[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 78 (Tuesday, May 10, 2022)] [House] [Pages H4764-H4771] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 903, RIGHTS FOR THE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION WORKFORCE ACT OF 2021; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2499, FEDERAL FIREFIGHTERS FAIRNESS ACT OF 2022; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 5129, COMMUNITY SERVICES BLOCK GRANT MODERNIZATION ACT OF 2022; AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 7691, ADDITIONAL UKRAINE SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2022; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES Mr. RASKIN. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1097 and ask for its immediate consideration. The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: H. Res. 1097 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 903) to enhance the security operations of the Transportation Security Administration and stability of the transportation security workforce by applying the personnel system under title 5, United States Code, to employees of the Transportation Security Administration who provide screening of all passengers and property, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Homeland Security now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 117-40, modified by the amendment printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Homeland Security or their respective designees; (2) the further amendments described in section 2 of this resolution; (3) the amendments en bloc described in section 3 of this resolution; and (4) one motion to recommit. Sec. 2. After debate pursuant to the first section of this resolution, each further amendment printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules not earlier considered as part of amendments en bloc pursuant to section 3 of this resolution shall be considered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, may be withdrawn by the proponent at any time before the question is put thereon, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question. Sec. 3. It shall be in order at any time after debate pursuant to the first section of this resolution for the chair of the Committee on Homeland Security or his designee to offer amendments en bloc consisting of further amendments printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution not earlier disposed of. Amendments en bloc offered pursuant to this section shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Homeland Security or their respective designees, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question. Sec. 4. All points of order against the further amendments printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules or amendments en bloc described in section 3 of this resolution are waived. Sec. 5. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2499) to amend chapter 81 of title 5, United States Code, to create a presumption that a disability or death of a Federal employee in fire protection activities caused by any of certain diseases is the result of the performance of such employees duty, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Education and Labor now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 117-41, modified by the amendment printed in part C of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Labor or their respective designees; (2) the further amendments described in section 6 of this resolution; (3) the amendments en bloc described in section 7 of this resolution; and (4) one motion to recommit. Sec. 6. After debate pursuant to section 5 of this resolution, each further amendment printed in part D of the report of the Committee on Rules not earlier considered as part of amendments en bloc pursuant to section 7 of this resolution shall be considered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, may be withdrawn by the proponent at any time before the question is put thereon, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question. Sec. 7. It shall be in order at any time after debate pursuant to section 5 of this resolution for the chair of the Committee on Education and Labor or his designee to offer amendments en bloc consisting of further amendments printed in part D of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution not earlier disposed of. Amendments en bloc offered pursuant to this section shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Labor or their respective designees, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question. Sec. 8. All points of order against the further amendments printed in part D of the report of the Committee on Rules or amendments en bloc described in section 7 of this resolution are waived. Sec. 9. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 5129) to amend the Community Services Block Grant Act to reauthorize and modernize the Act. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Education and Labor now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 117-42, modified by the amendment printed in part E of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Labor or their respective designees; (2) the further amendments described in section 10 of this resolution; (3) the amendments en bloc described in section 11 of this resolution; and (4) one motion to recommit. Sec. 10. After debate pursuant to section 9 of this resolution, each further amendment printed in part F of the report of the Committee on Rules not earlier considered as part of amendments en bloc pursuant to section 11 of this resolution shall be considered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, may be withdrawn by the proponent at any time before the question is put thereon, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question. Sec. 11. It shall be in order at any time after debate pursuant to section 9 of this resolution for the chair of the Committee on Education and Labor or his designee to offer amendments en bloc consisting of further amendments printed in part F of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution not earlier disposed of. Amendments en bloc offered pursuant to this section shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Labor or their respective designees, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question. Sec. 12. All points of order against the further amendments printed in part F of the report of the Committee on Rules or amendments en bloc described in section 11 of this resolution are waived. Sec. 13. House Resolution 1096 is hereby adopted. Sec. 14. House Resolution 188, agreed to March 8, 2021 (as most recently amended by House Resolution 1065, agreed to April 28, [[Page H4765]] 2022), is amended by striking ``May 13, 2022'' each place it appears and inserting (in each instance) ``June 10, 2022''. Sec. 15. Notwithstanding clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on a vote by the yeas and nays on the question of adoption of a motion that the House suspend the rules offered on the legislative day of May 10, 2022, or May 11, 2022, may be postponed through the legislative day of May 18, 2022. Sec. 16. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 7691) making emergency supplemental appropriations for assistance for the situation in Ukraine for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2022, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment printed in part G of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Sanchez). The gentleman from Maryland is recognized for 1 hour. Mr. RASKIN. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Fischbach), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave Mr. RASKIN. Madam Speaker, I ask for unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Maryland? There was no objection. Mr. RASKIN. Madam Speaker, today the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 1097, providing for consideration H.R. 903, the Rights for the TSA Workforce Act under a structured rule. It provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Homeland Security. It self-executes a manager's amendment from Chairman Thompson, makes in order eight amendments, and provides for one motion to recommit. The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 2499 and H.R. 5129 under structured rules. It provides 1 hour of debate for each equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Labor. It self-executes manager amendments from Chairman Scott to both bills. It makes in order 8 amendments and 17 amendments respectively, and it provides for one motion to recommit for both bills. The rule provides en bloc authority to Chairmen Thompson and Scott. {time} 1815 Further, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 7691, the Additional Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act, under a closed rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. The rule self-executes a manager's amendment from Chairwoman DeLauro and provides one motion to recommit. The rule also deems passage of H. Res. 1096, a resolution, Recognizing Congressional Workers' Right to Organize. The rule also provides recess instructions, suspension authority, and same-day authority through June 10. Finally, the rule postpones requested roll call votes on suspension bills considered on May 10 and May 11 through May 18. Madam Speaker, the rule contains five essential points of action. H.R. 903, the Rights for the TSA Workforce Act of 2021: This legislation seeks to afford TSA employees similar rights, protections, and benefits afforded to most other Federal workers across the country in order to improve the agency's operations, workforce retention, and morale. H.R. 2499 is the bipartisan Federal Firefighters Fairness Act of 2022. This legislation establishes a science-based list of diseases for which an automatic presumption of work-related illness would apply for Federal firefighters who get sick, provided that they are employed in fire protection activities for at least 5 years. It also establishes a process for adding other diseases based on scientific data and analysis going forward. H.R. 5129 is the bipartisan Community Services Block Grant Modernization Act of 2022. It reauthorizes and improves the popular and effective community services block grant program to help reach even more Americans, provide more community development across the country, and further reduce poverty. The rule also contains a resolution recognizing the right of congressional staff to unionize. Finally, it includes H.R. 7691, the Additional Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2022. Madam Speaker, generations to come will look back at this moment to ask: What did our generation do when Vladimir Putin and his army invaded the sovereign nation of Ukraine and tried not only to crush its democracy and violate the spirit of its people but vaporize and annex the entire nation? Well, today, let future generations observe the Biden administration and a bipartisan Congress has not only already provided more than $4 billion in security assistance to Ukraine, almost all of it coming after the February 24 invasion, but today, we are voting to provide nearly $40 billion to address the immediate and near-term security, economic, and humanitarian needs of the Ukrainian people that are urgent and desperate. We will provide $6 billion for training, equipment, weapons, logistics support, supplies, salaries and stipends, and intelligence support; $4.35 billion in emergency food assistance, medical equipment, and other humanitarian aid; and billions more for humanitarian relief for the millions of refugees displaced by Putin's violence and bombardment of communities in Ukraine. The aid that we vote on today will come with the fervent solidarity, admiration, and love of the American people. We are in awe of President Zelenskyy, the Ukrainian people, and their army. They have been hanging tough against terrible odds and terrible violence in a splendid display of democratic patriotism for their country. Their resolve is heroic, and it is breathtaking to behold. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I thank the Representative, Mr. Raskin, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Today, we are here to discuss a rule providing for consideration of H.R. 903, the Rights for the TSA Workforce Act; H.R. 5129, the Community Services Block Grant Modernization Act of 2022; and H.R. 2499, the Federal Firefighters Fairness Act, which would provide needed benefits to firefighters and other Federal workers suffering from occupation-related diseases and simplifies the process of providing care and benefits for these workers to ensure they will not be caught up in bureaucratic red tape. Finally, the rule provides for consideration of a supplemental appropriation to Ukraine to ensure that they have the necessary funds to counter Russian aggression. The community services block grant, or CSBG, aims to reduce poverty by improving economic security for low-income individuals and creating economic opportunities in their communities. This program has not been updated since 1998 and is in dire need of reform, but H.R. 5129 fails to accomplish that goal. It continues to let States set the benchmarks for progress and allows ineffective programs to continue receiving taxpayer dollars. It increases the income thresholds to 200 percent above the Federal poverty line, stretching Federal resources thinner and effectively robbing those most in need of help. It allows grantees to use their facilities for voter registration, completely distracting from the program's goal to fight poverty and risking the introduction of partisan activity into nonpartisan efforts. Worst of all, this bill cuts existing protections for faith-based charities. Without these protections, organizations that have fought poverty for years could be forced to remove their faithful beliefs from their work if they [[Page H4766]] want to continue providing important poverty relief. Why would we want to limit the number of organizations participating in this cause? H.R. 903, the Rights for the TSA Workforce Act, has so many flaws, I don't have time to mention them all. This bill goes against Congress' intent when it enacted the Aviation and Transportation Security Act to create the Transportation Security Administration, or the TSA, in November 2001 following the 9/11 terror attacks. At the time, Congress recognized the importance of providing unique authorities to ensure that TSA could carry out its national security mission. Converting all 60,000 TSA employees into title 5 would limit that flexibility. Under ATSA, the agency may exercise one-step removal for serious offenses such as intentional security breaches, theft, failure of drug and alcohol tests while on duty, or arrests for certain criminal offenses. Under H.R. 903, an employee who knowingly allows guns or explosives through a security checkpoint may no longer be immediately fired. Furthermore, under this bill, matters of national security could be negotiable under collective bargaining negotiations. The flexibility that Congress intended for TSA would allow for the imposition of, for example, enhanced screening procedures based on credible threats. Under this bill, the implementation of new security requirements could be subject to negotiation with the union. If the national security implications are not enough, how about the fact that TSA employees could actually lose benefits under this bill? If H.R. 903 becomes law, employees could lose the ability to trade shifts with one another, donate leave to their colleagues, and receive certain incentive pay. Some overtime pay would be prohibited, and current career milestone bonuses could no longer be offered. Finally, this bill forces employees to unionize under AFGE specifically so employees wouldn't even get to choose their labor representation. This bill does not allow for an intervening union election and would require the DHS Secretary to consult with AFGE on leave benefits, additional pay, and incentives and bonuses for all TSA employees, now a 60,000-person workforce. Everyone here, I am sure, is thankful for TSA and wants their employees to be satisfied with their working conditions. But that is a question of Congress prioritizing for that purpose, not an inflexible, forced unionization to appease the majority's base. I urge my colleagues to heed the recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Panel, a bipartisan group of former officials that strongly recommended against moving TSA personnel under title 5. Madam Speaker, I oppose the rule and ask Members to do the same. I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. RASKIN. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Virginia (Ms. Spanberger). Ms. SPANBERGER. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of this important legislation of which I am a cosponsor and intend to vote for. Firefighters are routinely exposed to high stress, smoke, heat, and various toxic substances. As a result, they are far more likely to contract cardiovascular disease, lung disease, and cancer than other workers. I strongly support extending workers' compensation to America's Federal civilian firefighters as we will do with the Federal Firefighter Fairness Act, but I want to use this opportunity to call on House leadership and the Veterans' Affairs Committee to bring forward another related bill, the Michael Lecik Military Firefighters Protection Act. I strongly support extending workers' compensation to our civilian firefighters, but we must extend the same benefits to our military firefighters. Not doing so would be nothing short of a dereliction of our sacred duty to them. One such military firefighter was Michael Lecik, an Air Force firefighter. He deployed twice to the Middle East, and after coming home to central Virginia some years later, Mike was diagnosed with multiple myeloma, a blood cancer linked to the dangerous conditions of his service as a military firefighter, a connection we are acknowledging for Federal firefighters with our votes for the Federal Firefighters Fairness Act. While I am grateful that we are moving this bill forward, I am deeply concerned and disappointed that we are not remedying this issue for the brave servicemembers like Mike who had similar exposures. Mike died in March 2021 at the age of 41, leaving behind a loving wife and three school-age daughters. As he faced down his illness, he worked and advocated to ensure that other military firefighters would have their service-connected illnesses recognized. In his honor and in service to military firefighters like him, I will continue to work to ensure an acknowledgment of harm is extended to all affected populations, including veterans dying from cancer without any acknowledgment of their service-connected injury. Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the Representative from Texas (Mr. Burgess). Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Minnesota for yielding. This Ukraine supplemental in this rule authorizes an additional $40 billion to provide defense articles and services, humanitarian aid, and financial support. I do believe it is important that Western countries continue to support Ukraine in its fight against its barbaric aggressors, but honestly, do we not deserve a plan? Does the administration not need to come to us with where we are going with this? This is an additional $40 billion on top of the several billion dollars that have already been spent. It is not that I object to the money. I object to not understanding how the administration is proceeding with this. Look, it was just 10 months ago that we were all on a conference call with the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Homeland Security. They assured us that the government in Afghanistan was solid, and they were going to be okay. At the same time, we are all getting alerts on our phones that the government in Afghanistan is headed for the exits with all of our money. Then it was October of this year with the clear signs that Vladimir Putin was amassing on the borders around Ukraine, and there was no solid discussion about whether or not this was important for the United States and whether or not we should do anything to counteract that. {time} 1830 Indeed, there were approvals for some transfer of weaponry, but it was slow to get there. Then the President made the unfortunate statement that a small incursion would perhaps be okay. The same Secretary of Defense and the same Secretary of State told us that this all would likely be over in 3 days' time, but they didn't take into account the nationality, the spirit of President Zelenskyy and his countrymen, who said: No, this is not going to happen in our country. Look, none of us can predict the future, but truly the Biden administration really does need to justify the use of American resources as this conflict unfolds. Is there a plan for when this supplemental funding runs out? Will the United States defense production keep up with Ukrainian demand? Who is keeping count on the number of Stingers and Javelin missiles that are leaving our stockpiles that should be defending our homeland? Are we depleting those so severely that we wouldn't be able to respond should we need to? Are we providing resources that will give Ukraine an asymmetric advantage to eventually win this war? If we are not doing that, how long are we going to ask the American people to continue to fund the status quo? Look, Russia advancing beyond Ukraine's borders into NATO territory would almost certainly also draw the United States into a war in Europe. But let me stress: That is a war in Europe. Where is the rest of Europe in this? We all want to prevent that outcome. We cannot let Vladimir Putin create this new world order in which he is the new tyrant of the world. To defeat him, we have to be united in our goals, united in the expenditure of American resources in support of those [[Page H4767]] goals, and we have to have a plan that we are confident is being followed. It is not lost on me that this amount of money that we are asking to appropriate in an emergency fashion today is exactly one-half of the dollar amount of the weaponry that was abandoned in Afghanistan, abandoned to our enemies. Let's not find ourselves in that situation again. Mr. RASKIN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, the gentleman asks us to justify the use of American resources in supporting our democratic allies in Ukraine. How would we justify the use of these resources? Well, let's start with this. The Ukrainian people and President Zelenskyy have asked for our help. They have asked for these resources, and they need these resources in order to beat back a brutal, bloody, and illegal innovation by Vladimir Putin, who is violating the laws of war on a daily basis. They have killed thousands of civilians, they have killed more than 150 children, murdering them, and his Army is raping and killing women, leaving their corpses in the street. So we have a democracy trying to defend its sovereign borders against an autocrat who wants to rebuild the Russian empire, Vladimir Putin, the former chief of the KGB, who said that the greatest catastrophe of the 20th century was the collapse of the Soviet Union. We were hoping that we would have a unanimous, bipartisan statement today in favor of aid to the besieged people of Ukraine. Instead, we get more voices of defeatism, pessimism, and gloom. We have heard it before. We heard Representative Cawthorn who said: Remember that Zelenskyy is a thug, remember that the Ukrainian Government is incredibly corrupt, and is incredibly evil and has been pushing woke ideologies. We heard from Steve Bannon who said: No Republican should vote for any money for Ukraine, zero dollars for Ukraine. We are hearing it from other candidates around the country, J.D. Vance, who says: I have got to be honest with you; I don't really care what happens to Ukraine one way or the other. Madam Speaker, the democratic world is under siege by Vladimir Putin and his filthy army, which is murdering children, raping women, killing civilians. Which side are we on? The Biden administration is rallying the democratic world, rallying the NATO countries. We should be standing on a unanimous, bipartisan basis with the people of Ukraine. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin). Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this rule, which includes the resolution I introduced to provide House staff legal protection to organize and bargain collectively. First, a big thank you to Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Hoyer, Whip Clyburn, and committee chairs Lofgren and Scott for working with me to get this legislation across the finish line and a big thank you to the majority of Democrats for cosponsoring this resolution. It feels surreal, and also completely right, to be here at this critical moment. I have spent much of my career helping workers form unions and bargain collectively. The power of workers to unite and demand fair wages, better benefits, and safer working conditions was central to the creation of the American middle class, and it is essential right now for working families simply trying to get by. That is why I was humbled when congressional staffers approached me earlier this year and asked me to introduce a resolution that would grant them a fundamental human right, the right to organize and bargain collectively without fear of retaliation. For months now, our workers have been organizing in the shadows, because they lack the legal protections to come forward. It should not and does not have to be this way for workers seeking to exercise their First Amendment right to freedom of association, especially here in the Halls of Congress. I fervently believe that all workers deserve the chance to have a union and to be protected in pursuing one. This resolution approves regulations originally proposed in 1996, 26 years ago. Those regulations provide guidance for how legislative branch employees can exercise their statutory right to form or join labor organizations, as Congress expressly intended. I can say without a doubt that here in the people's House, we could not serve our districts without the hard work and dedication of congressional staff. They manage our schedules, advise on policy, engage with constituents, and do so much more essential work with humility, with grit, and often with little to no recognition. These same workers have endured trauma while providing public service, working through a global pandemic that has killed a million people in this country, and experiencing an assault on our very workplace on January 6, 2021. The very least we can do is honor and respect their effort to organize in Congress, giving them the long-overdue right to find their collective voice. This resolution will protect bargaining over working conditions, wages, just-cause provisions, and more. We have heard loudly and clearly over the past few months: Congressional staffers want a union. Let's not make them wait a second longer. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the rule. Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Georgia (Mrs. Greene). Mrs. GREENE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the Ukrainian supplemental bill. Madam Speaker, $40 billion, but there is no baby formula for American mothers and babies. An unknown amount of money to the CIA in the Ukraine supplemental bill, but there is no formula for American babies and mothers. Madam Speaker, $54 million in COVID spending in Ukraine, but there is no formula for American babies and mothers. Madam Speaker, $900 million for nonprofits and organizations in Ukraine, but there is no formula for American babies and mothers. Madam Speaker, $8.7 billion for economic support and funding in Ukraine, but there is no formula for American mothers and babies. If this is about claiming that it is about saving lives, let's be real, then we would care about war-torn countries like Ethiopia. So that is a bunch of hypocrisy, because I never hear Ethiopia brought up here. Totally ignoring our own border crisis, our own baby formula crisis, and brutal inflation, skyrocketing gas prices that no one can afford, but $40 billion for Ukraine? Stop funding regime change and money laundering scams and U.S. politician coverups of their crimes in countries like Ukraine. The American people do not support paying for constant U.S. involvement in foreign affairs while our own government fails our own country. Let me remind everyone here: We swore an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America and our borders. We should be paying attention to our country right now. Mr. RASKIN. Madam Speaker, here is a formula for the destruction of democracy: Repeating Putin's propaganda and disinformation and appeasing imperialist assaults on sovereign nations. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Jayapal). Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, workers' rights are human rights. The labor movement has shown us what is possible when we dream big and fight hard. Tonight, we will clear yet another hurdle in the battle for workplace safety and dignity. I thank my colleague, Representative Levin, for his tremendous leadership on this resolution. With House Resolution 915, congressional staff will be able to organize and bargain for a better workplace without fear of intimidation or retaliation. As someone who organized with unions, working people, and for collective bargaining rights before coming to Congress, I know how important it is that we guarantee our staff that same [[Page H4768]] right. As a co-lead of the PRO Act, I have continuously pushed for pro- worker policies that prioritize safety, equity, and better pay. Like other workers, congressional staff deserve to be protected at work. They put in long, hard hours. They work incredibly hard to serve the people. We must lead by example and show our gratitude by ensuring our staff have the right to bargain, to organize, and to unionize. Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. If we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to immediately consider a bill that would block the Biden administration's effort to establish a so-called Disinformation Governance Board. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the Record along with any extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Jackson Lee). Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from Minnesota? There was no objection. Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, policing of the First Amendment protected speech has no place in this country. Yet, the Biden administration, unsatisfied with their big tech and their mainstream media allies' efforts to control criticism of their disastrous agenda, have decided to propose a government-sanctioned, taxpayer-funded ministry of truth. This not only runs contrary to the values of our Nation but is likely unconstitutional and Congress should play no part in its creation. In fact, Congress should come together to uphold the constitutional principles that the best weapon against speech we don't like is not censure; it is more speech. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Katko) to further speak on the amendment. Mr. KATKO. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the previous question and in support of the immediate consideration of legislation introduced by Leader McCarthy and House Republicans to defund and prohibit the activities of the Biden administration's Disinformation Governance Board at the Department of Homeland Security. That is right: It is called the Disinformation Governance Board. The notion that this ill-conceived effort will improve Americans' trust in their government is fundamentally absurd. In fact, it is just the latest example of how this administration, and specifically leadership at the Department of Homeland Security, remains grossly out of touch with what issues matter most to the American people. At a time when the border is in a state of crisis and more Americans than ever before are being fatally poisoned with fentanyl, everyone in this room and in this country would be wise to take note that this, a Disinformation Governance Board, is what your Department of Homeland Security is focused on. {time} 1845 Are they focused on combating the drug cartels and human traffickers that are profiting from the chaos at our southwest border? Apparently not. Are they focused on improving our economic security and resilience against unprecedented threats from China, Russia, and others? It doesn't seem like it. Madam Speaker, as ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee, I witnessed firsthand the consistent lack of transparency demonstrated by Secretary Mayorkas and the Department of Homeland Security when faced with congressional oversight and legitimate requests for information on the department's mission. Why on Earth would we trust the same department to now unilaterally expand their mission and decide for us, the public, what is or is not the truth? Why has the Department of Homeland Security been unable or unwilling to answer basic questions as to the functions, remit, or charter of this board when asked by Congress? If the Biden administration was serious about making the board apolitical, as they claim they are, why have they opted to appoint known partisan operatives as its executive director and co-chairs? In fact, it is reported that the named executive director herself has promoted now-debunked claims on social media. Think about that. The person that they claim to be the executive director is now the one that has in the past herself engaged in disinformation. That is pretty ironic. I ask you, Madam Speaker, and my colleagues across the aisle, where is the accountability for this misguided operation? With this vote, we have the opportunity to send a clear message: This administration should focus on restoring our national security, not making itself the arbiter of truth and speech. This is America, this isn't a Communist country. Mr. RASKIN. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green). Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I thank Mr. Raskin for the time, and I thank Mr. Levin for what he has done to bring this resolution to fruition. Madam Speaker, today I rise to defend the rights of our staff to organize. This really is about respect. We should respect their rights: Their right to have a decent day's pay for a hard day's work, their right to have the best healthcare that we can afford. I respect them, I support them, and I respect the right of all workers to organize. Hence, I will vote for the legislation. Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Johnson). Mr. JOHNSON of Louisiana. Madam Speaker, I rise today to oppose the previous question so that we can immediately consider H.R. 7690 to defund the Biden administration's recently announced Disinformation Governance Board. Madam Speaker, the Biden administration's decision to create this board is dystopian in design and should be doomed right from the start. Madam Speaker, the Disinformation Governance Board should be defunded for one obvious reason. It is not only Orwellian, as everyone has said, but it is clearly unconstitutional. In America, we don't allow bureaucrats and government officials to choose what speech is deemed acceptable or censor and silence viewpoints they dislike. This fundamental principle of our law must always be vigorously defended to preserve our freedom and to keep the government in check. I used to defend this principle in the Federal courts before I was elected to Congress, and I am so encouraged to work with so many colleagues, at least on this side of the aisle here, who are also fiercely committed to this cause. Let's put this simply: There is zero role for the Federal Government in determining what constitutes true speech. But while we have everybody's attention, let's just recap this real quickly. This Disinformation Governance Board will be housed within the Department of Homeland Security. It was just announced by ambush, very abruptly, by Secretary Mayorkas. There is no information about its budget. There is no information provided to us about the scope of its work, no information about how it will be kept accountable. Basically, there are no details at all. Remember, this is from the same administration that wants to spy on parents who speak up at school board meetings and spy on our bank accounts. This governance board is a glaring example of mission creep, and even its name is creepy. Here is what we do know, Madam Speaker: The board is supposed to be headed by a young woman by the name of Nina Jankowicz, who refers to herself--no kidding--as the Mary Poppins of disinformation. Miss Poppins is herself a frequent purveyor of untruths, such as calling the New York Post's report on Hunter Biden's laptop a ``Russian influence op'' and promoting the false claim that the Steele dossier was ``Republican opposition research.'' She also appears sympathetic to the cause of censorship because she told NPR recently that she shudders--that is her word--to think about a country where free speech absolutists, again quoting her, were taking over more platforms. She recommended that law enforcement and legislatures do more to censor Americans. To help her hit the ground running in doing what is certain to be a short stint in this job, here is what we suggest: She ought to check out the recent [[Page H4769]] falsehoods from her own administration. Here is a hit list: The falsehood that Secretary Mayorkas has done an ``effective job'' managing the border crisis and that it is somehow secure. He said that under oath here a couple weeks ago. The falsehood that economic contraction in Quarter 1 of this year is actually just masking some hidden, broad economic resiliency. The falsehood that Biden's $3.5 trillion spending bill actually cost zero dollars. The falsehood that inflation is a high-class problem, as they told us. The falsehood that 70 percent of our current inflation is being caused by Vladimir Putin. You get the point. The problem with the government appointing itself as the arbiter of truth is that it is often the government itself that often engages in spin and untruth. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman. Mr. JOHNSON of Louisiana. Madam Speaker, if the Biden administration was itself a beacon of truth, this board would still be unconstitutional. I would tell my colleagues, if this was being proposed by a Republican administration, we would be fighting it just as vociferously. I do find it noteworthy, however, that those who seem the most preoccupied with censoring Americans and policing disinformation are so often themselves the worst offenders at spreading it. Again, here is the bottom line: The government has no role whatsoever in determining what constitutes truth or acceptable speech. President Biden should dissolve this board immediately and entirely; and if he won't, Republicans will. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question so we may amend the rule to provide for immediate consideration of my legislation to defund the DHS Disinformation Governance Board. Mr. RASKIN. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett). Mr. DOGGETT. Madam Speaker, tonight we stand with courageous Ukrainians who refuse to give in to Putin's war crimes. The morning after this unprovoked attack, I authored the first sanctions legislation in this Congress. Eventually, it may help. But what is needed immediately is more weapons and humanitarian relief. Undoubtedly, Putin was encouraged by those he hoped would divide the West, like his admirer President Trump, who declared Putin ``a genius'' and called this ``a peacekeeping mission,'' and his close adviser who, even after the bombing got underway, claimed that Putin was being too gentle. With our weapons, Ukrainians defend not only themselves, but freedom and democracy everywhere. Tonight, I hope that Republicans will join Democrats in what is truly a test of our commitment to freedom. Together, we offer strong support for Ukraine to push back on the brutal aggressor, end this terror, and maintain its independence. Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs. Boebert). Mrs. BOEBERT. Madam Speaker, I rise to oppose the previous question so that we can immediately consider H.R. 7690. Madam Speaker, the Biden regime wants to talk disinformation? Okay, let's give them something to talk about. Let's talk about how the White House said that it was Republicans that want to defund the police. Let's talk about how Secretary Mayorkas said the southern border is closed. Let's talk about how Joe Biden said his Build Back Better agenda cost zero American tax dollars. Let's talk about how Biden's new press secretary falsely claimed Trump stole the 2016 Presidential election. And remember Afghanistan? Let's talk about how Joe Biden said any American who wants to come home, we will get you home. Well, that sounds like the words of a lying, dog-faced pony soldier to me. The American people will not have their speech monitored by corrupt, career professional politicians who lie day in and day out. And now the DHS, a militarized department, has established a new Disinformation Governance Board, or more accurately known as the department of propaganda. DHS was created to stop terrorism. Now it is being used to terrorize the American people. And who did Mayorkas hire to run this Orwellian ministry of truth? This lady, Nina Jankowicz. Mayorkas calls her an expert on disinformation, probably because she tells lies all the dang time. Nina said that President Trump would embolden ISIS. Well, he defeated it. Nina said the Hunter Biden laptop from hell was a Trump campaign product. Nina said that concerned parents who wanted a say in their children's education were pushing disinformation; and Nina said Big Tech should censor the Wuhan lab leak theory because it was, you guessed it, disinformation. Nina doesn't seem to have a good relationship with truth and will surely use this board to silence Americans. Nina is no public servant. How is that, you say? Don't take it from me. Here are her words. Are these the words of a public servant? What do I need to do to--well, Madam Speaker, I will let you read the rest of that. This doesn't sound like someone who should be monitoring Americans' speech. The Democratic Party has truly lost their minds, from intimidating judges at their homes, burning down pregnancy centers, and vandalizing churches, to calling moms and dads domestic terrorists, and now creating this department to censor free speech because extremists are scared of, what, Elon Musk? The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired. Mrs. BOEBERT. They say social media censoring doesn't go far enough. And this needs to be defunded. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman is no longer recognized. Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President while speaking on the floor of the House. Mr. RASKIN. Madam Speaker, the very distinguished gentlewoman from Colorado called the President of the United States, or likened him to, I think she said, a lying, dog-faced pony soldier. We obviously could have taken those words down, but we have serious business to do here, and unlike some of our colleagues on the other side, we are not interested in censoring other people's speech. We want the whole world to see how the gentlewoman from Colorado speaks in public as a Member of Congress. We want everyone to look at that. Meantime, we have come here tonight, Madam Speaker, to fight for the rights of the TSA workforce. More than 50,000 workers. We are giving them the same rights that other Federal workers have. We came here to fight for the rights of Federal firefighters, tens of thousands of them, who will be able to benefit from this legislation if and when they get sick from illnesses caused by their work as firefighters. We came here to expand and improve the Community Services Block Grant Modernization Act of 2022, a bipartisan piece of legislation. Despite what was said about it on the other side, I believe there were eight Members of the minority who voted for it in the House Education and Labor Committee. We are here to recognize the right of congressional staff to unionize, and we are here most significantly, Madam Speaker, on the Additional Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act. It is for that act that the antics and the diatribes of our colleagues are so profoundly disappointing to those of us who have come here to support President Zelenskyy and the heroic people of Ukraine who are resisting a brutal, illegal aggression by Vladimir Putin and his army. {time} 1900 And we were hoping that we would have a bipartisan, unanimous support for this legislation to render the military and strategic economic and humanitarian aid that our democratic allies need, and they are asking for and deserve, to fight off this illegal criminal aggression by Vladimir Putin, who is not a genius but a war criminal and a mass murderer. That is what he is. [[Page H4770]] We are very proud of the work that President Biden has been doing in unifying the democratic world against the autocrat Vladimir Putin and his naked, bloody aggression against the people of Ukraine, which has cost the lives of thousands of civilians already. We have seen the war crime of rape spread at the hands of Russian's filthy soldiers, and we have seen them kill children, blow up schools and hospitals. We don't see anything remotely like the seriousness and the solemnity that we would expect of Members of the United States Congress. Instead, they put up profanity, they mock the President of the United States, they make a disgrace of their own party by the way they behave on the floor of the House of Representatives. Madam Speaker, Vladimir Putin and his cheerleaders all over the world thought they would make quick work of the people of Ukraine and President Zelenskyy. They only had supplies for less than a week. Everybody thought it was just going to be game over, as some of our colleagues have said; that Vladimir Putin would just cut right through them. But you know what they weren't counting on, Madam Speaker? They weren't counting on the spirit of a democratic people, the noble people of Ukraine who have heroically resisted every criminal aggressive act by Vladimir Putin and his autocratic cheerleaders around the world. So today, 2\1/2\ months later, President Biden, having rallied the democratic world, having unified NATO, comes back to us and asks for nearly $40 billion in aid to support the strategic needs, the security needs, the economic needs, the humanitarian needs of a population that is reeling from the war. Madam Speaker, we say the American people are here to support the Ukrainian people. That is what we are doing here tonight. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will remind Members that remarks in debate may not engage in personalities toward the President, including by repeating remarks made elsewhere that would be improper if spoken in the Member's own words. Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Pfluger). Mr. PFLUGER. Madam Speaker, I rise to oppose the previous question so that we can immediately consider H.R. 7690 to DEFUND the Biden's Administration DHS Disinformation Governance Board. However, before I get into that, I would remind my colleague that just a couple months ago, that the administration did offer a ride to President Zelenskyy, offered him a ride out of Ukraine to leave the country that he so valiantly has been fighting for. I want to make sure that that is set straight. And we will get back to the business at hand: The Disinformation Governance Board. The fact is that the administration thinks that they should be policing disinformation. It is beyond alarming. And I am trying to put myself back into the shoes of the Founders 240 years ago, to think that the government would be in charge of personal views of the First Amendment. The antics, as it has been called here, my 750,000-plus constituents don't think what I am saying right now are antics. What they are proud of is we are standing up to say that we do affirm that the government does not get to determine what is true and false. Personally, I have heard the Secretary of Homeland Security, Mayorkas, claim that our border is secure, but millions of illegal immigrants are allowed to pour into our country, including known and suspected terrorists. Even more disturbing, is that Secretary Mayorkas has put an outspoken partisan person, who has mocked stories, including those about Hunter Biden's laptop, has praised the now-debunked Steele dossier, and other stories out into the public, while claiming to now be the purveyor of truth. The lack of credibility and the misinformation is beyond laughable. The Department of Homeland Security should be focused on one thing, and this is not a partisan issue. It is our security. It is our Nation's security. That is what DHS was founded on after September 11. That is what the focus should be on right now, not fact-checking social media or censoring Americans. Today, every Member of Congress will be put on Record, and the question will be: Do you stand on the side of free speech or not? I stand on the side of free speech for my constituents, the 750,000 who I believe would not call what I am saying antics. Mr. RASKIN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Our colleagues don't seem to want to talk about the chaos and the violence and the bloodshed that has been unleashed on the people of Ukraine. I am really shocked that they don't want to talk about it, but they want to talk about free speech. Great. Let's talk about free speech in Russia. More than 15,000 people arrested and detained as they crush the antiwar movement in Russia, as he jails political opponents in Russia. And they haven't said a word about that. Have they said anything about the opponents of the war in Russia who have been thrown into jail? No. They are talking about a board in America that I wasn't even aware existed--I am not sure it does--that has never thrown anybody in a jail. How do they feel about Russian critics of the war being thrown into jail? How do they feel about more than 8 million Ukrainians who have been displaced by the war, who are living in the homes of the Polish people who have heroically opened their doors to them? They say nothing about that. Do they think that Vladimir Putin is the leader of a democracy? Is there any one of them who will stand up and say that Vladimir Putin is an autocrat, an authoritarian, a would-be totalitarian? Do any of them remember that Vladimir Putin was the head of the KGB? Is that their ideal model for civil liberties? Vladimir Putin, who said that the collapse of the Soviet Union is the greatest catastrophe of the 20th century? Is this Abraham Lincoln's party we are hearing today? Or is it a cult of Donald Trump? Madam Speaker, we have to decide which side America is going to be on. The democratic world has risen as one to support the people of Ukraine, and yet, our friends don't seem to want to talk about that. They don't want to seem to support this effort, which is extraordinary to me, as the people of Ukraine are doing whatever they can to fight this naked, illegal aggression, this unilateral war of aggression; unprovoked, unjustified, a violation of international law in every way. Madam Speaker, it is incumbent upon us as the leader of the democratic world, if that is still what we want to be, to support democracies under attack by authoritarian regimes. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy). Mr. ROY. Madam Speaker, the gentleman from Maryland talked about protecting this institution or talked about this institution, but we have a $40 billion bill at 3 o'clock in the afternoon. I haven't had a chance to review the bill. My staff is poring over the pages to try to see what's in it. You want to talk about the institution? You want to talk about standing up alongside Ukraine? Why don't we actually have a debate on the floor of the people's House instead of the garbage of getting a $40 billion bill at 3 o'clock in the afternoon; not paid for, without having any idea what is really in it, with a massive slush fund that goes to the State Department--$13 billion; $8 billion for the Economic Support Fund, $110 million for embassy security. We got $40 billion that is unpaid for, and you want to sit here and lecture this body about what we are going to do or not do about standing alongside Ukraine? Why don't we talk about the American people who are hurting, the wide-open borders; the inflation that is killing people; the jobs that people can't get because of the cost of goods and services in this country. Sitting here and being lectured to, when I don't even have time to look at a $40 billion unpaid bill. [[Page H4771]] ____________________