[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 99 (Tuesday, June 10, 2025)] [House] [Pages H2581-H2587] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 884, PROHIBITING VOTING BY NONCITIZENS IN DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ELECTIONS; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2056, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FEDERAL IMMIGRATION COMPLIANCE ACT OF 2025; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2096, PROTECTING OUR NATION'S CAPITAL EMERGENCY ACT; AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF S. 331, HALT ALL LETHAL TRAFFICKING OF FENTANYL ACT Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 489 and ask for its immediate consideration. The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: H. Res. 489 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 884) to prohibit individuals who are not citizens of the United States from voting in elections in the District of Columbia and to repeal the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform now printed in the bill 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 Oversight and Government Reform or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit. Sec. 2. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2056) to require the District of Columbia to comply with federal immigration laws. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform now printed in the bill, modified by the amendment printed in 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 Oversight and Government Reform or their respective designees; and (2) 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. 2096) to restore the right to negotiate matters pertaining to the discipline of law enforcement officers of the District of [[Page H2582]] Columbia through collective bargaining, to restore the statute of limitations for bringing disciplinary cases against members or civilian employees of the Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform now printed in the bill 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 Oversight and Government Reform or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit. Sec. 4. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (S. 331) to amend the Controlled Substances Act with respect to the scheduling of fentanyl-related substances, 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) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to commit. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Moore of Utah.) The gentlewoman from Indiana is recognized for 1 hour. Mrs. HOUCHIN. 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 Mrs. HOUCHIN. 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 gentlewoman from Indiana? There was no objection. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and in support of the underlying legislation. Last night, the Rules Committee met and produced a rule, House Resolution 489, providing for the House's consideration of several pieces of legislation. House Resolution 489 provides for closed rules for S. 331, H.R. 884, H.R. 2056, and H.R. 2096. The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided by the chair and ranking member for the Committee on Energy and Commerce, or their respective designees, for consideration of S. 331. {time} 1215 Additionally, the rule provides for 1 hour of debate each for H.R. 884, H.R. 2056, and H.R. 2096, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform or their respective designees. Mr. Speaker, starting with S. 331, the HALT Fentanyl Act, important legislation that the House considered back in February when 98 Democrats supported it, this bill would permanently classify all fentanyl-related substances as illegal and give our law enforcement officers more tools to combat the crisis. The bill also ensures that medical professionals can research fentanyl-related substances so that we can better understand their effects on human health. In 2023, more than 100,000 people nationwide, including 2,190 from my home State of Indiana, died from a drug overdose. National numbers from the same year indicate that approximately 75,000 people died an overdose death related to synthetic opioids. Fentanyl deaths account for as much as 77 percent of adolescent overdose deaths, and it is the leading cause of death in the 18- to 49-year-old age bracket. We cannot stand by and do nothing while this scourge exists. The bottom line is that this overwhelmingly bipartisan bill is necessary to assist our law enforcement officers in combating fentanyl. Mr. Speaker, I will transition to the issue of free and fair elections and H.R. 884. In 2022, Washington, D.C., enacted a dangerous law: the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act, D.C. Act 24-640, which allows noncitizens, including illegal immigrants, foreign agents, and diplomats, to vote in local elections. We should not allow foreign entities who are hostile to the United States to vote in our elections, period. We should not allow illegal immigrants to vote in our elections. This is a direct assault on the value of American citizenship, and it undermines the voices of lawful voters. Worse, it is part of a broader effort by the left to chip away at Congress' constitutional authority over our Nation's Capital. The Constitution is clear: Congress has the power to legislate in all cases whatsoever concerning Washington, D.C. Under the Home Rule Act, we have the duty to review and reject laws that threaten the integrity of our elections and our constitutional system. Even Mayor Bowser withheld her signature from those actions, and I thank her for that. Of all places, we must not let the Nation's Capital become a model for illegal voting. Additionally, this rule provides for H.R. 2096, the Protecting Our Nation's Capital Emergency Act. In 2023, the D.C. Council passed the so-called Comprehensive Policing and Justice Reform Amendment Act, a bill that singles out the Metropolitan Police Department, making it the only union in the District stripped of its ability to collectively bargain on disciplinary matters. H.R. 2096 puts an end to this antipolice policy and restores fairness to the bargaining process for D.C.'s law enforcement officers. Finally, this rule includes H.R. 2056, the District of Columbia Federal Immigration Compliance Act, which simply ensures that D.C. follows Federal immigration law. That is because no city, especially not our Capital, should get a free pass to ignore the laws of the land. In 2019, D.C. Mayor Bowser approved the Sanctuary Values Amendment Act of 2019, which, according to the Mayor's Office, ``limits the District's cooperation with Federal immigration agencies, including by complying with detainer requests from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (``ICE'') absent a judicial warrant or order issued by a Federal judge or by providing to Federal immigration agencies information about when or where someone will be released.'' This is ludicrous. In other words, D.C. will make it harder for ICE to detain dangerous criminals and otherwise impede their ability to do their jobs. Mr. Speaker, you can't make this stuff up. While my colleagues continue to double down on their America-last policies, House Republicans are charging forward and standing up for hardworking families and vulnerable Americans. The legislation before us is common sense, pro-law enforcement, and necessary. Mr. Speaker, I look forward to the consideration of these important pieces of legislation. I urge the passage of this rule, and I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. Houchin) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the bills in this rule today are nothing more than a cheap distraction and another smokescreen from House Republicans, who are desperate to change the subject. I get why. After all, it was just 2 weeks ago that nearly every single Republican in this Chamber voted for what may be the most shameful piece of legislation that this body has produced in years, the GOP tax scam. Mr. Speaker, it is bad enough that it gives massive tax breaks to billionaires and wealthy donors, but it does that by literally taking food out of the mouths of hungry seniors and children and ripping healthcare away from more than 16 million Americans. In case it wasn't clear, Republicans are gutting Medicaid and even targeting Medicare, programs that millions of families depend on. It is not because they have to but because they want to. Mr. Speaker, I know my friends across the aisle hate to hear us say the truth out loud. It makes them uncomfortable because they know what they are doing is wrong. Yet, that is just the cold, hard truth, Mr. Speaker. [[Page H2583]] In the process, Republicans are adding trillions of dollars to the very national debt that the majority loves to complain about when it is politically convenient. That is also the cold, hard truth. Numbers don't lie. Look at the Congressional Budget Office's analysis. The Republicans' math does not add up. Again, this adds trillions of dollars to the debt. Since the backlash has been swift and deserved, Republicans are scrambling to do everything they can to sweep it under the rug and change the narrative. That is what these bills are about--political misdirection, not meaningful solutions. Let's be clear. Three of the bills this week meddle in D.C.'s local governance. It is not because there is some urgent crisis but because Republicans want to score cheap political points and take power away from a local government that they weren't elected to make decisions for. In fact, Republicans referred to the District of Columbia as ``property'' in last night's Rules Committee hearing. Who talks like that? I thought I was watching ``Gone with the Wind.'' This is so incredibly offensive. The people who live in D.C. are not the Republicans' property. Their land is not Republicans' property. Their money is not the property of the Republicans. The majority should keep their hands off of it and keep their hands off of them. Republicans, Mr. Speaker, are on a power trip. These bills either chase problems that don't exist or duplicate efforts already underway. That is not legislating. That is performative politics. Here is the real kicker: If my Republican colleagues were serious about public safety in D.C., as my colleagues on the other side of the aisle claim, then the first thing to do is restore the $1 billion in the city's funding that they slashed earlier this year. I want to be clear. This is not Federal money. We are literally talking about the city being able to spend their own money that D.C. residents have paid in taxes for the District. That money, taken from D.C.'s budget and paid by D.C. taxpayers, goes toward supporting public safety, social services, and critical infrastructure that residents and tourists alike rely on. The Senate already passed the fix. The bill is ready for us to vote on. Even Donald Trump says he supports it. I can't believe it, but he says that he supports it. Mr. Speaker, why is it that House Republicans here in Congress are dragging their feet? I thought they did everything Trump directed them to do, Mr. Speaker. Why are Republicans willing to stand strong against Trump on this, but when it comes to taking away healthcare and food assistance from their constituents, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle suddenly have no backbone and go along with Trump on that? Give me a damn break. The fourth bill this week makes formatting changes to the HALT Fentanyl Act, a bill that we have debated before. I will be very clear. The fentanyl crisis is real. It is deadly, and it demands serious action. Yet, that action must be more than slogans and symbolism. You can't say that you are serious about fighting fentanyl while slashing funding for mental health services, addiction treatment, and Medicaid. That is hypocrisy, and that is dangerous. Yet, this is the Republican playbook. Republicans pay lipservice to real problems, undercut the solutions that actually work, and shovel more tax breaks to the ultrawealthy--rinse and repeat. Mr. Speaker, the American people deserve a hell of a lot better. They deserve better than a party taking away their healthcare in the middle of the night. America's hardworking moms and dads, who may work multiple jobs but still don't make enough to afford groceries under this administration, deserve to know that they can rely on SNAP during rocky times so that their 7- and 8-year-old kids have something to eat. Seniors deserve to have full fridges and access to healthcare that they have paid into so that they can live out their remaining years with dignity. If seniors are paying their fair share in taxes, billionaires, hedge fund managers, and people who can afford to dump millions into political campaigns should pay their fair share, too. People are tired of all of these giveaways to multibillionaires while hardworking, middle-class families or those struggling to get into the middle class get screwed over. What we saw from Republicans in the last week of May, Mr. Speaker, is reprehensible. It is not what the American people deserve. We must do better, and I reserve the balance of my time. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I have said this again and again. The rhetoric from our Democratic colleagues on the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is just not true. In fact, we are preserving benefits for those who need it most by preventing people who are illegal and ineligible from accessing Medicaid. We are also ensuring that able-bodied adults have a mandatory work requirement of just less than 20 hours per week. It includes the ability for participating in education, job search, and community engagement to all count toward that work requirement. What we were trying to do in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is ensure that limited resources are protected for pregnant women, children, seniors, and individuals with disabilities. That is the truth. With reference to the CBO, the CBO has been wrong again and again. It is on record as being wrong by more than $1 trillion. We cannot count on the CBO's score alone as a measure of how well or what savings this bill will have or not have. In fact, the Democratic-led CBO has overestimated the cost of Trump's tax cuts, underestimated the cost of the Affordable Care Act, and overestimated the impact of the Inflation Reduction Act. I will note something about this being political misdirection, as my colleague noted. He said that this is not an urgent crisis. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues may want to take a look at the lawlessness that is happening in California. That is not a crisis? I think it is, and it is certainly something that we don't want to see in our Nation's Capital, in Washington, D.C., which is exactly the type of thing that we are trying to prevent by passing this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I hate to be the one to have to inform the gentlewoman of this fact, but the head of CBO, according to The Wall Street Journal, is a registered Republican. Now, we are being told by the Republicans that we can't trust the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office to give us correct numbers on how much things are going to cost or how much the tax cuts are going to cost. Who do we rely on for that? Is it Elon Musk? Maybe not anymore because Elon and Trump are fighting. The bottom line is that CBO has been kind of the gold standard that both parties have pointed to in various debates on budgetary bills over the years. I should also point out, because I think I want it to be very clear, there is no Federal funding in Medicaid that goes to provide support for undocumented immigrants. CBO also states that, so that little red herring out there is just, again, to distract. It is just not truthful. That is not truthful. I think everybody in this Chamber knows that. Enough of that. Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I am going to offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 2753, the Hands Off Medicaid and SNAP Act of 2025, which would block the Republican budget from cutting Medicaid or SNAP benefits and kicking people off of these lifesaving programs. Mr. Speaker, 3 weeks ago, House Republicans jammed through their multitrillion-dollar budget scam by a one-vote margin. Some Republicans didn't even know what was in the bill. They rushed it through so fast that we are reportedly going to have to revote on it later this week to fix all the errors in the bill. While we stand here debating three bills to micromanage the affairs of the District of Columbia, which has its own Mayor and city council, who are perfectly capable of representing their constituents, Republicans are moving forward with more tax breaks for billionaires and corporations while lower [[Page H2584]] income Americans are made worse off through their largest cuts to healthcare and food assistance in our Nation's history. {time} 1230 We live in the richest country in the history of the world. I will inform the gentlewoman and those in this Chamber that we have 46 million people in the United States of America who are hungry or food insecure. We should all be ashamed of that. Rather than trying to address that problem, by the way, which is a costly problem, the Republicans instead chose to cut $300 billion out of the SNAP program. They have also cut funding out of a whole range of other nutritional benefit programs, as well. Before they have a chance to vote again on their big bill later this week, I urge my Republican colleagues to correct their mistakes and to vote to protect healthcare. Don't throw American citizens off of healthcare. We should be protecting their healthcare and protecting SNAP for millions of Americans. This is not about undocumented immigrants. Stop that nonsense. This is about American citizens. Stop these cuts by voting to bring up the Hands Off Medicaid and SNAP Act. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment into the Record, along with any extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts? There was no objection. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Simon) to discuss our proposal. Ms. SIMON. Mr. Speaker, as a new Member of Congress, I was under the understanding that our job here is to lift up the voices of those in this country that hold our Nation together with their own hands: The working parents who will absolutely go hungry and will come home to empty refrigerators when their SNAP benefits are cut under the majority's big, cruel bill. Then there are those who cannot sleep at night because their child has a rare form of cancer and are worried about Medicaid not covering their care. The Republicans say it won't affect her. Today, if you go to the children's hospital here in Washington, D.C., and sit with the mother who is praying over her dying child, who had to quit her job and who now qualifies for Medicaid expansion, under their bill she will be cut. Tell her you will not harm her. Unfortunately, this is the America that the majority wants to create. The majority has sent a bill to the Senate that, Mr. Speaker, is not a piece of legislation. It is a piece of forgetting. It is forgetting who we are, and it is forgetting who we owe. The big, cruel bill breaks the basic covenant of government that the people who suffer the most should be seen first. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California. Ms. SIMON. It is without apology that when you write legislation that cuts into the flesh of the working poor, you cannot call it policy. When you cut into the flesh of working-class Americans, you don't call it policy. You call it what it is: cruelty. When you kick 16 million people off of healthcare, you don't call it policy. You call it heartless. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues today to vote ``no'' on the previous question. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, one of the things that my colleague mentioned was the people who are food insecure. I note something that we should be ashamed of is the inflationary policies of the Biden administration that drove up food costs leading to more people being food insecure. I am glad to hear that my colleague on the other side of the aisle is interested in preserving healthcare for those who need it most. I hope that means he will vote for H.R. 1. One of the things we heard just in the last few minutes is that children with cancer and the mother of a child with cancer will not be covered. That is just not true. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act protects benefits for those children. Democrats are fighting to protect healthcare for 1.4 million illegal immigrants. They are fighting to protect billions of dollars in fraud, waste, and abuse. The number that they keep referencing just keeps going up. It has been 13.7 million, 14 million, and now it is 16 million. That is just not true. Even The New York Times said that the numbers that the Democrats have been saying about people who will ``lose their healthcare'' is not true. If you are illegal, if you are ineligible, if you are able-bodied and could work, those are the people that this bill will target. Finally, I will say that, once again, taking it back to the issues at hand, we are here to do the important work of safeguarding our elections in the United States, supporting the police, and ensuring that local jurisdictions aren't obstructing immigration enforcement. Similar bills on these topics have gained support from some Democrats. Instead of trying to belittle these issues or endlessly debate H.R. 1 at every possible turn, they can stop and reflect about their opposition to these commonsense bills, bills supported by the agenda that voters backed months ago. Democrats just can't seem to help themselves. President Trump's multifaceted approach to immigration enforcement is working. Illegal border crossings are down 95 percent. Daily border encounters are down by 93 percent. Got-aways are down by 99 percent. Fentanyl flows are down 54 percent. Mr. Speaker, there were 2,000 ICE arrests every day recently. ICE is finally cleaning up the open-border policy of the Biden administration. Yes, they were open-border policies. Mr. Speaker, I hope that our colleagues will support the underlying rule and the bills that we have considered before us today because we need to secure our elections and stand up for our police and the rule of law. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me respond to the gentlewoman when she wants to know why the numbers keep on going up in terms of the number of uninsured. The reason is the Republicans continuously changed their bill and made it worse. That is why. The majority has made it worse. The bill that we voted on throws more people off of healthcare. Boy, that is something to be proud of. There is no denying the fact that their big, ugly bill cuts SNAP by $300 billion. They cut SNAP by $300 billion. This is a benefit that, on average, is about $2 per person per meal, and they cut $300 billion. They want us to believe there will be no adverse impacts. Everything will just be beautiful. Really? I mean, come on. They cut $300 billion out of the SNAP program. That is going to impact senior citizens, veterans, and children. Let me tell you, the savings that is going to be garnered from the $300 billion cut that the Republicans are using to offset the cost of tax cuts for billionaires, that is going to be very costly because hungry kids don't learn when they go to school. Senior citizens who take their medication on an empty stomach end up in an emergency room. People who don't have access to decent nutrition end up with chronic illnesses that last a lifetime. Workers who are hungry are less productive in the workforce. That is what my friends are doing. Don't give me this garbage about undocumented immigrants. CBO made it clear that there is no Medicaid funding going to undocumented immigrants in this country. It is clear. That is a smoke screen so that people don't focus in on how their big, ugly bill is going to hurt regular people in this country. It really is astounding to me. I thought we all came here, no matter what our politics might be, to help people. They are pushing forward a bill that is going to hurt people. It is going to hurt almost everybody in this country except if you are well- off and well-connected. If you are a billionaire, if you are a big donor, if you hang out at Mar-a-Lago, you are doing fine, but not everybody else. [[Page H2585]] The other thing that Republicans are doing is cutting medical research, cutting NIH. If you want to talk about lifesaving investments, let's find a cure for cancer. Let's find a cure for diabetes. Let's find a cure for Alzheimer's. Instead the Republicans are cutting that research. Mr. Speaker, I will just take a couple minutes here to talk about something else because this is a rules debate, and this is something that I find particularly annoying at this moment. I will take a moment to talk about process. Perhaps the only noteworthy thing the Republican majority achieved last Congress was shattering their own record for the most closed Congress ever. That is not something you want to be known for. To be clear, they made history for running the most closed, antidebate Congress we have ever seen. In total, Republicans issued 115 totally closed rules, meaning 115 times where the House could not debate a single amendment on the House floor. Republicans basically told us: nope, no debate, no amendments, no input to make these bills better. Just do whatever we tell you to do. This wasn't an accident. It was the whole game plan, a legislative lockdown that delivered the most unproductive, dysfunctional Congress in modern American history. Did they learn anything from it? No, they did not learn a thing. This Congress they have taken that broken model and somehow made it worse. As of last night, they have racked up over 50 closed rules in just 5 months. More than 90 percent of the bills they bring up have no amendments, no discussion, no democracy. It is just take it or leave it. At this rate, Republicans are on track to issue over 200 closed rules this Congress. What are we even doing here? In just 5 months, we have seen Republican leadership block over 800 amendments. These are amendments that our colleagues, Democrats and Republicans alike, have submitted to make bills better. Only 14 amendments were selected by Republican leadership to be debated across just four bills. That is a 98 percent rejection rate. They block 98 out of every 100 ideas they receive. What does this look like in practice? It looks like a complete destruction of the deliberative process. Republicans have blocked--get this--debate on amendments that would protect SNAP and Medicaid for millions of Americans and debate on amendments to protect access to the ballot box, the foundation of our democracy. They even blocked debate on bipartisan amendments which would provide a permanent pay fix for Federal wildland firefighters and allow grants to help with fentanyl prevention and education efforts. No wonder nobody likes Congress. The issues that are important to the American people are not even allowed to be debated. As we see here today, Republicans are okay with debating trivial issues passionately but important ones not at all. Mr. Speaker, when I chaired this committee, back when we gave a damn, we welcomed ideas. We let the House work the way it is supposed to work. In our first 5 months, Democrats allowed over 25 percent of all amendments, more than 200 thoughtful proposals to be debated. Here is the kicker: We gave Republicans more chances to debate their ideas than their own leaders do. In 5 months, only 6 of the 220 Republicans, over 97 percent of Republicans in this Chamber, have had an amendment made in order. That is not by mistake. That is a design flaw; a big one. I don't understand how my Republican colleagues, some of which were so excited about having a bigger, better, open process, can say with a straight face that this is what they wanted. They have no voice in improving legislation. Amendments that we offered last night were blocked. At this point in the 117th Congress, Mr. Speaker, under Democratic governance, over half of all bipartisan amendments were made in order. This Congress, we have yet to see a single bipartisan amendment make it to the House floor this year. Not even one. Mr. Speaker, this Republican leadership seemed to have forgotten that this institution is a democratic legislative assembly. Instead, they are running it like a wannabe authoritarian dictatorship. I know that Donald Trump speaks admiringly of Vladimir Putin all the time, but this place is becoming like Russia. Come on. Have some respect for the House of Representatives. Let's open this place up a little bit more. This process right now is a disgrace and the American people deserve so much better than this. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. {time} 1245 Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, fear-mongering is not a solution to the problems that we face today. If we are not going to find savings across all agencies by rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse, we are not going to safeguard these programs for the future. Unfortunately, my colleagues are against rooting out even waste, fraud, and abuse. By doing so, they are not protecting the very programs they claim that they are fighting to protect. Again, with the CBO, according to the White House press secretary, there hasn't been a single staffer in the entire Congressional Budget Office that has contributed to a Republican since the year 2000, but guess what? Many of the staffers within the CBO have contributed to Democratic candidates and politicians in every single cycle since. Unfortunately, it is not an institution in our country that is bipartisan. It has become partisan and political, which is why conservatives and Republicans on our side are skeptical of the CBO and what they report. My colleague referred to closed measures, so I just want to note that it is true, there have been 53 closed measures, but the number needs context. Twelve were in the rules package, which passed 2 weeks before the 119th Rules Committee even organized to begin meeting. An additional 21 measures were either CRAs or received no amendments, making them closed by definition, so only 17 measures have been closed by discretion of the committee. Mr. Speaker, again, I would like to make the emphasis what it should be today, which is on safeguarding our elections, supporting local law enforcement, and trying to eliminate the deadly scourge of fentanyl across the United States. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Wow, the gentlewoman is defending this process. I just want to repeat, when I was chairman, I made one out of every four amendments in order. My Republican friends are making 1 out of every 50 amendments in order, and 0 bipartisan amendments. Again, I don't quite know--well, I guess I do know. I mean, again, the way the Republican leadership is operating here is that, again, we don't debate serious proposals on the House floor. They don't want to have votes. They don't want to have debates. They just want to bring things to the floor under a closed process and tell people to take it or leave it. Then they do this other thing of sneaking things in the rules so we can't even have a vote up or down on major changes. However, that is not the way this place is supposed to run. In terms of, again, the Congressional Budget Office, the head of the Congressional Budget Office, according to The Wall Street Journal, is a registered Republican. If we are not going to rely on the Congressional Budget Office for analyses, who are we supposed to rely on? What, Stephen Miller? I mean, who? I mean, I am just trying to figure out who. Are we supposed to take your word for it or just take the President's word for it? I mean, this is a guy who doesn't read anything. He says he watches everything on TV. I don't even understand. This new position of the Republican Party is that there is no such thing as objective analysis unless it always agrees with them. Well, that is just not the way it is. In terms of fear-mongering, I mean, your big, ugly bill that you passed a couple of weeks ago is going to throw millions of people off of healthcare. It is going to throw--millions of people [[Page H2586]] are going to lose their SNAP benefits, their nutritional benefits, and the reason why is because you are making major cuts. It has nothing to do with undocumented immigrants. You can say that all you want. The gentlewoman knows that Medicare does not provide healthcare for undocumented immigrants. She knows that. Republicans know that. They keep on repeating it anyway because they don't want people to focus in on the reality. I think the American people are beginning to see through all of this. Again, they don't like what they see. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Amodei of Nevada). Members are reminded to direct their comments to the Chair. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that it is not just CBO saying that your big, ugly bill costs trillions of dollars, it is the Joint Committee on Taxation, Budget Lab at Yale, Penn Wharton Budget Model, and the right-leaning Tax Foundation. All of them, all of them say that your big, ugly bill is going to add trillions to the deficit, will explode the deficit, add to the debt, and that is--I mean, it is just everybody. The only people who are saying this is not going to explode the deficit are my Republican friends here in the House. I think they think if they keep on saying that it is not going to cost anything, then people will believe that. That is just not the case. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, many of the entities that my colleague on the other side of the aisle mentioned do not account for growth. The growth measure is significant in reducing the deficit, and I believe that under President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act, we will have record amounts of growth. Our version of the bill only accounts for about 2.6 percent of growth. Some of these agencies are accounting for only 1.8 percent growth counting toward the calculations in this bill. If we are not accounting for robust growth, which I think we will get, then we will have an unclear picture, which is why I am leaning into OMB Director Russ Vought's assessment of the bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I hate to tell the gentlewoman this, but every one of the organizations that I mentioned actually do account for growth. I have the charts here. I am happy to share them with you. From the Tax Foundation to the Penn Wharton Budget Model to Budget Lab at Yale to the Joint Committee on Taxation, here is the graph. I am happy to share that with you so you can see. If your leadership is telling you that they don't, then they are not being honest with you about the extent of this. Mr. Massie, a member of the Republican Party, has also talked about how your big, ugly bill is going to add trillions to the deficit and the debt. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire of the gentlewoman, how many more speakers she has on her side? Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts has 6\1/2\ minutes remaining. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. Mr. Speaker, the truth is that these bills are nothing more than window dressing to cover up a truly grotesque set of priorities. Let's not forget, Republicans just voted to rip healthcare away from 16 million people, not undocumented immigrants, but 16 million American citizens. They voted to deny food assistance to children, seniors, and veterans. They are set to explode the deficit by trillions--trillions-- just to reward their wealthy donors. Now, with even their own Members having second thoughts and regrets about that vote, as The New York Times reported last week, they are desperate to change the conversation. However, these bills, these distractions won't work because the American people are paying attention. They see what is happening. They see the cruelty behind these choices, and they are not fooled. This isn't about policy. This is about morality, about what kind of country we want to be, about whether we stand with working families or with billionaires; whether we choose compassion or cruelty. I know Democrats will keep fighting. We will keep speaking truth to power, and we will make damn sure that the public knows exactly who is responsible when services disappear, when costs go up as a result of these crazy tariffs, and when families are left behind. I urge my colleagues to reject these bills, to reject the politics of distraction, and start doing the hard work the American people sent us here to do. People want us to fight for them. They want us to be focused on their priorities, on making their lives better; not on the priorities of the Elon Musk-wing of the Republican Party, the billionaire class. They want us to focus in on what matters to them. Prices are going up, life is hard, and life is challenging. Rather than dealing with bills that might make their life better, we are dealing with this stuff. This is crazy. The American people want us to rise to the occasion, to be about something more than just politics as usual. This is about people's lives. I will tell you: We owe the American people much better than this Congress is delivering. Really, it is shameful that week after week after week we come up with these distractions that mean nothing in people's lives. Even worse, we pass this big, ugly bill that we did 2 weeks ago that is going to hurt my constituents and the gentlewoman's constituents, as well. There is no denying that people will lose their food benefits and their healthcare benefits in order to pay for tax cuts for billionaires. It is grotesque. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question. I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule. If the rule passes, I urge ``no'' votes on all these damned bills, and I yield back the balance of my time. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time I have remaining. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Indiana has 17\1/2\ minutes remaining. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time for the purpose of closing. I have got just a couple of things I would like to note in my closing, and this is reasons why the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is the best chance in a generation to pass critical reforms that the American people voted for: It delivers tax relief, the largest tax cut in American history, meaning an extra $5,000 in Americans' pockets with double-digit percent decrease to their tax bills. It makes the Trump tax cuts permanent, preventing the largest tax increase ever. It raises Americans' take-home pay by as much as $13,300 and wages by as much as $11,600. It reverses the spending curse plaguing Washington, D.C. The bill delivers the largest deficit reduction in nearly 30 years, with $1.6 trillion in mandatory savings, the largest single reduction in mandatory spending in our country's history. It delivers no tax on tips and no tax on overtime. It provides historic tax relief for seniors. It finishes President Trump's border wall. It boosts Border Patrol and ICE agents on the front line, with the largest border security investment in history. It increases the child tax credit to $2,500 per family. It protects Medicaid for Americans who truly need it. It implements popular work requirements for able-bodied Americans receiving taxpayer-funded benefits. It eliminates hundreds of billions of dollars in green new scam tax credits. It reverses electric vehicle mandates that let radical climate activists set the standards in American energy. [[Page H2587]] It ends Biden's war on American energy. It streamlines onerous permitting processes so America can get building again. It refills the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to safeguard America's energy security. It repeals and rescinds every green corporate welfare subsidy. It stops illegal immigrants from receiving tax credits and tax remittances sent to foreign countries. It supports small businesses by increasing the section 199A deduction to 23 percent. It incentivizes made in America. It creates new Trump savings accounts for newborns. It expands access to childcare for hardworking families. It provides historic increases in funding for the U.S. Coast Guard. It supports building new factories to grow domestic business operations. It helps American farmers, producers, and ranchers compete and sell products in foreign markets. It holds woke elitist universities accountable by increasing the endowment tax on large universities. It protects hardworking taxpayers by canceling Biden's illegal and unfair student loan bailouts. It ends taxpayer-funded gender transition procedures. It is a once-in-a-generation chance to revolutionize our Nation's defense capabilities and protect the homeland against new threats by funding President Trump's Golden Dome. It enhances the capacity of America's naval fleet. It modernizes air traffic control. It strengthens SNAP benefits. It implements critical program integrity and cost-containment provisions in Medicaid to strengthen it for future generations. It safeguards the Second Amendment by removing tax and registration requirements for firearm silencers and eliminating silencers from the National Firearms Act. It provides critical disaster recovery funding to farmers, producers, and ranchers. It provides funding to rebuild America's military. It expands health savings accounts to give Americans greater choice and flexibility in how to spend their money. It gives $10,000 bonuses annually over the next 4 years to Border Patrol and ICE agents on the front lines. It incentivizes scholarships that empower American families and students to choose the education that best fits their needs. It repeals Democrats' insane attack on the gig economy. It reforms and streamlines the Federal student loan program to drive down tuition costs and simplify repayment plans. It strengthens accountability for students and taxpayers on Federal student loans and implements critical reforms to Pell grants to make sure they prioritize students who truly need financial assistance while promoting completion. It increases timber sales on Federal lands. It authorizes the sale of expanded spectrum megahertz to strengthen rural broadband and secure America's technological dominance in AI and other emerging technology. It creates permanent fees that illegal immigrants must pay for their applications so American taxpayers aren't saddled with covering these costs. It protects family farmers. It ends abusive financing practices in Medicaid by freezing provider taxes and prohibiting new provider taxes. It reins in the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and it rolls back harmful Biden-era regulations that increase costs and administrative burdens with limited flexibility for States. {time} 1300 Mr. Speaker, we are not here today to talk about the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. We are here today to talk about the many provisions that are important to the safety and security of the United States. We are talking about a rule that includes provisions to secure American elections, protect and support our police, and target the deadly scourge of fentanyl across the United States. Despite what my colleagues on the left may say, that this is a distraction, we say it is necessary and that we can multitask by doing these things and the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The American people understand the importance of immigration enforcement and the need to provide law enforcement with the tools necessary to stop the deadly flow of fentanyl. That is why 77 million Americans voted to end the Biden-Harris administration's reckless handling of the border and their disregard for the rule of law. Today's measures crack down on fentanyl, safeguard our elections, and back the blue. It is about law, order, and protecting the American people. I look forward to moving these bills out of the House this week, and I ask my colleagues to join me in voting ``yes'' on the previous question and ``yes'' on the rule. The material previously referred to by Mr. McGovern is as follows: An Amendment to H. Res. 489 Offered by Mr. McGovern of Massachusetts At the end of the resolution, add the following: Sec. 5. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the bill (H.R. 2753) to amend the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to provide for a point of order against reconciliation measures that cut benefits for Medicaid or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, 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) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Rules or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit. Sec. 6. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the consideration of H.R. 2753. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous question. The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it. Mr. McGOVERN. 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 will be postponed. ____________________