not only does this bill look to the future, but it also mends acute stressors that we are all feeling today due to our years of federal underinvestment in science and innovation. a conference committee to discuss this, my friends. the america competes act tackles our supply chain vulnerabilities to make more goods in america and surges production of american-made semiconductors, chips, that which we invented here in this nation, and in the 1990's were producing 40% of, a crucial component in everything from cars to computers to medical devices. and the american people are ready, ready for investments that will spur innovative solutions to create jobs across the nation, support american manufacturing, and build a strong and diverse stem workforce ready to address the

challenges we face as a nation. during president biden's state of the union address, he called on congress to get our innovation package to him for signature, so we should be proud, i'm certainly am to be here, as we move to take the next step in this process. there is, frankly, no time to waste in getting competes to the president's desk. as the chairwoman of the subcommittee on research and technology, i am so proud of the range of bipartisan science committee provisions in a have long been championed that are included in this package. . i am especially proud of the nist for the future act. it will ensure they have what they need to be a key part of bolstering our american technology enterprise. a resilient supply chain. small and mid-sized

manufacturers being brought to the table to deliver for america and the american work force that compels them. since michigan's 11th district sent me to congress i have opinion laser focused on bringing innovation economy solutions not only to folks in southeastern michigan but also obviously across the united states. we built a transformative piece of legislation from this this -- from the ground thich ranking member is right. bipartisan. years of work on the science committee to do such legislation. we heard from the science community, we heard from industry, we heard from academia, we heard from other stake holders. they all told us the same thing. don't leave americans behind. don't leave anyone behind based on geography or demographics. bring the scientific research enterprise to all. we're here and we're here with a lot of hardworking people from the science committee staff. we have not had a conference

committee since 2018, albeit for ndaa. many people have not been able to be privy to such an action. and they deserve our gratitude. these are the folks writing the text late into the night based on our corrections. the science committee staff. who work so hard. the science committee members. the united states has long been a beacon of excellence in science and innovation and it is long overdue that we restore federal support for these vital initiatives that we invest now and lead the world. the house and senate approaches may certainly have some differences but we seek the same goal. to deliver for this nation. and i am very confident that we will have a very productive conference process and hope to get the america competes act to president biden's desk for signature very, very soon.

the u.s. has endless potential to compete globally in science and innovation. the america competes act provides the critical resources and tools we need to achieve that. and i look forward to working with my colleagues throughout conference to invest in america's most valuable resource, the talent of our people. with that, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. >> i yield two minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. babin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. babin: i thank the gentleman from oklahoma. madam speaker, last month the house passed the competes act, better known as the concedes act which which was forced through this chamber in a partisan fashion, lacking the policies needed to truly bolster our scientific infrastructure and combat threats from our foreign adversaries. the hard work and the bipartisan collaboration of the science, space, and technology committee

were left in the wake of partisan policy -- politics. the house-passed concedes act let china off the hook, very simply, for failing to contain covid-19. it failed to ban funding to c.c.p.-tied organization. it failed to punish the c.c.p. for its blatant human right abuses. and it failed to strengthen america's competitive edge over china. today we have the opportunity to instruct conferrees to bolster the language and to actually stand up against communist china. that is why i support this motion to instruct. it will ensure that no entities identified as chinese military companies operating in the united states are eligible to receive funds through the new-technology directorate, the supply chain resiliency program that we set up through the manufacturing extension partnership. we must put a stop to communist

china spreading misinformation, stealing our technology, and bolstering its economic advantages while weakening ours. the f.b.i. and the intelligence agencies have continually warned congress about these same threats from communist china. china's investment in development, not in basic research, implies that they are building their technological success on the backs of u.s.-funded basic research. we have even seen the infiltration of chinese influence in our university systems and academia, on several different occasions at the top institutions of america. we must work to ensure that china cannot undermine our open system of research and development. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. babin: let's support scientific discovery, hold our foreign adversaries accountable and let's not waste the american people's time again.

with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from oklahoma, do you reserve? the gentleman from oklahoma reserves. the gentlelady from michigan is recognized. ms. stevens: madam speaker, the ranking member, the gentleman from oklahoma, has given us a motion to instruct, a negotiation that will -- we'll pursue in the conference to come. with that, i would like to yield to the gentleman from new jersey for three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: thank you, madam speaker. we're in a crucial moment in our nation's history and congress has the chance to reinvigorate our economy and ensure that we can outcompete every other nation. the america competes act will put us on a course to lead the pack in creating the strongest and most advanced economy of the 21st century and today's actions move us one step closer to making this legislation a reality. over the past 40 years, america's manufacturing sector has lost market share to economic competitors like china.

this decline in manufacturing coupled with the covid-19 pandemic has led to severe supply chain disruptions across our economy that have raised prices for consumers. as the chairman of the energy and commerce committee i'd like to highlight several important provisions in the america competes act that will help reverse this trend, strengthen our economy, bolster our nation's supply chains and ensure that more critical goods are made right here in the united states. the legislation invests $45 billion in grants, loans and loan guarantees to support supply chain resilience and manufacturing of critical goods, industrial equipment and manufacturing technology right here in the u.s. it also invests $52 billion for the chips for america act, incentivizing private sector investments in semiconductor fabrication. this funding will help elimination disruptions in the supply chain from abroad that have hurt american automaker, medical supply chain companies and manufacturers of heavy machinery.

the bill invests $3 billion to help build a domestic solar manufacturing supply chain so we can aggressively counter china's control of the solar chain that jeep airtize ours energy security interests. the bill also keep ours electric grid secure and resilient in the face of evolving cyber security and physical security threats. madam speaker, the america competes act also improve ours medical product supply chain and strengthens our strategic national stockpile. in the early days of the covid-19 pandemic, there was widespread shortage of essential medicines, medical supplies and some personal protective equipment. this legislation increase ours domestic drug manufacturing base by expanding the use of advanced and continuous manufacturing practices. it also establishes a $1.5 billion supply chain manufacturing pilot program that will help maintain domestic reserve as critical medical supplies. and it creates a $10.5 billion program that awards grants to

states to expand or maintain state strategic stock piles of products essential in the event of a public health emergency. finally, madam speaker, the america competes act will help innovate our wireless supply chain and network security by funding the deployment of cutting edge technology and ensuring that next generation mobile wireless networks and technologies are safe and secure from foreign adversaries. madam speaker, for far too long, america has relied heavily on other nations to manufacture critical goods essential to our economy. that must come to an end as we work together to reinvigorate our manufacturing base and create new good-paying jobs here at home. thank you again and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from michigan is recognized. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. lucas: i yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from

california, ms. kim. mrs. kim: i rise in support of ranking member lucas' motion to instruct. this motion will agree with section 2502 included in new zika which prohibits entities identified as chinese military companies from receiving funds through new technology directorate, the smie chain resiliency program, regional innovation program, or the manufacturing u.s.a. program. in other words, this motion ensures taxpayer dollars spent in this bill do not go toward the chinese communist party. on the science, space and technology committee we spent several months working on a series of bipartisan competitiveness bills that we could have gone to a conference with. unfortunately, with little notice, we voted on a 3,000-page bill that was not bipartisan. did not include strong protections to safeguard u.s. investments from c.c.p., and

provided $8 billion for climate slush fund we have zero oversight over. china has already taken $100 million from. republicans offer several amendments with similar language to that of ranking member lucas' motion to instruct in this rules committee. but unfortunately, the majority did not allow them to be considered on the house floor. the c.c.p. is watching us. so today, we have an opportunity to send a strong, bipartisan, and bicameral message bolstering american competitiveness and national security to ensure we lead in the development and deployment of the technologies of the future. it's imperative we have guardrails such as mr. lucas' motion to instruct in order to ensure these investments do not fall into the hands of the c.c.p. and attain a true, bipartisan, bicameral agreement.

thank you, ranking member lucas, for your leadership on this motion and i yield back. mr. lucas: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma reserves. the gentlelady from michigan is recognized. ms. stevens: the gentlelady yields to the gentleman from oregon for three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. blumenauer: thank you. i think it's worth the wait to bring these important provisions to the floor to work on a path forward and maybe a little hint of restoring regular order. it's important that we invest in innovation for our future and i would note not just the cutting edge, high tech future developments that are so important in my state and in many others that are going to help keep on the front lines. but it's also important to invest in legacy technology, legacy chips. we had the manufacturing supply

chain all over america halt for lack of chips that cost only a few pennys because it wasn't profitable for some to create the legacy chips moving forward. and i hope some of these billions will be invested in opportunities to ramp up that production, it happened very fast and will make a difference from automobiles to microwaves and washing machines. i am proud of work we've done in the ways and means committee with -- under the leadership of richie neal, to develop pro-worker responsive efforts and deal with the chinese challenge. now, because the benefits of trade are broadly understood and spread, but the problems are localized. the impacts often hit individual communities. that's why our provision has a strong trade adjustment

assistance program, sadly expired a year ago, setting us back and leaving people desperately in need of this help out of luck. we have a very strong, carefully crafted provision that will help workers and communities alike with an updated, modernized trade adjustment assistance program. we hear a lot of concerns about china and i share those concerns. our provision -- our provisions are tough on china. we close the de minimus loophole that allows two million packages a day to be imported in the united states directly to our consumers, uninspected, in the main, and evading tariffs. it's time for us to close that de minimus loophole. i note that the chinese give americans $7 of an exemption and ours is $00.

the -- ours is $800. the least we ought to do is close that de minimus loophole. we are dealing with the t.s.p. and m.t.b. to improve global standards and strengthen american manufacturing. the title is supported by afl-cio, alliance of manufacturers, autoworkers, machinists, electricians, people who want to build products in america are advantaged under this. it meets workers' needs. bolsters america's ability to compete and is atubed to what americans want. i look forward to the work with the committee moving this forward and ultimately its passage. thank you and i yield back. ms. stevens: we thank the gentleman from we thank you for reminding us of legacy chips and thank the previous gentlewoman from california for reminding us

about manufacturing u.s.a. which was proudly started under the obama administration. with that we reserve the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from oklahoma is now recognized. mr. lucas: madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from oklahoma, mrs. bice. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from oklahoma is now recognized for two minutes. mrs. bice: thank you, madam speaker. i rise in support of the motion to instruct from my colleague, a oklahoma delegation member, mr. lucas. safeguarding our national security, improving our supply chain resiliency, and bolstering american innovation are things that we can all agree on. however, in the competes act, democrats took these problems and drafted ineffective partisan policies in response. as a member of the house committee on science, space, and technology, we have previously advanced strong legislation to combat these vary issues. on top of this, when this legislation came to the house floor for a vote in february, republicans in the house were

denied the opportunity to provide input on these important issues through the restrictive processes of the majority. while over 600 amendments were submitted, less than half were made in order by the rules committee. of the 600, there was a number that would have taken steps to address the ever-growing threat we face from the chinese communist party and their affiliated companies operating in the united states. this motion to instruct will ensure that the critical investments we are making in america's in -- and america's innovation don't fall into the hands of our foreign adversaries. democrats' failure to include similar provisions in the competes act exifrmify their -- exemplify their continued weak policies against china. it's common sense that u.s. taxpayer dollars should not be lining the pockets of the chinese communist party. and instead, should be used to

strengthen our industries here at home. investing in american companies will strengthen the economy while keeping the nation safe. this should not be a partisan issue, madam speaker. i encourage the adoption of the motion, and i yield back the balance. mr. lucas: madam speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: thank you. the gentlewoman from michigan is recognized. ms. stevens: madam speaker, i yield three minutes to the gentleman from new york. >> thank you. i thank the gentlewoman from michigan for yielding the time. madam speaker, we find ourselves in a competition to lead in the 21st century, and that is a competition that the united states cannot afford and if we do what we should do here will not lose. mr. meeks: a month ago, vladimir putin and xi jinping thought america was in the decline, that america could no longer lead the world, and that they could,

therefore, simply overwhelm smaller states. they believe that they could undermine the rules-based order whenever they chose. well, this incredible global coalition, biden getting us together, working with our allies that president joe biden has put together to condemn russia and support the ukrainian people has proven that their assertion is absolutely wrong. but the events of the past month have underscored the position to have america meet these challenges. therefore, it's absolutely critical that congress get h.r. 4521 to the president's desk.

it's an investment in science, innovation, and technology, which will allow us to excel for decades, create jobs, jobs for american workers. so i am proud that my bill, the eagle act, serves as the foreign affairs division of america competes. it bolsters our diplomacy to marshal a coalition of states to check the p.r.c.'s aggression, its stealth of technology, gross violation of human rights of which we need to focus on. i know if we put our minds to it, we can work together in a bipartisan and bicameral way to finalize this critical legislation and get it to the president's desk. and we must do it. and that is because our allies

and partners in the indo-pacific are watching. they need our help to bolster international rules, combat the p.r.c.'s coercion, and address shared global challenges like climate change. after what we've seen in ukraine, the people of taiwan are watching to ensure that we deepen our economic ties, strengthen its defense, and create greater space for taiwan globally. hong kongers and uighurs are also watching to make sure we get this done, because they urgently need the refuge protections that we have in competes. they need congress to send a message -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. meeks: that it's genocide and the lack of regard for human rights will not stand. i yield back. ms. stevens: we are lucky to have a chair of the foreign

affairs committee in this congress. with that, madam speaker, i reserve the reminder of the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. lucas: madam speaker, i yield three minutes to the gentleman from arkansas, mr. westerman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arkansas is recognized for three minutes. mr. westerman: thank you, madam speaker. you know, in a pee-wee sports competition, you can make the case that if you're competing, you're winning. but when it comes to global standing, energy independence, and economic security, there are no participation trophies. our goal can't be to just compete. we have to dominate, because if we're not winning in this area, we're losing. and if america loses, the world loses. unfortunately, this so-called competes act will place america on the loser's bench. i'm baffled while at a time when gas prices are skyrocketing because of president putin's war in ukraine this bill is focused

on a blind green energy political agenda when america needs a rational domestic energy plan that results in reliable, affordable, and clean energy. our constituents are paying almost $5 a gallon to fuel their cars. yet, i'm hearing my democratic colleagues suggest the solution is just to buy an electric vehicle. what a slap in the face to thousands of hardworking men and women that president biden put out of their jobs by canceling pipelines and shuttering american mines while turning to international adversaries like russia, china, iran, and venezuela to solve the energy and mineral crisis he created. no, madam speaker. if we really want to win, we must unleash the full power of american energy and mineral development by processing permits, issuing leases, streamlining the regulatory process and giving our own homegrown industries the ability

to use our american resources. we can and we will do that safer, cleaner, and faster than anyone else in the world. where china uses child and slave labor to mine minerals that are vital to batteries and computers, we can use sfait of the art -- state-of-the-art technology to access those minerals that are right here in the u.s. while russia controls oil rights and leverages it, we can produce energy for our own people and be a net exporter to our allies. we have no other option than to win. i urge my colleagues to give americans the power to develop, innovate, and unleash our full potential. democrats' strategies are proven. if you look around, they're proven to be losing strategies. america can't afford higher prices and more incompetence. let's begin to put an end to the

madness by passing this motion to instruct. i encourage that and i yield back. mr. lucas: i reserve the balance of my time, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from michigan is recognized. ms. stevens: the gentlewoman from michigan would like to inquire of the balance of the time, the remainder of the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from michigan has 13 3/4 minutes remaining. ms. stevens the gentleman from oklahoma -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma has 15 minutes remaining. the gentlelady is recognized. ms. stevens: as the gentleman from arkansas reminds us, we are very proud in michigan to be the destination where the combustion engine was invented and innovated and we are very proud to be the destination where the electric vehicles are manifesting and innovating. with that, i'd like to yield to the gentleman from the commonwealth of virginia for three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for three minutes. mr. beyer: thank you, madam speaker, very much. i confess, i cannot connect my

friend from arkansas's comments with this motion to instruct. but i won't take any time to refute these things because manufacturing has been a core strength to the american economy for the decade long decline in manufacturing jobs has cut off a pathway for americans. this bill will be a landmark investment in manufacturing in clean technology, own vagus that will -- innovation that will preserve and create jobs across america. it will drive long-term economic investment. our prices for so many consumers have been pushed. this bill will bolster supply chains, ramp up manufacturing in critical -- for critical components like u.s. semiconductors, and help build

americans' own family resilience. and the national secured data service act will allow agencies to get data collected through surveys, federal program associations to advance evidence-based policymaking. this will be the great boom for artificial intelligence and machine learning. also in the competes act is an amendment i co-sponsored with representative tra man to in -- trahan to create investment for infusion. the bottom line gives us, the u.s., the competitive edge to maintain a global leadership in innovation and research. madam speaker, i'm not sure why my republican friends felt the need to offer this motion in the first place. of course, we all understand that the essential understanding -- the essential subtext of the competes act has been to strengthen our competitive position versus communist china or to restate my friend from arkansas, to put us in the dominant position to

compete against communist china. of course, nothing in this landmark initiative in american research, in american innovation, american innovation, american artificial intelligence, american chips will not be transferred to the p.r.c. if this is meant to show that republicans are tougher on china than democrats, it's silly and untrue. together, we will fight china's human rights abuse, we will fight its cheating on trade, the dick at that torial government. and the america competes act gives us the strength to do that today. with that, madam speaker, i yield back. ms. stevens: with that, we reserve the remainder of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. lucas: i yield five minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. mccaul. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for five minutes. mr. mccaul: thank you, madam speaker. i want to thank the gentleman from oklahoma. the chinese communist party poses a generational threat to

the united states and our freedom-loving allies around the world. they're brutally oppressing their own people. they're committing genocide against ethnic and religious minorities. they're expanding their military reach and carrying out territorial aggression against their neighbors. we cannot wait any longer to address these issues. i stand before you, madam speaker, and quite frankly, disappointed. we had a great opportunity here, and this bill that passed the house is not the bill. i am very hopeful we can get to a good place in our conference committee. unfortunately, the democrat leaders chose not to work with republicans to pass a substantive and meaningful bill to counter this malign influence. instead, they jammed the partisan competes act through the house. the competes act, in my judgment, is a trojan horse filled with unserious, dangerous, and wasteful provisions.

those provisions include fringe progressive priorities like $8 billion worth of taxpayer money into an unaccountable u.n. slush fund. this u.n. slush fund has already provided at least $100 million directly to china, a country that this congress, former republican administration and current democrat administration, have all agreed is committing genocide. in fact, what's worse, the province, get this money to make solar panels in the province where they commit genocide itself. that's not good that's not good. secretary kerry admitted before the committee that they're using slave labor to make these products like solar panels and batteries that could be used by this u.n. fund. in effect the bill would fund

their slave labor, prop up their forced aabortions, we tried to stop this from happening, to stop u.s. taxpayers from funding slave labor, in my motion to recommit. shockingly, we were outright rejected by the democrats. the motion to recommit prohibited money going to slave labor, genocide and every democrat voted against that measure. this is a test of our time. so i remain the eternal optimist and hopeful that this conference process will be able to rectify these glaring issues as i've outlined. but we can start today by supporting this motion that will block billions of dollars from going to the c.c.p. military p.o.a. companies and human rights abusers. congress owes it to the american people to pass a bill that takes this threat seriously. and that includes tough export controls, outbound investment screening and funding for the

chips for america act which i introduced to give us the competitive edge, bring manufacturing to the united states to make advanced semiconductor chips and protect our national security at the same time. this is vitally important to our national security. and it keeps critical u.s. technology out of the hands of the chinese military like hypersonics. ensures u.s. taxpayers are not subsidizing their genocide. so with that, i urge my colleagues to support this motion to instruct. i hope we can all work together in a bipartisan manner on what could be the most important legislation of this congress. with that, madam speaker, i yield back. mr. lucas: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from michigan is recognized. ms. stevens: i join the ranking member in being optimistic because we are in a conference committee, negotiating the america competes act and we will get this chips legislation done proudly, i've led 29 democrat, 9

republicans in endorsing the chips act legislation. so it will be bipartisan. it will get done for the american people. and we will solve some of our supply chain woes. with that, madam speaker, i'm delighted to recognize my colleague, the gentleman from new york, for three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> i am proud of the work that has been done to address investment, investment in research, investment in work force, investment in manufacturing. mr. tonko: it is so important that we are now investing in research as the competes act requires so that we create the next generations of product line and chips. it is important to invest in that pipeline of workers that will have those precision

oriented skills in an innovation economy that requires such precision. it's important that we retrofit our manufacturing sectors so as to compete and compete effectively. i am impressed by the fact that we have taken the strengths of so many committees and brought them into the forefront of competes to make certain that we have invest in the chips for america act. i have industries for microelectronics and certainly the semiconductor industry that are hosted in the 20th congressional district that i'm honored to rep. they deserve and they require, more importantly, a partnership with the federal government, whose resources will be there with the passage of this bill as we bring together a consensus. we will invest in that $52 billion worth of investment for the chips industry, the chips for america act. we'll make certain that a bill that i authored, the

microamerica act, is incorporated in the context of competes. that will complement the provisions in chips to make certain we accelerate early stage electronics research to feed into the semiconductor secondnology center. so important to have the cutting edge investment so we with can lead the world in innovation and making certain also that we promote strong global leadership by positioning the interests and the values of our united states, not china, to win on the world stage, including with strong action to hold the p.r.c. accountable for its trade abuses which hurt u.s. workers and for its human rights violations. the america competes act will elevate american leadership in the global arena, putting diplomacy first, strengthening our alliances, combating unfair trade practices and standing up for our national values. competes act ensures that american goods are made in america by american workers and boost competition addressing supply bottlenecks,

strengthening u.s. manufacturing and lowering those kitchen table costs. this is a measure that is all inclusive. it's the boldest, strongest statement on competitiveness for america. it is the great strength of competes that i hope will carry us now into an innovation economy with the work force, prepared to go, research investment that gives us the vision and tethers that vision into future product lines and chips development and that will allow for us to strengthen our manufacturing partnership. they require that assistance, they require our partnership. with that, i yield back. ms. stevens: madam speaker, we reserve the remainder of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. lucas: i yield three minutes to the gentleman from ohio, mr. chabot. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. chabot: i rise today to strongly support mr. lucas' motion to instruct conferrees on the america competes act.

the house-passed version of the bill should really have been called, as a number of my colleagues have mentioned, the american concedes act. democratic leadership cobbled this legislation together from mostly partisan bills without republican support. in stark contrast to what our colleagues in the senate did. as ranking member of the asia and pacific subcommittee which has jurisdiction over china, i'm deeply disappointed by the partisan nature and substance in many ways of this house-passed bill. competing with china should not be a partisan issue. on every front, the chinese communist party is aggressively challenging the free world in our belief that open societies and free markets and yes rule of law are the way to a prosperous and equitable civilization. after decades of inaction it's time to re-evaluate our basic approach toward engagement with

china. the democrats' bill doesn't do that. when republicans attempted to amend the bill to make it bet, the democrats rejected virtually every one of those attempts. i'd like to highlight two particularly concerning omakes from the house -- omissions from the house bill. we should have adopted provisions to modernize and strengthen our relationship with taiwan, which by the way got bipartisan support in the house. excuse me, in the senate. second, we should also have used the opportunity to advance strong export control policies to ensure that our critical technologies do not advance the p.r.c.'s own drive for technological supremacy. moving forward as we seek bridge the gap between the house and senate bills, let's have these three priorities in mind. first, the c.c.p., the chinese communist party, is an adversary. no amount of cajoling or diplomacy is going to get them to drop their hedge monic

ambitions. they want to be the top dog. second, the legislation must not include irrelevant pet prompts like money for the u.n.'s climate slush fund. and third, at a bare minimum, we must ensure that any new technology or grant funding do doesn't end up going to china. a bill aimed at competing with the chinese communist party that simultaneously funds their military modernization simply makes no sense. mr. lucas' motion to instruct would go a long way toward making sure that american tax dollars don't go to fund the chinese communist party. therefore i urge my colleagues to support it and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma reserves. the gentlewoman from michigan is recognized. ms. stevens: i'm proud to yield three minutes to the gentlelady from texas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from texas is recognized for three minutes.

ms. jackson lee: i thank the gentlelady from michigan. i thank her for her leadership along with my colleague from texas, congresswoman johnson who chairs the science committee, but the many, many committees who have worked on the competes act. as an alum of the house science committee and member of the homeland security committee, i could not be more ecstatic for america. for america. for houstonians. for texans. and to take the words of president biden that is said to us in his comment on the competes act, it is transformational investment in our industrial base as well as research and development. it will help drive not only the american economy but the global economy. it will in fact bring more manufacturing jobs back and yes, we'll use the terminology, it will re-imagine not only the midwest but it will re-imagine the southwest. the east, the west, the north and the south. it'll re-imagine opportunities for young people. and the chips we've been waiting

for as indicated by the gentlelady from michigan, i know we'll have the opportunity to really join in in a bipartisan way in conference for something that nobody disagrees with. in addition, this ugly thing called the supply chain. that for a moment clogged the system, raised the prices, which are still -- have not yet been stabilized. we will have the opportunity to address that question as well by unclogging the seaway, by investing with the infrastructure bill in ports, and getting products where they need to go. let me also suggest that we'll be able to build other companies, smaller company, small businesses will improve or be able to result in more investment. the same time, this bipartisan legislation will create opportunities for the next generation and the next generation. and i hope as well that minority businesses, minority scientist, historically black colleges, will have the opportunity to be part of the competes act which i

know that they will. this idea that we have a distance between us as republicans and democrats has to be closed. this is an american bill. that is a bill to say to china that we're not going to take sitting down the unfair competition that you exert on many of the inventions that actually are made right here in the united states. take the age-old internet and what thy china has done in many instances. i rise to support again the competes act and going to conference and at the same time recognize that any issue dealing with china and the chips, dealing with semiconductor, will be addressed in conference and as well, we will get the job done, it is transformational and we could do in less than to invest in the great mountain of research and development in this nation. i ask my colleagues to support the competes act, ultimately, and to work with conference as we go forward on this

legislation. with that, i yield back my time. ms. stevens: madam speaker, we reserve the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. lucas: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from nebraska, mr. smith. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. smith: i rise in support of the motion to instruct conferrees. i welcome this opportunity to reck reconcile the differences between the house and senate bills. this is an opportunity to finally hold china accountable and i hope we get to a strong work product that we can be proud of. the house version of this bill, the competes act, truly is a nonstarter for house republicans, no surprise. for both sides of the senate as well and actually for the american people, that's my concern. while it was messaged as legislation to combat the chinese communist party's predatory practice, the trade provisions in house bill did little to level the playing field with china, adding hurdles that would hurt american consumers and small businesses.

instead, that bill actually discourages work during a work force shortage by expanding and delinking the trade adjustment assistance from new trade opportunities. it adds red tape and narrows eligibility of trade programs like g.s.p. and m.t.b., these are relief measures we know help small businesses and manufacturers in the marketplace. the bill also exacerbate ours supply chain crisis by making unvetted changes to the de minimus rule and it also fails to address the administration's lackluster efforts to compete with china in the indo pacific and around the world. the senate's bipartisan approach, while imperfect, addresses china. it promotes small businesses, businesses of all sizes across our country and more than anything it empowers american consumers right here at home. it offers a clean renewal of m.t.b. and retroactively ex-tandz g.s.p. and expands the

process with rhett are activity and does not include the green new deal wish list. let's work together on a final product that holds chi ma accountable. i reiterate my support, and urge my colleagues to do the same. thank you and i yield back. mr. lucas: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. stevens: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from michigan reserves. the gentleman from oklahoma. mr. lucas: we have no further requests for time, we are prepared to close and i believe i have the right to close so i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from michigan is recognized. ms. stevens: we're prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. stevens: madam speaker, i move to yield back and close time on debate. we have heard today, madam speaker, a commitment to act, a commitment to move into a conference, a commitment to get the america competes act done

for the united states. chips act funding, investing in scientific research and on. this is an exciting moment in this chamber. with that, madam speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. i close debate. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. lucas: madam speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. thank you, madam speaker. and i thank my colleagues for their words of support in this motion. as i have said when we began this debate, we have a once-in-a-generation chance to strengthen u.s. science and technology and secure a place in the global economy. the science committee has passed strategic bipartisan legislation to do just that. our bills double our investment in critical research and technology. they are a strong commitment to america's technological development. there's no question that our bills should be the core of the

final conferenced legislation. we can't afford to salute these critical policies with partisan poison pills and throw away our deliberate, strategic approach in favor for a one time spending spree in the competes act. competes is empty, unfocused spending. the science committee has passed targeted, bipartisan investments in research and development -- research and technology. they will have a stronger economy, a more secure homeland. i urge my colleagues to support that approach and to support guardrails to ensure that our taxpayer investments aren't going to the communist leadership in china. that's why this motion is so important. this isn't a partisan issue. it's been a part of senator schumer's legislative text on competition from day one. that's because this is basic,

commonsense policy. i can't imagine that any of our constituents would disagree with that. so i encourage my colleagues to pass this motion, and i yield back the balance of my time, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: all time for debate has expired. without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to instruct. the question is on the motion to instruct. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. mr. lucas: madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. ms. stevens: madam speaker, i ask for a recorded vote, please. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from michigan is recognized. ms. stevens: madam speaker, i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to section 3-s of house resolution 8, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, this 15-minute vote on the motion to instruct will be followed by five-minute votes on the motion to recommit on h.r. 6833 and passage of h.r. 6833,

if ordered. this will be a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from wisconsin seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mrs. lisa mcclain of michigan's 10th district, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mrs. mcclain will vote aye on the motion to instruct.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. beyer: as the member designated by mr. trone, i inform the house that mr. trone

will vote yes on the motion to instruct. as the member designated by ms. newman of illinois and mr. suozzi of new york, form frm these members will vote no on the -- i inform the house that these members will vote no on the motion to instruct.

the speao tempore: what purpo does the geleman from inaee recognitio the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from indiana seek recognition? mrs. walorski: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. baird of indiana, i inform the house that mr. baird will vote yea on the motion to instruct.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman seek recognition? mr. jeffries: men minnesota chairwoman eddie bernice johnson, chairman scott and representative wilson, i inform the house that these members will vote no on the notion instruct.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. trone of maryland -- no. by mr. yarmuth of kentucky, mr. kind of wisconsin, i inform the house that these members will vote no on the motion to instruct. and as the member designated by ms. manning of north carolina i inform the house that ms. manning will vote yes on the motion to instruct. i inform the house that mr. trone of maryland has decided to vote no on the motion to instruct. contrary to earlier instruction.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> thank you, madam speaker. as the member designated by ms. salazar of florida, i inform the house that ms. salazar will vote yea on the motion to instruct. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from utah seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. owens and mr. curtis from utah, i inform the house that mr. owens and mr. curtis will vote yea on the motion to instruct.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. cawthorn of north carolina, i inform the house that mr. cawthorn will vote yes on the motion to instruct. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by congress member espaillat, i inform the house that mr. espaillat will vote no on the motion to instruct. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. carter: as the member designated by mr. taylor of texas, mr. taylor will vote yes

on the motion strowct. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by congressman wilson and congresswoman mace, both of south carolina, they will both vote yes on 4521. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new york seek recognition? >> as the member designated by jamaal bowman, pursuant to house resolution 965, i inform the house that he will vote no on the motion to instruct.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. mo brooks, i inform the house that mr. brooks will vote yes on the motion to instruct.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek

recognition? >> as the member designated by representatives jayapal and harder, i inform the house that these members will vote aye on the motion to instruct. as the member designated by ms. sanchez, i inform the house that ms. sanchez will vote no on the motion to instruct. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from mississippi seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. lamalfa of california, i inform the house that mr. lamalfa will vote yea on the motion to instruct.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. waltz of the state of florida, i inform the house that mr. waltz will vote yea on the motion to instruct. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by representative billy thompson, he votes yes on h.r. 4521.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. kinzinger of illinois, i inform the house that mr. kinzinger ville -- will vote yea on the motion to instruct. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. albio sires and ms. ann kirkpatrick, i inform the house that these members will vote yes on the motion to instruct. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. bilirakis of florida, i inform the house that mr. bilirakis will vote yea on the motion to instruct and madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. comer of kentucky, i inform the house that mr. comer will vote yea on the motion to instruct. thank you.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from delaware seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by ms. degette of colorado, i inform the house that ms. degette will vote no on the motion to instruct.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. pete sessions of texas, i inform the house that mr. sessions will vote yea on the motion to instruct. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by representatives kahele, mor van and -- mrvan and strickland, i inform the house that these members will vote yes on the motion to instruct. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by michele steele of california, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that congresswoman steele will vote yes on the motion to instruct. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> as the member designated by ms. speier, i inform the house that ms. speier will vote no on the motion to instruct.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. crist and lawson of florida, i inform the house that mr. crist and lawson will vote yea on the motion to instruct. as the member designated by ms. roybal-allard of kale, i inform the house that ms. roybal-allard will vote nay on the motion to instruct. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. krishnamoorthi of illinois, i inform the house that mr. krishnamoorthi will vote yes on the motion to instruct. moti t inst.wil votes oe

e speakeproemre: the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. joyce of ohio, form frm mr. joyce -- i inform the house that mr. joyce will vote yea on the motion to instruct.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. evans: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. thompson of mississippi, want to make a correction in my vote. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, i inform the house that mr. thompson will vote no on h.r. 4521.

-- pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. thompson will vote no on h.r. 4521.

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 351, the nays are 74. the motion is adopted. without objection, a motion to reconsider is laid on the table. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the unfinished business is the question on agreeing to the motion to recommit on h.r. 6833, offered by the gentleman from indiana, mr. bucshon, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. the clerk will redesignate the motion. the clerk: motion to recommit on h.r. 6833, offered by mr. bucshon of indiana. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on agreeing to the motion to recommit. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house

proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. joyce of ohio, i inform the house that mr. joyce will vote yea on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. pallone: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. sires and mrs. kirkpatrick, i inform the house that these members will vote no on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> thank you, mel. as the member designated by ms. salazar of florida, i inform the house that ms. salazar will vote yea on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> as the member designated by representatives harder, sanchez and jayapal, i inform the house that these members will vote no on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek

recognition? >> as the member designated by congresspeople mace and wilson of south carolina, they will both vote no on 8833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. evans: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. thompson of mississippi, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. thompson will vote no on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from indiana seek recognition? mrs. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from indiana seek recognition? mrs. walorski: as the member designated by mr. baird of indiana, i inform the house that mr. baird will vote yes on the motion. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. kind of wisconsin, mr. yarmuth of kentucky, mr. suozzi of new york, mr. trone of maryland, ms. manning of north carolina, ms. newman of illinois,

mr. krishnamoorthi of illinois, i inform the house that these seven members will vote no on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from utah seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. owens and mr. curtis from utah i inform the house that that mr. owens and mr. curtis will vote yea on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from delaware seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by ms. degette of colorado, i inform the house that ms. degette will vote no on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. pete sessions of texas, i inform the house that mr. sessions will vote yea on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by congress member espaillat, i inform the house that congress member espaillat will vote no on the motion to

recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. comer of kentucky, i inform the house that mr. comer will vote yea on the motion to recommit. madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. bilirakis of florida, i inform the house that mr. bilirakis will vote yea on the motion to recommit. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new hampshire seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. cuellar, i inform the house that mr. cuellar will vote no on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. taylor of texas, i inform the house that mr. taylor will vote yes on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for

what purpose does the gentlewoman from new york seek recognition? >> as the member designated by jamaal mow bouman, i inform the house that he will vote no on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. cawthorn of north carolina, i inform the house that mr. cawthorn will vote yes on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> as the member designated by ms. speier, i inform the house that ms. speier will vote no on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by congresswoman mace of south carolina and congresswoman wilson of -- congressman wilson of south carolina, i inform the house that they will vote yes on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida seek recognition? ms. wasserman schultz: as the member designated by mr. crist of florida and mr. lawson of florida and ms. roybal-allard of california, i inform the house that that all three of these

members will vote nay on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from wisconsin seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by ms. mcclean of michigan's 10th district, i inform the house that ms. mcclean will vote aye on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by representatives moran, strickland and kahele, i inform the house that that these members will vote no on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by michele steelee of california, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that congresswoman steele will vote aye on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> as the member designated by chairwoman eddie bernice johnson, chairwoman scott and representative wilson, i inform

the house that these members will vote no on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. lamalfa of california, i inform the house that mr. lamalfa will vote yea on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. mo brooks, i inform the house that mr. brooks will vote yea on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. kinzinger of illinois, i inform the house that mr. kinzinger will vote yea on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. waltz of the

state of florida, i inform the house that mr. waltz will vote yea on the motion to recommit.

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 197, the nays are 225. the motion is not adopted. again, the yeas are 197, the nays are 225. the motion is not adopted. the question is on the passage of the bill. those in favor say aye.

those opposed, no. the ayes have it. >> madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana. >> i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to section 3-s of house resolution 8, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman rise? >> as the member designated by mr. cawthorn of north carolina, i inform the house that mr. cawthorn will vote no on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. pallone: as the member designated by mr. albio sires and ms. ann kirkpatrick, i inform the house that these members will vote yes on h.r.

3617. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from indiana seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. baird of indiana, i inform the house that mr. baird will vote no on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. kind of wisconsin, mr. yarmuth of kentucky, mr. suozzi of new york, mr. trone of maryland, ms, ms. newman of illinois, mr. frish frish -- from krishnamoorthi of illinois, i inform the house that these seven members will vote yes on h.r. 3617. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from utah seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. owens and mr. curtis of utah, i inform the house that mr. owens and mr. curtis will vote yea on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. thompson of

mississippi, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. thompson will vote yes on h.r. 6833. >> manufacture manufacture ms. steele will vote no on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from pennsylvania seek reck nying? >> as the member designated by ms. speier, i inform the house that ms. speier will vote yes on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. joyce of ohio, i inform the house that mr. joyce will vote nay on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by representative harder, sanchez and jayapal, i inform the house that these members will vote aye on h.r.

6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> thank you, madam speaker. as the member designated by ms. salazar of florida, i inform the house that ms. salazar will vote nay on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new york seek recognition? >> as the member designated by jamaal bowman, i inform the house that he will vote yes on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. waltz of the state of florida, i inform the house that mr. waltz will vote nay on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from delaware seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by ms. degette of colorado, i inform the house that ms. degette will vote yes on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from mississippi seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. lamalfa of california, i inform the house that

mr. lamalfa will vote yea on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. crist of florida, lawson of florida, roybal-allard of california, i inform the house that all three of these members will vote yea on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from mississippi seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. lamalfa of california, i inform the house that mr. lamalfa will vote nay on h.r. 6833. the speaker: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by representatives kahele, mrvan, strickland, i inform the house that these members will vote yes on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. brooks, i inform the house that mr. brooks

will vote nay on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new hampshire seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. cuellar of texas, i inform the house that mr. cuellar will vote yes on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> thank you, madam speaker. as the member designated by mr. pete sessions of texas, i inform the house that mr. sessions will vote nay on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. bilirakis of florida, i inform the house that mr. bilirakis will vote nay on h.r. 6833. and madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. comer of kentucky, i inform the house that mr. comer will vote nay on h.r. 6833. thank you.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> as the member designated by chairwoman eddie bernice johnson, chairman scott and representative wilson, i inform the house that these members will vote yea on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from wisconsin seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mrs. mcclain of michigan's 10th district, i inform the house that mrs. mcclain will vote no on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? ell, irmhe hou tha . paillat llotees on th pas of h.r e speaker pro tempo: for at ppose dthe n from texaseek recnion? . carr: madam ser, as thmb digtey

. taylor o texas, the house that mr. taylor will vote no on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. kinzinger of illinois, i inform the house that mr. kinzinger will vote nay on h.r. 6833. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by members mace and wilson, both of south carolina, they will both vote no on 6833.

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 232, the nays are 193. the bill is passed. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives. madam, i right write to inform you that i have notified texas governor greg abbott of my resignation from the u.s. house of representatives effective today at 11:59 p.m. eastern standard time. it has been a profound honor to represent the people of the 34th congressional district of texas for the last nine years. and my distinct pleasure to serve under your leadership. please let me know how i can be of assistance during this period of transition. signed, sincerely, filemon vela, member of congress.

the speaker pro tempore: the chair will now entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. the gentleman is recognized. mr. payne: thank you, mr.

speaker. i rise today to support the affordable insulin now act. in america, a unit of insulin costs almost $100. i paid $348 for a vial. across the border in canada, it costs $12 for the same insulin. this erroneous price difference causes diabetics to take drastic steps to survive. they ration their insulin to make it last. and some of them stop taking it, days, to save money. these are life-threatening financial decisions. as a diabetic myself, i know the importance of insulin to the daily life. this boot on my foot is not a fashion choice. it is for a diabetic ulcer that i've been fighting for eight months. and have had seven in 10 years. and i am one of the more than 37

million diabetics in america. if we can cap insulin payments to $35 per month, it saves lives. that is why we need the affordable insulin now act. and with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from hawaii seek recognition? mr. case: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. case: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise to commemorate the life of richard roy kelly m.d., a true son of hawaii just lost to us at age 88. he grew up in the why i canky hotels, graduated from stanford andujar vard and practiced in-lue will you. on doc's watch, it expanded into a world famous iconic beach

resort brand, success for any life. but doc did so much more. he pioneered true cultural tourism through which the entire life blood of each property embraces and embodies its special values and place. he led the world trade in tourism council and advised our own tourism and travel caucus and he endlessly loved hawaii and never stopped giving back. richard "doc" kelly, an amazing and unforgettable life from all of us to you and yours, mahalo and aloha. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to bring attention to a dangerous ideology threatening our democracy. white christian nationalism. most members of congress don't even know what it means. but experts from the freedom from religion foundation and the

baptist joint committee for religious liberty have studied it for years and their new report shows this movement was at the heart of the january 6 insurrection. white christian nationalism fuses christianity with a rigid view of civic life. a view that true americans are white, native-born and conservative. on january 6 it was the consecutive tissue that tied disparity groups together and propelled them to action. it's infecting our government. from members of congress and top officials in the previous administration to the wife of a supreme court justice whose messages to the president's chief of staff leading up to the insurrection smacked of white christian nationalism. mr. huffman: thankfully good americans, people of faith and nonbelievers, are standing up to this violent ideology. i call on members of congress to educate themselves about white christian nationalism and reaffirm the separation of church and state. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek

recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. from day one, house democrats have been working with the biden administration to build a stronger and more secure future for the american people. that is why we recently passed the competes act, to fix our national supply chains, boost competition and strengthen u.s. manufacturing. last week i had the opportunity to visit haas automation in my district in oxnard, california. they manufacture over 90% of all-american-made precision manufacturing tools and is the last standing major american manufacturer of the machines that are essential to most manufacturing in america. we are working to ensure american manufacturing companies like haas can continue to compete globally and continue to thrive. ms. brownley: that includes ensuring a level playing field

with foreign competitors and ensuring u.s. manufacturers have access to adequate supplies of essential semiconductor chips. and that is why we must get the america competes act across the finish line. because the success of american manufacturing will lead to the success of american working families. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? mr. carter: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. carter: mr. speaker, i rise today to remember the life of georgia golfing legend jack lumpkin. jack was a master of the game of golf and a pillar of what sea island and glen county is today. when it came to the game, jack was unparalleled in his understanding and knowledge. he spent his life coaching others and was recognized for his teaching ability numerous

times. in 1995, jack was named p.t.a. national teacher of the year and he was named a top 50 golf teacher in america every year since 2000. i will always remember jack teaching students at the first tee box at the golf performance center, which is now known as lumpkin's tee. jack would take his students to where the golf performance center now he would take students to the area where the center now stands because it was blocked from the winds from the ocean. it was jack's ideas that made this center possible. my prayers are with jack's friends, family and those at sea island. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from illinois seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to mark the end of

women's history month and highlight the contributions of women from my community from education leaders like joliet native margaret hey lee who led the chicago's teachers federation to become the largest women's union in the country by 1900 and katherine lucinda sharp of elgin, a founder of the illinois library association who ran the midwest east first library school, to melissa mccarthy whose comeky has graced our clean for decades and businesswomen like mary foot seaman of illinois, who founded a publishing company led entirely by women. these are just a few of the women who have made their mark in our northern illinois community and i'm proud to honor them. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the jop a -- the gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without

objection, the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. kaptur: i rise to applaud the pass aiming of the affordable insulin now and urge the other body to quickly take up the bill. millions of americans depend on insulin every day but too many are forced to ration -- forced to ration or cut back on other essential needs the drug that keep themes ailey. insulin can cost hundreds of dollars a month and the pens used are between $45 and $600. capping the price of insulin at $35 a month means no longer do families have to choose between groceries and rent or their own lives. no longer should a diabetic be forced to ration out injections to ensure they have enough until next month. congress must act to pass the affordable insulin now act. let's save people real money, improve their lives and afford them the dignity they deserve. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut seek

recognition? >> address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. what a great honor for me to be here today and pay tribute to the fighting hornets of east hartford high the girl's team has won the state championship for the state of connecticut for the first time in the school's history. 50 years ago, maureen rogers ushered in modern day girls' basketball at then-penny high school. the crown today is that these young women demonstrated that vision and brought home the state championship to east hartford, connecticut. with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expire. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute, unanimous consent. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute.

ms. jackson lee: mr. speaker, i rise today to remember the dean of this house, congressman don young. and to remember him from a perspective of far-reaching diversity and love of the institution. i want to offer my deepest sympathy to his wife, his family, his extended family, and all of the people of cay and all of the people of the nation. everyone who has offered a word of salute to congressman young, emphasizes his 49 years, but most of all his love of getting the job done. getting something done. and of course when i was having the privilege of being in the chair, mr. speaker, i could always be reminded of that voice, regular order. and often you wanted to just do what don young said. regular order. gavel it down. but again, you did so because of

respect for this institution. i thank him for all the introductions to alaska that he made and really all of the work for the alaskan people no matter who they were. where they lived. in far reaches or in cities. don young represented the state so ably. i'm grate to feel have spent just a small amount of time, two decades, with don young in the house. and he will be remembered and we will be reminded of what love of the institution truly means, unselfish commitment and the commitment to work and get the job done. i salute the late congressman don young. thank you for teaching us how to get the job done. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. under the speaker's announced policy of january 4, 2021, the gentleman from arizona, mr. schweikert is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of

the minority leader. mr. schweikert: thank you, mr. speaker, pro tem. i yield as much time as he may consume to my friend from west virginia. >> thank you. thank you, mr. speaker, members of the chamber. one of the latest partisan games being pushed by the radical left is the call for supreme court justice clarence thomas to recuse himself from certain cases or face impeachment. these demands stem from an email and other digital private communications of justice thomas' wife to and from government officials at the time. if it becomes the standard that an elected official or judge or a commissioner or other government appointees can be attacked because of the views and political actions of a spouse, then everyone is fair game. how many members of the democrat caucus would like to be held accountable for the politics or actions of their spouse? how many governors, state

legislators or judges at any level would be able to withstand an assault based on the beliefs of their husband or wife? mr. mooney: no good will come of this effort. there are those who argue that the radical left wants such a toxic environment. the feeling is that those who wish to radically transform america know that they are facing a harsh verdict from the american people come this november. these activist partisans are willing to literally teleour country into a frenzy of hate, suspicion and personal vendetta, in order to divert attention from the failure of their poll . i pray that the members of the democrat caucus making these extremist demands are ignored and that statesmen can take the lead. but if, once again, the democrat leadership is so beholden to the extremist fringe that they send us into such a fight, you will

not succeed. thank you, my good friend from yea, for the time and i yield back to my -- the gentleman from arizona. mr. schweikert: thank you, mr. mooney. mr. speaker, tonight's going to be a tricky presentation and i want to apologize immediately to those who have to try to, you know, take down our words. but tonight i'm going to actually try to focus on solutions. last week, i spent an hour behind this microphone begging our friends on the left, begging our democrat colleagues, to stop doing much of what they've been doing because we -- and i demonstrated, it's been hurting people. last year was miserable. for the working poor. for the poor. for the middle class. and it's -- in some ways it's our own fault in this body because intellectually this

place has calcified. that's my word of the day. because we see the math, we see the facts, we have folks lay out what's going to happen but because it's already part of, particularly in this case, the left's dogma, we do it any way and then we act surprised here a year later when my community had 10.9% inflation last year. year over year, how many people is that crushing, and now we're seeing some data, this is important. this isn't transer to. a number of the most power. modelers in the economic world in this country are now starting to ring the alarm bells of bolt, we're heading toward a recession and that inflation may now be with us for a decade because of how we've screwed things up in this place. first, this is a as of almost

today. you have goldman sachs now saying 27.5% chance of a recession. not a slowdown. a recession. which means two quarters of negative g.d.p. by the end of this year. citi is at 25%. j.p. morgan still at 15%, which was the numbers from last week. these numbers are skyrocketed. if you and i looked at this three weeks ago it was 9%. does anyone here actually care about people? do you care about working men and women? do you understand what a recession does to people? how long it takes to get your feet back underneath you? let alone the head kick we're giving to the american public with inflation. so here's my goal. i'm going to race through just a boatload of slides here and i'm going to throw out concept after

concept after concept. some of them are marginal. some of them you're going to go, oh, that makes sense. but the point is, there are actually solutions. if the left would ever allow us to offer a genuine amendment in committee. to actually have a genuine discussion and debate. maybe we could change some hearts and minds in this place or just even enlighten some intellect around here. but that isn't what this place does. so let's actually start to walk through the bill that a number of folks are so giddy about today. i am fix sated on diabetes. because of what it does and the misery to parts of my district. i represent a tribal community that is number two as its percentage of population who suffer diabetes. come to the reservation, i'll introduce you to some families i have known where mom has her

feet cut off. but to tout the bill that was passed here today as a solution is an absolute fraud. you do realize the con job that the democrats are touting here, and i'm not sure it's purposeful, i don't think they spent some time understanding. first, you basically created a subsidy bill for big pharma, congratulations. you didn't reduce the price. what you did is created functionally $20 billion of subsidy. to buy down the price of insulin. and you bought it down with a fraud because you're doing -- we're going to pretend that the trump administration, you know, rule in regard to rebates is in effect which was never going into effect. you made magic money again. and at the same time you just took away the pressure we could have done together to actually get a real solution to the price

of insulin. some of that solution could have been something as simple as the co-op that's in construction right now that's saying they're going to bring $30 a vial, $55 a box, which is five vials, of insulin to market a year. if we were doing solutions here, the democrat's bill working with republicans would have been we're going to put it at the stack for licensing and permitting. we're going to put aside some money to make sure that they get their factory up and running in virginia as soon as possible and oh, by the way, this is substantially less expensive. than the subsidized version that's going to cost the society $20 billion and you're handing that to big pharma, which, isn't that amusing? the speech phiing here and the democrats' approach -- the speechifying here and the

democrat's approach to people who can't afford their insulin is to blow up think market, screw up the incentives and screw up the solution. and the solution is coming. does anyone subscribe to something where they read? and you got to understand, we need to go in the whole debate around diabetes, we got to go much, much further. 31% of all medicare spending is diabetes. 33% of all health care spending. understand. in 29 years, the united states is scheduled to have about $112 trillion of borrowed money in today's dollars. 75% of that is just medicare. but if 31% of medicare spending is diabetes, cure it. you go, but david, how would we do that? well, i've been to this floor a dozen times over the last 12 months saying the research is

happen, the research -- early numbers look good. guess what, it succeeded. the phase ones work. now we're on another set of phase ones where they're using crispr to tag stem cell that's become an isolate cell so you can do a bio foundry and it doesn't even need to come from your skin to get the stem cells. meaning if we would get our reimbursement sets straight here, our licensing sets straight here, our incentives lined up, the modelers say in about five years you could actually be rolling out the cure to type i is actually the easy part. it's the cure to type ii which is much more difficult. we have to have a brutal conversation of nutrition support and -- nutrition support that's healthy. encouraging our brothers and sisters in my tribal community, lifestyles and things to be

ready to actually accept the cure its he. th didhe ssidyillorts jus inn. at's goingost $bin. how about if ty h t tt lion and p i into mo the pce get isure t mar itus it's just an a example we don't seem to get our heads around. we've made it so bureaucratic, so expensive that we are incumbent protection racket here. it's not incumbent members of congress, it's incumbent bureaucracies, incumbent business models and the disruptions like this that would end so much misery and also be the single biggest thing we can do to effect the debt -- affect the debt in this country.

we applaud ourselves for voting through a bill that actually will have made things worse. if there's an economist in the room and you walk through saying, well, because you just functionally government subsidized this, you just took away the pricing pressure to actually have the revolution of both the cost and the cure. and i'm begging my brothers and sisters here to think. there is this incredible hope. we've already had this -- they've already had the successes in the phase ones and now the ability to actually tag it, make it so you don't need to be on anti-rejection drugs. think about what it means to the health of the country. and why would i go to diabetes right after showing you that the projections of a recession at the end of this year are skyrocketing? because if you are heading in an approach where you're making a

substantial portion of our population and making them available to participate in the economy, mr. speaker, i'm going throw out a really uncomfortable subject for a second. but i'm the senior republican on joint economics and we've been trying a little side project for almost a year. what makes people poor? what's the real cause of income inequality? and unlike the rhetorical crap virtue signaling that's said around here, we're actually starting to find out there's a lot of things, but health, education, things of that nature, that we can affect are actually major precursors. and then you look at the amount of the population that is in the lower quartiles, that either they or their family or because

they have someone that's horribly sick, substantially because of renal failure or diabetes, my other side of the argument is why this is moral to pursue. it also would end lots of misery. it would actually really help the poor. actually might squeeze down income inequality. it's sort of the trifecta. and yet i will do these presentations on how it works and that it would be amazing for economic growth and if it truly brought more of our brothers and sisters to be able to participate in the economy, it would also be really good for inflation too. and, look, i've done this slide multiple times. i'm trying to sort of explain the mechanisms of, you know, a stem cell and you can now direct, almost like -- think of it as a biofoundry mechanism, sort of like -- you can direct

that stem cell to become an insulin producing cell. and in the previous slide, walk through how you can actually do this in a fashion that it can be almost a factory production. so even beyond the personal ietzed medicine concept -- personalized medicine concept. and why this is so important is we're on the cusp of a revolution to make people's lives so much better, so much healthier. and instead what we've done in this place over the last 12 months is we've set off inflation. we've set off crime. we've set off homelessness because of really, really bad policies. lots of great virtue signaling. there have been beautiful speeches behind these microphones telling you how much we care and how we feel and then the economics are just horrible. so some more of the disruption that i believe would be great for the country, and the technology is already here. we just have to learn to

legalize it. is your ability to wear something on your wrist. this is one of my favorites. i'm just going walk you through a concept. this is a breath biopsy. couple versions of this out there. think it would be a couple hundred dollars at most and you could have functionally a medical lab in your medicine cabinet at home. blow into it. within a couple moments it tells you, hey, guess what? you have a virus. it can then bang off your medical records. order your anti-virals. and maybe lift, or someone can drop it off at your house in a couple hours. would that make your life easier? would that give you more time with your family and faster to get healed? would that help crash parts of the health care costs? remember, 3/4 of that $112

trillion is health care. it's medicare. it's -- health care is what's substantially bankrupting this country. you know what the problem with that technology is? it's illegal. the fact of the matter is you would let this breath biopsy be able to order your anti-virals, allow the algorithm, and the data says the algorithm is more accurate than those of us as humans. i know that just hurt a bunch of people's feelings but if you legalize the technology you could have a disruption of the price of health care. could you make the society, our country, dramatically more efficient. give us more time with our families and be healthy. it would be an economic virtuous cycle and a healthy one. it would just require us around here to actually have to deal with the a.f.c. lanch of lobbyists that -- avalanche of lobbyists that hate this technology. but as i said before, we're sort of kalsified intellectually around here, aren't we?

so now i want to talk about the heresy that's in president biden's budget, and the solutions. first off, how many times you have gotten up here and seen -- the speaker herself, multiple times, tax reform in 2020 was for the rich -- 2017 was for the rich. no, it wasn't. and look. c.b.o., more revenues came in. i mean, corporate tax receipts leaped 75% after we reformed the tax code a couple years ago. the fact of the matter is, what we call receipts in ways and means, revenues as most people will think of coming into the -- of, coming into the government went up dramatically. 2018 and 2019 were our most successful years in modern economic history of poor people

getting less poor. the middle class doing better. income inequality shrinking. food insecurity shrinking. minority populations had the biggest moment ever in u.s. history in getting less poor, getting wealthier. but that income inequality gap shrank because we got the tax incentives correct. but because it was republicans who did it, there's this running away from it and we've seen great, great job, guys. think about what's happened to this country in one year. you are poorer today than you were one year ago. the fact of the matter is the setting off of inflation, god knows some of the other things that have gone on, we're going to touch on them. we're poorer today than we were one year ago. yes, there was covid. but we stood behind these microphones a year ago and said,

you don't want to keep dumping money the way you're doing, you're going to set off inflation, they told us to go jump in a lake. congratulations, they did it. and now some of the economists are telling us, recession by the end of the year, oh, and maybe so years of an inflationary cycle before we can squeeze it out of the system. and once again, if you actually look at the charts, it was actually working women that exploded -- this big movement here, i know this chart may not express it, that type of steep curve increasing is remarkable. just remarkable in what happened after tax reform. and it was actually working women, substantially those from minority populations, that had just remarkable increases in income. and they're the ones that also got crushed during the way we approached the pandemic.

and anyone that tells you, oh, it was this huge giveaway of money -- well, it's sort of amazing because it was the second and the third highest receipt it's, revenues -- receipts, revenues. 2018, 2019. and you got to remember, there was a little bit of a con in 2017 because the expensing went in, you could expense the last quarter before the tax reform. so the fourth quarter, 2017, you could begin expensing. so this actually had some of the economic growth effects pulled into the previous year. i know i'm geeking out a bit. but it continued. one of the reasons we've actually economically held up pretty well is the democrats haven't been able to repeal the 2017 tax reform. and i know this slide's a little hard to see. it was the best one we could put together in our short time frame. but guess what. we crossed over $4 trillion in revenues, in receipts.

and if you go back, think of that. it was only a couple yeerts earlier -- years earlier we were at 3.-- $3.3 trillion. you're understanding, that's like a $700 billion increase in receipts. in a time when the democrats told us we had eviscerated the tax code and gave it all away. at some point the calculator does tell the truth. so back to our earlier thesis. getting the tax system correct is amazing for the economics. but there's the other side of the question i want to ask. how many here believe growth is moral? i will try to argue over and over that economic growth create it's opportunity. and those -- creates opportunity. and those opportunities driven by that growth is moral. and i wish i could just get us to focus on that growth also is

a way we survive the debt bubble that's expanding like an alligator mouth, where here's the size of our economy and here's the scale of the debt. you do understand, c.b.o. basically says in nine years every single year, just our interest payment will be $1 trillion. that's where we're heading. so here's a crazy thought on, if i needed to tap down inflation today, but i wanted to do it by not solely having the federal reserve do monetary policy, which is squeezing cash out of the system. remember, inflation is what? too many dollars chasing too few goods. well, you have the monetary side of inflation pull the dollars out of the economy. the other side is make more stuff. so this year, expensing. and tax reform, it was the

expensing that drove much of the expansion in activity. it goes to 80% this year or next year. excuse me, 80% this fiscal year and then drops down i think to 60% the next year. a mechanism where you add a bonus. say, business, it you're willing to take some of that cash -- if you're willing to take some of that cash functionally out of the system and go invest it in productivity capital, go buy and new a plant, go put in new equipment, do things that will make it so you pay workers more, we make more stuff, because now numbers and dollars divided by numbers of stuff. crazy idea. do a tax adjustment, say, we're going to give you a bonus on your expensing to encourage you to take that money out of liquidity and buy things that make us more productive as a

country. it's a win-win. and it can be a long-term benefit to society. and we've been we're working on this, it may not be brilliant, but it's too few dollars chasing too few goods. so we tell business in america say, take some cash, set it aside, put it into new equipment that makes us more efficient so you could have more goods, more transportation, better supply chain, instead of buying things and shoving them in a warehouse because you're worried the price will go up tomorrow. this is the type of thought experiments, policy, we should be pursuing if you need to knock down inflation but you want to do it by growing as an economy. instead around here, we're going

to sit around on our back sides and let the federal reserve squeeze us out and put many people through months and months and months of recessionnary misery because that's how we're going to knock down inflation. another part of the thought experiment, i have some new areas, if i'm blessed enough to represent in the coming cycle, and we did some polling. and they came back, crime is their number one issue. i went on a ride-along with a sergeant who is a friend and he's showing me neighborhoods saying, you realize the homelessness in these neighborhoods has doubled in a year. doubled. he's explaining to me that someone now can get high for a fraction of the cost they could a year ago. every single one of those are what we call knockoff effects. second degree, third degree effects. you all remember your high

school economics class? you opened up the borders. what did you think was going to happen in my community of phoenix is flooded with markets. as a matter of fact we just had a bust a couple of months ago, there was enough fentanyl to kill every single resident in arizona. so the compassion that this administration and speaker pelosi wanted to show for the border, thank you, because you're killing my neighbors. the homelessness, i don't believe the phoenix market is the only area that is seeing incredible increases in homelessness. the crime, go on the city of phoenix's heat map, click, click, click, you can see expansion of crime and where it's moving. and the number of overdoses. the fact of the matter is, when you screw up a policy, you need to think through the knockoff effects. you screw up the border policy,

how much misery did you bring to society? and remember, we've done a number of presentations, what are the two ways you make the working middle class or the working lower class poorer? inflation, we're doing a great job at that. and you you flood the marketplace with people with similar skill sets. if you're that individual who may not have finished high school but you're a good drywaller, and you're busting your backside and it's hard work, i hung drywall as a young man, we just flooded the marketplace with people with similar skill sets. does anyone around here own a basic economics book sph so let's go to a couple of other things. the principle there is, get the border policy right, because there's this incredible irony. legal immigration for individuals with specific talent sets that we actually need in

this society, you know, the young man who just got his ph.d. at arizona state university and is leaving because the state department's ability to process visas and ability to be immigration has functionally become nonexistent the last two years. but over here, a couple million crossed the border. does anyone see the -- that's the weird irony of the democrats' policies of, they hurt, i don't think they were meant to hurt, i think they had the virtue signaling quality of sounding compassionate but that's not what's happen. let's walk through a couple of things that are actually additional solutions. how many times do we talk about smie chain? and yao seen the latest data. it basically says, and i'm not going to argue with it, i haven't had a chance to break down the numbers, half of inflation is we spent too damn much money.

but half of inflation is second degree knockoff effects in supply chains. so we just did transportation bill. and the transportation bill was substantially green-oriented, very little of the money actually went to roads and bridges. none of it actually went to disruptive technologies. but there's ideas like this where this was some space x engineers who are out raising capital to build this, where you would have autonomous trains. pull a container off, stick it on one of these, the autonomous lorry right underneath it,en a track, drives it to the warehouse it needs to be dropped off at. if you're telling me we have a crisis in truck drivers in the alameda corridor, the ability to use technology, why didn't we incentive size this sort of thing? you want to know what the democrats chose to incentivize in their build back better? wasn't create i have things to

make us more productive as a society. it was ideas like this. in their legislation, it's illegal for the ports to automate. huh? but they just told us that they were trying to fix the supply chains. except for the numbers of giveaway to the unions, they put into their legislation that you can't automate the ports. so on one hand, you have breakthrough technology that says we think we have a way to move these containers. and then the next thing that the brain trust around here does policy wise, but we're going to make it illegal to do the automation that would move the supply chains and that you are telling us is half the inflationary spike. there are solutions. stop putting up these impediments and start embracing the technology to fix the problem.

mr. speaker, may i ask for my time? mr. speaker, may i ask for my time? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has 29 minutes remaining. mr. schweikert: 29 minutes? so in the president's proposal, the democrat's proposals, they went to tax the rich more. the new president biden's budget has, what, 36 new taxes in it? but here's the great irony. ok, so they want to do this one tax where they want to functionally tax unrealized capital or unrealized gains which is a taking, will be ruled unconstitutional but it's an interesting concept. and we want to make a simple proposal that something both republicans and democrats might agree upon. stop subsidizing the rich. we've come here to this floor a couple of times and shown

there's $1.4 trillion every 10 years that the left subsidizes the rich and so what do the democrats do? they say we need to tax the rich more. ok. and then they put in build back better, you can make $800,000 a year and we're to hand you $125,000 of tax credits. not tax deductions. credits. does anyone see the lunacy going on here? so the virtue signaling is rich people aren't paying enough. then over here, we're going to give them $1 trillion plus in subsidies and then they're going to add more in their build back better for more rich people to have more subsidies. it's just infuriating, does anyone actually read this stuff? does anyone own a calculator? and you tart to see the number -- you start to see the number, i have a number of these slides hearing, and -- slides here, and the point is really

simple. if you can afford your fourth $6 million house on a beach somewhere, do you deserve subsidized flood insurance? but all through this government there's items like that where we wink and nod, we say we're going to tax rich people more and then we're handing out massive subsidies. as a republican, i want to cut spending. you say you want more revenues. great. stop putting through the tax code regulatory code these programs, wink, wink, nod, nod, a bunch of subsidies for people who write checks. so, you've had a number of particularly republican, we have come behind the mike stone and said, you canceled key stob pipeline and made it really hard to put new land into production for pulling hydrocarbons out. that's actually not the big

thing that the left did. what the left did is things like this. where the security and exchange commission is functionally -- is adding new rules that if you invest in hydrocarbons, or you're a pension system or these, you're going to have to fill out paperwork to explain your effect on global warming. what are your effects on carbon? they functionally did what we call, they screwed up the capital stat so you could have a natural gas field that was substantially shut down when prices collapsed during the pandemic. it's ready to go but you need a bunch of capital to put it back into production. where do you go to get a loan? democrats did something brilliant. if the goal was to make us much poorer and dependent on foreign countries' hydrocarbons like vrenz way that. -- venezuela. they made it so, we can do the

regulatory side, that's a little obvious, but if we make society no one can get capitol tal to put tease fields in production, they succeeded. and do not let someone try to con you that what you're paying at the gas pump today what you had to pay for your heating bill yesterday, happened because putin's invasion. natural gas prices exploded last september, october. do you remember this room being full of people wanting to talk about how we were going to survive the winter heating bills? that was because of this. it didn't just happen. but my proposal is, ok, i am fascinated with the use of natural gas. our friends on the left, our brothers and sisters on the left, say, but david, you know, yes it may burn about half as --

half the carbon emitting, co-2 emitting as coal but there's methane. well. has anyone -- let's see if i can find this slide. the technology that's out there. to basically gobble up methane. and maybe this works, maybe it doesn't work. but the fact that the technology exists and has been scientifically li proven to work, why -- scientifically proven to work, why wouldn't we do this say, if you can get your natural gas out, because remember, president biden promised we're going to ship lick phi phi -- liquefied natural gas to europe, except the left is going to protest leakage from methane. turns out you can take clay, a copper oxide, kitty litter, think about that. it's a cheap solution to absorb that methane. why wouldn't we bring the brain

trusts around here and say we need the natural gas. desperately. some are worried about the methane bleed. fine. let's find the solution. turns out there may be a really inexpensive one. why wouldn't we invest in this and pursue it? there are solutions. instead around here it's the malthusian economics of let's just shut it down and see how long people are willing to live in poverty and misery. transportation bill again. what's one of the most power. things you can do to move traffic in urban areas and suburban areas? technology. turns out if you care about the environment, and you want to move more traffic, invest in the technology that synchronizes the stoplights that tells you when school is out, so it synchronize, the onramps to a freeway that tell you when an

ambulance is coming. that studies over and over say whether it be an algorithm or a.i. mentioned smart grid system for traffic is one of the most impact. things you can do to clean the air because you move the traffic. we couldn't get anyone willing here to even listen to one of our amendments on the left. about promoting that type of technology. there's a biotech revolution going on around us and substantiallis this happening because of what we did in that 2017 tax reform which moved, exploded the investments. whether it be messenger r.n.a., my fascination with synthetic biology, the stem cells. there are disease after disease after disease, misery after misery, we're about to cure. we know how to cure hemophilia now. we know -- i think we're on the cus of -- cusp of knowing how to curcicle cell apeople -- anemia,

an incredibly painful disease. they're here. this place should be doing everything we can to promote getting those things to market safely and quick aas fast as we can in the miz -- end the misery and by the way it has amazing financial benefits to the economy and our tax base. bringt functiolly -he said, y it'oio l ugricesecsee're pric we'reoing to sayrcity you can hav cin dgs i it ce tha c ou lhey do in rope. but i willo crashhe capital stock onc a, a lot of youre goio d because u'ot goi t g thanext geratnf ce. and this amazing cycle of ces

that are coming goes away. great virtue signaling. the left will tell you they're about to do a bees of legislation to lower drug prices and we all go, yea, because they are too high. but by the end of the decade there's fewer cures and the value goes away. because you didn't remove people from being sick. it's all about curing people. in the misery, help bring those cures to market. personalized medicine, let's legalize it. the fact of the matter is i showed you the wearables, those things. the fact of the matter is, this here should be part of your ability to stay healthy. legalize it. mr. speaker, may i request my time again?

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has 19 minutes. mr. schweikert: forgive me. i've been trying to talk fast, not to chew it up all so, in a couple of the pieces of legislation that passed here, we've put aside boatloads of cash to run wire to rural america. and they deserve to have internet access. i just thought this slide was amusing. but you're actually seeing it happen in ukraine right now. these are a bunch of little kiddies and a satellite dish. the satellite dish stays warm in the winter so it defrosts it self. but the fact of the matter is every inch of north america now has broadband internet. and it's a bunch of satellites that are flying over us. so let me get this straight. in ukraine, they're now using this, the starling, to be able to communicate. but we can't get our brothers and sisters here in the house of representatives to understand

there's a solution to broadband all over the country. they just have to be flying in low earth orbit above our heads. it's here. but instead we're going to turn around and put out billions of dollars of subsidies to put more fiber and more wire in the ground to the middle of nowhere. there is a huge disruption coming. we need to make sure that our regulatory, our policy sets are ready for this. this is another thing that would also dramatically help this coming decade's inflation cycle. researchers, particularly at the university of illinois, have done this remarkable thing and i did a series of presentations a year ago, i'll do this real quick. y'all remember your high school biology class. remember a c-4 plant. plants that they really, really want to carbon to turn into a sugar and grow.

and they accidentally grab an oxygen molecule. and they have to spend all this energy purging that oxygen molecule and go back and try to get a carbon molecule. i know it's a little geeky but it's important to get our heads around. they've come up with a way to tweak the plant so every time -- it always grabs the carbon so it turns it into a sugar. some plants will grow 40% more efficiently on the same land, the same fertilizer, same water. you do realize if that -- just that basic math, it won't turn out this way, but just conceptually, that's like removing every car off the face of the earth. so if our brothers and sisters really care about the environment, they would be running as fast as they can to make -- allow these types of technology to feed the world, feed our country, available. yes, it would be a disruption. but these things exist. the other one i want to give you

is a tax policy. and this is a conceptual one. how many of you have ever heard of a vat tax? a -- v.a.t. tax? a value-added tax? ok. so much for the enthusiasm. a value-added tax is what substantially most of the rest of the world uses. if we're going to have a conversation of we want businesses back in the united states, we want manufacturing back in the united states, we want to take on china, we're going to do taiforts, we're going to do these -- tariffs, we're going to do these regulations, we're going to do import and export controls. great. do you realize most of those aren't going to really do much. because here's how i'm going to try to explain what the rest of the world does to stick it to the united states. so, this is a picture of a beautiful audi. let's pretend it's $100,000 car. my guess is this one's a little more expensive.

it's being made in germany. but someone in scottsdale, arizona, is about to buy this audi. when it's in germany, there's a 19% v.a.t. tax on it. value-added tax. but the moment it leaves the shore of germany and is on its way to the united states, so the car's been exported, they give them back the $19,000, that 19%. so when it comes to the united states, it's $19,000 less than it was sitting there in germany. then when it hits our shore, we put a small tariff or duty on it. but the $100,000 tesla that's made in texas, someone in germany's buying it. it has all the tax load, corporate tax, income tax, all the other things that we would do in the united states here, on -- in that price. and this car leaves the united states, we don't refund back 19% of the taxes to it. it hits the german shore and they put that $19,000 on top of

the price. so functionally we get it both ways. coming and going. when we want to export, other countries put their v.a.t. tax on our products. but when they send a product to us, they took it off. so we can be incredibly competitive. we can automate in ways to make up for labor differential costs, our energy costs are actually much more competitive than the rest of the world. why isn't all manufacturing in the united states right now? it's because we're getting basically ash tragedied -- arbitraged on the value-added tax. because the rest of the world refunds it. until we fix that, all the talk of we want made in america, the math doesn't work. there's a couple of creative solutions, they are technically difficult. where you'd have to take that refunded v.a.t. and put it back on at our shore so functionally

there's -- everyone's treated exactly the same. the $100,000 american-made car, the $100,000 germany-made car, have the same tax load when they're being sold in their respective countries. i've been trying to figure out a way to try to explain this concept simply. but the tax system, the current tax system as it is is one of the reasons it's so difficult to compete with other countries' manufacturing because they refund that value-added tax back. so the last thing. i'm truly worried about something and i believe it's going to affect the united states but i fear it's going to affect the entire world. how many of you have seen the stories that a number of the

economists, food economists, believe this coming fall parts of the world are going starve? the price of fertilizer is up dramatically. the price of grain is up dramatically. putin's war on ukraine has screwed up the grain markets. do we have a moral obligation to step up and understands that six months from now part of the world may be starving. and what happens in the world when you have people going hungry? you have violence. you have horrible things happen. we see it coming. and if i'm wrong, if all the things we're seeing in the futures markets, the price of fertilizer blowing up, they don't actually effect food supplies, if i'm wrong, it's a free option. but if i'm right, that we should be pulling alarm cord, we should be begging farmers, farm policy, our ag committee, saying rerks

move set -- saying, removing setasides. encourage turning corn into animal feed. the rotation that's happening to soy because soy only uses -- it's not my specialty, but a quarter or a third of the amount of fertilizer. if this is about to happen to the world and we see it six months ahead, what's our moral obligation to pull that alarm cord and get it right? because by getting it right, we also help our own inflation and maybe a couple million people don't die in sub-saharan africa. mr. speaker, i know that was a lot of different subjects thrown really quickly. if someone's interested, almost everything i touched on we've done much longer presentations on how the policy would work, how it would help inflation, how it would make people's lives

healthier and better. but my point tonight is a really simple one. stop doing the things that ultimately are hurting people. start looking for the optimism, the opportunity that can make america more pros -- prosperous, that can make the poor less poor, that can actually knock down inflation. and it would actually be able to be done together. because a lot of these ideas aren't actually republican or democrat. they're just disruptive. and if we would embrace the disruption this could be an amazing decade. but right now the data we're getting today, we may be in for years of misery because of policy from this last year. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. under the speaker's announced policy of january 4, 2021, the gentleman from texas, mr. green, is recognized for 60 minutes as

the designee of the majority leader. mr. green: thank you, mr. speaker. and still i rise, mr. speaker, and still i rise. and i rise as a proud member of this august body. i rise with gratitude for the time that i have been afforded. i rise understanding that time is precious. and i rise understanding that tonight i have a topic that is going to be of interest to many and provocative to some. but i still rise. i rise with the topic of institutionalized racism emanating from capitol hill. institutionalized racism emanating from capitol hill. this is hardly where one would expect institutionalized racism.

and there are a good many people who say there is no such thing as institutionalized racism. i trust that after tonight's message, many minds will be changed and perhaps some hearts will be changed. because if you know the truth it can set you free. it can free your heart. it can free your mind. it can free your body and it can free your soul. so let's take the acts of truth tonight and -- axe of truth tonight and slam it into the three of circumstance and let the chips -- tree of circumstance and let the chips fall where they must. and still i rise. mr. speaker, it is said that a picture is 1,000 words -- a picture a thousand words. here is a picture. this is a picture of the russell

senate office building. the russell senate office building. i think it appropriate that we get a better understanding of who russell was. in 1972, some 50 years ago, the old senate office building, that would be this building, was named after senator richard bravard russell jr., an unapologetic ratessist -- racist. white supremacist. he was the chief legislative architect of the south's bitter opposition to the civil rights, bitter opposition to civil rights. he claimed that america was a white man's country and he said,

quote, and we're going keep it that way. richard bravard russell jr. senator. during his first run for the state legislature in 1920, he solicited support and influence of every white voter and pledged he would serve only them, would serve only them if elected. russell said while campaigning in as one who was revered in the old south, with six generations of my forbearers, now resting beneath southern soil, i'm willing to go as far and make as great a sacrifice to preserve and ensure white supremacy in the social, economic, and

political life of our state as any man who lives within her borders. these are the words of richard russell, senator richard russell. senator richard russell, whose name is on the russell senate office building, a building maintained with tax dollars, a building constructed with tax dollars, a building that i have to go into from time to time. i try to limit my traversing through the building. but from time to time i must. but at some point, i'm going to limit all of my movement into the building. i won't be going into it at some point. and at some point, people of african ancestry aren't going to go into this building. it's a symbol of national shame. not national pride. a symbol of national shame. the russell senate office

building. senator richard russell successfully filibustered anti-lynching bills. we just passed an anti-lynching bill after many decades. one of the reasons why it took so long was because of senator richard russell. he blocked bills to eliminate poll taxes. stood in the way of voting rights. especially for people of color. he also blocked bills to desegregate public schools. and this was done after brown vs. the board of education. he called it the southern manifesto, to slow the integration of public schools after the supreme court unanimously ordered in its brown case that schools would be

desegregated with all deliberate speed. senator richard russell. russell senate office building. senator russell proclaimed there is no such thing as a little integration. this is what he said in 1957. he said, they, meaning black people, are determined to get into our white schools and into white restaurants and into white swimming pools. he went on and indicated that he would worn his senate colleagues that this would mean a mongel race, which would result in restroig -- destroying america.

senator richard russell. russell senate office building, named after senator russell. he talked about the imbalance of the negro population between the south and the rest of the country. literally proposed moving black people to some other states because there were too many in the south. senator richard russell. the russell senate office building. when president truman sought to end segregation in the military, russell responded with vial racial libels. here's what he stated. senator richard russell, these are his words -- the incidents of syphilis, gonorrhea, shankor,

and other have i nairial -- venerial diseases is higher among the negro race. one would say that by this standard all of us have been maligned, those of us who are members of the negro race, as he called it. he declared, this is sure to increase the numbers of men who will be disabled through communicable diseases. the words of senator richard russell. yes, the senate russell office building is named after a self-proclaimed white supremacist. it's a symbol of national shame.

on march 30, 1964, the southern block of 18 democratic senators and one republican senator, led by senator richard russell, launched a filibuster to prevent the passage of the 1964 civil rights act. stood in the way of what we now consider some of the great legislative actions that were taken by the house -- taken up by the house and the senate. russell proclaimed -- senator russell proclaimed, we will resist to the bitter end any measure or any movement which would tend to bring about social equality. some things bear repeating. we will resist to the bitter end any measure or any movement

which would tend to bring about social equality and intermingling and emall gogh makes of the races in our states. -- emalgomations of the races in our states. he voted against the 1964 civil rights act, which he called shortsighted and disastrous. he added that the civil rights bills' effect was to eliminate states' rights, and abolish the checks and balance system. a great president from the state of texas, the honorable president lyndon b. johnson, signed the civil rights act into law, and as a result, senator

richard russell led a southern boycott of the 1964 democratic national convention. many who contend there is no institutionalized racism could walk in the shoes of those of us who face it, who understand that for us racism is more than a word. it can sometimes be a way of life that you have to contend with. even in 2022. russell senate office building. you think i get great pleasure walking through a building named after a person who proclaimed himself a white supremacist? i get no great pleasure in moving through the facility.

and i find this to be very interesting. what the senate does -- the senate named it. it was the old senate office building. what the senate does the senate can undo. this building does not have to bear the name of a white supremacist. this can be changed. we but only have to have the will to do it. and unfortunately, too many of us find ourselves having to deal with our concerns of this nature siloed, siloed. well, this concerns black people, and as a result, black people ought to solve this problem. that's not the approach that i've taken. long before i came to congress, i thought that -- and still believe that if invidious discrimination exists against

anyone, it's everyone's duty, responsibility, and indeed an obligation to challenge it. not for myself but for humanity. and there are times when in so doing you have to stand alone, but i sincerely believe in the inner santh up of -- sanctum of my soul that i stand here. i stand here tonight acknowledging that on many occasions when it's come to the rights of others -- check my voting record. clek my voting -- check my voting record. where were you, al green, when we took up the rights of the lgbtq community? ives there. -- i was there. where were you when we took up the rights of the latino community? i was there. babies at the borders. where were you when we took up

the rights of the jewish community, those standing up against those -- standing up against those who are anti-semitic? i was there. so i ask tonight, where are we friends on the russell senate office building that to this day it honors a self-proclaimed white supremacist? this is institutionalized. it's institutionalized because the congress, by and through the senate, as an institution made it so. you want to see institutionalized racism? a picture is worth a thousand words. there it is. that's it. the russell senate office building. all people of goodwill ought to want to see this changed. i'm not the first person, by the

way, has said it should be changed. i may be one of many, but as long as i'm here, i'm going to be fighting to change the name of the russell senate office building. institutionalized racism, a picture of it worth a thousand words. emanating from capitol hill, a place where we passed the civil rights laws, a place where we stand, one would assume, against all forms of invidious discrimination. no one would have a building on capitol hill bear the name of a self-proclaimed white supremacist. but there it is. the russell senate office building. now, friends, i have not said that we should name the building after the name richard russell

is removed, senator. i have not said we should name it after any given person. i'm -- i've not said that we should have a certain process in place to select a name. i have said, let it revert to the name that was there before we named it after a self-proclaimed white supremacist. let it revert to what it was before and that was the old senate office building. let it revert and then establish the proper protocols and all of the processes and whatever methodology you choose to select a name. i believe that we won't make that mistake again, the mistake we made with senator richard russell. but let's let it revert. and that we can do overnight.

that we could do overnight. there is no requirement that we wait months, years, weeks. no requirement. we could change the name to the old senate office building overnight. we but only have to have the will to do it. and believe that in so doing it won't look like someone made us do it. you know, that always enters into politics, it seems. too often. we don't do things because we don't want it to seem as though someone made us do it. we ought to find our own way to get it done. we have to allow the parade to turn the corner and then run out in front of it and claim that we were there all the time. do whatever you must. but let's take the name off. let's take richard russell's name off of the building.

friends, if a picture is worth a thousand words, i contend that a song speaks for itself and its writer. a song speaks for itself and its writer. icui and sten fostee foster stevenos day --or d.a me morial thunitedtes federal even fosrn january3annu.

steven annually. steven foster memorial day. who, pray tell, was steven forester? well, let's talk about mr. foster and some of the lyrics in some of his songs. not all, not all of his songs. but too many of his songs contain lyrics that are offensive to people of color. before we examine the lyrics, let's do this. let's just explain that you don't get a day in your honor without the consent of the house. and the senate. and the president of the united states of america. you don't get a day in your

honor without voting. people have to vote. the president has to sign an order. i'll be reading for you the resolution in just a moment. but for now let's look at some of the songs, songs by steven c. foster. steven c. foster. songs by stephen c. foster containing the n word. some of you may be familiar with "oh, susana." i trust at home that you can read this. he uses what i consider

demeaning vernacular. i jump aboard the telegraph and travel down the river. the electric fluid magnified and killed the 500n-word. we're not allowed to say the word on the floor and appreciate that. i never say it. i'm not one of those persons who in my private life -- i don't use that word. song by stephen c. foster. stephen c. foster, by the way, was declared the father of american music. the father of american music.

the date that we commemorate or celebrate, however you choose, is january 13. annually. the date was created by joints remain, h.j.res. 308, 82nd congress. introduced in the house on august 2 of 1951. passed the house on october 15, 1951. some 74 days after introduction. but 74 days after its introduction, it passed the house. passed the senate on october 19, 1951. some 78 days after introduction. and was signed into law by the president of the united states

on october 27, 1951. some 86 days after introduction. one can only but pray that legislation, righteous legislation that benefits people who have been demeaned, people who have been discriminated against, righteous legislation that would benefit them and prevent future discrimination, righteous legislation would only pray that we could get such timelines for righteous legislation. stephen foster performed in blackfacement for those who are not -- blackface. for those of you who are not familiar -- and by the way, he started this at the age of 9. so he was influenced. blackface.

this is a form of art, and i'm being kind, wherein persons who are of european ancestry paint their faces black and in a sense they perpetrate a vision of black people as happy-go-lucky dancers, jumping around, simple and good-natured creatures in minstrel shows. they were a form of racist entertainment developed in the early 19th century, consisting of comic skits, variety act it's, dancing and music performances that depicted

people specifically of african descent. the shows were performed by mostly white people in makeup or blackface, as i have explained, for the purpose of playing the role of black people. minstrel shows lampooned black people as dim-witted, lazy, bafoonish, superstitious and happy-go-lucky. stephen foster was a master of minstrel music. christie's minstrels, the most successful minstrel shows of the time, made an arrangement with foster to be the show to be the first to sing his songs. mr. foster, if you have a song, a minstrel song, we want to be

the first. i can imagine mr. christie saying that. he would have the rights to be the first to sing these songs. present these plays demeaning black people. and mr. foster complied. before i read the resolution, let's take a look at another song. another song written by the father of american folk music. to this day. with a day that sell is celebrated on the 13th -- that is celebrated on the 13th of each january in his honor. the father. old uncle ned, an excerpt. there was an old n-word, they call him uncle ned. he's dead long ago, long ago.

no more work for poor old ned. he's gone where the good n-words go. the father of american folk music. institutionalized racism in song. institutionalized racism because this institution made it so. we, not us personally, but this house made it so. more about that in just a moment. let's look at another song. these are excerpts.

it reads, go down to the cotton field. go down, i say. go down and call the n-word boys all well no more today. the father of american folk music. proclaimed as such by the united states house of representatives. institutionalized as such with the concurrence of the united states senate. ordered as such with the signature of the president of the united states of america. one final one. and i shall not read it. i'll simply place it before you. i trust that the camera allows

you to see the words. away down souf. so now we find ourselves with a day honoring stephen foster by way of a joint resolution, joint resolution, authorizing the president of the united states of america, i might add, parenthetically, to proclaim january 13th of each year as stephen foster memorial day. and reads in part, not in total,

whereas stephen collins foster has become a national expression of democracy. stephen collins foster has become a national expression of democracy through his clear and simple embodiment of american tradition in his world famous lyrics. so says the house, the senate and the president, such that we honor him on the 13th of january every year. the resolution reads, whereas the songs of stephen collins foster belong to the people. don't count me among the people that these songs belong to. belong to the people and are the

musical essence of democracy. this is the musical essence of democracy. what a sad state of affairs that we have to contend with. whereas the songs of stephen collin foster belong to the people and are the musical essence of democracy, so that he is now recognized as the father of american folk music and the true interpreter of the fundamental spirit of music. stephen collins foster. whereas stephen collins foster symbolizes his work in his

works. the unity of mankind through music. this is the unity of mankind through music. so says the house, the senate and the president and a day in honor of stephen collins foster. his works symbolize the unity of mankind. resolved by the senate, these are the words, do a little bit of research and you can read it in its entirety. i've given you exermts -- excerpts. but these are the words. resolved by the senate and the house of representatives of the

united states of america in congress assembled that the president of the united states is authorized to issue a proclamation designating january 13 of each year as stephen foster memorial day. calling upon the people throughout the united states of america to observe such day with appropriate ceremonies, pilgrimages to his shrines and musical programs, featuring his compositions. i assume approved october 27, 1951. i was alive when this was approved. i'm a son of the segregated south. i know what racism looks like.

i've seen the cross that the klan burned in my yard. i know what it sounds like having called these words. i know what it hurts like. i've been to some funerals. so now, my dear friends, my dear brothers and sisters -- and i say such because i'm a student of dr. king and i believe, as he proclaimed, that there really is but one race and that's the human race. and i believe that all persons were created equal from a base black, as dr. king put it -- bass black, as dr. king put it, to treble white.

and he said that fleecy locks and complex could not forfeit claim. though skin may differ. where i so tall as to reach the pole or to grasp the ocean as a span, i must be measured by my soul for the standard is the eye of the man and woman. i believe this. and because i believe it, i believe that we all have a responsibility to eliminate this constitutionalized -- institutionalized racism emanating from the capitol of the united states of america. institutionalized by the congress, signed into law by the president. institutionalized by the senate russell office building.

i love my country. i sing the national anthem. bits and parts of it that we may want to address at some point, but i love my country. i say the pledge of allegiance. i love my country. it means something to me to have been born in the united states of america. i just want to make america the beautiful, a more beautiful america for all americans. i want every little black baby to grow up in a world where we don't have a self-proclaimed white supremacist honored with our tax dollars on a building built with our tax dollars.

they deserve that. i would do it for any other set in this society, subset of this society. i would stand up for you. when will we stand up against institutionalized racism emanating from the capitol of the united states of america? i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. under the speaker's announced policy of january 4, 2021, the chair recognizes the gentleman from kansas, mr. mann, for 30 minutes. mr. mann: mr. speaker, i first ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and submit any extraneous materials. mr. speaker, i am honored to

host this special order -- the speaker pro tempore: without objection. sorry about that. mr. mann: i am proud to host this special order. i am proud of the people that feed, clothe this country but the entire world. i grew up on a farm. it meant i spent thousands of hours on a tractors, working on the horseback. it led to the lessons of the value of hard work, creativity, flexibility and putting others before myself. my district, the big first district of kansas, are homes to thousands of agry -- agribusinesses makes sure we feed the world. not only do our national security depends on food

security, i am honored to serve on the house agriculture committee and host to special order tonight. if congress is going to legislate effectively on matters relating to agriculture, congress must first understand the agricultural perspectives of america. there is something when farmers pray for rain, parents drive 30 miles both ways to take their kids to school and communities shrink and grow with oil gas prices that gives you a perspective. g.t. thompson and i just returned from my district. we saw the innovative energy that creates new ideas and love of tradition that respects tried and true methods. we saw the usda national biofacility that will take american agriculture in the future and we met with the family who owns and operates a feed yard, one of the first feed lots in kansas. we also saw oil production, ag lending, ethanol production, wheat innovation and next

generation at the -- leaders at the state university. i look forward to celebrating the force, passion, and the strength of american agriculture. first up, i am delighted to have here -- i am going to yield, mr. chairman, to the gentleman from pennsylvania, a descendent of dairy farmers, a champion and also joined me on a agriculture tour in kansas, the leader of the house agriculture committee, g.t. thompson. mr. thompson: i want to say this is the most important industry in america and it's an industry that impacts and touches the lives of american families more times in a given day than any other. it's not just the food, it's the fiber, it's the building materials, it's the energy resources, it's the economy. and so just honored to be here. i'm proud to be the republican

leader of the house agriculture committee where we celebrate the contributions of american farmers, ranchers, producers and foresters all year long. farm country is no stranger to struggle. in the past couple years have been a punch to the gut between a global pandemic, historic fires and floods, wind events, and a president who's waging a never-ending war on agriculture, times have been particularly tough. the supply chain crisis paired with skyrocketing inflation is kicking our farm families while they're down. folks who buy retail, sell wholesale, and pay shipping each way. the men and women who work around the clock to provide us with a safe and reliable food supply. but rural america is tough. rural america is resilient. and rural america is the backbone of this nation. now, i'm grateful to congressmanmann on our farm -- congressman mann being on our

farm team as well as all the other agriculture advocates who will be speaking this evening. before i go, i'd like to specifically recognize pennsylvania's contribution to agriculture, which is the commonwealth's number one industry. one out of every seven jobs is directly or indirectly related to agriculture. 59,000 farms. 280,500 direct jobs. more than $135 billion in revenue or about 18% of pennsylvania's economy. america's agriculture impact in the keystone state is undeniable. in closing, i'd like to thank the families, the men, the women who work 24/7, 365 days a year to feed, to clothe, and to fuel this great nation. and once again, thanks for congressman mann for leading this important special order. mr. mann: thank you, ranking member thompson, for being here

tonight and talking about pennsylvania agriculture. very important to this country. next up, mr. speaker, i yield to the gentleman from washington, who's a third generation family farmer. good friend. i always appreciate your perspective of washington state agriculture and what you bring to this body. so with that, i yield to representative dan newhouse. mr. newhouse: thank you, mr. mann, great friend from kansas, on this special occasion to talk -- talk about american agriculture. i'm truly proud to stand with my colleagues to talk about something that affects, impacts every single person, not only in this room, but listening tonight, the american agriculture industry. in central washington where i'm from, i know our industry is made up of honest, hardworking, freedom-loving americans who provide food and fiber to this nation.

my community is home to some of the most dedicated, innovative, agriculture producers in our entire country. washington farmers and ranchers produce 300 different commodities including high-quality hay, wheat, beef, dairy, wine grapes, hops, which i raise, potatoes, cherries, mint and, of course, washington's iconic apple. blessed with the conditions to produce such a diverse range of crops, central washington is proud to share its natural abundance to help feed the country and feed the world. those of us who live there have a deep appreciation for our nation's farmers and recognize how important it is that we have a strong domestic agricultural sector. but lately, unfortunately, the president and his far-left democrats are so focused on radically altering the country with their trillion-dollar spending proposals.

they're blind to the impacts of their own policies that are already having on americans across the country. cost of living is at a 40-year high. still going up. now they're looking to raise taxes, again, on small businesses, on family farms. as a lifetime farmer and former director of the department of agriculture for the state of washington, current chairman of the congressional western caucus, i understand the vested interest that we all share in supporting our agricultural producers and i am proud to join my house colleagues in advocating against burdensome regulations that impact rural communities and for real solutions, not just empty promises, to help our farmers and our ranchers, to our farm workers, and to all americans who deserve a strong food supply chain. i introduced the first serious agriculture labor reform bill to pass the house in over 30 years,

the farm workforce modernization act, to ensure that those who wish to come to our country, abide by our laws and contribute to our farms, ranches, and local communities are able to do so. i, along with my republican colleagues, am leading efforts to stop our adversaries -- foreign adversaries from gobbling up our farmland and taking our food supply. and hydroelectric dams in the northwest, which helps with base load power for central washington and beyond and serves as sustainable and sufficient way to transport our nation's crops. the columbia river barges carry more than 50% of u.s. wheat. and, get this, 700,000 semis trucks are off the road each and every year.

i'm leading the entire western caucus in fighting against this administration's efforts to revive the single most overreaching federal regulatory action in history. it's called the waters of the united states, or the wotus rule. it requires bureaucrats to place every single body of water, every ditch, every puddle, every stream under federal regulation. and as a result, the livelihoods of our farmers and rural communities across the nation, not just in washington, all over the country are at stake. while it's clear to me, just as i know it's clear to my constituents, president biden and democrats are failing to display the leadership america needs and deserves. but there's a silver lining here. american agriculture is strong. we have overcome far worse, and we will not let these radical policies hold us back from the

job of feeding this nation. i call on the administration to take a good long look at how their policies are harming us here in central washington and in rural communities across the country and take immediate steps to reverse them. we deserve far better. thank you, mr. mann. thank you for helping recognize the importance of american agriculture, and i appreciate your leadership. . mr. mann: thank you for joining us tonight. mr. speaker, next i'd like to yield to the gentleman from pennsylvania, a staunching defender of -- staunch defender of farmers in his district. thanks for joining us tonight. mr. keller: thank you, congressman mann. as we, national agriculture month comes to a close, i'm reminded of a speech paul harvey delivered to the f.f.a. in 197 -- 1978 no truer words have ever been spoken about america's farmers.

listening to the speech brings back memories of the days spent working with my step-dad on his farm. so this is a tribute again to america's farmers, the work they do, and when i read this speech, it reminds me i can see my step-dad those days working. but it's a tribute to all of the farmers in our great country. so here are a few of the excerpts that i really like from this speech. and it goes like this. it begins, and on the eighth day, god looked down on his planned paradise and said, i need a caretaker. so god made a farmer. god said, i need somebody who can shape and ax handle from a sprout, shoe a horse with a hunk of car tire, who can make harness out of hay wire, feed sacks and shoe scraps. who planting time andujar vest season will finish his 40-hour week by tuesday noon and then put in another 72 hours. so god made a farmer. it had to be somebody who plowed

deep and straight and not cut corners. somebody to seed, weed, feed, breed and rake and disk and plow and plant. and tie the there's no and strain the milk and refelonyish the self-feeder and finish a hard week's work with a five-mile drive to church. somebody who would bail a family together with the soft, strong bonds of sharing. who would laugh and then sigh and then reply with smiling eyes when his son says that he wants to spend his life doing what dad does. so god made a farmer. thank you to america's farmers. this is a tribute to the work that you do every day on behalf of not just the united states but our world. thank you and i yield back. mr. mann: i thank the gentleman from pennsylvania for joining us tonight. as you were reading that i thought about my family, my grandparents and many producers all over america that that describes. thank you very much for sharing

that. mr. speaker, next up i'd like it yield to the gentlelady from illinois who runs a grain and livestock farm with her husband and who has raised her children to be the fourth generation of farmers on her family farm in illinois, representative mary miller. mrs. miller: thank you, congressman mann, for hosting this special order. at the conclusion of national agriculture month, i would like to share how strongly i believe in the family farm as part of the american way of life. it has truly been a blessing to have our sons and their children, the fifth generation, working our land. i'm proud to be an illinois farmer and to represent the farmers' needs in congress and on the ag committee. if americans are hungry, really, what else matters? the agriculture industry keeps americans and the world fed,

filled and clothed. i'm so thankful for the work the ag industry does and their contributions to the g.d.p. in illinois and across our nation. america's on a dangerous path, losing our self-sufficiency in farming, which is why i introduced a bill in congress to prevent china from buying up our farmland. biden and the democrats continue to push policies that promote chinese-made batteries and solar panels instead of american biofuels. national agriculture month is a great time to thank our farmers, ranchers and agriculture professionals for their tireless work. thank you and i yield back. mr. mann: thank you, the gentlelady from illinois, for joining us tonight. next, mr. speaker, i would like to yield to the gentleman from california who represents our nation's largest dairy district and he and his family operate a dairy farm, lives at the dairy, wonderful for you to join us, my good friend from california, congressman valadao.

mr. valadao: thank you. and i thank the representative from kansas for putting this together. thanks great honor to be able to speak about the great people that feed our country. i'm proud to represent the farmers that feed the world. with less than 1% of our nation's farmland, the central valley supplies 1/4 of our nation's food. our well deserved reputation as america's bread basket comes from the help of nature and a whole lot of hard work and skill from our farmers, ranchers and producers. but without water, we cannot grow our nation's food at all. our central valley farming community has endured drought conditions and low water allocations for years. at a time when even the president is warning about global food shortages, we need to be supporting our agriculture producers here at home. that includes making sure that the central valley has the water they need to continue providing food for the world. we must fix complex and krctry laws, court decisions and

regulations and improve water storage infrastructure to bring more water to the valley. the livelihoods of my constituents and our global food supply demand -- depend on it. thank you and i yield back the balance of my time to the gentleman from kansas. mr. mann: thank you for joining us tonight, congressman valadao. mr. speaker, i would now like to yield to the gentleman from texas who farmed and ranched in the texas panhandle before he came to congress. the pride of loveland, texas, congressman ellzey. mr. ellzey: thank you. ukraine is a bread basket of that region and 30% of all of the world's grain, wheat, is produced in that region. as we talk about this today, in a few months we're going to be talking about it even more, about how the farms and ranches

of the united states feed the entire world. so over the past couple of years, our farmers have faced unprecedented obstacles from covid, covid lockdowns, labor shortages, supply chain disruptions, high fuel prices and record high fertilizer prices. but as always, they have overcome those challenges and have kept americans and the the world fed during a time of great uncertainty. each american farmer feeds more than 165 people. texas leads the nation in the number of farms and ranches with 248,416 farms and ranches covering 127 million acres. the ag industry is the pillar of a healthy and prosperous nation. and in the sixth congressional district of texas, we have a long history of farming and ranching. we're home to families like the beaklies, the pattins, the buccholzs, the bornes. many of them have earned the title of a texas century farm or ranch.

those titles are only given to families that have served our country as farmers and ranchers for over 100 years. families who get up before dawn to tend crops and hurd cattle. they're part of ranches and farms in my district. if you fed your family today, thank a farmer, thank a rancher, and in texas, thank a neighbor. i yield back. mr. mann: i want to thank the gentleman from texas for joining us and representing texas. such a legacy of agriculture in that great state. mr. speaker, i want to thank everyone who spoke today for helping congress understand an agriculture perspective. as dwight eyesen however, who was interest -- eisenhower, who was from my state, from my district, said, farming looks mighty easily when your plow is a pencil and you're 1,000 miles away from a corn field. today it felt like members who spoke on this floor brought the farm a little closer to capitol hill and for that i thank them. congress uses the re-authorization of the facial bill every five years determine the nature of our support for the men and women who feed, fuel

and clothe the world. america's food security is so important because it determines the strength of our national security. we will never be a secure country if we have to run on -- rely on other countries to feed ourselves. because of the tenacity of the american farmers, we are the most food-secure country in the world and i will do everything in my power to keep it that way. as congress determines how we will support farmers, ranchers and agriculture producers in the 2023 farm bill, i encourage members to imagine how different their lives would be without healthy american agriculture. from the food on our tables to the fuel in our cars, to the fiber ins our clothing, to the roofs over our head, agriculture is all around us and we tend to take it for granted. well, it isn't granted. it is gifted. every day american farmers, ranchers and agriculture producers give us the gift of our quality of life in this country. our comforts come from the sweat of their brows, the least this congress can do is support their efforts wholeheartedly with a

strong, thoughtful 2023 farm bill and related legislation. the future of america depends on it. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 4, 2021, the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. roy, for 30 minutes. mr. roy: i thank the speaker. i thank my colleagues for coming down here and talking about the importance of farming in the united states. one of the things we're dealing with obviously, talked about, it some fertilizer shortages. i know that firsthand seeing some of the farms in the district i represent out in west texas and so forth. we've got a lot of issues we've got address. and i just want to note, as a texan, we have my fellow texan down here just a little bit ago, that here we sit again, here it's march 31, and an empty

chamber again. you know, it's the close of a quarter. a fiscal quarter. members got their places to go, their difference to go to -- dinners to go to. we just ran through a handful of votes today. no amendments. no debates. here's the people's house and all -- in all its glory. no debate. no discussion. do we have a single debate here in the people's house about what's happening at our southern border today? any discussion at all? did the speaker of the house of representatives give a rat's rear end about south texas or the rest of this country? about the ranchers that are dealing with a flood of people coming across our border, endangering them and their families? no, they don't care. they don't care at all. but i can tell you, we in texas care. and the leadership of this body better start caring soon. let me just say something all my fellow republicans, who just funded this government two weeks

ago, those of who you cut a deal, a deal with the devil, you're responsible for this too. you funded this government. you funded the government that's allowing people to come across our border, that's empowering cartels, that's allowing my grants to get abused, that's causing ranchers to lose their livestock, ranchers to be endangered, fentanyl to pour across our border. and now this administration has the gall to shut down title 42? while americans are still wearing masks on airplanes? while we still have men and women in uniform being forced to get a needle stuck in their arm with the power of government? and the leadership, so called leadership, of our government has the gall to shut down title 42, the one thing allowing us to stop the flood at our border even partially.

march of this year, this year, right now, march, 200,000 apprehensions. 100,000 turned away under title 42. but now the head of the c.d.c. in coordination with the department of homeland security secretary is saying we're going to stop using title 42. well, then what the hell are you going to do? nothing. other than process more immigrants coming across our board who are are not -- border who are not truly seeking asylum. but that's what's happening. and what's actually happening at our border right now is that there are shootouts going on as we speak on a daily basis between the gulf cartel, technically the cartel of new generation, but gulf cartel, c.d.g., warring with the cartel

of the la zetas and we're talking about dead people, dead bodies. people getting shot in their car. bullets firing. flying all over our southern border. dead individuals. this young girl here. head blown off. all of this is happening every single day all while american kids are dying with xanax laced with fentanyl. and again, i want to be clear here. when you take title 42 away, you, secretary, you c.d.c. director walenski, you, my democrat colleagues who are funding it, you, president biden, when you take away title 42, the blood is on your hands.

dead americans, dead migrants, destroyed communities in texas, empowered cartels, making literally last night talking to people coming across the border saying they're spending $3,000 to 5dz,000 to -- $5,000 to come up from nicaragua, venezuela, cuba. 13,000 apprehensions from russia in apprehensions from russia. we're about to see an explosion on our southern border. but again, this administration not only doesn't care, it's purposeful. it is 100% purposeful. endangering the people of the united states, endangering migrants while saying it's good for them, empowering cartel, knowing they're doing it, knowing for the most part do not

have a he scrit mat claim to asylum. they're purposely not enforcing the laws of the united states, purposely not using the tools at their disposal, like now ending title 42. and for what reason? for crass political purposes. that is your modern democratic party. using migrants, using them, for political purposes. and endangering them and americans in the process. it is a gross violation of the oath take ton deafen the constitution of the united states. it is fully and entirely impeachable. and every republican should be agreeing to impeach secretary mayorkas on day one when we come into this body and we're in charge of the house of representatives next january after the absolute feckless destruction of this country by

an incompetent, destructive democratic majority in this body, an incompetent derek instructive and flat out reckless administration refusing to enforce the laws of the united states. that is what is happening. they're line of scrimmage, there you go, ranting on the floor about the border again. well excuse me, but it's texas. texas needs to be starting to take a little action to they will the -- to tell the rest of this country to shove it up its rear end because texas is taking it on the chin, because the leadership of this country is foretaking -- foresaking texas. hurting texas. hurting mimy neighbors. hurting my community. and it's about time that it stopped. it's about time that republicans on this side of the aisle stopped giving lip service to border security, choose to actually do their job and not fund the government that is refusing to enforce the laws. i listened to republican

leadership down here on the floor a few weeks ago trying to tell me, oh, thank me for giving us more money for i.c.e. and border patrol. well how the heck is that working out now? more money for more processing of more migrants getting abusessed by cartels? more money for more processing or many -- of more migrants to come into uvalde, texas, where the mayor just texted me five minutes ago? tell them, in case you're wondering, that's you, democrats, on the other side of the aisle, tell them, and by the way, republican leadership, tell them to come and see the -- i'll eedit his remarks, crap show they have created, 500 to 1,000 a day in eagle pass and del rio, no vetting. these are human beings, texans, people we represent, our communities. but i promise my colleagues on the other side of the aisle don't give a wit. they sit in their smug chairs in

their committee hearings saying, oh, this is all made up. there's nothing to it. it's all lies. just like the lie that president biden said and his press secretary said when he accused border patrol agents of whipping people. flat out lie. where are those border patrol agents now? have they been returned to their job? has a report come out? no. i'd like to yield to my friend from virginia, who accompanied me on a trip to the border, not, what, about a month ago or so? and he's a good friend and he understands what's actually happening at our border, i would like to yelled to my friend from virginia. >> thank you to the gentleman from texas. we don't have a finer patriot and more courageous warrior for freedom in the congress and i appreciate your leadership on this and so many issues and i appreciate you leading this

discussion here on the floor tonight. never in the history of the country has our own president done more to intentionally harm the country than this president has done in his first year in congress. never in the history of the country has our own president done to harm the united states than this president has done with the border in his first year. we're averaging 7,000 illegals across the border a day right now. the administration is admitting that. they're allowing 7,000 illegals across the border a day. i had a constituent say to me on the phone, nothing that this administration is doing makes sense unless they hate the country. nothing this administration is doing makes sense unless they hate the country. whether you're talking about the crime cry sthirks inflation crisis, our diminished standing on the national stage, the spending cry circumstances the energy crisis, what we're doing to american energy and making us depend on foreign neighs who hate us. i think at the top of that list is what we're doing at the border.

when i ran for the first time two years ago, i identified the biggest thrit to our nation, education, indoctrination of k-12 and college students, our runaway spending, and our immigration and border situation. nothing has changed my mind to that effect. i've been to the border four times. i'm well aware virginia's fifth district is not geographically, physically related at the border but we just had a ms-13 gang member sentenced for murder in my hometown. everything that comes across the border comes around the pow ore they have crime cartels. it's an economic security issue. it's a health security issue. and it's certainly a national security issue. and the projection i'm seeing with the ending of title 42, the egregious attempt to end title 42, rejections i'm seeing, it's

going to go from 7,000 a day to 18,000 a day. 7,000 a day to 18,000 a day. perhaps even tripling what's already happening. we had two million illegal crossings a year ago. extrapolate that out for four years. are we going to allow this president to have eight million come across at the current pace? my most recent trip to the border that my friend from texas mentioned was to dell vee io, texas. he led a trip to del rio, texas. that's where we had biden town just a few weeks ago with 20,000 haitian migrants assembled under the bridge there in biden town, del rio, texas. while we don't have that still today because they distributed those migrants, those illegal, into the interior of the country, which they're doing all the time, flying and busing illegal aliens in the dark of night, wherever they want to go, throughout the country, with no requirement of a court date to appear, it's a pinky process that we'll get back with you in

the future and give you a date to appear. while we don't have 20,000 in biden town under the bridge in del rio, texas, right through that corridor, border patrol and the ranchers and sheriffs that were there said it's 1,000 a day through there. every three weeks you have a repeat of what we saw with biden town a few weeks ago in del rio, texas. does this administration care? every resource they have committed or directed to that border has been to facilitate, to willfully, purposefully, facilitate more illegals crossing into our country and to hide it from the american people. to hide it from the american people. there's been no effort by this administration in this -- his first year, in this president's first year, to stem it, to stop it, instead they try to facilitate it, hide it from the american people and now they want to make it worse. two or three times worse. with what they're doing to title 4. with that, i yield to the gentleman from texas or the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. roy: before i yield to the gentleman from pennsylvania,

which i'll do momentarily, i want to pick up on something the gentleman said, and see if he would agree. if title 42 goes away, our country is completely open to anyone who wants to come in. would the gentleman agree? mr. good: absolutely. mr. roy: because almost everyone who has been turned away has been under title 42. now for listeners at home, title 42 is a health code provision allowing our officials in government to turn people away if we have a communicable disease environment like we do during the covid pandemic. we can do it for any number of communicable diseases. but we've got that in place now. under title 42 that's been roughly half the people who have been turned away have been under title 42. would the gentleman agree? mr. good: yeah but they're just turnarounds, coming right back. mr. roy: would it surprise the gentleman we have turned away 1.7 million people under title 42.

mr. good: since 2019? mr. roy: including time under the trump administration, 1.7 million times it's been used during the pandemic, all the people turned back would likely have been let in and released into the united states under this 1kwr5d mrgs. some of those are repeats. but something along the license of a million people that would have been released into the united states last year. does the yellow light agree? mr. good: absolutely. mr. roy: and one other point, of the people coming into the united states and being encountered, these are not all just nice people looking for a job. mr. good: 160 different countries. mr. roy: 160 different countries. roughly -- at least 6,662 have been arrested thus far in fiscal year 2022. it includes 85 convictions of manslaughter, or homicide, 604 sexual offenses and 2,892 convictions of illegal drug possession and trafficking based on reports at least 14 illegal my grants who were on the

terrorist watch list were stopped at the southern border in fiscal year 2021. but the biggest problem is what? mr. good: gotaways. mr. roy: the more than half a million known gotaways. known, gotaways, last year. if we've got people we're catching on the terror watch list if we've got criminals convicted of sex crime, convicted of murder and manslaughter that we're catching, but that's all people border patrol are running across, and they're often turning themselves in, all those known gotaways are those just angels. mr. good: these are the one -- reason the ones dressed in head-to-hoe tough camo and carpet shoes evading capture? mr. roy: it would be. now i turn to the gentleman, a great patriot. >> i thank my friend. he's been the consummate crusader on this issue.

if not for him this would even be more ignored in washington, d.c. than it is already. i just -- i just think about a scant month ago, month 1/2 ago or something, the president of the united states stood right there, stood right there and talked about securing the border. it's unfathomable to me, we used to not say lie in the world of politics about your opponent or your -- the other party or whatever. but i don't know what else that is other than a lie. and look, i come from pennsylvania, we're not on the border, where mr. roy represents, where his community and state is being completely overrun. pennsylvania is far from the border. we got route 81. we got route 83. the fentanyl comes up. right. the president took an oath to faithfully discharge the laws of this country. but just -- you wonder, abrogating them, you just wonder who is he representing?

whose citizens is he representing? because the people in my community, the people all across he h the country, are dying at record levels from drugs coming across the southern border. and nothing is happening to stop it. it's not only people coming here illegally. and taking your jobs. you know. all these different languages your school has to teach now. somebody is going to pay for that. who can afford this? and whose job is it to safeguard america? if it's not the president's job, whose job sit? mr. perry: chip roy is trying. bob good is trying. we can't keep title 42 in place. even better yet, the question should be, why is it remain in mention -- why isn't remain in mexico in place. seek asylum the right way. if you're indeed oppressed, you're suffering political retribution for your beliefs, your religious persecution, the

first country you come to. but the first country you come to when you travel through mexico, when you fly into mexico from one of the other 160, 190 countries on the planet, isn't the united states. it's mexico. if the president says the border is open, these people aren't coming to the white house, ladies and gentlemen. they're coming to your house. coming to your community they're not going to joe biden's house in delaware. not coming to pennsylvania avenue. coming to your house and your community. they're bringing the drugs with them. human trafficking. and for goodness sakes, your taxes. we just -- half the people on this side of the aisle just supported -- 75% of the people on this side of the aisle just supported more spending for this. you know what it does? bob good is right. you're not going to see them all pied up under the bridge at del rio, we'll hire more people to move them more efficiently p into your town. they don't like that look.

it's not hire to stop them. they're hired to more efficiently have them come to your town, your community, including the people on the terrorist watch list, criminals, the fentanyl, the human trafficking, coming to your town. thank you, mr. president. turn it back over to my friend from texas. mr. roy: i ask my friend from pennsylvania our colleague, ms. herrell from new mexico, introduced legislation a year ago, over a year ago, to require the use of title 42. is that right? mr. perry: that's right. all we need is enough people to sign it. whether you are a democrat or republican, these folks are coming -- coming -- the fentanyl is coming to your town. the overdoses is coming to your town. if your leadership says we refuse to move the bill the american people want, maintain this title 42, all you have to do is sign that piece of paper and we can do it. leadership can't hold us up. but they don't want to do it, do they?

mr. roy: i want to make sure for every american out there to understand the truth, if you are disgusted about what's happening at the border, if you are concerned what's happening to our communities, there is a way we can solve this problem without speaker pelosi making the decision. that's how things work. we don't ever debate, amend, we don't have discussion in the people's house. the speaker in a bam room -- backroom decides what happens on the floor, vote yes or no, and give a press conference. we can do something about that. there is a tool. called a discharge petition. we have a discharge petition at the desk to try to empower the actual representatives of this country. we have 200, i think 208 republicans. mr. perry: how many democrats? mr. roy: zero democrats. not one democrat on that discharge petition i want everybody to -- everybody to think about that. the democrats in this body pairnl are so beholden to the radical idea of wide open borders not implementing title

42 while americans are being forced to wear masks on airplanes. while americans are getting a jab needle stuck in their farm by force of government if they are in the military or border patrol. while there is still a federal health emergency in place under order of the president. mr. perry: we are firing people on the frontlines at the beginning of the pandemic where there was no vaccine present, right? they went out -- they went out and risked their lives, not knowing what they were dealing with, and now unless they take the jab, now they are out of work. mr. roy: while that's in place, we have a discharge petition where we can bring to the floor and vote to force enforcement of title 42. in this country. and not one of our democratic colleagues will join us in that effort. we have 13. it sure would. i think there is somewhere around 50 democratic members

from border states. if you count new mexico, arizona, california, texas. where are my democratic colleagues? in border states. i think they ought to be asked. i want to know. why won't my democratic colleagues from border states or anywhere else in the country say they believe that we ought to enforce title 42. guess what? there are a few senators have said so, isn't that right? mr. perry: i think there are a few representatives that said so, too. they can put their money, so to speak, where their mouth s you can say t you can take action. talk is cheap, right? take some action and walk down there and sign the paper. once one does maybe a few more will because their constituents, their bosses, their communities are being wrecked, too. mr. roy: it is a way to wrestle control of the people's house away from a handful of self-anointed individuals wrecking this country in the name of so-called democracy. my friend from virginia agree.

mr. good: absolutely. you mentioned secretary mayorkas, he has said the border is secure. the border is secure he has said. as you know we have lost operational control of our border. the mexican crime cartels are making hundreds of millions of dollars a month off sex trafficking, drug trafficking, child trafficking, human trafficking, you name it. everyone, everything that comes across that border comes under the control of the mexican crime cartel. there is no humane component to it. they are finding dead bodies at the border. people who are trying to -- they got starved or they dehydrated or couldn't make the journey or something happened to them on the way. and talk about remain in mexico policy, instead of remain in mexico policy, the m.p.p. in place under the trump administration, here we've got our own -- we have united nations using our own resources we made the united nations to help illegals cheat our asylum system. the united nations is taking

resources that the united states is giving to them to use to train illegals on how to cheat our asylum system and how to gain access into our country by claiming asylum. and then the democrat party, 20 years ago, passed a law that prohibits the requirement of proof of citizenship to vote. now, of course, they don't want any i.d. in order to vote. and you've got the president promising amnesty to anybody that's here illegally. do you think there is incentive to cheat our voting system and to vote illegally when there is no requirement or proof of citizenship? there is no i.d. to vote. you have the promise of amnesty. we have essentially got illegals with a license to vote here in this country right now. here we want to continue to ramp it up. take it from 7,000 a day to an estimate of maybe 18,000 a day by eliminating title 4 2. mr. perry: it's not only the u.n., in this body they voted

recently to pay for attorneys to go help those folks that came across the border illegally navigate the system. you go try that. you go break the law wantonly, and then appeal to your federal government to pay for your attorney to get around the law that you just broke wantonly. mr. roy: the gentleman from pennsylvania, the gentleman from virginia you guys are both fathers, correct? do you think there is anything compassionate when my colleagues on the other side of the aisle like to talk about their compassion for migrants seeking to come to this country, to my friends think there is anything at all compass gnat about a little girl get getting raped in a stash house in houston, texas, as we speak or being driven up and put in the sex trafficking trade 2349 southern -- in the southern part of the united states or trafficked anywhere throughout the rest of this country, do you think that's compassionate? do you think it's compassionate for a young woman to be getting

shot up in a cartel warfare having at south texas, along the reon grand in northern mexico, is that compassion? is it compassion? mr. perry: we have been to the border. you have seen the little shoes all stacked up at the border. these are the little children. representative roy is absolutely right. trophies, can you um imagine -- you imagine little girls, somebody's little girl, little girl panties hanging from the tree as a trophy. this is what our colleagues on the other side of the aisle refuse to acknowledge. like it's not hamming. like it never -- happening. like it never happened much but it's happening every single day. somebody, somebody's got to do something about it. mr. roy: is it compassionate for the young man or woman of the 100,000 or lows last year who died from drug overdoses to take zahn zach and take fentanyl and

die. is that something that's compassionate? these are compassionate things to be doing? mr. good: the number one killer of americans between 18 and 45 was drug overdoses. yet we are allowing dangerous drugs, fentanyl and other dangerous drugs to stream across the border. the only way you get across the mexican border in the united states is to pay the mexican crime cartels. border patrol and the local sheriffs will tell you if you try to cross apart from the cartels they'll dill you. you come beholden to them, an endentured servant. they will kill your family if you don't pay or you work it off. you work it off by trafficking drugs across -- trafficking children or trafficking women across the border. nothing compassionate about that. mr. roy: one of my good friends, a former texas department of public safety expert on these issues dealing with cartels just sent me a text showing me video from last night at the border and individuals reporting saying they are paying 3,000 or $5,000 to get across the river. how is that compassionate?

they are going to have to make a monthly payment to cartels. a lot of those payments are going to come in the form of sex trafficking, labor trafficking. i just think -- i think we have about a minute and a half left. i would just say -- i thank my friends for joining me here on the floor. that this is a solvable problem right now. this could be stopped right now. it could be stopped right now. this hour. this moment. but where is president biden? where is secretary mayorkas. other than purposely ignoring the laws of the united states to endanger the american people anti-migrants who seek to come here -- and the my grants who seek to come here. where are they? why shouldn't we be impeaching secretary mayorkas for failing to faithfully execute the laws of the united states causing death and destruction to americans' property and american people in the form of drug overdoses and the endangerment of our citizens. again the migrants who seek to come here. i would ask that question of all

my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. you can take this back and wrestle it away from the administration. sign that discharge petition. let's have a vote. let's have a debate. what are my colleagues afraid of, the truth? what are they afraid of? the rule of law? what are they afraid of? a secure america? migrants who get to come here safely. put aside the politics and stand up for our country. that's our job as members of the house of representatives. and i thank the gentleman from virginia and pennsylvania. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the member has yielded back. members are reminded to refrain from engaging in permanents towards the president. members are reminded to address their remarks to the chair and not a perceived viewing audience. pursuant to section 11-b of house resolution 188, the house stands adjourned until 9a.m. tom

announcer: as always, we will have live coverage when the house gobbles back in here on c-span. announcer: ♪ announcer: c-span is your unfiltered view of government. funded by these television companies and more, including wow. >> the world has changed. today, internet is something no one can live without. wow is there for our customers. no more than ever, it all starts with great internet. announcer: wow supports c-span as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. announcer: have your becerra

testified on president biden's 2023 budget requests before a house appropriations subcommittee. you can watch that at 9 p.m. eastern on c-span come online at c-span.org, or watch full coverage on c-span now, our free video. -- free video app. >> i find it challenging and exciting. and demanding. some of it i do because i feel that has to be done. announcer: the first author on book tv's in-depth, since then, he is written dozens of books. live sunday, join our to our conversation with mr. chomsky as he rejoins us a talk about capitalism, u.s. foreign policy, and social exchange. join in the conversation with your phone calls, facebook comments,