Jan. 14, 2026 16:45-19:12 - CSPAN
02:26:48
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
Source
Participants
Appearances
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
|
More Sunshine Needed
00:03:29
|
||
| And we all know the power that United States attorneys have. | ||
| A lot of people went to jail for not complying in the years past. | ||
| And I think Mr. Powell would solve a lot of problems if he would just be transparent and put out where they spent the money. | ||
| That's what I'd like to see as a new member of Congress. | ||
| And remember, that's what I'm used to. | ||
| In Florida, we put it all out in the sunshine. | ||
| And in Washington, we need more sunshine so we can make better decisions. | ||
| Because when you see how they spent money with USAID, some of these problems in Minnesota, the train program in California, all people want is transparency because people are working incredibly hard right now with higher prices and high taxes. | ||
| And they're saying why am I getting all these? | ||
|
unidentified
|
We'll leave this here for live coverage of votes in the U.S. House. | |
| The House in the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of H.R. 7006. | ||
| Will the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Weber, kindly take the chair? | ||
| The House is in the committee of the whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of H.R. 7006, which the clerk will report the title. | ||
| A bill making further consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30th, 2026, and for other purposes. | ||
| When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier today, amendment number two, printed in House Report 119-445, offered by the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Crane, had been postponed. | ||
| Pursuant to clause six of Rule 18, proceedings will now resume on those amendments printed in House Report 119-445, on which further proceedings were postponed in the following order: Amendment number one by Mr. Roy of Texas, amendment number two by Mr. Crane of Arizona. | ||
| The chair will reduce to two minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote after the first vote in this series. | ||
| The unfinished business is a request for a recorded vote on amendment number one, printed in House Report 119-445, offered by the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Roy, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote. | ||
| The clerk will redesignate the amendment. | ||
| Amendment number one, print it in House Report number 119-445, offered by Mr. Roy of Texas. | ||
| A recorded vote has been requested. | ||
| Those in support of the request for a vote, recorded vote will rise and be counted. | ||
| A sufficient number having risen, a recorded vote is offered. | ||
| Members will record their votes by electronic device. | ||
| Members, this will be a 15-minute vote. | ||
|
unidentified
|
So the first of three votes here, we believe these will be the last roll call votes of the day. | |
| In the House, members have been working on a spending package for parts of the federal government, providing money for the state and treasury departments, the IRS, and D.C. and federal courts. | ||
| Current funding expires at the end of the month. | ||
| So, this first vote is on an amendment offered by Texas Republican Chip Roy. | ||
| In addition to reducing Washington, D.C. district and appeals court funding by 20%, this amendment would also strike the salary and expense funding for Judges James Boseberg and Deborah Boardman staffs. | ||
|
Impeachment Charges Against Secretary Noam
00:05:26
|
||
|
unidentified
|
Judge Boseberg notably ruled against the Trump administration in several cases, including prohibiting the administration's use of the Alien Enemies Act to swiftly deport Venezuelans. | |
| In the meanwhile, Congressman Roy believes Judge Boardman has undermined federal law when she sentenced Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh's potential assassin to only eight years in prison, a ruling that led Mr. Roy to file impeachment articles against Judge Boardman last October. | ||
| As you heard, this is a 15-minute vote. | ||
| While we are in this vote, I want to point you to something extraordinary that's happening in space. | ||
| The SpaceX Crew 11 is conducting what they're calling a medical evacuation from the International Space Station today. | ||
| Crew members were scheduled to come home in a month, but NASA officials made that decision to have them leave early because one of the astronauts is ill, apparently. | ||
| NASA has been careful not to name that astronaut, but they are saying that the person is in stable condition. | ||
| Right about now, the space capsule is undocking from the ISS and will be heading back to Earth. | ||
| And you can watch all of this unfold in a few minutes, as we'll have it on our companion network, C-SPAN 3. | ||
| Back here on Earth, while the House members are voting, we'll show you comments from Illinois Democrat Robin Kelly, who's filing impeachment charges against Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Ngo. | ||
| Hello, everyone, and thank you so much for being here today. | ||
| This morning, I introduced articles of impeachment against Homeland Security Secretary Christy Noam. | ||
| I am proud to have the support of almost 70 members of Congress already from all across the country. | ||
| Secretary Noam has brought her reign of terror to the Chicagoland area, LA, New Orleans, Charlotte, Durham, and communities north to south to east to west. | ||
| You'll hear from some of those communities, Minnesota and Portland. | ||
| She needs to be held accountable for her actions. | ||
| This is why I introduced three articles of impeachment against Secretary Noam. | ||
| Number one, obstruction of Congress. | ||
| Secretary Noam has denied me and other members of Congress oversight of ICE detention facilities. | ||
| I was denied access to the ICE facility in Broadview despite following Secretary Noam's unlawful seven-day notice requirement. | ||
| It is our constitutional duty to find out what's happening in these centers where inhumane conditions continue to be reported. | ||
| Number two, violation of public trust. | ||
| Secretary Noam directed DHS agents to arrest people without warrants, use tear gas against citizens, and ignore due process. | ||
| She claims she's taking murderers and rapists off our streets, but none of the 614 people arrested during Operation Midway Blitz in Chicago have been charged or convicted of murder or rape. | ||
| Federal agents repelled from Black Hawk helicopters and burst through an apartment in the South Shore of Chicago. | ||
| That was in my district. | ||
| They dragged people, U.S. citizens and immigrants alike, out of bed in the middle of the night. | ||
| Number three is self-dealing. | ||
| Secretary Noam has abused her power for personal benefit. | ||
| She steered a federal contract to a new firm run by a friend. | ||
| Her propaganda campaign to recruit ICE agents cost taxpayers $200 million. | ||
| She made a video that turned the South Shore raid into something that looked like a movie trailer. | ||
| But make no mistake, this is not a movie. | ||
| This is real life, and real people are being hurt and killed. | ||
| Renee Nicole Goode is dead because Secretary Noam allowed her DHS agents to run amok. | ||
| Families are forever torn apart. | ||
| This is not about personalities or trivial disagreements. | ||
| Secretary Noam has called my impeachment efforts silly. | ||
| I want to tell her right now: Secretary Noam, you have violated your oath of office and there will be consequences. | ||
| I am watching you. | ||
| Members of Congress are watching you. | ||
| The American people, most importantly, are watching you. | ||
| And most of all, we are not liking what we're seeing. | ||
| If you believe impeachment is silly, then you are not taking your job or our Constitution seriously. | ||
| Now it's my honor to introduce Congressman Adriano Espayat from New York's 13th District and chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| Thank you. | ||
| Thank you, Congresswoman Robin Kelly. | ||
| I am proud to join you in introducing these articles of impeachment against Secretary Noam, who have clearly violated the law and the trust of the American people. | ||
|
The Broken System Revealed
00:02:34
|
||
| 32 people died under DHS custody in 2025. | ||
| And already, four people have died in 2026, along widespread reports of sexual abuse, medical neglect, and inhumane conditions. | ||
| All of this enabled by a broken system. | ||
| But most importantly, our eyes do not defy us. | ||
| Our eyes did not lie to us. | ||
| We see, as the rest of the world has seen, have women are being violently pulled out of their cars and assaulted in front of the American people and in front of the eyes of the world. | ||
| How a woman was shot in the face as America watched on TV and as the rest of the world watch of this heinous murder. | ||
| We've seen how not only immigrants, but green car holders, TPS recipients, farm workers, and even American citizens are being stopped illegally, cuffed, detained, and in some cases arrested and deported. | ||
| I went to Monterey, Mexico, where I met with four children, U.S.-born children, American citizens that were sent to Mexico with their parents, including a young girl with a chronic cancer condition in her brain that needed immediate medical attention in a hospital in Houston, Texas. | ||
| So this is a human rights violation, a blatant human rights violation. | ||
| This is only seen in aggressive dictatorships across the world. | ||
| And so that's what we have. | ||
| This is the Trump dictatorship. | ||
| Do you think that a dictatorship knocks on your door and gives you a dozen roses when you open it? | ||
|
Exercise Oversight Powers
00:09:57
|
||
| A dictatorship takes away your rights, your fundamental rights. | ||
| It creeps up behind you and it assaults you. | ||
| Eventually, it knocks on your door and shoots you. | ||
| This is what's happening in America today. | ||
| And so that's why it is important to hold the Secretary accountable. | ||
| This is enshrined in our laws and our Constitution. | ||
| We must exercise our oversight powers. | ||
| Congresswoman Velasquez and I went to 26 Federal Plaza, where we were denied entry to an ICE building. | ||
| Subsequently, we went to court, and we had a favorable decision by that court to allow us to exercise our oversight powers. | ||
| And just recently, Secretary Noam again placed another seven-day notice so they can prepare themselves and hide the truth before we get there. | ||
| When we got there, they were mopping the floors. | ||
| They were cleaning up. | ||
| They didn't want us to see the dirty conditions. | ||
| 30 men in a room with two toilets, one of them broken, a woman right across in another cell that could see each other. | ||
| No confidentiality at all. | ||
| This is inhumane and warrants an impeachment proceeding. | ||
| Esto es in humano. | ||
| Y si merece un proceso de institución por eso toto aquí co la congresista Kelly para unino a este proceso que no lo guarantiza la constitución de los estados unido gracias. | ||
| Oh, I'm sorry. | ||
| And now allow me, please, to introduce Congresswoman Maxine Dexter from Oregon's 3rd District. | ||
| Thank you so much for joining us today, and thank you to Representative Robin Kelly for meeting this moment with action and moral clarity. | ||
| I am Congresswoman Maxine Dexter. | ||
| I'm a mother, a physician, and the honored representative for Oregon's 3rd Congressional District. | ||
| Last week, ICE murdered Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis. | ||
| The very next day, federal agents shot two people in East Portland in my district. | ||
| These are not isolated events. | ||
| This is part of a pattern of abuse by brazen, militarized federal agents who act without fear of being held accountable to the law. | ||
| People are being disappeared. | ||
| People are being assaulted. | ||
| And now people are being murdered. | ||
| And when our children and grandchildren ask what we did, when our neighbors were being targeted, I cannot sleep unless I can say every single thing we could. | ||
| That is why I'm helping introduce articles of impeachment to remove Christy Noam from office. | ||
| We've all seen her crimes play out right before our very eyes. | ||
| She's willfully obstructed congressional oversight, denying members, as you have heard, of Congress to facilities they have a legal right to conduct oversight at. | ||
| She's clearly violated public trust with her warrantless arrests, the use of violent force against U.S. citizens, including detaining four U.S. citizen children from my district and being held in a windowless cell at the border near Canada for weeks. | ||
| And Christy Noam has misused her position for personal gain while inappropriately using $200 million, taxpayer dollars, to fund an ad campaign to bring in ICE recruitment. | ||
| These are not the best of the best folks that she's looking for. | ||
| She is looking for people who are willing to invoke her lawless charade. | ||
| I'm going to use every opportunity to implore my colleagues across this institution to wake up and join this effort because protecting communities from unaccountable power isn't optional. | ||
| That is our duty. | ||
| Courage is contagious. | ||
| And with that, I'm honored to yield to one of the most courageous among us, Representative Nydia Velasquez. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Good morning, everyone. | ||
| And to all my colleagues here and to Robin Kelly, thank you so much for this action. | ||
| When the president was running for office for president, he made a pledge to the American people that he will be the no worse president. | ||
| And yet, he is invading sovereign countries like Venezuela. | ||
| Also, sending a message to Cuba, Mexico, Iran, and in our own streets of America, he's launched war against American citizens. | ||
| So, let's get straight to the point. | ||
| We are here today because the Department of Homeland Security has been turned into a weapon of political revenge. | ||
| This agency thinks is above the law. | ||
| Christine Noam has treated the Constitution like a suggestion and our communities like a battlefield. | ||
| I have represented the people of New York for over 30 years. | ||
| I have seen a lot of presidents, but I have never seen an administration use federal agencies to explicitly punish cities just because they didn't vote for them. | ||
| That is exactly what Donald Trump is doing. | ||
| And Christine Noam is his willing executioner. | ||
| In my city, ICE is no longer a law enforcement agency. | ||
| It's a rogue operation. | ||
| Mass agents are abducting high school students from their neighborhoods. | ||
| They are snatching fathers and mothers outside our immigration courts doing routine checks, turning places of justice into traps. | ||
| Even this week, they detain a city council staffer who is here in New York legally. | ||
| This agency is completely out of control. | ||
| Every time you see an ICE officer interacting with Americans now, they are screaming, cursing, and smashing windows to pull people out of their cars. | ||
| It is the wild west out there. | ||
| And I guess that is why Christine Noam loves wearing that cowboy hat. | ||
| The difference is, Ms. Noam, this is not a show. | ||
| Lives are on the line. | ||
| When she bragged about shooting her own dog, she wasn't just telling a story. | ||
| She was showing us her character and how she might run a government agency. | ||
| When you give untrained individuals a badge and set them loose, Americans are going to get hurt. | ||
| Just like we saw last week in the tragic killing of René Nicole Good. | ||
| And what was Christine Noam's response? | ||
| Did she demand an investigation? | ||
| No, she went on national television and smeared a dead American as a domestic terrorist. | ||
| The articles we are filing today lay it all out. | ||
| The obstruction of Congress, the violation of the public trust, and the self-dealing. | ||
| While her agents are out there shooting citizens, Nom is busy funneling hundreds of millions in taxpayers' dollars to her friends at agencies through emergency contracts. | ||
| Christine Nom has betrayed her oath, she has betrayed the Constitution, and she has betrayed the American people. | ||
| Quiero decides that we are con estos artículos para procesar a la secretaria de homeland security. | ||
| Una persona que no dicna de la confianza del pueblo Americano, estabiolando la constitución, no tiene la capacidad de sentir ni concentien detener ni con sentimiento sobre justicia y mucho meno respetal el proceso legal de toda la personas que 1 lo estado zonigo por está y other razón. | ||
|
Enough Is Enough
00:10:52
|
||
| Estamos hoy aquí para treaticia a la familia nos lamente de Nicole, pero to allas imigrante que están viviendo a terorizadas. | ||
| Aquí en esta nacion que tiene la estatua de la libertad que sepones que sea, the beacon of hope. | ||
| Graci. | ||
| Thank you so much to my colleagues from East Coast to Hawaii for standing with me today. | ||
| And now I'll open it up for questions. | ||
|
unidentified
|
If I can just ask, obviously, you have many members here. | |
| I think you said there's 70 people who have signed on. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Does Leader Jeffries support this effort? | |
| You'll have to ask Leader Jeffries, but I would not be standing here if I was told not to do it. | ||
| You know, if there was some. | ||
|
unidentified
|
So you've spoken to him directly about this? | |
| Yeah, our staffs have spoken. | ||
|
unidentified
|
It was 50, just some time ago, it's 70 today. | |
| Do you anticipate that the majority of the caucus will eventually sign on to this effort? | ||
| Yeah, I expect more to sign on. | ||
| That's what we're doing now, trying to build more sponsors of the legislation. | ||
| I mean, people joined on quickly. | ||
| You know, when I put it out there, people contacted me almost immediately, and it's been growing and growing and growing as people find out about it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And just to follow up to that, have you encountered any resistance from Democrats? | |
| Not really. | ||
| You know, I can't say there's all different kinds of people. | ||
| If you look at who signed up, you know, in all different caucuses, as you see right here, you know, there's many different people that have signed on. | ||
| So, you know, not really. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I want to ask, why do you think so many folks have signed on? | |
| There are a lot of proposals around reining in ICE, reining in DHS. | ||
| Why do you think that impeaching the secretary is something that has rallied so many members of the caucus towards the effort that you're pursuing? | ||
| I just feel like enough is enough. | ||
| We've been working on this for a little while. | ||
| This wasn't just a knee-jerk reaction because, of course, they've been in Chicago for so very long. | ||
| And I know other colleagues are working on other parts. | ||
| And I believe that people will join with those colleagues too. | ||
| But I just think that people are sick of it. | ||
| And anyone can answer the question because they've signed on. | ||
| I could add that public sentiment is everything. | ||
| We are watching the polls. | ||
| The American people are upset. | ||
| They didn't sign on for this. | ||
| The most fundamental principle and value for the American people is fairness and humane policies, not beating the shit out of people, especially vulnerable women and children. | ||
| Let me just say that while everybody is vulnerable, I can attest to the fact that the Latino community as chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus has been disproportionately targeted to the degree that even in Minnesota, where there's a clear intent to go after the Somalian community, the vast majority of the people arrested are Latino men. | ||
| For that reason, I will be going Friday to Minnesota as I went to Chicago for the shadow hearing there. | ||
| Para que todo sepan, la comunidad Latina estades proporcionadamente afectada por este asalto. | ||
| In Minnesota, la grand malloría de personas que son arrestadas son hombres Latinos. | ||
| In Chicago, tabien la grand malloría de personas arrestadas son Latinos. | ||
| En Nuevo Orlín, in New Orleans, the people targeted are workers from Honduras that went to New Orleans to rebuilt the city after Katrina. | ||
| So this is a hit job against Latino communities. | ||
| And let me tell you, people are regretting. | ||
| Some folks, many folks are regretting their last vote and turning around. | ||
| And so I would like to stress that because I think that's an important factor. | ||
| Well, I can just speak to my constituents in Minnesota. | ||
| We are being terrorized by Homeland Security and ICE and Secretary Christy Noam's orders in the state of Minnesota right now. | ||
| And let me be clear. | ||
| I'm from a swing district in Minnesota. | ||
| I have been one of the most bipartisan members of Congress that you will find in the Congress. | ||
| This has crossed a line. | ||
| Minnesotans, we want safe and secure borders. | ||
| We want violent criminals to not be in our community, but this is not what we signed up for. | ||
| This rogue agency is violating the rights of immigrants. | ||
| It is violating the rights of American citizens in our communities. | ||
| And last Wednesday, the violation of those rights, the escalation by ICE in our communities, got Renee Good killed. | ||
| And now this administration is going after her widow and going after her and six U.S. attorneys, who, by the way, are patriots in Minnesota at the U.S. Attorney's Office had said, no, we are not this. | ||
| This is not who we are as Minnesotans. | ||
| This is not who we are as Americans. | ||
| And so I believe you will continue to see members of Congress from across the ideological spectrum stand up, speak out, because we know the difference between right and wrong. | ||
| And Americans can see with their own eyes that what's happening in Minnesota and in Illinois and most possibly coming to New York is just plain wrong. | ||
|
unidentified
|
May I say something? | |
| Americans across this country have been protesting what they see with their own eyes and the lies that they're told, which are belied by the things that they're seeing. | ||
| What they're looking, they're out there protesting, and they expect Congress to use every tool that we have to push back, to hold accountable, and to show the American people that we are fighting for this democracy, for constitutional laws, and for treatment and respect of all of our communities. | ||
| So, that happens to be a time when you had the horrible situation in Minnesota. | ||
| We've had the horrible situation in other cities. | ||
| This particular resolution comes just at a time when enough is enough is enough, and people are looking to us to do everything we can to show that we have responsibility in this space. | ||
| Also, I wanted to say that I've gotten phone calls, and I know my colleagues have too from constituents, but from people from across this country, people I do not represent, people in different states encouraging what we're trying to do. | ||
| The other thing is, you asked me about Leader Jeffries, that we have concentrated so much on the cost, affordability, and health care, and I never want to detract from that. | ||
| But when you think about it, and we work with many different people and committees, but this is affecting people's health care. | ||
| This is affecting affordability. | ||
| When I think about Chicago and people afraid to go to work, when I think about restaurants that don't have as many people coming to eat there, when I've heard stories about people afraid to go to the doctor, afraid to take care of their health, because they're afraid to come outside, I had a town hall meeting in a grocery store, and people told me stories how they're just simply afraid to go outside, whether it's shopping, whether it's going to work, whether it's going to health care, you know, to their health care needs. | ||
| So, this is affecting, you know, it's widespread. | ||
| It's widespread. | ||
| I'm not good at this. | ||
|
unidentified
|
When you think about impeachment, obviously, there's a numbers game that's involved with that. | |
| If you put the merits of your resolution aside and think about just that numbers game of getting passage in the House and conviction in the Senate, is this more about sending a political message right now or previewing the playbook for Democrats? | ||
| Should you take back the majority? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Or what sort of the impetus is just striking at the moment with current events? | |
| You know, for me, and others can answer, it was like Congresswoman Bonnie Watson-Coleman said, Enough was enough, you know, and I just feel like we need to use every tool in our toolbox. | ||
| If we do nothing, nothing will happen. | ||
| And so, just really now trying to build on momentum, getting as many people signed on as possible. | ||
| That's the first step. | ||
| If I can just add, you know, we cannot be cynical at this moment. | ||
| We have to stand up for our country. | ||
| And if we are cynical that nobody's going to join or we're not going to get it passed, nothing happens. | ||
| And we proved that with the ACA extended premium or the premium tax credit extension. | ||
| People thought that there was no way that we would pass that in the House. | ||
| And we have to continue to message what's right. | ||
| The American people can see what's happening is wrong. | ||
| They want us to act. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I had a town hall in less than 24 hours where standing on this vote, the yays are 163, the nays are 257 with one present. | |
| The amendment is not adopted. | ||
| The unfinished business is a request for a recorded vote on amendment number two, printed in House Report 119-45, offered by the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Crane, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote. | ||
|
FCC's Spectrum Auction Authority
00:04:45
|
||
| The clerk shall redesignate the amendment. | ||
| Amendment number two, printed in House Report number 119-445, offered by Mr. Crane of Arizona. | ||
| A recorded vote has been requested. | ||
| Those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. | ||
| A sufficient number having risen a recorded vote is offered. | ||
| Members will record their votes by electronic device. | ||
| This will be a two-minute vote. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And now the second of what we believe will be the last three votes of the day here in the House. | |
| Members have been working on a spending package for parts of the federal government, providing money for the State and Treasury Departments, the IRS and D.C. and federal courts. | ||
| Current funds run out at the end of the month. | ||
| This vote is on an amendment offered by Arizona Republican Eli Crane. | ||
| It prohibits funds for the National Endowment for Democracy, which was founded in 1983 as a bipartisan private nonprofit corporation, but acts as a grant-making foundation. | ||
| During his time at Doge, Elon Musk criticized the agency, saying it was corrupt and guilty of unspecified crimes. | ||
| He posted in early February that the evil organization needs to be dissolved, quote unquote, and Doge blocked disbursement from the Treasury of the agency's congressionally mandated funding. | ||
| Back in August, it was granted an injunction to allow access to its funds. | ||
| While we're in this vote, we'll show you a portion of today's FCC oversight hearing. | ||
| In this clip, we'll hear from Chairman Brendan Carr. | ||
| Chairman Hudson, Ranking Member Matsui, distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the invitation to testify. | ||
| While this is not my first time appearing before the subcommittee is my first time doing so as chairman, like my colleagues, I have fond memories of this room. | ||
| I started as an intern here over 20 years ago now. | ||
| I also want to start by saying how proud I am of the FCC's dedicated staff and everything they accomplished for the American people last year. | ||
| The FCC delivered an historic set of wins in 2025, thanks to them. | ||
| I also want to applaud the important work that the subcommittee has accomplished this Congress. | ||
| For instance, thanks to Chairman Hudson, Chairman Guthrie, and many of their fellow members, the FCC's spectrum auction authority has now been restored through President Trump's Working Families Tax Cut Act, a major legislative accomplishment. | ||
| In terms of the FCC's work, the agency has been following President Trump's strong leadership and moved quickly to execute on an ambitious set of reforms. | ||
| We're advancing a Build America agenda, a concrete plan to unleash high-speed infrastructure builds in communities across the country. | ||
| We're reinvigorating the agency's consumer protection work, including cracking down on illegal robocalls. | ||
| We're empowering broadcasters to meet their public interest obligations. | ||
| We're strengthening America's national security. | ||
| And we're eliminating waste while modernizing agency operations. | ||
| Much of this represents a significant change in the Biden administration policies. | ||
| Indeed, when I took over as chairman of the FCC a year ago, the FCC faced several serious challenges. | ||
| For instance, the Biden administration had allowed the U.S. to fall behind when it comes to one of the most important features of our economic strength, national security, and connectivity goals, spectrum. | ||
| The FCC's Spectrum Auction Authority had lapsed two years earlier. | ||
| The Biden administration had failed to tee up a single new spectrum ban for auction. | ||
| And President Biden's national spectrum strategy committed to freeing up exactly zero megahertz of spectrum. | ||
| On top of that, permitting reform was going nowhere. | ||
| The Biden administration was layering on heavy-handed regulations that only made it harder for broadband builders to start turning dirt. | ||
| To make matters worse, the Biden administration was pushing policies that would make services more expensive for Americans. | ||
| We had to turn things around and fast. | ||
| Thanks to President Trump's leadership, we're doing exactly that. | ||
| As I detail in my written testimony, the FCC's Build Agenda focuses on unleashing the nation's broadband builders. | ||
|
House in Order
00:15:40
|
||
| It does say 127, the nays are 291. | ||
| The amendment is not adopted. | ||
| There being no further amendment under the rule, the committee rises. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Chairman. | |
| Mr. Speaker, the Committee of the Whole House and the State of the Union has under consideration H.R. 7006. | ||
| And present to House Resolution 992. | ||
| I'll report the bill back to the House. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The Chair of the Committee of the Whole House and the State of the Union reports that the Committee has had under consideration the bill H.R. 706 and, pursuant to the House Resolution 992, reports the bill back to the House. | |
| Under the rule, the previous question is ordered. | ||
| The question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. | ||
| Those in favor say aye. | ||
| Those opposed say no. | ||
| The ayes have it. | ||
| Third reading. | ||
| A bill making further consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30th, 2026, and for other purposes. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The question is on passage of the bill. | |
| Under clause 10 of Rule 20, the yays and nays are ordered. | ||
| Members will record their votes by electronic device. | ||
|
unidentified
|
This will be a five-minute vote. | |
| Last roll call vote of the day here in the House as members have been working on a spending package for parts of the federal government, providing money for the Treasury, state departments, the IRS, and D.C. and federal courts. | ||
| Current funds expire at the end of the month. | ||
| This is a vote on passage. | ||
| In the Senate today, we're expecting the next vote on a war powers resolution for any further military actions in or against Venezuela. | ||
| You can watch that vote. | ||
| It's set for 5:30 Eastern about eight minutes from now in the Senate live on C-SPAN 2. | ||
| We got a preview of that vote earlier. | ||
| Here's a look. | ||
| The Senate today is slated to vote on a war powers resolution that would block President Trump from further action in Venezuela without congressional approval. | ||
| Joining us from Capitol Hill is Anthony Adragna, who is a defense reporter for Punch Bowl News. | ||
| Anthony Adregna, the Senate will vote first on advancing to this resolution. | ||
| Why is that? | ||
|
unidentified
|
It's a complicated procedural process here. | |
| We're about to kick off what is known as the Votarama process, where senators could, in theory, offer unlimited amendments. | ||
| What we've heard throughout this week is that there's not a ton of interest in doing that. | ||
| People don't want to draw out this process. | ||
| They've obviously got a minibus to consider on the floor as well. | ||
| But we could kick off what could be an extended process in theory with this. | ||
| They will vote to advance the legislation. | ||
| And as you said, then that kicks off how many hours of debate and this voterama. | ||
| Explain to our viewers how that will work and what are you expecting. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| So in theory, there could be up to 10 hours of debate on the resolution once we're formally on it, followed by a votarama in which senators are allowed to offer amendments on anything germane to the resolution. | ||
| Now there's dispute about what that could entail. | ||
| However, before we get to that, I think there's going to be an effort to try to kill this resolution altogether. | ||
| Republicans are going to argue essentially that there's no active troop presence here on the ground in Venezuela. | ||
| They're going to try to win out some of the five Republicans who voted with Democrats last week to advance the resolution. | ||
| If they're successful in making that case, we could see the debate cut off right then and there. | ||
| What do you mean by that? | ||
| Cut off at the point when they try to advance it in the first vote or during the amendment process? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I guess I'm not entirely sure about when this point of order would be raised, but Republicans would try to raise it and essentially forestall the furthering of this process. | |
| Again, they've got five Republicans that held out last week. | ||
| The president has singled them out by name. | ||
| And so they're trying, both administration officials and Republican leadership are trying really hard to pick off two of them, flip their votes, and try to short-circuit this whole process altogether. | ||
| Let's talk about those five. | ||
| Who are they? | ||
|
unidentified
|
So it's Senator Ram Paul. | |
| He's one of the co-sponsors of the resolution. | ||
| He's joined by Senator Murkowski, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who's voted with Democrats previously on War Powers resolutions. | ||
| And then Senator Susan Collins of Maine, Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri, and Senator Todd Young of Indiana. | ||
| Now we just heard my colleague Andrew Desiderio reported that Senator Hawley is inclined to join with his party in voting for this point of order. | ||
| So that would mean that people have flipped, Republicans have flipped back one of those votes. | ||
| They would need just one more in theory to again short circuit this process and stop the resolution in its tracks. | ||
| So of those four remaining Republican senators, who are you watching that could potentially go back on how they voted last week and side with the president? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well again, Senator Murkowski and Senator Paul have voted with Democrats before and prior iterations here. | |
| So I think they're pretty much off the books. | ||
| We talked to Senator Collins yesterday. | ||
| She said her position is unchanged despite the president's pressure. | ||
| So I think it really does come down to Senator Young. | ||
| He's been pretty circumspect with his comments that he's offered on this process. | ||
| But he did tell us yesterday that he really did, he thought it was important to vote procedurally to advance this resolution. | ||
| He thought the debate was important, but he's definitely going to be the vote to watch here on the floor. | ||
| I would also just mention Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania. | ||
| He's a Democrat, but he's expressed vocal support for the president's actions in Venezuela. | ||
| He did side with his party to advance the resolution last week, but he remains sort of a wildcard on final passage. | ||
| We'll have to see what he does here. | ||
| What could happen on final passage then with the vote total? | ||
| Because it is a resolution, meaning they only need a simple majority, right? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right, so a 50-50 vote would fail. | |
| So again, if you take Senator Hawley back, you know, back with the rest of his party, then you would just need one more vote for this thing to fail on the floor. | ||
| So again, all eyes are going to fall on Fetterman and Young, I think in particular, with Senators Collins, Murkowski, and Paul also worth watching. | ||
| What has Senator Hawley said about his decision to now being open to sticking with the administration's stance on Venezuela? | ||
|
unidentified
|
He expressed the most concern with the idea of U.S. troops being present in Venezuela going forward in the future. | |
| There was a letter that Punchbowl News obtained this morning from Secretary of State Rubio, I guess, writing in his capacity as the National Security Advisor. | ||
| He has a lot of jobs right now. | ||
| But again, sort of reiterating the position that there are no troops on the ground right now and they're not expecting them to go be there forward. | ||
| That's an attempt. | ||
| The nays are 79. | ||
| The bill is passed without objection. | ||
| motion we consider is laid on the table. | ||
| The House will be in order. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The house will be in order. | |
| House fellow members, please take your conversations off the floor for what purpose does the gentleman from Texas seek recognition, Mr. Speaker. | ||
| I hereby remove my name as co-sponsor of HRES 932. | ||
| The request is granted. | ||
| For what purpose does the gentleman from Texas seek recognition? | ||
| Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourns to meet at 9 a.m. tomorrow. | ||
| Without objections, ordered. | ||
| So we're done. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Ladies and gentlemen, the house will be in order. | |
| The Chair announces the Speaker's appointment pursuant to U.S. 2SC 276D, Clause 10 of Rule 1, and the order of the House of January 3rd, 2025, of the following members of the part of the House to the U.S.-Canada Interparliamentary Group. | ||
| Mr. Larson of Washington, Mr. Morelli of New York, Ms. Omar of Minnesota, Mr. Tanidar of Michigan, and Mr. Kennedy of New York. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The Chair announces the Speaker's appointment pursuant to 20 U.S.C. 2103B and the order of the House of January 3rd, 2025, of the following individuals to the Board of Trustees of the American Folklife Center in the Library of Congress as part of the House for a term of six years. | |
| Mr. Robert Enikladis Underwood of Tamong, Guam. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The Chair announces the Speaker's appointment pursuant to 22 U.S.C. 6913 and the order of the House of January 3rd, 2025, of the following members on the part of the House to the Congressional Executive Commission on the People's Republic of China. | |
| Mr. Walkinshaw of Virginia. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The chair announces the speaker's appointment pursuant to 22 U.S.C. 1928A, Clause 10 of Rule 1 and the order of the House of January 3rd, 2025 of the following members on the part of the House to the United States group of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly. | |
|
One Minute Tributes
00:15:00
|
||
| Ms. Sanchez of California, Mr. Larson of Washington, Mr. Norcross of New Jersey, and Ms. Kamlager Dove of California. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The chair will now entertain requests for one-minute speeches. | |
| For what purpose does the gentleman from Wisconsin seek recognition? | ||
| Mr. Speaker, I rise and ask unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. | ||
| Without objection, the gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized for one minute. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an extraordinary young woman from northeastern Wisconsin who recently saved her mother's life by performing CPR. | ||
| While at home sick from school, 11-year-old Josie Petton was confronted with a nightmare scenario that no child should have to experience. | ||
| Josie had been reading on the couch next to her mother when she had a sudden medical emergency. | ||
| She quickly realized something was very wrong. | ||
| Without hesitation, Josie jumped into action, calling nearby family members for help and then contacting 911. | ||
| She soon spoke with dispatcher Brenda Dawes, who started guiding her on how to perform CPR. | ||
| Brenda was able to walk Josie through proper CPR technique while they waited for EMTs to arrive. | ||
| When asked about who was in her mind during this traumatic experience, she responded, Jesus. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring this remarkable young woman. | ||
| Because of her decisive actions, her mother is alive today and doing much better. | ||
| I also want to recognize and thank Brenda Dawes for her service to our community. | ||
| Because of your calm guidance and sound advice, a tragedy was prevented. | ||
| Northeast Wisconsin is blessed to have such compassionate and dedicated 911 dispatchers just like you. | ||
| Josie, your quick thinking and faith in God will carry you very far in life. | ||
| On behalf of everyone in Wisconsin's 8th District, I want you to know how proud we are of you and how happy we are that your mother is doing okay. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, I yield back. | ||
| For what purpose does the gentleman from Pennsylvania seek recognition? | ||
| Mr. Speaker, I request unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and revise or extend my remarks. | ||
| And without objection, the gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for one minute. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Speaker. | ||
| I rise today to celebrate and congratulate the many high school teams in Pennsylvania's 17th congressional district that won their Whippie El Championships this fall season. | ||
| Those champs are in football, Aliquippa, Avonworth, and Seton-LaSalle, in boys soccer, Fox Chapel, West Allegheny, and Deer Lakes, and girls' soccer, North Allegheny and Fox Chapel, and girls' tennis, Shadyside Academy in Quaker Valley, and girls volleyball, Beaver, Avonworth, Eden Christian, and boys golf, South Fayette, Shadyside Academy, and field hockey, Pine Richland, Fox Chapel, Shadyside Academy, and boys cross country, Quaker Valley, and in girls cross-country, Shadyside Academy. | ||
| I say it a lot. | ||
| We make champions in Western Pennsylvania. | ||
| Congratulate all the winners. | ||
| You make us proud at home. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, thank you, and I yield back. | ||
| For what purpose does the gentleman from Pennsylvania receive? | ||
| Mr. Speaker, I have to approve unanimous consent to address the House for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. | ||
| Without objection, the gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for one minute. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Frank Sardecki, a devoted public servant and proud Pennsylvanian who passed away on January 11, 2026, at the age of 84. | ||
| Frank dedicated more than six decades of his life serving our nation. | ||
| After proudly serving in the United States Air Force, he spent over 50 years at the Toby Hannah Army Depot, where he rose to the role of deputy commander and helped lead one of the region's most important defense facilities. | ||
| His leadership and commitment to excellence at Toby Hannah and his life was exceptional, earning him some of the highest civilian honors in federal service, including the Department of Defense Medal of Distinguished Civilian Service, the highest DOD civilian service award. | ||
| Following his retirement in 2022, he was inducted into both the Army Material Command Hall of Fame and the U.S. Army Communications Electronics Command Hall of Fame. | ||
| Above all, Frank was a devoted husband, father, and grandfather who cherished time with his family and his community in northeastern Pennsylvania. | ||
| I extend my deepest condolences to his loved ones and thank them for sharing Frank with our nation. | ||
| His legacy of service will not be forgotten. | ||
| With that, I yield back. | ||
| For what purpose does the gentlewoman from California seek recognition? | ||
| Mr. Speaker, I request unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. | ||
| Without objection, the gentleman from California is recognized for one minute. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, I rise with a heavy heart to honor the remarkable life of civil rights activist and community leader Joy Atkinson. | ||
| Joy dedicated her life to mentoring thousands of black women to become the next generation of change makers in Los Angeles, and I was one of them. | ||
| Joy was the first person to introduce me to public policy work, and without her, I would not be standing here today as a member of Congress. | ||
| Whether advising local elected officials or leading the Los Angeles African American Women's Public Policy Institute, her integrity, courage, and commitment to building coalitions and creating change never wavered. | ||
| In my city, Joy touched the lives of anybody who is anybody. | ||
| With her unexpected passing, we have not only lost a giant in the fight for justice, but also a beloved mother, friend, and confidant. | ||
| Her legacy will endure as we continue working toward the more equitable and inclusive society in which she so deeply believed. | ||
| May she rest in peace. | ||
| With that, I yield back. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The gentlewoman yields. | |
| For what purpose does the gentleman from Indiana seek recognition? | ||
| Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. | ||
| Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, across my home state of Indiana, I hear the same thing time and again. | ||
| People work hard, they pay their taxes, and they expect Washington to treat their dollars with respect. | ||
| Hoosier hospitality means we help neighbors who truly need it. | ||
| But fraud turns this virtue into a target, and hardworking Hoosiers foot the bill. | ||
| This is not left versus right. | ||
| It is honesty versus the dishonest, trust versus waste. | ||
| For every dollar stolen by fraud, it's a dollar we cannot spend on public safety, on our national security, or on helping working families get ahead. | ||
| We owe taxpayers accountability, stronger oversight, and closed loopholes that invite abuse. | ||
| Protect the taxpayers, protect the programs, and punish the scammers. | ||
| I yield back. | ||
| The gentleman yields. | ||
| For what purpose does the gentleman from New York seek recognition? | ||
| Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. | ||
| Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Speaker. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, this past December, the Department of Veteran Affairs released a proposal to cut 25,000 openings nationwide for much-needed nurses and medical staff. | ||
| In the New York City area, this would mean a loss of approximately 380 positions. | ||
| While the VA claims these are unneeded openings left from the pandemic, its own Inspector General reported last August that 94% of VA facilities reported severe staffing shortages for medical officer occupations, and 79 percent of facilities reported severe shortages for nurses. | ||
| It is baffling, but 250 years on, this nation still struggles to reconcile the way that it treats the men and women who fought for our country after they have traded their swords for plowshares. | ||
| The same can be said for the caregivers that tend to their wounds, both physical and psychological, in the years after their service. | ||
| Scrimping on veterans' medical care or diverting its availability is un-American, and it sends the message to our citizens that this government will not keep its part of the bargain. | ||
| I demand that this government invest in the VA system rather than seek its demise. | ||
| The brave men and women who sacrificed to defend our country deserve better. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I yield back. | ||
|
unidentified
|
For what purpose does the gentlewoman from Wyoming seek recognition? | |
| Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Without objection. | |
| I rise today to honor one of Wyoming's remaining World War II veterans, Mr. Bob Willis of Laramie, who recently turned 101 years old. | ||
| Mr. Willis served his country as an infantryman during some of the fiercest fighting of the war, including the Battle of the Bulge. | ||
| While under enemy fire, a German tank ground exploded beneath him and shrapnel stuck his side, stopped only by the Book of Mormon he carried in his pocket. | ||
| Mr. Willis is a true hero here in the Purple Heart, helped liberate Europe from Nazi tyranny and later protected Holocaust survivors in the aftermath of the war. | ||
| When he returned home, he devoted four decades to serving the Laramie community as a dentist and raised a family with his wife, Kay. | ||
| Bob Willis exemplifies duty, faith, humility, and service. | ||
| Please join me in honoring his extraordinary life and service to Wyoming and to our nation. | ||
| Thank you, and I yield back. | ||
|
unidentified
|
For what purpose does the gentlewoman from Illinois seek recognition? | |
| I ask unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and to revise and accept my remarks. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Without objection, the gentlewoman from Illinois is recognized for one minute. | |
| Thank you, Mr. Speaker. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor Eric Sarota for his work to expand tenants' rights and reshape the housing landscape. | ||
| As Director of Housing Justice at the Shriver Center on Poverty and now as a director of a tenant advocacy clinic, Eric uses litigation and advocacy to advance housing equity in Illinois and beyond. | ||
| His work with the Illinois Fair Housing Coalition led to the passage of a state law prohibiting discrimination against housing choice voucher holders. | ||
| Eric co-led the Partnership of Just Housing, a national coalition that improved housing access for people with arrest and conviction histories. | ||
| And as a trusted counsel to countless tenant associations, Eric has maintained his commitment to housing for all. | ||
| So on behalf of Illinois' 3rd Congressional District, it is my honor to commend Eric Sarota for his work to ensure safe, just, and affordable housing as a fundamental human right. | ||
| Thank you, Eric. | ||
| Congratulations. | ||
| With that, I yield back. | ||
|
unidentified
|
For what purpose does the gentleman from Texas seek recognition? | |
| Mr. Speaker, I ask for unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Without objection, the gentleman from Texas is recognized for one minute. | |
| Thank you, Mr. Speaker. | ||
| I rise today in recognition of the Sharia Free America Caucus, which I am proud to have joined. | ||
| Across the world, ideologically driven Islamic movements have destabilized entire regions, displaced tens of millions of people, and fueled terrorism, repression, and violence. | ||
| Where civil law is subordinated to Islamic authority, freedom, prosperity, and security collapse. | ||
| Sharia law is not a personal creed. | ||
| It is a political and legal system and one that rejects equality before the law, suppresses dissent, and fuses radical religious doctrine with state power. | ||
| History shows that where Sharia gains influence, constitutional government gives way to coercion. | ||
| In Texas, my constituents are increasingly alarmed by the consequences of mass migration and the importation of ideologies that are fundamentally incompatible with our Western civilization. | ||
| The purpose of this caucus is clear, to ensure that Sharia never gains a foothold in America, not now and not ever. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Speaker. | ||
|
unidentified
|
For what purpose does the gentlewoman from Vermont seek recognition? | |
| Without objection, the gentlewoman from Vermont is recognized for one minute. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, I need a level set here. | ||
| The president cannot take money from the proceeds of seized Venezuelan oil and control it himself via means of a highly illegal and improper offshore slush fund. | ||
| The president has no constitutional authority to do this. | ||
| He doesn't get to create his own secret overseas slush fund, which is outside of our purview and oversight. | ||
| This is absolutely insane. | ||
| We take Venezuelan oil at gunpoint, engage in regime change and nation building, and then the president personally controls the proceeds? | ||
| What has happened here? | ||
| Why do my colleagues give up their power? | ||
| Mr. Speaker, where is the Republican opposition to this lawless, half-baked, absurd plan? | ||
| You know, if any Democratic president claimed this kind of maniacal power, you would be enraged. | ||
| So I ask you, Mr. Speaker, where is the outrage now? | ||
| Where is the pushback? | ||
| Do not give this president any more power. | ||
| I yield back. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the president. | |
| For what purpose does the gentleman from Rhode Island seek recognition? | ||
| Address the House one minute to revise and extend my remarks. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. | |
| Mr. Speaker, 2025 was one of the worst years for job growth in decades. | ||
| In fact, if you don't count COVID, the United States created fewer jobs last year than any year since 2009. | ||
| And you don't need data. | ||
| Just ask anyone who's been looking for a job. | ||
| They will tell you no one is hiring. | ||
| This weak economy is a direct result of President Trump's policies, the crazy tariffs that are raising costs for businesses and consumers, massive costs, cuts to health care, and the political attacks on clean energy that are driving up energy costs. | ||
| The president claimed that his tariffs would help American manufacturing, but instead we have lost 72,000 manufacturing jobs since Liberation Day after years of gains. | ||
|
Real Needs of American People
00:11:13
|
||
| And what is the president focused on as working people struggle? | ||
| Building himself a new ballroom, naming the Kennedy Center after himself, trying to take over Greenland, selling cryptocurrency out of the White House to enrich himself. | ||
| None of this creates jobs or lowers costs for you or the millions of Americans who are struggling. | ||
| It is time for the President to focus on the real needs of the American people. | ||
| I yield back. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Again, members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the president. | |
| For what purpose does the gentleman from Ohio seek recognition? | ||
| Without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, I rise today to draw attention to the 68,000 manufacturing jobs lost across our country in 2025 as a direct result of President Trump's reckless tariffs and Doge cuts. | ||
| Why did he visit Detroit yesterday when his insistence on continuing these tariffs actually cuts investment in American manufacturing? | ||
| It's all backwards, and it puts America backwards and America's workers backwards. | ||
| In December, manufacturing jobs continued an eight-month decline that began after President Trump falsely promised these new tariffs would lead to an economic resurgence for American workers. | ||
| Well, instead, his broad across-the-board tariffs have driven prices up for everyday goods and all supply chains. | ||
| Tariffs create uncertainty in the job market, leaving hardworking families worse off. | ||
| When manufacturing jobs disappear and costs rise, Ohio families feel it. | ||
| Lost jobs and rising costs are not an abstract economic theory for us. | ||
| They are a harsh reality. | ||
| Thousands of families I represent have been touched. | ||
| Another company just closed in Fulton County. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, let's make manufacturing more competitive, not less. | ||
| Let's create jobs in the USA. | ||
| I yield back. | ||
|
unidentified
|
For what purpose does the gentlewoman from New Mexico seek recognition? | |
| Mr. Speaker, I ask for one minute to address the House and to revise and extend my remarks. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. | |
| Mr. Speaker, do you recall just one week and a half ago when the President of the United States stood in front of the American people and said that he conducted an unauthorized military invasion of Venezuela to save American lives from drugs? | ||
| But then a few days later told us it was actually about the oil. | ||
| Well, if we needed any confirmation that it was not about the drugs and not about saving American lives, look no further than the fact that last night the White House announced that they would cut millions of dollars from substance abuse and addiction recovery programs that save lives in America every single day. | ||
| Because in Donald Trump's America, down is up and up is down, and they will lie to your face every single day if they think it will get them what they want. | ||
| And that is why we are in the fight to stop unauthorized wars, to stop the daily assault on our communities, and to restore the America that we know and to save American lives. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I yield back. | |
| Members are again reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President. | ||
| Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 3rd, 2025, the gentleman from Utah, Mr. Moore, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the topic of this special order. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Without objection. | |
| Thank you, Mr. Speaker. | ||
| I am glad to be joined by my colleagues for this conference special order to talk about ways we have delivered for all Americans through our legislative action, committee work, and more and much more. | ||
| To start us off, I'd like to invite up and yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Buddy Carter. | ||
| I thank the gentleman for yielding, for hosting this. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, America's back. | ||
| And like the President says, hotter than ever. | ||
| Throughout 2025, Republicans worked to undo the damage of the Biden-Harris administration, resulting in less red tape, bigger paychecks, a blue-collar boom, and a stronger, more resilient workplace. | ||
| The United States will always be the land of opportunity, but the previous administration shuttered small businesses, choked economic growth, and enacted countless regulatory measures that hurt families and businesses alike. | ||
| I believe in America first. | ||
| That means a federal government that gets out of the way and allows hardworking people to succeed. | ||
| Republicans put America first when we passed the largest tax cut in America history. | ||
| We delivered no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, and tax relief for seniors by lowering taxes on Social Security benefits because the key to affordability is bigger paychecks, not bigger government. | ||
| People are going to be feeling the effects of these tax savings in their pocketbooks this tax season when Georgia families can expect up to $5,000 in savings. | ||
| And by unleashing American energy, we're bringing relief to families right now. | ||
| The national average of gasoline is now under $3 a gallon, under $3 a gallon. | ||
| That matters to everyone, from the large-scale shipping to the blue-collar worker driving their daily commute. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, what they've done, what we've done in 2025 is just the beginning. | ||
| As we move to 2026, Republicans are focused on expanding opportunity even further, bringing jobs back home, growing domestic manufacturing, and ensuring the American Dream is within reach for every person willing to work hard, especially our young people. | ||
| The key to Republican success is that we govern by a simple concept, common sense. | ||
| It's common sense to use our vast natural resources and unleash American energy dominance because affordable energy means affordable living. | ||
| Just like it's common sense that trillions spent on so-called Green New Deal projects cause runaway inflation at over 9%. | ||
| President Trump and Republicans are reviving the American dream by advancing pro-growth, pro-worker, America-first policies that help young people build a future, provide relief for our elderly, and strengthen the middle class and everyone in between. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. President, for your work on our economy, and I yield back. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| The gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Carter, appreciate your thoughts and articulating much of that. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, last year, House Republicans passed the Working Families Tax Cuts. | ||
| This is a reconciliation bill that included monumental pro-growth and pro-family legislation that lowers costs for American families. | ||
| Lot's been said about this. | ||
| I want to share just a few aspects of this as we've, you know, we're with the six months in the rearview of when we accomplish this. | ||
| Again, the largest tax increases in American history would have happened on January 1st of this year had we not completed that. | ||
| And we got it six months done prior to that crisis. | ||
| I don't know when the last time I looked at Congress and found something done that ahead of schedule. | ||
| It's usually the last minute. | ||
| And that matters because that was a reality. | ||
| That's what we knew was coming. | ||
| And we worked hard to accomplish a lot of really key important pro-growth elements. | ||
| No tax on tips or overtime, an increased tile tax credit, tax relief for seniors, an increased standard deduction targeted entirely at the middle and lower income Americans, investment in rural America. | ||
| These are just a few of the reasons Americans will see a significant increases in their upcoming tax returns. | ||
| And Mr. Speaker, that doesn't even include the provisions that strengthen small business and encourage investment in American industry. | ||
| This year, House Republicans are keeping more hard-earned dollars in working families' pockets, not with the Washington bureaucracy. | ||
| The tax filing season begins next week, and Americans can expect to see some of the biggest tax refunds in history. | ||
| After four years of painful inflation, we're cleaning up the economic mess. | ||
| Real wages and benefits fell 3.9 percent during the Biden-Harris administration, and through the working families' tax cuts, real wages are growing faster than prices. | ||
| We saw a 4.3 real GDP growth in the third quarter of 2025. | ||
| That is substantial. | ||
| The average since World War II is 3.1. | ||
| And after a 3.8% in Q2, we continue to exceed expectations there. | ||
| Economic growth is an important economic indicator with a substantial impact on our annual deficits, and I am confident it will only continue to grow. | ||
| 2026 will be about bigger paychecks and lower costs on everything from health care to housing to household goods. | ||
| We are moving forward with housing affordability legislation to lower costs and update financing options. | ||
| We are streamlining and simplifying permitting processes to create more jobs, reduce costs, and increase wages. | ||
| We are also lowering health care costs. | ||
| In December, the House passed legislation to cut premiums, expand choice accounts, provide more affordable rates to small businesses, and expand PBM transparency to lower costs of prescription drugs. | ||
| 2025 was a big year for my team and for House Republicans. | ||
| We passed landmark legislation, and people are going to see the difference because of it. | ||
| I'm looking forward to 2026 and continuing to work hard for Utah's 1st District. | ||
| Thank you so much, Mr. Speaker, and I yield back the balance of my time to the chair. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Under the speaker's announced policy of January 3rd, 2025, the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Foster, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. | |
|
Discussion On Nuclear Security
00:15:41
|
||
| Thank you. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Speaker. | ||
| I first ask for unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and submit extraneous material into the record. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Without objection. | |
| Thank you, Mr. Speaker. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, I rise today to open this special order hour to discuss the expiration of the new START treaty, the importance of arms control, and the urgent need to strengthen global nuclear security. | ||
| I want to thank the members who will be joining me this evening for their leadership and their willingness to engage on issues that carry existential consequences for our country and for the world. | ||
| As many of my colleagues know, I'm the only PhD physicist currently serving in the United States Congress. | ||
| Before coming to Congress, I spent more than two decades as a high-energy particle physicist and particle accelerator designer at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, where we were smashing together protons and antiprotons to make particles that have not been around since the Big Bang, and designing and building the giant particle accelerators and detectors and analyzing the data. | ||
| I was on the team that discovered the topcork, the heaviest known form of matter. | ||
| But because of that background, I feel a special responsibility to engage deeply on issues of nuclear weapons, arms control, and strategic stability, not as abstract policy debates, but as matters grounded in technical reality. | ||
| Arms control is not about unilateral disarmament or wishful thinking or fantasies of dominance or trusting adversaries. | ||
| Arms control is about verifiable limits, predictability, and reducing the risk of miscalculation between nuclear armed states. | ||
| For decades, arms control agreements have helped prevent a catastrophic nuclear exchange, not by eliminating deterrence, but by stabilizing it. | ||
| The New START Treaty, which stands for Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, was signed in 2010 and extended in 2021 and is the last remaining bilateral nuclear arms control agreement between the United States and the Russian Federation. | ||
| NewStart places verifiable limits on deployed strategic nuclear weapons and on delivery systems and provides for data exchanges, for notifications, and on-site inspections that give us direct insight into Russia's nuclear forces. | ||
| Newstart followed a long line of arms control agreements from SALT to START ONE to SORT that helped reduce the global nuclear arsenal from the Cold War highs of more than 70,000 weapons to fewer than 13,000 today. | ||
| These agreements were supported by Democratic and Republican administrations alike because they made the United States safer. | ||
| Under Newstart, the United States does not rely on guesswork, on satellite imagery alone, or on worst-case assumptions. | ||
| We rely on legally binding limits and on verification measures backed by some of the most sophisticated scientific and intelligence capabilities of the world. | ||
| Today, that system is fraying. | ||
| Russia has suspended its participation in New Start, and on-site inspections remain paused, and the treaty itself is set to expire in less than one month. | ||
| Anyone who remembers past arms control negotiations understands the gravity of this moment. | ||
| Negotiating a successor agreement will take years, not months, and we are already past the danger zone. | ||
| If Newstart expires without a replacement, there will be no legally binding limits on the world's two largest nuclear arsenals for the first time in more than half a century. | ||
| The consequences of that outcome would be serious and immediate. | ||
| The United States would lose treaty-mandated insight into Russia's deployed nuclear forces. | ||
| Both countries would be free to increase the number of deployed warheads on existing missiles. | ||
| Strategic planning would increasingly be driven by worst-case assumptions rather than verified facts. | ||
| At the same time, we'd face a far more complex nuclear environment than during the Cold War. | ||
| China is rapidly expanding its nuclear forces. | ||
| Russia continues to engage in irresponsible nuclear saber rattling during its illegal war in Ukraine. | ||
| And Iran and North Korea continue to challenge the global non-proliferation regime. | ||
| In this environment, allowing arms control to collapse is not a show of strength. | ||
| It is an abdication of leadership that increases the risk of miscalculation, of arms races, and of ultimately nuclear use by design or by accident. | ||
| Verification will be at the heart of any future arms control effort, and this is where America's scientific enterprise plays a critical role. | ||
| Our national laboratories provide the technical backbone for verification, for monitoring, for treaty compliance, and they are essential to maintaining U.S. leadership in this area. | ||
| As co-chair of the bipartisan National Labs Caucus, I've seen firsthand how investments in science and scientific talent directly translate into national security. | ||
| You know, if you're a member of Congress, you have the opportunity, if you ask, to go into the room where you see our nuclear weapons taken apart. | ||
| You talk to the experts about why the design choices were made, what the design margins are, and why they have to be built the way they are. | ||
| And if you walk into that room and you see those weapons and think about what they're capable of, if that doesn't make you take your job seriously, you're not thinking clearly. | ||
| But verification is not a diplomatic afterthought. | ||
| It is a scientific challenge that demands sustained investment and expertise. | ||
| The choice before us is not between arms control and national security, because arms control is national security, and it remains one of the most effective tools we have to reduce nuclear risk while maintaining a credible deterrent. | ||
| The expiration of New Start without a successor would mark a dangerous turning point, signaling that restraint and verification no longer matter. | ||
| This special order hour is about sounding the alarm, but it's also about reaffirming that Congress has a responsibility to engage. | ||
| Congress has a role in oversight, a role in funding verification and nonproliferation, and a role in insisting that arms control remains a core pillar of the U.S. national security policy. | ||
| The next few years will be decisive, and decisions that we make or fail to make will shape whether the world moves towards stability or towards once again unconstrained nuclear arms races. | ||
| So I look forward to the discussion this evening, and I'm now proud to introduce my colleague John Garmendi of California, a longtime advocate for arms control, and with whom I've had the honor of spending the weekend underneath the North Polar ice cap in a nuclear submarine. | ||
| And I just, it's my honor, and I will recognize him for the duration of his remarks. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you, Mr. Foster. | |
| Thank you for bringing us together to talk about this profoundly important situation. | ||
| We stand here today on a precipice. | ||
| In less than a month, the New START Treaty, the last remaining major arms control agreement between the Soviet Union, Russia, and the United States, is set to expire. | ||
| If we allow this treaty to lapse without a replacement, we'll be entering a world we haven't seen in decades. | ||
| A world without limits on the nuclear arsenals of the two largest nuclear powers, Russia and the United States, will be stripping away the last guardrail, preventing a catastrophic return to an unchecked nuclear build-up Cold War. | ||
| In 1985, President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Govashek declared a profound truth. | ||
| A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. | ||
| That principle has been the bedrock of global security for nearly 40 years. | ||
| It led us and Russia to eliminate nuclear testing, to shrink bloated stockpiles, and to prioritize communications over conflict. | ||
| Yet today, today we are close to forgetting that profound lesson. | ||
| Instead of prioritizing de-escalation, we see a resurgence to the same Cold War mindset that once pushed us to the brink of annihilation. | ||
| We see hawking perspectives pushing the U.S., Russia, and now China to a new three-way nuclear arms race. | ||
| Proponents tell us this build-up will make us more safe. | ||
| More is better. | ||
| They tell us that pouring trillions of dollars into a nuclear monetization is the only way to be safe. | ||
| But nothing, nothing could be further from the truth. | ||
| Without nuclear arms control agreements like the New Start, every new weapon we build only fuels an unwinnable arms race as our adversaries respond in kind. | ||
| We build, they build, we build, they build, and the cost of this race is staggering. | ||
| Let me give you one example. | ||
| The Sentinel program, which aims to replace the Minuteman III ICBMs. | ||
| This single program has already ballooned to cost over $200 billion, an 81% cost overrun. | ||
| We're spending brinely. | ||
| We're on remote control. | ||
| More bombs, more, more, and we'll be safe. | ||
| Nonsense, just nonsense. | ||
| We will not be safer. | ||
| Instead of doing the hard work of diplomacy, we're being asked to plound billions of taxpayer dollars into a dangerous fantasy. | ||
| The so-called golden dome, a missile defense system. | ||
| We'll be safe. | ||
| We'll build more bombs and we'll stop their bombs. | ||
| We'll told this system will cost only $175 billion and it will provide the perfect shield. | ||
| But a recent working paper showed that this system actually attempts to defend against the full range of Russia and China will cost as much as $3.6 trillion, a multi-trillion dollar gap between rhetoric and reality. | ||
| So what do we get for that price? | ||
| The same report concludes that with this unlimited spending, such a system will still fail to be 100% effective. | ||
| We're prepared to spend trillions of dollars on a shield that cannot be 100% effective. | ||
| Oh, well, only if one or two bombs get through. | ||
| Forget about New York. | ||
| Forget about Washington, D.C. After all, who needs a Washington, D.C. | ||
| We have to be prepared to think differently. | ||
| We cannot spend trillions of dollars on a shield that cannot protect us all the while that we're building more and more bombs so that our adversary will build more and more bombs and find a way to evade the shield. | ||
| They will. | ||
| We cannot engineer a technological fix for a political problem. | ||
| Decades ago, we realized the only true shield against nuclear annihilation, it's not a golden dome. | ||
| It's the hard, unglamorous work of a verifiable arms control treaty. | ||
| When we forgot the lessons of the past, we're doomed to make the same mistakes. | ||
| Luckily, we still have time, very short time, to do the hard work of diplomacy. | ||
| Instead of resting the fate of our nation, in fact, humanity, on the fantasies of fool's gold, we still have a choice. | ||
| We can choose to continue down the path of unconstrained spending and escalation and drift towards a future where security is based upon a perpetual, a perpetual threat of annihilation. | ||
| Or we can choose to modernize our thinking rather than just our weapons. | ||
| We can prioritize diplomacy over escalation, arms control over an arms race. | ||
| In short, we can learn from history. | ||
| That's why I'm a proud co-sponsor of House Resolution 100, authored by our leader today, And support arms control agreements and negotiated constraints. | ||
| This resolution is not just about a treaty. | ||
| It's about sanity. | ||
| It's about reaffirming our commitment to arms control, to oversight, and to policy based on reason and restraint, not on fear and reflex. | ||
| I thank the gentleman from Illinois for organizing this evening. | ||
| We have one month, one month in which to extend the New Start Treaty, or we can fall into an arms race. | ||
| We have choices. | ||
| We have time. | ||
| We have the power to change. | ||
| And with that, I yield back. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| And I have to say, you are absolutely right about the messaging that is surrounding the Golden Dome effort. | ||
| This is a system that has never been tested against countermeasures that we know our adversaries have. | ||
| For 40 years, physicists have been patiently explaining to members of Congress, members of the administrations, that systems like this will never work at the reliability level that they need. | ||
| And for 40 years, we have been howling at the wind, I guess, because this is we don't have hundreds of billions of dollars to waste on a system that you can calculate from elementary principles doesn't have a chance of working and has failed the majority of times it's tried. | ||
| For those who have not, please take the time to see a recently produced movie called House of Dynamite. | ||
| It is a recent one that actually talks about what a modern nuclear war would look like from the point of view of the participants who have to make those decisions and the equipment and provisions they have to aid those decisions. | ||
| Well, I'd now like to yield to my colleague, the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Byer. | ||
|
Nuclear Tensions Rising
00:15:17
|
||
| Mr. Speaker, I want to thank you, Dr. Foster, for gathering us here to help shine a light on what remains the most serious existential threat facing our country and our planet. | ||
| It was too easy to forget in these days of polycrisis that we're on the brink of a new nuclear arms race. | ||
| Very soon, one of the last remaining pillars of the nuclear arms control regime, the New START Treaty, is due to expire. | ||
| This treaty restricted the U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals and provided some measure of stability in our bilateral relationship. | ||
| Sadly, the Trump administration has failed to do anything to get ahead of the exploration of New START and has done a lot to raise nuclear tensions. | ||
| The President has made threats, endorsed insanely expensive plans to expand our arsenal, pushed for the resumption of explosive testing, and advocated for an impractical missile defense system that will only encourage our adversaries to accelerate their own weapons program. | ||
| I am particularly horrified that the president may choose to ignore the comprehensive DESPAN Treaty, which has given comfort, comfort, and safety to the world for two generations. | ||
| Meanwhile, Russia has expressed an interest in maintaining New Start restrictions on its stockpile for another year while the terms of a new treaty can be hashed out. | ||
| But unfortunately, the White House has not responded to their offer and it has shown no interest in engaging with China either on nuclear arms reduction. | ||
| This, despite the danger China is dramatically trying to build up its nuclear arsenal, if ever there were time to talk to China, it would be right now. | ||
| And it's not hard to guess what happens next if nothing changes. | ||
| Each side will be adding new weapons to their arsenal for the first time in decades. | ||
| We've come back to 10,000 nuclear weapons aimed at the Soviet Union, 10,000 aimed at us, to 1,500 to 1,800 each. | ||
| Now we're going back to that feedback loop that were reminiscent of the worst days of the Cold War. | ||
| Not only will this cost a tremendous amount of money and put us on an even more dire fiscal trajectory, it will ratchet up the very real danger of a nuclear exchange. | ||
| Look, we can already destroy the planet many, many times over with our own existing nuclear stockpiles. | ||
| Why on earth do we need to spend more of our scarce resources on these incredibly expensive weapons? | ||
| We've gone through this cycle before. | ||
| We are very lucky. | ||
| But I'm terrified we will not make it through again. | ||
| And this shouldn't be a partisan issue. | ||
| You know, it's never been partisan. | ||
| Republican presidents from Dwight Eisenhower to Ronald Reagan to George W. Bush have all led on arms control agreements. | ||
| I've been critical of my own party's approach to nuclear weapons. | ||
| The Biden administration, despite campaign promises, refused to adopt a first-use or no sole-use nuclear policy. | ||
| And currently, the U.S. President can order the launch of hundreds of nuclear warheads within 15 minutes, with no oversight or even conversations with the Speaker of the House, the Secretary of Defense, the Chief of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and including Congress. | ||
| Vesting this much power in one person, particularly this president, is irresponsible, dangerous, and unnecessary. | ||
| And given our massive conventional military advantages over our adversaries, think of Venezuela, there is no plausible circumstance that could justify the use of nuclear weapons to deal with a non-nuclear threat. | ||
| Removing the specter of U.S. using nuclear weapons first in a conflict would go a long way towards slowing down this renewed global arms race. | ||
| And I'm so glad to see my other colleagues here. | ||
| I know share my concerns, and I hope that we can make a dent in the common sense here in this Congress. | ||
| And while I have you here, today I voted against a funding measure that would enshrine the Trump administration's illegal destruction of the United States Agency for International Development, U.S. Aid. | ||
| Among the litany of illegal, immoral, and illegitimate acts committed by this administration, what President Trump and Elon Musk did to U.S. aid will echo in our history as one of the most evil and pointless decisions made by this country. | ||
| Hundreds of thousands of the most vulnerable people in the world have died already because of this decision so far. | ||
| Their premature and tragic deaths are the direct moral responsibility of Donald Trump, Elon Musk, and Marco Rubio. | ||
| They remind me of the comments of an unnamed French diplomat speaking of the horrors of World War I. Quote: The war? | ||
| I cannot find it to be so bad. | ||
| The death of one man, that is a catastrophe. | ||
| 100,000 deaths, that is a statistic. | ||
| Our global reputation and soft power around the world have suffered permanent damage. | ||
| Our ability to fight future global pandemics and diseases has been crippled. | ||
| And U.S. farmers have suffered needlessly on top of the hundreds of public servants who are harassed and thrown out of their jobs. | ||
| And beyond the human cost, far from saving the taxpayer any money, the State Department's own assessments show that shutting in on the agency will cost more than $6 billion. | ||
| The whole point of this misguided crusade against starving and sick children overseas was to find waste, fraud, and abuse that simply did not exist. | ||
| This was the case of the very worst of us attacking the very best of us. | ||
| I've heard from hundreds of my constituents, former USAID public servants, who dedicated their lives to making the world a better place. | ||
| And their overwhelming regret is not that they lost their jobs, but that the critical work that they did to help the poor, the sick, and the starving has stopped. | ||
| I'm sickened by what this administration has done to USAID and to the world, and I will do everything I can to reverse this awful decision. | ||
| Thank you, Dr. Foster, for convening us together and for your leadership, and I yield back. | ||
| Well, thank you for the many excellent points you made, one of which was how foolish it would be for the United States to resume testing of nuclear weapons. | ||
| You know, the fact is the United States has the best database of nuclear test results of any country on earth by far. | ||
| And if we resume nuclear testing, we will, as will all of all the other nuclear-capable countries on earth, they will rub their hands with glee, and soon they will have a data set of performance of their weapons that is as good as ours. | ||
| We have a tremendous advantage, and this would be a foolish way to give it away. | ||
| And I now yield to the gentlelady from Oregon, Ms. Hoyle. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Thank you, Dr. Foster. | ||
| At a time when global tensions are rising, the last thing we need is more weapons. | ||
| And that's why it's so important that the new START Treaty, set to expire in 21 days, is renewed by the administration quickly and in good faith. | ||
| The new START Treaty reduced the number of nuclear warheads in the United States and Russia to the lowest level since 1950. | ||
| This is not the time to start going in the other direction. | ||
| Nuclear risks continue to rise, and when we see countries like Russia testing their nuclear delivery systems, the danger grows for everyone, including many Oregonians. | ||
| In southern Oregon, the federal government rushed to mine uranium in the 1950s to fuel the Cold War. | ||
| Two open-pit mines outside Lakeview in the Fremont National Forest supplied the material that went to the Hanford site to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons. | ||
| When that rush ended, we were stuck with that contamination. | ||
| It took decades for the EPA to declare the mines a superfund site, leaving the land poisoned. | ||
| At the Albany Research Center, construction workers built, maintained, and later tried to clean up the nuclear weapons complex, often without being told what they were exposed to. | ||
| Decades later, workers are still fighting to get screened for cancers and other life-threatening illnesses caused by their exposure to radiation. | ||
| And taxpayers are still paying the price from the arms race. | ||
| The federal government has paid out more than $27 million to more than 430 Oregonians who were uranium workers exposed to fallout or downwinds of testing. | ||
| This is what happens when we forget what nuclear proliferation costs us. | ||
| And yet the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy plan to spend more than $900 billion over the next decade to modernize our nuclear arsenal. | ||
| The cost of the Sentinel-ICBM missile program alone has exploded, pushing the cost per missile to $161 million, an 81% increase from its original projections. | ||
| The cost of nuclear acquisition programs will be 11.8% of the Department of Defense planned acquisitions costs over the next 10 years. | ||
| And remember, this is an agency that cannot pass an audit. | ||
| This is out of control. | ||
| We will always find the money for war, but not to take care of our workers, our tribal partners, or to compensate the communities who paid the price for that last generation of weapons. | ||
| So we must act in good faith to ensure an open-ended arms race does not happen. | ||
| Nuclear non-proliferation has not been and should not be a partisan issue. | ||
| We don't need more weapons. | ||
| We need more affordable health care, upgrades to our transportation infrastructure, expansion of U.S. manufacturing capacity, and to focus our taxpayer dollars on things that benefit the American people and that make our communities safer. | ||
| I'm happy to work with any of my colleagues to develop a common sense approach to limiting our nuclear stockpiles and to keep this administration from taking us down a costly and destabilizing path, which is why I am proud to have co-sponsored H.R. 100, which again just reiterates my position on nuclear proliferation. | ||
| Thank you, and thank you, Dr. Foster, for all your work, and I yield back. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| And you're absolutely right about the real costs of restarting the arms race. | ||
| You know, as a physicist, you know, I have some guilt, frankly, collective guilt for physicists about some of the irresponsible things that were done during the arms race when we said the only thing that was important was to have better weapons and more weapons than our adversaries and forget about the damage that it can inflict on our American soldiers, our American workers, and the populations downwind. | ||
| So at this point, I will now yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. McGovern. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Illinois, Dr. Foster, for yielding me the time and for scheduling this hour on this most important topic. | ||
| You know, the threat of nuclear weapons challenges our conscience. | ||
| It is a threat not just for Americans, but for all humanity and all species of life on our planet. | ||
| The idea of nuclear conflict isn't an issue that families normally discuss around the kitchen table, but it is real. | ||
| It is deadly serious. | ||
| It demands our urgent attention. | ||
| We cannot afford to throw our hands up and say there is nothing to be done. | ||
| The United States can take concrete action. | ||
| Today, extend the new STAR Treaty. | ||
| The arc of arms control is one of success, led by presidents of both parties. | ||
| 40 years ago, there were 70,000 nuclear warheads in inventories around the world. | ||
| Today, there are 12,400, far more than we should have, but it is progress. | ||
| Arms control is hard work. | ||
| It involves technical expertise, diplomatic skill, and political will. | ||
| Today, we need all three. | ||
| That is because the last control agreement remaining in force between the United States and Russia expires on February 5th in only 22 days. | ||
| The new STAR Treaty limits the number of deployed strategic nuclear warheads for each party to 1,550 on no more than 700 deployed long-range missiles and bombers. | ||
| Extension is common sense for our security. | ||
| First, New START promotes stability. | ||
| With the war in Ukraine, tensions between the U.S. and Russia are high. | ||
| Negotiating an extension offers space within that relationship to lessen tensions. | ||
| Second, if not renewed, we risk the possibility that each side will go beyond the treaty's limit in a misguided pursuit of geopolitical advantage. | ||
| Third, there is no nuclear strategic gain from deploying more warheads on more delivery vehicles. | ||
| Our massive, largely invulnerable nuclear arsenal is more than sufficient for deterrence. | ||
| And fourth, increasing our strategic forces might incentivize China to accelerate its nuclear buildup. | ||
| And lastly, it would cause us to funnel billions more taxpayer dollars into our nuclear arsenal when we should be restoring funding to health care, medical research, food and nutrition programs here at home. | ||
| Why is it that we always have money for bombs, but when it comes to helping improve the quality of life for our people, we're told we can't afford it. | ||
| It doesn't have to be this way. | ||
| And both Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump seem to agree. | ||
| Both presidents have spoken favorably of extending a new start. | ||
| In September, Putin said Russia is ready to continue to adhere to the central quantitative restrictions under the START Treaty for one year after February 5th, 2026, if the United States reciprocates. | ||
| In response, Trump said, sounds like a good idea to me. | ||
| So here we are, 22 days from expiration. | ||
| The White House has yet to reply to the Kremlin's offer, and the clock is ticking. | ||
| We ask the administration to respond to the Russians today, announce we will abide by the new start limits, build confidence, create time and space for negotiation. | ||
| President Trump can be a leader for peace. | ||
| Last year, he said from the Oval Office, there's no reason for us to be building brand new nuclear weapons. | ||
| We already have so many. | ||
| You could destroy the world 50 times over, 100 times over. | ||
| And here we are building new nuclear weapons, and they're building nuclear weapons. | ||
|
Nuclear Moratorium Milestones
00:15:41
|
||
| President Trump, I've got to say, you're right. | ||
| He can join Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and Ronald Reagan among the presidents with major arms control wins. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, as a member of Congress, I have worked to reduce the threat of nuclear weapons. | ||
| With Representative Jill Takuta of Hawaii, I introduced HRES 317, a resolution that calls on the U.S. government to return to the negotiating table on nuclear disarmament and to lead a global effort to reduce and eliminate nuclear weapons. | ||
| I've also introduced with Senator Ed Markey from my state of Massachusetts the Hastening Arms Limitations Talk Act of 2025 or the HALT Act. | ||
| Our bill outlines a vision for a 21st century freeze on the testing, production, and deployment of nuclear weapons. | ||
| You know, we never thought there would be a need to revive the nuclear freeze movement, but here we are. | ||
| And let me quote from Michael Clare, an arms control expert at Hampshire College and a constituent of mine. | ||
| Quote, February 6th is likely to bring us into a new era, not unlike the early years of the Cold War, in which the major powers will be poised to ramp up their nuclear warfighting capabilities without any formal restrictions whatsoever. | ||
| That comfortable feeling we once enjoyed of relative freedom from imminent nuclear holocaust will also undoubtedly begin to dissipate. | ||
| If there is any hope in such a dark prognosis, it might be that such a reality could in turn ignite a worldwide anti-nuclear movement like the ban the bomb campaigns of the 1960s, 70s and 80s. | ||
| We have a path out of this. | ||
| Trump can make good on his statement that there is no need for new nuclear weapons. | ||
| He can extend new start limits on deployed warheads. | ||
| And for our sanity and for the safety of Americans and all of humanity, let's make the world less dangerous. | ||
| Thank you again to the gentleman from Illinois for leading this effort and I yield back. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| And you're absolutely right that diplomacy is not a lost cause. | ||
| There has been some big wins from diplomacy. | ||
| You know, back when I was younger, the number of countries possessing nuclear weapons was higher and then decreased. | ||
| We convinced through diplomacy South Africa to give up their nuclear weapons. | ||
| Ukraine, at the time of the end of the Soviet Empire, Ukraine possessed the world's third largest nuclear weapon inventory, which they voluntarily gave up in return for a guarantee of territorial integrity, one unfortunately which we are not abiding by. | ||
| So I now yield to the gentleman from California, Mr. Takano. | ||
| I thank my esteemed colleague, Dr. Foster, for yielding time and for organizing and hosting this special order hour and for his leadership on nuclear nonproliferation issues. | ||
| You know, in my many, many years as a member of Congress, I've watched many a fiery floor speech filled with overstatement and hyperbole, grandiose pronouncements laced with exaggeration and puffery. | ||
| But it is entirely right and proper to say that the expiration of the New START treaty will make the world and every inhabitant blessed to live on it less safe. | ||
| Formally, the new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, otherwise known as New START, caps U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear arsenals and underpins on-site inspections. | ||
| It is the latest in a series of treaties that have reduced the global nuclear warhead stockpile from a high of 70,000 in the mid-1980s to roughly 12,000 today. | ||
| Now that is meaningful, serious progress, but instead of building on that progress, we are weeks away from reversing those hard-earned gains. | ||
| On February 5th, New START is slated to expire. | ||
| That expiration will mean the end to limits on or into limits or verification of the still formidable nuclear arsenals of the United States and Russia. | ||
| Now, New START is by no means perfect, but removing these safeguards will create a vacuum. | ||
| And we all know nature abhors a vacuum. | ||
| Without these limitations, there are fewer constraints, fewer eyes, and fewer breaks in how Vladimir Putin expands and modernizes Russia's nuclear forces. | ||
| And in this wilderness, we would see a broader breakdown of norms on nuclear weapons. | ||
| Both in the United States and Russia, both the United States and Russia have openly amused about potentially restarting nuclear weapons testing. | ||
| After we have worked so hard to bring some clarity to nuclear weapons regimes, we risk the steady erosion of the few safeguards against these terrible and awesome weapons. | ||
| But the U.S. is not without options or agency. | ||
| If this expiration comes to pass, it is because we have allowed it to happen. | ||
| Russia has offered to voluntarily maintain the new start limits for one year. | ||
| We should take that deal, not because we trust Vladimir Putin, but because inspections and limits protect us, not him. | ||
| Arms control is neither an act of faith nor of naivete. | ||
| It is an act of cold logic and discipline, a process that reduces the risk of miscalculation, escalation, and catastrophic error. | ||
| This year not only will keep America and the world safer, but it will also give time to hammer out a new record. | ||
| As the U.S. sits across the negotiation table, there should be no illusion. | ||
| We know that Putin and his cronies in the Kremlin are adversaries of the United States. | ||
| They would like nothing more for our nation to falter. | ||
| But they are also self-interested. | ||
| Both the United States and Russia benefit from a stable, controlled nuclear regime. | ||
| That mutual self-interest lies at the heart of why New Start was signed in the first place. | ||
| To throw it all away would be a mistake of immense proportions. | ||
| While time is short, we can step away from the edge. | ||
| I add my voice to a host of others calling on, pleading for, demanding action from the Trump administration. | ||
| Now, I know the threat of nuclear weapons can often seem so large and abstract, so unimaginable, that it becomes easier just to ignore it all. | ||
| But to say nothing is not an option, especially for someone like me. | ||
| Many of my family, my distant family, was in Hiroshima on the day the atom bomb fell. | ||
| That memory is not just historical. | ||
| It's personal for me and my family. | ||
| The atomic bombs of 1945 caused unimaginable horror. | ||
| Some died instantly, many over subsequent days and months. | ||
| Others suffered for the rest of their lives, afflicted with burns, radiation, and cancer. | ||
| The modern nuclear weapons of today are orders of magnitude more horrifying. | ||
| It is incumbent on all of us to ensure that these weapons are never used again. | ||
| New Start is a concrete step towards ensuring that future, one where no person, no man, woman, or child lives under a constant threat from nuclear annihilation. | ||
| Thank you, and I yield back. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Tangano, and thank you for reminding us of Hiroshima. | ||
| You know, I had the opportunity for the first time in my life to visit, and the things that stick in your mind from there are hard to describe. | ||
| One of them, they have the steps of, I think it was a bank, and someone was sitting on the bank on the steps having a meal when the nuclear weapon went off overhead. | ||
| All that remains of that person after his or her entire body was vaporized is a shadow of where they were sitting on those steps. | ||
| And just the power of these weapons is not easy to describe. | ||
| You know, I can calculate it, but just the descriptions of the survivors are worth spending a day just listening to and trying to understand what's at risk here. | ||
| So thank you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| And I now yield to the gentlelady from Nevada, Ms. Titus. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, thank you, Representative Foster, for having this special hour on such an important topic. | |
| I have seen the movie House of Dynamite and the previous year, Oppenheimer, which introduced a lot of people from the movie-going world to the development of our first atomic bomb at the Manhattan Project. | ||
| So it's very important that we go from popular culture to real history and talk about this in terms of the destruction that will occur if we do not continue the New Start Treaty. | ||
| I'm a former political science professor. | ||
| I've taught and written about the history of nuclear weaponry. | ||
| Now I'm a member of Congress representing southern Nevada. | ||
| You know, that's where you have a lot of testing right in our own backyard. | ||
| So over the years, I've learned quite a bit about our nuclear legacy, both good and bad. | ||
| You know, Nevada was the focal point of nuclear development throughout the Cold War. | ||
| Over four decades, the Nevada test site, which is located just about 100 miles north of downtown Las Vegas, hosted over 900 nuclear tests, more than any other place in the country. | ||
| And throughout the 1950s, the visible mushroom clouds often loomed in the distance. | ||
| You could see them from the strip, and they became kind of part of a tourist attraction there in southern Nevada. | ||
| These tests were conducted for a number of reasons. | ||
| Better understand the power and effects of nuclear weapons, what were the consequences, how could you make them bigger, how could you make them cleaner? | ||
| All of these things were part of that testing. | ||
| And so the test site became a real player. | ||
| It had a major role in shaping our policies both nationally and internationally regarding testing and non-proliferation. | ||
| The radiation given off by more than 100 atmospheric tests had devastating impacts, however. | ||
| It wasn't a tourist attraction to those downwinders who were exposed. | ||
| That fallout caused cancer and premature deaths for thousands across the West. | ||
| And that's what prompted me to introduce the PRESUME Act, which would ensure that radiation-exposed veterans who did war games there at the test site could receive their rightful benefits from the VA. | ||
| Furthermore, there were 800 underground tests that sometimes vented and radioactive contaminants came out in the air or in the water table. | ||
| And that's a problem we're still dealing with today. | ||
| Some of you may know the story of the Bainberry shot. | ||
| Now, last year, the Nevada legislature passed a resolution urging the federal government to maintain the moratorium on nuclear weapons testing. | ||
| That's been in effect since 1992. | ||
| They cited risk of environmental damage and also health hazards from what had been caused by testing before. | ||
| Now, you may remember that the 2021 Trump administration called for a resumption of nuclear testing in the breach of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. | ||
| Back then, I led the charge in the FY21 NDAA process to ensure that that didn't happen, that we couldn't resume that testing in the United States. | ||
| But the more things change, the more they stay the same. | ||
| Pardon my bad French, but plus a change, plus la même chose. | ||
| On October 29th, 2025, just last year, Trump announced that he's directing the Department of Defense to again resume nuclear testing in a disastrous policy reversal. | ||
| But it's really not surprising because it is in Project 2025, which is the policy blueprint of this disastrous administration. | ||
| Just look on page 399, and you will see that Project 2025 calls for the rejection of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty once again. | ||
| And it would allow testing here at home, but would also give a green light to other nuclear powers around the world to start doing the same. | ||
| This would put us on a disastrous collision course of catastrophic proportions with Russia and China, allow the proliferation of these weapons to non-nuclear states that seek its development, and put the health of Nevadans once again in jeopardy. | ||
| By foolishly announcing his intention to resume nuclear explosive testing, Trump will trigger a dangerous nuclear arms race that could blow apart our strategy for the last decades and any kind of nuclear non-proliferation treaty. | ||
| Now, there is no technical, national security, or political reason for us to resume nuclear testing. | ||
| If a power resumes testing because the U.S. is abandoning the moratorium, those countries will develop new types of warheads, close the technical scientific advantage that we've always had, and be a detriment to our national security. | ||
| Furthermore, scientists are already doing groundbreaking experiments and simulations, as our professor knows. | ||
| They test the existing stockpile to make sure it's safe, secure, and reliable. | ||
| These subcritical tests are done without an explosion of any kind. | ||
| Now, the last time a nuke was tested was 2017 by North Korea. | ||
| That was a good while ago, in the longest period since 1945, that we've gone without a nuclear test. | ||
| Are we really the ones who want to break that record and start testing again? | ||
| For these reasons, I introduced the RESTRAIN Act to prohibit the resumption of explosive nuclear testing and prevent any funds from going towards Trump's misguided policy. | ||
| Now, amidst all this nuclear saber rattling, the new STARC treaty that we're here to talk about tonight, which is the last remaining arms control agreement between the U.S. and Russia, expires in just 21 days. | ||
| Now, that treaty caps deployed strategic nuclear warheads at 1,550 each and limits deployed systems for delivery to 700 per side. | ||
| Without this treaty in force, there would be no legally binding limits on the size or composition of the U.S. and Russia strategic nuclear arsenals. | ||
|
Nuclear Arms Control Revisited
00:05:47
|
||
|
unidentified
|
This would be the first time in over half a century. | |
| Without limits, both countries could expand their nuclear forces without constraint and potentially trigger a renewed arms race internationally, just like we had during the Cold War. | ||
| So letting that treaty lapse without a successor closes the door on incremental progress towards broader multilateral nuclear arms control. | ||
| Now, if President Trump really wants to be the President of peace, really thinks he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize, he would stop invading and threatening to invade other countries. | ||
| He would drop the idea of resuming nuclear testing, and he would make tangible necessary steps to prevent New START from expiring, to make sure the catastrophic consequences of a new nuclear arms race are averted. | ||
| Unless there is dramatic action, the world will be a much more dangerous place after February 4th. | ||
| We cannot let that happen. | ||
| Again, thank you for your time and letting me join you tonight on this important topic, and I yield back. | ||
| There is no necessity to resume nuclear testing. | ||
| You know, we have a very extensive thing. | ||
| It's called the Stockpiled Stewardship Program. | ||
| And every year or so, the leads of the heads of the weapons labs and the head of NSA have to sign a document saying if you, a document to the President that says if you push the button, these weapons will detonate at their designed yields. | ||
| And the reason that they're confident to do that is that we have a lot of test data from the nearly 1,000 tests that many of them took place in Nevada and the extensive data that we have and the fact that we can then put that data back into simulation programs and get the right answer. | ||
| And that tells you that these will work and they will work with design margin, that even if small things go wrong, the device will work. | ||
| And that's what our opponents have to know, that we don't need to test to know that if we decide to use them, they will work. | ||
| And so it's an important thing to bear in mind because our adversaries, many of them, have weapons that they have not tested and they don't really know how well they'll work. | ||
| And we do because we have some of the most, I have to say, beautifully designed weapons that I could ever imagine could exist. | ||
| So, Mr. Speaker, as we conclude this special order hour, it's important to restate a fundamental reality that nuclear weapons remain one of the greatest existential threats facing humanity. | ||
| For more than half a century, the United States has worked across administrations and across party lines to reduce the risk that those weapons will ever be used. | ||
| Arms control agreements like Newstart have been central to that effort, providing real, enforceable, and verifiable limits on the world's most destructive arsenals. | ||
| The extension of New Start is set to expire, and with it goes the last remaining treaty that limits and monitors the world's two largest nuclear arsenals. | ||
| As Newstart expires without a successor, we lose on-site inspections, data exchanges, mutual visibility into the Russian nuclear forces. | ||
| That loss does not make the United States safer or stronger. | ||
| It increases uncertainty, it fuels worst-case assumptions, raises the risk of a dangerous miscalculation. | ||
| And that's why I am proud to be leading H.R.E.S. 100, which calls on both Russia and the United States to continue abiding by the numerical limits set under New Start, even in the absence of a successor treaty. | ||
| I want to thank the 24 members of the House, several of whom spoke here tonight, who have co-sponsored that resolution. | ||
| Maintaining those limits are an essential step to preserve strategic stability while we work on future arms control. | ||
| I want to thank the many organizations and nonprofits who helped drive interest in this special order hour and who work every day to reduce nuclear risk. | ||
| Those organizations play a vital role in public education, policy development, and maintaining dialogue during times when official channels are strained or closed. | ||
| Finally, I want to thank all of my colleagues who joined me tonight in the special order hour. | ||
| Preventing nuclear war has never been a partisan goal, and history shows that bipartisan cooperation is not just possible, but it is necessary. | ||
| The choices that we make in the coming months will shape global security for decades to come. | ||
| So I urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to recommit to arms control, to verification, and to the hard work of reducing nuclear risk. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I yield back. | ||
| The gentleman yields back. | ||
| Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the president. | ||
|
Welfare Penalties Disrupting Marriages
00:15:27
|
||
| Under the speaker's announced policy of January 6th, 2026, the chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Grothman, for 30 minutes. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Yesterday in this building, we had a panel put together to address the situation of the lack of two parent homes in America and the degree to which it's caused by huge marriage penalties in our welfare system. | ||
| The panel consisted of Matt Dickerson of the Economic Policy Information and Innovation Center, Terry Shanling of the American Principal Project, Jim Gillespie from the White House, and Robert Rector from the Heritage Foundation, together with three congressmen. | ||
| The purpose of the program was to provide a framework to deal with the anti-marriage bias in American welfare programs. | ||
| The panel was put together at the request of 16 organizations and other concerned system citizens who work with nonprofits. | ||
| Groups like Center for, in addition to Heritage Foundation and the Principal Project, Center for Urban Renewal, Advancing American Freedom, Advance USA, Concerned Women for American Legislative Action Committee, the Coalition for Jewish Voters, the Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, Eagle Forum, Family Watch International, | ||
| Faith and Family Foundation, Independent Women's Forum, Students for Life Action, the Family Policy Alliance, and the Faith and Liberty in the nation's capital organization all were present. | ||
| I quite frankly, since I've been here, haven't seen such a groundswell of so many conservative nonprofit groups to come together to address such a problem. | ||
| But this isn't surprising. | ||
| The number of children born into families without a mother or father at home, missing one, is very high. | ||
| When I was a child, that number was around 4 to 5 percent. | ||
| It's now around 42 percent. | ||
| These groups have gotten together to call on President Trump, Speaker Johnson, and Majority Leader Thune to do something about this. | ||
| It is not unusual that a single woman, if she marries the father of her child, would lose over $25,000 in benefits. | ||
| And by the way, when I talk about going from 4% without a mother and father at home to over 40%, at the time it was 4%, we didn't even have abortions. | ||
| Think about that. | ||
| Then in the interim, we had abortions, and still the number of children born into homes without a father at home went up by a factor of more than 10. | ||
| There are over 70 government programs available to a single parent with low income, but you lose the benefits of these programs if you marry the other parent who has a decent income, let's say $50,000 a year. | ||
| I realize that all American, there are great American families of all backgrounds. | ||
| I, like all of us, know single parents who've done a fantastic job of raising their children, and I commend them for that. | ||
| But I think also everyone would agree it is easier on both the parents and the children if you have two parents there. | ||
| And in essence, bribing a young couple not to get married is not the way to go about doing things. | ||
| Programs like food stamps, low-income housing, earned income tax credit, women, infants, and children, Medicaid, Pell Grants, government daycare, all are generous programs, and you would lose those benefits if you had another parent in the house with an income. | ||
| And of course, this changes behavior as well. | ||
| I remember talking about this topic about 15 years ago at a tea party event in Wisconsin. | ||
| And I talked about Pell Grants, which is a program of free college tuition or free scholarships for low-income kids. | ||
| And I was addressing, like I said, a tea party group, and like most tea party groups, usually older men who agreed with me. | ||
| But there was a young gal who was tending bar where we had the meeting. | ||
| And I asked her what she thought about the speech and what she thought about Pell Grants, which were, like I said, a grand condition upon having low income. | ||
| And she said, well, her and her husband got married before they had children, but she told me none of her friends were getting married. | ||
| They got free college. | ||
| And I've heard that from other people. | ||
| That's just one of these programs, Pell Grants, which intentionally or unintentionally is designed to discourage marriage. | ||
| And like I said, I rattled off about eight programs. | ||
| There are about 70 programs that you could lose if you worked your way out of poverty or married somebody who wasn't in poverty. | ||
| Usually what you have to do is you have to keep your income below $16,000 or $17,000. | ||
| And if you talk to employers who hire people who are making in the $10,000 to $15 an hour range, they will always give you anecdotes of their employees who don't want to work extra hours or they'll lose their benefits. | ||
| They don't want to raise because they'll lose their benefits. | ||
| This is because in America right now, we discourage work and we actually discourage savings as well. | ||
| And we discourage marriage as well. | ||
| Just yesterday, I heard of another couple. | ||
| They just had their second child, but they weren't getting married. | ||
| I didn't dig into it, but I know what's going on. | ||
| You have people like that not getting married. | ||
| They realize they don't want to lose their benefits. | ||
| Now, is the fact that all these government programs are set up to discourage marriage, is this an accident? | ||
| Believe it or not, no. | ||
| I don't think it's entirely an accident because there are very powerful intellectuals on the left who wanted to get rid of families. | ||
| We know Karl Marx himself felt that in order to have the dream universe, you had to get rid of the family. | ||
| A woman by the name of Kate Millett, who was around in the 1960s and I think could be described as the mother of women's studies classes, also was adamant that we should try to get men out of the household. | ||
| And I don't think it's a coincidence that she was at the peak of her power in the 1960s when a lot of these programs went into effect. | ||
| Now, this problem should have been addressed years ago. | ||
| It's kind of a well-worn anecdote, but I'll say it again. | ||
| Patrick Monaghan, a Democrat U.S. Senator, in the late 1960s put together a study, and he warned the degree to which we had these programs contributing to the breakdown in marriage. | ||
| But nobody paid attention to Patrick Monaghan. | ||
| Another man who did a lot of work in this area was George Gilder, who wrote a couple of books, Men in Marriage, Visible Man, Wealth and Poverty. | ||
| And he first looked into this problem, as some people do, in a ghetto in Albany, New York. | ||
| And he could remember the time right before that where it was considered a real crisis if a woman got pregnant out of wedlock. | ||
| But to his surprise, even in the 1970s, it was a cause for enjoyment or a cause to celebrate for the young couple. | ||
| Because when the girlfriend got pregnant, she was able to make the rounds and get a free apartment and get free food and get free medical care and at the time get a free cash from a program called Aid for Families with Dependent Children. | ||
| Now we have free cash from a program called TANF. | ||
| But in any event, Gilder was a little bit surprised but wrote books on the matter saying, hey, wait a minute here. | ||
| It shouldn't be a cause for celebration when someone gets pregnant out of wedlock. | ||
| It should be cause for a little bit of panic and what are we going to do now. | ||
| But it wasn't in the late 1970s as George Gilder documented. | ||
| And so here we are today. | ||
| We did do a little bit of looking at the welfare programs in the 1990s under Bill Clinton, but we didn't go anywhere near far enough. | ||
| By the way, George Gilder made another observation. | ||
| When we talk about the welfare state, it obviously affects the children. | ||
| It obviously affects the single women and it affects the men. | ||
| But according to Gilder, of the three groups, the one who is harmed the most by our welfare system is the men. | ||
| Of course, the women are hurt a little in that financially it can be a little bit of a struggle. | ||
| The statistics will show again and again and again it harms the children. | ||
| But we have created a society in which men have lost the purpose of raising children and being involved in the raising of their children, being involved in providing for their children. | ||
| And therefore, in areas in which the welfare culture is widespread, we have a situation that the men are doing drugs, committing crimes because they have no purpose in life. | ||
| You know, here in Washington and other big cities like Chicago and Milwaukee, they write articles about where is all this crime coming from. | ||
| And if they'd stop and look or talk to any policeman, they'll tell you where the crime is coming from. | ||
| The crime is coming from children from these broken families. | ||
| And if we didn't have these broken families, a lot of the men who are committing the crimes, the men that are just hanging out and doing drugs, would have a purpose in life and be more likely to be productive. | ||
| I should point out, by the way, that this is a very important thing for the men. | ||
| But sometimes people say that we need the welfare system because there are no men with decent jobs. | ||
| And that's why we have to have the government step in. | ||
| I have an Indian immigrant friend of mine. | ||
| It always amazes me how people who come here from other countries have observations that Are not made by the native-born who are just used to it. | ||
| As my Indian immigrant friend said, in America, the woman marries the government. | ||
| So, in any event, while the woman is marrying the government, the man has nothing to do, and that's why we have many of these problems. | ||
| I have, of course, been in politics for a while now. | ||
| I've attended a lot of committee hearings, and be it committee hearings on poverty, be it committee hearings on crime, be it committee hearings on drugs, be it committee hearings on depressants, be it committee hearings on people not doing well at school. | ||
| They always look for how this happened, but they never address the obvious reason why kids do less well in school or why kids wind up committing crimes. | ||
| They do it because of the total breakdown in the family. | ||
| In any event, both for the children and the men and the single women, we'd be better off retracing our steps back to the great society years of 1965 and 1966, | ||
| when, in my opinion, the worst president in our country's history decided to institute these programs and destroy the family. | ||
| I'm not sure that was the motive. | ||
| I think perhaps the real motive was electoral. | ||
| Our forefathers, when they put together our founding documents, warned us that there were going to be some politicians who are going to try to make people dependent on the government in exchange for votes. | ||
| I think that at the time was maybe the motivation for these horrible programs. | ||
| But in any event, it's something we have to address now. | ||
| Now, we're going to be doing a reconciliation bill, I hope, sometime in the next six months. | ||
| And a lot of these bills, or a lot of these programs, almost all these programs, are what are referred to as mandatory spending, so we can change these programs and do what we can to get rid of the perverse incentives. | ||
| I think some of the burden of these folks will have to be put on private organizations because it is a problem, no doubt, if we do not address, | ||
| or it's a problem, no doubt, if people are able to get these programs without being confronted with moral choices or moral problems. | ||
| In a great book that I'm reading, The Tragedy of American Compassion, the type of people who were involved in providing food for the poor when our country was founded were very keenly aware that programs which indiscriminately gave things to people were actually harmful to people, | ||
|
Time to Strengthen Families
00:01:41
|
||
| that you had to weigh in with them on their moral choices, on their work choices, and it was, in fact, a negative to set up a program in which one did not look at moral choices that people are making. | ||
| But in any event, after we have spent about 60 years after the Great Society, 60 years after Patrick Monaghan warned us what would happen, it's time for this Congress to address this problem, get rid of the perverse incentives which discourage marriage, and get America back to where we were before the Great Society, | ||
| when we had so much stronger families, when crime was lower than it is today. | ||
| I think you'd have to say people came out in school better than today. | ||
| I think you'd have to say the amount of antidepressants consumed was a tiny fraction of what we have today, and really make America great again. | ||
| And I implore President Trump's administration. | ||
| We had a representative from his administration there yesterday. | ||
| I implore them to put together a working group so that we can come up to solutions to this problem over the next few months. | ||
| So thank you very much. | ||
|
Government Funding Debate
00:01:21
|
||
| And I'll yield the remainder of my time. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Now. | |
| Does the gentleman have a motion? | ||
| Yes, I'd like to move that we adjourn. | ||
| The question is on the motion to adjourn. | ||
| Those in favor say aye. | ||
| Aye. | ||
| Those opposed, no. | ||
| The ayes have it. | ||
| The motion is adopted accordingly. | ||
| The House stands adjourned until 9 a.m. tomorrow. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The U.S. House has been working on government funding past January 30th, and today members passed a bill providing money for the State and Treasury Departments, the IRS, and federal and D.C. courts. | |
| One of the amendments to the bill offered by Texas Republican Chip Roy would have stripped away funding for a pair of judges who have ruled against the Trump administration recently, James Boesberg and Deborah Boardman. | ||
| That amendment failed on a vote of 163 to 257. | ||
| Off the floor, work continues on bills funding the Homeland Security and labor departments. | ||
| We'll have more live House coverage when members return here on C-SPAN. | ||
| C-SPAN, Democracy Unfiltered. | ||
| We're funded by these television companies and more, including Comcast. | ||
Chapters
- 00:00:00 More Sunshine Needed
- 00:03:15 Impeachment Charges Against Secretary Noam
- 00:08:26 The Broken System Revealed
- 00:10:46 Exercise Oversight Powers
- 00:20:28 Enough Is Enough
- 00:31:05 FCC's Spectrum Auction Authority
- 00:35:36 House in Order
- 00:51:21 One Minute Tributes
- 01:06:06 Real Needs of American People
- 01:17:05 Discussion On Nuclear Security
- 01:32:31 Nuclear Tensions Rising
- 01:47:34 Nuclear Moratorium Milestones
- 02:03:00 Nuclear Arms Control Revisited
- 02:08:33 Welfare Penalties Disrupting Marriages
- 02:24:01 Time to Strengthen Families
- 02:25:27 Government Funding Debate
Export Selection