:12:34The out of business records collected under current law are in direct violation of this prohibition. Recent reports have even shown that the atf may possess over 1 billion gun registration records. That would be copies of 4473. And the atf has admitted to digitizing over 50 million records a year. We must shut this illegal registry down once and for all, and we have a provision in the bill to do just that by prohibiting the recording, digitization and maintenance of any of the records collected.
▶ 8:13:03I applaud chairman rogers and chairman cole for inclusion for the inclusion of this vital second amendment protection. I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment before us to strip this protection, and I thank you and yield back. >> thank the gentleman for his remarks. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close. >> Mr.
▶ 8:13:28Chairman, it is shocking to me that there would be opposition to this amendment. Truly shocking. This amendment does nothing to impede anyone's second amendment rights. This. The. The.
▶ 8:13:49The effort to strip the bill of this policy of this writer is an effort to help law enforcement. The only thing that this would protect would be criminals. Law enforcement depends on their ability to trace guns.
▶ 8:14:09When guns have been used to commit a crime, why would we want to stand in the way of law enforcement from catching a criminal? I do not get it. I would ask my colleagues to allow to follow logic and to ensure that we give law enforcement the tools that they need. Thank you. I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady.
▶ 8:14:37The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from texas. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed say no. No. The chair the nos have it. Roll call has been requested. Sufficient support has been demonstrated. The clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt. No. Mr. aguilar, Mr. alford, Mr. alford. No. Mr. amodei, Mrs. bice, Mr. bishop, Mr.
▶ 8:15:13Bishop, I. Mr. calvert, Mr. calvert. No. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. No. Mr. case. Mr. eskamani. Mr. kline, Mr. kline. No. Mr. cloud, 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, miss.
▶ 8:15:44Delauro, 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, miss. Frankel, I. Mr. franklin, Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest, Mr. harter, Mr. harter, I. Doctor. Harris. Mrs. henson.
▶ 8:16:15Mr. hoyer, Mr. hoyer, I Mr. iv, Mr. iv, I Mr. joyce, Mr. joyce. No. Miss. Kaptur, miss kaptur, I Mr. lalota, miss lee, miss lee, I miss. Letlow, Mr. levin. Mr. levin, I miss. Molloy, miss. Molloy. No. Miss. Mccollum, miss ming, miss ming I, Mr. molinari, Mr. mulliner. No. Mr.
▶ 8:16:47Moore, Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli. Mr. mervyn, Mr. moran, I. Mr. newhouse, Mr. newhouse. No. Miss. Perez. Miss. Pingree, miss pingree, I. Mr. pocan, Mr. pokemon I, Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley I. Mr. rosenthaler. Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. shreeve, Mr. shreeve. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. strong, Mr.
▶ 8:17:23Strong. No. Mrs. torres. Mrs. torres, I miss. Underwood, miss underwood, I. Mr. valadao, Mr. valadao. No. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz, Mrs. watson. Coleman. Mrs. watson. Coleman. I. Mr. womack, Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink, Mr. zink. No. >> are there any members wishing to record their vote or change their vote? Gentlelady from minnesota. >> miss mccollum. >> I gentlelady from florida.
▶ 8:17:54>> miss wasserman schultz, I. >> gentleman from north carolina. >> Mr. edwards, no. >> gentleman from texas. >> Mr. cloud, no. >> gentleman from maryland. >> doctor harris. No. >> gentleman from arizona. >> Mr. >> no gentleman from new york. >> Mr. lalota. No. >> gentlelady from oklahoma. >> Mrs. by no. >> gentleman from idaho. >> Mr. simpson, no. >> gentleman from texas. >> Mr. cuellar, a.
▶ 8:18:25>> gentleman from nevada. >> Mr. amodei, no. >> are there others wishing to vote or change their vote? Seeing none, clerk will tally. Oh, sorry. Gentleman from california. >> Mr. aguilar, I. >> are there others?
▶ 8:18:53And if not, the tally.
▶ 8:19:33On this vote. The ayes are 25. The nos are 31. The amendment is not adopted. The gentleman from indiana, Mr. moran, is recognized for an amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chair. I have an amendment at the desk. I move that the reading be dispensed with. >> without objection. The reading for the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentleman is recognized for remarks on his amendment.
▶ 8:19:59>> I rise to offer an amendment that would restore full funding for two critically important agencies which impact economic and national security, create and sustain good jobs, and support domestic manufacturing. The international trade administration focuses on american competitiveness and forces our nation's trade laws and supports businesses and exports the ita's critical work and strengthening our resiliency of the U.S. industries. Ensure that the american workers can compete on a level playing field.
▶ 8:20:28Underfunding this agency with $142 million reduction from the previously enacted level will cause delays in combating unfair trade practices. For example, this bill will significantly reduce the investment in supporting global market strategies that deter and fight unfair trade market practices. The. This translate to job loss for workers in northwest indiana and across the country. Throughout my career, I've sat across from those that are losing the.
▶ 8:20:58On the losing end of an unfair trade practice, I can tell you that the. Its role in enforcing trade laws and prioritizing american businesses are vital to american competitiveness and protecting american workers. Additionally, this bill proposes a significant reduction in funding for the economic development administration 144 million below the previous enacted level. The eda helps economically distressed communities stimulate job growth, provides technical assistance, and facilitates critical investments in each of our communities.
▶ 8:21:27In my district, the eda grants have directly supported improvements in water infrastructure, transportation planning and environmental management. For example, northwest indiana, the northwest indiana regional planning commission was recently awarded the eda grant to support the implementation of their comprehensive economic development strategy for lake and porter and laporte counties.
▶ 8:21:50This funding aims to promote this effort to bring together the public and private sector, to strengthen the regional economy and create more job opportunities. On a national scale, over 50,000 jobs are created or saved in 2024 because of the work of the eda. These dollars support projects that drive business growth and expand job opportunities in communities that need it most.
▶ 8:22:15Additionally, the agency's response to the industry and local workforce needs to create jobs that strengthen our commodity economy and provides opportunity. I urge the committee to restore this funding, and with that, I yield back. >> thank the gentleman for his remarks. The chair now recognizes chairman rogers to address the amendment. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 8:22:39This bill includes responsible levels of funding for the economic development, administration and international trade administration. This amendment would increase the funds provided to eda and it. Without the necessary offsets exceeding the bill's allocation.
▶ 8:23:06Therefore, I must oppose the amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same, and I yield back. Thank the gentleman for his remarks. Gentlelady from new york. Miss ming is recognized to address the amendment. >> Mr. chairman, I strongly support this amendment. It is restores funding for programs that create and preserve good jobs when working americans need them most.
▶ 8:23:27At a time when families are struggling with the high cost of living, we should be doubling down on job creation, not slashing the programs that help american businesses compete and win. Yet this bill, as written, guts eda grants by over 35%, walking away from investments that have created hundreds of thousands of jobs and revitalize struggling local economies, primarily in rural areas. Eda grants are not handouts.
▶ 8:23:55They are investments that create opportunity in communities that have been left behind. In 2025, congress reauthorized eda for the first time in 20 years with strong bipartisan support. I know many of my colleagues here know how important these investments are for their constituents. Why are we cutting programs? We worked together to make better. The ita cuts are even harder to defend, given the unprecedented chaos in our global economy.
▶ 8:24:27Small and medium sized businesses are drowning in rising costs and struggling to navigate trade policies. Tariff rates have changed countless times in a single year. Policies have been announced on social media and then reversed days later. Businesses have faced higher costs and retaliatory tariffs on their own exports. Yet this bill fails to invest in the support that it provides. The businesses that it helps don't have armies of trade lawyers.
▶ 8:24:56They rely on it to help them export, understand regulations, address trade barriers and navigate the global marketplace. It is antidumping and trade enforcement work also protects american jobs from countries that don't play fair. I appreciate my colleague's amendment to restore critical investments in eda and ita and urge your support. I yield back. >> thank the gentlelady for remarks. The gentlelady from connecticut, Mr.
▶ 8:25:23Lawrence, recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise in support of this amendment. Economic development assistance programs help communities across this country, especially in rural areas, in need of investment and support. These programs are essential to revitalizing distressed communities, kickstarting local economies, and giving residents the opportunity to thrive.
▶ 8:25:46From 2018 to 2024, the eda created or retained more than 727,000 jobs led to over $80 billion in private investment. The support creates economic opportunities, allowing people to earn more money to spend more money, creating a virtuous cycle that ultimately benefits the country as a whole.
▶ 8:26:10My state of connecticut, eda invested over $52 million in construction, manufacturing and technology hubs during that same time period, creating hundreds of jobs and generating another $52 million in private investment.
▶ 8:26:27Just one example is 320 zero zero $0 in funds to support the city of waterbury's plan for the brass city regional food hub, which focused on supporting local farmers by bringing fresh fruit and vegetables to seniors. The international trade administration is responsible for standing up for american businesses and fighting back against unfair trade practices.
▶ 8:26:50We have heard from this administration over and over and over again about how we are being, quote, ripped off by other countries, but instead of taking steps to actually address the problem in a way that works, they have imposed tariffs that drive costs up for everyone. The ita works to beat back these unfair practices give american businesses a fair shot at success without punishing consumers in the process.
▶ 8:27:15It also directly helps small and medium sized businesses expand their exports and navigate the complexity of international markets. It makes no sense that this bill cuts funding for the ita by $142 million, and the eda by $144 million. These are agencies whose programs provide crucial support for the american people.
▶ 8:27:37That support is especially necessary now, when the cost of living continues to climb, and more and more americans are seeing fewer and fewer job prospects, instead of waging trade wars that hurt american families and businesses and cutting back support for our communities, we should be increasing our investments and providing relief for our constituents. I encourage my colleagues to support this amendment. I thank you, and I yield back.
▶ 8:28:06>> thank the gentleman for her remarks. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. Um, as we approach september of 2026, we are going to redo the usmca, which is going to be our trade agreement between canada and mexico. Our adversary, china, is going to be and has consistently tried to figure out how to fill or have overcapacity of steel in our country, which cuts jobs.
▶ 8:28:36The ita are the ones that enforce that in any trade policy is only as good as the teeth that we have to enforce it. All that I ask is that we consider these types of arrangements and the funding for the ita when we look at those types of trade agreements, and china will not stop trying to figure out how to circumvent our trade policies. Therefore, we have to be able to have enforcement on the ita side to stop them.
▶ 8:29:04With that, I ask for your support. >> thank the gentleman. The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from indiana. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say no. The chair of the nos have it. Roll call has been requested. Sufficient support has been demonstrated. Clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt. No. Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar, I, Mr. alford, Mr. alford. No. Mr.
▶ 8:29:36Amodei, Mrs. bice, Mr. bishop, Mr. bishop, I. Mr. calvert, Mr. calvert. No. Mr. carter. Mr. carter. No. Mr. case. Mr. kimani, Mr. kline, Mr. klein. No. Mr. cloud. Mr. cloud. No. Mr. clyburn, Mr. clyburn I. Mr. clyde. Mr. clyde. No. Mr. cole. Mr. cole. No. Mr. cuellar, miss.
▶ 8:30:06Dean, miss. Dean, I miss. Delauro. Mr. I, Mr. diaz-balart, Mr. diaz-balart. No. Mr. edwards. Mr. edwards. No. Mr. ellzey. Miss. Escobar, miss. Escobar, I Mr. espaillat, Mr. fleischmann, Mr. fleischmann. No. Miss. Frankel, miss. Frankel, I. Mr. franklin, Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest, Mr. harter, Mr. harter, I. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. No.
▶ 8:30:37Mrs. henson. Mrs. henson. No. Mr. hoyer, Mr. hoyer, I Mr. iv, Mr. iv, I Mr. joyce, Mr. joyce. No. Miss kaptur marcy kaptur I Mr. lalota. Mr. lalota. No. Miss lee, miss lee I miss. Ludlow, Mr. levin, Mr. levin, I miss. Molloy, miss. Molloy. No. Miss mccollum, miss mccollum. I miss ming, miss ming I, Mr. molinari, Mr. molinari. No. Mr. more. Mr. more. No. Mr. morelli.
▶ 8:31:15Mr. merman, 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. rosenthaler. Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. shreeve, Mr. shreeve. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong, Mr. strong. No. Mrs. torres. Mrs.
▶ 8:31:43Torres, I miss. Underwood, miss underwood, I. Mr. valadao, Mr. valadao. No. Miss. Wasserman. Schultz, miss. Wasserman. Schultz, miss. Wasserman. Schultz. I. Mrs. watson. Coleman. Mrs. watson. Coleman. I. Mr. womack, Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink, Mr. zink, no. >> other members wishing to record their vote or change their vote. Gentleman from new york. >> I Mr. espaillat I. >> gentleman from texas.
▶ 8:32:16>> Mr. cuellar, I. >> gentlelady from oklahoma. >> Mrs. bice, no. >> gentleman from arizona. >> Mr. eskamani. No. >> are there others? Which gentleman from nevada. >> Mr. amodei? No. >> are there other members wishing to record or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tally.
▶ 8:33:15On this vote. The yeas are 26. The nos are 31. The amendment is not adopted. Gentleman from maryland. Mr. ivey is recognized for the purpose of an amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I have an amendment at the desk. I be number one, and I ask for the reading of the amendment to be dispensed with. >> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentleman's recognized for remarks on his amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 8:33:42My amendment simply restores to the legal assistance for victims grant program at the fy 26 level, uh, enacted, uh, previously, and it restores it by $5 million. So it takes it up to $55 million altogether, the legal assistance for victims provided, uh, needed practical legal support for survivors. Um, custody order.
▶ 8:34:07When a child is sexually abused by a stepparent, helping an employee sexually assaulted or supporting a student assaulted at school or needing accommodations. I saw this frequently when I was a local prosecutor, and in fact, it had a huge impact when we were able to assist victims of crime. Uh, because if they felt that they were out there on an ice floe, they wouldn't come back to us.
▶ 8:34:32And the word spread quickly when we were able to provide assistance, especially in domestic violence cases, it gave survivors of domestic violence a different kind of option and a level of confidence that they would not be let down by the court system. Uh, 2025 survey by the national alliance to end sexual violence said that 60% of rape crisis centers reported increased demand for services.
▶ 8:34:54That year, 53% of rape crisis centers experienced a reduction in the staff and the same at the same time, 50% of the programs reported having no full time therapists, counselors on staff, and on average, programs indicated that they needed two additional full time staff to meet the current demand. Demand has not gone down. The funding for it should not go down either. Uh, just one other quick point.
▶ 8:35:18Um, in one day last year, 13,000, uh, over 13,000 requests for services went unmet due to a lack of resources, funding, and or staffing of those unmet needs, 58% were for emergency shelter, transitional housing and legal services. So I recognizing the lateness of the hour, I'll just say this if we allow these cuts to happen, it makes it less likely that these cases will actually be prosecuted.
▶ 8:35:48It makes it less likely that we'll be getting dangerous, um, sexual offenders and people committing domestic violence off the street. And it makes it less likely that those families can be repaired and brought back to wholeness, uh, with the type of assistance and support that they can get from these kinds of services. So I ask for the support of all my colleagues on this amendment. And with that, I yield back. >> thank the gentleman for his remarks.
▶ 8:36:17The chair recognizes the distinguished gentleman from kentucky, mister rogers, to respond to the amendment. Mr. chairman, we accept the amendment. The amendment? Well, we still have to vote on. >> winner, winner, winner. Chicken dinner. >> I thank the chairman. >> uh, lady need to respond. Very smart.
▶ 8:36:47There's no further debate. The gentleman is recognized for one minute to close. >> that was my one minute. >> thank the chairman. I appreciate the support. Thank you so much. >> okay. The questions now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from maryland. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say no. Any opinion? The chair the ayes have it. The amendment is adopted. Gentleman from maryland. Mr.
▶ 8:37:16Ivey is recognized for the purposes of amendment. >> I'm glad I got the. Yes before I offered this one, I haven't. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. chairman iv number two, and I will ask for the. To dispense with the reading of the. >> without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentleman from maryland is recognized for remarks on his amendment. >> Mr.
▶ 8:37:45Chairman, I, um, in going through the bill, saw that section 588, um included t r amendment language that actually expanded what it covered previously, and I was concerned about that for a variety of reasons. The amendment has caused, um, a number of challenges with respect to gathering and collecting information.
▶ 8:38:08I recognize that there's concern about second amendment protections, but this is the kind of information that is useful for research, not so much in particularly identifying individuals, um, and particular cases in some ways, but in helping, for example, universities, university of maryland, my district helps to develop gun violence reduction programs. This is the type of information that would be tremendously helpful in doing that.
▶ 8:38:34Um, because many of the offenses are committed with guns and they have a high probability of being more lethal, uh, in cases where gun violence results, I note that there are cities like baltimore, for example, mayor brandon scott, uh, who's got a challenge with respect to the flood of illegal guns into his city. Now, I note at the front end of this that baltimore has had great success in reducing certainly murders in the last few years, but still, we still have a long ways to go there.
▶ 8:39:04In my district and everywhere across the country. Uh, he said that, um, we've already seen close to 2700 illegal guns in the city this year. That's a 9% increase over last year. And we know that over 60% of them come from other places. I can testify to that. When I was a local prosecutor, actually, I apologize when I was a federal prosecutor here in washington, D.C. um, obviously sale of guns was illegal at that time in washington, D.C.
▶ 8:39:30So what people would do is they would just drive out to virginia town, about 30 miles from here, I think it was fort belvoir, lorton area. They would buy the guns there and then drive them back into the city. And it was so pervasive that, um, they actually started stationing atf agents at that store undercover, and they would drive back to follow them into the city. Obviously, that's not the most efficient way to go about dealing with these kinds of matters.
▶ 8:39:56And so having the information available so we can pursue these kinds of cases, um, and also develop strategies to address the, uh, the gun violence that results from the plethora of guns that are hitting the streets and getting into the wrong hands is critical and important and makes a huge difference in our cities.
▶ 8:40:14I'll note here, um, three years ago, and it's interesting, this is national law enforcement memorial week about three years ago, um, there was a murder of a chicago police officer, ella french. And the police and prosecutors have revealed, uh, much about her case, the grim details of her final moments, the type of gun that was used to shoot her during the traffic stop, and how that 22 caliber glock made its way into the hands of the man who pulled the trigger.
▶ 8:40:42But absent from the public discussion was the name of the retail shop where the gun was used to kill. French was purchased. Its disclosure has been hindered by a long standing push by the gun industry to protect the identities of retailers that is sold and use those guns. I understand there's sensitivity on this issue, but I think it's important for us to be able to trace this information back to the gun stores where they come from, for the reason I just talked about a moment ago, and not having this information makes it harder to do.
▶ 8:41:12And one thing that really surprised me when I was going through this bill, if I reading this correctly, congress can't even get this information. Um, law enforcement can get it. Uh, they can be obtained by federal agency for national security or intelligence purposes, but we can't get it. And that doesn't make any sense to me. We ought to be able to get any and all information we need to make.
▶ 8:41:36Legislation might want to go in different directions on what the legislation should be, but at a minimum, we're setting these kind of policy goals for an issue about the level of violence on our streets. We really ought to have full information when we're doing it. So I ask people to ask my colleagues to support this amendment, and with that, I yield back. >> thank the gentleman for his remarks. The gentleman from kentucky, chairman rogers, is recognized to respond to the amendment.
▶ 8:42:04As I said earlier, I'm proud to say again, the house bill maintains robust second amendment protections. This amendment would once again endanger that hallowed protection by striking a provision in the bill. I oppose the amendment, urge my colleagues to do the same. Yield back. Thank the gentleman for his remarks.
▶ 8:42:32The gentlelady from new york, miss ming, is recognized to respond to the amendment. >> I rise in strong support of this amendment. Section 588 is yet another extreme policy rider that has absolutely no place in this bill. It effectively shuts down all firearms data transparency at atf. It goes far beyond existing law.
▶ 8:42:52Not only does this amendment block public disclosure of atf's firearms data, including national integrated ballistic information network data, it blocks any analysis, investigative leads, or testimony based on this data. It also makes atf's firearms data immune from subpoena and inadmissible in civil court.
▶ 8:43:14This will only shield negligent gun dealers from accountability and will make it even more difficult for researchers, policy makers and members of the public who are trying to better understand and combat illicit gun markets, gun crime and gun deaths. This amendment strikes this damaging provision and preserves the ability of victims, cities and localities and the public to seek justice through the courts and to investigate gun violence in their communities.
▶ 8:43:41I support this amendment and urge my colleagues to vote yes. >> thank the gentlelady gentlelady from pennsylvania is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you, chairman, and I thank Mr. ivey for bringing this forward. I would ask my colleagues to take a look. This is just about the final page of this bill. Uh, and read the language of it, uh, of the section that the good man's, um, amendment would strike.
▶ 8:44:10This is on page 142, section 588. Uh, no funds appropriated under this act or any other act may be used to disclose part or all of the contents of the national integrated ballistic information network, uh, nimbin database maintained by the bureau of alcohol, tobacco and firearms under the firearms trace system database maintained by the national trace center, or any system, platform or analytical product. It's staggering.
▶ 8:44:40Look at this language. They want to hide the data around guns. Guns used in crimes. I ask like I did on my own amendment. Why would this even be in the bill? Why would we want to be? Why would we want hidden from us information on guns that appear in crimes? Who are we protecting here? Again, this has nothing to do with anybody's second amendment right. And by the way, I heard it here a couple of times today.
▶ 8:45:12A god given right. I don't know what religion any of you are a part of, but no, god that I know actually declared that we have a right to bear arms. No, god did that, as far as I can tell. But just look at this language. It is darkness over the data that would actually help us understand what help atf would help law enforcement, uh, understand where these guns are going. Uh, I really rise in strong support. Thank you, Mr. ivey, for bringing this to our attention. I yield back.
▶ 8:45:42>> thank the gentlelady. Are there others wishing to make remarks on this amendment? A gentleman from georgia, Mr. clyde, is recognized to address the amendment. >> thank you. Mr. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I rise in very, uh, strong support of chairman rogers. And, um, want folks to vote no on this amendment.
▶ 8:46:05You know, the tiahrt amendment has been a part of the appropriations process, I believe, about over 20 years. And it's very, very critical to ensuring that the second amendment is respected and protected. Um, and within our bill itself, it says nothing in this bill shall be construed, construed to prevent the disclosure of aggregate statistical information concerning total production, importation, exportation by federal firearms licensees.
▶ 8:46:32It also does not prevent the sharing or exchange of trace data among or between federal, state and local law enforcement, even foreign law enforcement. And it also does not prevent the publication of annual statistical reports by the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives. Um, so to say that that it shuts off atf's ability to, to discuss statistics and, and what they find is just not true.
▶ 8:46:59So, um, I rise in opposition to this amendment and I ask everyone to vote against it. Thank you. And I yield back. >> thank the gentleman for his remarks. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Uh, gentlelady from minnesota is recognized. >> I just have a question. >> Mr. ivy can answer it for me. Um, miss ming said that you can't even subpoena this information. Is that correct? Why would we?
▶ 8:47:26Why would information not be able to be subpoenaed? I don't understand that. >> yeah, the why is a good question, but I'll read it. All such data shall be immune from legal process, shall not be subject to subpoena, discovery or request pursuant to section 52552 of title five, which is under the federal register. So you can't get it. >> I'm not an attorney.
▶ 8:47:48I get to pretend I'm one, I guess, for a few seconds here, but I'm going to say I don't understand how we could write a law that would deny the prosecution or the defense to have the right to ask for this material. That seems very odd to me as well. >> well, there's an exception for prosecutors and for national security or intelligence purposes, but not for anybody else, including congress, as far as I can tell. So only the prosecutors can get it.
▶ 8:48:15And if they get it, there's a they have to agree to a protective order so they can't disclose it to anybody else. So if the evidence is if the information is turned over to prosecutors and they use it and find it useful, they can't give it to us or any other local policy makers in order to use that to make their community safe. >> but if I'm the prosecutor and you're the defense attorney, how do you do discovery?
▶ 8:48:40>> well, the that would be part of the, um, court system, but they don't actually provide for that here that says federal, state, local tribal law enforcement agency or a federal, state or local prosecutor. Okay. They don't actually provide for the defense. >> thank you very much. I'm fully informed and prepared to vote. >> are there other members wishing to ask the amendment? And the gentleman from texas, Mr. cloud's recognized. >> sure. Someone mentioned the inalienable rights to bear arms.
▶ 8:49:13Uh, I will point you to isaiah 54. Verse 17. No weapon formed against you will prosper. Every tongue that rises up against you in judgment will be condemned. This is the heritage of the servants of the lord, and their vindication is from me, declares the lord. Interestingly, if you look at the verse right before that, this is what it says. This is god speaking in scripture.
▶ 8:49:44Behold, I myself have created the smith who blows the fire of coals and brings the weapon for its work. And I have created the destroyer to ruin. In the context of the time. What happened is the philistines had taken over the territory that the israelites had, and the first thing that they did was they banned the. The blacksmiths. Why did they do this? This was a form of. >> gentleman will suspend. The gentleman controls the time. >> this was a form of weapon control or today we would call it gun control.
▶ 8:50:13Back then it was swords and plows. And that's what the scripture right before that is saying. And if you go up a little further, the scripture before that says, in righteousness you'll be established. You'll be far from oppression. You will not fear terror, it will not come near you. And so the purpose of the blacksmith was to help create the weapons so that you would not fear oppression, and it will not come near you. The scripture right before that says, all your sons will be taught of the lord, and great will be their peace.
▶ 8:50:39So the peace against oppression was because we have a right to keep and bear arms that our founders understood and enshrined in our constitution. >> okay. >> are there others wishing to debate the amendment? Seeing none, the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 8:51:04I, I will I will say this, um, you know, with respect to the quotes from isaiah, uh, and I have a great deal of respect for that prophecy. Um, there's nothing in there about you can't share information that's about the weapon that may or may not be against you. And that's all this is about. So.
▶ 8:51:33Uh, by the way, I know, um, scalia isn't quite a god, but, uh, among my conservative friends, but even justice scalia and the heller opinion recognize the need for basic regulation with respect to guns. That's why you can't take guns into the supreme court, for example, or here. So I appreciate the points about the second amendment. But at the end of the day, as I like to say, there's ways for us to protect the second amendment, but also protect second graders.
▶ 8:52:03We're talking about trying to make sure that we can make our streets safe, make our schools safe, make our homes safe. And with that, I ask for your support and I yield back. >> thank the gentleman for his remarks. The question now is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from maryland. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say no. The chair the nos have it amendment has been requested. Sufficient support has been demonstrated. The clerk will call the roll.
▶ 8:52:35>> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt. No. 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. case. Mr. case I. Mr. Mr. eskamani. No. Mr. klein, Mr. klein. No. Mr. cloud. Mr. cloud.
▶ 8:53:08Mr. 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, 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.
▶ 8:53:38No. Miss. Frankel, miss. Frankel, I. Mr. franklin, Mr. franklin. No. Mr. guest, Mr. harter, Mr. harter, I. Doctor. Harris. Doctor. Harris. No. Mrs. henson, Mrs. henson. No. Mr. hoyer, Mr. hoyer, I Mr. iv, Mr. iv, I Mr. joyce, Mr. joyce. No. Miss. Kaptur, miss kaptur, I Mr. nick lalota. Mr. no. Miss lee, miss lee, I miss.
▶ 8:54:07Letlow, Mr. levin, Mr. levin, I miss. Molloy, miss molloy. No. Miss mccollum, miss mccollum, I miss ming, miss ming I. Mr. mulliner, Mr. mulliner. No. Mr. moore, Mr. moore. No. Mr. morelli, Mr. morelli, I. Mr. van. Mr. van I, Mr. newhouse, Mr. newhouse. No. Miss. Perez. Miss. Pingree, miss pingree, I. Mr. pocan, Mr.
▶ 8:54:40Pocan, I Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley, I. Mr. guy reschenthaler. Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers. No. Mr. rutherford. Mr. rutherford. No. Mr. shreeve, Mr. shreeve. No. Mr. simpson. Mr. simpson. No. Mr. strong, Mr. strong. No. Mr. 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.
▶ 8:55:10Coleman. I. Mr. womack, Mr. womack. No. Mr. zink, Mr. zink. No. >> are there other members wishing to vote or change their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will tell. I'm sorry. Gentlelady from oklahoma. >> Mrs. bice. No. >> and are there others? Seeing? None. The clerk will tally.
▶ 8:56:06On this vote. The eyes are 26 and those are 32. The amendment is not adopted. Before we move on to the next one, a couple of housekeeping things. And first, just thank all of you. Frankly, we got done a lot earlier than I expected. And I, I think you are all on both sides of the aisle to be commended for that. I appreciate it very, very much. And I appreciate the demeanor. There have been questions about next week because the schedule has been changed.
▶ 8:56:36We've had this problem before. It creates some problems for us. Sometimes when things are given back, we will pursue the schedule as it is written. In other words, we will be in session on wednesday, uh, for in full committee for, uh, energy and water and ledge branch, which we will try and get done that day. Then the next day, one of the two we. >> have. >> uh, the next day we'll have subcommittee markups for interior and thud.
▶ 8:57:03So it will be a pretty busy week to keep us on schedule. We are not sure yet exactly the time, but it will be either 10 or 11:00 that we convene here. Uh, we will let you know as soon as we know. What we don't know is if either party is planning a conference that morning, but plan to be here and ready on wednesday morning, it'll it'll either be mid-morning at ten or a little bit later at 11, and we will move those bills, hopefully get them out of the full committee.
▶ 8:57:34We don't want to be on the floor the next day. We want to get those things out of here. So anyway, uh, with I'm sorry. Yeah. >> Mr. chairman. Yeah. >> gentleman from maryland. >> do we have any knowledge as to when the leadership will be giving us time on the floor to pass these bills that we're passing? >> I, I don't have anything beyond obviously, we have one scheduled, but I do not know.
▶ 8:58:04And as soon as I do know, I'll be more than happy to convey it. So people. Thank you. Have that? You bet. As I always remind our people on our side, it's, uh, our majority in this committee is bigger than it is on the floor. So my problems are minuscule compared to my whip and my majority leader. Um, with that, the chair recognizes the gentleman from alabama, Mr. aderholt, for the purpose of an amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chair. I move to favorably report to the house. Fiscal year 2027.
▶ 8:58:35Commerce, justice, science and related agencies appropriations bill. >> the question is now on the motion to favorably report fiscal year 2027. Commerce, justice, science and related agencies. Appropriations bills to the house. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say no. No opinion. The chair the ayes have it. Roll call has been requested. Sufficient support has been demonstrated. Clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. aderholt. Mr. aderholt. Aye, Mr. aguilar, Mr. aguilar.
▶ 8:59:07No. Mr. alford, Mr. alford I. Mr. Mr. I miss vice, 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. clyburn, Mr. clyburn. No. Mr.
▶ 8:59:37Clyde. Mr. clyde. I Mr. cole. Hi Mr. cole I Mr. cuellar. Mr. cuellar, Mr. cuellar. No. Miss. Dean. Miss. Dean. No. Miss. Delauro, Mr. loro. No. Mr. diaz-balart, Mr. diaz-balart. I. Mr. edwards, Mr. edwards, I. Mr. lee, Mr. lee. I miss. Escobar, miss. Escobar. No. Mr. espaillat, Mr. espaillat. No.
▶ 9:00:08Mr. fleischmann. Mr. fleischmann, I miss. Frankel. Miss. Frankel. Miss. Frankel. No. Mr. franklin, Mr. franklin, I. Mr. guest, Mr. harter, Mr. harter. No. Doctor. Harris. Miss. Doctor. Harris. I. Mrs. henson. Mrs. henson, I. Mr. hoyer, Mr. hoyer. No. Mr. iv, Mr. iv. No. Mr. joyce. Mr.
▶ 9:00:41Joyce, I miss. Kaptur, miss kaptur. No. Mr. lalota. Mr. lalota. I miss lee, miss lee. No. Miss. Letlow. Mr. levin, Mr. levin. No. Miss molloy, miss molloy, I miss mccollum, miss mccollum, miss mccollum. No. Miss ming, miss ming. No. Mr. molinari, Mr. molenaar I. Mr. moore, Mr. moore, I. Mr.
▶ 9:01:11Morelli, Mr. morelli. No. Mr. mervyn. No. Mr. mervyn. No. Mr. newhouse, Mr. newhouse, I miss. Perez. Miss. Pingree, miss. Pingree. No. Mr. pocan, Mr. pocan. No. Mr. quigley. Mr. quigley. No. Mr. guy reschenthaler, Mr. rogers, Mr. rogers, I. Mr. rutherford, Mr. rutherford, I, Mr. shreeve, Mr.
▶ 9:01:42Shreeve, 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. Wasserman. Schultz, miss. Wasserman. Schultz. No. Mrs. watson. Coleman. Mrs. watson. Coleman. Mrs. watson. Coleman.
▶ 9:02:12No. Mr. womack, Mr. womack. I. Mr. zink, Mr. zink, I. >> are there any members wishing to record their vote or change their vote? Gentlelady from washington. >> miss perez? No. >> are there other members wishing to record or change their vote? Seeing none. Clarksville. Tally. >> there's a lot in there.
▶ 9:02:45Relatively painless. >> relative. On this vote. The yeas are 32, the nose are 28. The motion is agreed to.
▶ 9:03:14I ask unanimous consent. The staff be permitted to make technical and conforming changes to the bill and report. Uh, just approved three days. Seeing no objection. So ordered. Without objection. So ordered. There being no further business, the committee stands adjourned.