U.S. House of Representatives U.S. House of Representatives
The U.S. House debates leadership qualifications amid claims Trump and allies are unfit, dismissing accusations as baseless while honoring figures like Dr. Wendy Winterstein (40+ years at Iowa State) and Maureen Fitzsimons (Georgetown alum, cancer survivor). Rural investment bills target farm debt and costs, while April McClain Delaney proposes doubling food bank funding during shutdowns—critical after 43 days left 42M without SNAP benefits. Morgan Griffith pushes six bills, including NIL protections for student-athletes and restrictions on Chinese Communist Party school influence (e.g., $3M to Fairfax’s TJHSST), but Jim McGovern counters, accusing Republicans of ignoring health care crises—premiums set to surge 200–400% in January—and prioritizing billionaire allies over working families. The clash underscores partisan divides: transparency vs. economic urgency, with Trump’s legacy and foreign ties framing the debate. [Automatically generated summary]
And first of all, that's an allegation that you're making.
And second of all, how does this deal with Pete Hagseff specifically?
unidentified
Well, it just goes to show you.
Donald Trump himself is a DEI, and so is HeadChef.
And the thing about it is, none of them are qualified to do the job that they're doing.
You know, really, to be honest, tell you the truth: the United States is the laughing stock of the whole world because, for one thing, they got people unqualified for the first time running this country, and this does not make any sense.
And everybody knows this.
People know that.
Even the people coming on talking about what HeadSet is doing is right or whatever.
They know that this is a lie.
It is all a lie.
Trump is doing this to hide his.
You can continue watching this event if you go to our website, c-span.org.
Back now to the U.S. Capitol, where the House is about to gavel in live coverage on C-SPAN.
The chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceeding and announces to the House the approval thereof.
Pursuant to clause one of Rule One, the journal stands approved.
The Pledge of Allegiance will be led by the gentlewoman from Iowa, Miss Henson.
unidentified
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
I rise today to recognize Dr. Wendy Winterstein, president of Iowa State University, on her retirement next month after more than 40 years of distinguished service.
Dr. Winterstein has been a remarkable leader whose commitment to her students and to the state of Iowa has left a lasting impact on the institution.
She brought the Innovate at Iowa State vision to life, solidifying the school's role as a national leader in research and entrepreneurship.
Under her leadership, Iowa State University has advanced cutting-edge research to strengthen Iowa agriculture.
She supported world-class faculty and helped prepare the next generation of leaders and innovators to solve challenges and better our state and our nation.
My husband, Matt, an Iowa State alum, and I, of course, look forward to many more Cyclones games and know that Dr. Winterstein will be cheering on the clones for many more years to come.
So thank you and congratulations, Dr. Winterstein, on your retirement.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Maureen Ann Fitzsimons, born and raised in Larchmont, who passed away the day before Thanksgiving.
Maureen, a bright and engaging young woman, leaves behind her mother, two brothers, and adoring nieces and nephews after a 15-year battle with cancer that began at age 30.
She attended St. John's and Paul's School in the Ursuline School, continued on to earn her undergraduate degree from Georgetown University, and went on to earn her J.D. from St. John's Law School.
During her school years, she was an athlete as well on the tennis and the track teams.
Her optimism and warmth shone through the many years, despite her health concerns, whether at work or sailing at the Larchmont Yacht Club, she lived her life to the fullest as best she could.
Last night, her friends and family gathered to pay her final homage before today's funeral mass at St. Augustine's Roman Catholic Church in Larchmont.
She deserved a better fate, a longer life, but she made her mark nonetheless.
I rise today to applaud YouTube TV and Hulu Plus Live TV for expanding public access to Congress by carrying C-SPAN, C-SPAN 2, and C-SPAN 3 beginning next week.
For 46 years, C-SPAN's respected non-profit service has offered Americans unfiltered gavel-to-gavel coverage of their government in action.
However, millions of streaming households were left without this vital window into the debates and decisions which shape our nation.
By adding the C-SPAN networks, YouTube TV and Hulu Plus Live TV are making a strong and, I hope, enduring commitment to public service, transparency, and civic engagement.
They now join cable and satellite providers like Comcast, Charter, Cox, DirecTV, and Dish in supporting a treasured service that strengthens accountability and confidence in our democratic systems.
This is a big win for the American people.
Full access will help inform the public no matter how they choose to watch.
I thank YouTube TV.
I thank Hulu Plus Live TV for their important decision, and I yield back.
We all mourn the loss from the tragic attack on two National Guard members here in Washington last week.
Yet, once again, the master of distraction seeks to avoid any accountability for his role in this tragedy.
Only seven months earlier, the Trump administration granted the asylum to the assassin.
Big unanswered questions for the president.
What specific vetting was done with regard to the three years that this assassin lived here in America?
Was his prior post-traumatic stress from his violent work considered?
Was the caseworker who reported his possible radicalization interviewed and reviewed?
Was his inability to even get a job a factor?
Did this review include biometric information, check social media platforms, and other steps?
Instead of blaming all immigrants, blaming Biden, how about just looking in the mirror and figuring out what went wrong here in this regime and how to fix it in order to avoid another tragedy?
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
unidentified
Mr. Speaker, today I rise to recognize an extraordinary public servant from Jones County, Mr. Paul Sheffield, whose career reflects a lifetime of dedication to the safety and well-being of Mississippi families.
Paul began his public service in 1998 with the City of Laurel's Traffic Maintenance Division.
By 2001, he was serving as a police officer in the town of Sandersonville and soon joined the Jones County Sheriff's Emergency Operations Center, working as a dispatcher, operations officer, reserve deputy, and a K-9 deputy.
In 2005, Paul continued his calling as a MEMA and area coordinator, serving for 11 years during that role.
During that time, he and his wife, Tracy, whom he married in 1999, welcomed their son Caleb through adoption in 2010 and celebrated the birth of their daughter in 2013.
His commitment to service grew right alongside his family.
After leaving MEMA in 2016, Paul served with the Emergency Management District of Forrest County.
In 2018, he became Executive Director of Jones County Emergency Operations Center.
He holds the distinction of Mississippi Certified Emergency Manager and has served as both Vice President and President of the Mississippi Civil Defense Emergency Management Agency.
Nationally, he is recognized as a certified emergency and disaster professional.
His service also extends into the 9-11 Coordinators Association and six years with the Jones County Coroner's Office, where he continues to serve as deputy medical examiner.
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sheffield's decades of leadership and dedication have strengthened the emergency preparedness across our state.
I'm proud to honor him today in his lifetime of service.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak about rural America and the challenges it's facing.
People back home in eastern North Carolina are concerned about the lack of investment in rural communities, programs that are hard to access, high input costs, low return on their crops, and increasing debt just to keep the farm open.
That is why I'm introducing two key bills to strengthen rural communities and family farms.
The Rural Uplift and Revitalization Assistance Act will provide necessary technical assistance for rural communities to improve access to rural development programs.
The Farm Transitions Act of 2025 will reauthorize the Commission on Farm Transitions and require it to release a report with recommendations to help farms transition to the next generation.
These bills will make it easier to access rural development programs and for our next generation of farmers to keep the rich agriculture tradition alive.
Today, I rise to speak as a witness to the power of prayer.
Last week, my constituent, Andrew Wolfe, was attacked by an Islamic terrorist here in Washington, D.C.
He is still fighting for his life.
I know Andrew's family, we've spoken many times, and I will tell you he is improving right now, but we need to continue to pray for him.
It is actually working.
Prayer works.
And behind the Speaker's Rostom here, it says very clearly, in God we trust.
And indeed, we do, and indeed we must trust in God and his saving power and continue to pray for Andy Wolfe.
He's currently able to move some of his fingers and hands and toes.
He's not completely woken up yet.
But please, everyone across the aisle, across this entire building, continue to pray and across this great country of ours, pray for my constituent, Andy Wolfe.
Mr. Speaker, in the spirit of Giving Tuesday, I rise to urge my colleagues to join me in supporting a measure at a time when our country needs it most.
We're giving in your time or treasure.
Today is the day when we give to those organizations across the country who help others all year long.
Ahead of Thanksgiving, I introduced the Food Bank Emergency Support Act, which will protect our nation's food banks from future lapses in government funding like the recent government shutdown.
During the 43-day period, 42 million Americans struggled to put food on the table.
These individuals were recipients of SNAP, our largest anti-hunger initiative.
When SNAP assistance is halted, the burden shifts to local food pantries, funded by the Emergency Food Assistance Program, or TFAP, which typically provides one meal for every nine offered through SNAP.
My legislation will automatically double TFAP funding during future funding lapses so food pantries can respond swiftly.
This will supplement the giving that is given today and many days by nonprofits across the country so no one goes hungry.
By setting politics aside, we can prioritize the health and well-being of all Americans and give back.
Today, I rise to recognize several North Canton first responders as Ohio's 13th Congressional District Champions of the Week.
In the early hours of October 9th, Sergeant Cody Dollinger, Officer Adam Coonum, Officer Michael Fultz, and firefighter paramedic Eli Bosler of the North Canton Police and Fire Departments responded to reports of gunfire and injuries at a local apartment complex.
In a remarkable act of bravery, Sergeant Dollinger and his team successfully rescued a wounded woman from the window of her apartment and brought her to safety with medical professionals, all while the alleged assailant continued to fire shots from inside the apartment building.
In the end, without discharging their firearms, Canton Regional SWAT successfully apprehended the suspected shooter.
Mr. Speaker, on October 9th, before many of us had left the comfort of our homes or checked our emails or even had a cup of coffee, Sergeant Dollinger, Officer Coonam, Officer Fultz, and Firefighter Paramedic Bosler accomplished an incredible feat of bravery and heroism, reminding us how important they are for the safety and security of our communities.
Notification of Acting Inspector General Designation00:02:55
Again, I want to extend my sincere gratitude to Sergeant Dolger and his entire team, as well as our North Canton and Canton first responders who risk their lives every day to stop and battle evils only they can stop.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I yield back.
unidentified
The chair lays before the House a message to the Congress of the United States.
I'm hereby notifying the Congress that I intend to designate Christian Schrank, Deputy Inspector General for Investigations, Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General, as acting inspector general for the Federal Housing Finance Agency in place of the current acting inspector general James Lyle.
Such designation will be effective no less than 30 days from delivery of this message.
The Constitution vests the executive power in the President, who has a duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.
U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, Clause 1, id at Section 3.
In exercising that power and duty, I have determined that based on the qualities outlined in 5 United States Code 403A and the confidence I must place in my appointees, Mr. Schrank is the best available person to serve as acting inspector general of the Federal Housing Finance Agency at this time.
In my judgment, Mr. Lyle can better serve the nation performing other duties, i.e., returning to his position as the Federal Housing Finance Agency's Audit Director.
I am providing this notification as a courtesy, a show of comedy and respect between the executive and legislative branches.
It should not be interpreted as a concession that the Congress can limit my power to remove any officer because no single person could fulfill the President's responsibilities alone.
The framers expected that the President will rely on subordinate officers for assistance.
CELA Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 591 United States 197-203-20420.
And the Constitution gives the President the authority to remove those who assist him in carrying out his duties.
Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board 561 U.S. 477-513-514-2010.
Without such power, the President could not be held fully accountable for discharging his own responsibilities.
The book would stop somewhere else, id at 514.
Ultimately, I have determined that the priorities of my administration will be better implemented with this individual in this office.
Therefore, I am apprising you of my intention to designate Mr. Schrank as acting inspector general of the Federal Housing Finance Agency effective no less than 30 days from the delivery of this message.
Resolve that upon adoption of this resolution, it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill H.R. 4312 to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of student athletes and to promote fair competition with respect to intercollegiate athletics and for the purposes.
All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived.
In lieu of the amendments in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Education and Workforce and Energy and Commerce now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 119-14 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 one.
One hour of debate equally divided among and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on education and workforce or their respective designees and the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on energy and commerce or their respective designees and two one motion to recommit.
Section two.
Upon adoption of this resolution, it shall be, in order to consider in the House any bills specified in section three of this resolution, all points of order against consideration of each such bill are waived.
The respective amendments in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on Education AND Workforce, now printed in each such bill, shall be considered as adopted.
Each such bill as amended shall be considered as read.
All points of order against provisions in each such bill as amended are waived.
The previous question shall be considered as ordered, on each such bill as amended and on any further amendment thereto to final passage, without intervening motion, except one, one hour of debate, equally divided, controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on Education AND Workforce or the respective designees, and two.
One motion to recommit section three.
The bills referred to in section two of this resolution are as follows, a.
The bill hr 1005 to prohibit elementary and secondary schools from accepting funds from or entering into contracts with the government of the People's Republic Of China and the Chinese Communist Party, and for the purposes b.
The bill hr 1049 to ensure that parents are aware of foreign influence in their child's public school.
And for the purposes c.
The bill Hr 1069 to prohibit the availability of federal education funds for elementary and secondary schools that receive direct or indirect support from the government of the People's Republic Of China.
Section four, upon adoption of this resolution, it shall be in order to consider in the house the bill hr 2965 to require the administrator of the Small Business Administration to ensure that the small business regulatory budget for a small business concern in a fiscal year is not greater than zero and for the 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 Small Business 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 order on the bill as amended and on any further amendment thereto.
To final passage without intervening motion, except one, one hour of debate, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on Small Business or their respective designees, and two, one motion to recommit.
Section five: Upon adoption of this resolution, it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill, H.R. 4305, to direct the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration to establish a red tape hotline to receive notifications of burdensome agency rules 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 Small Business 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 one, one hour of debate, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on small business or their respective designees, and two, one motion to recommit.
Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume.
During consideration of this resolution, all time is yielded for the purpose of debate only.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.
The Rules Committee met last night and reported out a rule providing for consideration of six measures: H.R. 4312, the SCORE Act, H.R. 1005, Combating the Lies of Authoritarians in School Systems Act, H.R. 1049,
Transparency and Reporting of Adversarial Contributions to Education Act, H.R. 1069, the Protect Our Kids Act, H.R. 2965, Small Business Regulatory Reduction Act of 2025, and H.R. 4305, the Dump Red Tape Act.
House Resolution 916 provides for consideration of H.R. 4312, the SCORE Act, under a closed rule.
The rule provides one hour of general debate equally divided amongst and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Workforce or their respective designees and the chair or ranking member and ranking member on the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective designees and provides for one motion to recommit.
The rule further provides for consideration of H.R. 1005, Combating the Lies of Authoritarians in School Systems Act, H.R. 1049, Transparency and Reporting of Adversarial Contributions to Education Act, and H.R. 1069, the Protect Our Kids Act, all under closed rules with one hour of general debate each, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Workforce or their respective designees,
and provides each one a motion to recommit.
Finally, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2965, Small Business Regulatory Reduction Act of 2025, and H.R. 4305, the Dump Red Tape Act, both under closed rules with one hour of general debate each, equally divided and controlled by the Chair and Ranking Minority Member of the Committee on Small Business or their respective designees, and provides each one a motion to recommit.
This rule deals with several critical issues.
There are three bills that all came out of Education and Workforce Committee that would combat efforts by the Chinese Communist Party who meddle in our schools and universities.
These bills include H.R. 1005, the Combating the Lives of Authoritarians and School Systems Acts, led by Representative Joyce of Ohio.
The bill prohibits public elementary and secondary schools from participating in financial contracts with the People's Republic of China.
Additionally, H.R. 1005 requires school systems that receive sizable funds of 10,000 or more from foreign sources to disclose their agreements to the Department of Education.
Another bill being considered under this rule is H.R. 1069, the Protect Our Kids Act, led by Representative Hearn from Oklahoma.
Under 1069, federal funding would be barred for elementary and secondary schools that have a partnership with a cultural or language institute funded by the Chinese government, including a Confucius Institute.
It would also bar any school that directly operates a learning center supported by the Chinese government or receives support from an individual or entity acting on behalf of the Chinese government.
On the outside, these seem like harmless educational organizations that seek to teach students Chinese language and culture.
However, they are often used as tools by the CCP to steal American knowledge and or indoctrinate children with anti-American ideas.
Lastly, H.R. 1049, the Transparency and Reporting of Adversarial Contributions to Education Act, led by Representative Bean from Florida.
This bill empowers parents by giving them the right to know when a foreign government or foreign entity of concern, particularly the Chinese Communist Party, funds, influences, or provides curriculum for American students in public schools.
Upon written request, a parent is entitled to review any curriculum that was purchased by foreign entities for their children's classroom.
While I think we can agree that it can be beneficial to broaden our children's horizons with new ideas from across global cultures, we must ensure it is done properly without undue foreign influence.
There are also two small business committee bills being considered under this rule.
Small Business Regulatory Reduction Act, led by Representative Van Dyne from Texas.
This bill would ensure that any agency action taken by the Small Business Administration does not increase compliance costs on small businesses.
The agency meant to be the promoter of small businesses shouldn't add to the already existing or the already crushing regulatory burden facing these businesses.
H.R. 4305, the Dump Red Tape Act, is led by Representative Weed from Wisconsin.
This bill creates a dedicated hotline so small business owners can report to the Small Business Administration on any overly burdensome and costly regulations they must deal with.
I think we can agree that we should do everything we can to help protect our small businesses in this country.
And finally, in this rule, we also will be considering H.R. 41, excuse me, 4312, the SCORE Act, led by Representative Bill Rockas from Florida.
The chairman of each subcommittee that has jurisdiction over this issue, Energy and Commerce Committee, Education and Workforce Committee, and the Judiciary Committee.
This bill affirms the students' athletes' right to profit from their name, image, and likeness, or NIL.
What the SCORE Act is trying to do is level the playing field for universities of all sizes and establish protections for student athletes that all schools must abide by.
What we've gotten into is a race to the bottom, with over 30 state laws and athletes jump with over 30 state laws and athletes jumping from team to team.
The SCORE Act will make sure that universities that hit a certain threshold in athletic revenues are required to provide academic support, career counseling, and medical benefits.
As a longtime mediocre swimmer and a former swim coach, I am glad to see that the SCORE Act attempts to protect our Olympic sports.
Under the bill, large universities must offer 14 to 16 different sports, which I personally hope will include swimming, but the universities get to make that decision.
But it will ensure that non-revenue-producing sports are still supported.
This bill would also protect athletes from unscrupulous agents.
As I said before, the Score Act affirms student athletes' right to make money by endorsing products or services.
But to protect the athlete, the Score Act caps agent fees at 5% of each contract's value.
The Score Act also allows for revenue sharing amongst student athletes.
Under this bill, up to 22 percent of the average athletic revenue at the top 70 universities could be paid out to athletes by those universities.
The Score Act also requires NIO contracts to be examined to ensure that a contract is in fact a payment for services rendered as opposed to a payment to attend a certain institution.
Without disclosure of NIL deals, there is a real possibility that the integrity of competition could be called into question.
This bipartisan bill has received overwhelming support from schools and conferences across the country, including the NCAA.
I believe this bill is the first step, not the last, but the first step in protecting college athletes and to ensure that there is a national standard and an even playing field for universities across the country.
And accordingly, I urge passage of this rule.
And with that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the remainder of my time.
We're now only a few weeks away from new health insurance premiums skyrocketing.
People's insurance bills are going to double, triple, and in some cases quadruple.
And so you'd think we'd be here on the floor today addressing that, right?
You would think, but you would be wrong, because we have on the floor this week another embarrassingly pointless and irrelevant collection of bills that do absolutely nothing to help everyday people.
You know, when Democrats first raised the alarm about health care premiums skyrocketing earlier this year, Speaker Mike Johnson said, oh, don't worry, this is a policy debate for December.
And here we are in December, and Republicans are doing nothing, zero.
Actually, they're doing less than nothing.
They took an eight-week taxpayer-funded vacation while people panicked about how they're going to afford their insurance premiums starting January 1st.
Families are going to see their bills go up and up and up, and in some cases by nearly $1,000 more dollars a month.
Now, maybe that doesn't sound like a lot of money to Republicans, because these guys might not get how much that means to regular people.
I know how out of touch they are.
But they're building a fancy new ballroom at the White House with their billionaire donors.
That's where their attention is.
They eat caviar and they drink fine wine and mar-a-lago while regular people suffer.
And maybe they don't understand how much $1,000 a month is to the people I represent.
But guess what?
It is a lot.
For most hardworking people, this is a catastrophic amount of money that suddenly needs to be added to a monthly budget.
It's more than what a lot of people earn during a week of work.
And Republicans have known that this crisis was coming for some time, yet they still have no plan on health care.
They say they have one.
Well, where the hell is it?
We're still waiting.
Their only answer so far is: good luck, folks.
Hope you like choosing between health insurance and food.
And here's the kicker, Mr. Speaker.
If this House voted today to stop premiums from exploding, it would pass.
It would pass easily.
Democrats would vote for it, and I know there's a chunk of Republicans that would vote for it as well.
But the Republican leadership will not bring it up because they care more about tax breaks for billionaires than tax credits for working families.
It is that simple.
Now, don't even get me started about the bills Republicans are bringing to the floor this week.
Two bills for small businesses.
Sounds good, right?
You know what their bills do?
One of them creates a hotline that already exists.
And neither of them do anything about the number one issue that I hear from small businesses, and that is tariffs.
Every small business owner I talk to says the same thing.
The tariffs are killing them.
The tariffs are making prices skyrocket.
The tariffs are slowing down business.
But these guys don't care.
They don't care.
They just go along to get along.
They don't want to tick Trump off.
I guess my question is: if Republicans want to help small businesses, why are they blocking a vote to overturn the tariffs?
Why have they refused to let Congress vote on the tariffs for months and months, even though it's our responsibility?
What's up with that?
After all, it's our responsibility.
It is our job.
And are they afraid that if it comes to the floor for a vote, that they will lose?
And then we got a bunch of bills about protecting public schools.
Give me a break.
Give me a break.
My sisters are public school teachers.
I talk to parents and students all the time.
You know what they tell me?
Reduce class size.
Support teachers.
Make schools safer.
Fund education.
But these guys are bringing up a bill about foreign infiltration in third-grade math class.
I mean, are you kidding me?
Is that a joke?
They're so concerned about China funding our schools.
Well, here's a novel idea.
Why don't we have America fund our schools?
Why isn't funding our schools a bigger priority in this Congress?
There's a crazy idea for my Republican friends.
You know, if you really care about public education, you know, let's be wind at the backs of our teachers and our schools.
And of course, they have a bill to help the NCAA take advantage of student athletes because what this Congress desperately needed was another billionaire organization empowered to squeeze young people.
More of the same.
More of the same.
They give more to those with the most while taking away from those with the least.
It is sick.
It is sick.
It is immoral.
It represents the opposite of what I believe we are here to do, which is to help people, to help people.
But that is their entire governing philosophy.
Republicans want to use their power to reward the billionaires and special interest donors.
They want an economy where those at the top get showered in tax break after tax break while working people get left further and further behind.
Mr. Speaker, it is shameful.
It is shameful that this is what we are doing this week.
It is shameful and it is outrageous and it is wrong.
And I urge every member of this body to vote no on this Republican rule, and I reserve.
unidentified
Gentleman Reserves, gentlemen from Virginia is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, isn't it amazing that we come here to talk about these six bills and a significant portion of the debate from the other side of the aisle deals with bills that we're not addressing?
And they talk about some of those and they then make allegations, Mr. Speaker, that are just not accurate.
I remember hearing the clause just a second ago a phrase, well, what are they doing to help small business?
How soon we forget, Mr. Speaker, that just last summer we passed the Working Families Tax Cuts Bill with lots of help for people on Main Street, in Abingdon, Virginia, in Marion, Virginia, in every small town that I represent in the 9th congressional district.
Those businesses are benefiting from what we did because we made major adjustments.
Actually, what we did was we kept everything that we already had that was going to expire for taxes that would have burdened our small businesses and made it more expensive for them to compete against the big companies.
Now, it's true the big companies get some of these tax cuts too.
But Mr. Speaker, the people who really need them are the small businesses.
The people who need those breaks are the mom and pop shops.
The people who need those breaks are the my son, who's 18, is now getting tips.
He's working tables at Mac and Bob's restaurant.
And he's getting tips.
Guess what?
He won't have to pay income taxes on that.
Now, maybe he's at a point where his money wouldn't be high enough that he'd pay those taxes.
Anyway, but for those families who rely on that tip money as a part of their income, that's a huge benefit to the American families.
So I find it surprising that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to focus on saying that we're not helping small business when every single small business person in the United States knows that we've been fighting for them, knows that we've been helping them, and knows that while these bills today in this rule, that's all we're doing, Mr. Speaker, is a rule on six bills, and the bills that relate to small businesses that we're doing today will help a little bit.
But to challenge us and say, what are we doing to help small business after we did a huge benefit on a number of different issues for small businesses, for mom and pops, for people out there working, whether they're working overtime jobs where they're able to take a tax credit for that as well, whether they're doing tips or whether they're just trying to buy some new equipment and want to be able to write that off in the first year instead of having to amortize it over a number of years,
as used to be the law, and is what my colleagues on the other side advocated for last summer, that they start paying that again so that they can't take that write-off.
That hurts small business.
So I ask you, Mr. Speaker, just to consider that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle really don't understand small business or they wouldn't make such a comment.
And with that, I reserve the remainder of my time.
unidentified
Gentleman Reserves, gentlemen from Massachusetts, recognized.
Yeah, well, let me just say that as the son of small business owners, I don't think the gentleman knows what he's talking about.
This is outrageous.
Yeah, I have the bills that we're considering here today.
And the reason why I'm not spending much time talking about them is because they suck.
They're awful.
It's pathetic.
One creates a hotline that already exists.
You go online and call that hotline.
You just restate it.
That's what we're doing here.
Nothing about the tariffs that are screwing over small businesses.
Nothing about the realities that small businesses are dealing with each and every day.
You come up with these bills that are meaningless, that do nothing for anybody.
And I'm sorry that my Republican friends don't want to talk about the health care crisis, but because of Republican inaction, millions and millions of people are going to see their health care bills skyrocket.
And millions are going to probably go without health care.
And we've been warning my friends about this for months, and the Republicans have done nothing, not a damn thing.
I don't know how you go home and face your constituents who are about to get screwed over with high health care premiums and bills and say, oh, yeah, no, I get it.
I mean, people are going to lose their health care.
You've been in charge all year, and you've done zero, nothing, not a damn thing.
You know, so these bills that we're talking about today, I mean, I would encourage anybody who's viewing this on C-SPAN to Google them, to look them up.
It's pathetic.
It's pathetic that this is what we're wasting our time doing.
And there's so much at stake.
And we have two weeks left to address the health care crisis.
And my Republican friends have nothing to talk about that today.
Yeah, I mean, the hotline already exists, by the way.
You go on, you can Google it.
So you recreate, you basically establish a hotline that already exists.
Boy, that's helping small businesses.
Yeah, that's not a big problem, my friends.
Big problem is the high cost of health care and these tariffs, which are just, you know, basically putting many of our businesses out of business.
And so you come here, my friends come here and defend this garbage that we're doing.
It is pathetic.
It's pathetic.
Mr. Speaker, I want to yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio, Ms. Sykes.
Today I rise in opposition of the rule and H.R. 4312, the SCORE Act.
This legislation fails to address the rights of students to advocate for themselves, and that's why I introduced an amendment to allow for students to collectively bargain.
As a former gymnast and athlete, my allegiance will always be with athletes and with the underdog.
It is undeniable that student athletes are not receiving equitable compensation for their labor, especially those in high-revenue sports.
A student athlete constantly endangers themselves and risks great harm to their bodies for the entertainment of the masses, all while juggling classes, practice, and potentially a part-time job just to survive.
Their natural talents allow for universities to recruit on and off the field, raise money, all while the actual revenue generators are left in the cold.
This issue was already addressed in the courts, and one thing that remains clear is the NCAA has been profiting off of college students' labor, and the students have not.
For decades, students have not been paid for their participation in what is clearly a billion-dollar industry, and this is not right.
Currently, the SCORE Act has not laid out an equitable revenue-sharing model and leaves it wholly up to the interpretation of the school.
Further, passing the Score Act as it stands would only eliminate students' abilities to collectively bargain.
That's why I introduced an amendment in the Rules Committee to strike the language from the bill and allow students to be properly compensated for their labor.
I thank my colleagues on the Democratic side for offering the amendment, but unfortunately, the amendment failed on party line rules and was rejected by the Republicans.
Without my amendment, players at schools in my district, basketball players specifically, would not have the means of recourse to negotiate compensation and would be forced to simply shut up and dribble.
I understand that the needs of a Big Ten school are different than those than the MAC or the SWAC.
And without the ability to collectively bargain, these athletes cannot negotiate with the university for their specific needs, no matter the size of the program.
For those reasons and more, I am in opposition to the rule and the bill, and I encourage my colleagues to get back to the drawing board and do something that actually works for student athletes and allows them to be paid equitably, equitably, and fairly, and collectively bargain.
I appreciate that some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle may have been involved in small businesses.
I was too.
Not just family, but I ran a small business for many, many years.
People may not consider a solo practitioner of law, a small business, but I tell you, when you have to pay the light bill and you have to pay the salaries, you're a small business.
Further, I've also been involved in many years in a swimming pool that some years makes money, but most years may show a little bit of a profit, but it's there mainly because we want it to be a community pool.
But it is a corporation that makes money occasionally, even if only on paper, and that corporation has to buy equipment.
Shockingly, you need new kickboards, you need new diving boards, you need new swim blocks.
And what we did last summer helps all those small businesses, and every one of them knows it.
So to say that we haven't done anything on that is really a misnomer and a mistake.
I will tell you that it is true that the bill, the SCORE Act, does not solve all the ills that some may see out there, but it is a step in the right direction.
That's why in my opening, I said that this was a first step, but not the last step, in trying to solve problems that we have in our college athletics.
And it's true that the big sports make lots of money, but the gymnasts of the world and the swimmers of the world don't bring in a lot of revenue.
And I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, that when I would be swimming in the pool, even in my prime, it was never considered mass appeal entertainment.
Nobody would have paid to watch our swimming meets.
Now, we had a good time swimming for Emory and Henry College now university, but you know, it was not bringing in great revenues to the college.
And that's why this bill says that some of those revenues have to be spent if you're going to be doing this.
Some of those revenues have to be spent to keep other sports going as well.
We're trying to make sure that there's some recognition of the Olympic sports.
We're trying to make sure that there's recognition of other sports.
That also means women's sports.
That you've got to have some abilities to take some of the money that you make off the revenue sports, as they're called, and use them for the other sports.
Now, if we want to continue with the wild, wild west, as my friend Gus Bill Arakas likes to say, then we do nothing and we defeat this rule.
We do nothing.
And it will continue to be a crazy arena out there where students aren't looked at.
And particularly if you're not the top-bill student on the football team or on the basketball team, but if you're a student athlete in any other way, you're getting harmed by what's starting to happen and what is happening in our larger universities, where everything is going to pay the top-name athlete to come to your school next year.
This starts us down that path.
Is it a perfect bill?
I will not claim that.
The rule makes it so that we get this first step moving down the pathway to try to resolve some of these issues.
And I fully expect that we will have bills in the future that will deal with some of the other issues.
We will find that when we do this, that we probably have solved some problems and will discover additional problems.
Sometimes when you get an answer to a question, it raises more questions.
That's what this bill is supposed to do.
It's supposed to start us down the path.
And if we find that there are other issues that Congress needs to step in and deal with, then we can do so.
We are not limited to taking action in only December of 2025.
That's why we have a legislative body that will consider, does this bill do good?
I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, the SCORE Act does good.
Does it do perfect?
No.
Does it solve everything that everybody might think of?
No.
Does it solve problems we have yet to think of?
No.
But it is a good start in an area where there is no guidance currently and where the NCAA has lost control of our college athletics completely and where it is, in fact, a wild, wild west where the vast majority of students I submit who are student athletes are being hurt and left behind.
We're trying to rectify it, to create a balance, so to speak.
And that's why as a first step on this first step bill, we need to pass the rule.
Mr. Speaker, you know, the gentleman wants to talk about the rule.
So let's talk about the rule.
What is frustrating to me, and I tell you, I think many of us, not just Democrats, but a good chunk of Republicans, are at the end of our rope.
The Republican leadership, you know, is running this House like an authoritarian dictatorship.
It's their way or the highway.
You know, there are six bills that are allowed to be considered in this rule.
Six.
Every single one of them is completely closed.
What does that mean?
It means nobody can offer any amendments.
Democrats can't offer amendments.
Republicans can't offer amendments.
They didn't even ask for people to submit amendments.
And they like to say, oh, nobody offered amendments.
Yeah, people did offer amendments.
The gentleman talks about the Score Act.
A Republican came to the Rules Committee last night and offered five amendments.
I think they were reasonable.
I think they were reasonable enough to be debated and for us to vote on them.
All five were blocked.
They're blocking members of their own party.
That's how they run this place.
And, you know, a Democrat came up with an alternative, a good idea.
I mean, you know, you may not support it, but people like me thought it was a better way to approach this than the way the bill is written.
And that was blocked too.
Everything is blocked.
Everything is blocked.
I mean, I think they're being blocked because my friends are afraid they might prevail.
And by the way, all the players associations are against the SCORE Act the way it is currently written.
Every single one of them.
I mean, you know, this year alone, Republicans have issued 86 closed rules.
86.
That puts them on track to obliterate their previous record of the most closed rules in a single Congress.
That's 86 times that this chamber was kept from even considering amendments to approve bills.
No debate, no votes, nothing.
I mean, that's what an authoritarian dictatorship is like.
Republicans have blocked nearly eight out of every 10 amendments submitted to the Rules Committee.
And get this, that's 2,700 amendments gone, tossed out by this leadership.
They have blocked 60% of bipartisan amendments, most of their own party's amendments, and more than 90% of Democratic amendments.
Apparently, the only ideas welcome in this Congress are the ones written by special interests or the ones that Donald Trump personally signs off on.
Now, we used to debate in this chamber.
We used to vote on amendments on the floor.
Members had a voice.
Legislation wasn't cooked up in the Speaker's office and rammed through with no chance to fix it.
But here we are.
Republicans have made fewer amendments in order at this point in the year than any Congress going back a decade.
By decimating debate, Houpicans have turned themselves into a rubber stamp for Trump.
And they'll fast-track giveaways to the wealthy and the well-connected, but they will block amendments that would protect care for millions or unrig our economy for working people.
I mean, the real scandal here is that we can do something to control the rising costs of health care.
And we have been begging, by the way, not just Democrats, some Republicans have too, for them to at least just put something on the floor that we can debate and vote on to help alleviate the terrible burden that's about to fall on millions and millions of families in this country.
And the answer is we can't do it.
They won't do it.
They won't do it.
You want to debate the rule?
This rule is pathetic.
Six completely closed rules on six completely different bills.
Congress is supposed to work for the American people.
I think my Republican colleagues have forgotten that.
Mr. Speaker, I yield two and a half minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico, Ms. Stansbury.
It's always instructive to come down here to the floor and listen to the debate.
I think it speaks for itself.
But I rise today in opposition to the bills that are before us and in strong defense of the Department of Education, our students, and kids across America.
As a public school student myself, I can say unequivocally these bills are fundamentally unserious and designed to distract from the fact that the Trump administration is currently dismantling the Department of Education right before our very eyes.
They've laid off thousands of employees, shuttered offices, carved up programs and transferred them to other agencies, declassified educators from getting student loans, threatened schools and universities, and given their friends contracts to not only rewrite educational curricula, but to even rewrite American history itself.
So let me remind my colleagues, this is the agency that was born out of the civil rights movement, the agency that ensures kids with disabilities have opportunities and ensures that all kids, no matter who they are or where they live, have access to education.
Because before the Department of Education, millions of children all across this country were denied access to schools and educational opportunities.
Federal programs were duplicative and wasteful.
And states, yes, states, regularly violated the basic civil rights of students.
So if our colleagues want to stand with students, you want to stand with schools and you want to stand with educators, then we should be fighting to protect our schools, fighting to protect them from an administration that is trying to dismantle education as we speak.
You should be fighting to address housing, food, health care, and fixing our broken economy.
Which is why, Mr. Speaker, I am here to stand today to oppose these bills and to stand with every public school and every kid across America who is fighting for a fair shot, because that's what we were elected to do.
And I will see to my colleague, the ranking member of the Rules Committee, that it's absolutely a fair point of debate to bring up the number of closed rules, but he does so without providing all the context.
When accounting for closed rules in the rules package, CRAs and bills which received no amendments, less than 35%, this is for this Congress.
Less than 35% of closed rules have been at the discretion of the Rules Committee.
Now, I know the ranking member will also say there was no formal deadline or call for amendments.
But don't be misled, Mr. Speaker.
He knows all too well that when he was chairman of the committee, the committee did not always provide a formal amendment deadline every week when they ran the show either.
Now, it's true that this rule has six closed measures, but it should be noted that amendments were only submitted on three of the six.
This means of the six bills, only three were closed at the discretion of the committee.
My friend, the gentleman from Massachusetts may also recall that members can submit amendments and the Rules Committee may make them in order whether there's a formal deadline to submit them or not.
This is a practice that both Republicans and Democrats have employed.
Now, Mr. Speaker, sometimes we get down here and we get all riled up.
Been there, done that.
I've been riled up myself before.
But I find it fascinating from a historical context that my colleague said, this is what it looks like when you have closed rules.
This is what it looks like in an authoritarian dictatorship.
Now, I know that the words authoritarian dictatorship must poll well because my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are consistently, Mr. Speaker, they're consistently throwing it out there.
But here's what's so fascinating.
In an authoritarian dictatorship, you don't get to claim that something that the majority is doing is like an authoritarian dictatorship because you would be banned from saying such things.
You would not be allowed to say such things.
You would not be allowed to have your time to debate the rule and then the bills.
All that would go by the wayside.
That's not happened here.
Now, we can argue, and on some points, I might even agree with my colleague from Massachusetts in the general running of a House floor.
I might even be willing to go further than him on some issues because I'd like to see us reform a lot of the things we do around here.
But we are nowhere near his so-called authoritarian dictatorship from a historical perspective.
And for those of us who study those movements throughout history, I would submit, Mr. Speaker, that to even say that is damaging to this great republic, known throughout the world as the beacon of freedom and known as the United States of America.
I reserve.
unidentified
Reserve, gentlemen from Massachusetts, recognized.
And by the way, I will say again that when the gentleman says that, oh, people didn't offer amendments to all these bills, let me just say, I think people are getting to understand what's going on here.
My Republican friends don't even ask for amendments anymore.
They don't give people time to write them.
You know, they basically, everybody kind of knows that the system is rigged and take it or leave it.
People have had it.
I mean, every single member here, you know, has ideas that maybe could improve some of this legislation.
But the whole system is rigged in a way that you've got to take it or leave it.
This is not the way the House of Representatives should be run.
You know, and there are a whole bunch of other issues that we should be dealing with.
You know, Mr. Speaker, on Friday, the Washington Post reported an egregious abuse of power by the Secretary of Defense.
You know, back in September, an order was reportedly carried out to eliminate all remaining survivors on a suspected drug trafficking boat sailing through the Caribbean.
Pete Hegseth, who now calls himself Secretary of War, issued an order to, quote, kill everybody, end quote, who survived the first strike.
Kill everybody.
Those are the alleged words from the leader of our Defense Department.
Just to be clear, killing defenseless people regardless of whether they had been engaged in armed conflict is a war crime, plain and simple.
The administration is trying to brainwash the American people into thinking that cruelty and murder and war crimes are normal.
Well, I have news for the Trump administration.
This is not normal.
Even if we were at war, attacking survivors of an airstrike, whether or not they pose a threat to the United States, is a war crime.
It is unconscionable.
It is an unconscionable act of aggression that violates the Department of Defense's own guidelines, U.S. law, and international norms and laws.
And even President Trump is trying to distance himself from this unlawful attack, saying that he, quote, wouldn't have wanted that, not a second strike, end quote.
Let me be clear.
Secretary Hegseth has blatantly carried out illegal acts of violence, and right now he's trying to convince the American people that these actions are okay.
Mr. Speaker, the American people know better and they deserve better.
And by the way, in case anybody tuned in to the President's little press conference before we gathered here today, he said the issue of affordability is a hoax.
It's a scam, he said.
I mean, really?
To anybody who's watching these proceedings, do you really think the issue of affordability is a scam?
I mean, prices are higher than ever.
I mean, people are paying more.
Going to be paying more for their health care because of the inaction of Republicans in the House and the Senate and this White House.
They're going to be paying so much that many of them are going to drop their health insurance.
And he says that the issue of affordability is a scam, is a hoax, is not real.
I mean, come on, come on.
And I would urge my Republican colleagues, you know, stand up for your constituents.
I mean, do the right thing.
Say no to these closed processes that don't allow you, even you, to be able to offer amendments and stand up for policies that make life easier for all people in this country.
I reserve my time.
unidentified
Reach around.
You feel that hard thing in the mood?
Members are reminded to address their remarks to the chair.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Massachusetts and I agree on one thing in his comments.
Killing defenseless people is wrong.
And I don't know whether that happened or not, but as he knows or ought to know, Mr. Speaker, both the Senate and the Armed Services Committee in the House are looking into these allegations.
But again, let me unequivocally state that I agree killing of defenseless people is wrong.
Let's talk about affordability.
I do agree that affordability of health care is an issue.
It's a complex issue.
It's not in any of the bills that we're dealing with today, and that's his complaint: there ought to be something in there.
But let me remind folks how we got here.
We got here with a bill that came out of the Speaker's office, Speaker Pelosi's office, called the Affordable Care Act, Obamacare.
It was going to make everybody's world much better.
Now, it did take care of pre-existing conditions, and it's something that Republicans, and I wasn't here then, but Republicans should have fixed.
They should have fixed that.
But other than that, it did not make health care affordable.
And in fact, the biggest complaint that my colleagues have had throughout the course of the last few weeks has been about the enhanced premium tax credits, which were a temporary program that they said would end in December of 2025.
And now they claim nobody can afford it without this temporary program that was brought in because of COVID.
Nobody can afford insurance in exchanges.
They have, in fact, admitted that health care costs and health insurance costs in this country are a problem because of Obamacare.
Now, that said, Mr. Speaker, we've talked about everything.
I thought about maybe getting up here and give a speech on the D-Day National Memorial.
I mean, people are talking about everything has nothing to do with this rule.
I believe that I have exhausted all of my comments that are directly related to the rule.
So I am prepared at the appropriate time to close.
But if we keep bringing up new issues, I may feel compelled to respond.
But if we're just talking about the rule that deals with these six bills that we're considering this week, then I am prepared to close.
Mr. Speaker, I got to tell you, I love my Republican friends.
You know, I mean, they just reach back.
I mean, I would go back to Obama.
What they don't tell you is that Donald Trump has been in public life as president for four years.
He's been around for 10 years now, and yet he has no responsibility for anything.
It's always somebody else's fault.
Donald Trump never had a plan to make health care more affordable or accessible.
He didn't care about any of that stuff.
But I just want to point out for the record, because I think it's important, you know, one half, one half of adults with the Affordable Care Act health care coverage are small business owners, are small business employees, or self-employed people.
I mean, we're talking about millions and millions and millions and millions of Americans.
Many of them are going to see their health care costs rise so high that they're not going to be able to afford it.
They will lose their health care.
And many of them will have to choose between health care and paying their rents or their mortgages or basically putting food on the table.
I mean, the idea that that's not an urgent issue, that we're not addressing that, that it's kind of an afterthought, and instead we've got a rule here that brings up a bill that creates a hotline that already exists.
I mean, I would say to my Republican friends, are you serious?
I mean, really?
Is this serious legislating?
You know, again, despite Republicans spending years of attacking the Affordable Care Act, it has gotten only more popular.
I mean, support for the ACA consistently polls at or above 60 percent.
In September 2025, in fact, 64 percent of the people viewed the ACA favorably.
Maybe support for it is so overwhelming because the ACA extended coverage to millions and millions of Americans, and its provisions help everyone, including people who were previously insured, and many who were never insured.
Currently, the Affordable Care Act stops health insurance companies from charging sick people more in premiums than healthy people.
It keeps those same health insurance companies from denying coverage to pregnant women, people with pre-existing medical conditions, or because of their person's medical history.
It prohibits the health insurance industry from setting an annual or lifetime limit.
It demands insurance companies cover most preventative services.
It gives states the flexibility to expand their Medicaid programs, which 40 states have done, 40 states have done.
It provides financial assistance to working people to make health care coverage more affordable, and it allows young adults to stay on their parents' insurance plans until they're 26.
These are just some of the provisions within the ACA that make it so popular with the American people.
These are provisions that literally have saved people's lives and livelihoods.
And in addition, the last time Democrats were in control, we built on the progress we made in the ACA.
We allowed Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices for the first time in history, saving both Medicare and the American people billions of dollars.
We capped the cost of insulin at $35.
We crucially made signing up for health care coverage easier and more affordable.
And we lowered premiums by an average of $800 per person.
And over four years, nearly 12 million Americans, 12 million more Americans, signed up for insurance in the ACA marketplace, bringing the total up to nearly 24 million in 2025.
So taken together, Democratic policies brought the uninsured rate to a record low.
Mr. Speaker, this is a terrible bill, and I urge everybody to vote no.
Again, this is an important topic.
This is about whether or not people can basically have their basic rights upheld and respected in this country.
We're in the midst of a health care crisis, a crisis that Republicans are refusing to address.
And more than 20 million Americans who get their health care on the ACA exchanges are going to see their premiums skyrocket in less than a month.
There were only 12 legislative days left with this House to fix this problem before disaster strikes millions of American families.
And what are the Republicans focused on?
Non-existent foreign influence in kindergarten classes.
You can make this up.
You can't make this up.
It is not for the lack of opportunity to do the right thing.
Over and over, Democrats have offered the Republican majority in the House and the Senate a lifeline to vote to extend these credits and to get out of their own way.
In fact, we've given them 19 separate chances to vote to extend the ACA credits.
They've voted no on each and every one.
And this point, in this PQ vote today, will be Congressional Republicans' 20th opportunity to vote to prevent the health insurance costs of millions of Americans, their constituents, my constituents, from rising significantly.
It is past time for them to do the right thing for the sake of millions of Americans and their health care.
I urge my Republican colleagues to support this extension and to vote on the previous question.
I ask unanimous consent, Mr. Speaker, to insert the text of my amendment into the record along with extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.
All right, Mr. Speaker, make no mistake, this Republican majority is failing spectacularly, and the American people know it.
They have now had 12 months, a full year, to do something, anything, to bring down prices, to lower costs, to focus on housing or health care or food prices or transportation.
That's what I hear about when I talk to people back home.
They want the government focused on housing costs, health care, child care, food, transportation.
They want a Congress that makes it easier to buy a home, raise a family, build a life.
And instead, we get a bunch of absurd bills that nobody asked for.
Republicans want to bring up legislation addressing foreign influence in our kids' classrooms.
How about they start addressing foreign influence in the Oval Office?
How about Qatar gifting a new Air Force One to Trump?
What was that in exchange for?
And how about the $20 billion Trump gave to his friend in Argentina?
And how about the lavish dinner he just held for the Saudi prince who murdered a U.S. journalist?
No, no, no.
Republicans don't want you to ask about that foreign interference.
You need to worry about the Chinese government getting involved in your kids' math class.
I mean, that's what they say.
I mean, this is the Republic.
Is this the Republican majority for real?
This is insane.
These guys have had a full year to do something for working families, to bring down food prices, to reduce health care costs for regular people, to take on corporate greed, to lower everyday expenses.
They've protected special interests while regular families are getting screwed.
They've shoveled subsidies and giveaways to greedy CEOs while families struggle to pay for groceries and rent.
Quite frankly, we don't share the same values.
Democrats want a very different government.
We want a government that stands up to corporate greed, a government that uplifts workers, empowers consumers, and fights on the side of everyday people.
We want a Congress that takes on special interests and doesn't reward them.
And we believe in passing big, bold, consequential bills that make life better for everyday people, not creating hotlines that already exist, and certainly not going on a taxpayer-funded vacation for eight weeks like Republicans did in October and November.
The American people deserve so much better.
They deserve leaders that fight for them, not a Republican majority that worships Donald Trump and rewards his wealthy friends.
I urge a no vote on this rule, Mr. Speaker.
It is pathetic that we are here talking about this stuff and not talking about ways to keep the government open and to make sure that people can afford their health care and can afford other things.
There's too much attention being showered on those who are well-off and well-connected, who are connected to this president, who give him gifts, and who write up big checks to this administration.
We certainly have to put regular people first.
And with that, I again urge a no vote on the rule, and I yield back.
Oversight for School Integrity00:02:37
unidentified
Members, I'll remind you to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the president.
I'm actually going to talk about what we're supposed to talk about.
That would be the rule.
I'm not going to talk about everything that's out there that I think ought to be changed in the world.
And I'm not going to say that if you don't do everything I want done, that we shouldn't pass anything.
Because if you vote this rule down, you're basically saying, if you're not going to do what I want, shouldn't do anything.
I don't believe that's the way a legislative body ought to operate.
I urge passage of this rule in order to bring more transparency and oversight into our children's schools, to ensure that our children are not being improperly influenced by foreign actors, or that foreign actors aren't using contributions to our schools to benefit themselves.
You know, one of our colleagues on the Edwin Workforce Committee did a whole hearing on the Chinese Communist Party back in 2023, and part of what this bill is addressing are issues that were brought out at that time.
One of which struck home was Fairfax County's Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology, which at one time was the number one high school in the United States of America.
It has apparently slipped to number five.
I did some checking before I came here today.
But they received over $3 million from Chinese entities, and in return, The top-ranked high school in the United States gave them all the techniques that we're using to teach our students to be better scientists, to be better in the technology field, to be better in mathematics, to be able to compete better with the United States.
Doesn't make any sense.
That's why one of these bills is, or some of these bills are great bills that make sure that we're reining that in, that we know about it, that parents know about it, that the government knows about it, that we know if we're getting people from our money influencing our schools, our students, or maybe stealing our ideas.
And on top of, and I talked a lot about that earlier, but on top of that, we take the first step, and as I said in the beginning and said in the debate, not the last step, to bring integrity into the name, image,
and likeness NIL process in college sports by setting up a federal framework, not possibly 50, we already have 30, but a federal framework to ensure that we have fairness across the board on college athletics.
Mr. Speaker, I urge the passage of this rule so that we can bring about these good policies and we can debate all the other things that ail the world another day.
And with that, Mr. Speaker.
Oh, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
And with that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back.
unidentified
Gentleman yields.
Questions on ordering the previous question?
The question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution.
Those favoring a vote by the yays and nays will rise.
A sufficient having risen, the yays and nays are ordered.
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.
Pursuant to clause 12 of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess for less than 15 minutes.
Sorry.
Today, the U.S. House is considering a number of bills, including two small business-related measures.
One would require the Small Business Administration to ensure that any agency roles do not increase costs for small businesses.
The other permanently authorizes the SBA Office of Advocacy Red Tape Hotline, allowing small businesses to report federal regulations that negatively impact their business.
C-SPAN: Democracy Unfiltered00:00:33
unidentified
Also, this week, lawmakers will consider legislation to address how college athletes are paid by setting national standards for charging for the use of their name, image, and likeness, or NIL.
Watch live coverage of the U.S. House when lawmakers return here on C-SPAN.
C-SPAN, Democracy Unfiltered.
We're funded by these television companies and more, including Charter Communications.