[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 69 (Friday, April 19, 2024)]
[House]
[Pages H2526-H2532]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 8034, ISRAEL SECURITY SUPPLEMENTAL 
  APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2024; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 8035, 
 UKRAINE SECURITY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2024; PROVIDING FOR 
    CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 8036, INDO-PACIFIC SECURITY SUPPLEMENTAL 
  APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2024; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 8038, 
21ST CENTURY PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH ACT; AND PROVIDING FOR CONCURRENCE 
  BY THE HOUSE IN THE SENATE AMENDMENT TO H.R. 815, WITH AN AMENDMENT

  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 1160 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 1160

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 8034) making 
     emergency supplemental appropriations to respond to the 
     situation in Israel and for related expenses for the fiscal 
     year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes. All 
     points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. 
     The bill shall be considered as read. All points of order 
     against provisions in the bill are waived. The previous 
     question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and on 
     any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening 
     motion except: (1) 30 minutes 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.
       Sec. 2.  At any time after adoption of this resolution the 
     Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare 
     the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on 
     the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 
     8035) making emergency supplemental appropriations to respond 
     to the situation in Ukraine and for related expenses for the 
     fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other 
     purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed 
     with. All points of order against consideration of the bill 
     are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and 
     shall not exceed 30 minutes equally divided and controlled by 
     the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
     Appropriations or their respective designees. After general 
     debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the 
     five-minute rule. The amendment printed in part A of the 
     report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution 
     shall be considered as adopted in the House and in the 
     Committee of the Whole. The bill, as amended, shall be 
     considered as read. All points of order against provisions in 
     the bill, as amended, are waived. No further amendment to the 
     bill, as amended, shall be in order except those printed in 
     part B of the report of the Committee on Rules. Each such 
     further amendment may be offered 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, shall not be 
     subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand 
     for division of the question in the House or in the Committee 
     of

[[Page H2527]]

     the Whole. All points of order against such further 
     amendments are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of 
     the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report 
     the bill, as amended, to the House with such further 
     amendments as may have been adopted. In the case of sundry 
     further amendments reported from the Committee, the question 
     of their adoption shall be put to the House en gros and 
     without division of the question. 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 one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 3.  Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
     order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 8036) making 
     emergency supplemental appropriations for assistance for the 
     Indo-Pacific region and for related expenses for the fiscal 
     year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes. All 
     points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. 
     The bill shall be considered as read. All points of order 
     against provisions in the bill are waived. The previous 
     question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and on 
     any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening 
     motion except: (1) 30 minutes of debate equally divided and 
     controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 
     Committee on Appropriations or their respective designees; 
     (2) the amendment printed in part C of the report of the 
     Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, if offered 
     by the Member designated in the report, which shall be in 
     order without intervention of any point of order, shall be 
     considered as read, shall be separately debatable for the 
     time specified in the report equally divided and controlled 
     by the proponent and an opponent, and shall not be subject to 
     a demand for division of the question; and (3) one motion to 
     recommit.
       Sec. 4.  At any time after adoption of this resolution the 
     Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare 
     the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on 
     the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 
     8038) to authorize the President to impose certain sanctions 
     with respect to Russia and Iran, and for other purposes. The 
     first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points 
     of order against consideration of the bill are waived. 
     General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not 
     exceed 30 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair 
     and ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign 
     Affairs or their respective designees. After general debate 
     the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-
     minute rule. The amendment printed in part D of the report of 
     the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be 
     considered as adopted in the House and in the Committee of 
     the Whole. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. 
     All points of order against provisions in the bill, as 
     amended, are waived. No further amendment to the bill, as 
     amended, shall be in order except those printed in part E of 
     the report of the Committee on Rules. Each such further 
     amendment may be offered 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, shall not be 
     subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand 
     for division of the question in the House or in the Committee 
     of the Whole. All points of order against such further 
     amendments are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of 
     the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report 
     the bill, as amended, to the House with such further 
     amendments as may have been adopted. In the case of sundry 
     further amendments reported from the Committee, the question 
     of their adoption shall be put to the House en gros and 
     without division of the question. 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 one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 5.  During consideration of H.R. 8035 and H.R. 8038, 
     the Chair may entertain a motion that the Committee rise only 
     if offered by the Majority Leader or his designee. The Chair 
     may not entertain a motion to strike out the enacting words 
     of the bill (as described in clause 9 of rule XVIII).
       Sec. 6. (a) Upon disposition of the bills specified in 
     subsection (d), the House shall be considered to have taken 
     from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 815) to amend title 
     38, United States Code, to make certain improvements relating 
     to the eligibility of veterans to receive reimbursement for 
     emergency treatment furnished through the Veterans Community 
     Care program, and for other purposes, with the Senate 
     amendment thereto, and to have concurred in the Senate 
     amendment with an amendment inserting the respective texts of 
     all bills specified in subsection (d), as passed by the 
     House, in lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by the 
     Senate.
       (b) In the engrossment of the House amendment to the Senate 
     amendment to H.R. 815, the Clerk shall --
       (1) assign appropriate designations to provisions within 
     the engrossment;
       (2) conform cross-references and provisions for short 
     titles within the engrossment;
       (3) be authorized to make technical corrections, to include 
     corrections in spelling, punctuation, page and line 
     numbering, section numbering, and insertion of appropriate 
     headings; and
       (4) relocate section 3 in the matter preceding division A 
     of the text of H.R. 8038 to a new section immediately prior 
     to Division A within the engrossment.
       (c) Upon transmission to the Senate of a message that the 
     House has concurred in the Senate amendment to H.R. 815 with 
     an amendment, the bills specified in subsection (d) that have 
     passed the House shall be laid on the table.
       (d) The bills referred to in subsections (a) and (c) are as 
     follows: H.R. 8034, H.R. 8035, H.R. 8036, and H.R. 8038.

                              {time}  0915

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 1 
hour.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
McGovern), 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. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their 
remarks.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, late last night, the Rules Committee met and reported a 
rule, House Resolution 1160, providing for consideration of four 
measures: H.R. 8034, the Israel Security Supplemental Appropriations 
Act, under a closed rule; H.R. 8036, the Indo-Pacific Security 
Supplemental Appropriations Act, under a structured rule; H.R. 8035, 
the Ukraine Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2024, under a 
structured rule; and H.R. 8038, the 21st Century Peace through Strength 
Act, under a structured rule.
  The rule further provides that after the House's consideration of 
these measures, the Senate will be quickly able to move to 
consideration of the legislation that we pass.
  Mr. Speaker, today, it is important that we support the underlying 
rule and the underlying legislation. Specifically, I rise in support of 
our allies after the attack on Israel by Iran 10 days ago. That 
unprecedented attack has reaffirmed the need for strong American 
leadership and support for our allies abroad, especially Israel and now 
our allies in the Indo-Pacific.
  I am well aware there have been concerns in our Conference and really 
on both sides of the House about the southern border and national debt.
  As a Member from Texas, as a member of the Budget Committee, I fully 
understand these concerns and share all of them, but the requirement 
for America to insert itself as the leader of the free world is not 
optional. It is not a requirement we can put on pause.
  Israel has been attacked. China talks menacingly about reunification 
with Taiwan. Ukraine is in crisis and is in need of our help to survive 
Russian aggression.
  Now, I would say to the President that this legislation on the floor 
today perhaps could have been facilitated by some leadership from the 
executive branch, but despite the circumstances that brought us here, 
we stand before the House to support our allies and reaffirm America's 
leadership on the world stage.
  H.R. 8034, the Israel Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, will 
provide much-needed material support to the Jewish state as it faces 
twin threats from Hamas and the Islamic Republic of Iran. This includes 
$4 billion to replenish Israel's Iron Dome and over a billion dollars 
for the Iron Beam defense system.
  H.R. 8036, the Indo-Pacific Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 
2024, will work to counter the Chinese Communist Party and create a 
strong deterrence in the region.
  H.R. 8035, the Ukraine Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, will 
assist Ukraine as they counter Russian aggression.
  Of the latter, all financial assistance to the Ukrainian Government 
is converted into a loan, ensuring that the Ukrainian Government is 
held accountable to the American people.
  Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that our failure in Afghanistan was 
the spark in the tinderbox that led to the subsequent invasion of 
Ukraine in 2022.

[[Page H2528]]

That conflict had been smoldering for a long time, certainly at least 
since 2014 and two previous administrations. Had the administration in 
2014, as well as the current administration, had more foresight to 
provide aid and arms to Ukraine before February 2022, there might have 
been a different set of circumstances that we were contemplating today, 
and there might have been a more swift resolution to this conflict, 
with the saving of untold lives.
  Mr. Speaker, I stand with my colleagues requesting more information 
from the administration. The American people deserve answers about how 
previous funding has been used. They deserve answers about what the 
long-term goals by the administration are to resolve this conflict.
  I welcome more oversight. I welcome additional information from the 
administration and will continue to push its accountability. Today, we 
are at an inflection point, and the longer we wait, the more expensive 
any solution to this conflict will become, both in terms of dollars and 
lives.
  Lack of aid now could cost us much more dearly later, and I don't 
want that to become a reality. I would hope my colleagues on both sides 
of the aisle feel the same.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of the rule. I urge passage of the 
underlying legislation. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for 
yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the world is watching. It is time for Congress to act, 
and act we must.
  America's allies have been waiting for this Republican majority to 
get their act together.
  People are dying in Ukraine. Democracy is on the line in Ukraine, and 
this Republican majority has been twiddling their thumbs.
  I am glad my friends have finally come to realize the gravity of the 
situation and the urgency of getting this aid to our allies.
  What have Republicans done? Nothing. No action to help our allies. It 
is all delay, distract, deny, and blame Joe Biden.
  Ukrainians are fighting for democracy--theirs and ours--and they have 
been set back as a result of Republican extremism. They have suffered 
because of Republican inaction.

  I will remind my friends that Ukrainians didn't choose this war. It 
chose them.
  Two years ago, when Putin illegally crossed the border and invaded, 
he was banking on the United States and our allies growing weary. He 
was hoping we would give up. He was hoping we would do nothing. He was 
betting we would abandon our friends and our internal divisions would 
leave us in disarray, at odds with one another.
  I hope Putin is wrong, Mr. Speaker, because after 2 years of 
unrelenting war, Ukrainians are still willing to hold the line.
  I visited Ukraine with former Speaker Pelosi shortly after Putin 
attacked them, and we learned about the particularly cruel nature in 
which Putin has been fighting this war. If you care about human rights, 
you have to care about what is happening in Ukraine. That is what this 
is all about.
  Ukrainians are still ready to defend their democracy, but they cannot 
continue to do so without our support.
  I won't sugarcoat it here. Ukraine's defense of democracy has 
suffered because there is a faction here in this House, a MAGA 
minority, that doesn't want to compromise. They don't want to take this 
vote because they are afraid of what the outcome might be--not that it 
will fail, but that it will succeed.
  That argument might hold sway in the Kremlin, Mr. Speaker, but this 
is the United States. We are the people's House, an institution 
designed to reflect the will of the majority.
  Today, the majority's voice is being heard here on the House floor--
not a majority of one State, one party, or one faction, but a majority 
that wants to help Ukraine hold the line, a majority that says bring 
these bills to the floor for an up-or-down vote.
  Democrats are providing the votes necessary to advance this 
legislation to the floor because, at the end of the day, so much more 
is at stake here than petty partisan brinkmanship.
  Putin is looking to rebuild the Soviet Union, and mark my words, he 
will not stop at Ukraine. Anybody who thinks that is delusional.
  If the world doesn't help them defend their democracy, this war will 
not end. It will grow.
  Mr. Speaker, I don't agree with everything in this package. I have 
deep, deep problems about the unconditional aid to Israel. I was among 
the first calling for a cease-fire, and I still call for a cease-fire. 
I have demanded more humanitarian aid for civilians in Gaza, and I will 
continue to do so. I have called for a two-state solution. I believe 
Prime Minister Netanyahu is putting Israel on a path that, quite 
frankly, undermines his own country's security. I am outraged by his 
cruelty and inhumanity toward the people of Gaza and the West Bank.
  There is no justification for that. There is none. Israel has a right 
to defend itself--nobody questions that--but what is happening now, I 
believe, is outrageous and unconscionable.
  We will have separate debates, and we will have separate votes on all 
of these bills, and people can decide where they want to be.
  Quite frankly, some Republicans wanted a different path. They wanted 
to extort this rule for a campaign ad on border security for Donald 
Trump. We almost had no Ukraine aid because that is what some of my 
Republican friends wanted and advocated for. They advocated for a bill 
with no humanitarian aid for anybody who is suffering--not just in 
Gaza, but also in Ukraine and other parts of the world--and they wanted 
all this kind of ugly border security language attached to this 
measure.
  There is a lot at stake at this moment, and we are all supposed to be 
grownups. We should act like it. Let's proceed in a way that allows 
everyone to vote their conscience.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  0930

  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my very good friend from Texas, my 
classmate, my colleague when I served on the Rules Committee, and now I 
am very proud to say our very distinguished chairman of the Rules 
Committee for yielding. Today's rule makes in order a series of three 
critical security supplemental bills, Mr. Speaker, paired with a fourth 
bill covering other high-priority national security matters. 
Collectively, these bills represent the commitment to move much-needed 
security assistance funding for America's friends and partners.
  Mr. Speaker, the members of the Rules Committee faced a serious 
challenge in putting together today's resolution, but they met that 
challenge in admirable, bipartisan fashion. I can't tell you how proud 
I am of both sides of the aisle, including my friend, the distinguished 
ranking member, for the manner in which they responded to this 
particular difficulty.
  Today's rule creates a full and fair process for floor consideration 
of these measures. It grants ample debate time on these bills and makes 
in order a series of amendments ensuring that the entire body has the 
opportunity to work its will and make our voices heard.
  It ensures that Members have a full 72 hours to review these bills 
before the vote. After all, taking up a matter as important as this, 
both Members of Congress and the American people deserve no less.
  Finally, it provides an up-or-down vote on each of these bills. 
Importantly, this rule allows every Member to vote his or her 
conscience on every issue. Thanks to this process, the House will be 
able to work its will. That is the way the Founders intended this 
institution to work.
  Speaker Johnson's work in setting this process in motion has been 
admirable, and we all owe him our thanks for ensuring both that the 
House takes up these critical funding measures and that each Member can 
vote his or her conscience on every single issue.
  Mr. Speaker, the need for this funding is not hypothetical. Ukraine, 
Israel, and Taiwan are on the front

[[Page H2529]]

lines of the struggle to preserve democracy and freedom around the 
world.
  In the case of Ukraine and Israel, these two nations are, quite 
literally, in harm's way. Ukraine is entering the third year of their 
struggle against Vladimir Putin's unjust and illegal invasion. Its 
continued ability to resist hangs in the balance dependent on foreign 
aid. Its people need the weapons and ammunition provided in this bill 
to keep them in the fight.
  Israel, meanwhile, is involved in a life-and-death struggle against 
the perpetrators of the October 7 terror attack, Hamas. Over the 
weekend, Hamas' backer, the Iranian regime, launched an unprecedented 
and direct aerial assault on Israel. That attack has been thwarted, and 
an appropriate response is underway.
  Taiwan faces ongoing threats from the Chinese Communist Party which 
continue to threaten Taiwan's right of self-determination.
  Around the world, the United States and our partners are confronting 
a tinderbox of uninvited aggression on multiple fronts. America must 
stand firmly on the side of freedom.
  Peace through strength cannot be delivered through appeasement. Taken 
together, these measures protect our friends and partners and replenish 
American stockpiles of ammunition, weapons, and supplies. This is not 
only about safeguarding our ideals of democracy and peace but is 
central to our own national security.
  Mr. Speaker, I encourage all Members to vote to support the rule and 
the underlying legislation.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett), a champion for human rights.
  Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, those who committed atrocities against 
Israelis on October 7 were not martyrs. They were murderers and 
rapists. But neither were those murderers children, and the children of 
Gaza have paid an incredible cost for Netanyahu's massive assault. His 
policies have shown conscious indifference to children, journalists, 
humanitarian aid workers, and civilians in general. I believe strongly 
in Israel's right to self-defense, but that does not require dropping 
hundreds of 2000-pound nonprecision ``dumb'' bombs in densely populated 
areas, nor does it require a medieval-type siege denying water, food, 
and medicine, using famine as a weapon of war, nor does it require 
killing, not only World Central Kitchen aid workers, but so many 
others.
  This rule gives us a proper opportunity to finally, belatedly, vote 
to help desperate Ukraine from Putin's war crimes and offensive without 
voting to support Netanyahu, but the rule, I believe, improperly 
rejected amendments that would have permitted a vote in support of 
Israel's right to self-defense without embracing Netanyahu's wrongful 
policies, which are killing the innocent, sacrificing the hostages, and 
endangering Israel's long-term security.
  Sending more offensive weapons to Netanyahu while begging him not to 
use them simply does not protect Rafah and others from an assault. I 
would vote to defend Israel but do not want to be complicit in 
providing weapons for an assault on Rafah that will cause thousands of 
deaths and likely lead to a wider and tragic war.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Kentucky (Mr. Massie), a valuable member of the Committee on Rules.
  Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Speaker, I truly thank the chairman for yielding me 
time because he knows I am slightly opposed to the rule, so he is very 
gracious.
  I am concerned that the Speaker has cut a deal with the Democrats to 
fund foreign wars rather than to secure our border, but what I want to 
talk about today is process.
  The bill that will come out of the House after all of this is a bill 
that began as H.R. 815 to expand the eligibility for veterans to 
receive reimbursements for their emergency care. How did a bill that 
was intended for veterans that came out of the House become a bill that 
may bring us to the brink of war in at least three places on the globe 
by sending $100 billion to military contractors?
  Well, it started in the House, and then the Senate took it and 
stripped every word from the bill.
  Why did they do this? Were they trying to get around the origination 
clause in the Constitution? Were they trying to shortcut some process? 
It is one of those things.
  What we have got now is a collection of bills, and I do appreciate 
that we get individual votes on four of these bills. They include $100 
billion, but they don't include securing our border. They include a 
bill called the REPO Act, which could call into question the value of 
our Treasury bills when we go out to auction those next if we are going 
to confiscate Treasury bills that we sold to other countries. It also 
includes a bill that allows the President to ban websites based on his 
discretion. I am concerned about that.
  This bill, H.R. 815, started as a veterans bill, went to the Senate, 
got gutted, and then became the foreign aid package bill. Now, here in 
the House, we are going to vote on four separate titles, but we are 
going to package them back as amendments to that H.R. 815. So we are 
actually going to send it back to the Senate as the bill they sent to 
us, which is the gutted veterans bill.
  I know this is all confusing, but why is this all being done this 
way? Some will say to force the Senate's hand, but really what it is 
going to do is jam the conservatives in the Senate who would like to 
have a more fulsome debate.
  I am opposed to the rule, and I thank the chairman for the time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez), a valued member of 
the Rules Committee.
  Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, today, after months of delay that 
cost the loss of the Ukrainian military advantage, that cost children's 
lives and access to food and aid, that allowed China to threaten the 
Indo-Pacific, Congress will finally vote. Congress is finally going to 
vote to fund the fight against the tyranny of Russia, Iran, and China, 
the fight for democracy and peace.
  Why did it take us this long?
  Yesterday in Rules, the Republican chair of the Foreign Affairs 
Committee noted that every Republican President since the Soviet Union 
era has stood on the right side of history and stood up to Russia. 
Presidents from Eisenhower to Reagan, George Bush, Sr., and George 
Bush, Jr., they all knew that Russia's desire to reassert its empire by 
bombing and invading its neighbor also harms America and American 
interests--every Republican President, that is, until Donald Trump.
  In contrast to every President before him, Trump praised Putin, tried 
to do business in Russia, allowed Putin to gain the upper hand, and 
eventually denied Ukraine military aid that Congress had approved 
unless Ukraine gave him dirt on Biden. Donald Trump became the pied 
piper for Putin.
  Some of Trump's most ardent followers in this House became Putin-
protecting Republicans and denied the Members of Congress this vote 
until now.
  Now is the moment history has its eyes on this Chamber as Democrats 
and Republicans stand up and stand together for what we love--
democracy. Democracy is the very reason we get to sit here together 
today and debate in the people's House. Democracy is the best answer to 
tyranny, aggression, and depravity.
  It is our shared bipartisan love for democracy that best unites us 
with our allies around the world, allies that are once again united in 
our fight against the war in China and Russia thanks to the leadership 
of President Biden, who repaired the damage Trump inflicted on our 
international relationships.
  I hope that shared love of a world where democracy is defended will 
also unite us in this Chamber. I remind my colleagues, Republicans and 
Democrats, that bipartisanship is a good thing. It is how America 
expects us to govern, and it is how we move one step closer to 
defeating the cruel regimes that seek to take the world backward.

  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Roy), another valuable member of the Rules Committee.
  Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my distinguished colleague from Texas 
for yielding me time, and I very much appreciate his service. I 
apologize that I am here on the floor in opposition to a rule in his 
first week as chairman of the Rules Committee. I have great respect for 
him.

[[Page H2530]]

  The gentlewoman was just essentially implying that for some reason 
this is somehow Donald Trump's fault. Ukraine was invaded by Russia 
under the watch of this President. That is the truth. This incompetent 
President has led to the situation that we sit in right now. People are 
dying in Ukraine, yes, but the problem is they are being funded with 
American debt. There is no skin in the game for the American people. We 
are not talking about tax increases. We are not doing anything to say 
that we are going to pay for this stuff as we rack up a trillion 
dollars of debt every 3 months.
  The truth is, Americans are dying, not just Ukrainians, at the hands 
of wide-open borders, while literal hostiles flood into our country, 
fentanyl pours into our streets, and people are chanting, ``Death to 
America.''
  The response by Republicans is to pass a $1.7 trillion, cap-busting, 
spending bill under suspension of the rules, handing the keys to the 
NSA and intel to continue spying on Americans. Now, we are on the floor 
under a rule to give another $100 billion to fund war, unpaid for, with 
zero border security under a rule which Republicans should oppose 
because it is a process predesigned to achieve the desired 
predetermined outcome, with no border security.
  The individual votes on Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, and a sweetener bill 
for TikTok are belied by the fact they are being packaged together as 
an amendment to the Senate-passed foreign aid bill. This was all 
precooked. It is why President Biden and Chuck Schumer are praising it.
  The problem is, there were 9 amendments handpicked by leadership to 
be made in order despite 300 amendments having been filed.
  Speaker Johnson said in January: ``If President Biden wants a 
supplemental spending bill focused on national security, it better 
begin with defending America's national security. We want to get the 
border closed and secured first.''
  To that I say, amen, and I would say to Speaker Johnson, where is 
that?

                              {time}  0945

  Mr. McGOVERN. Wow, Mr. Speaker, I guess the gentleman from Texas is 
unaware of the fact that there was a bipartisan border security deal 
that was agreed to that, unfortunately, House Republicans and Trump 
decided to kill.
  I ask unanimous consent to insert in the Record an Axios article 
titled: ``Trump, House Republicans plot to kill border deal.''
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Massachusetts?
  There was no objection.

                      [From AXIOS, Jan. 29, 2024]

           Trump, House Republicans Plot To Kill Border Deal

                           (By Stef W. Kight)

       Republican and Democratic senators are taking to the 
     airwaves, scrambling to pass severe restrictions on migrants 
     flooding across the U.S.-Mexico border. There's just one 
     thing: Their plan is all but dead.
       Why it matters: The Senate might pass the plan, which would 
     be one of the harshest immigration bills of the century. 
     President Biden is ready to sign it. But House Republicans--
     egged on by former President Trump--already are planning to 
     shut it down.
       State of play: Illegal immigration has rocketed to the top 
     of voters' concerns, and Biden has become increasingly 
     desperate for a solution. Trump and conservative Republicans 
     see a political opportunity to squeeze Biden and Democrats on 
     the issue.
       Trump, whose front-runner status in the Republican 
     presidential race has solidified his leadership of the GOP, 
     has loudly vowed to kill the bipartisan border deal.
       It's not going to happen, and I'll fight it all the way,'' 
     Trump said Saturday in Nevada.
       Zoom in: House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has fallen in 
     line. He called the deal ``dead on arrival'' on Friday, then 
     doubled down over the weekend, claiming it wouldn't do enough 
     to stop illegal border crossIngs.
       He has said he talks frequently with Trump about the 
     border.
       Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) warned 
     senators last week that Trump's opposition would make it 
     difficult to get a border plan through Congress.
       A sign of Trump's influence: Oklahoma's GOP voted Saturday 
     to censure Sen. James Lankford (R.-Okla.) for being a lead 
     negotiator in the border policy discussions.
       The details: The text of the border bill is expected to 
     drop soon. It will include a measure that effectively would 
     block illegal border crossers from asylum once the number of 
     migrant encounters hits a daily average of 5,000 in a week or 
     8,500 on a single day, as Axios has reported.
       Those restrictions would remain until illegal crossings 
     drop and remain low for an extended period of time.
       The deal also would expedite the asylum process and limit 
     the use of parole to release migrants into the U.S.
       The big picture: The migrant crisis at the border and in 
     major U.S. cities is one of the most jeopardizing issues for 
     Biden and Democrats this November.
       It's also Trump's marquee political issue. He has every 
     incentive to keep it front and center as he heads toward a 
     likely rematch against Biden.
       Biden has doubled down on a tougher border image in recent 
     months, and has signaled his willingness to ``shut down the 
     border'' if he's given new authority under the Senate 
     agreement.
       What they're saying: The White House is accusing 
     Republicans of flip-flopping for politics--first supporting 
     their own strict immigration bill and now saying Biden 
     already has the authority to close the border
       ``If Speaker Johnson continues to believe--as President 
     Biden and Republicans and Democrats in Congress do--that we 
     have an imperative to act immediately on the border, he 
     should give this administration the authority and funding 
     we're requesting,'' White House press secretary Karine Jean-
     Pierre said in a statement.
       ``Right now [the plan's critics] are functioning off of 
     internet rumors of what's in the bill, and many of them are 
     false,'' Lankford said on ``Face the Nation,'' defending the 
     plan he has been negotiating.
       ``I want to know how house R's square their support for 
     H.R. 2 with their position now that we should do nothing,'' 
     one senior GOP Senate aide told Axios, referring to a 
     sweeping border bill passed by House Republicans last year.
       Republicans ``are redefining the terms of any debate for 
     the future,'' one former Biden official told Axios. ``A very 
     extreme, enforcement-heavy package is now being rejected as 
     not tough enough.''
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Kentucky (Mr. Barr) from the Financial Services Committee.
  Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, while I rise in support of the rule, and I 
thank Chairman Burgess for his leadership on giving Members the 
opportunity to vote on these packages, I also rise to express my 
profound disappointment that the Biden administration and Democrats in 
this Chamber have blocked from being ruled in order my amendment to cut 
off a blank check to Russia's war machine.
  President Biden, the U.S. Treasury Department, and congressional 
Democrats are so concerned about my amendment that they have prevented 
it from even being considered or debated before this body. Last 
October, the Biden administration renewed General License 8, which 
authorizes certain energy-related transactions involving Russian 
financial institutions. This license has now been renewed eight times 
since the start of Russia's full-scale, unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, 
and it continues to undermine measures designed to curtail Russia's 
energy revenues.
  This license, which is the architecture of the Biden foreign policy 
on Ukraine has become a lifeline for Vladimir Putin. It is the symbol 
of President Biden's weakness on Russia, the primary avenue through 
which he is financing Russia's war machine. It is the most prominent 
example of how the Biden administration's radical climate agenda has 
collided with its stated policy to counter Russian aggression, and it 
shows how the Biden administration's climate policy conflicts with our 
national security.
  Coincidentally, the current general license is set to expire on May 
1. My very timely amendment would prevent this renewal and would erode 
the energy profits that are refilling Putin's coffers and funding his 
war in Ukraine. The sanctions put in place by the Biden administration 
on Russia's energy sector, a principle source of revenue for the 
Kremlin, had been wholly inadequate.
  Russia's oil and gas revenues have been rising, and countries like 
India and China have been buying Russian oil well above the price cap 
put in place. Enforcement of the price cap has been poor, which has 
enabled Russia to find non-G7 insurers and ships for the transport of a 
seaborne crude much more quickly than anticipated. The ease with which 
Russia has been able to evade the price cap calls into question the 
efficacy and enforceability of the price cap.
  Moreover, another renewal of the general license next month would 
completely ignore the efforts Europe has finally made to diversify its 
energy supplies and reverse its dangerous prewar

[[Page H2531]]

reliance on Russian energy. General License 8 originally reflected the 
need to get countries that were dependent on Russian energy sufficient 
time to diversify their energy resources, but many of those countries 
have now effectively diversified their energy suppliers.
  Continued issuance of an overly broad general license in this 
instance threatens to repeat the mistakes made in relation to the Nord 
Stream 2 pipeline, where the Biden administration's refusal to 
implement strong sanctions against the pipeline not only removed 
deterrents before the full-scale invasion----
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Kentucky.
  Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the additional time. 
The Biden administration's refusal to implement strong sanctions 
against the pipeline not only removed deterrents before the full-scale 
invasion and invited Putin's invasion of Ukraine, but also allowed 
parts of Europe's dangerous reliance on Russian energy to continue 
until Putin's tanks had already rolled across Ukraine's borders. 
Rescinding the license would encourage our allies' efforts to rid 
themselves of reliance on Russian energy sources.
  It makes no sense to fund a needed resistance against Russia's 
unprovoked war against Ukraine while also allowing Russia to fill its 
war machine coffers through its sale of energy to the rest of the 
world. Biden can't have his cake and eat it too. It is just ridiculous.
  He cannot pursue a radical anti-fossil energy climate crusade at home 
and hope to keep energy prices low. Similarly, he can't keep the flow 
of Russian crude on the world markets to bolster global supply while 
reducing Moscow's revenues through an unenforceable price cap.
  The only way to truly punish Moscow and deprive Putin of the 
financial support he needs to materially--to prosecute the war is by 
removing the general license on the energy-related transactions 
facilitated by sanctioned Russian banks. I urge my colleagues to 
support this rule.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I would just ask if the gentleman from 
Massachusetts has additional speakers. If not, I am prepared to close, 
and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I yield myself 
the balance of my time to do so.
  Mr. Speaker, the Democrats have had to make some tough decisions 
about how to vote on this rule, and let me tell you why I voted to 
support it last night. I have disagreements with many aspects of the 
various pieces of legislation that will come before us, and there are 
some of these pieces that I will vote against.
  Again, there will be separate votes, and there will be separate 
debates, but as we learned last night in the Rules Committee, the 
alternative that some of my Republican friends were pushing to this 
approach was an Israel-only package with no humanitarian aid, not just 
for the people of Gaza, but for any suffering people that the aid would 
benefit and some really ugly border provisions, which I found 
unconscionable and some other bad stuff as well.

  Democrats, once again, will be the adults in the room, and I am so 
glad Republicans finally realized the gravity of the situation and the 
urgency with which we must act. But guess what, Mr. Speaker? You don't 
get an award around here for simply doing your damn job. President 
Biden told us last year, 6 months ago--over 6 months ago--that this was 
urgent and important, that Ukraine needed us, that Putin was not going 
to stop, that the war against Ukrainians was particularly vicious. 
Every major human rights organization in the world has told us the 
impact of Russia's attack against Ukraine.
  The Senate voted months ago. The Senate can barely agree on what to 
have for lunch, and they voted months ago. What did the House do? What 
did my House Republican friends do? They did nothing. There was no 
action to help our allies. It is all delay, distract, deny and blame 
Joe Biden. I would just say to my colleagues, look at what MAGA 
extremism has gotten you; nothing. It has gotten you nothing, not a 
damn thing.
  In fact, it has empowered Democrats. At every critical juncture in 
this Congress, it has been Democrats who have been the ones to stand up 
for our country and do the right thing for the American people. 
Democrats ensured the U.S. didn't default on its debt last year in case 
anybody forgot. Democrats supplied votes to keep the government running 
in September of last year, in November of last year, and in March of 
this year. Democrats supplied the votes to pass the National Defense 
Authorization Act. Democrats supplied the votes for the tax relief bill 
that passed earlier this year. Democrats have done the job that 
Republicans have refused to do.
  Again, we have different priorities, and I think, based on what I 
have heard in this last Congress, different values. We don't even agree 
on a lot of what has come before the full House. Democrats have done 
the job that Republicans have refused to do. We don't want an award for 
it. We don't want a trophy for showing up to work. All we want is for 
Republicans to do their job, stop blaming Joe Biden for their own 
incompetence, and work with our side to find common ground. We are in a 
divided government. A Democrat is President, we have a Democratic 
controlled Senate, and we have a narrow Republican majority in the 
House. Nobody is going to get everything they want. We have to work 
together. We have to compromise.
  I hope today's vote loosens the grip that MAGA extremism has on this 
body, and especially when it comes to supporting our allies. You know, 
the Rules Committee is the committee that has been known as the traffic 
cop of Congress. Every bill of consequence comes through the Rules 
Committee. I mean, we set the bills for debate on the House floor.
  The last bill that the Rules Committee reported that actually became 
law was almost 10 months ago. All the other bills that we have sent 
that made it over to the White House and become law had to be brought 
up under different processes and procedures. I mean, let that sink in. 
Something is not working here. You either want to be a body that is 
constructive and that gets stuff done, or you just want to be a party 
that just obstructs everything and gets nothing done, because at the 
end of the day, there is nothing to show for all the yelling and 
screaming and finger-pointing that we see on a regular basis on this 
House floor.
  My friends have to choose. History is going to judge them by how they 
answer one simple question: Are they going to work together with 
Democrats; in this case, stand with our allies and stand for America, 
or are they gonna throw in their lot with MAGA Trump and Putin? We are 
living in very uncertain times, Mr. Speaker, and people around the 
world are counting on this country to stand up and lead.
  People in Ukraine, people in Taiwan, people in Gaza, people in 
Israel--you know, the eyes of the world are on this body. There are a 
lot of things in this package I disagree with. And in my opening 
statement, I talked about my concern about the unconcerned aid package 
to Israel. My concern is that Netanyahu's government is not moving in a 
direction that, quite frankly, is a direction that I think will lead to 
more security for Israel; it is exactly the opposite. I worry that what 
he is doing is, quite frankly, a violation of the human rights of so 
many innocent people in Gaza and in the West Bank.
  I was hoping that they would pursue a different pathway. Instead, we 
now hear that he wants to go into Rafah. There is a famine happening in 
Gaza. People are starving to death. Aid is being frustrated from 
getting there, food medicine, important supplies. People are dying. 
Surely we should all care about that. We should be able to advocate for 
Israel's security but also advocate for the people of Gaza, children of 
Gaza, senior citizens. People are just trying to get on with their 
lives.
  Notwithstanding the fact that we may have disagreements--and some of 
my Republican friends obviously disagree whether we should be helping 
Ukraine or not. I disagree with you, fine, but we have a process that 
you will be able to vote on all of these things separately, and you 
will be able to make your views clear. I have got to tell you, you 
know, you don't have to

[[Page H2532]]

agree on everything to agree on something. We ought to agree that these 
issues are important enough to debate and to have up or down votes on.
  The people who are advocating that we do nothing, you know, or that 
we--you know, that we attach things to this bill that will guarantee 
that it goes nowhere in the Senate, and therefore, we help nobody, I 
don't understand why you are even here quite frankly. We need to move 
this process forward.
  The House has to function. As we have seen, under Republican control, 
that only happens when Democrats are the adults in the room. I say that 
not to be partisan. I say that because that is what has been happening. 
I gave you a list of things that needed to be done, you know, not just 
in terms of helping our allies, but in terms of saving our economy, 
that could not have been done unless Democrats stood up and behaved 
like adults.

                              {time}  1000

  Mr. Speaker, this should have been dealt with a long time ago, months 
ago, but here we are. Here we are.
  Mr. Speaker, I hope that as we proceed, we have rational and 
thoughtful debate, knowing that we will have disagreements and knowing 
that some of us will have different ideas on how we should proceed 
forward.
  This is the United States House of Representatives. We are supposed 
to debate issues. We are supposed to vote on things. Unfortunately, 
this has become a place where trivial issues get debated passionately 
and important ones not at all.
  Well, these are important issues that are in this bill. Some of them 
I agree with; some of them I don't agree with. Let's debate them, let's 
vote on them, and then let's move on.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, our adversaries, notably Russia, China, and Iran, are 
watching to see how we will respond. Our reaction to these crises will 
determine how they will choose to proceed. An important difference 
between this package of bills today and the previously passed Senate 
supplemental is the addition of the 21st Century Peace through Strength 
Act. The legislation is important as it includes sanctions and policies 
that counter our adversaries through the inclusion of the REPO Act, the 
removal of our payment for foreign pensions, and requiring the 
administration to provide a game plan in Ukraine, something that many 
of us have been asking for, for some time.
  Ronald Reagan told us peace comes through strength. By failing to act 
now, it will signal the opposite of strength. It will invite future 
aggression, as failure to act has done so often in the past.
  Mr. Speaker, I also feel obligated to point out that this Congress 
has had two votes on providing aid to Israel. One occurred in October, 
right after Speaker Johnson was elected. Indeed, it was one of his 
highest priorities. I thought that aid package was responsibly offset 
through cuts to other Federal agencies here. Senator Schumer didn't see 
it that way and said we have never conditioned aid to Israel with 
anything, so there can be no offset, that it can't be paid for.
  In the House, in February of this year, I think it was Mr. Calvert of 
California who introduced a bill to provide the same aid to Israel 
without the offset. It was blocked, this time by people on my side.
  The Speaker said, okay, let's bring it up under suspension, and maybe 
we can get agreement between Members on both sides. In fact, under 
suspension, the two-thirds majority required was not achieved, so that 
bill failed in February, as well.
  Had any one of those bills passed, we might not be here today because 
we all know 1 week--10 days ago--Iran attacked Israel, the missiles and 
drones originating from Iranian soil, the first time that has ever 
happened, and the crisis advanced.
  Yes, we did have an opportunity to provide that aid to Israel. It 
might not have been what my friend from Massachusetts would have 
wanted, but at the same time, we had the opportunity to provide that.
  Unfortunately, now, even members of my committee are upset with where 
we are today, but we had the opportunity to sort of head off all of 
this by simply passing that aid package last February, and we wouldn't 
do it.
  What happens if we don't do this today? Does it get better or worse 
for us down the road? Nobody knows the answer to that, but history 
tells us it is very likely to get worse.
  We have two votes now, Mr. Speaker, on Israeli aid. On both counts, I 
think most of us in this body want to see that pass.
  I will stress again that weakness invites aggression, and we cannot 
allow our allies in the Middle East, the Indo-Pacific, and Ukraine to 
be abandoned. By doing so, we will not prevent future aggression but 
will invite it.
  Today, we have an opportunity to deliver critical aid to our allies, 
and I believe it is appropriate to do so.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the 
previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on adoption of the 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question are postponed.

                          ____________________