Transcription
To the order of the House of December 16, 2025. The concurrent resolution is considered as read. The concurrent resolution shall be debatable for one hour, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on foreign affairs or their respective uh design. The gentleman from Florida, Mr. Mast, and the gentleman from New York, Mr. Meeks, each shall control 30 minutes. The chair recognizes a gentleman from Florida.
>> Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that members all have five legislative days in which to revise and extend the remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.
>> Without objection, so ordered.
>> Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.
>> Gentleman's recognized for such time as he may consume.
>> Right now, we have cartels operating in our backyard. They are kidnapping Americans, extorting families, trafficking women and children, and flooding our towns with fentanyl to maximize death and addiction on American soil. Someone tell me that I'm wrong. I don't hear anything. Just look at the images next to me. It's not Photoshop. None of this is new. It's just new that it's being defeated by President Trump. Brought to an end by President Trump. This violence, it comes from the Sinaloa and Haliscoco cartels, Trend Aaragua, MS-13, Cartel of the Suns, headed by Nicholas Maduro, just to name a few. The president has every bit of Article 2 authority to defend the United States of America from these imminent threats. These cartels that are doing this are an imminent threat. These cartels have tens of thousands of members who wake up every day and see it as their sole mission to flood the United States with lethal drugs. But my Democrat colleagues want to ignore that. Sinaloa and Haliscoco alone have nearly 45,000 members combined. Gulf cartel 50,000 members. MS-13 another 30,000. They're coming across the Gulf constantly. 365 days a year, 7 days a week, they are coming to the United States of America with their violence. That is the definition of imminent. These drug cartels are highly organized, militarized. They are terrorist networks that have convinced my colleagues that they're nothing more than small street gangs. They control territory, run armed convoys, use drones for surveillance, communicate through encrypted networks like the military. They terrorize entire countries with extreme violence. And they terrorize the United States of America and our people. They spread carnage wherever they go, not just across the border, but on our side of the border as well. Right here in the United States of America. Look at this morbid scene that we're going to put up here. These are two men about to be decapitated, literally out in the open by the Gulf cartel. The tactics of these cartels are the same as those used by al-Qaeda and ISIS. These are terrorist networks. Some are given safe haven by foreign governments. Others like Trend Aaragua take orders from Nicholas Maduro. I can tell you that Americans have paid the price for it. Lake Riley, 22-year-old nursing student, murdered in Georgia by a confirmed member of Trend Aaragua. Clartha Daniels and Justin Lawless, executed outside of their Bronx apartment by six Trendar Awa terrorists. These were neighbors to my ranking member. 74-year-old American rancher killed in Brownsville, Texas when his truck hit a cartel-planted IED. Exactly the same kind of thing that took my legs off. Democrats don't want the president to be able to defend America from these terrorists. Even more tragic is the fact that nearly 80,000 Americans overdosed last year on fentanyl, cocaine, and other cartel-trafficked drugs. But Democrats don't want to protect you from that either. In fact, yesterday after we had a classified briefing, the gentleman on my left, the ranking member, went directly to the press to claim that these strikes were not protecting America. Literally said these strikes were not stopping drugs. Everything that he said is very easy for me to prove wrong. Every drug boat sunk is literally drugs not coming to the United States of America. Every narco-terrorist killed is an American life like Lake and Riley or Clartha Daniels saved. The threat is pressing and it's frequent. In November, the Coast Guard announced it seized 510,000 pounds of cocaine in the Eastern Pacific and the Caribbean since the start of 2025. This is enough cocaine to harm nearly 170 million Americans. Congressional authorization is not required to carry out precise, limited strikes. My colleagues did not object when prior presidents conducted military operations in Yemen and Libya and Syria, operations which were also limited and successful. This resolution is also reckless and poorly written. It prevents the president from acting against any foreign terrorist organization in the Western Hemisphere. Under this resolution, the president could strike al-Qaeda or ISIS in the Middle East. But if those same terrorists came across into the Western Hemisphere, they could be untouchable and free to kill as many Americans as they want. Democrats are not putting forward an authorized use of military force telling the president how to combat any of these issues. Democrats are putting forward a resolution to say the president cannot do anything about MS-13 or Trend Awa and every other cartel. That is getting aid and comfort to narco-terrorists. That is ignoring an imminent threat. The cartels are relentless and ruthless. They have military capabilities and use them every day against the American homeland. When a threat poses immediate danger to Americans, the Constitution gives the president the authority to act. I reserve the balance of my time.
>> Gentleman reserves. The gentleman from New York is recognized.
>> I yield myself as much time as I may consume for the purpose of speaking in favor of my resolution of House Concurrent Resolution 61.
>> Gentleman's recognized for as much time as he may consume.
>> I'll get to the the chairman later about his incorrect statements, but what I want to point out is since September the 2nd, the administration has carried out 25 known strikes killing 95 people. Among these was a so-called double-tap strike where U.S. forces killed two survivors clinging to the wreckage of a destroyed vessel in open sea. The administration now refuses to release the video of this strike, denying the American people the ability to see for themselves what is being done. That the Freedom Caucus and President Trump love America's children more than their own parents do or that they can make better decisions for tens of thousands of American children than their own parents. I can't understand the logic of it. In a time of skyrocketing healthcare costs, which our colleagues will do nothing about except perhaps a handful of them who have crossed over to join us today in a discharge petition. But at a time of skyrocketing healthcare costs, grocery prices, and housing, not to mention the recent news of escalating unemployment higher than the last four years, does anybody really think that what the American people need right now and are looking for is a federal law authorizing FBI agents and government prosecutors to investigate doctors, nurses, hospitals, and parents for providing AMA-recommended medical care to children? The politicians that have brought America to a point of crisis in healthcare coverage for millions of Americans and can't seem to do anything about it cannot be trusted to make the most intimate and fundamental decisions for the physical, mental, and emotional well-being of America's children. Let us leave it to people's parents. Let's leave it to the families. Um, and we will reserve at this point.
>> Gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Alabama uh is recognized.
>> Uh, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to mention that Gavin Newsom signed a bill into law recently not to notify parents. Uh, administrators and school teachers don't notify parents if the kids are considering a transition. So, we do trust parents in many cases, but a lot of cases in some of these blue states, they're not notified. And with that, I'll yield five minutes to my friend from Georgia, Miss Green.
>> The gentle lady from Georgia is recognized for five minutes. Thank you, Madam Chair. One of the most serious responsibilities we have as adults and particularly those of us who are elected and hold power when it comes to legislating and making laws is to protect children. Today, the House is delivering on what the American people voted for, the opportunity to vote to end the genital mutilation of children via transgender treatments for children. This important bill that I've introduced years ago and finally is getting a vote today will let the House set to vote on this this afternoon will criminalize gender-affirming care on minors, not adults, on minors who have not yet grown up to make adult decisions. It will end genital mutilation and chemical castration of children and imprison offenders for up to 10 years. This is a direct legislative reflection of President Trump's executive order and every single Republican's campaign promise in 2024. It was also one of the top issues across the country. Most Americans agree that kids just need to grow up before they do anything radical like a mastectomy on a 15-year-old girl, castrate themselves through surgery, or even take dangerous drugs that have lifelong effects. American children are being systematically indoctrinated with perverse gender ideology by teachers, doctors, mental health counselors, and on social media platforms. Autistic children are particularly vulnerable and are three to four times more likely to have gender dysphoria. Joe Biden's former assistant secretary of health, Richard Lavine, who identifies himself as Rachel Lavine, called for the federal government to empower kids to go on puberty blockers and obtain sex reassignment surgeries. We truly don't know the lifelong effects of puberty blockers, but we do see the lifelong effects of sex reassignment surgeries. For far too long, children have been sexually exploited under the malicious falsehood of so-called gender-affirming care. Mutilating children's bodies and giving them sterilizing drugs is anything but affirming and anything but care. These types of surgeries and hormone treatments are destroying children's lives all across the country. While this perverted multi-billion dollar industry rakes in profits, pharmaceutical company Pfizer led the way in hormone production drugs with revenues of $74 million from those products in 2022 alone. Total revenues for transgender drugs and surgeries in 2023 were estimated to surpass $4.4 billion, and by 2030 the market is expected to grow to nearly $8 billion. There are for-profit pediatric gender clinics as well as hospitals that receive federal funding that are engaged in this type of child abuse. One of the nation's top children's hospitals in the country, Boston Children's Hospital, even released videos that explained its surgeries promoting sterilization, castration, and mutilation of children to kids and their parents. The hospital had been discovered to have performed gender-affirming gender-affirming chest surgeries on 15-year-old girls. Girls that are not even old enough to get a tattoo, buy nicotine, buy alcohol, and even vote. Jaime Reid, who worked at a gender clinic and directly assisted transitioning 1,500 patients, she says aged three to 25 years old, over 5 years, publicly came out to discuss the atrocities happening to children at these gender clinics. When a female takes testosterone, the profound and permanent effects of the hormones can be seen in a matter of months. The voice drops, beards sprout, body fat is redistributed, sexual interest explodes, aggression increases, and moods can be unpredictable. One of the side effects includes sterility. Can you imagine this happening to a young woman before she's ever even of legal age to be considered an adult? Jaime Reid has a has fullblown come out as a whistleblower on how fraudulent the entire industry is. The clinicians didn't care about the symptoms of the child. If the child believed they were trans, the clinicians took their word for it. If a child believes they're a unicorn, do adults take their word for it as well? We have laws that prevent children from being sexually exploited already on the books. And as a matter of fact, in 2020, this body passed a law to stop the female genital mutilation of young women all across America. My bill has the exact same commerce clause that is in the law preventing FGM. We also have federal laws that have stopped uh sexual exploitation of children.
>> Time is expired.
>> Additional minute.
>> I additional minute.
>> Gentleman has one additional minute. Thank you, Madam Chair. We already have federal laws that stop the sexual exploitation of children related to porn and sex crimes against children. And these federal laws are so important because they protect children all across America. There's historical data that shows that 60 to 90% of pre-puberty children with gender dysphoria stop identifying as trans once they grow up. And in 2022, there's a statistic that says only 12% of boys with gender dysphoria continue it into adulthood. This is a matter of common sense. This is a vote of good versus evil. And it's our duty as a governing body filled with responsible adults to protect children from making the worst mistake of their lives before they're ever grown up and have the ability to enter enter into adulthood. I urge the House to vote yes on the Protect Children's Innocence Act and do the right thing for America's children. I yield back.
>> Gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Raskin, is recognized.
>> I yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California, the chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus, Mark Takano.
>> Gentleman from California is recognized for two minutes.
>> Uh, thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in strong opposition to this bill. There are not words strong enough to express my disgust. I just want to respond to the gentle lady from Georgia. Surgery, gender-affirming surgery is never performed on young children. It is extremely rare for older uh transgender adolescents. This bill would have little impact on surgeries for transgender young people because surgery is already extremely rare for transgender adolescents. Republicans keep bringing up surgeries to shift attention away from how extreme this bill is. This bill hypocritically bans safe and effective medications for an entire group of people just because of who they are while still allowing them for everyone else. This bill will not lower the cost of your healthcare. It will not protect children. It will not ease the strain on doctors and other healthcare providers. What it will do is interfere with parental choice and open private medical data up to federal investigation. It threatens to jail doctors who follow evidence-based practice supported by every medical association in the United States. It deprives children of proven life-saving medical care. My Republican colleagues should be ashamed. I'm ashamed of what they're doing. I'm ashamed that trans children out there may see this debate in the people's house and watch elected officials lie about them. I'm ashamed that the world sees this democracy spending its time wielding the law as a weapon to attack a few rather than shield uh rather than to use the law as a shield to protect the vulnerable. And I am furious that while millions of families struggle to for afford groceries, healthcare, rent, and basic necessities, this is the vindictive, petty garbage Republicans are using the people's house to put to a vote. Banning healthcare for trans people cannot be justified by science. Using the federal government to strip parents of their right to make decisions for their children is a massive violation. And jailing doctors and in some cases parents for following best practices, best medical practices.
>> Time is expired.
>> I yield the gentleman 30 seconds more.
>> Gentleman's yield 30 seconds. And jailing doctors, in some cases parents for following best medical practices is backwards, ignorant, and dangerous. To my colleagues who support this bill, you are not vested with the power to say someone does not deserve medically necessary care. This body has a duty to protect the vulnerable. This is this bill is a radical perversion of that duty and a disgusting abuse of power. I yield back. Thank you for the yielding.
>> Gentlemen, gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Alabama is recognized.
>> Madam Speaker, this is not rare. 5,700 children had these surgeries mainly between 2019 and 23 2023 in mainly blue states. And and here on PBMs, it says puberty blockers have not been approved by the FDA for the indication of gender dysphoria and they're off-label uses. So these are not safe uses in many cases with these transitions. And with that, I'll yield two minutes to my friend from South Carolina, Miss M.
>> The general lady from South Carolina is recognized for two minutes. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in strong support of the Protect Children's Innocence Act. And when we're talking about shameful, shameful is castrating a kid. Shameful is chopping off the breasts of an underage girl. And that is what the Democrats are doing today. It is obscene. It is disgusting. You're seeing in real time Democrats wanting and defending grooming of children and it is abhorrent. There is a lie at the heart of the debate we're having today that I have to correct. No child is born in the wrong body. There are only two sexes. They are male and they are female. There are no others. Every child is created in the Lord's image and we cannot remain silent while demonic forces are here today on the floor. The left here to groom children and defend it. Children are innocent. And for too long, Democrats have tried to mainstream satanic, irreversible procedures which destroy the bodies of young children and often lead to kids being sterilized for life, leads to disease, leads to cancer, leads to suicide. Democrats say protect trans kids. I came here today to the floor of the House of Representatives to say there is no such thing as a trans kid. Transgenderism is a mind virus perpetuated by the far-left to groom kids. This is not gender-affirming care. It's genital-destroying child abuse. This chemical and surgical mutilation of children has devastating consequences on their physical and mental health. And many live to regret it. Many live to detransition if they make it out at all. This is sick. This is disgusting. And we cannot allow the left to prey on underage kids any longer.
>> Time is expired.
>> Gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized.
>> Thank you, Madam Speaker. So, at a time when our colleagues are perfectly content to see millions of Americans lose their health insurance, when they do nothing to extend the Affordable Care Affordable Care Act tax credits that millions of Americans are depending on at a time when they're happy to throw millions of people off of Medicaid coverage, they decide to change the subject in order to vilify and demonize a small minority. You know, that's a time-honored tactic in the authoritarian playbook to pick a small minority of citizens here. We're talking about around 2 million people who are transgender America and scapegoat them, dehumanize them, demonize them, Satanize them, take away their basic freedoms, and even deny their very existence. It's happening to gay people right now in Putin's Russia and in Orban's Hungary. It's happening to Uyghurs and Tibetans in China. It's happening to Christians and freethinkers in Pakistan. It's happening to Muslims in India. And now it's happening to trans people in America when they're happy to attack them, vilify them, try to destroy their community. And if they purport to be acting in the name of the trans community, why is it that the trans community opposes their legislation so strongly? I yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois, Representative Krishnamoorthi.
>> The gentleman from Illinois is recognized for one minute.
>> Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in strong opposition to HR 3492. This measure would allow politicians, not doctors, not families, in deciding medically necessary care for family members. It criminalizes medically necessary, evidence-based, life-saving care, and it threatens parents and physicians with prison time for providing care for their kids. As millions of Americans face losing their health insurance, Republicans are not working to protect coverage or lower costs. Instead, they're focused on throwing the parents and doctors of trans youth into jail. We should be strengthening care, not dismantling it. We should trust doctors and families, not replace medicine with ideology. No parent should have to fear prosecution for trying to get their child the care they need. And this is exactly what this measure would do. I urge a strong no vote. I yield back.
>> Gentleman reserves.
>> We reserve.
>> Gentleman from Alabama is recognized.
>> Reserve.
>> Gentleman reserves. Gentleman from Maryland is recognized.
>> Um, and now I am delighted to recognize for one minute the representative from Oregon, Representative Bonamici.
>> Gentle lady from Oregon is recognized for one minute.
>> Thank you, Madam Speaker. I join many of our colleagues in opposing this hateful and harmful legislation. This is a devastating moment for transgender youth, their parents, and their healthcare providers across the country. The so-called Protect Children's Innocence Act is a blatant attack on the rights of parents. It allows the government to interfere with very personal healthcare decisions. My Republican colleagues have spent years touting parental rights. Yet now they want to put moms and dads and doctors in prison for deciding how to best support their own children. It's dangerous and it's wrong. These decisions belong to parents, their children, and their healthcare providers, not politicians. Every parent wants what's best for their children. And as a parent, I cannot imagine how I would feel if a doctor told me that Republicans in Congress banned life-saving evidence-based care that would help my child. Medical care for transgender youth is safe and effective and supported by major medical associations. Access to transgender-related healthcare is critical, medically necessary, and often life-saving. The president and my Republican colleagues have spent the years scapegoating a very small group of very vulnerable children because they have no solution to strengthen the economy, reduce healthcare costs, or make our communities safer. And this legislation is gentle.
>> And as I yield back, Madam Chair, I want Madam Speaker, if I find it disturbing that my colleague's time has expired.
>> I'm happy to yield another 20 seconds.
>> Thank you. I find it disturbing and disappointing that my colleagues seem to be more obsessed with what genitals are in people's pants than whether they can afford their healthcare or their housing bills. And I yield back, Mr.
>> Gentleman reserves.
>> We reserve.
>> Gentleman from Alabama is recognized.
>> Gentleman reserves. Gentleman from Maryland is recognized.
>> So, um, we know that, uh, the proponents of this legislation are certainly not speaking for the families that have to deal with this problem because all of them are lobbying against this. They're saying, "The last thing we want at this point is to send the FBI in and federal prosecutors to deal with the problem. Let them deal with it." Well, perhaps they're speaking for medical authority. Nope, not at all. Look at the letter that was just sent to members of Congress. We, the undersigned medical professional organizations, write in strong opposition to HR 3492. These bills, this also 498, would criminalize and dismantle healthcare for transgender young people and as such represent a direct threat to our patients' welfare. We urge you to reject these extreme proposals. Look who signed this: the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American College of Physicians, the American Psychiatric Association, and so on. These are the people, the leading medical authorities in the country are saying, "Hey, we can work this out at the state level." Gentleman referred to California. There are states that are regulating in the field as they regulate lots of different kinds of medical treatments and procedures. Suddenly, we're going to turn the United States Congress into a super medical licensing board for the entire country. And this is why our colleague from the other side of the aisle, Mr. Roy, raised the question of whether this is even constitutional. Where is the federal jurisdictional nexus for us to be overriding the state medical boards in order to bulldoze into people's living rooms and their kitchen tables to usurp the family decision-making process of Americans across the country? We reserve. Oh, I'm sorry. If I could I see Representative Salinas has arrived. I represent I will yield one minute to the distinguished gentle lady from Oregon.
>> Gentle lady from Oregon is recognized for one minute.
>> Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this disgusting bill that does nothing to protect children's innocence. It endangers parents, healthcare providers, and children. It allows healthcare providers and parents to be fined and possibly jailed if they help a minor access life-saving care, and it permits federal law enforcement to act as the National Gender Police, allowing them to invade children's private medical records. This bill puts even more children in harm's way and exacerbates the mental health crisis that our young people are facing because it stops them from actually receiving the care that they need right now. Madam Speaker, why is our focus on this when what I'm hearing from constituents is that Republicans are falling short in addressing the cost of groceries, healthcare, and housing? To my Republican colleagues, why not focus on the issues that will impact millions of families who are just one paycheck away from homelessness or losing their healthcare instead of waging a war on children's genitals? What is this unhealthy obsession? Let's end it today by voting no on HR 3492. I yield back.
>> We reserve.
>> Gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Alabama is recognized.
>> Madam Speaker, I'm going to yield five minutes to Miss Green from Georgia.
>> Gentle lady from Georgia is recognized for five minutes. Thank you, Madam Chair. This poster displayed here is the results of uh females having their skin and flesh stripped from their arms and their legs in order for a surgeon to create um a a fake penis and have it sewn on their body. And these are the horrific scars and damage that these women are left with for the rest of their lives undergoing these barbaric surgeries. This this is not something any child, any minor under the age of 18 years old should ever undergo. This is not healthcare. This is not a parent's uh choice for a child. This right here is child abuse. This is child abuse. And no one under the age of 18 should ever make that decision. And no doctor should ever perform a surgery like this on a child simply because they are suffering gender dysphoria and are confused about their feelings of how they identify and how they see themselves. You can go ahead and put it down. This condition that so many young people are suffering with and it has been on the rise in the past 10 years. This was something that it was a very small percentage, but young people today have been indoctrinated on social media. They have been indoctrinated by school counselors, teachers, and many adults, even their own parents. They are being indoctrinated to believe and take that confusion they're having just as a child, whether it's pre-puberty or while they're going through puberty, to believe they want to change their gender. And here's the real truth. God only creates two sexes and two genders, male and female. And God does not make mistakes. And no child is a mistake. No feeling they have inside of themselves can change that. And no barbaric surgery, no chemical castrating drugs that are given to uh sex predators can change that. No amount of hormones can change that. The reality is is that parents um and adults across the country can use the responsibility, our God-given responsibility to protect children while they're growing up. And we have laws that do that. We have laws that say they can't register to vote until they're 18 because they're not adults yet to make those kinds of adult decisions. We have laws that say they can't get ink tattooed on their skin until they are of legal age. Most most states are 17 or 18 years old. We have laws that say they can't buy nicotine or even see an R-rated movie until they're 17 years old. So this is this isn't an argument between Democrat and Republican. This is simply common sense and most Americans agree. The best thing that we can do for our children across this country is to say you're not ready to make these decisions. Your feelings are very likely going to change. And it's proven through the statistics. The statistics show one study from a doctor in Finland who happens to be the leading expert, Dr. Kaltiala, says four out of five gender-questioning kids grow up. Four out of five stop questioning who their their gender. They stop those feelings. 12% of boys with gender dysphoria continue it into adulthood. Only 12%. These are major changes and we already have federal laws and that's incredibly important to recognize. The law, the legislation that made it a federal law against female genital mutilation, which has the same commerce clause in the Protect Children's Innocence Act, the bill that we will be considering that I've introduced, that bill passed by voice in 2020. That meant that no member of this body raised up and said we needed a recorded vote because they wanted to vote no. It simply passed by voice. We also have so many other laws to protect children from sexual exploitation. This is something that doesn't affect people's uh sexual identity. It's in no way, shape, or form insulting to anyone that identifies as gay or lesbian or bisexual. This is simply a bill to tell kids, "Hold on. Parents, hold on before they have double mastectomies, before they're castrated, before they take drugs that are not FDA approved for the use that they are given that are chemical castrating drugs. We have to stop."
>> Time has expired.
>> Thank you. I urge the House to vote for Protect Children's Innocence Act.
>> Gentleman reserves. Gentleman from Maryland is recognized.
>> Thank you, Madam Speaker. We are invited to believe that the United States Congress is not only more competent to make medical decisions for America's children than their own parents, but that the United States Congress is more competent than all 50 state legislators to run uh medical practices within their states. I'm going to yield now one minute to my friend, Representative Schrader from Washington, who is both a mom and a pediatrician.
>> The gentle lady from Washington is recognized for one minute. Thank you, Madam Speaker. As the first and only pediatrician in Congress, I rise today to condemn the so-called Protect Children's Innocence Act. I have served children and their families for over 20 years, and I find this piece of legislation to be dangerous and an absolute slap in the face for parents and for doctors who have dedicated their lives to caring for children and families. This bill could put doctors behind bars for up to 10 years for providing medically appropriate care for children. And it doesn't even stop there. It could put parents behind bars for making after deep consideration and in many cases anguish the decision that they deem best for their own child. This bill will instill fear in doctors and patients and rob parents of their freedom to make decisions for and with their own children. Instead, it puts that power in the hands of DC lawmakers. Healthcare decisions are deeply personal, and the confidential relationship between a patient and their parents and their physician is sacred.
>> Physicians follow evidence-based guidelines.
>> I'll grant the gentle lady an additional 15 seconds.
>> It is outrageous that the government would commandeer those decisions. I strongly oppose this bill and encourage my colleagues to all vote no.
>> I yield back. and we reserve.
>> Gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Alabama is recognized.
>> Madam Speaker, I'll yield two minutes to my friend, Mr. Grothman from Wisconsin.
>> Gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized for two minutes.
>> I'd like to thank my friend from Georgia for introducing this bill. It has so much uh common sense and it is so scary that our country has gone so far downhill that we would allow young people sometimes as young as 14 or 13-year-olds take powerful drugs, puberty blockers or do surgeries on them in the name of this idea that we always all of a sudden have this epidemic of transgenderism. Something that nobody ever miraculously seemed to know about 50 years ago. But instead, in our society, we have all the helping professions, the guidance counselors, the psychologists, the psychiatrists, as well as our pop culture icons from California out there pushing our poor young people into the idea that it's cool to be transgender. And the fact that recently it's come out the number of kids who are transgender and I think it is uh uh 18 or 19-year-olds has been cut in half, which proves what anybody with common sense knew all along. There was a cool thing created so that young people could say look at me, I'm transgender. And some of these kids, their life is ruined. It's a testament, by the way, that this is not genetic when all you have to do is look at um uh the fact that these kids have to continue to take uh powerful drugs even after surgery. If it was a natural thing, you wouldn't have to keep taking the drugs. So, in any event, I strongly hope that we take out this bill. I should also point out last year doing doorbells like politicians do, I ran into two grandparents who had grand one granddaughter, one grandson going down this uh going down this rabbit hole and I felt so sorry for them because when somebody makes this decision, it affects not only themselves, it affects the whole family. And uh in any event, I'm glad the bill is introduced. I hope they have the common sense in the Senate. Probably won't uh to pass the bill.
>> Time expired.
>> Gentleman reserves. Gentleman from Maryland is recognized.
>> I recognize the distinguished gentle lady from Vermont, Representative Bonamici, for two minutes.
>> Gentle lady from Vermont is recognized for two minutes.
>> Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise today in fierce opposition to Representative Green's bill that would throw doctors and parents in jail for providing life-saving medical care. Even for Republicans, this is extreme. Are we really attempting to lock up parents and doctors? Your kids' medical care is none of their damn business. We should call this obsession with your kids and what treatment they're getting in the pediatrician's office what it is. It's creepy. It's a creepy obsession. And we've had to deal with it for years. The science is clear. Evidence-based medically necessary care for transgender youth is safe. It's effective. It's supported by every major medical association in the United States, including the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics. My Republican colleagues know this because this intentionally discriminatory bill includes a bunch of exemptions to allow other kids to get the exact same medical care. I call on my colleagues to vote no on this truly reprehensible piece of legislation. Congress should not be making medical decisions for your kids. And for this reason, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to recommit this bill back to committee. If the House rules permitted, I would have offered the motion with an important amendment to this bill. My amendment would ensure that this bill does not compromise the private medical records of a minor or result in parents or doctors being thrown in jail. I ask unanimous consent to insert into the record the text of this amendment. I hope my colleagues will join me in voting for the motion to recommit and I yield back.
>> Without objection and members are reminded to direct all of their comments to the chair. Gentleman from Maryland reserves. Gentleman from Alabama is recognized. Gentleman reserves. Gentleman from Maryland is recognized.
>> Um we have no more speakers. We're prepared to close.
>> Gentleman is recognized to close.
>> Thank you, Madam Speaker. Um, well, we obviously disagree vehemently on this bill, but this may be the last time that I get to share the floor with the distinguished gentle lady from Georgia, and I want to thank thank her for her hard work and her thoughtful comments in CNN News recently, which moved me when she said, "I would like to say humbly, I'm sorry for taking part in the toxic politics. It's been bad for our country. It's been something I've thought about a lot, especially since Charlie Kirk was assassinated." So I want to thank you for that and I want to wish you all the best and your family all the best in your future endeavors. Having said that um on the gentle lady's bill, look there are lots of people in the country who are not getting their kids vaccinated for different reasons and for different kinds of illnesses and a lot of people in the country reject that and oppose that and perhaps the vast majority do. Does that mean we should come forward with a bill to the United States Congress to say, "We are going to put in jail any parents who don't vaccinate their children because we think they're making the wrong decision for their children." In other words, we know better than the parents do, and we know better than the doctors do, and we know better than the medical associations do, and we know better than all of the states do. I think that would be an absurd abuse of our power. And as uh Mr. Roy from Texas has been saying, a very questionable deployment of federal power given the fact that the United States Congress has limited powers that are supposed to deal with actual national and federal issues, which is why medical care has always been left to the states to deal with. So, um, this is like a bulldozer going into everybody's house if you happen to be dealing with this particular kind of medical crisis. And you don't have to agree with any particular decision that any particular family or set of parents have made. All you have to do is respect their right to make decisions with and for their own children. That's all that we're talking about. And you know who's on this side and opposed to this legislation? Medical.
associations like the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Association of Pediatrics, the American Psychological Association representing more than a million doctors in the country, saying no, don't let the politicians start fingerpainting all over the protocols for dealing with an actual medical problem that millions of people have had to deal with in our country.
So, we will stand with the families. We will stand with the doctors. We will stand with the medical associations. We will stand with the states. This is, we've got enough real work on our hands. Let's just try to get medical care and medical attention to the people of America. Millions of people are losing their access to health insurance and to Medicaid. Why don't we try to deal with that before we barge into, uh, the, uh, the, the, the doctor's rooms and the living rooms and the kitchen tables of America to try to take over what is a fundamentally private and personal decision that we should be trusting families to make for themselves. And with that, I'm happy to yield back.
>> Gentleman yields back. The gentleman from Alabama is recognized to close.
>> Madam Speaker, how about we just don't mutilate our children? I think that's a good call. And this is allowing people above the age of 18 to make those decisions. But I'm, most of us in here were young people at one time or another. And I can remember being in the second and third grade. And I, you know, there was a thing called cooties. I don't know if y'all remember that, but if you hung around the girls, you know, they'd say, "Oh, don't do that. You're going to get the cooties." I don't know if you ever heard that term, but, uh, it's a South Alabama thing, Miss Bice. But, uh, by the time we were in the sixth grade, we were on the gym floor trying to decide whether or not to ask, we didn't have the courage to ask the girls to dance. And by the time we were in the 10th or 11th grade, we were hoping they would notice us in the hallways. And by the time we were seniors, maybe we had the courage to ask them on a date and maybe they said yes. But, you know, the decisions that they're wanting to make, these are kids that are in the second and third grade. These are not kids that are either old enough to understand that we might be interested. We might want to, you know, go the direction like Marjorie said, only 12% of the, the, the males who go through this actually stick with it. So, it's important to us to understand that these are children and in many cases, they are being bullied by the physicians. You know, one of the physicians in Vanderbilt said, "We make a boatload of money on these procedures." And often, I think that it's more about the children and protecting the children than driving this ideological left wing, whatever it is, and a mutilation of our children. So, with that, I'll yield back and thank you.
>> The gentleman yields back. All time for debate on the bill has expired. The chair understands that amendment number one, printed in the House Report 119-411, will not be offered. Pursuant to House Resolution 953, the previous question is ordered on the bill as amended. The question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed say nay. The ayes have it. Third reading. A bill to amend section 116 of title 18, United States Code, with respect to genital and bodily mutilation and chemical castration of minors.
For what purposes a gentlewoman from Vermont seek recognition?
>> Madam Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
>> Clerk will report the motion.
>> Miss Balot of Vermont moves to recommit the bill HR 3492 to the Committee on the Judiciary.
>> Pursuant to clause 2B of rule 19, the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit. The question is on the motion. All those in favor say aye. Those opposed, nay.
>> The nays have it. The motion is not agreed to.
>> Madam Speaker, I ask for the yeas and nays.
>> The yeas and nays are requested. Those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. A sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.
Perfect. We're reading. I love doing this. Some of it, I feel like. For what purposes a gentleman from Texas, Mr. Weber, seek recognition?
>> Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 951, I call up HR 3616 and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
>> The clerk will report the title of the bill.
>> Union Calendar number 256, HR 3616, a bill to require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to review regulations that may affect the reliable operation of the bulk power system.
>> Pursuant to House Resolution 951, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Energy and Commerce, printed in the bill, is adopted, and the bill as amended is considered read. The bill as amended shall be debatable for one hour, equally divided and controlled by the Chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective designees. The gentleman from Texas, Mr. Weber, and the gentleman from New New Jersey, Mr. Pallone, will each control 30 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Weber.
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the legislation and to insert extraneous material on HR 3616.
>> Without objection.
>> Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
>> Gentleman is recognized.
>> Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of HR 3616, the Reliable Power Act, sponsored by my colleague from Ohio's 12th Congressional District, Mr. Troy Balderson. Put simply, this bill protects reliability that is critical to the economy as well as the public health. The bill protects the public from future federal rules that would force the premature retirement of power generation that is absolutely essential to keeping our grid reliable. Madam Speaker, our nation today is confronting a reliability crisis. The North American Electric Reliability Corporation, which is the nation's electric reliability organization, shows vast regions of our nation are at risk for blackouts when weather events and peak demand collide. And it, it's only going to get worse. The Energy and Commerce Committee has repeatedly heard from grid authorities about the number, massive number of premature retirements of base load power in our very own electric system. These retirements take much needed energy out of the grid system without adequate replacement of the types of base load power needed to remain the very reliability we depend on. The numbers are staggering. Madam Speaker, over the next decade, 150 GW of power is expected to come offline while 151 GW demand or needed to come online. Do that math. For too long, radical green activists in the Obama and Biden administrations were able to hijack environmental agencies with no authority over the grid to force shutdowns of power plants without regard of the impacts on that very reliability we depend on. Madam Speaker, if the Biden EPA's radical Clean Power Plan 2.0 had gone forward, it would have shut down most of the nation's coal-fired power and threatening the closing of a substantial number of existing gas generation plants to a disastrous effect. We cannot, we must not let federal agencies with no authority over electric reliability undermine that very vital electric service. Congress already established the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission as the reliability, reliable authority, or reliability authority. But when FERC is needed most, there is no requirement that its expert view should be accommodated. This bill fixes that. Let me repeat, this bill fixes that. During periods of increased reliability risk, FERC, informed by the technical expertise of grid operators and NERC, can require changes before a rule can be finalized. FERC will not stop agencies from pursuing their policy responsibilities effectively. It just protects reliable power. The legislation is necessary to provide a mechanism to adjust federal rules to ensure they protect electric reliability, which is so essential, Mr. Speaker, to the economy, to our public health, and yes, our safety. So, I urge my colleagues to support HR 36. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
>> The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized.
>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
>> Gentleman's recognized.
>> Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to HR 3616, yet another Republican bill that puts large corporate polluters over people. And at a time when American families are struggling with rising monthly energy bills, this legislation does nothing to address the affordability crisis. Electricity prices continue to go up. They've increased by 13% just since President Trump took office, and they're about to get worse as a Republican's big ugly bill is expected to increase those prices another 61%. You'd think Republicans would want to do something to address the affordability crisis, but this is just more the same from them. They refuse to address healthcare affordability and now they continue to ignore, uh, the crisis with regard to electricity this afternoon. And I guess we shouldn't be surprised. After all, they just blindly follow President Trump, who simply does not care. He does not believe the affordability crisis is real. In fact, he recently said it was, uh, affordability is a Democratic scam. That's what he actually said. Uh, the president should tell that to the hardworking families who are facing skyrocketing prices across the board. It is a crisis. Uh, and Republicans are simply ignoring it. Now, this bill is basically a thinly veiled attempt by Republicans to obstruct any future administration's EPA regulations that keep our air, lands, and water clean. This bill would allow the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, to block any regulation from any other agency under certain circumstances. It takes what should be an apolitical process, a neutral review of the reliability of our nation's electric sector, and twists it into a fully partisan exercise. And that's why we should reject this bill entirely. Right now, a number of federal agencies have authorities that could impact the power sector. FERC and the Department of Energy have the ability to comment on those regulations if they have concerns and work through the interagency review process to ensure that those concerns are heard. FERC commissioners in recent years have not been shy about using their powers to publicly highlight and comment on federal actions that they deem flawed or insufficient, and agencies can and do respond to that feedback, as we saw with the EPA during the previous administration. What no agency has the power to do now is to arbitrarily block another agency's regulations that Congress gave that agency the power to make. And that's simply ridiculous. If Republicans have their way, agencies will not only have to seek review from the Office of Management and Budget, but also ask permission from FERC to see if FERC likes the regulation or not. And if not, even if the White House likes a regulation, the agency can't finalize it. So, if that's not bad enough, FERC testified before the Energy and Commerce Committee that it does not even have the capacity and expertise necessary to investigate every other agency's regulation for the impacts that they will have on the electric, on electric reliability. And that was before the staff attrition that has hit FERC over the past 10 months. The agency has lost over 1.1, no, I'm sorry, over 11% of its staff through September, and who knows how many additional staff have left over the last three months because, you know, the president, he's wanting to fire everybody. So, let me just review this again because I don't want to be too bureaucratic here. Mr. Speaker, House Republicans want FERC to do something it has no ability to do, that would politicize our nation's electric reliability regulator, and would make FERC into a super authority with powers rivaling those of certain White House offices. And this is all to kill regulations that keep our air clean and our water drinkable. That's what this is all about. It's, let's not pretend that the House Republicans are worried about regulations coming from the Trump administration. They knew those regulations are all going to be to, you know, destroy whatever, you know, clean air or clean water we have. Instead, they're worried about the next time we have a president who actually cares about protecting public health and the environment. A president who wants to restore the bedrock environmental laws that the Republicans have gotten rid of. Republicans then want to use this bill as a shield to protect polluters. So, if the polluter now under a new president isn't going to have the protection and the public's going to have the protection to make sure that the, the water and the air are clean, then they want to make sure that, you know, they have some shield to protect the polluters. Now, we shouldn't let them do that. I mean, that's not what we're supposed to do. We're supposed to worry about the public. So, I urge my colleagues to vote no, and I reserve the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.
>> The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Texas is recognized.
>> Mr. Speaker, I yield two minutes to the gentleman from Georgia. The gentleman is recognized for two minutes.
>> I thank my friend from Texas for yielding. Uh, Mr. Speaker, uh, I rise today in support of HR 3616, the Reliable Power Act, of which I am a proud co-sponsor. My home state of Georgia has been named the number one state to do business for 12 consecutive years, making it a popular destination for new manufacturing facilities and data centers. While I, uh, I join Georgians in welcoming these economic drivers to our state, it also presents increased demand for our grid that we must address. We know electricity demand is expected to grow significantly over the next several years, which means this body has a duty to ensure our constituents have a dependable grid that meets the need of hardworking families. Unfortunately, both the B, the Obama and Biden-Harris administrations were guilty of using the EPA to promote radical policies designed to drive out base load generation in favor of wind and solar, which simply cannot assure adequate grid reliability and it increases the risk of rolling blackouts. HR 3616 will correct that very problem by improving federal rulemaking to ensure that future regulations impacting power generation will not harm electricity reliability, especially in already vulnerable regions. Under this bill, if FERC finds that a proposed rule will have a significant impact on reliability, the rule cannot be finalized. That's about as common sense as it gets, Mr. Speaker. The United States has abundant energy supply. The question we must ask ourselves is not if we have enough energy resources, but can we produce energy at the necessary levels to meet the growing demand? The Reliable Power Act will help us do just that. I urge a yes vote on HR 3616. And with that, I yield back.
>> Gentleman yields. Gentleman reserves.
>> Gentleman from Texas reserves. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized.
>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield such time as this she may consume to the gentlewoman from Florida, Miss Castor, who is the ranking member of our energy subcommittee.
>> The gentlewoman is recognized.
>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank ranking member Pallone for yielding the time. Uh, Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to HR 3616. It's another Republican bill that fails to address skyrocketing electric bills that are part of the overall affordability squeeze that is gripping the country right now. What should we be doing on the floor of the House right now? We should bring up the discharge petition to make sure that, uh, healthcare costs don't skyrocket for 20 million Americans, 4.7 million Floridians back home in the Sunshine State. Now that the discharge petition has the necessary number of votes to come to the floor, uh, and extend those life-saving and cost-saving ACA tax credits, we should be doing that instead. That would have a real impact. That would send a great sign to folks back home who are struggling with the rising cost of living and are wondering how they're going to pay for their health coverage next year. That would really help our neighbors back home. But alas, we're not doing that. Uh, while at a time prices are up, inflation is up, and despite the Republican promises to do something about it, all of their bills and their policies are making it worse. They're making life even more expensive. Household electricity prices are up across America by about 13%, and a lot higher in some places. Why is that the case? First of all, the big ugly bill that Republicans passed in July to provide tax breaks to the wealthy and well-connected took away tax credits to keep, uh, cleaner, cheaper energy producing across America. They ripped away rebates for households to help them afford the cost of upgrading their homes, making their lives more energy efficient. Also, uh, these arbitrary Trump tariffs are at the tariffs now at the highest level since the 1930s. You see it in your grocery bill, but it's also impacting, uh, electricity cost. Um, even poles and wires and things that we import for our electricity system, those costs are way up, and that's being passed along to consumers. And then the Trump administration has has canceled hundreds of projects across America, some that were permitted and approved, ready to bring cleaner, cheaper energy onto the grid to help keep electricity, uh, prices lower. All of that, all of that is a recipe for skyrocketing electricity bills. So, but what do Republicans in Congress do? They keep bringing these random bills to the floor to boost the profits of polluters. This bill, uh, it is a good example of that. This bill would elevate the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission above any other federal agency, give it unprecedented veto power, and transform it and the North American Energy Reliability Corporation into political actors, a world away from the independent agencies that they are now, uh, where they act in the public interest, not in the interest of polluters. And, you know, Mr. Speaker, FERC doesn't even want this power. And they lack capacity and they lack the staff for this highly technical work. When we discussed this bill two years ago, David Ortiz, then FERC's director of the Office of Electric Reliability, testified before the Energy and Commerce Committee that FERC couldn't execute on the bill because FERC does not have the capacity to assume other agencies' expertise. And that was before FERC lost 11% of its staff, hardworking public servants, due to resignations and layoffs under the Trump administration. This bill, does it do anything to provide FERC with the staff or funding they would need to implement the bill? No, it doesn't. Polluters simply want to short-circuit any oversight of their higher costs and pollution. That's what this is about. You know, FERC already has the power to intervene and comment on agency rulemaking dockets that if they think there could be a reliability issue, as does NERC, as does any of the grid operators and any utility. This polluter-friendly bill is a way to sabotage cleaner, cheaper energy, however, and energy storage, and it's a recipe for higher costs and electric bills for American families. Regional grid operators have the necessary expertise and staffing to maintain reliability on their grids already. Regional operators know that there are cheaper, cleaner, and more reliable energy sources available, not just expensive coal and gas. And there are modern grid solutions that the committee has refused to take up this year. That's another reason electric bills are so high. Answers like energy storage, demand response, grid enhancing technologies, and regional and interregional coordination that can provide reliability at a lower price with less pollution. Republicans also don't want you to know that while this bill gives FERC more responsibilities that it cannot meet and does not want, the Trump administration has been busy gutting the agencies that are already working to ensure that we have a reliable grid. For example, the Trump Department of Energy eliminated the Grid Deployment Office last month. That was an office created by under the bipartisan infrastructure law to manage important and cost-saving investments to make our grid more reliable. Over $3 billion in grid deployment investments were cut in October. The real Republican mantra should be a less reliable grid with higher costs because that's what this year has produced. Republican energy policy is creating a less reliable environment for businesses, making it harder for companies to invest in America. Just yesterday, Ford announced that they were laying off all 1,600 employees at their battery manufacturing plant in Glendale, Kentucky. In October, on top of the grid modernization cuts at the Department of Energy, DOE canceled 321 awards totaling $8 billion in funding. The largest award was $316 million to support the manufacturer of components from recycled EV batteries in Kentucky. That would have helped us compete with Chinese batteries. 197 million was supposed to help a plant in St. Louis producing 30,000 metric tons annually of critical mineral products. $170 million was intended to support production of synthetic graphite, including construction of a at a large plant in Alabama. $31 million was cut. It was going to build an advanced glass factory at the site of an old coal plant in Detroit. All of this taken together. As a result, the United States will have less capacity to support real reliable power. This bill does not solve problems, doesn't, doesn't tackle the affordability crisis. It makes it worse. Doesn't even support more reliable power. Republicans are just trying to slap a new permitting reform label on bad ideas that they've never been able to pass into law. The last week in session, here we are in the last week in in session this year. Mr. Mr. Speaker, and Republicans have not brought a single bill to the floor of the House that would lower costs for hardworking families. They have no new ideas here. No ideas on how to make energy more affordable for everyday Americans. No ideas to help us out of this healthcare crisis. People really deserve better. They deserve better at the holidays and they deserve better from this Congress. So, I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill and I yield back my time.
>> The gentlewoman yields. The gentleman from New Jersey reserves. The gentleman from Texas is recognized.
>> Mr. Speaker, I yield two minutes to the author of this bill, uh, Representative Troy Balderson from the great state of Ohio.
>> The gentleman is recognized.
>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you, Vice Chair Weber. America's electric grid is facing a reliability crisis, one created by heavy-handed federal rulemakings that prioritize politics and ignore the realities of power generation and the needs of American families. That is why I rise today in support of my bill, the Reliable Power Act. Under the Biden administration, federal agencies pushed out rapid-fire climate rules and mandates with little coordination and even less accountability. Instead of listening to grid operators, they raced to advance extreme policies that threatened our most dependable power sources with the American people paying the price. The Reliable Power Act puts an end to this by preventing federal rules from moving forward if they threaten the ability of the grid to keep the lights on. This legislation ensures proper coordination between FERC, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and federal agencies proposing regulations that could affect the power generation and grid reliability. It strengthens federal accountability, streamlines communication, and puts in place common sense guardrails needed to protect the bulk of the power system. Since introducing this bill in spring, I've heard from energy leaders across Ohio, energy co-ops, utilities, manufacturers, and grid operators who all say the same thing. Regulatory chaos driven by climate activists is putting grid reliability at risk and driving up cost. Just look at this map I have with me today. You can see for yourself how short-sighted policies can drive up electricity cost from one state to the next. When Democrat states sideline reliable conventional fuels and mandate a rust transition to renewables, consumers pay more. I don't know about New York or California, but Ohio cannot afford rolling blackouts, price spikes, or uncertainty about whether our grid can meet future demand. Earlier this year, the Department of Energy released a reliability report warning that blackouts could increase by 100% by 2030.
>> Gentleman's time.
>> I yield him an additional 30 seconds.
>> An additional 30 seconds. The Reliable Power Act directly responds to those concerns. First, it requires NERC, the Electricity Reliability Organization, to conduct annual long-term assessments of the bulk power system. If NERC finds the grid is at risk of inadequate generation, it must notify FERC. Then, FERC must notify the Department of Energy, the EPA, and other relevant agency. And once notified, those agencies must send the proposed rules back to FERC for review, comment, and recommendations to prevent severe impacts on grid reliability. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this bipartisan common sense legislation and ensure that no future administration or unelected federal bureaucrat can unilaterally jeopardize grid reliability. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield back.
>> Gentleman yields. Gentleman from Texas.
>> Mr. Speaker, I reserve.
>> Reserves. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized.
>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I have a lot of respect for the gentleman from Ohio who just spoke, but the bottom line is I, I think it's dishonest for Republicans to claim that the cost of compliance with environmental regulations is driving up utility prices. Regulatory, the regulatory chaos that the gentleman from Ohio mentions is created by the Trump administration. Since President Trump took office, his administration has created tremendous regulatory uncertainty through Doge, senseless tariffs, and unprecedented executive actions. And as a result, as I mentioned, electricity prices are up 13% and natural gas prices are up 8% since the president took office. Mr. Speaker, this holiday season, Americans are struggling to afford record high utility bills and skyrocketing grocery prices. Donald Trump and the Republican party were elected on their promise to bring prices down. Instead, the Republican party is about to become the Grinch who stole Christmas. They want to let the Affordable Care Act credits that kept health insurance affordable for families to expire on January 1st. And this bill, the Reliable Power Act, would let the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, kill any environmental regulations they don't like. In other words, this bill would make Americans sicker as health insurance prices are skyrocketing. And Republicans in Congress are just not delivering on their promise to bring down prices. The big ugly bill will increase electricity prices for American families by 61%. Instead of passing partisan bills this week that would increase energy prices, Republicans should be working with us and Democrats on bipartisan proposals that can decrease energy bills. Americans are just begging for relief on skyrocketing prices. Mr. Speaker, and President Trump's only response has been to call the affordability crisis a Democratic hoax. His rhetoric is an insult to the American people, but my Democratic colleagues and I are taking the affordability crisis very seriously. We hear your concerns. We hear the concerns of the public. And we strongly urge our Republican colleagues to come to the table to pass common sense legislation that bring prices down for the American people. And I reserve the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.
>> The gentleman reserves. Gentleman from Texas is recognized.
>> Mr. Speaker, I yield two minutes to the gentleman from Missouri, Dr. Bob Ader. The gentleman is recognized for two minutes.
>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of HR 3616, the Reliable Power Act. And if the Democrats cared one wit about affordability, they would join me in that support. In Missouri's third congressional district, families, farmers, and manufacturers rely on affordable, dependable electricity. Our district is powered by a diverse mix of nuclear, hydro power, natural gas, and coal. That diversity is a strength, which is why Missouri consistently enjoys lower energy prices than the rest of the nation. But reliability is threatened when Washington policies force premature plant closures and prioritize ideology over affordability. The Reliable Power Act restores common sense. It ensures that grid reliability is not sacrificed and that critical base load generation is protected when reliability is at risk. This bill protects consumers from price hikes, safeguards American manufacturing, and keeps power flowing in communities like mine. Reliable power, Mr. Speaker, is not a luxury. It is essential. I urge my colleagues to support HR 3616. I yield back.
>> The gentleman yields. The gentleman from Texas.
>> Mr. Speaker, I yield. I mean, I'm sorry. I reserve.
>> Gentleman from Texas reserves. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized.
>> Did I hear you were prepared to close?
>> I'm sorry. Say that again.
>> Are you prepared to close or you have additional speakers?
>> Well, depends on how much you have to say. No, we're prepared to close.
>> Okay, then I'll, I'll go first. Uh,
>> The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized.
>> Mr. Speaker. Um, and I yield my such time as I may consume.
>> Gentleman is recognized.
>> You know, I want to stress again that, um, the president promised to cut Americans' power bills in half, but instead, he and his Republican accomplices in the House are causing those prices to soar with their backward policies and essentially their war on cheaper clean energy. Uh, thanks to Republicans, electricity prices are climbing more than twice as fast as inflation, and more than 80 million Americans are struggling to pay their utility bills. Many of these Americans are having to make the impossible choice of either paying for housing, medicine, and food, or keeping their lights on. Let me just give you some examples. Since, uh, President Trump took office, electricity prices are up 13% nationwide, as I mentioned. But in Iowa, they're up 23%. In North Carolina, they're up 21%. In Pennsylvania, they're up 16%. But electricity prices aren't the only bills that are skyrocketing. Residential natural gas prices are now 8% higher than they were, uh, a year ago, uh, nationally. But again, 19% in Pennsylvania, 14% in Wisconsin, 13% in North Carolina. And we mentioned that the big ugly bill will raise electricity prices by a staggering 61% over the next decade due to its attacks on clean energy, cleaner and cheaper energy, and its crippling of the American clean energy industry. The big ugly bill destroyed tax credits that were designed to incentivize developers to build more domestic energy projects, raising barriers to building on America to those buildings in the process. And it will have the deployment of cheap renewable American energy and imperil our power grid. And these historic price hikes are on top of the $29 billion in electricity bill rate hikes that utility companies have requested since the start of President Trump's term. Now, I don't want to just talk about prices because the bottom line is we're also talking with this bill about a cost to Americans' health and safety. This bill allows FERC to override regulations established by other agencies. This is the Christmas gift to some of the nation's largest polluters. Think about that. FERC, which has no expertise in public health or environmental protections, would just be able to stop another agency's regulation meant to protect public health. These are regulations that are responsible for safe drinking water, for reducing air pollution, and preventing exposure to cancer-causing chemicals. We're not just talking about price increases here, the, the, the Trump administration has imposed. We're also talking about the impact on health and people's ability to breathe and drink clean water. By advancing this bill, Republicans are telling communities that their health and safety is not a priority. Pollution is exacerbating your child's asthma. Who cares? Your water may be contaminated. Nothing to worry about. We don't care. Other agencies spent years crafting regulations, often after an extensive analysis that shows the benefits of that regulation from a health and safety point of view outweighs the cost. But this bill would throw all of that out the door by allowing FERC, which has no expertise in these areas, to just say no. And, and FERC doesn't even want to do it. They told us, and as the ranking member of the energy subcommittee, Miss Castor, said, they literally told us at the committee that they didn't want to do this and didn't have the capacity to do it. So, we've just made so much progress in the United States on environmental protection over the last 50 years. Our nation's rivers used to catch fire, now they don't. Smog used to surround our cities, particularly Los Angeles. Now, it doesn't. And President Trump and House Republicans want to undo all that. They've waged an all-out war against public health, and this bill is just one piece of that. So, if you care about public health, if you care about prices, if you want to make sure people can breathe and they can still pay their electricity bill, I urge you to oppose this bill. It just makes common sense. And with that, I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker,
>> The gentleman yields. The gentleman from Texas is recognized.
>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, I want to thank the gentleman from Ohio's 12th Congressional District, Troy Balderson, for sponsoring this important legislation. HR 3616, the Reliable Power Act, provides a critical tool to protect the public from future federal rules that would force the premature retirement of power generation that is absolutely essential to keeping our grid reliable. The Reliable Power Act, Mr. Speaker, is about safety. It's about security, and it's also, quite frankly, about affordability. There is nothing more expensive, Mr. Speaker, than a blackout, rolling blackout. I know. And there's nothing more costly than green visions that drive out affordable power for expensive overbuilding of weather-dependent generation and backup power. That is why these bills, electric bills are rising. Mr. Speaker, we cannot afford to let radical rules destroy reliability in our great nation. HR 3616 provides a way to adjust proposed rules to absolutely ensure good federal policies while protecting electric reliability. A yes vote on HR 3616 is a vote for that kind of reliable power. There's nothing more important for our electric policy than that, Mr. Speaker. And, Mr. Speaker, in closing, I want to urge my colleagues to vote yes on HR 3616, and I yield back.
>> The gentleman yields. All time for debate has expired. Pursuant to House Resolution 951, the previous question is ordered on the bill as amended. The question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. Those in favor say aye. Aye.
>> Those opposed say nay.
>> Nay.
>> In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. Third reading. A bill to require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to review regulations that may affect the reliable operation of the bulk power system.
>> The question is on passage of the bill. Those in favor say aye.
>> Aye.
>> Those opposed say nay.
>> In the opinion of the chair, the bill is passed.
>> The yeas and nays are requested. Those in favoring, uh, of the vote of the yeas and nays will rise. A sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. Pursuant to clause 12A of rule one, the chair declares the House in recess subject to the call of the chair. Proceedings will resume on questions previously postponed. Votes will be taken in the following order: Adoption of House, uh, Concurrent Resolution 61. Adoption of, uh, House Concurrent Resolution 64. Passage of HR 3616. The motion to recommit HR 6703. Passage of HR 6703, if ordered. The motion to recommit HR 3492. And passage of HR 3492, if ordered. First electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, remaining electronic votes will be conducted as five-minute votes.
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the unfinished business is the vote on adoption of House Concurrent Resolution 61, on which the yeas and nays are ordered. The clerk will report the title of the concurrent resolution.
>> House Concurrent Resolution 61, Concurrent Resolution directing the President, pursuant to section 5C of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with presidentially designated terrorist organizations in the Western Hemisphere.
>> The question is, adoption of the concurrent resolution. Members will record their votes by electronic device. This is a 15-minute vote.
On this vote, the yeas are 210 and the nays are 216. The concurrent resolution is not adopted. Without objection, the motion to re to reconsider is, uh, laid on the table.
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the unfinished business is the vote on the adoption of House Concurrent Resolution number 64, on which the yeas and nays are ordered. The clerk will report the title of the concurrent resolution.
>> House Concurrent Resolution 64, Concurrent Resolution to direct the removal of the United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress.
>> The question is an adoption of the concurrent resolution. Members will record their votes by electronic device. This is a five-minute vote.
On this vote, the yeas are 211, the nays are 213. The concurrent resolution is not adopt is adopted. Not adopted. Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.
The unfinished business is the vote on passage of HR 3616 on which the yeas and nays are ordered. The clerk will report the title of the bill.
>> Union Calendar number 256, HR 3616, a bill to require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to review regulations that may affect the reliable operation of the bulk power system.
>> The question is on passage of the bill. Members will record their votes by electronic device. This is a five-minute vote.
On this vote, the yeas are 225. The nays are 203. The bill is passed. Without objection, a motion to reconsider is laid on the table.
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the unfinished business is the question on agreeing to the motion to recommit on HR 6703 offered by the gentlewoman from Illinois, Miss Underwood, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. The clerk will redesig nate the motion.
>> Motion to recommit HR 6703 offered by Miss Underwood of Illinois.
>> The question is on agreeing to the motion to recommit. Members will record their votes by electronic device. This is a five-minute vote.
On this vote, the yeas are 210 and the nays are 218. The motion is not adopted. The question is on passage of the bill. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, nay. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.
>> For what purpose? A gentleman from Ohio.
>> Request the yeas and nays.
>> The yeas and nays are requested. Those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. A sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. Members will record their votes by electronic device. This is a five-minute vote.
On this vote, the yeas are 216, the nays are 211. The bill is passed. Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the unfinished business is the question on agreeing to the motion to recommit on HR 3492 offered by the gentlewoman from Vermont, Miss Ballot, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. The clerk will redesig nate the motion.
>> Motion to recommit HR 3492 offered by Miss Ballot of Vermont.
The question is on agreeing to the motion to recommit. Members will record their vote by electronic device. This is a five-minute vote.
On this vote, the yeas are 210, the nays are 218. The motion is not adopted. The question is on passage of the bill. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, nay. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.
>> Mr. Speaker,
>> For what purpose does the gentlewoman from Vermont seek recognition?
>> I ask for the yeas and nays.
>> The yeas and nays are requested. Those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. A sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. Members will record their votes by electronic device. This is a five-minute vote.
On this vote, the yeas are 216. The nays are 211. The bill is passed. Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.
But we can start. Purpose of a gentleman from Arizona seek recognition?
>> Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow.
>> Without objection. The House will be in order. The chair chair will now entertain requests for one-minute speeches.
What purpose does the gentleman from Pennsylvania seek recognition?
>> address House for one minute and revise and extend my remarks and the House is not in order.
>> Gentleman is correct. The House is not in order.
>> Please take your conversations off the floor. The House will be in order. Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Kiwanis Club of Lock Haven, Pennsylvania on its 100th anniversary. Since the club's founding on January 26, 1926, the members of the Kiwanis Club have been a crucial part of the community in Lock Haven. The club has 43 members, and it works to help children by improving literacy rates, health, and educational outcomes. Lock Haven Kiwanis sponsored two Key Clubs, one at Central Mountain High School and the other Jersey Shore High School. It's an, it awards annual scholarships to Key Club members at both schools. The club recently started a Bringing Up Grades, or BUG, program at the Rob Elementary School in Lock Haven and also partners with Sleep in Heavenly Peace to build and deliver beds to children and youth who do not have beds. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Lock Haven Kiwanis Club for 100 years of dedicated service to the Lock Haven community and wish them the best as they work towards many more. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I yield back the balance of my time.
>> Gentleman yields back. For what purpose does a gentlelady from California seek recognition?
>> Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks.
>> Without objection, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute.
>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, it's hard to think of anyone more remarkable and excellent in every field and endeavor than they than those pursued by Rob and Michelle Reiner. Rob was creative, funny, and beloved, and Michelle, successful in her own right, was an indispensable partner, intellectual resource, and loving wife. Personally, Rob and Michelle were first and foremost very loving parents. Rob cared deeply about people and demonstrated in the community beyond family, whether by supporting the First Five initiatives. First Five initiative took money from the tobacco tax and applied it to the first five years of a child's birth. Children born in California, my own grandchild has a packet that they take home and teaches them how to care for an infant child. Uh, and also for fighting against the discriminatory Proposition 8. Civically, was a champion for the First Amendment and the creative rights of artists, and professionally, he was an iconic figure in film who made us laugh, cry, and think and think with the movies he created. Paul and I and our tabby family mourned the loss of our dear friends and pray for the his loved ones. His children, his children Jake and Romy put out a statement thanking everyone for their good wishes but asking for privacy. We respect that. And with that, Mr. Speaker, I want to have you apply a fuller statement for the record of the great life achievements, beautiful, beautiful love of community of Rob and Michelle Reiner. I just want to say three things. Do you recognize this?
>> I can't even without objection admitted for the record time, but it's in the record. It's the things that have been said in his movies. "I'll have what she's having." "You can't handle the truth." "As you wish," and "Go to 11." You know what that is? But that. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
>> Gentle lady yields back. For what purpose does the gentleman from the great state of Tennessee seek recognition?
>> Gentleman from the greatest state Tennessee cons, Mr. Speaker.
>> Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute and only one minute.
>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Hey, y'all hold it down back there. I don't come to your place of business. Be rude to y'all. I didn't, I didn't go back behind the Capitol and they were crushing aluminum cans earlier and I said, "Hey y'all, I didn't get in their way." Mr. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor my dear friend Johnny Wayne Ferris who was recently nominated as candidate for Time magazine Dealer of the Year. He is also being recognized nationally by Time for his community service and in industry accomplishments. Johnny Wayne Ferris is the president of Ferris Motor Company, founded by his grandfather in 1929. Ferris grew up in the industry and joined the company full-time in 1972 when I was in the second grade. Mr. Speaker, after graduating from Tennessee Tech University, Ferris Motor Company's mission is to be the dealer of the people, and he truly has accomplished that in his time with the company across Tennessee. Ferris has an honorable record of humanitarian aid and philanthropy as well. He has shipped over 140 containers of humanitarian assistance over the last 12 years to support East Tennessee families and refugees at home and abroad. Johnny Wayne Ferris is not only a great businessman, he is in my fraternity, Sigma Chi. He's also even a better member of this community, helping anyone and everyone everyone he can. I want to congratulate my dear friend Johnny Wayne Ferris and thank him for all that he's done for East Tennessee and me and my family. Thank you, Johnny Wayne. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
>> For what purpose does the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania seek recognition?
>> Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks.
Without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. This month, my community, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, lost a giant, Jean E. Corrian. Whenever I hear the term grassroots or boots on the ground, I think of Jean. She believed wholeheartedly and full-throatedly in democratic values and devoted her life to them. It didn't matter if it was for school board or the American president. Jean gave herself entirely to candidates she believed in. She led by example, always willing to knock doors, make calls, volunteer at polling places. She served on countless committees and was vice chair of her local party, the Abington Rockledge Democratic Committee. Her front porch was an election season hub of lawn signs, literature, lists, listening sessions, uh, on the latest intel. And all the while, Jean was a devoted wife and mother. Her husband Pete and children Joe, Dave, and Pauline, and her beautiful granddaughters were lucky to have her in their corner. I was lucky to have Jean in my corner, too. And we were all lucky that the Corrians shared Jean and her many talents with us. May God bless Jean Corrian. She taught us well. I yield back.
For what purpose does the gentleman from North Carolina seek recognition?
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today marks a monumental day for the Lumbee tribe of North Carolina, the effects of which will transcend generations. The Lumbee have fought tirelessly for decades to achieve full recognition by the U.S. Congress. Today, that day has arrived. The Lumbee Fairness Act, which I offered as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act, will soon head to the President's desk as part of the annual Defense Bill for his signature, providing full federal recognition. This is a historic milestone, decades in the making, and a moment of celebration for a community that has never wavered in its resolve. This amazing achievement would not have been possible without the steadfast leadership of Chairman John Lowry and generations of Lumbee. Their voice has been heard, and their commitment and perseverance has brought us to this historic moment. I also want to commend and thank President Trump for his tremendous support, our current Senators Tom Tillis and Ted Budd, as well as former Senators Elizabeth Dole and Richard Burr, in addition to my many colleagues here in the House who continually supported this effort. So, Madam Speaker, I thank them all, for the Lumbee are great and honorable people who deserve federal recognition with all the rights and benefits that come with it. I yield back.
For what purpose does the gentleman from New Jersey seek recognition?
Madam Speaker.
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor my dear friend Donald Payne Jr. on what would have been his 67th birthday. There were a few differences between Donald Payne and myself. We often got confused. His birthday was on the 17th. Mine was on December 13th. He came from North Jersey. I come from South Jersey. I served the first district. He served the 10th district. But what mattered most is what we had in common. We both fought for families in the state of New Jersey. Don brought to New Jersey the values of what we were to be from New Jersey each and every day. He was tough. For those of you who know him, he had dialysis in the morning and would come here in the afternoon and continue to work. For anybody who's ever been through dialysis, that was tough, and he knew it. And we owe him a great debt of gratitude for coming to work each and every day. And I will always remember him for his kindness, his compassion, his open heart. And I will be forever grateful for his friendship. From one Don to another from New Jersey, we miss you and your bow tie.
For what purpose does the gentleman from Florida seek recognition?
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address this body for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks.
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
Madam Speaker, we all know the simple joy of a glass of sweet tea. Refreshing, comforting, a lift to the spirit. Tanelia Sweet Tea Anderson of Fernandina Beach, Florida, brought that same sweetness into every room she entered. This week, at the age of 86, she passed away peacefully, surrounded by friends and family. And today, I am honored to honor her life of service. Sweet Tea was a devoted wife and mother, a clown, a business owner, and a woman of deep faith. I would often see her at the hospital dressed as her alter ego, Luciana the Clown, with her husband Don as Hamone, visiting sick kids, reminding us that healing begins with kindness and connection. Even up until her death, she was working with my office to protect children. Our thoughts are with her husband Don, daughter Kim, two granddaughters Brooke and Ashley, and her entire family. Madam Speaker, Sweet Tea's life was like her name. A steady sweetness that brightened every day, and her legacy will continue to inspire. You will be missed, Sweet Tea. I yield back.
For what purpose does the gentleman from Missouri seek recognition?
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks.
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
As the holidays roll around, I want to say this to folks across the St. Louis region. This season isn't just about what's under the tree. It's about who we show up for. There's a lot happening in the world right now. Some of it's heavy, but at home, I see a community that still believes in looking out for one another, especially our children. And not every child has the stability they deserve through no fault of their own. When families can't carry that load alone, the rest of us have to help. That's what organizations like the Foster and Adoptive Care Coalition do every day. And it's what Annie Malone has done for generations, helping young people aging out of the system find their footing. So, as we celebrate with the people we love, I hope we also think about how we can help others. That's how we make this season matter. Happy holidays, St. Louis. I yield back.
For what purpose does the gentleman from Wisconsin seek recognition?
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and revise and extend my remarks.
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Ernest Stevens Jr., a proud citizen of the Oneida Nation of Wisconsin, who sadly passed away recently. For more than two decades, Ernie Stevens served as chairman of the Indian Gaming Association, where he was elected to 13 consecutive terms. Under his leadership, tribal government gaming grew into the largest segment of the U.S. gaming industry, generating more than $43 billion annually and supporting health care, housing, education, and jobs in Native communities. He also served his own nation as a member of the Oneida Business Committee and was a steadfast advocate for tribal sovereignty, always reminding us that tribal gaming was about building nations, not just business. Beyond his professional achievements, he was a mentor, a family man, and a source of inspiration to countless young leaders. He leaves behind his wife, Cheryl, their five children, and 20 grandchildren. Madam Speaker, the people of Green Bay, the Oneida Reservation, and all of Indian Country mourn the loss of this remarkable leader. May his memory continue to inspire generations to come. With that, Madam Speaker, I yield back.
For what purpose does the gentlewoman from Arizona seek recognition?
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks.
Without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute.
Only in the United States of America do we now have college students who have survived not one but two school shootings. That is the reality for students at Brown University right now. Students like Zoe Weissman, who was a middle schooler at the school next to Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School during the Parkland Massacre, and years later found herself again facing an active shooter on a college campus. And Mia Treda, who was shot as a teenager at Sage High School, survived, and now has lived through yet another school shooting at Brown. Let that sink in. Two shootings in one lifetime, all before graduating college. We cannot allow ourselves to become numb to this. This level of trauma is not normal. It is not inevitable, and it is not acceptable. If we are serious about protecting young people in America, Congress must act now. That means universal background checks, a ban on assault weapons designed for mass killing, cracking down on ghost guns, and investing in mental health and safe storage policies grounded in data. I'll say it again. This is not inevitable. Thank you. I yield back.
Sorry.
For what purpose does the gentleman from Georgia seek recognition?
I ask unanimous consent to address the House for one minute to revise and extend my remarks.
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the bicentennial celebration of Lowndes County, Georgia. 200 years ago, the Georgia State Legislature established Lowndes County, named after a prominent lawyer and congressman from South Carolina. The area quickly became a haven for settlers seeking opportunity and prosperity, evolving with the times while never losing its sense of community. From moving entire towns to meet the railroad's arrival in the 1850s to developing thriving industries like textiles, timber, and turpentine, the county's spirit of adaptability is evident throughout its history. Today, the county and the city of Valdosta are still thriving, being a critical hub for Georgia with Valdosta State University and having nicknames like "Wintersville" and "Title Town." Not only does it have culture, but it offers thousands of acres of beautiful wetlands from the Grand Bay Swamp. These traditions, these values, and achievements make Lowndes County a shining example of Georgia's enduring spirit and a model community to be honored and emulated. Congratulations on 200 years, Lowndes County. Here's to 200 more. Thank you, Madam Speaker, and I yield back.
For what purpose does the gentleman from New York seek recognition?
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for one minute to revise and extend my remarks.
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. Any day now, the Supreme Court will issue a ruling on whether the President can impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. President Trump's tariff policies have hurt American small businesses, who often cannot absorb the cost of higher duties. Now, the economy is showing warning signs. Unemployment has risen to 4.6%, and small businesses shed 120,000 jobs in November alone. That is why I recently joined 20 of my colleagues in sending a letter to Treasury Secretary Mnuchin and Homeland Security Secretary Nielsen urging both departments to dedicate resources to planning for the Supreme Court's decision. Proper planning is needed around an information campaign for small businesses on how to navigate the tariff protest process, ensuring that eligible tariff refund tariff refunds are provided on an expedited basis. Without a plan, the complexity and time needed to pursue a refund will further burden small businesses. I urge the Trump administration to work quickly to guarantee that small businesses, the lifeline of our economy, are not left behind because of this erratic policy. Thank you, Madam Speaker, and I yield back.
For what purpose does the gentleman from Alaska seek recognition?
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks.
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the extraordinary life and legacy of Earl Lackey, a pioneer of Alaska's motorsports community and the driving force behind Alaska Raceway Park. Earl's commitment to racing spans more than half a century. In the early 1960s, while stationed in Germany as an army helicopter mechanic, he worked on a pit crew at the legendary Nürburgring. Those early days sparked a lifelong devotion to motorsports. He raced sports cars in Wisconsin before moving to Alaska in 1983. And in 1994, he helped purchase a small drag strip. By 1998, he became its sole owner. With his family, Earl built, literally by hand, the foundation of what would become the northernmost NASCAR-sanctioned track in the world. Anyone who's ridden in Earl's pace car knows the magic that he helped create in Alaska. Earl shaped a track that NASCAR calls a model for community racing. The raceway is a family endeavor: Karen, his wife, at the ticket booth; his son Jim on the grounds; and his daughter Michelle managing operations. Together they built a gathering place where generations of racers, families, and visitors find excitement and camaraderie. Madam Speaker, we honor Earl's legacy for his vision, his perseverance, and the community he forged at Alaska Raceway Park. His legacy, in the view of Alaska's pioneer peak, will endure for generations to come. And with that, I yield back.
For what purpose does the gentleman from Illinois seek recognition?
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for one minute, revise and extend my remarks.
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
Madam Speaker, I rise to express condolences to Illinois Lieutenant Governor Juliana Stratton and her family on the passing of her father, Dr. Henry Wiggins, a renowned physician, military veteran, and health activist. I also express and convey condolences to the family of my good friend, Reverend Charles Bowers, who recently passed away last week at the age of 95. And on a happier note, I extend congratulations to my dear cousin and high school classmate Corey Henderson and her husband Floyd on the occasion of their 65th wedding anniversary. Sixty-five years is a long time. And I yield back.
For what purpose does the gentleman from Florida seek recognition?
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks.
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
Madam Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the 100th birthday of Mr. Carlos Manuel Hali, an extraordinary member of our South Florida community, uh, who embodies perseverance, family, and the pursuit of freedom. Born on November 4th, 1925, in Santiago de Cuba, Mr. Hali married Delia and built a beautiful family. Following the Cuban Revolution, as a man of deep conviction who believed in liberty and democracy, Mr. Hali made the difficult decision to leave his homeland. Mr. and Mrs. Hali and their five children settled in Miami, determined to rebuild. Through his faith and perseverance, all of his children became professionals, and his legacy now extends to 56 family members. Surrounded by his family and loved ones, he celebrates this remarkable milestone. Mr. Hali remains full of life. He enjoys spending time with friends, charming everybody with his humor, and still proudly considers Burger King as his favorite restaurant. I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating Mr. Carlos Manuel Hali and recognizing the strength of his faith, his love of freedom, and his deep devotion to family. Thank you, and I yield back.
For what purpose does the gentleman from Illinois seek recognition?
Seek unanimous consent to address the House for one minute.
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
Madam Speaker, over the weekend, two different countries experienced gun violence tragedies. In one, they targeted a Hanukkah celebration, and in the other, they targeted students in an engineering classroom. Both of these countries were founded by Europeans who landed on a large landmass, took control from the natives with their superior arms, and developed a cowboy culture at the heart of their national ethos. One of those countries responded by acting like an adult. Having initiated gun buyback programs after their last tragedy, they're now working to further tighten gun regulation. The other one of these countries acted like a child. Our FBI Director and President shared misinformation. The Vice President suggested that the politics of one of the victims was the real tragedy. And the Republican Party remained committed to defending the rights of people who think it's fun to play with things that go bang bang. Gun violence is still the number one cause of death among actual American children. They are dead because members of this chamber who claim to be adults keep acting like children. I would point out that the Brown University shooting was the 389th mass shooting in America this year. I yield back.
For what purpose does the gentleman from California seek recognition?
Speaker.
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. In my district, the wolf problem is not just some abstract issue. They're on the ground. They're creating real problems for a lot of people and a lot of wildlife. This past weekend in my district, gray wolves were seen dangerously close to the Little Shasta Elementary School right here in Siskiyou County. That's an ele—that's, excuse me. As a precaution, law enforcement was contacted. A local emergency was declared, and students were kept indoors for the entire school day, including recess and P.E. That's an elementary school changing its daily operations because of predators in the area. This is exactly what I've been warning about. Federal federal policy has made wolves untouchable, even when they show up near homes, schools, and working lands. Local officials are left trying to manage this threat, the consequences, while Washington bureaucracy tells them to wait. We have a bill, H.R. 845, the Pet and Livestock Protection Act, which is a giant step towards fixing this. It gives states and locals more authority to deal with problem wolves before someone gets hurt. Ignoring this doesn't make it go away; it just makes it worse. Devouring wildlife and livestock with no compensation is not something that just can be ignored. What are we going to do? Kids next. Yield back.
For what purpose does the gentlewoman from Ohio seek recognition?
Consent to address the House for one minute to revise and extend.
Without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute.
Madam Speaker, it has been only seven months since billionaire Elon Musk fled town and barely one month since his heartless Doge machine collapsed. Yet, the damage keeps spreading. Now, the target is the U.S. Maritime Administration. Mared, at the Department of Transportation, Marad strengthens our maritime industry. It protects our economic and national security in our Great Lakes, our nation's third and longest coast. We rely on a strong, capable American shipping fleet. American shipping fleet. Our economy depends on it. Marad supports 13 public and 50 commercial ports across the Great Lakes and the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway. In my district in northwestern Ohio, the Port of Toledo and Sandusky Harbor connect us to global markets for energy, metals, farm commodities, and more. In 2024, South Bass Island and the Put-in-Bay Authority received $10,300,000 from Marad to improve infrastructure, and they needed it. Our ports generate real dollars for families and jobs. Nearly $900 million in annual economic activity and 8,000 jobs by the latest count. Apparently, this does not matter to the President and his administration. Uh, unemployment has been rising. Let's be honest, DRP does not mean Deferred Resignation Program. It means Destroy, Ruin, and Punish. Madam Speaker, stop this madness. Protect Marad. Protect our ports. Protect our workers. Protect and grow jobs in America. I yield back.
For what purpose does the gentleman from Wisconsin seek recognition?
Like to ask unanimous consent to speak for a minute and revise and extend my remarks.
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
Thank you. So, I'd like to interject a little bit of common sense in the deportation debate we've had going on here. No one knows exactly how many people are in this country illegally. I think it's safe to say under President Biden, that number went up by about 8 million, which means almost certainly it's over 15 million. There are some muddled-up people here who claim that all we should do is remove the illegal immigrants if they are breaking the law. That obviously makes no sense. I applaud President Trump and Kristi Noem for trying to remove all people who are here illegally. Otherwise, we have no immigration law in the first place, right? If you come here illegally and all you have to do is avoid committing a serious crime, we have no country, and we will, in our next president, wind up getting another 8 to 10 million people crossing here together with the increased welfare cost, housing cost, and government services it applies. And together with, um, the change in culture in the United States away from the culture that we've had that's allowed America to go so long.
Thank you, Donald Trump and Kristi.
For what purpose does the gentlewoman from New Mexico seek recognition?
Thank you, Madam Speaker. Our diversity is what makes this country beautiful. And I ask for unanimous consent to address the House for one minute to address the House.
Yes, Madam Speaker. I am asking for unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks.
Without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute.
Madam Speaker, imagine being so ideologically committed to destroying an imperfect healthcare bill that has helped millions of Americans access care over the last 15 years that you would block a vote, just a vote, to extend the life-saving credits that help keep millions of Americans on their healthcare. Imagine that you would block members of your own party from bringing an amendment to extend those credits. That those members would be forced to join all 214 Democrats to force a vote on the floor. And imagine that you would kill a motion to vote on that one day before you plan to send everyone home for the holiday. Well, welcome to Donald Trump's America and the Republican Congress, where the leadership would rather let children, seniors, veterans, and small businesses lose their healthcare than even take a vote. Well, thankfully, we have filed a discharge petition that will ripen in seven legislative days, but we know that is not enough. The gentlewoman's time is so—we are calling on the leadership to call a vote. The gentlewoman's time has expired.
I yield back.
For what purpose does the gentleman from California seek recognition?
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and to revise my remarks.
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the extraordinary life of Colonel Vu Van Lộc, a South Vietnamese Army veteran and beloved community member and leader in San Jose for his selfless dedication to Vietnamese refugees and to cultural preservation. Born in 1933 in northern Vietnam, Lộc Vu and his family fled their homeland during the fall of Saigon, ultimately finding refuge in San Jose, California, the home of the largest community of ethnic Vietnamese of any city outside of Vietnam. Soon after arriving, Lộc Vu founded the Immigrant Resettlement and Cultural Center to aid fellow refugees in rebuilding their lives. And over the next four decades, the IRCC became a lifeline to Vietnamese, Cambodian, and Laotian families throughout our region. He also founded, funded, and passionately led the creation of the Museum of the Boat People and of the Republic of Vietnam to ensure future generations understand the tremendous sacrifice, courage, and resilience of the thousands who came to our shores after the Vietnam War. Lộc Vu passed away peacefully this November at the age of 92. I feel fortunate to have known Lộc Vu for two decades and will miss our community's friend, mentor, and leader. His legacy lives on in the hearts of the more than 20,000 neighbors he has helped to support and lift. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I yield.
For what purpose does the gentleman from New Jersey seek recognition?
The House one minute. Madam Speaker.
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
Madam Speaker, today would have been Congressman Don Payne Jr.'s 67th birthday. And Don was more than a colleague to me. He was family. He called me Uncle Frank, and that meant a lot to me. In the House, our names often appeared right next to each other on the voting board: Palone, P-A-L, and Payne, P-A-Y. And many times when we were voting on civil rights, housing, or issues affecting urban communities, I would look to see how Don voted because, for me, he was a conscience for our delegation. Someone who grounded big national decisions in lived reality. And Don dedicated his life to public service, from the New York City Council to county freeholder to Congress, and always it was trying to improve people's lives on health care, the environment, or public safety. So, happy birthday, Don. Your legacy continues, and we're carrying the work forward. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
For what purpose does the gentlewoman from New Jersey seek recognition?
Speaker to address the House for one minute.
Without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute.
Madam Speaker, I rise to wish a happy heavenly birthday to my predecessor in representing New Jersey's 10th Congressional District, the Honorable Donald Payne Jr. He served as New York City Council President and went on to succeed his father in this body. Donald M. Payne, Sr., was the first African-American elected in New Jersey's congressional delegation, and his son carried that legacy while blazing his own path. A leader on the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Mr. Payne secured critical investments that made rail travel in New Jersey safer and more affordable. In honor of his legacy that inspires my leadership and shapes my home district, today I introduced a bill to rename Penn Station in his honor, the Donald M. Payne Jr. Transit Center at Newark Penn Station. Newark is where so many workers start their mornings, where families reunite, where students, seniors, and commuters pass through every single day. When people walk into that station, they should know the name of a man whose work helped keep it moving. Happy birthday, Congressman Payne. We miss you. With that, I yield back.
For what purpose does the gentleman from New Jersey seek recognition?
I request unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks.
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
I rise today to honor my friend and colleague, the late Congressman Donald Payne Jr., as we commemorate what would have been his 67th birthday. Donald and I were good friends and neighbors, both representing the cities of Newark and Jersey City together. A proud son of Newark, Congressman Payne dedicated his life to fighting for his neighbors, ensuring no one was left behind. In his decades of public service, Congressman Payne was among the most progressive voices in our country, fighting for every single American. But what I admired most about my colleague was the courage and bravery he displayed in making his battle with diabetes public so he could advocate for better treatments and solutions for the horrible disease that ultimately took him from us. Until the very end, Congressman Payne continued to fight for his constituents, introducing legislation to protect people with disabilities within our healthcare system. I miss my friend. I miss his style. I miss his flair. I miss his laugh. But I know that his spirit lives on and that we will continue the work he committed himself to. Happy birthday, Donald. We miss you and will always be better for the work and dedication that guided your years of service. I yield back.
For what purpose does the gentlewoman from Florida seek recognition?
Without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute.
Madam Speaker, in just 14 days, hard-working families, seniors, and veterans across America will face the largest healthcare insurance premium increase in history, which will make healthcare unattainable for so many Americans. When healthcare becomes unattainable, it turns treatable illnesses into a death sentence. Americans will be forced to figure out their healthcare. For people with high blood pressure, diabetes, or heart disease, figuring it out means going without medication that is life-saving. This is cruel and simply unacceptable. Congress has the responsibility to act and finally make healthcare affordable for all Americans because a single mother in Lauderhill rationing her medication to keep the lights on is counting on us. The disabled veteran in Riviera Beach working two jobs is counting on us. The recent college grad in Tamarac who makes enough money only to pay rent is counting on us. We must deliver and extend the ACA tax credits because America is counting on us to survive, to thrive, and to have another chance. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I yield back.
For what purpose does the gentleman from Texas seek recognition?
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for one minute.
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized.
Madam Speaker, uh, thank you very much. Uh, today I rise to honor the life and legacy of my good friend and former Fort Worth City Council member Franklin Douglas Moss, better known as Frank Moss. Uh, Frank Moss was an incredible man. Uh, he worked in, in real estate and had his own real estate firm, Moss Real Group. Uh, he was so well known throughout the community, uh, for the work that he did, uh, in the Stop Six area, in the Carver Heights community in which he lived, and was just an incredible, uh, believer in the community, helping on maternal health issues, HIV awareness, preserving historic neighborhoods. Uh, he, uh, was an incredible person, uh, and, and a family with just a such a long and distinguished legacy of service to the community, as his wife was one of our former school board members. Uh, but most of all, Frank Moss was the keeper of the Black history in Fort Worth, Texas. Uh, he knew about the first African-American politicians, doctors, lawyers, dentists, uh, people that really helped change and shape Fort Worth, uh, for all. And he did such a tremendous job in sharing those stories. I know that he's going to be missed as a deacon at Ebenezer Missionary Baptist Church in Fort Worth, where he was a proud member. Uh, and we will all miss Frank, not just, uh, because of his work on the council, but because he really cared about making sure that stories in our community were elevated, uh, in Fort Worth and Tarrant County. And that is something that we will all truly miss. And my, uh, prayers go out, uh, to his family during this time. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
For what purpose does the gentleman from North Carolina seek recognition?
Madam Speaker, I ask the unanimous consent to address the House for one minute to revise and extend.
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize and honor Thirsten Quinn, who turned 100 years old. Mr. Quinn has been a central figure in our veterans community. He served in the 89th Infantry Division during World War II, fighting in France and Germany. He had a distinguished service career, receiving two Bronze Stars, a Combat Infantry Badge, and an Occupation Badge. When the war ended, he returned home, and he continued to serve his community. Mr. Quinn's legacy is preserved at the Disabled American Veterans Office in Goldsboro, where the cafeteria bears his name. What a true American hero. And it was a pleasure to join his family, friends, at his church to wish him a 100th birthday. I yield back.
For what purpose does the gentleman from New Jersey seek recognition?
Speaker, consent to address the House floor for one minute.
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
Madam Speaker, last April, Jersey and our nation lost a dedicated father, husband, public servant, and just a real giant. I miss Don Payne like we all do. As a member of Congress for nearly 14 years, son of Newark, was an incredible champion for hardworking Jersey families. He fought for healthcare issues and fought to upgrade our transportation, rail, and infrastructure. But beyond that, he just was there for all of us. When I was first elected, Don showed me the ropes and shared his wisdom and gave me a good Jersey ribbon whenever he could. His great sense of humor and meaningful experience made it a true privilege to serve in the House with him. And then those suits. He was the man, a true family man. Don always beamed about his loved ones, and I'll miss him greatly like we all do as we mark today what would have been his 67th birthday. We remember the impact Don made on so many, not just in this great chamber but across the Garden State and across our country. May his memory be a blessing. We miss you, Don.
Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 3rd, 2025, the gentleman from Utah, Mr. Moore, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the Majority Leader.
Madam Speaker, thank you. I ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the topic of this special order.
Without objection. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I am glad to be joined by several of my colleagues for this last conference special order of the year to talk about ways we have delivered for all Americans through our legislative action, committee work, and more. I understand some of my colleagues have commitments, and I want to start, and I'm going to be respectful of their time. So, I'll have them start us off before I provide some of my own comments. And with that, I'd like to yield to the gentleman from Utah, good friend, Mr. Kennedy. Uh, I yield him so much time as he may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Utah for yielding and leading this important discussion on how Republicans are focusing on making healthcare more affordable for hardworking American families. We have taken action and are committed to doing more to fix the broken system of Obamacare that empowered big insurance at the expense of our taxpayers. As a family practice doctor for over 25 years, I hear directly from my patients about the skyrocketing cost of insurance and prescription drugs. Democrats promised Americans lower costs, more choices, and better care. More than a decade later, too many families are asking a simple question: What happened? Former President Obama and pushing the ACA promised that the bill would lower healthcare premiums by up to $2,500 per family per year. But since Obamacare went into effect, premiums have nearly tripled, and deductibles have more than doubled. The cost of coverage for a family of four has increased by more than $10,000. Back in July of this year, this Republican Congress passed the Working Families Tax Cut Act. This important legislation puts more money back into the pockets of Americans and will help lower the cost of healthcare as well as childcare. Thanks to the Working Families Tax Cut Act, all bronze and catastrophic ACA marketplace plans are now considered high-deductible plans, allowing more people to contribute to Health Savings Accounts. Health Savings Accounts can now be used to pay for direct primary care arrangements that cut out the middleman and allow patients to coordinate care directly with their chosen provider. High costs are not the only Obamacare failure. It also resulted in a major increase in fraud. A 2024 GAO investigation found that fake identities were approved for Obamacare subsidies at a 100% rate, often remaining enrolled despite missing or falsified information. In 2023, $21 billion in subsidies were paid out with no evidence of tax reconciliation. Taxpayers are left footing the bill as reused Social Security numbers, subsidies paid on behalf of deceased individuals, and billions in unreconciled payments expose a system unable to protect public funds. In the Working Families Tax Cut Act, Republicans restored accountability and fairness to the healthcare marketplace through reforms that save taxpayers billions of dollars and drive down costs for everyone: full income and eligibility verification before subsidies are issued, ensuring assistance goes only to those who qualify. We've ended anytime enrollment abuse that fueled fraudulent signups and drove premiums higher for everyone. We closed loopholes that allowed illegal immigrants and other ineligible groups to access taxpayer-funded health benefits. Many Americans have insurance on paper but still cannot afford to use it. I am committed, along with my Republican colleagues, to addressing the root cause of rising costs to provide real relief for taxpayers and families. I appreciate my congressional colleague from Utah for allowing me this time. With that, I yield back. Thank you to the gentleman from Utah, the physician, and attorney, and everybody and everything that he does to understand all these issues. It's so important to call out the reality of it. Uh, I now will move to the great state of Georgia and yield so much time as he may consume to the, uh, to Mr. Loudermilk.
Thank you. And I appreciate, uh, my friend from Utah for giving me this time. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize a friend and a former member of my congressional staff, Mr. John Bart Mitchum, on his milestone birthday and for his service to Georgia's 11th Congressional District, the state of Georgia, and the United States of America. Mr. Bart Mitchum was born on December 24th, 1945, in Ada, Oklahoma, to John and Virginia Mitchum. Bart's parents both served in the United States Navy during World War II, with his father serving as a naval aviator on the USS Hornet during some of the most critical moments in the Pacific theater. Bart knew from an early age he wanted to serve his country as a naval aviator. So eager to learn to fly, Bart watched aircraft in exchange for one hour of flight time while he was in high school. He also served as a cadet in the Civil Air Patrol, the civilian auxiliary of the United States Air Force. Bart attended Tyler Junior College on a music scholarship, where he played in the school's band and performed at high-profile events, including the Cotton Bowl, as well as Dallas Cowboys games. He later transferred to the University of Oklahoma, Edmond, where he graduated in 1968, commissioning as an ensign in the United States Navy. Fulfilling his lifelong dream to become a naval aviator like his father, Bart began naval flight training, and upon graduation, was assigned to Naval Air Station Dallas, where he flew the storied F4 Phantom. Bart was then transferred to the USS Enterprise, where he flew combat missions in Vietnam. He later served at the Defense Intelligence Agency as a command and as a commanding officer at Naval Air Station Atlanta before retiring at the rank of Captain in 1994, after almost 26 years of service. Bart is not only recognized for his exemplary service to our country as a veteran; he is also recognized as a man of numerous talents and passions. Bart obtained a law degree from Woodrow Wilson Law School, attended New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, and earned a Master of Divinity from Andersonville Seminary. He operated a real estate appraisal business while pastoring churches. During his service in the United States Navy, Bart studied several martial arts disciplines before achieving a seventh-degree black belt. He then taught martial arts and self-defense classes, developed his own self-defense technique, and was inducted into the martial arts hall of fame. Wanting to use his expertise, training, and talents to continue to serve others, Bart became a licensed private investigator and an executive protection agent. As his reputation expanded, Bart opened his own agency and began teaching and facilitating classes in private investigation and executive protection. For a time, he served as a member of the Georgia Board of Private Detective and Security Agencies. Due to Bart's vast experience and reputation, he became part of my staff when I entered Congress. He was our veteran engagement liaison and the security director for several years and was an excellent choice for this role, reaching out to help fellow veterans as well as helping to ensure the safety and security of myself and our staff. Bart continued his legacy of community service by taking on the role of an associate magistrate judge for Bartow County, Georgia. Throughout his exemplary career of service to others above self, Bart has touched countless lives across our country. On behalf of the United States House of Representatives, the people of Georgia's 11th Congressional District, I wish my friend Bart Mitchum a wonderful 80th birthday and extend my sincerest gratitude for his lifetime of service. May God bless you, Bart, and happy birthday. I yield back.
Thank you to the gentleman from Georgia. Appreciate his remarks. Now move and yield to the, uh, great state of Mississippi, gentleman and chairman, Mr. Guest.
The Christmas story as recorded in Luke chapter 2. And it came to pass in those days that there went a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed. And all went to be taxed, everyone into his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be taxed with Mary, his espoused wife, being great with child. And so it was that while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn. And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. And lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them, and they were so afraid. And the angel said unto them, "Fear not, for I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David, a Savior, which is Christ the King. And this shall be a sign unto you. Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger." And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying, "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will to men." Thank you. And I yield back.
Yes. Thanks. Thank you to the chairman, gentleman from Mississippi. I now yield five minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Grothman.
Thank you. I'd like to one more time point out what should be the most important issue facing this body in 2026. I have talked before about the huge marriage penalties that we build into our income transfer programs, also known as welfare programs. When you add up the penalties that you have to endure if, say, a single mom marries a husband with an income. And we look at the food stamps. We look at the low-income housing. We look at the Earned Income Tax Credit. We look at the TANF check. We look at the Pell grants. You can easily wind up in a situation in which you are penalized $25,000 a year if you get married. This is the primary reason why in the 1950s we had a penalty—we only had about 4% of the newborn children in this country born without a mother and a father at home, and now we're over 40%. It is not difficult, if people in this body would meet with some average people rather than the lobbyists or the big campaign contributors. It is very easy to find young people today who are not getting married specifically because they find that the federal government has almost a policy of punishing people who get married. Even the Republican Party, in its big beautiful bill, has, as I count, maybe maybe there are more, has three programs in which we are penalizing married couples. I found out today on the tuition credits for private schools that we're supposed to brag about, there's a big marriage penalty there, as we punish people who want to go to private school who are married. We also increased the low-income housing tax credit so that more and more Americans are in housing in which they are discouraged from getting married and also, by the way, are discouraged from working harder because in all these programs, in addition to being penalized for getting married, there comes a point where if you take on overtime or get a raise, they begin to take the benefits away from you. And that's what they do in the low-income housing tax credit. If you are paying so much in rent and you decide to work overtime or decide to get a second job, the local—the housing development will have to say, "I'm sorry, you're working harder. We got to take—we got to raise your rent." Uh, another thing that we should be looking at and trying to change. And a third penalty comes in a mild increase in Pell grants with regard to technical schools. Pell grants is another one of those programs where, in order to get them, you can't work that hard and you can't be married to somebody with an income. So, in any event, I implore my colleagues and implore my leadership team to see what they can do in the, in the, uh, year 2026 of not penalizing Americans for getting married and not penalizing Americans for working too hard. So we try to work our way back when there was a time with stronger families. I realize all families, uh, can succeed, and I know all sorts of families who do succeed, uh, by being, um, very conscientious with their children. But nevertheless, I think we would all agree America would be better off if we worked our way back from the 42% of children born without a mother and father at home back down to the six or five or 4% that it was in the 50s or 60s. Thank you very much. Excellent.
Excellent. Thank you to the gentleman from Wisconsin and his issue that he brings up. It's something that some of my state legislators are actually working on, namely, um, Ms. Melissa Garf Ballard. She's a, um, excellent policymaker, lawmaker back home, and this is something that she cares deeply about and is doing quite a lot of good work on this at the state level, and I
Applaud her for that. Uh, thank you, Madam Speaker, and to all my colleagues for your comments this evening. Um, it's, uh, it's very much appreciated. And as we move into, um, the next couple weeks where we'll get to celebrate the holidays, it's, it's excellent to look back and and think about the the amazing work that's taken place over the last year.
But as, as, as it's, you know, dominating the headlines and and recognizing there is a lot to talk about with healthcare, particularly this week, I want to touch on a few aspects to be abundantly clear. Republicans are currently dealing with the aftermath of what has been a decade or so failure, uh, that the Democrats put in place, that an unaffordable and fraudulent healthcare system.
For years, Democrats promised Obamacare would lower costs. In reality, premiums have increased nearly 80% since the so-called Affordable Care Act was enacted. The average premium for family coverage is nearly $27,000 per year. A report from the Government Accountability Office confirms what Republicans have said for years. There is significant fraud associated with co-era enhanced premium tax credits established by a the trifecta of President Joe Biden and majorities in the House and Senate led by Democrats.
Again, in 2021, Democrats put in place what's called the enhanced premium tax credits. They did this during their COVID era bills, uh, the, um, the American Rescue Plan and the Inflation Reduction Act. Two, uh, two, two bills that, um, were massive expansions for several programs, but in particular, they were able to pass this legislation on party-line votes and set it for four years. Democrats set this policy during COVID to last for four years and expire at the end of this year.
So, in this study, GAO found that 58,000 enrollees matched Social Security death records, with 7,000 of them being deceased before enrollment began. One Social Security number was even associated with 125 different Obamacare policies in one year. That's the first level of potential fraud. The second item is that a $0 premium obviously leads to more fraud. And that's what we've seen happen. Enrollment went up without people using or even knowing that they had coverage.
This is something you need a check and balance on. When they moved the original Obama subsidies, which aren't going anywhere, they're, they're, they're still in place. They're not expiring at the end of this year. They've existed from the start. It's only this, the, the, the enhanced version that the Democrat party did in 2021. That's what's expiring. And the worst aspect of those, in my opinion, is the fact that you used to be required to pay just 2% of your your annual income towards your health insurance premium, and then the federal government tax, then taxpayer dollars paid the insurance company the the remainder of that. You were only required to pay 2%. Right? That moved to 0% in 2021.
And since 2021, you had a massive expansion of people being on these premiums and these and this insurance coverage, but never using it. Never using it year-over-year. But the insurance company continued to get taxpayer-funded subsidies directly to them to cover nothing because they never used it. The percentage of people that weren't using their health insurance went up significantly. And it wasn't like people weren't getting hurt or sick at a similar rate. What was happening is they didn't know they were on the system. They didn't, they were, they were getting signed up as part of the GAO study will will explain.
And then the last final piece, uh, that I'm going to highlight here is the income caps. So people that could be making 400% above the federal poverty level, the insurance companies that they were getting signed up for were still receiving these subsidies. Right? So originally, the talk about Obamacare was just for folks that are very low income and that weren't that were un, that were uninsured and didn't have, um, ability to make any payments towards covering their own insurance. So what Obamacare does, it says, "All right, if you're, you know, 100%, 150% of poverty level, all we require you to do is pay 2% of your income, and federal taxpayers will cover the rest. Send it to the insurance, cover that that subsidy." In most cases, that's $300 a year that you would have to cover of your own.
When that moved to $0, that's when you saw a lot of fraud happening. Because even if you're paying five bucks, 10 bucks, 20 bucks a month towards your insurance, at least you know those that that that's an actual policy and it's going somewhere. When it becomes a zero dollar, all sorts of shenanigans can happen. And, um, and that is something that we absolutely have to move away from. And, uh, with these, with these, um, subsidies, these enhanced version, these co-era subsidies expiring on the Democrats' timeline, and then that zero aspect will go away. It'll be a few hundred a year for some folks as opposed to $0. That alone will create an opportunity to cut away a lot of fraud.
Look, Democrats created a program that Americans just can't, can't afford. The Unaffordable Care Act works for insurance companies, but it does not work for patients. And it is, like I mentioned, filled with waste and fraud. Insurance revenues have increased from a hundred, from $245 billion when Obamacare was originally passed to $1.4 trillion in 2023. Go. I love it when companies, private sector, uh, growth happens. I'm a big supporter of it. I've supported tax policy to ensure that that can happen. That type of increase right when Obamacare gets established to see that rampant of growth there is a problem there, right? Uh, we can celebrate economic growth across the board, shareholder value, all that stuff, but if you look at the massive increase of year-over-year, the aside from revenue and profits, there's something wrong with this entire situation. And you can directly correlate it to when Obamacare increased or came into play. Um, they can't have it. So, you know, insurance companies are seeing such record profits, and at the same time, taxpayers are forced to sort of subsidize these plans. That's not a healthy way to grow a market.
So, the, uh, the, the Affordable Care Act, Obamacare, ACA, like it broke the American healthcare system. It created a numerous amounts of problems over the last decade. And since its inception, these premium costs have skyrocketed. Networks have shrunk, and the system has become bloated and inefficient. It's important to remember that the enhanced premium tax credit expiration at the end of the year, again, was set by Democrats. And so when they're complaining that Republicans are going to let this expire, that was their timeline, right? And this zero issue and then not capping it so it's only targeted towards lower-income individuals, that stuff has to go away, right? Even in, like, you know, uh, compromise, you know, bipartisan approaches to deal with this expiration, those aspects had to go away. Those were things that, um, were, were on the chopping block. And, and again, I think when, when folks understand, it's, it's, it, the subsidies aren't going away entirely. If you are a low-income individual, say you're making 100% federal poverty line, and for an, for a, for a single person, that's $15, maybe $15, $20,000 a year, your plans are only going to require you to pay a few hundred a year. And just by moving it so it doesn't go to zero dollars creates it so there's not so much fraud in the system. And then hopefully over time, we don't see this rapid, rapid, rapid increase in premiums, because that's bad for all Americans.
Americans simply deserve better, and we haven't, they have not been given the healthcare system with the exception of Obamacare. Uh, this is why House Republicans have proposed legislation that delivers real relief. The Lower Care, the Lower Healthcare Premiums for All Act focuses on lasting policies that provide predictability and transparency. And as the name suggests, this is focused on the entirety of the individuals on healthcare. Right? This isn't just targeted towards a small 7% of the total population. That's that narrow margin, uh, in Obamacare. This is touching every single person, and that's the only way to actually lower health premium costs over time.
This bill lowers premiums through pharmacy transparency and cost-sharing reductions. This legislation improves options for workers by expanding access to associated health plans. It also ensures that small and midsize employers that they can offer more tailored, affordable care, and it codifies and strengthens choice arrangements, permitting employees to pay premium premiums, their pay their premiums pre-tax. So all those things are targeted towards a broad group of people and not just this tiny little subset that we're hearing a lot that we're hearing a lot of complaining about right now. We're actually focused on the entirety of the world that's out there paying, uh, more and more for their health insurance. It's time to implement policies that work for all Americans and pro, that provide predictability and affordability. I'm grateful to, uh, be a voice from Utah on the Ways and Means Health Subcommittee and during this critical moment, and I am excited to see this legislation move forward, delivering real results, savings, and peace of mind for Utahns and Americans across the country. And with that, Madam Speaker, I yield back the remainder of my time to the chair.
>> The gentleman yields. Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 3rd, 2025, the chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Schwikert, for 30 minutes.
>> Thank you, Madam Speaker. Prom. Um, all right. I promise you at least this one, I think I have the half an hour. I'm going to try not to use all of it, and I will try to slow down some of the speaking. Um, I had a couple odds and ends, and then some basic, uh, optimism on one or two things. First off, um, let's do some cleanup. Uh, last week I actually walked through a little bit of an economic report. We got a preview of it. I think it will be published fairly soon. Um, um, Measuring What Matters. And look, the title is "Why Italy May Be in Better Fiscal Shape Than the US." And this is done by some of the super economic geeks out of Boston and Cambridge. But what terrified me, because I'm actually doing my best to read these sorts of documents, is the little sentence I have highlighted here. And I tried to point this out last week, but, um, and this is for super geeks. If you use a 6% discount rate, you need 104% of a child's lifetime income who's born next year and this year, just to cover the pension healthcare benefits in our country. So you need more than they're ever going to earn in their entire life just to cover those promises.
Now, if you take it down to a 2% discount rate, which is the way you sort of say here's where inflation these things are going to be, you still need a 22% increase on their lifetime taxes just to cover pension benefits. Um, and this is actually based on some numbers where I think they may have too high a fertility rate. The reason I point that out is we're not having the really difficult conversation here. What happens in a country this year when my economists and the Joint Economic Committee are saying we may have zero population growth in the United States this year? The fact that we have fewer 18-year-olds today than we had 20 years ago, but almost double those who are 65 and older.
So, I keep coming here week after week after week and showing charts about the debt and the unfunded liabilities. And now I'm seeing some stories today saying, "Hey, you know, um, uh, net interest will be over a trillion dollars this year." If you add in the paying back, because we got to pay interest back to the Social Security trust fund and all those when we borrow the money, it could be $1 trillion, $250 billion of interest. So what you should understand there is, let's walk through some of the hierarchy. Social Security is number one. We're going to spend $1.5, $1.6 trillion this year on Social Security. Guess what the number two expense in our country is? Now it's interest. If you do the total interest load, interest, and then the next is Medicare, and number four turns out to be the Obamacare or the ACA subsidies and Medicaid is number four. Guess what's number five now in our spending is defense. And so, so often, you know, I'll talk to my my liberal brothers and sisters, and they'll turn to you and say, "We should cut defense. That way we can give out more money." It's now number five.
So, look, it breaks my heart because we keep having these discussions, and you know, I've come behind this microphone for over a decade now and feel like sometimes I'm doing a, you know, junior, uh, economics lecture. And the point is trying to say, here's the scale of the problem, but there are actually solutions. If we could be bold, if we could be creative, if we can take on the entrenched incumbency of the bureaucracy and business models. So, let's actually do a couple things here and see if I can make this make sense.
So, let's march along. Um, sort of important and and see if I can make this make sense. This is last year. The red is spending, the blue is re, tax receipts. That gap is debt. You'll notice actually our projection for the '26 fiscal year is our tax receipts. So tax collections are actually up. They're actually up, um, almost 17.8%. Which is wonderful. Most of it's capital gains. You know, the stock market's done well. Um, and oddly enough, our spending is actually slightly down, but we still have this massive gap. And our best guess is we're still running a $2 trillion deficit this year. Um, and depending what the Supreme Court does in regards to the enhanced tariffs, you know, we may pick up some other liability that we're going to have to find a way to work out with the White House. But look, this is an improvement, but the scale is still terrifying. It's still a couple trillion dollars. And I know there's some products that have come out of the White House, CBO and others saying it, you know, debt may only be 1.6, 1.8. It's, it's what not what we're tracking because so far the first quarter of this year, we still have a couple more weeks on it. You know, for every dollar in tax receipts, we're spending about $1.62. We think this will even out to being about $1 of taxes in, and we're going to spend about a $1.43. And guess what? Most of that debt, that growth in that debt is interest because we've been refinancing a lot of our debt that was sold a few years ago when interest rates were very, very low, and healthcare costs.
So, a point I want to make, and I'm going to come back to this a couple times here. Um, couple hours ago, we had the Joint Economic Committee, um, over in the Senate. I, it's one of my blessings, I get to chair it. And we did something, and both sides were pretty good. Some Democrats took some pokes at us, but the the theme of this Joint Economic hearing was healthcare. We, as a body, we as Congress, we as a society have turned into financial engineering. The ACA, Obamacare, is a financing bill. It's who pays and who gets subsidized. Um, the Republican alternative had much better, well, somewhat better actuarial distribution, but was still a financing bill. It's who got to pay and who got subsidized. Medicare for All is almost completely a financing bill. How about if we held a hearing where we talked about not the financing of healthcare, but things that could disrupt the cost of healthcare?
And you know, we had, uh, one gentleman from one of the biggest life insurance companies in America come in and talk about saying, "Hey, here's the things we do to keep our insured population alive and healthier." You know, we do things. We reward them for doing these data rings or putting things on their wrists or how they eat, or if we gamify some exercise and talking about how much healthier their population is. And for them, it's a profit model. Turns out if you sell life insurance, the longer someone keeps making their premium payments, the more money you make. They were incentivized. We had, um, one of the lead medical officers from a healthcare system in Arizona called Banner, talking about how they're trying to align the, uh, a system that actually rewards, they get rewarded for helping populations be healthier. And the technology they're using to do it. So the fact of the matter is, we're finally trying to drag the conversation around this place from being financial engineering is the future of healthcare. Let's subsidize more populations. Even though I'm going to show you a couple boards here of how much of that subsidy, your tax money, is just disappearing.
And maybe the crazy conversation here of what happens, a combination of use of technology, of cures, of availability. You know, if, if it's true that, um, blue tights, you know, you think of them as GLP1s, um, one of the deals the president made is the tablet version, it's going to go to $149 sometime next year. Um, and we know obesity from the Milken study a few years ago is 47% of US healthcare spending. What would happen if we could help our brothers and sisters get healthier? And yes, obesity is a complex, um, diabetes is a complex autoimmune. There's all sorts of things that go on. I accept the complexity, but the morality of what happens in a society if you could, over a couple years, help your brothers and sisters get healthier. Turns out you could have these remarkable changes in cost because how many times have you heard the saying, um, in healthcare, 5% of the population is over 50% of the spend. Turns out much of that 50% of spending is people who have multi-chronic conditions. A substantial portion of that is because of obesity. Um, let's not be afraid to talk about it. Let's do the moral, the moral thing of help our, help ourselves, help our brothers and sisters, and it actually helps the debt and deficit. We may, we published a major report, um, two years ago now, showing that obesity will be responsible for $9.1 trillion of additional healthcare spending over 10 years, making it the single most expensive thing in our country. And yet, how much work have you seen behind these microphones saying, maybe we shouldn't always talk about the subsidization of healthcare and start talking about what we all pay. You know, for a decade I've come behind these microphones with technology and ideas.
So, we're going to walk through just a little bit on the ACA because I can't stop myself after what I heard a couple of our Democrat colleagues say. Um, this is from the audits and the Joint Economic Research, and it's a very simple thing. This is on the, the ACA, the Obamacare subsidies, and then the enhanced subsidies. So it's the subsidies on top of the subsidies. We actually get to the point where it appears only 33% of the money actually goes to you as a consumer for your healthcare, for your, you're, you're getting well. We have 27% what they call dead weight. It just disappears. It's someone who's insured who never made a claim, even though they may have been 100% subsidized. And now we're finding out huge portions of that appear to be fraud. People who are signed up. But because we, last year, almost 40, well, over 41% of the ACA population, which is 7% of healthcare, so ACA, the Obamacare population, 41% paid no premiums. Well, if you're not paying premiums, you see how easy it would be to sign someone up, take the commissions, and no one ever has to know because you're not getting a bill. They, we're discovering stunning amounts of fraud. The other thing which was just fascinating is we have over in the study, almost over 38% of these dollars disappearing functionally in insurance. You go, but that they can only hold 6, 7% of it. That's not actually what happens. And so, and we did it, we published an entire paper on this two weeks ago on the Joint Economic Committee. Go to the website, Joint Economic Committee Republican, and you'll see our methodology and where the math is.
So, we're back to once again arguing, is this how you want your taxpayer dollars to disappear? We want our brothers and sisters to have the most affordable healthcare possibly in America. But to do it, do you want us to funnel your cash, your tax dollars into this level of fraud? It's just, we got to walk through this. So, and why the fixation, particularly for my Joint Economic Committee and myself, on changing the actual cost of healthcare is you look at the long-run charts, the national healthcare expenditures. We have this substantial gap. And I know these are types of charts that are almost impossible to read, but what I'm trying to help understand here is here's the gross domestic product. We're growing as a country, but the cost of healthcare is growing substantially faster. And a factoid I beg of you, whether you be on the left side or the right side or confused somewhere in between, in seven years, the trillion dollars we spend this year on Medicare, in seven years becomes two trillion. So we double the spend on Medicare in the next seven years. And in seven years, the trust fund's gone. Meaning, if you're a hospital or a doctor, and your, the part of your revenues you receive on Medicare patients is from the Medicare Part A trust fund, it's gone. It's gone in seven years. Let alone the Social Security trust fund's also gone in seven years, and we double senior poverty. But we're not allowed to talk about that. And I'll get an angry text message this evening saying, "David, you can't talk about that." As the Democrat political consultants are saying, "Oh, good. More attacks." The immorality of this place to not want to tell the truth about our demographics and the complete barrier we have built legally on innovation.
So, um, I have a couple really geeky things here, but I'm going to skip them and go to something that's a little crazy. So, every week when I do these, I try to come here with something that's optimistic. So, a few years ago, I got behind this microphone and talked about a University of Houston, um, uh, drug that basically takes fentanyl in your system and, and I'm, I'm sure I'm describing it partially wrong, but I'm doing my best. And attaches a protein to it, and therefore the drug can't pass the brain blood barrier. It lasts for six months to a year. What would happen if I came to you and showed you some of the economic studies we've done in the Joint Economic Committee, reading the literature and some of our data? You know, we're a few years out of date, but in 2020, we were approaching $1.5 trillion for the cost of fentanyl in America. In 2020, that's more than the defense budget. That's almost what we're going to spend this year in Medicare, excuse me, in Social Security is the cost to society from fentanyl.
So, what happens if someone like me comes to you and says, "Hey," and, and anyone that's interested, look it up because Wired magazine last week actually did an amazingly detailed article. It's a long article. It's a long read on the labs around the country. They featured University of Houston and a couple of the private companies that are trying to bring these things to market. They call it a fentanyl vaccine. It's technically not a vaccine. What would happen in our society if someone who's used a synthetic opioid, it's rewired their brain. And one of the ways we help them get through rehab, how about if you're the police officer who doesn't have to worry about having Narcan close by? The other challenge I will give you is go look up a couple of the articles that are about Philadelphia and some of the animal tranquilizers, and this is beyond the nazipines, and I think that's spelled with an X. It's a whole another category that make it almost impossible to detox because the cravings are so violent. And once it starts in the East Coast, it's coming across the country. I beg of everyone here to start to think about what happens if our ability to help bring a solution, a, that's a drug solution, to help our brothers and sisters and protect our first responders, because so far the data on, let's call it a fentanyl vaccine, it's 92 to 98% effective. What if this were worth a few hundred billion dollars in economic savings in our society in a single year?
So repeatedly I come here and I talk about, you know, helping our brothers and sisters with obesity, the technology that you can walk around and have a medical lab attached to your body. But here's some of the others when I've talked about biology and synthetic biology and other solutions. They're out there. But how do I get the brain trust around here to come together and say, we're going to take all these ideas and build a unified theory? And this unified theory is how we crash the price of healthcare. Instead of spending a couple more years arguing back and forth of how much more money we should borrow to hand out as subsidies, particularly to insurance companies. That's my simple theory I'm trying to sell is there are solutions. They're complex. They actually, you got to read a lot of long articles and try to understand what's going on. You got to stop being afraid. And you got to stop protecting incumbent business models that are terrified of having cures, solutions, better and faster ways to do it, and the, uh, use of technology. But if we get rid of that fear and start doing what's moral and economically rational around here, we're in the time of miracles.
All right, Mr. Speaker. With that, I'm going to let you go back to your lives. I yield back.
>> Back.
>> Does the gentleman have a motion?
>> Mr. Speaker, I move that the House stand adjourned.
>> Just read this. The question is on the motion to adjourn. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed? No. The ayes have it. The motion is adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until 9:00 a.m. tomorrow. Thank you.