U.S. House of Representatives debates erupt over Senate Concurrent Resolution 33, where Republicans demand $70 billion for ICE and CBP to counter alleged Democratic hostage-taking following a 74-day shutdown, citing surges in officer threats. Democrats condemn the funding as supporting a rogue agency responsible for deaths like Renee Goode's while ignoring inflation spikes from $3 to over $4.20 per gallon. Simultaneously, lawmakers clash on FISA Section 702 reauthorization; Republicans defend it as vital national security reform reducing queries to 127, whereas Democrats label it a warrantless spy blank check for the Trump administration and FBI Director Kash Patel, exposing civil liberties to unchecked surveillance. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
Source
|
Time
Text
Uncertain Path Ahead00:04:54
So it makes all the sense in the world that people would look at that and we'd have a vigorous discussion about that.
You saw that three people dissented over the language.
I think all of those people agreed with the rate decision.
So the majority of the committee did not want to do that.
And I didn't think we needed to do it at this meeting.
It really was just a question of why do we need to do that now?
You know, we have so much to learn.
There's so much uncertainty about the path ahead.
There doesn't need to be any rush.
To make that decision now, because you know what.
What happens in the next 30, 60 days, even by the next meeting, could really change the picture around that, around that language.
So you know it was a, it was a, it's a close, it's.
It's a much closer thing on the committee than it was in march and you know that makes all the sense in the world.
It seems to me Claire Jones Financial Times.
Um, just just going back to this issue of the, the easing bias, um, we've now got oil approaching 120 dollars a barrel when it comes to the benchmark, um brent crude.
Continue watching this online at C-span.org.
House members returning now to continue consideration of a Fisa surveillance authority extension, funding for ICE AND Border Patrol and a Farm bill reauthorization.
This is live coverage of the House on C-span.
The appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 27 through 2035 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The clerk will report the title of the concurrent resolution Senate.
Concurrent resolution 33.
Concurrent resolution setting forth the congressional budget for the United States government for fiscal year 2026 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2027 through 2035.
Pursuant to house resolution 1224, the concurrent resolution is considered read.
The concurrent resolution shall be debatable for one hour, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on the budget or their respective designees, the gentleman from Texas, mr Arrington, and the gentleman from Pennsylvania, mr Boyle, each will control 30 minutes.
The chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas, mr Arrington.
Mr speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on ESCON Res 33 currently under consideration.
Without objection.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Without objection.
Mr. Speaker, we're here because my Democrat colleagues have shut the United States government down, the Department of Homeland Security, for now 74 days.
They have held the American people hostage and have imperiled the safety of every citizen of this country for their ridiculous and even dangerous demands.
They're not serious.
We had a four corners agreement between Republicans and Democrats in the House and the Senate.
They reneged.
And if it weren't for President Trump's intervention, we would have the hardworking public servants at the Department of Homeland Security going 100 days without pay.
Ask me, Mr. Speaker, how many days my Democrat colleagues have gone without pay.
How long they would tolerate going without pay.
Mr. Speaker, this isn't just about the inconvenience of long lines at airports.
This is an unprecedented national security and public safety crisis.
And this is the moment we take the keys from the kids and we say no more of this nonsense.
And we open up the people's government and we restore the safety and security of the American people.
Now, you'll hear my colleagues no doubt say, if we could just agree on some common sense reforms, we would have opened up the Department of Homeland Security.
We would have been glad to work with you.
But let's think about these quote-unquote common sense reforms.
To require this administration to get a judicial warrant to expel criminal aliens from our country.
There is not a Democrat or Republican former commander-in-chief that would ever find that acceptable.
Because in fact, these criminal aliens have had their day in immigration court and they have their orders to be expelled because they are not here with cause.
They are here with threat to my family and to my community and to my great state of Texas and to this beloved country of ours.
Wall of Obstruction00:03:39
And it's unacceptable.
But they would effectively stop all deportations.
But we had an election after four years of lawlessness and chaos at the southern border, crime criminals, and all kinds of criminal elements and drugs that killed more people than the entire Vietnam War in one year.
And this president was elected to restore law and order, rule of law in this great civil society of ours.
It's been an embarrassment for those four years, and he's done it, and that's what the people sent us here to do.
That's the mandate they gave us, along with unified Republican leadership.
But there's been one wall of obstruction after another for this president and this administration.
And that's one example of their ridiculous, absurd, unserious demands.
The other one is, and I heard this at the Rules Committee, my friend, and I couldn't believe my ears.
They called our law enforcement agents who risked their lives to keep us safe.
Their families pray and wait for their mom or dad to come home wondering if something goes wrong and the bad guys win that day and they never see their family member again.
And yet my Democrat colleague repeatedly referred to our honorable ICE and CBP agents as masked thugs.
When evil is called good and good is called evil.
You remember that quote?
You remember that admonition?
These are the days.
Mr. Speaker, we've given 16 chances in all opportunities to vote to turn this government of the people back on and support our ICE and CBP agents, to protect our ports by funding our guardsmen, to protect the CISA agents, to protect our critical infrastructure while cyber attacks are on the rise,
and to resource our FEMA agency to be ready to respond to our citizens in a natural disaster.
16 times they said no.
No.
And here we are.
Demasking our agents, calling them masked thugs.
8,000% increase, Mr. Speaker, in death threats to these gentlemen and gentlelady who wear the badge, who wear the uniform, who protect the thin blue line.
1,300% increase in assaults.
3,200% increase in vehicular assaults.
We know who they are.
We have made great effort to identify each agent so they would be held accountable if they did anything illegal or inappropriate.
But we have cartel members who have bounties of tens of thousands of dollars on their heads.
And we have masked, leftist, radical, violent folks who are assaulting them in the streets while they're trying to do their dangerous job.
Cost of Living Crisis00:09:46
You want to know why we're here, Mr. Speaker?
You want to know why we're here, American people?
That's why we're here.
And we say, enough's enough.
And today we put forward this reconciliation, this budget resolution with reconciliation instructions to fund the people's homeland security, to protect our citizens, and to do right by these hardworking, God-fearing public servants that go to work every day not knowing if they're going to come home.
And with that, Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of, actually I don't yield the balance, I reserve.
Well, that was almost a fatal flaw in this debate, Mr. Ranking Member, but I reserve the balance of my time.
You pick that up?
The gentleman from Texas reserves.
The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Without objection.
Thank you.
Let me set the stage here for what has brought us to this point.
Last year, over the course of the first six months of the year, mind you, there was Reconciliation 1.0.
That was what the other side and the president used to call the Big Beautiful Bill.
Remember that?
You don't hear that phrase too much anymore.
You know why?
One of the most unpopular pieces of legislation to pass Congress in modern American history.
More than two to one disapproval over approval.
Why is that?
Because the American people know what was in the bill.
The American people know that it throws more than 15 million Americans off their health care, more than 17 million, according to one nonpartisan service.
In addition to that, it raises health care costs for tens of millions more.
But that's not all.
It also cuts nutrition assistance, the biggest cuts to the SNAP program in American history.
And on and on, I could take up the next hour listing the cuts.
And why are those cuts in there?
In order to fund the biggest tax breaks for billionaires in American history.
But that's not all.
It is also the biggest increase to our national debt in American history.
And that's not all.
It also includes $140 billion, record funding, mind you, for ICE and CBP.
So that is what has set the stage for Reconciliation 2.0, the bill that is now in front of us.
This bill is quite different in that it is narrowly pertaining to just two areas, ICE and CBP.
That's interesting to me because one thing the vast majority of the American people agree on, whether they're Democrat, Republican, or Independent, is that costs keep going up.
They haven't come down in the last year and a half.
They've only gotten worse.
They've only gotten higher.
And that is no accident.
It is not because of something like a terrorist attack or the business cycle.
No, it is directly because of this president's reckless policies, trade policies that have spiked inflation and a war in Iran that has taken the average price for a gallon of gas from under $3 a gallon just two months ago to now $4 over $4.20 a gallon and rising.
You don't see anything in this Reconciliation 2.0 to address anything that I just discussed.
Any of the rising costs, any of the rising health care costs, any of the rising costs of the supermarket.
Nothing, not a zilch zero.
The only thing that is in this is another $70 billion for ICE and CBP, on top of the record funding that was in the bill last year.
The American people simply want costs to come down, period.
Unfortunately, those priorities are not being met by this Republican majority.
Now, I want to be clear.
I believe, and sometimes this is inconvenient on both sides of the aisle to say it, I strongly believe in a secure border, period.
What I don't believe in is any agency of the government shooting and killing American citizens in the streets of our country.
I think the vast majority of the American people agree with me that we need to have a secure border, but that we cannot have any agency of our government carrying out killings on our streets.
We know that there are reforms that need to happen with ICE and CBP in order to rein in the abuses that we have seen.
Unfortunately, none of that is in the bill before us.
Instead, it's just throwing them, showering them with additional billions of dollars that they simply don't need.
So, Mr. Speaker, I really hope soon we can get back to a budget bill that addresses the needs and concerns of the American people.
Unfortunately, that is not the one that is presently before us.
The American people deserve far better.
I thank you, and with that, I reserve the balance of my time.
The gentleman from Pennsylvania Reserves, the gentleman from Texas, is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, unfortunately and conveniently, some of my Democrat friends have had a bad case of amnesia.
So I'm going to remind the American people that when Joe Biden and the Democrats had control of this town and this chamber and Congress and the White House, they took inflation from 1.4% all the way past 9%.
We had a 22% increase cumulative of prices of everyday goods that Americans depend on.
So it was Joe Biden and the Democrats who lit the fuse on the inflationary firestorm that American people, especially working Americans, suffered from.
The average inflation rate during the Joe Biden-Kamala Harris era was 5%.
Inflation is down.
The average inflation under this president, President Trump, is 2.7%.
Wages are up, business investment up, growth up, GDP up, and money in people's pockets.
Because had we relied on the Democrats, we would have seen a $1,700 a month tax hike on the American people.
But we said no tax on tips, no more tax on working people with respect to overtime or seniors on a fixed income.
I'm very proud of what we did as one strategy to provide much-needed relief after the cost of living crisis that was caused by the unbridled spending and failed economic policies of my Democrat colleagues.
Now, with that, I'd like to introduce the American people to a great man and patriot, a dear friend and the vice chairman of the budget committee from the great state of Pennsylvania, Mr. Lloyd Smucker, for two minutes.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you.
I just like to respond to some of the comments of my friend, the ranking member of the Budget Committee, also from Pennsylvania, just to say that in regards to the tax bill, the one big beautiful bill, I can tell you individuals, families, wage earners in my district are feeling the impact of that bill when they're filing their taxes.
They like the no tax on tips that so many in my district have taken advantage of, the no tax on overtime that so many have taken advantage of.
And I've had many seniors come to me and say they had a lot more in their pockets after they filed their taxes this year.
And I'll put up our record in the last year, our economic record, the impact on people in our districts against that of the Biden administration anytime.
We have an economy that is growing quickly.
We have inflation at a manageable spot and people are feeling it in their pocketbooks.
I was happy to hear the ranking member say that he supports a secure border because you certainly wouldn't have known that during the past administration when Democrats were in control and we had thousands of people pouring across this border every single day, including individuals who were criminals, who were members of gangs, including drugs flowing across the border.
Funding Homeland Security00:14:47
And Democrats did nothing to stop that.
And I'll tell you in my district, when I talk to people of all political stripes, Democrats and Republicans alike, they support removing people from this country who are criminals and who are here illegally.
And they support the work of ICE in doing that.
Democrats obviously do not.
A shutdown should never be used.
I yield the gentleman.
Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional minute.
You're recognized.
We should never use a government shutdown to achieve any policy benefits.
We've seen Democrats do that time and time again.
We certainly shouldn't be using it to not fund those who are keeping Americans safe and who are removing criminals from our country.
That's what this bill is about today.
We shouldn't be funding this in this way.
It should be done through a regular appropriations bill.
But we were not able to do that because we did not have Democrat support.
I don't like necessarily the way we're doing this, but there has to be grown-ups in the room, and that is Republicans right now who are going to ensure that those people who are working hard to keep Americans safe every day are going to be able to count on a paycheck at the end of the week.
So this is an important bill.
It's very unfortunate that Democrats continue to shut down the government over this issue, but Republicans are going to stand for the safety and security of the American people.
It's the number one thing that every one of us as elected officials should be doing.
We should be ensuring that American individuals, American citizens, are safe and fair.
And thank you.
I thank the gentleman in reserve.
Gentleman from Texas Reserve, the gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I yield one and a half minutes.
The gentleman from California, distinguished member of the budget committee, Mr. Pinetta.
The gentleman from California is recognized.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Republican budget resolution does nothing to end the shutdown, does nothing to reform ICE, yet does everything to give ICE and CBP $70 billion more dollars.
Look, I support a strong and secure border, but the Trump deportation policy goes way beyond going after felons and gang members.
The last Republican reconciliation bill injected $190 billion into DHS, leading to thousands of untrained ICE and CBP agents being injected into our communities.
They called themselves law enforcement, but they acted with lawlessness, trolling big box store parking lots, causing chaos in our communities, deaths to American citizens, and were allowed to act with impunity.
So I said no more funding until they transform, reform, and retrain with commonsensical law enforcement protocols and procedures.
Now, I hate shutdowns, but if you allow a vote on the bipartisan Senate bill today, we can open and pay TSA, Coast Guard, Cyber, and FEMA.
But instead of working with us across the aisle, the purely partisan resolution that just funds ICE without any reforms demonstrates once again you're going it alone.
You're doing nothing to lower costs.
You're adding to our debt and deficit.
You're giving in to the president and you're giving up on our constitutional responsibilities.
So I'm voting no, not just because I'm for reforming ICE, but I'm standing up to this administration and I'm living up to my oath of office.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I yield back.
Gentleman from Pennsylvania Reserve, gentleman from Texas is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, instead of the absurd demands of asking for judicial warrants after immigration judges have ruled that these criminal aliens are not with cause, for heaven's sakes, in our country, we included body cams, millions of dollars.
The president reviewed protocols, included and strengthened training programs.
But here's the root cause of what people saw on their TV sets at night when they saw the mayhem and they saw the chaos.
It was lawless sanctuary cities, rogue leaders who incited violence against our law enforcement officers while they were doing a dangerous job to rid our country of criminal aliens.
How in the world did we expect them to do this job when you have state and local leaders who refuse to cooperate, who thumb their nose at the rule of law and make things not only more difficult, but more dangerous for the men and women in uniform who courageously protect us every day.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield two minutes to my friend from the great state of Utah, Mr. Blake Moore.
Gentleman from Utah is recognized for two minutes.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
One trick that you see back here in Washington politics is when the opposing side is arguing in defense of the undefensible, they will say, I support border security, but there's always a but.
What we have seen for the last five and a half years since President Biden took over in 2021 to today is very simply laid out in the following three strategies.
Leave the border wide open, create a bunch of sanctuary cities, and then refuse to fund immigration and border patrol.
You look at those three things, that is exactly what they're doing, and now they're forcing us to go at it alone.
When for decades, longer than that, Republicans and Democrats have always been able to come together and support Homeland Security Bill.
But they refuse to support ICE and CBP.
Senate concurrent Resolution 33 is a critical step in delivering on the key policy mandate that voters gave Congress to secure the southern border and end the national crisis that is mass migration.
I would much rather fund and regulate the Department of Homeland Security and Immigration Enforcement through regular appropriations.
My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have made that impossible.
This is not a serious way to govern.
It is irresponsible.
It is dangerous.
Congress should not play with the livelihoods of service members at the Coast Guard, Transportation Security Agency, or the Secret Service to secure a political win.
We cannot restrict resources at a time like this, especially amid recent threats to White House officials and national security concerns.
We're now forced to run a narrowly focused, partisan reconciliation process to provide necessary funding to ICE and CBP and their operational and support components to last through the Trump administration.
The Trump administration has made great strides in securing the border and removing those who have entered our country illegally, which will alleviate strains on local law enforcement and hospital systems, help lower insurance premiums, and put downward pressure on housing prices in the long run.
Supporting this resolution will ensure we can build on the success and continue to provide a safe environment for American families to thrive.
This also does a very important thing by setting our projected deficit of 3% of GDP.
Another 20 seconds.
I will end there.
Thank you very much for the additional time to take our finances seriously and put a 3% debt to GDP.
I urge my colleagues to support this budget resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back.
I'll reserve the balance.
Gentlemen from Texas Reserves, the gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I now yield one and a half minutes to the gentleman from Texas, distinguished member of the Budget Committee, Mr. Doggett.
The gentleman from Texas is recognized.
ICE has become another three-letter word for lie.
Lies about immigrants as an excuse for racist and un-American policies.
Lies about dead American citizens like Renee Good and Alex Predty.
Lies about outrageous conditions at detention centers like Dilley, Texans, where measles spreads and children are fed infested food with worms.
Lies really to all of us that the Trump regime is merely concerned about dangerous criminals when in fact their dragnet picks up anyone who happens to get in the way that they can take no matter how much that immigrant teacher, that immigrant construction worker, that immigrant small business or health care worker are contributing to their community.
While we have simply asked that ICE meet the standards that we expect of our local law enforcement, this bill is designed to let ICE continue its rampage across America totally unrestrained.
What we should be doing is using this $70 billion that this Republican bill showers on ICE and CBP to instead address the affordability crisis that our American families are facing because of Trump's continued mismanagement, his reckless, endless war in Iran, and his illegal tariffs.
That $70 billion, think of what it could accomplish.
With it, we could restore affordable access to a family physician for millions of American families.
Another 30 seconds, Mr. Chairman.
I yield the gentleman another 30 seconds.
We could restore access to a family physician to millions of American families who no longer have it thanks to the Republican action.
Or we could instead choose to provide for our future by assuring that every single three and four year old in America can access pre-kindergarten, pre-K.
But instead of helping working families, Republicans insist that we shower more dollars, more tax dollars on a rogue agency that already has entirely too much funding to continue its mission of ripping families apart and detaining babies.
I yield back.
Gentlemen from Pennsylvania Reserves, the gentleman from Texas is recognized.
Okay, let's play back the tape, Mr. Speaker.
Four years, wide open border, flooding the zone.
And by the zone, I mean the entire country.
Crime, criminals, drugs, record number of people on the terrorist watch list, record number of people from countries of interest, record number of criminal, of illegal immigrants dying in the desert, record number of humans trafficked to this country.
Record, record, record, open border disaster.
And now, now after this mess, when we have to get the brave men and women to go clean up the streets from the criminals that roam in the great cities of this country and threaten our citizens, they want to call them what I heard at Rules Committee, masked thugs.
That's what they're calling our law enforcement officers.
But I guess we shouldn't be too surprised because that's the party that wanted to defund the police.
That's the party with the battle cry, defund ICE.
That's the party who at the top of their ticket in the last presidential election had a presidential nominee who compared ICE to the KKK and her vice president compared them to the Gestapo.
So no.
No, sir, Mr. Speaker.
I'm not surprised.
Not surprised that now that they created this self-inflicted disaster and mess and our brave ICE officers are trying to clean it up, that they'd want to impede them and insult them, but they only insult law-abiding American citizens.
I assure you that.
And with that, I yield to my dear friend from the Tar Hill State, the member of the budget committee, Mr. Addison McDowell.
Gentlemen from North Carolina is recognized.
Well, thank you, Chairman.
And I think that for two minutes, Mr. Speaker, I apologize.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I think it's important that we point out that as our Democrat colleagues across the aisle are pointing a finger at us, there's three fingers pointing back at them.
And what we need to look at is exactly what they've done for the last four years of Joe Biden.
They let all of these people into our country.
We're trying to get rid of them.
There was a mandate by the American people for us to do that.
That's what we're trying to do.
Now, we're also trying to do one of our very basic functions as Congress, which is to pass appropriations bills.
And while they want to blame us, I will remind them that each time that has come up, it has passed out of this chamber with bipartisan support.
It has gone to the Senate where it has died.
The President, the Senate, our leadership, they have tried to come to an agreement.
They will not let us.
That's exactly what's happening.
Mr. Speaker, this is day 74.
74 days.
That is exactly how long the Department of Homeland Security has been shut down.
74 days, Mr. Speaker.
And let's be clear about one thing.
Democrats have forced the shutdown to defund law enforcement and gamble with the safety of our country.
They are pushing an agenda that leads to lawlessness in our communities.
They're willing to let dangerous illegal aliens, murderers, rapists, drug traffickers, walk our streets and destroy our communities.
They're even willing to force Americans to stand in long TSA lines simply as leverage to force their agenda.
And maybe they were fine with the millions of illegal aliens that were released into our communities under the Biden administration.
And maybe they were fine with the massive flow of drugs that poured across our southern border.
But my constituents were not, Mr. Speaker.
The American people were not.
And House Republicans will keep the promises that we made.
We will do what it takes to keep Americans safe and secure.
Now, despite the Democrat resistance, we will stand on principles and deliver for the American people.
Mr. Speaker, I urge a yes vote to get us back on track to fully reopening the Department of Homeland Security, and I yield back.
I thank the gentleman in reserve.
Gentlemen from Texas Reserves, the gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized.
Boy, that sounds like a scary hellscape that the last couple speakers on the other side have described.
I'm just glad they're not talking about the United States because in the country where I live, actually, specifically in my city of Philadelphia, the murder rate is lower today than at any point in the 1960s.
There are a lot of American cities right now that have the lowest violent crime rate in my lifetime.
Misguided Budget Priorities00:16:06
I can understand, though, why they want to talk about anything but costs.
Because right now, according to one opinion poll, the American people are more pessimistic today about their own economic future than they were even in the depths of the Great Recession.
And they rate this president the lowest job approval on the economy since George W. Bush in the middle of the Great Recession.
You can understand why they want to talk about anything except for costs and the financial livelihoods of most American households.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield one and a half minutes to a gentleman from a fellow Commonwealth, except he is from the Commonwealth of Virginia, the distinguished ranking member of the Education and Workforce Committee, also a member of the budget committee, Mr. Scott.
The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for one and a half minutes.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we're talking about the budget.
For years, my Republican colleagues have sanctimoniously spoken about the need to reduce the deficit, but continuously vote for spending bills that add trillions of dollars to the federal deficit.
The CBO estimates that last year's big ugly bill will add $3.4 trillion to the deficit by 2034.
And this bill is not even serious.
They didn't even bring it to committee.
They just brought it to the floor.
It continues the pattern of presidential administrations.
Every Republican administration since Nixon has left for the Democrats a worse deficit than they inherited.
By the way, every Democratic administration since Kennedy has left for the Republicans a better deficit than they inherited, all without exceptions.
Now they're back here with the misguided budget priorities.
This thing does nothing to lower costs and make life better for the American people.
It does give $70 billion to ICE after they violated the Constitution, kill Americans, and refuse to agree to Democratic demands that they conform to the same standards as other law enforcement officers, like get a warrant before you go into somebody's house, don't use unconstitutional excessive force, don't deport citizens.
We should be investing in education, health care, and child care, and job creation.
This bill doesn't do it, and that's why we ought to vote no.
I yield back.
Jennifer, Pennsylvania Reserves, the gentleman from Texas is recognized.
Just a note, Mr. Speaker, on cost.
When the Democrats controlled Congress and the White House, they spent a record $12 trillion.
Now, $5 trillion of that is because of the record interest rate hikes that were associated with an almost half a century high inflation.
So combined, we're talking about, again, almost $12 trillion.
And what did we get for that?
What did we get for that as the American people, the shareholders?
What return did our citizens get for that, quote, investment?
Green energy subsidies to corporations that was a disaster for our energy economy, made the prices of gas and electricity for our consumers skyrocket.
Well, the American people got tens of thousands of IRS agents.
They expanded the IRS by $80 billion because that's what they thought that the American people needed after a 22% increase in price.
They bailed out student loan programs.
They bailed out schools that wouldn't open.
One bailout after another, the Union Pension Fund, it's hard to keep up with it.
And they actually, and you go back and look at the executive order from President Biden and Vice President Kamal Harris at the time, they actually provided health care at the cost of taxpayers to people in this country illegally.
And we wonder why we had record numbers of illegal immigrants pouring into this country.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I want to yield to my friend from the Buckeye State and the House's chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Jim Jordan, for three minutes.
Gentleman from Ohio is recognized for three minutes.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I thank the, or Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Why are the Democrats doing it?
Why would they shut down the Department of Homeland Security for 74 days?
Why would they do that when we've had a third assassination attempt on the President of the United States while we're in the middle of a military operation in Iran, when we've had terrorist attacks here on the homeland?
Why would they do it?
Simple answer is, they don't want a border.
They don't want a border.
They've said it, but look at their plan.
Four years of Joe Biden, they let in 10 million illegal migrants.
Then they create sanctuary jurisdictions all over the country, which makes it difficult to remove illegal migrants who commit another crime.
And now they say, let's don't pay the guys who do the removing.
Let's don't pay ICE.
Let in 10 million, create sanctuary jurisdictions.
By the way, 18 cities, 11 states, 3 counties, District of Columbia are sanctuary jurisdictions.
Because they're big blue cities, big blue states, that represents almost a third of the country, lives in a jurisdiction where the politicians tell local law enforcement don't work with federal law enforcement when it comes to enforcing federal law.
And now they say don't pay the guys who enforce federal law.
Don't pay the ICE.
It's not enough that the left-wing agitators out there have doxxed them, tracked them, spit on them, sworn at them, threatened them, attacked them.
That's not enough.
We're not going to pay them.
We're not going to pay them.
Such a plan.
And it's all because they don't want to border in our country.
Well, there was an election where the people said we want to border.
And that's why this bill and the good work that Chairman Arrington and the Budget Committee have done is so darn important.
We shouldn't have to pass this kind of bill.
Should have been done in the appropriation bill.
But nope, they're going to shut the government down for 74 days because they don't want to border.
They let in 10 million.
They create sanctuary jurisdictions so it's difficult to remove them.
And then they don't want to pay the guys who do the removing.
That's their plan.
And the country needs to know that, plain and simple.
But here come the Budget Committee and Republicans say we're going to do something to pay the guys.
We're going to have to do it via reconciliation.
So thank the Budget Committee and the Chairman for doing the work.
I urge a yes vote and yield back.
I thank the gentleman in reserve, Mr. Speaker.
Gentleman from Texas Reserve, the gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, I yield one and a half minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota, distinguished member of the budget committee, Ms. Omar.
You're recognized.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today in strong opposition to this Republican effort to funnel another $70 billion to ICE and CPP to continue their inhumane, illegal, reprehensible actions.
This effort is even more incomprehensible, considering it comes after Trump and Congressional Republicans already created an $85 billion slush fund for ICE during the last budget reconciliation process.
In my district, ICE has used the money to terrorize Minnesotans, particularly our black and brown communities through Operation MetroSurge.
We watched in horror as ICE agents murdered our neighbors, Renee Goode and Alex Breddy, in broad daylight.
We witnessed our neighbors being snatched off the street, pulled from their homes and cars without a warrant.
We saw dozens of children ripped away from their families, friends, and schools shipped to detention centers out of state.
Our communities are still recovering from that devastation caused by the federal occupation and the blatant trumpling of the rights we as Americans hold dear.
We cannot send this rogue and unaccountable agency another cent.
I urge my colleagues to vote no.
Thank you, and I yield back.
Gentlemen from Pennsylvania Reserve, the gentleman from Texas is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, I yield one and a half minutes to my friend from Tennessee, Mr. Van Epps.
Gentleman from Tennessee is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, Congressional Democrats have kept the Department of Homeland Security shut down for more than 70 days.
During this time, the critical services DHS provides to the American people are at best disrupted and at worst, paused entirely.
This comes as we prepare for the busiest travel season ever, celebrating our founding and welcoming visitors from around the world.
It also comes during a threat environment unlike any other.
The previous administration welcomed unvetted migrants across our border for four years.
There have been three assassination attempts against this sitting president, and cyber threats targeting our critical infrastructure are accelerating.
The threats are persistent, and they are here within our borders.
It is high time we empower these agencies to accomplish their crucial mission.
And I urge my colleagues to support this budget resolution.
With that, I yield back.
I thank the gentleman in reserve, Mr. Speaker.
General from Texas Reserves, the gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized.
Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I now yield one and a half minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington State, distinguished member of the budget committee, Ms. Jayapal.
The gentlewoman is recognized for a minute and a half from Washington State.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
This budget resolution is a total insult to the American people.
Instead of addressing the rising prices of gas, of groceries, of housing, of childcare, the things that actually allow people to survive in an economy that Republicans have rigged for the billionaires, this resolution puts another $70 billion into ICE and CBP.
That's on top of a $170 billion slush fund that was given to these agencies in the Republicans' big bad betrayal bill last year that allowed ICE and CBP to carry out a violent, cruel, unconstitutional campaign of terror in communities across this country, killing Renee Goode and Alex Predi in Minnesota, conducting a campaign of mass detentions,
detaining an unprecedented number of people that has resulted in 47 record deaths, locking up children and using them as bait for their parents, terrorizing schools and churches and hospitals with their activity.
Meanwhile, Republicans refuse to address the rising costs that Americans are dealing with because this administration refuses to put the people first.
Americans of every political strike do not want more money to go to ICE slush fund.
What they want is real reforms to ICE and CBP to rein in the lawlessness.
What they want is for the administration to get serious about cutting their costs instead of catering to Trump's cronies.
Vote no on this resolution.
Jennifer from Pennsylvania Reserves, the gentleman from Texas is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve.
Jennifer from Texas, I'm sorry, Pennsylvania is recognized.
Almost gave the gentleman a heart attack saying I was from Texas.
Mr. Speaker, I yield one and a half minutes to the member from California, also a member of the budget committee, Ms. Chu.
The gentlewoman from California is recognized for one and a half minutes.
For yet another week, Republicans have brought us legislation that does absolutely nothing to lower the cost of groceries, housing, or health care.
Instead, they want another $140 billion to expand their lawless deportation machine.
Not one penny will make life more affordable for people.
In fact, this bill fails to implement the most basic common sense reforms to ICE and CBP.
Trump's immigration agents have ripped hundreds of thousands of people from their families, jobs, and communities.
Nearly 60,000 people are trapped in ICE detention, almost half with no criminal record.
And 48 people have died in ICE custody.
Their anti-immigrant agenda is killing people.
People, like my constituent Carlos Montoya, a 52-year-old father and grandfather, when ICE agents raided a Home Depot just minutes from my district, Carlos was so frightened that he fled and was tragically struck and killed by a car on the freeway.
This administration is instilling so much terror that people are willing to risk their lives to escape.
Republicans' big ugly bill already handed ICE $170 billion, and now they want another $140 billion to keep kidnapping children, tackling grandmothers to the ground, raiding car washes, and shooting innocent people.
But somehow they keep insisting there's no money for health care, food assistance, or housing.
Vote no on this bill.
Gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Reserves, gentlemen from Texas is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, just again, setting the record straight for the American people, the only monies we're spending are monies that the Democrats in the House and Senate agreed with us to spend to operate Homeland Security, including ICE and CBP.
And then they reneged on it.
They went back on their word and they shut the Department of Homeland Security down for over 70 days.
And all we're doing is using reconciliation, a budgetary tool, to fund ICE and CBP because they want to defund ICE and CBP.
I mean, you hear it in their rhetoric.
I mentioned the masked thugs and the comparison to the KKK.
They're talking about protecting the illegal immigrant.
But you haven't heard a word about Lake and Riley and her family.
You haven't heard anything about Jocelyn Nungery and her family or the thousands upon thousands of American citizens whose lives are forever changed because of the harm that was perpetrated upon them from an illegal criminal alien that was allowed in this country with impunity.
Because our president at the time was derelict in his duty to uphold the laws of the land because he refused to provide for the common defense.
And when Texas and other states tried to protect their citizens, they were harassed and obstructed at every turn.
So what choice do we have?
Go back to the open border and a sanctuary nation for criminal aliens?
That's not acceptable to Republicans.
And that's not acceptable to the people in the popular vote, in the electoral vote, every swing state.
They sent us here to put America first and the American people first and to restore law and order, Mr. Speaker.
Defense of American People00:14:32
And with that, I yield.
Gentleman from Texas Reserves, gentlemen from Pennsylvania is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, listen for the dog that didn't bark.
You notice what the other side hasn't mentioned once during this debate, a debate, mind you, on a reconciliation budget bill?
Nothing about costs.
Nothing about their plan to bring down the cost of gas, which had the biggest monthly increase in my lifetime thanks to this administration's policies.
Nothing to make health care more affordable.
Nothing about child care to make that more affordable.
Nothing to make housing more affordable.
Nothing at all about that.
They have nothing to say because they have no plan and they don't have one dime for any of that in their bill.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to yield to gentlemen from the Commonwealth of Kentucky, distinguished member of the budget committee, Mr. McGarvey.
For one and a half minutes.
The gentleman from Kentucky is recognized for one and a half minutes.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this Republican budget.
Last year, my Republican colleagues forced through a budget that gave ICE over $80 billion.
Let's put that in perspective.
Last year, ICE got more than double the amount they got during the entirety of Trump's first presidency, but somehow that's not enough.
Now, they're trying to push through another $70 billion with no reforms, no accountability, no strings attached, nothing.
$70 billion in taxpayer dollars for an agency responsible for kidnapping people off the street, murdering U.S. citizens, separating families, detaining children, and breaking down doors without warrants.
$70 billion for taxpayer dollars for masked, armed, and untrained agents who don't answer to anyone.
$70 billion in taxpayer dollars for a campaign of terror directed at our own neighbors while the rest of the country struggles to feed their families, pay rent, go to the doctor, and keep the lights on.
I'm so tired of hearing that we don't have enough money for our schools and hospitals.
No money to make sure our veterans are taken care of.
No money to make sure everyone has a roof over their head.
No money for health care.
I mean, just a couple of weeks ago, we were told we don't even have the money to make sure that pregnant women can have fruits and vegetables.
But the second Trump needs more money to bankroll his own personal police force, Republicans in Congress can move mountains.
For ICE, we have $70 billion.
For everyone else, nothing.
This is intentional.
It's a choice, and it's the wrong one.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back.
Pennsylvania Reserves.
Chair from Texas, you're recognized.
Mr. Speaker, again, just reminding my colleagues and friend that average gas price under Joe Biden and the Democrat leadership was over $5.
Under President Trump, it's just a little over $3.
He talks about cost, but if you look at the CBO, which is nonpartisan scorekeeper, they would tell you in the first six months of this fiscal year compared to the last six months of last fiscal year, that the deficit has actually gone down for the first time in almost a decade by $138 billion.
That's not me telling you that.
That's not conjecture on the part of either party.
It's the watchdog, scorekeeper, nonpartisan, telling you that when we held the line to control spending on discretionary side for the last four years, we've saved almost a half a trillion dollars.
And then in the Big Beautiful bill, and it is big and beautiful, because we protected tax dollars and we preserved the safety nets for American citizens who need them and depend on them.
And CBO also has, and I submit for the record, a letter about the Medicaid coverage impacts of the Big Beautiful bill.
And you know what it says?
Let me summarize.
The millions of people who are no longer on Medicaid or SNAP are people who don't qualify to be on there.
They're people who are in this country illegally.
And they are people who refuse to work even though they're able to work.
And taxpayers, hardworking, are willing to support their fellow Americans.
But it is a social compact.
And there is a responsibility.
And that's what we did as Republicans.
And Mr. Speaker, that's what the American people sent us here to do.
So we can talk about the cost.
Deficits are coming down, more money in people's pockets, safety nets being restored and protected and preserved for the American citizens who depend on them.
And we are protecting tax dollars.
And we are looking out for our kids and future vulnerable Americans who need these programs that are unsustainable because my Democrat colleagues haven't lifted a finger to help us root out waste and fraud.
And with that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Gentlemen from Texas Reserve, the gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, just to fact-check here what we heard since the previous speaker said that the national average for a gallon of gas is $3 a gallon.
No, that's what it was two months ago.
Today, as of literally just a few moments ago when I checked, the national average is $4.22 a gallon.
Again, last month, the largest monthly increase in the price of gas since 1967.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I'm happy to yield one and a half minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island.
Mr. Raskin, thank you.
I yield one and a half minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island, member of the budget committee, Mr. Amo.
The gentleman from Rhode Island is recognized for one and a half minutes.
Mr. Speaker, Rhode Islanders have had enough of Trump's reign of terror.
Across my state, they know when so-called enforcement becomes intimidation, when profiling and abuse are rampant, and when accountability is absent.
And now, instead of restoring trust or lowering costs, Republicans are doing it again.
Their first big, ugly bill ripped billions out of our health care system that will make millions sicker and poorer, all to spend $170 billion on ICE and CBP's rogue tactics.
Now, this budget doubles down on that spending spree, dumping another $70 billion in taxpayer funding into the same cruel system without any reforms.
So here it is.
They are using your money not to lower costs for gas, groceries, rent, or health care, not to help people, but to fund raids, roundups, and fear in American communities.
I will not stand by while costs rise, rights are trampled, and working families are left behind.
So we have a choice.
Use your tax dollars to fund mass men and their mass raids, or help families put food on the table, keep a roof over their heads, and stay healthy.
I choose families.
I urge a no vote on this latest Republican budget betrayal, and I yield back.
I reserve.
Gentlemen from Pennsylvania Reserve, the gentleman from Texas is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve.
The member from Texas Reserves, gentlemen from Pennsylvania, you are recognized.
Mr. Speaker, I now yield one and a half minutes to the always eager gentleman from Maryland, the distinguished ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Raskin.
The member from Maryland is recognized for one and a half minutes.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Last year, Devil May Care, foot-loose, free-spending, Trump-enabling mega-Republicans cut ICE and CBP a check from the American people for $170 billion with no oversight, no accountability, and no programmatic details.
And in the months since they passed their staggeringly irresponsible, budget-busting, debt-enlarging, big, beautiful bill, the American people have seen the consequences of handing billions of dollars to a rogue agency headed up by terrible leaders like Christy Noam.
ICE now routinely tramples the constitutional rights of the people.
It thumbs its nose at federal court orders, and it brings fear and terror to communities across the country.
Look at what federal courts have said about ICE, which didn't just lie about the killings of Renee Goode and Alex Predi.
In dozens of cases, federal judges have found that ICE officials are lying in court.
A Reagan-appointed judge rejected the testimony of the acting ICE director as, quote, disingenuous, squalid, and dishonorable.
Another judge called the affidavit of a top ICE official, quote, the sorriest statement I've ever seen in court, and said that if you were asking to get a warrant issued on this, I'd throw you out of my chambers.
Could I request an additional seconds?
Thank you very much.
Well, now our colleagues, rather than deal with the reality of what they've created, a monster here with American citizens being shot down in cold blood at point-blank range in Minnesota,
Alex Predi and Renee Goode, rather than deal with that reality, they just want to double down on their world historical error by giving up to another $140 billion with basically no strings attached to the people at ICE that have unleashed this chaos against us.
And I'm voting no.
Gentleman from Pennsylvania reserves, the gentleman from Texas, you are recognized.
Mr. Speaker, unleash chaos.
Think about that.
Ask the American people what they believe about unleashed chaos.
Millions upon millions of people flooding our country.
The Biden administration releasing five-plus million people into our streets and our neighborhoods.
Record number of criminals, record number of terrorists.
Mr. Speaker, I think the chaos that was unleashed was from the Biden administration and the Democrats opening up our border and throwing complete caution, rule of law, and the security of the American people to the wind.
And we have suffered greatly as a country.
We're trying to fix it, trying to be the adults, trying to fund the government, trying to support our ICE agents and all those at the Homeland Security that are protecting our ports, our critical infrastructure.
They're doing their job for the country they love, and we are preventing them from getting a paycheck.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve.
Gentlemen from Texas Reserve, the gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, I now yield one and a half minutes to the gentleman from Texas, distinguished member of the Financial Services Committee, Mr. Greene.
Gentlemen from Texas is recognized for one and a half minutes.
And still I rise, Mr. Speaker, in defense of the American people who are suffering as a result of more than a trillion dollars in health care cuts.
I rise to defend them because my colleagues across the aisle would reduce them to freeloaders, would reduce them to persons who do not deserve to be in the country and receive medical care.
I rise to call to your attention Mr. Bonner, an American citizen, worked for NASA.
Mr. Bonner was in line for a double lung transplant.
His premiums went up to the point that he could not afford the premium that would allow him to get the double lung transplant.
We had to go out on the internet to secure funds for an American citizen who was in line for a double lung transplant who couldn't get it because of the premiums that went up in January.
You would reduce these persons, the bonners of the world, to freeloaders.
They are not freeloaders.
These are American citizens who are suffering because of the way you're treating health care.
I rise in support of the American citizens who don't have money in the stock market and who are not playing the stock market.
They have the supermarket as their means of determining how successful they are.
When they go there, they cannot afford the necessities of life.
They're having to choose guests over food.
I rise in defense of the American people that you reduce to freeloaders and persons who don't care enough about this country to want to support it and make sure that all persons have access to health care.
I rise to defend the American people.
Chairman's time has expired.
The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to time remains on each side?
The gentleman from Pennsylvania has seven and three quarters of finished mining, and the gentleman from Texas has one minute remaining.
And I'll remind members to direct their comments to the chair.
Gentlemen from Pennsylvania, you are recognized.
I reserve.
Gentleman, reserves, gentlemen from Texas, you're recognized.
Mr. Speaker, I'm going to go ahead and close.
I got a minute.
I heard from my Democrat friend about rising to support the vulnerable in this country who need health care.
Well, let's just face the harsh facts.
I know it's difficult for my Democrat college because they created this monster, but Obamacare, since the inception, has doubled premiums, doubled deductibles.
It has made health care anything but affordable.
And then Joe Biden writes an executive order to allow illegal immigrants to avail themselves of social services, namely health care, when American people are standing and waiting in line, getting sicker at hospitals and other health care providers.
Reckless Policies Explained00:03:28
I think it's unacceptable.
This is the most generous country in the world when it comes to immigrants, Mr. Speaker.
But we're going to fund the Homeland Security Department.
We're going to protect the American people.
I urge my colleagues to support it.
Gentlemen from Texas, Reserves.
Gentleman from Pennsylvania, you're recognized.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Let me first state for the record that it's always a pleasure debating with Chairman Arrington.
We have vigorous debates in the Budget Committee as well as here on the House floor, and always a pleasure to do so.
I thank he and his staff, who are always professional and courteous to us.
Now, Mr. Speaker, we've heard a lot over the course of this debate.
I would like to take a step back and put things in perspective.
Mr. Speaker, the bottom line is this.
Things are too expensive right now, and they're making it worse.
Their policies are making it worse, which is remarkable because two years ago, being a resident of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, I saw more TV ads, I should say, was subjected to seeing more TV ads, especially during the sports games I watch, than any other state in the country.
And as different as the two presidential nominees may have been from one another, one thing they actually agreed on is that the overwhelming majority of the ads from the Democratic nominee and the overwhelming majority of the ads from the Republican presidential nominee were about the same thing.
They were about costs.
So everyone agreed that costs were too high and they needed to come down.
This president ran around my state saying, and I quote, I will lower costs on day one.
Remember when he said that?
Well, here we are, not on day one, not on day two, day 400, 500, whatever it is of this presidency.
And costs aren't any lower today than 2024.
In fact, they're higher.
More for health care, more at the supermarkets, more at the gas pumps.
And unlike previous downturns in our economy, it is not because of an act of terrorism like 9-11.
It is not because of a downturn in the business cycle.
No, it is specifically because of the reckless policies of this administration and those who have supported those policies here in Congress.
His reckless trade war has only increased costs.
He has doubled down on that policy by now launching a war in Iran that in just two months had brought gas prices from under $3 a gallon to now $4.22 just today and rising, perhaps approaching $5 a gallon this summer.
And what has he done on taxes and health care and spending?
Their first reconciliation bill last year showered tax breaks by the trillions to mostly the wealthy, and it paid for it on the backs of the health care of the American people.
Say No to This Bill00:02:52
And here we are now in Reconciliation 2.0.
And what do we find?
Nothing in here about the price of groceries.
Nothing in here to lower the price of gas.
Nothing in here on housing, on child care, or on health care.
No, we have $70 billion more for ICE and CBP.
We can do far better.
The American people deserve better.
Say no to their reckless policies.
Vote no on this bill.
With that, I yield back.
All time for debate has expired.
All debate has time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 1224, the previous question is ordered on the concurrent resolution.
The question is on the adoption of the concurrent resolution.
Pursuant to clause 10 of Rule 20, the yays and nays are ordered.
Pursuant to Clause 8 of Rule 20, further proceedings on this question are postponed.
What purposes?
The gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Jordan, seek recognition.
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1224, I call up the Bill S 1318 and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The clerk will report the title of the bill.
Senate 1318, an act to direct the American Battle Monuments Commission to establish a program to identify American Jewish service members buried in United States military cemeteries overseas under markers that incorrectly represent their religion and heritage and for other purposes.
Oppose This Legislation00:15:07
Pursuant to House Resolution 1224, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 119-27, modified by the amendment printed in Part C of House Report 119-628 is adopted and the bill as amended is considered red.
The bill as amended shall be debatable for one hour, equally divided among and controlled by the chair of the and the ranking minority member of the committee on the judiciary or their representative designees and the chair of the ranking the chair and the ranking minority member of the permanent select committee on intelligence or their respective designees.
The gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Jordan, the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Raskin, the gentleman from Arkansas, Mr. Crawford, and the gentleman from Connecticut, Mr. Himes, will each control 15 minutes.
With that, the chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Jordan.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days in which to revise or extend their remarks and to insert extraneous material on S 1318.
So that adopted.
I yield myself such time as I may consume.
You are recognized.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It ain't the same FISA.
We were in this chamber two years ago debating a reauthorization of FISA 702.
The program was significantly different than it is today.
2021, the FBI reported conducting nearly 3 million U.S. person queries.
An audit of those queries found that 278,000 times they did not comply with the rules, didn't follow the rules.
FBI agents ran queries on protesters, donors, to congressional campaigns, public officials, journalists, colleagues, even ex-girlfriends.
In response to those abuses, Congress enacted the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act.
House Judiciary Committee, House Intelligence Committee, all of Congress put together that law that contained 56 different reforms.
Things like new training and approval requirements before a U.S. person query could even take place, audit requirements, accountability measures for those who misused the program, and enhanced reporting and transparency requirements, such as allowing certain members of Congress and staff to attend FISA court proceedings.
We are beginning to see the effect of those reforms.
In the year after RISA was passed, the FBI reported conducting 9,089 U.S. person queries.
Of those roughly 9,000 queries, just 127 did not comply with the rules.
So think about it, 278,000 to 127.
That's real improvement.
That's a different program.
And most of those, 127, were due to errors, typos, clerical errors.
And due to the improved reporting and transparency required by RISA, Congress has more insight than ever into the program's operation.
Today, every single U.S. person query conducted by the FBI is audited to ensure compliance with applicable requirements and legal standards.
The results of those audits and other information are provided to Congress on an annual, semi-annual, and quarterly basis.
The Foreign Intelligence and Accountability Act would add to those reforms.
The legislation in front of us, for example, adds the Civil Liberties Protection Officer within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, who will conduct a monthly review of FBI U.S. person queries.
I think this is the best thing we put in the reauthorization bill.
This 30-day look back on how the queries are going, are they following the rules, what took place in those actual searches?
Queries that violate the rules would be referred to the Inspector General of the intelligence community for further investigation.
So, again, a couple more layers of accountability.
This bill would also impose criminal penalties for those who knowingly conduct improper queries and those who lie about conducting improper queries.
Finally, the bill will require that an FBI attorney, rather than just some other agent or supervisor, approve any U.S. person search before they are conducted.
The 702 program is incredibly important for protecting our national security and advancing our interests abroad.
In light of the progress that has been made and the threats that we face, we think that the bill before us today makes sense right now.
That does not mean our job is over.
Judiciary Committee will continue to conduct aggressive oversight of FISA, and we will continue to work on some things that we think can be helpful in the future.
But again, today is not 2024, and I urge my colleagues to support the bill and reserve the balance of our time.
The gentleman from Ohio Reserve, the gentleman from Maryland, you're recognized.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I will yield myself such time as I may consume.
Recognized?
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Chairman, I want to urge all of our colleagues with constitutional patriotism still beating in their hearts after this tortured and demeaning and visibly transactional process we've seen today to oppose the legislation.
This bill is a three-year permission slip and blessing for the Trump administration and the next administration to keep abusing the sweeping FISA Section 702 surveillance authority to spy on American citizens' private communications and to violate the privacy rights of the people.
I want every member of this body to be clear on exactly what is in this bill.
It has no warrant requirement for queries of U.S. citizens.
It has no probable cause requirement.
It provides for no judicial oversight of these government queries.
It subjects U.S. citizens to completely subconstitutional standards, avoiding the Fourth Amendment entirely.
It is in a parallel universe from the Constitution, or perhaps I should say a perpendicular universe to the Constitution.
The Constitution interposes a judge, a neutral, independent magistrate between the government and a search of persons and their things.
But this three-year blank check to Trump and Patel and company leaves the executive branch free to conduct these searches with self-reporting and self-policing as the sole protection against their abuse of the Section 702 program.
Without any meaningful guardrails, this U.S. person information collected under foreign intelligence standards that have got nothing to do with the Fourth Amendment is ripe for abuse.
It has been systematically abused to spy on American citizens in the past, and it will be used in exactly the same way by Kash Patel and Todd Blanche in the future if we pass this bill.
Last week it came to light that the FBI Director Kash Patel was unhappy about a New York Times article which focused on the fact that he had used FBI SWAT teams and jets to chauffeur his girlfriend around the country at taxpayer expense.
So what did he do?
He didn't decide to change his policy on how he uses the people's resources.
Instead, he had his agents query FBI databases for dirt on the reporter.
Well, was the FISA Section 002 program one of the databases he searched?
Well, the FBI says no, he just searched every other database at the FBI, but we have no idea because they don't have to go to a judge before searching an American citizen's information.
And we depend now on this system, in this system, on Kash Patel to be the check and balance against Kash Patel.
We only know about this, the fact that it even happened because a reporter got the information.
Otherwise, we wouldn't have even known anything about it.
Let it be a warning to people vigilant about our civil rights and privacy, about what actually goes on.
Even Republicans on the Rules Committee last night were registering their displeasure with these reports.
Look, the FISA Section 702 program has been misused and abused under every administration.
Section 702 authorizes the government to collect information from electronic communication companies in the U.S. about non-U.S. persons who are physically outside the U.S.
But when the government gets communications to and from these foreign targets, it also incidentally collects large amounts of information about American citizens.
In 2022, the FISC, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, detailed an historical pattern of non-compliant queries at the FBI.
Improper searches swept in elected officials, political campaign donors, and Black Lives Matter protesters, among many others.
At other agencies, analysts used Section 702 to query their own names, the names of their relatives, and even the names of former Romantic partners.
Just last month, federal judges on the Fisk issued an opinion that sounded the alarm about how the FBI is currently abusing FISA, currently violating the law and flouting the safeguards Congress imposed two years ago to snoop on Americans' private communications.
The administration is deliberately keeping this opinion totally classified in a basement skiff here at the House.
Reforms that we made during the last FISA Section 702 reauthorization, which I strongly supported and voted for, unlike my friend, Chairman Jordan, those reforms relied on internal watchdogs and required agencies to track and report the use of Section 702 data to spy on Americans.
I strongly supported that reform, but one year and change into the Trump administration, the watchdogs are all but gone.
After returning to the White House, President Trump quickly removed the internal watchdogs charged with verifying FBI's representations that the reforms are working.
He illegally fired a majority of the members of the Independent Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, and his Department of Justice reassigned other key compliance personnel.
The watchdogs have been removed from the scene of the crimes.
The administration repeatedly claims that FBI compliance exceeded 99% in 2024 and 2025.
Well, even if those claims are true, and I seriously doubt it, that's an admission that the FBI has illegally accessed the data of thousands of American citizens.
More importantly, these numbers are based on the violations and abuses that Kash Patel and Todd Blanch are willing to identify themselves and self-report.
How can we believe these numbers when the administration has returned all the watchdogs to the pound?
They're no longer there.
The FISC judges warned us just last month that the FBI is abusing its authorities to spy on Americans.
So what makes us think that a three-year blank check renewal will lead to self-correction?
Proponents of the bill claim that it protects privacy, but asking Kash Patel's FBI to self-report abuses of our civil liberties to Tulsi Gabbard's DNI is like asking Donald Trump to self-report his collection of millions of dollars from foreign governments directly to the U.S. Congress.
That's actually the law under Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution, the Foreign Emoluments Clause, and yet he has never once come to ask for our permission for him to keep a foreign government emolument, whether pocketed through the Trump Hotels or the Trump golf courses or the other Trump enterprises and crypto coins and scams and so on.
So if you think self-reporting by this administration is working well under the Foreign Government Emoluments Clause, go ahead and vote for self-reporting under the Ford Intelligence Surveillance Act.
For me, I'm sticking with the Fourth Amendment and the Constitution.
Under our Constitution, it is judges, not FBI agents or government lawyers, who must protect our privacy and our civil liberties.
I reserve the balance of my time.
General Reserves, gentlemen from Ohio is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, we reserve.
Gentlemen from Ohio Reserves.
I'd like to grant two minutes to the gentlelady from California, Ms. Lofka.
Gentlelady is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to reauthorizing FISA Section 702 without meaningful reform.
At a time when the Trump administration is building a sweeping surveillance apparatus, trampling civil rights and disregarding the rule of law, Congress should be strengthening oversight, not rubber-stamping warrantless surveillance.
If the government wants to search in Americans' private communications, it must get a warrant.
That is what the Constitution requires and is what the American people demand.
Yet, once again, our Speaker is trying to block debate and deny a vote on a warrant requirement.
Instead, we're trying to jam through another extension of warrantless surveillance without meaningful reforms.
I've opposed this abuse under both Republican and Democratic administrations, and I oppose it today.
Congress should reject this bill and take up meaningful reform, including my bipartisan Government Surveillance Reform Act introduced with Representative Davidson, along with Senator Wyden and Senator Lee in the other body.
We do not have to choose between national security and constitutional rights.
That is a false choice.
We can protect the country and protect Americans' constitutional right to privacy.
Congress should do both.
Oppose this bill so we can get meaningful reform.
I yield back.
Gentlelady Yelts.
Gentlemen.
We reserve.
Reserves.
Gentleman from Ohio is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, we reserve.
Gentlemen from Ohio Reserves.
General from Maryland.
I'd like to recognize the distinguished gentleman from New York, Mr. Nadler, for two minutes.
Gentleman is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, Pfizer Section 702 can be a powerful tool against foreign threats, but without significant guardrails against abuse, it is also a massive threat to the privacy and civil liberties of all Americans.
Meaningful Reform Needed00:10:42
That is why I must oppose this legislation.
I have worked for many years in a bipartisan fashion to include major forms to Section 702, and I was looking forward to working with my colleagues again to strengthen these protections during this reauthorization.
But the new provisions in this bill are simply a fig leaf and do not represent real reform.
In particular, the supposed new warrant requirement is nothing more than a restatement of current law and completely misses the point of reform.
It is already unlawful to target the communications of Americans under Section 702.
That is not the problem.
The problem is what to do with the massive amounts of U.S. person information that is swept up along with foreign communications.
The intelligence community is not supposed to search this data except under strict protocols, but we know that these protocols are violated all the time.
The only solution is to require a probable cause warrant if the government wants to search the 702 database for U.S. person information.
That is what this debate is about, and that is the bare minimum demanded by the Fourth Amendment.
The Trump administration's argument appears to be: trust us, but that is not good enough for any administration, and especially not for this administration, which has already shown a shocking disregard for American civil liberties.
Mr. Speaker, we should get this right.
We should work together, as we have in the past, to strike the right balance between security and liberty.
We should put in a probable cause warrant requirement.
Until then, vote no in this legislation.
I yield back.
We reserve.
General from Maryland Reserves.
General from Ohio is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, we reserve.
General from Ohio Reserves.
Recognizing Ms. Jayapol for one minute.
Gentlelady is recognized.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise in strong opposition to this bill to reauthorize FISA with no reforms.
I have long worked on bipartisan reforms that protect the privacy of Americans.
And frankly, I'm sad that some of my colleagues across the aisle who were part of that struggle have caved to Donald Trump.
But the reality is that Americans across the political spectrum out there, outside of Congress, want us to reform FISA so that the government does not spy on them.
That has never been more necessary than right now, as Donald Trump and Stephen Miller openly use domestic surveillance to suppress our rights.
Trump blacklisted Anthropanthropic for refusing to drop its condition that their AI technology never be used to facilitate domestic mass surveillance targeting Americans.
Law enforcement has used American sensitive data to punish women seeking reproductive care.
And ICE has deliberately used data to suppress First Amendment activity.
Why is it so hard for the majority to just assure Americans that the FBI will get a damn warrant to access their sensitive data?
Americans don't want to be spied on.
And I've been consistent on this, pushing Democratic presidents and Republican presidents.
This bill continues to allow FBI to spy on you and offer zero reforms.
Vote no.
Gentleman from Maryland.
We reserve.
General Reserves, General from Ohio is recognized.
We reserve.
General from Ohio Reserves.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Key point is this.
Under this bill, FBI agents can still collect, search, and review Americans' communications without any review from a judge.
And that's the heart of the 14th Amendment, that search warrants have to be based upon probable cause, and you've got to go to a judge to get a search warrant before you can invade the private expectations of the people in their places and in their things.
This bill leaves intelligence agencies in charge of policing their own compliance with the law.
Asking Kash Patel to self-report his abuses to Tulsi Gabbard does nothing to protect the civil liberties of Americans.
That's not how our Constitution was designed.
The whole reason we have the courts involved is to make sure that the executive branch doesn't get to be its own check and balance against itself.
We reserve.
I think one of the reasons they attacked Mr. Patel Siddharth much is because crime is down in the country.
He's actually doing his job.
I think probably another reason they'd like to attack the director of the FBI is because he's the guy who uncovered what they were doing 10 years ago.
When he was a staffer here on the House Intelligence Committee, it was Kash Patel who told us that the dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign was a bunch of garbage.
And yet that's exactly what Mr. Comey used for the other part of FISA, Title I, to go get a warrant to spy on the other party's campaign.
Maybe that's why they like to attack Director Patel so much, but I think he's bringing down crime in our country, and I applaud him for that.
With that, we reserve.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Well, Kash Patel has been using government resources to chauffeur his girlfriend all over the country.
Then, when it was learned by the press that he was doing that, there was an article about it.
And when he got mad about it, rather than say, well, yeah, maybe there is a problem using an FBI SWAT team to shepherd my girlfriend around the country, instead of changing the policy, he decided to go after the reporter and search the databases of the FBI.
This is why we are debating FISA.
So if you need any more vivid demonstration of the danger of allowing law enforcement officials to govern themselves and to regulate whether or not they're violating the Constitution, check that out.
Okay?
We may disagree a lot about this FBI director's record.
That's not directly relevant to this point.
Say you trust him.
We don't, but we know you haven't trusted other people in the office before.
Let's legislate in a way that's consistent with the Constitution of the United States.
We reserve.
We reserve.
Gentlemen Reserves.
Gentlemen from Maryland.
We are prepared to close.
The gentleman is recognized.
Mr. Speaker, the reason why we have to hold fast to the Constitution is precisely because we are all imperfect beings.
I stood strongly for FISA 702 last time without the necessity of a search warrant because of all the reforms that I believed that the Biden administration would engage in, and they faithfully engaged in them.
Now the Trump administration is in, and President Trump came and dismantled all of the safeguards we put in and just chased the watchdogs out of the FBI.
And that's why we must stick very closely to the Constitution, as my good friend, the chairman of the committee, argued the last time we debated this and has convinced a lot of people that we need to stick to the Constitution.
I'm sorry we're not on the same side today.
The key point is we do not trust government officials to regulate themselves.
That's why law enforcement officers across the country, FBI, have to go to a judge to get a Fourth Amendment search warrant before they invade somebody's privacy, unless there's an exigency, unless there's an emergency, and we've accounted for that.
We can deal with that problem.
Let's stick with the Constitution.
Chairman Yields.
Gentlemen from Ohio.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
FISA, as we all know, is a critical program.
It is important for our government to understand what bad guys are planning to do to our citizens and to our nation and to have this program in place.
That's why it's critical we reauthorize it.
We have made major changes over the last several years, not just two years ago, but over the last several years.
The Judiciary Committee has been involved in the oversight in making sure this program is done the way it should be done and protecting Americans' liberties.
56 different reforms we put in the last reauthorization bill that, as I said in my opening statement, we know have made a difference.
Today's program is different.
It is different.
And we should reauthorize it because FISA is critical.
Today, there are training and checks on the front end before a search can be done of a U.S. person.
There's transparency for the whole process and how it all works.
There's accountability on the back end if you don't do it right.
And this bill now says that accountability includes criminal penalties if you don't do it right.
So, this is the kind of legislation we need to pass, and we need to pass it soon because they're shutting down the government, the Department of Homeland Security, for what, 74 days now?
And oh, by the way, we do also happen to be in the middle of a military operation in Iran.
So, let's get this done.
With that, I yield back.
Chairman Yields, Mr. Crawford, and the gentleman from Connecticut, Mr. Himes, each will control 15 minutes.
The chair recognizes the gentleman from Arkansas, Mr. Crawford.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I yield such time as I may consume.
I rise in support of S-1318, the Foreign Intelligence Accountability Act.
This legislation makes further reforms to Section 702, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and reauthorizes the authority for three years.
Originally authorized in 2008, Section 702 allows the intelligence community to gather foreign intelligence on foreign targets based overseas.
Targets of 702 are terrorists, hackers, and spies living abroad.
No U.S. citizen anywhere in the world can be targeted under Section 702.
I want to be very clear on this point.
Section 702 is not a backdoor surveillance tool that allows the government to collect and review an American's emails or other electronic communications.
The only U.S. person data collected is if the terrorist, spy, or hacker targeted under 702 is talking to an American or about an American.
In that case, only the communications held in the foreign targets' accounts are collected.
For the government to collect that American's communications, current law already requires the government to get a warrant under different FISA authorities.
Section 702 is one of our country's most important foreign intelligence authorities.
In 2025, 100% of the President's intelligence priorities reported by the NSA were supported by Section 702, and more than one quarter of all NSA reporting contained 702 information.
90% of the synthetic drug disruptions enabled by the CIA were supported by