Congressional Record, Volume 169 Issue 157 (Wednesday, September 27, 2023)

[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 157 (Wednesday, September 27, 2023)]
[House]
[Pages H4669-H4712]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2024

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 723 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill,
H.R. 4367.
Will the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Guthrie) kindly take the chair.

{time} 1832

In the Committee of the Whole

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of
the bill (H.R. 4367) making appropriations for the Department of
Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and
for other purposes, with Mr. Guthrie (Acting Chair) in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole House rose earlier
today, amendment No. 11 printed in part B of House Report 118-216
offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Arrington) had been disposed
of.

Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Correa

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. CORREA. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 13, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $496,260,000) (increased by $496,260,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from California (Mr. Correa) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. CORREA. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I say to you, if you want to reduce fentanyl on our streets, I ask
you to vote for this amendment.
This amendment No. 13 simply allows CBP to hire additional CBP
officers at our ports of entry in addition to new CBP Border Patrol
agents. Our ports of entry today are the economic engine of our
country. They are vital gateways for our international commerce,
travel, and they collect more than $112 billion in duties and taxes
every year, but our ports of entry are understaffed.
CBP has told us they need 4,000 more agents at our ports of entry. As
you know, about 90 percent of fentanyl seizures and other narcotics
actually happen at our ports of entry. That is with only 2 percent of
the vehicles crossing being inspected. That is with only 17 percent of
cargo coming across those ports of entries being inspected. If you want
to stop and if you want to seize more fentanyl, you need to hire more
agents at our ports of entry. It is very simple.
Today, this bill that I am amending calls for 2,000 more border
agents, but only 150 new officers at our ports of entry. Let me repeat:
This bill only calls for 150 new agents at our ports of entry, and my
amendment simply says: Give the CBP, our folks at the border, the
ability and the flexibility to determine who they hire--ports of entry,
or between ports of entry. Those experts that are there protecting our
borders day in and day out should make that decision.
Again, Mr. Chair, 90 percent of the fentanyl seized coming into this
country is seized at our ports of entry. Ninety percent? Says who?
Ninety percent, says those officers at our ports of entry.
They need our help. Let's give them the flexibility. Let's give them
the tools to make sure they keep our country safe from fentanyl while
continuing to increase economic commerce and trade at our borders.
Mr. Chair, I ask my colleagues to support amendment No. 13, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, the amendment offered by the gentleman
from California is well-meaning, but ultimately misguided. We are
averaging nearly 10,000 encounters at the southern border on a daily
basis, near record levels. My bill addresses the challenge by funding
an additional 1,800 Border Patrol agents to relieve the burden on our
overworked agents along the southwest border.
Taking funds dedicated to the Border Patrol agents and instead using
them to hire additional customs officers dilutes our efforts to secure
the border between the ports of entry. Additional officers may be
needed to help with legitimate trade and travel that crosses the
border, but we have to address the immediate crisis caused by this
administration's disastrous border security policies.
If you turn on the television, you can see the flood of migrants
heading north on trains, crossing the border in an uncontrolled
fashion. It must stop, which is why we desperately need additional men
and women in green uniforms to help us gain operational control of the
border. I reluctantly urge my colleagues to vote no on this amendment.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CORREA. Mr. Chair, and I say to my colleague on the other side of
the aisle, who is absolutely correct, we need those forces at our
border. I am just pointing out that we know most of the drugs,
narcotics, fentanyl, come across the ports of entry. Why not give those
ports additional personnel to stop the fentanyl that we know is killing
our citizens, our young people in our streets.

[[Page H4670]]

Give them the opportunity to also hire. Give the Border Patrol and
those agents at our ports of entry the ability to stop these poisons
from coming into our country. One death is one death too many from an
overdose from fentanyl. Let's stop fentanyl and other narcotics from
coming into the country.
Again, sir, 90 percent of the fentanyl and narcotics are actually
apprehended at our ports of entry. That is not my statistic. That is
not his statistic. That is Homeland Security data. Mr. Chair, I reserve
the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. Members are reminded to direct their remarks to the
Chair.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CORREA. Mr. Chair, again, I think all of us recognize the
challenges we have at our border.
What I am merely doing is presenting this amendment, amendment No.
13, in response to what I have seen at our ports of entry, which is:
They need more personnel, and they need it today. Let's help them at
the border keep our country safe. Let's give them the personnel and the
resources they need.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Correa).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. CORREA. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California
will be postponed.

Amendment No. 19 Offered by Mr. Grothman

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 19
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 14, line 20, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $1,000,000) (increased by $1,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Wisconsin (Mr. Grothman) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chair, I have been down on the border several times, and every
time we are down there, we learn a little bit more.
My amendment would highlight the need for alternative methods of
management for border wall infrastructure during flood season. The
border wall faces a challenge when the waters rise during flood season.
These floods can jeopardize the structural integrity of the wall,
compromising its effectiveness and putting our border at risk.
During a recent hearing I held in Sierra Vista, Arizona, I was
surprised to discover the way in which we deal with this issue. We deal
with it just by opening up the gates along the wall. You heard that
right. Border Patrol agents are required to open vast sections of the
wall, allowing migrants to flow into the country unimpeded. This comes
at a time when we are facing an unprecedented crisis.
Last month, U.S. officials encountered 230,000 migrants crossing the
border; 180,000 of those migrants crossed the border between ports of
entry, areas that are supposed to be protected by the wall. However,
during flood season, these migrants simply walked through because we
open up the gates.
To address this critical concern, we need to explore alternative
methods and technologies that can protect the border wall.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Again, I understand where the gentleman is coming from,
but, if we look at it, even the prior administration also understood
that the way to address this issue is to put those gates there because
of the flooding.
Congress has been looking at this issue with CBP for the last 15
years, and, while it is not perfect, I do understand the prior two
administrations have come to the same conclusion, and that is: Deal
with the monsoons, the flooding, and they put those doors to make sure
that things are not washed off.
Keep in mind that we are spending about $36 million a mile for every
fence that we put up. That is $36 million a mile. With about $3 to $5
million, we can get the best technology that can include drones, that
could include sensors, that can include so much of the technology to
address that.
Again, if you spent $36 million a mile for a fence, all you need is a
$100 ladder that would take care of the problem that you have. Again, I
will show that, even in Texas, Mr. Chairman, people are concerned about
the flooding over there, and that is why the fence is put a quarter
mile or a half a mile away, so all the landowners that are over here,
they lose their property because you are putting the fence on this
side, so the renters, the property, the private right is gone because
of the fence.
All you have is the river over here. People just walk over here to
the fence and claim asylum. We have to have repercussions at the
border. Whoever is supposed to stay, stay. Whoever is supposed to be
deported should be deported.
Again, we cannot play defense on the 1-yard line, called the U.S.
border. We need to extend the perimeter out there. Again, I feel, Mr.
Chairman, that the wall might be damaged because of the water or the
flooding, but, again, the past administration--the Trump
administration, the Biden administration, and the Bush administration--
all came up with the same conclusion when they got asked to look at
this issue, and they said: You have to put doors or gates so the rain
or the floods don't wash away the fence.
Mr. Chair, I understand where my colleague is coming from, but I will
ask the floor to vote ``no.''
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

{time} 1845

Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Chair, I just reiterate, being at the border and
talking to the members of the Border Patrol who are on the border every
day, they feel the current situation is untenable and is allowing more
people to cross the border than they should.
As far as the idea of simply climbing over a fence, I have yet to
meet anybody on the border, be it Border Patrol agent, be it American
law enforcement, be it people who have land on the border, who do not
feel the wall is a good thing.
They all realize it is a wall system. It takes more than just a wall.
They prefer if we describe it as a wall system, but they all feel we
need additional barriers at the border to prevent this over 200,000
people a month streaming in here.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Grothman).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 23 Offered by Ms. Wasserman Schultz

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 23
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Strike section 213.
Strike section 214.
Strike section 220.
Strike section 221.
Strike section 224.
Strike section 404.
Strike section 405.
Strike section 544.
Strike section 549.
Strike section 550.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentlewoman
from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Florida.

[[Page H4671]]

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chair, my amendment gives my Republican
colleagues a chance to reconsider some of the cruel and reckless
partisan riders tacked onto this atrocity of a Homeland Security bill.
Republicans are really done, obviously, pretending that they just
want people to immigrate here legally. This bill puts their bitter
disdain for all immigrants on clear display because when President
Biden set up legal pathways to reduce pressure at the border, the
radical right objected. They took aim at Dreamers and refugees with
legal status. By taking away their right to work, they threaten to harm
our economy, jack up inflation, and condemn these communities to
poverty in the process. That is not securing the homeland. It is
inflicting vicious harm.
Instead of registering immigrants and offering the chance to work and
pay taxes, this bill would leave immigrants to languish in private
prisons that fail to meet bare minimum standards for convicts, all at
taxpayer expense.
This Republican bill blocks inspections of detention facilities so
our constituents can't see the horrific treatment and squalid
conditions that migrants are forced to endure.
Even that malevolence doesn't satisfy my Republican colleagues.
Listen carefully here. This bill goes further to mandate that every
last one of these prisons is filled to the brim, packed full of people
who have not been convicted of a crime, have not faced a judge, and
have not seen a lawyer.
Finally, this bill blocks legally admitted migrants from being
reunited with their families, separating children, even toddlers, from
their families. Yet, MAGA Republicans will still preach to all of us
about family values.
I know the people they are marginalizing in this bill, people who
come from Venezuela, Cuba, and Haiti. They are my neighbors, my
friends, my children's classmates. They are like family in my
community.
None of us are happy with our immigration system. Why not work toward
a bipartisan plan that balances legal pathways with unbiased
enforcement?
The secret is out: Republicans don't want a solution. They want more
chaos and more heartbreak. They want more desperate people trying their
luck against the Rio Grande or the Florida Straits instead of safely
applying online from home and coming through a port of entry. The pain
is the point for these extremists.
Mr. Chair, I wish my amendment could make sense of this bill, but
these provisions barely scratch the surface. All I can hope is that my
colleagues will show a shred of courage and common sense, even if it
means facing jeers from the radical rightwing fringe, their base who is
holding this majority hostage.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to join me in countering this effort
to deepen the despair of families who have had enough of it for one
lifetime.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, this amendment seeks to strike several
provisions that are crucial to ending the open border crisis that this
administration has created.
While I have heard it just portrayed as somehow being cruel and being
done by names that are called MAGA or other things, if I am not
mistaken, it was just this morning on the news that I happened to see
the mayor, I believe a Democrat, from New York saying they can't take
any more; the Governor of New York, a Democrat, saying they can't take
any more; the Governor of Massachusetts declaring a state of emergency;
the Democratic mayor of Chicago, same issue.
I guess it is our problem, and we are attempting to fix it. The Biden
administration continues to subvert the law and implement policies that
are detrimental to our border security, our national security, and our
overall sovereignty.
This bill includes several provisions to mitigate the misguided and
ineffective policies of the Biden administration that have been
exploited by transnational criminal organizations, human smugglers, and
cartels.
For example, the bill prohibits funds to implement the
administration's prosecutorial discretion guidance, which encourages
DHS attorneys to administratively close nonpriority cases, allowing
aliens to continue living in this country without having any legal
basis to do so.
Additionally, this bill includes a provision prohibiting asylum
officers from making determinations about an alien's credible fear
claims instead of actual immigration judges.
These are only two of the main provisions in the bill that seek to
reverse the damage done in the past 2\1/2\ years and halt the migration
crisis in its tracks.
To strike these provisions would be to tell our constituents that
Congress approves of this administration's catastrophe at the border.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
While they may not admit it, my colleagues on the other side of the
aisle know that what is happening at the border right now is nothing
short of a catastrophe.
Mayors and Governors throughout this country alike are speaking out
on the impact of the illegal migration crisis on communities across the
Nation and are calling on this administration to acknowledge and
resolve the problem at the border. This amendment would only make the
disaster worse.
Mr. Chair, I urge defeat of the amendment, and I reserve the balance
of my time.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chair, I will give a couple of examples of
the type of torture that the language in this bill supports and
endorses.
One provision, section 404, prohibits funds for asylum officers to
adjudicate fear claims, which is the point of our asylum program.

Republicans include the perfect provision to demonstrate that they
value disrupting due process for migrants more than they value speeding
up results for their constituents. They want to block asylum officers,
who receive extensive training and face enough difficulties as it is,
from assessing whether refugees have a reasonable claim to asylum.
While Republicans continue to engage in massive hyperbole, leaving
people with the impression that people are storming the border, this
bill actually prevents a lawful, orderly asylum process from occurring
because the Republicans defund it in this bill.
Another section eliminates the inspections of detention facilities.
All I have heard since the MAGA majority gaveled in this Congress is
oversight, oversight, oversight. Yet, when it comes to our detention
facilities where vulnerable women and families are held indefinitely
without a trial or legal counsel, Republicans want no oversight at all.
These inspections are critical. These inspectors ought to get combat
pay for what they walk into. At one facility in my home State, Mr.
Chair, an investigation found severe violations, including sexual
voyeurism by guards, denial of menstrual products as punishment,
refusal of lifesaving medication and healthcare, beatings, and extended
solitary confinement.
Yet, Republicans in this Homeland Security bill actually eliminate
funding for inspections of detention facilities and allow this torture
to continue. It is outrageous.
Mr. Chair, I will use the balance of my time to underscore my fierce
opposition to these toxic anti-immigrant provisions.
I will always stand up to counterattacks on legal pathways for
migrants. I will also condemn cruelty against the vulnerable, even when
it is justified by deterrence. I will never stay silent when
opportunists try to blind the American people to the trauma we are
inflicting on a generation of refugees.
The extreme MAGA Republicans ignored dozens of commonsense requests
from bipartisan Members regarding detention conditions, preserving
asylum access, and ensuring that Congress upholds its oversight
responsibility.
Mr. Chair, I hope my colleagues will join me in mitigating the most
harmful components of this bill, and I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz).

[[Page H4672]]

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Florida
will be postponed.

Amendment No. 24 Offered by Mr. Burchett

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 24
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. BURCHETT. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 32, line 1, insert ``or across State lines'' after
``United States''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Tennessee (Mr. Burchett) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee.
Mr. BURCHETT. Mr. Chair, the key to this amendment is just four
words: ``or across State lines.''
One of my cosponsors, Mr. Donalds--I guess it is like football
practice this morning--is absent.
This amendment prohibits Federal funds from being used to transport
illegal immigrants over the age of 18 across State lines except for the
purpose of removing the individuals from the country.
As it currently stands, the bill prohibits funds from being used to
transport illegal immigrants into the interior of this country but
fails to recognize there are already folks here illegally.
This amendment will cut wasteful and unnecessary spending of taxpayer
dollars. It will get the Biden administration out of the human
trafficking business. It will focus Homeland Security operations on
removing the people who enter our country illegally.
Mr. Chair, our border States have been overwhelmed by the Biden
administration's pro-illegal immigration agenda since he first came to
office. This amendment would help our border agents do what they are
supposed to do, and that is protect our border and deport illegal
immigrants.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I oppose this amendment.
I trust the work of Border Patrol agents. I trust the work of OFO,
which are the men and women in blue at ports of entry. I trust the Air
and Marine agents. I trust the work of ICE agents. I trust the work of
HSI, Homeland Security agents. I trust the work that they do.
What we are looking at, what wants to be changed, is section 221 that
says that none--this is what the law is right now--none of the funds
appropriated or otherwise made available by this act may be made
available to transport aliens unlawfully present, paroled, or
inadmissible to the United States into the interior of the United
States for purposes other than the enforcement of immigration law.
It is already here. Again, I don't think we ought to be legislating
on the House floor. I think we need to get input from the agents that I
mentioned that I support: Border Patrol, OFO, Air and Marine, ICE, HSI.
I think we need to ask for it, but the law is already there. It says:
cannot go into the interior of the U.S. itself.
Mr. Chair, I stand in opposition, and I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. BURCHETT. Mr. Chair, we are leaving out a key element of this. I,
too, trust our Border Patrol agents. They are underpaid and overworked.
I do not trust this White House. This has four words added to it: ``or
across State lines.'' That is what is currently happening. It needs to
stop, Mr. Chair. That is the bottom line.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Burchett).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BURCHETT. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Tennessee
will be postponed.

{time} 1900

Amendment No. 25 Offered by Ms. Escobar

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 25
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Ms. ESCOBAR. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Strike section 224.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentlewoman
from Texas (Ms. Escobar) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. ESCOBAR. Mr. Chair, my amendment strikes section 224 of the bill,
which mandates that ICE prioritize detention before considering any
other options, such as alternatives to detention.
This mandate is absurd, and for a party claiming to champion fiscal
responsibility, it makes no sense to mandate detention, which is the
most expensive option available.
We know from previous alternatives to detention, like the case
management program run by DHS in 2016, that providing case management
services for migrant families costs the Department roughly $39 per day.
Compare that to the cost of detaining those same families, which is
roughly $300 per day.
The mandate makes no sense, even on the most practical level. The
United States simply does not have the capacity to detain every single
asylum seeker who arrives at our Nation's front door, nor should it.
Furthermore, section 244 of the bill hamstrings DHS' operational
flexibility to effectively manage their resources depending on the
Department's needs at a given time. This could cause a ripple effect of
management issues for several agencies within DHS, including ICE and
CBP, which would further exacerbate the challenges we see in border
communities like mine.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, the amendment before you seeks to
strike a provision in the bill that requires the prioritization of
detention and appropriate GPS monitoring technology for aliens going
through immigration proceedings.
As we continue to see record levels of migrant encounters under this
administration, and our nondetained docket continues to grow
exponentially, we must use every available tool to compel the
Department to enforce the law.
Striking the provision will give the Biden administration a free pass
to continue releasing migrants into the country, a total disregard of
the law. We cannot allow the administration to continue the status quo
that has ravaged our communities.
Mr. Chair, I urge defeat of the amendment, and I reserve the balance
of my time.
Ms. ESCOBAR. Mr. Chair, if my colleagues were truly being honest with
each other, they would admit the proposed Homeland Security
appropriations bill is unworkable and truly will not solve the
challenges that we face.
For this reason, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to
recommit this bill back to committee.
Mr. Chair, this bill pulls money from critical DHS functions and
improvements, including investing in our ports of entry, the CBP One
app, and even endangers public safety by defunding CBP's recently
updated vehicle pursuit policy.
In short, this bill is filled with unworkable, empty promises
Republicans feed their base instead of putting forth real solutions.
I have tremendous respect for my colleague, the gentleman from Ohio,
and I would implore him to work with

[[Page H4673]]

us on a bipartisan solution that is truly workable.
I was born and raised in El Paso, Texas, on the U.S.-Mexico border. I
live there today. I raised my two children there in that beautiful
community.
No one wants safety, security, and order more than those of us who
live there and have invested our lives in those communities. We know
that relying on borders, as my colleague, Representative Cuellar, has
pointed out, is not the answer.
They don't deter or manage, and they don't make migrants go away. All
it does is feed cartels so that they can find other routes for
migrants. We share a commitment to wanting to end that.
We can find a solution and a bipartisan pathway. My colleague, Maria
Salazar, and I have come together to find compromise, to seek true
solutions that uphold our values and actually solve the problems at
hand, and I invite my Republican colleagues to join us.
There is no doubt that this is a very broken system that puts
significant pressure and strain on communities like mine, on NGOs, on
local governments, on our Federal personnel, and, of course, the
incredible inhumanity that migrants endure in order to seek an
opportunity to live and work in our country.
This broken system is a consequence of Congress' inaction. It has
been 37 years since Congress has reformed and passed a comprehensive
immigration law. There is no better time than the present to do that
together, in a bipartisan way.
Depending on unworkable solutions, expecting that Mexico will accept
every migrant, believing we can jail every human being that comes to
our border is unrealistic, and it is not a true solution.
If the House rules permitted, I would have offered a motion to
recommit with an important amendment to this bill.
My amendment would cut the billions of dollars being allocated to the
outdated and expensive border wall and reallocate it to the programs
and services necessary to address a deadly and urgent matter--the
fentanyl smuggling detection and interdiction that is needed at our
ports of entry.
The most effective way to ensure that fentanyl smugglers are caught
and held accountable is to send resources where fentanyl is entering
the country--our ports of entry.
Over 90 percent of fentanyl is seized at these land ports and
interior checkpoints, and it is overwhelmingly smuggled by U.S.
citizens crossing the border legally.
Mr. Chair, I include in the Record the text of my amendment.

Ms. Escobar moves to recommit the bill H.R. 4367 to the
Committee on Appropriations with the following amendment:
Page 13, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $310,274,000)''.
Page 14, line 20, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $658,400,000)''.
Page 14, line 20, after the second dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $317,000,000)''.
Page 14, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $975,400,000)''.
Page 15, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $258,750,000)''.
Page 16, line 21, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(increase by $15,000,000)''.
Page 16, line 21, after the second dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $15,000,000)''.
Page 18, line 16, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $9,676,000)''.
Page 19, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $50,000,000)''.
Page 27, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $658,400,000)''.
Page 27, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $1,052,000,000)''.
Page 27, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $317,000,000)''.
Page 27, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $76,600,000)''.
Page 56, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $14,700,000)''.

Ms. ESCOBAR. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, I certainly appreciate my distinguished
colleague and am always there to work together in a bipartisan fashion
to try to fashion something.
She is right. It is long overdue for Congress to address this
situation, but unfortunately, this is about appropriations and not
authorizations.
Therefore, Mr. Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Escobar).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Ms. ESCOBAR. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Texas will
be postponed.

Amendment No. 26 Offered by Mr. Tony Gonzales of Texas

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 26
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. TONY GONZALES of Texas. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the
desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 33, line 8, insert ``at all detention facilities''
after ``full capacity''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Tony Gonzales) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. TONY GONZALES of Texas. Mr. Chair, I represent a district that is
over 42 percent of the southern border, places that, sadly, nobody knew
very well a few years ago and now everybody knows, places like Eagle
Pass, Del Rio, and El Paso.
Right now in my communities, we are completely overwhelmed. In El
Paso alone, there are over 11,000 people who are here illegally in the
community. That has saturated the situation.
In Eagle Pass, we have come to beyond the breaking point where over
2,000 people are coming illegally. In that community, we are beyond a
point of return, and we need help. We need assistance.
Every instinct in my body is to leave this place and go home and help
the people in my district. It feels as if a Category 5 hurricane has
hit the southern border. This is the absolute worst I have seen it, and
there is no bottom to it. There is no end in sight.
My amendment is simple. My amendment asks to end catch and release
essentially in a humane and orderly way. If there is space, if there is
capacity, instead of DHS releasing migrants into a community that is
already saturated, this amendment asks that they look for other places
where they have capacity.
It is humane and orderly, and most importantly, it would end the
catch-and-release policies that have turned my communities upside down.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I rise respectfully in opposition against
this amendment, but I will say this: My good friend and I share the
border. We will continue working.
I do believe in detention beds. I do believe there is a place for
them. I do believe that we should best utilize the detention beds for
the high-risk detainees, and I believe also that we should give ICE
flexibility.
I will commit to my good friend from Texas (Mr. Tony Gonzales) and to
my other good friend from Ohio (Mr. Joyce) that I will work with them
when we get in conference committee because this is not the final bill.
I will work with them on this particular language.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. TONY GONZALES of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I urge this body to please
grant the people in my district, the people in Eagle Pass, the people
in El Paso some relief. We are beyond a breaking point, and we are
completely overwhelmed.
I am here to urge this body to do something today, not a week, not a
month, not a year, not 10 years from now--today. Ending catch and
release is exactly what our communities need to get some relief.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Tony Gonzales).
The amendment was agreed to.

[[Page H4674]]

The Acting CHAIR. The Chair understands that amendment Nos. 27 and 28
will not be offered.

Amendment No. 29 Offered by Mr. Clyde

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 29
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. CLYDE. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 41, line 9, strike the first dollar amount and insert
``$1,778,222,250''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Georgia (Mr. Clyde) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. CLYDE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to cut
the funding levels for the Department of Homeland Security's
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, also known as CISA,
by 25 percent, which equals about a $592.7 million reduction.
On CISA's website, the agency's mission reads: ``We lead the national
effort to understand, manage, and reduce risk to our cyber and physical
infrastructure.'' Great mission statement.
Unfortunately, CISA has dangerously and nefariously migrated far from
its mission, kind of like one of the illegal aliens coming across our
southern border.
Last year, CISA was involved in the infamous Disinformation
Governance Board established under the Biden administration's
Department of Homeland Security to regulate and police Americans'
speech.
While this dystopian Disinformation Governance Board was rightfully
disbanded a few months later after enormous public outcry, many will be
shocked to learn that CISA has not stopped monitoring Americans' free
speech.
According to a draft copy of DHS' ``Quadrennial Homeland Security
Review,'' CISA drafted plans to target ``inaccurate information'' on a
wide range of topics, including ``the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic,
the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine, racial justice, U.S. withdrawal
from Afghanistan, and the nature of U.S. support to Ukraine.''
Moreover, Twitter's business records suggest that CISA migrated its
true mission to protect the Nation's critical cyber and physical
infrastructure into controlling what Americans can say and what speech
is accessible online.
This is wrong, dangerous, and a massive violation of our
constitutional rights. Americans' First Amendment freedoms shall not be
regulated or controlled by a rogue government agency either directly or
indirectly through Big Tech. This government by proxy censorship has no
place in our constitutional Republic.
For some background, CISA was first created with overwhelming
bipartisan support prior to my service here in the House. Under the
Trump administration, CISA focused on countering foreign cyber
influence. Unfortunately, since the current administration took office,
CISA has aggressively shifted beyond the original mandate of countering
foreign threats.
In January 2021, CISA officials renamed the Countering Foreign
Influence Task Force, one of the key bodies countering foreign
disinformation founded during the Trump administration. They renamed it
to the mis-,
dis-, and malinformation team, or MDM team, meaning they took the word
``foreign'' out of the title. This shift in name represents a shift in
CISA's mission from foreign to domestic to censor American citizens.

{time} 1915

Earlier this year, information was reported that showed members of
CISA had privately characterized those who raised concerns over
government censorship of free speech. CISA had labeled these
individuals bad actors.
CISA needs to return to its original mission of strengthening and
protecting our national cybersecurity and infrastructure, not censoring
free speech and infringing America's First Amendment liberties.
As CISA's budget has drastically increased by 44 percent over the
last 3 fiscal years, this agency has dangerously expanded its mission
to police free speech and to silence the American people.
There is a clear connection here. Given an extraordinary boost in
funding, CISA has weaponized tax dollars to censor Americans and target
speech they find disagreeable. It is time to end this injustice in
order to protect the American people's unalienable First Amendment
rights.
Therefore, I offer this amendment to reduce CISA's funding closer to
its fiscal year 2019-2020 funding level. This agency must be refocused
on its true mission and not get expanded funding to continue
undermining our constitutional rights.
There is nothing like a budget cut to get an agency's attention.
Mr. Chair, I urge all Members to support my amendment in an effort to
stop CISA's Orwellian practices and defend our cherished First
Amendment freedoms.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, we set out to make precise and
calculated cuts in this bill due to CISA's rapid growth over the last
few years. The top line serves effectively as a strategic pause and
significant budget growth. It is $19 million above the fiscal 2023
enacted level, but $130 million below the President's requests.
This provides CISA the opportunity to mature its operations
commensurate with its historic budget growth. This amendment would cut
CISA's operation and support budget by 25 percent on top of what we
have already done.
We had a debate on a cut of this magnitude during full committee
consideration, and I said then, as I do again now, passing this
amendment would make our homeland less secure. This mis-, dis-, and
mal-information language is strong, and I want to commend the gentleman
from Georgia for his valuable edits to those provisions during markup,
which we made sure we addressed in a more holistic way.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment, and
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CLYDE. Mr. Chairman, the only thing that agencies in this town
respect is funding.
Indeed, reduced funding is the only way that we will bring them back
to their core mission. This agency has had a 44 percent increase in
funding, and yet, they have taken that money, and what they have done
to our First Amendment civil liberties, to our rights, is they have
spied upon us.
In the cybersecurity world, they have taken our information and they
have misused it. I think CISA needs a haircut, and I think this haircut
will get their attention.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, it is with the utmost respect I speak
to my colleague. We have had lengthy debates about this in full
committee. I understand and appreciate the desire that he has to defund
or at least severely reduce the budget of this agency.
However, we are at a time in America where it serves as a
clearinghouse for those rogue nations and bad actors that prey upon
Americans on a daily basis. This is something that is not only
important for everybody who works in the cyber communities and cyber
systems, but also for the schools, hospitals, water and sewage
facilities, the gas pipeline, and all those things throughout our
country that don't have a safety net. They have to rely on CISA for
their information in the hope and support because unfortunately the
companies that provide the software do nothing when they are hacked by
these outside influences and actors.
All this agency could do and hope to do is promote that
clearinghouse, if you will, that platform for which we can all come to
an understanding. Bad actors exist and we must prevent it.
I understand and appreciate and will work closely with my colleague
to make sure the things he talks about as far as the attacks on First
Amendment rights never occur in any agency of the United States.
Mr. Chair, at this time I must urge a ``no'' vote, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Clyde).

[[Page H4675]]

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. CLYDE. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia will
be postponed.

Amendment No. 38 Offered by Ms. Tenney

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 38
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Ms. TENNEY. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to pay Secretary Alejandro Nicholas Mayorkas a salary
that exceeds $1.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentlewoman
from New York (Ms. Tenney) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
Ms. TENNEY. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to
reduce Department of Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas' salary to
$1.
Since President Biden has taken office, we have witnessed an
unprecedented invasion on our southern border, causing 6 million
migrants to flood across our border, and including the northern border.
The district that I represent in upstate and central New York
contains most of the New York border region. Secretary Mayorkas has
ended numerous successful border policies by the Trump administration,
including the remain in Mexico policy, building the border wall, and
ending the catch-and-release policy. As a result, all of our
communities have been transformed into border communities, including
New York.
Near my district in Erie County, two migrants were charged, one for
rape and one with a sexual assault. In nearby Rensselaer County, a
migrant has been charged with murder.
These migrants were not vetted, in spite of the false claims of
Governor Kathy Hochul, who claimed they were vetted. Over 100
individuals on the terror watch list have successfully crossed the
southern border, putting all of our communities at risk, including
those in New York.
Secretary Mayorkas is willfully derelict in his duties or is
completely incompetent. Either way, he should no longer be paid
hundreds of thousands of dollars a year for failing to perform the
basic obligations required under our Constitution to protect American
citizens and to provide effective border security and control of our
border.
I was honored to co-lead this amendment with my friend from Texas and
my colleague, Representative Chip Roy. I urge my colleagues to join us
in support of this amendment and to finally hold Secretary Mayorkas
accountable. I am hoping Mr. Roy will join me and speak on behalf of
this amendment.
Mr. Chair, I would say that just this past month we hit a record for
migrant crossings in American history of over 304,000. Despite repeated
pleas and actions by me and my colleagues on this side of the aisle,
Mayorkas refuses to change course and actually secure our border.
Secretary Mayorkas has completely failed to do his job and has
completely doubled down on his failed policies. While Congress
ultimately needs to impeach and remove Secretary Mayorkas, defunding
his salary is a great first start.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
Any Secretary of Homeland Security plays a very critical role in
national security. Secretary Mayorkas has served our country as U.S.
Attorney, director of USCIS, Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security and
now Secretary.
I know that we hear a lot from the other side of the aisle where they
say that the Secretary has not achieved operational control of the
border. Operational control of the border was first defined in the
Secure Fence Act of 2006, and neither the Border Patrol chief nor the
Secretary has yet declared operational control since then.
If you look at it, two Republican Presidents, Bush and Trump, neither
of them obtained operational control. Two Democrats, Obama and Biden,
also have not obtained operational control.
I know how important the Constitution is to my colleagues, and I
would ask you to say that by targeting salaries it is simply
unconstitutional, as pointed out in the United States v. Lovett, a
Supreme Court case from 1946.
If we are going to uphold the Constitution, the Court has said that
targeting salaries is not the right way. We all want to secure the
border, but targeting somebody's salary does not get us to the end that
we want to get to.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no,'' and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Ms. TENNEY. Mr. Chairman, the Holman rule still exists, and we are
exercising our right under the Holman rule.
Mr. Chair, may I inquire much time I have remaining.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman has 2\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Ms. TENNEY. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Roy).
Mr. ROY. Mr. Chairman, I have great respect for my colleague on the
other side of the aisle from Texas. On this matter we disagree.
The Secretary of Homeland Security has entirely abdicated his
responsibility to follow the laws of the United States. He has done so
purposely, he has done so with complete disregard to his constitutional
obligation to run the Department of Homeland Security, which by
definition means he is supposed to secure the homeland--having released
some 2 million people into the United States.
He has come before the House Judiciary Committee, and literally said,
yes, we have operational control of the border, while staring directly
at a statute defining operational control of the border under the
Secure Fence Act. He later went back to the committee and said, no, no,
no, that is not the definition I was talking about. He knew full well
what he was doing.
He is trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the American people
that he is somehow following the laws. That he is somehow following
asylum laws and parole laws when he is using parole--which is supposed
on a case-by-case basis--to literally dump hundreds of thousands of
people into the United States.
Americans are dying. Kids are dying from fentanyl poisoning. The very
migrants that my colleagues say this is supposed to be helpful for are
dying in the Rio Grande or dying on south Texas ranches or getting sold
into the sex trafficking trade, or dying, or getting abused in stash
houses.

This is a blatant disregard of his duty. He should be removed from
office. We sure as hell shouldn't be funding his salary. The Holman
rule exists for us to exercise our Article I authority over an abusive
Article II executive.
It is time for Congress to reassert its authority, to reclaim
control, to use the power of the purse to stop the abusive authority by
this Secretary to endanger the American people, to endanger migrants,
and to undermine our Homeland Security.
Ms. TENNEY. Mr. Chair, may I inquire much time I have remaining.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman has 30 seconds remaining.
Ms. TENNEY. Mr. Chairman, let me just be clear to everyone out there.
The Democrats in New York are against this policy put in place by Joe
Biden and Secretary Mayorkas. Even Mayor Adams of New York City has
blamed Joe Biden. Our current Governor Kathy Hochul has done a 180 and
now she blames Joe Biden. Even former Governor Cuomo is now blaming Joe
Biden for this migrant crisis in New York.
Mr. Chair, 82 percent of New Yorkers, in a recent poll, blame Joe
Biden and Secretary Mayorkas for this migrant crisis in New York, which
is having devastating consequences on our security, and is harming our
taxpayers.

[[Page H4676]]

Mr. Chair, I ask my colleagues to join Congressman Roy and I in
reducing Secretary Mayorkas' salary to $1. I yield back the balance of
my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Tenney).
The amendment was agreed to.

{time} 1930

Amendment No. 39 Offered by Mr. Biggs

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 39
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to pay the salary and expenses of the position of the
Director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security
Agency, occupied by Jen Easterly.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Biggs) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak in support of my amendment,
which prohibits the use of funds to pay the salary and expenses of CISA
Director Jen Easterly.
It is no secret at this point that this administration is waging war
on conservative voices, and Jen Easterly has been at the tip of the
Biden administration's spear to censor American speech.
In the recent case decision of Missouri v. Biden, Judge Doughty
specifically pointed out Ms. Easterly's targeting of conservative
speech for censorship. In fact, Ms. Easterly's censorship efforts were
so explicit and pervasive that Judge Doughty believed that the
plaintiffs in the case are likely to succeed in their claims against
Ms. Easterly and the other Biden administration officials.
This was affirmed recently by the Fifth Circuit. On September 6,
2023, they wrote, ``CISA, however, did flag content. Beyond holding
regular industry meetings with the platforms, CISA officials engaged in
`switchboarding' operations, meaning they acted as an intermediary for
a third-party group by forwarding flagged content from them to the
platforms.''
For her part, Ms. Easterly has both worked with and in some cases
coerced social media platforms to take down and suppress posts that
don't fit into the administration's idea of what the truth is. We know
this because Ms. Easterly herself has said that conservative opinions
that question the administration are not truth but are instead
alternative facts and are dangerous to national security, implying that
terms like truth are for her and the administration to define. She and
other members of the administration have ordered the removal of posts
about Hunter Biden's laptop, the COVID lab-leak theory, the
ineffectiveness of masks and the vaccine, questions about the security
of the 2020 election and future elections, and the state of the
economy. Most of that has been proven objectively to be true, but she
suppressed it as well as suppressing a variety of other posts, which
happened to be inconvenient for the Biden administration.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, I understand and join in the outrage
shared by my colleagues over the CISA mis-, dis-, and malinformation
scandal.
No administration and no government should ever be in the business of
labeling or attempting to convince social media companies that First
Amendment-protected speech is or is not disinformation.
The government is not the arbiter of the truth, a position that even
the ACLU agrees with. That is why we worked diligently to address
government censorship concerns in this bill, and I stand by our
language.
However, this amendment is not targeted at the policies of the Biden
administration that we disagree with. It is targeted at a person who
wasn't in office when CISA engaged in mis-,
dis-, and malinformation activities. While we might not agree with her
policies, the CISA Director has a history of dutiful service to this
country, including a long career in the military.
Director Easterly is a West Point graduate, two-time recipient of the
Bronze Star, retiring from the Army after more than 20 years in
intelligence and cyber operations.
While I empathize with the sponsor on the sentiment behind this
amendment, I cannot support it, and I urge my colleagues to vote
``no.''
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, not only has Ms. Easterly already suppressed
many conservative voices, she has stated that she is preparing to do
the same thing again for the 2024 election; not somebody else in the
administration, not somebody else in CISA, Ms. Easterly has said this.
This continuous and purposeful censorship of conservative voices must
stop.
Just as we saw in the last amendment with Secretary Mayorkas, using
the Holman rule helps us do our job and do our duty.
In July, Federal Judge Doughty of the Western District of Louisiana
gave a memo decision in the case of the State of Missouri v. Joseph R.
Biden, Jr. As part of his conclusions, Judge Doughty stated multiple
times that it was likely the plaintiffs in this case will prevail on
their ultimate case of censorship and suppression of conservative
voices by the Biden administration.
The primary means of censorship by the defendants in the case was by
colluding with and in some cases ordering social media companies to ban
conservative individuals on their platforms and to take down posts
which dared to question the Biden administration on a number of
important issues.
Among the defendants listed by Terry Doughty as having directed this
purposeful policy of censorship are CISA Director Jen Easterly. I urge
my colleagues to join me in this important endeavor of holding someone
accountable. I don't know what more we need to do, but certainly we
should hold Ms. Easterly accountable.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Cuellar), the ranking member.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chairman, I join the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
Joyce), my chairman, in strong opposition to this amendment.
CISA Director Easterly leads an organization of over 3,000 dedicated
public servants who play a critical role in our national security.
First, Director Easterly is the operational lead for Federal
cybersecurity charged with protecting and defending the Federal
civilian executive branch networks, the dot-gov we all rely on.
Second, CISA serves as the national coordinator for critical
infrastructure security and resilience, working with partners across
government and industry to make sure that we protect and defend our
Nation's critical infrastructure from bad actors.

Again, when you target somebody by name and you want to reduce their
salary, it is unconstitutional. Targeting salaries is unconstitutional,
as pointed out by United States v. Lovett, a Supreme Court case from
1946.
I join the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Joyce), my good friend, in asking
my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the two-on-one here. No, that is
fine. I am just kidding you guys.
Here is the deal. Not only is this critical that you hold people
accountable, but this person, this Director lied in response to a
question from Representative Cloud on this particular issue, on these
issues that we were talking about in testimony in the approps oversight
hearing earlier this year.
It is my opinion that if we fail to hold this person accountable,
then we are going to see like things happen in the future. When you
provide a specific deterrent, you also provide a general deterrent, and
that is the way a justice system works. That is the way you hold people
accountable.
Mr. Chair, in closing, I appreciate my colleagues who don't want to
see this

[[Page H4677]]

done. It is not unconstitutional to do this. This is a good way to hold
people accountable. That is one of the jobs of the United States
Congress, to hold people accountable.
What did the Founders give us? They gave us the purse strings. In
this instance, it seems to me that this individual should have her
salary eliminated.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, in closing, I disagree. I understand
and appreciate the concerns of my colleague and certainly feel that,
again, they have been addressed in what we could do within the confines
of an appropriations bill. I urge a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will
be postponed.

Amendment No. 40 Offered by Mr. Biggs

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 40
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to pay the salary and expenses of the position of
Director for the Election Security Initiative of the
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, occupied by
Geoffrey Hale.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Biggs) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, this may seem like Groundhog Day, but I am
going anew. I rise to speak in support of my amendment which prohibits
the use of funds to pay the salary and expenses of CISA Director of
Election Security Initiative Geoffrey Hale.
As outlined in Judge Doughty's memo decision in the Missouri v. Biden
case, as Director Hale worked with social media companies to censor
conservatives who speak out against the Biden administration, he was
singled out by the judge.
Under the guise of protecting national security and election
integrity, Mr. Hale and his team purposely suppressed social media
posts that went against the Biden administration's view of what they
considered the truth to be.
CISA seems to believe itself to be the ultimate arbiter of truth,
ordering social media companies to suppress and ban posts and users
that dare to question their side of the story, that dare to speak up
for what they believe. Listen to what I am saying, please.
That is what was going on in the agency that was supposed to protect
cybersecurity and our elections.
The blatant censorship by Mr. Hale and others of constitutionally
protected speech has got to end. It is the weaponization of government
against the American people. It is up to us to stand up against that.
I urge my colleagues to join me in passing this amendment. At some
point we are going to have to recognize that we need to hold people
accountable.
Now, I appreciate my colleagues who oppose this, but I will just tell
you something. I don't think we can say we can't do this in the
appropriations bill. We have already done something else in the
appropriations bill. We just passed by voice vote a defunding of the
Secretary of Homeland Security. Why cannot we hold these people
accountable? I think we can.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, I empathize with wanting to hold this
administration accountable for its many failed border and immigration
policies. I also join in the outrage shared by my colleagues over the
CISA mis-, dis-, and malinformation scandal.
Labelling Americans' First Amendment-protected speech as mis-, dis-,
or malinformation is not a role for any government agency, whether
there is a Democrat or Republican in the White House. However, this
amendment targets a career civil servant who was not in charge of
creating the policy on which we disagree.
We worked diligently in our bill to address the security failures and
censorship concerns associated with this administration. I stand by our
language.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Cuellar), the ranking member.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
Joyce), my good friend, for yielding. Again, I stand in opposition to
the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs) on this amendment.
What we are looking at here is CISA Director of Election Security
plays a critical role in our national security. Director Hale has
served his role in many administrations as a career civil servant under
Republican and Democratic administrations.
Again, I say that targeting salaries is unconstitutional, as pointed
out in United States v. Lovett, a Supreme Court case from 1946. I join
my chairman, Mr. Joyce, in urging our colleagues to vote ``no.''
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, I again appreciate my colleagues and their
position. I fundamentally disagree. You have a heavy burden when you
are going to enjoin people. When this case came before the court, the
CISA Director of Election Security Initiative, Geoffrey Hale, was one
of the defendants that was found to be one of the officials of this
administration that was engaged in a clear and focused policy of using
the Department of Homeland Security to stop conservatives from
questioning the Biden administration on social media, even if it meant
censoring constitutionally protected speech.
I guess we have a fundamental difference here. I appreciate and
understand what my colleagues who oppose this measure are saying, but I
am just not certain what we are going to do then. How are we going to
stand up to an administration where every institution of this
administration has been weaponized: FBI, DOJ, Department of Education,
the border security leadership.

{time} 1945

We have CISA and the people who are running CISA leading areas that
are systematically suppressing speech and censoring speech.
This isn't me saying it. It is a court of law saying it after
evidentiary hearings. It is through admissions, through discovery of
these individuals. That is why these individuals lost in court, but
there is no other way to hold them accountable.
Holding an administration accountable is one thing, but holding an
individual accountable for systematically participating in violations
of our First Amendment rights, this is the way we do it. This is the
way we should do it.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to join me, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, I don't want to make any arguments
other than to say that I urge a ``no'' vote on this, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will
be postponed.

Amendment No. 41 Offered by Mr. Biggs

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 41
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.

[[Page H4678]]

Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to pay the salary and expenses of the position of the
Under Secretary of the Office of Strategy, Policy, and Plans
at the Department of Homeland Security, occupied by Robert
Silvers.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Biggs) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I rise to speak in support of my amendment,
which prohibits the use of funds to pay the salary and expenses of the
DHS Under Secretary for the Office of Strategy, Policy, and Plans,
Robert Silvers.
Much of my argument is the same. In a court hearing, they are found
to have violated the free speech rights of Americans systematically.
They are going to lose in court, and we have an opportunity to hold
them accountable.
I feel the need to try to throw maybe a slider instead of a fastball.
I am reminded of George Mason, who said many years ago something to the
effect that because individuals can be punished and rewarded in Heaven
but nations can't, nations need to be held accountable on Earth. I am
now making an appeal that we hold individuals where we can accountable
on Earth.
What we have are people who systematically defied the rights of
American citizens for no other reason than they didn't like what was
being said about the administration. They politicized their position,
and we are going to hold them accountable. I thought it was $17 million
or something like that that was going to come off their overall budget.
Maybe I am off on that--$19 million? I was pretty close.
Let me give you another example. Somebody said recently that they
will take responsibility for that, for a problem that this
administration was doing. That begs the question: How did you take
responsibility for it? You can't just say, ``I take responsibility. I
take the full blame.'' No. What did you do? What did you do to take
blame? Were you fired? Were you reprimanded? What happened?
If you don't hold people accountable, they will persist. There is a
theory of punishment in criminal law--and I practiced criminal law--and
it was, why do you have punishment and sentencing at all? You have
punishment and sentencing for public safety. That is one reason.
You also have two kinds of deterrents. You have a general deterrent
and a specific deterrent. If you have a specific deterrent, you are
trying to teach that individual that that conduct is not acceptable and
cannot happen again, so you punish them in whatever way you can that is
appropriate. A general deterrent is when the entire society--in this
instance, it is the Federal bureaucracy that says, if we do that, we
are subject to specific deterrents--in other words, maybe even the
elimination of our position, elimination of our salary, whatever it may
be.
If we don't hold people accountable, this action will persist because
there will be no specific or general deterrents.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment of
my friend from Arizona.
The DHS Under Secretary for the Office of Strategy, Policy, and Plans
plays a critical role in our national security. The Senate confirmed
this position to do certain things. At his confirmation, Mr. Silvers
said that the Department must secure the borders. It must be relentless
in disrupting the human and drug trafficking organizations that inflict
such devastation. It must administer our immigration system securely
and humanely and must also facilitate the lawful flows of trade and
travel that power this economy.
Again, we might have some differences on how we secure the border. We
did have an opportunity the last 2 years in the Homeland appropriations
that we added $2.4 billion, a 15 percent increase, to Homeland the last
couple of years. I remind my colleagues that except for two members of
the Republican Party that are still serving, everybody else voted no on
securing the borders--hiring more Border Patrol, hiring more ICE
agents, hiring more RFO, Air and Marine, technology. Except for two
Members that are still serving on the Republican side, everybody voted
no.
If we want to secure the border, let's look at how we do that. Again,
I say this just because we might have differences on how we do it, but
to target an individual, I would assume it would violate the Bill of
Attainder Clause of the Constitution. In fact, targeting an individual
by name is unconstitutional, as pointed out in United States v. Lovett,
a Supreme Court case in 1946.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this
unconstitutional amendment. If we want to have a debate on border
policy, we certainly can do that.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to the time remaining.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arizona has 1\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I appreciate my colleague talking about the
border. I wasn't going to bring up the border because that is not what
my main beef is with this amendment. My beef was about the censorship
of U.S. citizens, but if you want to talk border, let's talk border.
I have to clear up one fact that I hear so often from my colleagues
across the aisle. When they say something like 90 percent of all the
fentanyl that is coming across the border is seized at ports of entry,
that is a total sham statement. Ninety percent of interdictions take
place at ports of entry, not 90 percent of the drugs coming across.
Why do you stop 90-plus percent at the ports of entry? Because that
is where the X-ray machines are, where the dogs are, where the
personnel is.
You have all the equipment, but do you know where you don't have
equipment? How about the 62-linear miles of the Tohono O'odham Nation
Reservation in southern Arizona, which is one of the busiest drug and
human trafficking corridors in the world?
This Under Secretary has not secured the border. That is two strikes.
I want to get back to the CISA argument because we have an individual
who systematically is okay with censoring United States citizens who
are exercising First Amendment rights, but if we want to talk border, I
will be here till hell freezes over to talk about why we need to make
changes in the Homeland Security folks on the border.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will
be postponed.

Amendment No. 42 Offered by Mr. Biggs

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 42
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to pay the salary and expenses of the position of the
Assistant Secretary for Counter Terrorism and Threat
Prevention at the Department of Homeland Security, occupied
by Samantha Vinograd.

[[Page H4679]]

prohibits the use of funds to pay the salary and expenses of the DHS
Assistant Secretary for Counterterrorism and Threat Prevention,
Samantha Vinograd.
When she was senior adviser for national security, Ms. Vinograd took
her role of surveilling and stopping terrorist threats against our
Nation and turned it on the American people.
As outlined by Judge Doughty in his memo ruling in the Missouri v.
Biden case, Ms. Vinograd and her colleagues purposefully and
systematically targeted American conservatives who dared to exercise
their right of freedom of speech.
This is on issues that later proved to be accurate objectively,
ranging from COVID-19 origins, lab leak theory, the Hunter Biden
laptop. The DHS explicitly sought to suppress statements and posts that
made the Biden administration look bad.
Turning the counterterrorism role of the DHS on the American people
and engaging in explicit government censorship of constitutionally
protected speech constitutes a major breach of trust.
Despite this--or, more likely, because of it--Ms. Vinograd was
promoted. She wasn't held accountable.
The court names her as a responsible defendant for this activity. She
wasn't held responsible. She was promoted to Assistant Secretary for
Counterterrorism and Threat Prevention.
In her new position, Ms. Vinograd is no doubt even more of a threat
to conservatives who wish to exercise their constitutional right of
freedom of speech.
Unelected bureaucrats like Ms. Vinograd cannot be allowed to continue
to censor Americans and to decide for themselves what is worthy of
being called the truth.
Mr. Chair, I urge the passage of my amendment.
Now, I want to add something different this time, as well. Elected
officials have an accountability measure built in. Leave out
impeachment or anything else, our voters elect us. They look at us with
scrutiny. We stand before them. We tell them what we intend to do. They
look at our record to see how successful we were in doing what we said
we would do. You do not have the same ability with a bureaucrat.
The reason that we know about these things, as we began to see these
things, is you had an attorney general and several attorneys general
come together and file a lawsuit, and a court, in looking at the
discovery and taking evidence, said the plaintiffs here, the attorneys
general, the States, are going to probably win this. Why? Because
people like this bureaucrat, Ms. Vinograd, abused her authority and
violated the constitutional rights of American citizens. Seems to me
that someone like that should not be in the pay of the American
Government.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
Respectfully, to my colleague, again, if we are concerned about the
security of the country, national security, border security, again, I
will remind that the last couple of years, we have added over $2.4
billion to the Homeland Security bill, and there were only two of my
Republican colleagues that are still in Congress that voted for the
increase.
If we are concerned about security and the work that we are doing--
terrorism, counterterrorism, and threat--we all should have voted for
the appropriation bill.

{time} 2000

Mr. Chair, let me bring up some figures again. We know as of July
2023, just a couple months ago, 92.9 percent of the fentanyl, 93
percent of the heroin, 94.1 percent of the meth were seized at the
ports of entry and interior checkpoints.
If you look at the U.S. Sentencing Commission, 86 to 87 percent of
the people that were caught with drugs were U.S. citizens. I want to go
after anybody that brings drugs in but, again, we, as Members of
Congress, have the constitutional duty to provide oversight over the
budget. The way we provide oversight is not by targeting somebody by
name and going after their salary.
Again, this will violate the Bill of Attainder Clause in the U.S.
Constitution, and it would also be in violation of the Supreme Court
case of 1946 that we have mentioned before.
If we want to provide oversight, there is a way of doing it and it is
not targeting somebody without their due process and basically firing
that individual.
Again, if we want to go ahead and debate how much money we put in, we
can do that, but not by targeting somebody against the Constitution.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, may I inquire how much time is remaining.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arizona has 2 minutes remaining.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, I would rebut a couple of things. When you
quote statistics saying 94 percent of all drugs coming into the country
are stopped at interior checkpoints or ports of entry, that is an
inaccurate statement. It is 94 percent of drugs that are interdicted,
that we catch, that is where you catch them.
Why do you catch them there? I mean, this is not rocket science. You
catch them there because you have personnel there. You have drug-
sniffing dogs. You have X-ray machines that are looking at trucks. You
have personnel there.
But I will tell you what you don't have. Come with me to San Miguel
Gate.
I have been all over southern Texas. I have been all over southern
Arizona and Southern California. Come with me to San Miguel Gate. There
is nothing near the San Miguel Gate. The nearest town south of the
border is Caborca; that is 2 hours away.
You know what happens? You have more got-aways, known and unknown,
through that sector than anywhere else in the country.
Good grief. They don't want to be caught because they are the ones
that are bringing in drugs and human trafficking. That is just kind of
a fallacious argument.
The next thing is when you say, only two people voted to increase
Homeland Security funding, it was because it was an omnibus bill. You
had every Christmas tree ornament in the world on that puppy, just
enough to drive every Republican off but two.
Yeah, if we had done 12 bills like so many of us advocate, you might
have seen a different thing. You might have seen a kind of a joinder of
stuff. This does not violate the Bill of Attainder provision of the
Constitution. It doesn't violate a court decision. What this is is
adherence to the Holman Rule?
Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption, and I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will
be postponed.

Amendment No. 43 Offered by Mr. Biggs

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 43
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to pay the salary and expenses of the position of the
Director of the Departmental GAO-OIG Liaison Office for the
Department of Homeland Security, occupied by Jim Crumpacker.

[[Page H4680]]

Director Crumpacker leads DHS's Department of OIG liaison office, an
office tasked with maintaining mutually beneficial and productive
relations with GAO and the OIG. That is what Mr. Crumpacker stated in
testimony before the Senate several years ago.
Unfortunately, under the Biden administration, that mutually
beneficial and productive relationship has broken down completely.
DHS continues to obstruct oversight by its own inspector general in
violation of the agency's obligations under the Inspector General Act.
Last year, then-Ranking Member Comer and Oversight Committee
Republicans opened an investigation into reports that the Department of
Homeland Security was obstructing efforts by their inspector general to
conduct oversight over DHS programs and policies consistent with its
obligations under the Inspector General Act.
At the time the letter was sent, committee Republicans had uncovered
a memo circulated to Customs and Border Protection employees, which
essentially encouraged CBP employees to resist OIG's request for access
to CBP systems.
Think of that. You have a memo going out to CBP employees saying,
Don't cooperate with the OIG. The memo falsely claimed that OIG's
access to information was not unlimited, contrary to the statute,
incorrectly relying on a statute that limited public disclosure of
information.
To be clear, the Inspector General Act contains no such limitation.
DHS/OIG has a statutory mandate to have timely access to all records,
reports, audits, reviews, documents, papers, recommendations, or other
materials from DHS components, with only a narrow national security
exemption that requires Congressional notification. Unfortunately, DHS
continues to slow-walk and stonewall oversight efforts.
In June, Inspector General Cuffari came to committee and testified
under oath that:
Since the fall of 2021, DHS/OIG has consistently reported DHS delays
and denials of DHS/OIG's request for information.
These are requests for information allowed under statute, and a
response is mandated. These are requests for information that our more
than 700 career professionals need in order to do their jobs in the OIG
offices and which DHS is required to provide to DHS/OIG consistent with
the statute.
I remain hopeful that DHS will improve its responsiveness to our
requests for information so that DHS/OIG can continue to provide
Congress and the public robust and timely oversight with the words that
Inspector General Cuffari said.
I appreciate his optimism, but after nearly 3 years, Congress may
need to start twisting some arms.
This is the place, this is the individual who has put his thumb on
the scale to prevent that information from going to the inspector
general, information that we need, and we need the results of that OIG
report.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, again, this amendment violates the Bill of
Attainder Clause of the U.S. Constitution. This amendment, again, by
targeting someone by name is unconstitutional as pointed out by U.S. v.
Lovett, a Supreme Court case from 1946.
Again, I would go back. If we are so interested in border security
and national security, we had a chance to add $2.4 billion to CBP's
budget authority, an increase of 15 percent. It doesn't matter what the
vehicle was. The bottom line is some people who voted, except for two
of my Republican colleagues, voted against pay raises for Border
Patrol, the mental health services that we provided, college help also,
clothing allowance, technology, canines, everything that is so
important to border security, except for two of my colleagues who are
still in Congress.
Again, you can say that I didn't like the vehicle and this pay raise
for Border Patrol and the other help that we provided. The bottom line
is some folks voted against border security, and now we are trying to
come back to try to change the narrative.
Again, I would say that it violates the Bill of Attainder Clause of
the U.S. Constitution and the Lovett case of 1946. If we want to
provide oversight, there are ways, and I will be happy to sit down with
my colleague from Arizona and go over that.

Mr. Chair, I ask my colleagues to vote ``no,'' and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, may I inquire how much time is remaining.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arizona has 1\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, let's litigate the border some more, and let's
talk about how these things get funded.
If that is the new deal that you throw an omnibus bill because you
don't bother to do your 12 bills and you are going to say, Oh, you
voted against something, then we should start talking about all of the
bad programs and policies that you all voted for in that omnibus bill
that has left us with $2 trillion in deficit this year. That is what
you did. You added $2 trillion to the national debt.
Mr. Chair, the bottom line is they have an individual here, Mr.
Crumpacker, who has basically said we are not going to provide
information to the DHS-OIG.
What are we going to do about it? We are going to say, Oh, that is
just too bad. That is too bad.
Mr. Chair, we have a massive border problem. I don't even think my
colleague across the aisle would disagree with that.
Last Friday in the Rules Committee, the gentleman from Massachusetts
said there was no border crisis. I thought that was intriguing. You got
11,000 people rolling through the Tucson sector. Those are the
encounters. They don't get those kinds of groups in Tucson because they
are getting the runners. But you know what, the whole border is in
disarray, and that is between the ports of entry.
That is your ports of entry that you are so pleased with. You have
the CBP One app bringing people in by the tens of thousands. I think we
need to hold Mr. Crumpacker responsible.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will
be postponed.

Amendment No. 44 Offered by Mr. Biggs

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 44
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to pay the salary and expenses of the position of the
Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, occupied by
Alejandro Mayorkas.

[[Page H4681]]

Can you tell me, do we have operational control of the border?
He says: Oh, yeah, we have operational control of the border.
Okay. Then how come you have set a record every month?
At that point, he had set a record every month, from February 2021;
every month a new record. In fact, last month we had another new
record: 304,000 encounters.
We brought him into the Committee on the Judiciary. He is under oath
at that point.
Do you know what the definition of operational control of the border
is?

{time} 2015

Oh, yeah.
Do we have it?
Yeah, we have it.
Then, Mr. Secretary, why in the world are we seeing literally tens of
thousands of people, 8 to 9,000 most days, some days 10, 12, 13,000
people? That is a violation of that act.
He says, Look, we have control.
The last time we had him in, what, just a month, month-and-a-half
ago: Mr. Secretary, hey, do you have operational control?
And he says, Yeah.
We bring out the poster with the statute again and said, Hey, take a
look at the statute.
He says, Oh, no, no. We don't have operational control with that. We
have defined our own operational control.
That is the kind of person that needs to be held accountable.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr.
Scalise), our distinguished majority leader, who we are so happy to see
with us on the floor tonight.
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend from Arizona for leading
and for his leadership on the border, on this amendment, on this issue.
I rise in strong support of the amendment. As I see my friend from
Ohio, Mr. Joyce, I rise in strong support of his legislation. Frankly,
Mr. Chairman, all of us here in the House and Senate, as we talk about
the necessary funding of government, should be talking about what we
need to do to secure America's border, and it should start with the
Secretary of Homeland Security, who has been derelict in his job, and
this is the most important job that he has.
Not only has he gone before committees and said, Yes, the border is
secure, as Mr. Biggs talked about, he said there is operational
control. Do you know who has operational control of the border? The
drug cartels have operational control of the border.
It has become a multibillion-dollar industry for the drug cartels to
bring people across our border--not just from South America, Central
America--from all over the world, over 140 countries, millions of
people. He can't even tell you what the real number is. Is it 5
million? Is it 8 million?
This Department of Homeland Security won't even tell you what that
number is of how many millions of people have come into our country
illegally since he took this job, since Joe Biden became President of
the United States and systematically destroyed the things that were
working to secure America's border.
More people than live in my home State of Louisiana have entered our
country illegally since Joe Biden became President of the United
States. They can't even tell you where they are going. We see mayors
all around the country, livid--Republican mayors, Democrat mayors. It
doesn't matter what your party affiliation is. It is wrecking cities.
Read comments from the mayor of New York City himself, Mayor Adams.
The cost of migrants will destroy New York City. You have people,
leaders--Republican, Democrat--all across America pleading with
President Biden to address this problem, and he refuses. He doesn't
want to solve this problem.
Secretary Mayorkas doesn't want to do his job and solve this problem.
The tools are there. The ability is there. They dismantled the things
that were working day one, and so what we have done as House
Republicans is brought legislation, not just today in Mr. Joyce's bill,
but we brought H.R. 2, the border security package that we passed
months ago, to take necessary steps to secure America's border.
It has been sitting over in the Senate. They don't want to take
action on this. The United States Senate has sat back and done not a
single thing to secure the border. They want to pass a CR over here
that continues the open border policy, meaning millions more people
coming across our border illegally to communities all across America.
I have gone to our border. I have embedded with our Border Patrol
agents. You don't need to re-invent the wheel to know how to fix this
problem. Our Border Patrol agents will tell you what needs to happen to
fix this problem. They have told the President. He doesn't want to take
those steps.
This House took those steps, but more of those steps need to be
funded, and that is what Mr. Joyce did in his bill that the Committee
on Appropriations put together, to actually fund more Border Patrol
agents, to give them more technology, to build the wall. Yes, walls
work. Technology works.
Border Patrol agents want to do their job because they don't want the
drug cartels having operational control like Secretary Mayorkas has
allowed them to have. If he is going to be derelict in his duty, we are
not going to be derelict in ours, and so why don't we work until we get
this right, not only here in the House, which we have done and we are
going to continue to do, but until the Senate finally realizes it is a
problem worth taking up for America, until the President of the United
States finally realizes this is a problem worth taking up for the
American people, who are sick and tired of an open southern border.
It is not just because it is open. It is because of the problems that
are coming with it every single day. We are losing 150 young people who
are dying every single day in America from the drug overdoses that are
coming in from the open southern border.
Imagine if an airplane fell out of the sky every single day in
America. How long would it take for us to stop everything we are doing
and fix that? It wouldn't be a week that would go by that we would
allow that to happen as a country, and, yet, it has been going on for
over a year and a half, over 2 years, every community.
Talk to coroners in any community in America and ask them how many
fentanyl deaths they are seeing of young people. I had a high school
group here not long ago, and I said, How many of you know someone who
died of a fentanyl overdose? Every single hand went up.

These are our young people in America that they are poisoning with
drugs made in China, infiltrated through our southern border because
the drug cartels have been allowed to have operational control of our
border by a Secretary who says it is under control. If that is under
control, I don't know what he would consider out of control.
We are fed up with this problem. America is fed up with this problem.
Look at what they are saying all around the country. The whole
mainstream media is covering this issue. It is not like this issue is
under radar anymore. Six months ago, it was. This issue wasn't being
covered for a long time.
I have to give credit to a lot of my colleagues who represent border
communities, because they are on the front lines. They started getting
vocal, because they started seeing it before anybody else did. They
started raising alarms, and they said, This is a crisis.
Then others started going down to the border. We have taken over 150
delegations down to the border, Members of Congress, again, embedding
with Border Patrol agents, talking about the problem, listening to our
Border Patrol agents, who are telling us what needs to happen. That is
how we built the legislation we passed. That is how we built the
legislation we are working on passing here on this floor right now.
Look at what they are saying all around the country. Everybody is
seeing this except the President of the United States and the United
States Senate. We are not going to be quiet about this. We are going to
continue fighting until we get this problem fixed. America demands it.
America deserves it. We need to secure our border.
That is what this bill does. It is a package of bills. It has been
months in the works. It is time for the President to pay attention to
this crisis and join with us as we talk about funding the government.
You fund the government

[[Page H4682]]

to address the problems that this country is facing, and this open
southern border is at the top of that list.
Let's get this done.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, first of all, let me just say, as a point of
privilege, it is so good to see my good friend from Louisiana. Again, I
am with him all the way. I appreciate it.
We disagree on this amendment. We might agree on defunding other
things, but not this particular one.
I will say, again, in the last 2 years, we added $2.4 billion to the
CBP operation moneys. From there, we added moneys for more Border
Patrol agents, more CBP officers, new intel specialists, trade
enforcement staff, and other personnel. We added additional technology
at the ports of entry. We added initiatives that support CBP workforce,
such as suicide prevention, wellness efforts, uniform allowances,
tuition allowance, to make sure that we support our men and women in
green, in blue, and Homeland Security in general.
Again, I will say that, if we support them, except for two Members
that are still on my Republican side, all voted against supporting
Border Patrol in all this. If we are so interested, why did we vote on
$2.4 billion of moneys for Border Patrol?
Again, this is something that I would ask you to look at. Again, what
we should be focusing right now is: How do we keep our government open?
Folks said, If you pass H.R. 2, and we are going to go ahead and get
the job done. It is right in the Senate. If this bill passes the floor,
it is going to be in the Senate.
What we ought to be focusing on is: How do we keep the government
open? Again, I would remind my colleagues that, if you look at the last
five shutdowns, the House Republicans controlled the House. On November
13, 1995, the Republicans controlled the House; December 15, 1995, it
was the Republicans who controlled the House; September 30, 2013, the
Republicans controlled the House; January 19, 2018, the Republicans
controlled the House; December 21, 2018, again, the Republicans
controlled. We had shutdowns, and, again, if we are not careful, the
Republican-controlled House will have another shutdown at 12:01 this
coming Sunday.
Again, we want to work with you. We want to sit down. You know my
position. I have always said that I don't like open borders, and we
have to make sure that we secure the border. Again, people talk about
crime. I can pick any city. I will say New Orleans. If I pick New
Orleans, you will see that crime is lower per 100,000 than in my
hometown of Laredo. Rape, murder, assaults, those crimes are lower. Our
border is safe.
Now, that is on the crime part. If you want to talk about migration,
I agree we need to do more on that, but cutting somebody's salary
doesn't get us to what we need. We need to make sure that we stop
playing defense on the one-yard line, called the U.S. border.

What we need to do is to do what happened in 2015 and 2019. President
Barack Obama sat down with the Mexicans and said, Hey, you have to stop
people from coming to the border, and guess what? The numbers went
down.
In 2019, President Trump did the same thing, and asked the Mexicans,
Hey, stop the people from coming in. Guess what? The numbers came down.
We need to make sure that we put authorities--and I emphasize--
authorities for Homeland, where they can do more outside the U.S.
border, because otherwise, we are not going to see the same thing we
saw in 2015 and 2019.
We keep playing defense on the one-yard line. I want to secure the
border, but, again, if you want to stop drugs, I will say it again,
most of the drugs will be coming in--again, the latest numbers from
July of 2023, 92.9 percent of the fentanyl, 93 percent of the heroin,
94.1 of the meth were seized at the ports of entry and interior
checkpoints.
Again, I will say that, if you look at the U.S. Sentencing
Commission, 86 to 87 percent of the people that were caught with drugs
were U.S. citizens. I don't care who brings in drugs. I want to make
sure that they are put in jail.
Again, I will say this: I know that a lot of you believe in the
border wall, but if you look, this is fencing all here, and this is
where the heat map shows. Why? Because the border fence is a quarter
mile to a mile away from the river where the international border is.
Keep in mind--I agree with you--89 to 90 percent of the people asking
for asylum don't get granted asylum officers. What we ought to be doing
is sending judges and asylum officers down here to make sure that we do
our job over here.
If we need to deport somebody, I will be the first one to say, Deport
that individual, but, again, putting a wall, $36 million a mile, when
you can get $3 to $5 million for the drones.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Molinaro). Members are reminded to direct their
remarks to the Chair.

{time} 2030

Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to the time remaining.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arizona has 2 minutes remaining.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, let's talk about which side wants to get
something done on the border. I keep hearing about the magnificent omni
bill. How many Democrats voted for H.R. 2 in this House? Not one. Don't
tell me that you care about the border. You didn't vote to secure the
border with H.R. 2.
When you say Americans are importing the drugs, first of all, you got
it wrong again. I don't think you are listening. Ninety-two percent of
the drugs they catch, that is what they catch. It is what they
interdict. That is what they stop. That is who they arrest. That takes
place at the ports of entry. That ain't where 92 percent of the drugs
are coming through.
They are coming through the places wide open where there is no
fencing in Arizona. We don't have the river. We have four-strand
barbed-wire fence in places. They are coming through there. It is
considered the number one drug trafficking corridor in the world.
Don't be telling me that we are stopping 92 percent of the drugs
because we are not. Don't show me a heat map of where people are coming
through in Texas. That is xenophobic. You need to spread out. Don't be
so parochial.
Let's go to Arizona. I will take you to Cocopah. We will stand right
there. Literally hundreds of people walk on through. They are not
coming from the Northern Triangle states. They are coming from
Mauritania. They are coming from Mali and Togo. They are coming from
all over the world.
Don't say that you guys care about the border because you are not
doing a damn thing to stop it.
What is happening on the border is a crisis. It is the largest mass
migration in the history of this entire world. It is time you join us
and bring it under control because it is bringing crime.
Laredo is great. Good.
Do you know what they are releasing in Cochise County now? Secretary
Mayorkas is calling them freedom runs. We are just going to release
people into the community and call them freedom runs.
Mr. Chair, it is time to do something, and I urge my colleagues to
vote for my amendment.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. Members are reminded to direct their remarks to the
Chair.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 45 Offered by Mr. Biggs

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 45
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to implement, administer, or enforce the rule
entitled ``Public Charge Ground of Inadmissibility''
published by the Department of Homeland Security in the
Federal Register on September 9, 2022 (87 Fed. Reg. 55472).

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman

[[Page H4683]]

from Arizona (Mr. Biggs) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I rise to speak in support of my amendment,
which prohibits the use of funds in furtherance of the public charge
ground of inadmissibility rule.
Section 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that any
alien who is likely at any time to become a public charge is
inadmissible for entry or a readjustment of status. Any alien at any
time who might become a public charge is inadmissible for entry or even
for readjustment of status. Think about that.
Someone is a public charge if they are likely to become primarily
dependent on the government for subsistence, as demonstrated by either
receipt of public cash assistance for income maintenance or
institutionalization for long-term care at government expense.
The primary factor that the DHS is supposed to look at when
determining if someone is or will likely be a public charge is the
likelihood that the person will be reliant on government benefits and
services, such as Medicaid and SNAP.
This past December, the DHS greatly reduced the number of public
benefits considered when determining whether an immigrant is or will be
a public charge and thus inadmissible for entry or permanent residency.
The Trump administration rightly included programs such as SNAP,
housing vouchers, and Medicaid in its determinations on whether an
individual would be a public charge. However, President Biden and
Secretary Mayorkas have decided that not only should we take in
thousands of illegal aliens every day but that they should receive the
same benefits that thousands of struggling Americans rely on and that
those same Americans should pay for it.
The American ideals of self-sufficiency and personal responsibility
have always been the spirit of our immigration law. It is in this
spirit that Congress decided that immigrants who are likely to become a
public charge are ineligible for admittance or permanent residency.
However, under this new rule, individuals who are reliant on a number
of government benefits can be considered self-sufficient when applying
for renewal or adjustment of status.
The DHS' new rule is not only costly to the American taxpayer but
also directly incentivizes hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens to
cross the southern border and come into our country.
It seems to me that Secretary Mayorkas is not only negligent and
reckless with securing the border, but he is also negligent and
reckless with the American taxpayers' hard-earned money.
That is why I am calling to stop any funding for the DHS' new public
charge rule until they secure our border and start acting in the best
interests of the American people.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, since 1999, the policy has been, under the
Clinton administration, under the Bush administration, and the Obama
administration, that immigration officials still consider whether a
noncitizen will become dependent on cash benefits. I agree. That has
been the policy since 1999, and I think we ought to stick with that
policy where a noncitizen should not be dependent on cash benefits.
Follow the law, and that is what we want to do under the current
policy.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I urge the passage of my amendment, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 46 Offered by Mr. Biggs

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 46
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to implement a COVID-19 vaccine and mask mandate for
travelers passing through the Transportation Security
Administration checkpoints.

Amendment No. 47 Offered by Mrs. Boebert

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 47
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mrs. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

[[Page H4684]]

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. The salary of Ur M. Jaddou, Director of U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services, shall be reduced to $1.

{time} 2045

Mrs. BOEBERT. Jaddou previously pushed other amnesty policies in her
role as USCIS during the Obama administration.
Specifically, she aggressively tried to expand parole in place in
order to bypass Congress and implement mass amnesty.
Jaddou has also defended the unconstitutional Deferred Action for
Childhood Arrivals program, falsely claiming this is a permissible
exercise of discretion by the Secretary of Homeland Security.
As an attorney, she should know only Congress has the authority to
authorize this type of program. With that, Obama and DHS should have
never unilaterally created this amnesty program.
Jaddou in her current role is literally enabling and supporting the
Biden border crisis. In August alone, there were 232,972 illegal
immigrants encountered at the southern border.
Customs and Border Patrol has seized 25,500 pounds of fentanyl so far
in fiscal year 2023. Of course, that is only what has been seized, not
what we know is coming into our country illegally and killing
Americans, at least 300 a day.
Biden's bureaucrats like Jaddou are literally allowing deadly
fentanyl to easily flow into our communities and kill our children.
My amendment is supported by the National Immigration Center for
Enforcement, NumbersUSA, and the American Accountability Foundation.
I urge my colleagues to support my amendment and hold Ms. Jaddou
accountable for her blatant disrespect for the law of our Nation.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, we support border security. We also support
the U.S. Citizen Immigration Service where they have asylum officers.
One of the things we ought to be doing is adding more money to
support the asylum officers so they can be at the border, and they can
make a decision whether somebody stays or has a credible fear.
We know the numbers; 89, 90 percent of the people who ask for asylum
will be denied because the law is very specific on what asylum is.
It has to be persecution by the state based on religion or based on
political beliefs. If you are coming in because you want a job, or you
are coming in for a better life, or you are coming in because of a
drought or you are hungry or because your country is falling apart, it
is not allowed under the law.
What we ought to do is make sure that Homeland has the money to
support border security. Again, I remind my friends that the last 2
years, we added $2.4 billion to the CBP budget authority, a 15 percent
increase. Except for two Members from the Republican side, everybody
voted ``no'' on it.
Again, we want to support border security. If you want to look at
fentanyl, the fentanyl will come in through two ports in Mexico, the
legal precursors.
Then they come up here, and we have to make sure that we add money
for technology to make sure that we stop the drugs coming in.
Again, I am for border security, and I want to work with you to get
to border security. Congressman Holman in 1976, the Holman Rule--keep
in mind that the Bill of Attainder Clause says no punishment without a
trial.
I believe this is in violation of Lovett in The Supreme Court in
1946; it says this type of action is unconstitutional.
Again, if we want to have a debate, let's go ahead and have a debate,
but to target somebody's salary is unconstitutional.
I agree. We need to do more to secure the border, and I certainly
want to work with my colleagues from Colorado, Ohio, and wherever you
might be from. I certainly want to work with you.
I yield back the balance of my time, Mr. Chairman.
Mrs. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I do appreciate my colleague on the other
side of the aisle and his efforts to promote border security.
He and I have had conversations about the border. I realize that he
represents a district on the border, and I appreciate his sincere
concern for what is taking place.
Unfortunately, we do have an invasion. My colleague mentioned that
much of the fentanyl that is coming into our country is being found at
the ports of entry.
We know that it is being found at the ports of entry, but
unfortunately, our Border Patrol agents are overrun, they are
overworked, and there is just too large of a surge for them to handle
everything that is happening at the border.
Certainly, we want more funding to secure the border, but we don't
want more funding for our Border Patrol agents to simply be process
agents and bring people into our country in these mass amounts that we
are seeing.
I do appreciate my colleague and his efforts to work with us to
secure the southern border, and I look forward to future conversations,
as well.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs. Boebert).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 48 Offered by Mrs. Boebert

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 48
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mrs. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. The salary of Kenneth L. Wainstein, Secretary of
Homeland Security for Intelligence and Analysis, shall be
reduced to $1.

[[Page H4685]]

was a threat to the rule of law and endorsed Joe Biden for President of
the United States.
I will tell you what is a threat to the rule of law: blatantly
violating Federal immigration law and intentionally facilitating a
complete and total invasion at our southern border.
I will tell you what is a threat to the rule of law: refusing to
cooperate with State and local law enforcement officials as required
under Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
I will tell you, Mr. Chair, what is a threat to the rule of law:
pursuing a radical open border agenda, purposefully and willfully
circumventing every safeguard, check, and balance required by law,
allowing terrorists and deadly drugs like fentanyl to freely flow into
our great country.
This administration has presided over the largest influx of illegal
immigrants in American history. Since they took power, there have been
over 6 million illegal crossings of our southern border. That's right--
6 million.
Under this administration's watch, illicit fentanyl has killed more
than 100,000 American citizens. Furthermore, 151 people whose names
appear on the terrorist watch list were stopped.
I applaud our brave men and women who serve as our Customs and Border
Patrol agents who were able to detain these 151 people who are on the
terrorist watch list.
They were trying to cross our southern border, an all-time record of
known terrorists on the watch list crossing into our country, beating
the previous record also held by the Biden administration in fiscal
year 2022. This is more than the encounters in all fiscal years 2017,
2018, 2019, and 2020 combined.
In August, we discovered that a smuggler with ties to ISIS was
helping migrants enter the United States from Mexico. This madness
needs to end.
This has all occurred on the Under Secretary of Homeland Security for
Intelligence and Analysis, Mr. Wainstein's, watch.
The American people deserve to have a Department of Homeland Security
committed to securing the homeland, not sitting idly by as terrorists
flock across our wide open southern border.
My amendment is supported by the National Immigration Center for
Enforcement, NumbersUSA, and the American Accountability Foundation.
I urge my colleagues to support my amendment and hold Mr. Wainstein
accountable for not doing his job and for his role in facilitating the
worst border crisis in our Nation's history.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition to this amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, the last 2 years we had an opportunity to add
$2.4 billion to the CBP budget authority. That is a 15 percent
increase.
Except for two Members, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle
voted ``no''. Money for Border Patrol, money for intelligence, money
for securing the border, and they voted ``no'' on it. We had an
opportunity to vote ``yes'', and it was voted against.
Again, I would say that if we have differences, how do we address
this, by cutting somebody's salary, which is unconstitutional?
In United States v. Lovett, the Supreme Court says you can't do this.
It is due process without a trial, punishment without a trial, which is
the Bill of Attainder Clause again.
I want to secure the border, but I want to make sure that we put
funding on this. We are about to have a shutdown this Saturday.
Again, we have been asking our Republican friends to sit down, and I
am ready to sit down and work it out. If we don't do this, we are going
to be affecting so many people.
It is going to affect 43,000 U.S. Coast Guard employees, including
38,000 Active-Duty Coast Guard military personnel.
It is going to affect 59,000 CBP personnel, including Border Patrol
agents, Customs and Border Protection officers, 16,800 ICE personnel,
including HSI agents, 58,000 TSA personnel, 19,300 FEMA employees, and
6,300 Secret Service personnel. We are not focusing on what we ought to
focus on, and that is making sure that we don't have a shutdown.
Again, Members, I would remind you that the last five shutdowns, you
were in charge, and again, five--we are going to make it number six.
We want to sit down and work with you, but again, as the minority
Members, we want to sit down and be at the table.
I ask that we oppose the amendment, and I yield back the balance of
my time.
Mrs. BOEBERT. May I inquire as to how much time is remaining.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman has 2 minutes remaining.
Mrs. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I would agree with my colleague on the other
side of the aisle. We do want to sit down and have a conversation.
We realize we are in divided government right now, and that is the
process that we are currently working on. We are trying to avoid doing
things as normal as they have been done since the mid-1990s here in
Washington, D.C.
We do not want to govern and fund the entire government with a
straight up and down vote ``yes'' or ``no.''
We don't want continuing resolutions or omnibus bills. We want to go
through the funding of the Federal Government bill by bill, sit down,
and work with our colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
This will be bipartisan. This will be bicameral. We do not have the
majority in the Senate. We will have to come together in conference and
hash out our differences and work with one another.
I do agree with my colleague that we are going to have to work
together in a bipartisan, bicameral way to fund the Federal Government.
I understand that there are a lot of scary numbers of people who
would be impacted by a shutdown, but that is why this week we are here,
passing four appropriations bills to fund the Federal Government, to
avoid a full government shutdown.
There may be a partial shutdown for a short amount of time, but I
believe that we can come together and alleviate that and come to a
resolution soon.
We can do our jobs. We are passing the Department of Defense bill. We
have that on the floor. We are also bringing up the Department of
Homeland Security bill, the State and foreign ops, and the ag bill. We
can fund these parts of the Federal Government.
Mr. Chair, again, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs. Boebert).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado
will be postponed.

Amendment No. 49 Offered by Mrs. Boebert

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 49
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mrs. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. ___. The salary of Claire Trickler-McNulty, Assistant
Director of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Office of
Immigration Program Evaluation, shall be reduced to $1.

[[Page H4686]]

Ms. McNulty admitted publicly that she stayed at the Department of
Homeland Security during the Trump administration to sabotage border
enforcement.
Ms. McNulty worked for an organization known as KIND where she
provided legal services for illegal aliens to fight deportation and
stay in the country even though they broke our laws and entered America
illegally.

{time} 2100

Now this open borders advocate is supposed to help protect America's
cross-border crime and illegal immigration that threaten national
security when she clearly has no interest in following the law and
doing either of these things.
The appointment of Ms. McNulty is a prime example of the Biden-Harris
administration's ignorance to the importance of securing the border.
Not only is she an open borders fanatic, but she was behind an $80
million no-bid contract that the DHS Inspector General criticized as
improper.
The Biden administration has essentially closed ICE down. They do
nothing about people entering the country illegally, that has been
shown repeatedly. Just look at the 151 terrorists on the terror watch
list that have entered America on Biden and McNulty's watch.
During Ms. McNulty's tenure at ICE, instead of protecting our borders
and enforcing our laws, ICE now is acting more like a social service
agency for illegals.
ICE is even partnering with groups that campaign for ICE to be
abolished, that give aid to illegal aliens, and that award contracts
that strictly prohibit tackling the whereabouts of illegal aliens.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment and hold Ms.
McNulty accountable for doing her job, or not, and for her role in
facilitating the worst border crisis in our Nation's history.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition. This particular
individual has served in senior roles throughout DHS, including as a
career official under Republican and Democratic administrations.
As a career official, she led the initial implementation of the
Prison Rape Elimination Act standards for ICE during the Trump
administration--and she was not fired under the Trump administration.
During the Trump administration she also led the development of a 2019
National Detention Standards, which is interesting because my
colleagues included it as a provision in this bill that would require
those standards to be applied to all detention facilities.
If we have a problem with policy, let's debate policy. I can tell you
we ought to be focusing on making sure that we keep the government
open. We can pass these four bills, but I can tell you there is no
Senate conference over there. They are not going to take these bills up
in the next couple of days.
Instead of focusing on what we ought to do, that is, preventing the
sixth Republican-led shutdown since 1995, we ought to be working
together instead of doing this.
This amendment violates the Bill of Attainder Clause of the U.S.
Constitution. As the U.S. Supreme Court has said in United States v.
Lovett, 1946, it is unconstitutional to target an individual.
Mr. Chair, I ask Members to vote ``no,'' and I yield back the balance
of my time
Mrs. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I would remind Members that Ms. McNulty only
stayed in the Trump administration, as she was quoted, to sabotage
border security efforts. That is not genuine. That is un-American. It
is not dutiful.
There are many things that we are doing right now to avoid a
shutdown. I certainly do not want a government shutdown. That is why my
colleagues do not want a government shutdown. That is why we are
debating these four bills and why we are debating the amendments to
these four bills.
I agree with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, and maybe
many on my own side, that we should have done this sooner. We should
not have waited until the deadline, but here we are, and we are all in
Washington, D.C., working diligently to ensure that the debate is heard
on these bills and we have an opportunity to fund these very important
aspects of the Federal Government.
Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of my amendment, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs. Boebert).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado
will be postponed.

Amendment No. 50 Offered by Mrs. Boebert

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 50
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mrs. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. The salary of Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia, Officer
for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, shall be reduced to $1.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentlewoman
from Colorado (Mrs. Boebert) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Colorado.
Mrs. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I rise today to offer my amendment that
utilizes the Holman rule to reduce the salary for the Officer for Civil
Rights and Civil Liberties, Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia to $1.
DHS's Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties is staffed with
people that literally want to abolish the U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, an agency whose mission is to protect America from the
cross-border crime and illegal immigration that threaten national
security.
The woman that leads DHS's Office for Civil Rights and Civil
Liberties once said that illegal immigrant felons, convicted of murder
and rape, shouldn't be eligible for deportation solely because of their
crimes.
Let me repeat that. Wadhia believes that illegal immigrant felons
convicted of murder and rape should not be deported. She has also
advocated for purging the term illegal immigrant and tried to humanize
illegal immigration in order to allow mass illegal immigration.
Throughout her career, this open border bureaucrat has aggressively
pursued pro-amnesty policies and even defended illegal immigrants in
court who should have been deported.
In her current role, she is literally enabling and supporting the
Biden border crisis. Since Joe Biden took office, more than 6 million
illegal aliens have entered America. In August alone, there were
232,972 illegal aliens encountered at the southern border, and that
does not include the got-aways who were not encountered by our brave
Custom and Border Patrol agents.
Customs and Border Patrol have seized 25,500 pounds of fentanyl so
far in fiscal year 2023, a deadly drug that is literally killing our
children.
Mr. Chair, 25,500 pounds is only what was seized at the border, not
what is still flowing freely into our country. Biden's bureaucrats are
literally allowing deadly fentanyl to easily flow into our communities.
She has also been a major part of the Federal Government's obsession
with diversity, equity, and inclusion, consistently forcing woke
policies down the throats of public servants. These woke Federal
policies shouldn't be embedded in our Nation's border and national
security policies. These misguided agency initiatives need to come to
an end.
My amendment is supported by the National Immigration Center for
Enforcement, NumbersUSA, and the American Accountability Foundation. I
urge my colleagues to support my amendment and hold Shoba Wadhia
accountable for her going rogue in an administration that has ignored
the rule

[[Page H4687]]

of law and has facilitated the worst border crisis in our Nation's
history.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. This bill on Homeland Security passed June 21, 2023. We
are in September and we are just taking the bill right now. This bill,
Homeland Security, got passed out of appropriations on June 21, 2023,
and here we are late at night trying to pass a bill where there is no
Senate conference. They are not even considering this bill, and we are
not addressing the issue before us.
The issue before us is that the last government shutdowns were under
Republican House majorities. In fact, the longest shutdown in history
was a Republican House and Senate with Trump in the White House in
2018. Again, on November 13, 1995, December 15, 1995, September 30,
2013, June 19, 2018, and December 21, 2018, Republican-controlled
Houses had a shutdown, five of them that we are looking at, and I think
we are going to have the sixth one. Again, this bill passed on June 21
of 2023, and here we are in the middle of the night trying to decide.
Instead of focusing on what we ought to do to make sure we don't have
a government shutdown, we are focusing on a bill that might pass over
to the Senate, but there is no conference committee. What are we going
to do at 12:01?
Again, if we have a problem or a difference--I should say, a
difference in policy--I am ready to sit down. I don't want to see open
borders. I want to make sure we support Border Patrol. I don't just go
visit the border; I live there. I go with Border Patrol to church, I
see them at the stores, our kids go to school together. I want to make
sure that we support our men and women in green.
This amendment is unconstitutional. When you target salaries, the
Supreme Court has already said in United States v. Lovett in 1946, it
said, the Bill of Attainder Clause to the Constitution says that you
cannot provide punishment without due process.
If we have a difference, let's debate it. You know what? We should
have been doing this on June 22, the day after we passed it. Here we
are in the middle of the night, 9:10 p.m. Eastern time, and we are
talking about passing a bill that the Senate is not even considering
right now.
Mr. Chair, I want to sit down with my good friend from Colorado and
the chairman, Mr. Joyce, but this is not the time to be talking about
taking people's salaries away.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time, and I ask Members to
vote ``no.''
Mrs. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, legislating is beautiful. It is great to
actually be down here debating the real issues that Americans are faced
with day in and day out.
I do agree with my colleague on the other side of the aisle that we
should have been debating this bill on June 22, but here we are. It is
our responsibility to pass these appropriations bills, 12 individual
appropriations bills in total, to the Senate.
What the Senate does is up to them and their Chamber. This is our
House and it is our responsibility to do our part of our jobs. That is
exactly what we are doing tonight.
I, too, would like to see our border secured. And I look forward to
my colleague on the other side of the aisle joining us to support H.R.
2 to secure the border. I can tell he is very, very enthusiastic about
actually accomplishing something rather than just throwing money at a
problem and creating more processing agents.
I can see the sincerity and hear the sincerity in his voice that he
wants a secure Nation and secure borders, especially since he
represents a district on the southern border and encounters our brave
Border Patrol agents each and every day.
My colleague has brought up several times tonight that you cannot
have punishment without a trial. Well, this Holman rule is part of our
House rules. We are a self-governing, majority rule body. The Holman
rule is here in place to hold unelected bureaucrats accountable.
If my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have any sort of
qualm with punishment without trial, I would encourage them to visit
our January 6 prisoners in the D.C. jail.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by
the gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs. Boebert).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado
will be postponed.

{time} 2115

Amendment No. 51 Offered by Mr. Castro of Texas

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 51
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. CASTRO of Texas. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. ___. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used for the Texas border and immigration enforcement
program known as ``Operation Lone Star''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Castro) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas for 5 minutes.
Mr. CASTRO of Texas. Mr. Chair, I yield myself 2\1/2\ minutes.
My amendment would prohibit Federal Homeland Security funding from
being diverted for Operation Lone Star, ensuring that Federal Homeland
Security appropriations are spent on Federal operations like Border
Patrol.
Operation Lone Star, unfortunately, has been defined by corruption,
incompetence, and cruelty. Two years ago, the Governor of my State of
Texas launched Operation Lone Star, a destructive $4.5 billion
political stunt that has led to a Federal civil rights investigation,
the tragic deaths of 8 National Guard servicemembers, and a formal
diplomatic complaint from our Nation's and Texas' largest trading
partner.
Under the guise of border security, Governor Greg Abbott has embarked
on an unprecedented campaign of government overreach--seizing private
property, destroying livelihoods, and turning American border cities
and towns into war zones where helicopters buzz overhead and armed
troopers pull over American citizens for looking too much like
immigrants.
At the beginning of the summer, Governor Abbott installed invisible
razor wire in the middle of the Rio Grande and built a 1,000-foot
string of floating deathtraps that are separated by serrated blades and
secured to the riverbed with a net that is designed to catch and drown
the families who reach it.
During the August recess, I went down to Eagle Pass, Texas, to see
the impact of Operation Lone Star for myself. Standing on the banks of
the river, I could see scraps of clothing and shoes stuck in the razor
wire mesh that Governor Abbott's troops have installed on the border.
The wire isn't tall enough or strong enough to stop anyone who is
desperate enough to cross, but it is sharp enough to leave them
bloodied and broken.
When families finally make it to U.S. soil, Operation Lone Star
troopers have been arresting the fathers and sons on trumped-up
trespassing charges and locking them up for months at a time, some
without the ability to reach their families, while bussing their wives
and children to cities that are thousands of miles away and also to
other States, including New York, Colorado, California, and Illinois.
Mr. Chair, Americans want border security. They also want an
efficient and orderly immigration process. Operation Lone Star
interferes with that. It hurts the Federal Government's effort, and it
damages Border Patrol's efforts.
When Democrats were in the majority, we voted for billions of dollars
in funding for Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and
Customs Enforcement, and we fought to rebuild a functioning immigration
system

[[Page H4688]]

from what had been left behind by the Trump administration.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. CASTRO of Texas. Mr. Chair, I yield myself an additional 30
seconds.
Mr. Chair, Operation Lone Star isn't border security. It is just
plain out brutality. There is a difference between treating people like
human beings and treating them like animals.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, Texans have every right to defend and
secure their borders, particularly during a time when the White House
has abandoned attempts to secure the border and enforce our immigration
laws.
Due to the Biden administration's failed policy, States along the
border, including Texas, are seeing their resources being severely
depleted. They are overrun. Therefore, Governor Abbott did what most
responsible, reasonable public servants would do and launched Operation
Lone Star. The goal of Operation Lone Star is to stop cartels and
criminals from smuggling deadly drugs, weapons, and people into Texas.
As of last week, the multiagency effort resulted in 457,500
apprehensions and more than 34,400 criminal arrests, with more than
31,300 felonies reported. In the fight against fentanyl, Texas law
enforcement has seized over 429 million lethal doses of fentanyl.
Due to the rapid and dangerous migrant street releases in Texas, the
Governor has recently had to deploy additional buses to Eagle Pass and
El Paso to assist those border communities overwhelmed by the influx of
migrants. This is a constantly compounding issue that gets forgotten in
the beltway because it is out of sight and out of mind.
This administration is putting politics over people, and it has
completely abandoned these areas along our southwest border. If this
was happening in my backyard, I would want my State to step up, too. I
urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. CASTRO of Texas. Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Casar), my good friend.
Mr. CASAR. Mr. Chair, we must stop the dangerous, expensive, corrupt,
and ineffective political stunts at the border and instead chart a new
path for a safe, orderly, and humane immigration system. Abbott's
Operation Lone Star must end, and I urge passage of the amendment of
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Castro), my good friend, to ensure
Federal funding does not go to this failed program.
Every day, Texas Governor Greg Abbott violates the rights of asylum
seekers and violates the rights of our border communities all to score
political points against President Biden. We have seen these inhumane
policies in action that have taken the lives of children at the border,
and we have lost National Guardsmen to death.

This is not only inhumane, but Operation Lone Star is not effective.
Governor Abbott is lighting $25 million on fire every week to cause
suffering instead of creating solutions.
Why do my colleagues across the aisle not want solutions? Because
they have no interest in a functioning immigration system. They thrive
off of keeping the immigration system broken so they can continue to
stoke anti-immigrant fears for their own politics.
Operation Lone Star, furthermore, is also unconstitutional. In
Arizona v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled the Federal
Government, not people like Governor Abbott, have supremacy over the
immigration system. Abbott's unconstitutional, abusive, wasteful, and
inhumane Operation Lone Star is a disgrace to our State and to our
Nation.
I want to be clear: Not one cent of Federal money should go toward
caging families, cutting innocent people with razor wire, or drowning
children, period.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume
to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Pfluger), my friend.
Mr. PFLUGER. Mr. Chair, what an opportunity to have Texans debating
Texans. I hope that every Texan from the RGV all the way to Amarillo
and from El Paso all the way to Beaumont is listening to this debate
because the line is clear.
Chaos and lawlessness or law and order. Which is it going to be?
I do agree with my colleague who just said that the Constitution
clearly says this is a Federal issue. I think this is the first thing
that we have agreed on. The Constitution does say that. Article IV,
Section 4. Joe Biden has abdicated his responsibility.
I have got the numbers from the Del Rio sector right here. Just in
Del Rio during FY 23, 347,572 encounters, 144,900 known got-aways,
2,155 criminal arrests, and the gall to say that the Governor of Texas
doesn't have the right to protect us when the Federal Government has
completely abdicated?
I was in Eagle Pass this week. I wish that my colleagues would have
been there. I wish they would have met the young lady from Venezuela
who was brutally attacked by the cartels, separated from her husband,
kicked in the face multiple times, 30 stitches in her head because of
the failed policies.
Texas is the only government that is doing anything about this, and
yet they have the gall to say that we don't have the right to defend
ourselves when a Venezuelan flag is placed onto the shore of Texas
property? In any other time period in history, that would be a
declaration of war.
Talk to the troopers. Talk to the State troopers who are down there
and see the things that they are going through: The resuscitation of a
4-year-old last week and the week before.
I have had multiple Border Patrol agents tell me that the reason we
have 2.3 million people who have entered this country illegally this
year is because we have no consequences. There were 2.2 million last
year. Every year since Joe Biden has been President, this chaos has
gotten worse and worse. Enough is enough.
I am so glad that we are sitting here having a Texas versus Texas
debate because I hope that Texans are looking at this for what it is.
The reason that this is an issue is because the President of the United
States, Secretary Mayorkas, and others throughout the administration on
day one in January of 2021 reversed every single policy that worked. No
more MPP, no more border wall, and to hear the falsehoods that are
coming out of my colleagues about not funding Border Patrol agents?
Take a look at H.R. 2. Take a look at what that does to fund more
agents, to put more technology into place.
It is time for a shutdown of the southern border, and that is what we
are calling on the President to do. This amendment should have said
that we are going to reimburse the State of Texas for $5 billion this
year and $5 billion last year.
Mr. CASTRO of Texas. Mr. Chair, cruelty and incompetence, these are
what define Operation Lone Star. Unfortunately, the era that we are in
in American politics for those across the aisle is marked by
fearmongering because they have no solutions to the real issues that
confront Americans--education, healthcare, jobs. They can't even get a
budget together, so they try to scare everybody. They try to use these
brown-skinned immigrants to scare everybody. That is what this is
about. They are either going to send this money to Border Patrol or
they are going to send it to Greg Abbott so he can go on FOX News and
be celebrated.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Castro).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. CASTRO of Texas. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas will
be postponed.
The Chair understands that amendment No. 52 will not be offered.

Amendment No. 53 Offered by Ms. Greene of Georgia

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 53
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Ms. GREENE of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

[[Page H4689]]

The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to require an employee of the Department of Homeland
Security to wear a face mask.

{time} 2130

Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment
because I think this is a policy that should be debated in a different
context in a different bill.
DHS' role here is guided by the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, the CDC. DHS does not develop independent policies on these
issues but rather implements policies that originate within the CDC.
Again, we can have this debate, but I think we are in the wrong
jurisdiction of the bill. This is the Department of Homeland Security
bill, not the Labor-HHS bill. If we are talking about things that are
important, I would respectfully ask that we look at the date that this
Homeland bill was on--June 21, 2023.
We should have taken this bill on June 22, 2023, but here we are, at
9:30 on September 27, looking at trying to pass one of four bills to a
Senate that has not taken H.R. 2. Certainly, they are not in conference
ready to take up any of our bills.
What we ought to be focusing on is the shutdown. That is what we
ought to be focusing on. Again, I will remind my friend that the last
five government shutdowns were under a Republican House majority. We
are, again, under a House Republican majority, whether it was on
November 13, 1995, a Republican-controlled House, 5 days of a shutdown;
December 15, 1995, a Republican-controlled House, 21 days of a
shutdown; September 30, 2023, a Republican-controlled House, 16 days of
a shutdown; January 19, 2018, 2 days; and, of course, December 21,
2018, a Republican-controlled House, 34 days.
Again, we are under a Republican-controlled House. On Sunday, 12:01,
I hope we are not talking about a shutdown because, Members, we could
pass this bill. Over there, there is no Senate waiting for this. They
are working on a continuing resolution. If we have a shutdown, it is
border security that is going to be hurt because, in October, starting
next week, we are supposed to hire 150 new Border Patrol agents.
All of that will stop. Any vetting, any hiring, anything that we are
supposed to do will be shut down. Members should have done this on June
22, 2023, but here we are, at 9:33 p.m. Eastern time, where we are
debating a bill and an amendment that has nothing to do with this. It
is the wrong jurisdiction.
I say, respectfully, that we ought to be focusing on trying to keep
the government open.
Mr. Chair, I respectfully ask Members to vote ``no'' on this, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. GREENE of Georgia. Mr. Chair, this is laughable. This is
absolutely pathetic. All the whining and complaining about shutdowns
coming from Democrats, who forced shutdowns on Americans by shutting
down their businesses, shutting down their freedom of speech, shutting
down their churches, shutting down their playgrounds, shutting down
beaches, shutting down every human right that Americans possessed,
shutting down their freedoms. Listen to Democrats whining and
complaining about working late at night.
Americans wanted to work late. They wanted to work all the time, but
Democrats forced shutdowns. Do you know how many small businesses
closed? We don't know the actual number, but it is a casualty to the
American Dream. Businesses were forced to shut down, and they went out
of business.
Children are behind in schooling because their schools shut down, and
they were forced to stay home doing virtual schooling. We have kids all
over America who can't read, can't do math, and this is all happening
under the Biden administration that wants to use all of our hard-earned
taxpayer resources to pay for migrant children in our taxpayer-funded
schools.
Yes, it is important to have an amendment in the Department of
Homeland Security appropriation bills forcing there to be no mask
mandates because we know the truth: Democrats will do everything they
can to bring COVID back, scare Americans, and convince them that a
piece of paper strapped on their ears with rubber bands is going to
protect them from the man-made COVID-19 virus that came from the Wuhan
lab.
This is outrageous. I can't listen to the pathetic whining. It really
is pathetic.
We remember last Congress. Last Congress, Democrats had us in here
late at night practically every night. I can remember many times
sitting on the House floor waiting for them to get all of their things
together and voting past midnight.
This is what hard work looks like. We don't want to hear government
employees getting a taxpayer-funded paycheck whining about a shutdown
when this comes from the very party that shut down America, and we
haven't recovered yet.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Georgia (Ms. Greene).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 54 Offered by Ms. Greene of Georgia

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 54
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Ms. GREENE of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), add the
following:
Sec. _. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act may be used for the Uniting for Ukraine
program.

[[Page H4690]]

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentlewoman
from Georgia (Ms. Greene) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Georgia.
Ms. GREENE of Georgia. Mr. Chair, my amendment will prohibit funding
for the Uniting for Ukraine program.
This is a streamlined, categorical parole process that allows an
unlimited number of illegal aliens into our country from Ukraine.
There have been over 9 million illegal aliens who have invaded our
country since Joe Biden took office. It is unprecedented.
Just last month, over 300,000 illegals invaded our country, the most
ever recorded in a single month. Over this past weekend, Border Patrol
reported there were over 11,000 illegal alien encounters in just a 24-
hour period.
I deeply sympathize with the innocent people in Ukraine, especially
since our government is forcing a proxy war there by funding and
fueling the war instead of pushing peace in this country.
However, America is facing our own war at our southern border, and we
cannot stand to address every global crisis when our own house is not
in order, not safe.
We cannot afford to violate our own immigration laws on behalf of a
global crisis, especially a global crisis that the United States
Government is fueling and funding. The United States is fueling the war
in Ukraine by sending tanks, ammunition, F-16s, and over $113 billion
taxpayer dollars and counting, especially when the debate in Washington
and the argument is about more money for Ukraine.
The Uniting for Ukraine process grants mass categorical parole to
these individuals, which is a complete violation of our own immigration
laws. Parole is to be granted on a case-by-case basis, as required by
the law. Although many claim the specific process is granting parole on
a case-by-case basis, based on a proven track record, this
administration doesn't even know what case by case means. They just
know mass migration into the United States.
Joe Biden and Secretary Mayorkas continue to abuse our immigration
laws and create categorical parole for illegal aliens into our country.
Secretary Mayorkas has already granted temporary legal status to 75,000
Ukrainians under the temporary protected status designation, which
includes benefits such as work permits, Social Security numbers, and
driver's licenses.
This Uniting for Ukraine process has no numerical cap, which means an
unlimited number of illegal aliens from Ukraine can come and displace
American workers. Our country needs to put American citizens first for
once.
We need to win the war at the southern border that the Mexican
cartels are waging on our country before granting parole to an
unlimited number of individuals and allowing them to remain here for an
indefinite amount of time.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in
personalities toward the President.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to an amendment
that prohibits funding for the Uniting for Ukraine program.
In life, we have to make a decision: Either we are for good or for
evil. Either we are for democracy or for dictatorships. This Uniting
for Ukraine program allows Ukrainians who are displaced by the Russian
invasion of Ukraine to apply to come to the U.S. through humanitarian
parole.
This amendment seeks to stop a program and block thousands of
Ukrainians from entering the country. Here, again, is an attempt to cut
any support for Ukraine as they fight to defend the country from an
illegal Russian invasion.
Putin is attempting to rewrite the map of Europe through the use of
force. He is doing so in violation of international law and is
deliberately killing civilians, destroying the economic livelihood of
Ukraine, and taking kids from Ukraine, stealing the kids, taking them
to Russia.
War crimes are being committed on a mass scale, and the United States
and the democratic nations of the world must continue to strongly
oppose him.
Again, I remind Members that this bill passed on June 21, 2023. Here
we are, at 9:40 p.m., and we are going to be here till about 2 or 3
o'clock in the morning. I don't mind working. My parents were migrant
workers who worked hard, so we can work and stay here till whatever
time, but the point I am trying to make is that instead of looking at
this bill on June 22, 2023, here we are a few days before the shutdown
and, again, I remind everyone that the last five shutdowns have been by
Republican-controlled Houses.
This Sunday, at 12:01, we will probably see the sixth Republican-
controlled shutdown. Again, I want to work with the majority. I want to
work with my good friend, who is always in a good mood, Mr. Joyce. I
want to work with him on this, but you can't say: We are in the
majority. You are in the minority. You are not going to have a say.
Some of us don't just go visit the border. We actually live there. I
work with the Border Patrol. I want to support them.
I want to remind Members that we had an opportunity to put $2.4
billion, which we did add, to support Border Patrol and control the
border. Guess what? All except for two Republicans that are still in
the House of Representatives voted against border security.
Again, we have a choice. It is either good or evil. It is either a
dictatorship or a democracy. I stand for good, and I stand for
democracy, and I ask Members to vote against this amendment.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. GREENE of Georgia. Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to the time
remaining.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Georgia has 1\3/4\ minutes
remaining.

Ms. GREENE of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I will remind the House and the
American people watching at home that Democrats aren't worried about
shutdowns. They love shutdowns. They shut down America for almost 2
years.
People are still suffering from the Democratic, communist shutdowns.
I don't know why they keep complaining about it because they are the
party that forced it on the American people while they are complaining
about it for themselves. That is so pathetic.
Everyone here gets a taxpayer-funded paycheck, so don't whine about
shutdowns when you shut down America on the very people who pay your
salary.
Let's talk about allowing an unlimited number of Ukrainians into the
country on the American taxpayer dime. This war is not supported by
American taxpayers, not Americans. Over 55 percent of Americans do not
want to fund it anymore.
We want to talk about funding Border Patrol agents. Let's talk about
funding Border Patrol so they can secure our border, not be the
welcoming committee to the entire world for the United States of
America.
Mr. Chair, I ask the House to pass my amendment, and I yield back the
balance of my time.

{time} 2145

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Georgia (Ms. Greene).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 55 Offered by Ms. Greene of Georgia

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 55
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Ms. GREENE of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. The salary of Alejandro Nicholas Mayorkas,
Secretary of Homeland Security, shall be reduced to $1.00.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentlewoman
from Georgia (Ms. Greene) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Georgia.

Parliamentary Inquiry

Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chairman, I raise a point of order.

[[Page H4691]]

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, haven't we done this amendment two or three
times already?
I mean, we know that the majority doesn't want to pay the salary. We
already passed--
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman will suspend.
The amendment has been made in order under the rule.
The gentlewoman from Georgia is recognized.
Ms. GREENE of Georgia. Mr. Chair, my amendment uses the Holman rule,
which is different from other amendments that have been introduced.
This uses the Holman rule to reduce the salary of Secretary Alejandro
Mayorkas to $1, and $1 is too much money.
Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has aided and abetted the complete
invasion of our country by deliberately flooding our Nation with drugs,
terrorists, and illegals from over 160 countries from around the world.
The mission of the Department of Homeland Security States right here:
``With honor and integrity, we will safeguard the American people, our
homeland, and our values.''
Being that Secretary Mayorkas has direction, authority, and control
over the entire Department, he has failed in his duties to safeguard
the American people and our homeland, and he deserves to be fired and
impeached.
His job is to protect our homeland and strengthen the national
security of our country. Yet, his policies, directives, and statements
have created a national security crisis, and has tragically resulted in
the deaths of thousands of Americans each year.
Since assuming office, he has allowed approximately 7.5 million
illegal encounters at our border; over 250 people on the terrorist
watch list to be caught crossing our border, and those are the ones we
know of, approximately 1.6 million known got-aways to evade U.S.
authorities. Imagine how many we don't even know about.
Just this fiscal year alone, Border Patrol arrested over 32,000
illegals with criminal convictions and over 167 MS-13 gang members.
Remember, there are 1.6 million that got away.
Are these terrorists? Are these gang members?
I am sure they are. How many of them have criminal records?
Secretary Mayorkas has allowed fentanyl, the number one killer of
Americans between the ages of 18 and 45, to overwhelmingly flood into
our country and kill around 300 Americans every single day. This fiscal
year alone Border Patrol has seized approximately 24 pounds of fentanyl
attempting to be smuggled into the United States. That is enough
fentanyl to kill every single American 15 times over, but the fentanyl
keeps coming because 300 Americans are dying every single day.
His open border policies have allowed unaccompanied children to be
exploited, and now over 85,000 of them are unaccounted for. Where are
these children?
Tens of thousands of other children have been forced into slave
labor, and that is according to The New York Times.
He has provided copious amounts of baby formula to illegal aliens at
one of the largest processing centers in the country, while American
mothers and infants were intensely suffering from severe shortages and
couldn't find baby formula on the grocery store shelves.
He flooded hospital maternity units with illegal aliens, so much so
that American mothers were turned away and forced to delay inductions.
That was in Yuma, Arizona.
He canceled border wall construction contracts established under
President Trump that would have secured our Nation's border and was
securing our Nation's border, but now the materials lay rusting on the
ground.
He has repeatedly pulled border agents from actually securing our
border and has moved them to processing roles, welcoming committees,
leaving huge gaps for the Mexican cartels and drug smugglers to exploit
and gain control of our border, and they are controlling our border.
He has violated the law by directing DHS to mass-parole illegal
aliens into the U.S. when Federal law specifically prohibits this. He
has encouraged asylum fraud, abused the credible fear standard, and
exercised mass catch-and-release policies.

He has turned every single State into a border State. Veterans are
even being kicked out of their hotel rooms to make room for illegals.
He has even caused approximately a 1,700-percent increase in just one
sector of the northern border. He has not only enabled child
exploitation, sex and drug trafficking, and fentanyl overdoses, but he
has also done everything in his power to put Americans last.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman's time has expired.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I guess the question I have is, we have done
this amendment three times.
Lower it down to $1. Lower it down to $1. Lower it down to $1. I
guess his salary would now be $3 dollars since we have done this three
times.
Nevertheless, I would remind Members again that the last two fiscal
years we added $2.4 billion to CBP authority. That is a 15-percent
increase. Money that would have been used to hire more Border Patrol
agents, more CBP officers, intel specialists, threat enforcement
officers, and other personnel, adding technology at the ports of entry
where 90 or 94 percent of the drugs come in.
Again, initiatives to support the morale of the CBP workforce, like
suicide prevention, wellness efforts, uniform allowances, and tuition.
Guess what? Every single Republican, except two that are still
serving, voted no to pay the Border Patrol and give them the money so
they can do the work. They voted no.
Again, here we are, at 9:50. What are we doing? Taking a bill that
passed on June 21, 2023. We are not talking about the continuing
resolution--because again, on Sunday at 12:01, we are going to have the
sixth Republican shutdown since 1995.
Again, I thank all the staff, both on the Republicans' and Democrats'
side, for working late; Capitol Police are working late. We can stay
here as long as you want to, and maybe increase it to $4 instead of $3
on the pay for the Secretary.
Mr. Chair, I would say this: We are going to have a shutdown because
we can pass this bill, or we can say we are going to strip out the H2B
visa and get some Members who are going to vote ``no.'' Whatever you
want to do, but there is no Senate waiting to handle this bill.
Mr. Chair, I say to my colleagues again, we can stay as long as we
want to. I can stay, and some of us will be here at 2:00, 3:00 in the
morning, but again, we ought to be working on a CR because we are going
to have the sixth Republican shutdown. Five in a row; you can make it
six if you don't work with us.
Mr. Chairman, I oppose the amendment respectfully, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Georgia (Ms. Greene).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. The Chair understands that amendment Nos. 56
through 59 will not be offered.

Amendment No. 60 Offered by Ms. Hageman

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 60
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used by the Secretary of Homeland Security to travel to
outside of the United States.

[[Page H4692]]

Mr. Chairman, under Mr. Mayorkas, the Department of Homeland Security
is a disaster by every single metric, and he has utterly failed at
protecting our country, securing our borders, adhering to the rule of
law, and protecting the constitutional rights of the citizens of this
country.
The southern border is in chaos. We are being invaded by military-
aged men from hostile countries from around the world and our cities
are being overwhelmed by a mass of humanity and level of migration most
likely not seen in world history.
At the same time, the Committee on the Judiciary continues to expose
Mayorkas' role in creating, implementing, and enforcing the censorship
industrial complex. The list of failures goes on and on and on and on.
Despite Mr. Mayorkas' direct and intentional involvement in the
destruction of the borders, boundaries, security, and integrity of the
United States of America, he has had the audacity to travel overseas to
praise--yes, praise--the importance of the borders in other countries
and the benefits of having an orderly transfer of people and goods
across the same.
Yes, while ignoring the invasion on our southern and northern
borders, an invasion that he has facilitated, Mr. Mayorkas actually
traveled to a border between Poland and Ukraine to praise ``the use of
U.S. technology that has been deployed to ensure the safe transfer of
people and goods between Poland and Ukraine.''
That is right, even while our border has become a raging inferno, Mr.
Mayorkas traveled to view another nation's border crossing, to view and
judge their operations while also meeting and speaking with their
border enforcement officers. If only he had the same such care for what
is happening right here in the United States of America.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of amendment No. 60,
and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment,
with all due respect, but I would remind folks that we can't play
defense on the one-yard line and call it the U.S. border. We have to
make sure we move the perimeter. The Secretary has to look at threats
inside and outside the United States.
Mr. Chair, I ask the gentlewoman to look at 2015.
What happened in 2015? The numbers went down under President Obama.
Why? Because we were able to go, visit, talk to other countries so they
can stop the migrants before they came to the U.S. The numbers went
down.
In 2019, under President Trump, the same thing happened. Again, we
were able to work with those countries, traveled over there, talked to
them to make sure that they are able to stop folks before they come
over here. The numbers went down.
Again, we need to do the same thing, because it is not only the
Secretary, but if you have a shutdown--and again, I remind Members at
10:00 at night, we should have been doing this debate back on June 22,
a day after the appropriations of Homeland Security passed.
But here we are, addressing something when we know there is no Senate
waiting for this bill. There is no Senate ready that has handled H.R.
2. So again, the best thing to do to avoid the sixth Republican
shutdown since 1995 is to sit down with Democrats, do it in a
bipartisan way, and address this particular issue.
Mr. Chair, a shutdown would not be helpful for anybody. I ask my
colleagues to please look at this amendment, and I urge them to reject
it.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, with all due respect, I do not believe Mr.
Mayorkas was traveling to other countries to learn how best we can
secure our border.
In fact, I don't think there is any evidence whatsoever that he has
ever traveled to another country and asked them to stop sending their
poor to our country to invade our country.
The fact is that Mayorkas and his boss, Joe Biden, are the largest
human traffickers and drug smugglers in U.S. history. We receive
absolutely no benefit whatever from Mr. Mayorkas traveling to other
countries to observe their functioning borders while ours is burned to
the ground.

{time} 2200

There is no basis, rationale, or benefit for Secretary Mayorkas to
travel outside of the United States to enjoy the fruits of an ordered
society. He has failed to do his job and should not be rewarded for
such failure by traveling the world at the taxpayers' expense. He needs
to leave the visitation and discussions with foreign nations to the
State Department. He needs to secure our border and reform his corrupt
Department.
My amendment would prohibit Mr. Mayorkas from traveling outside of
the United States while acting as the Secretary of the DHS.
I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment. Mr. Chair, I
yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in
personalities toward the President.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Wyoming (Ms. Hageman).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 61 Offered by Ms. Hageman

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 61
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to implement the Climate Literacy Strategy.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 61, the gentlewoman
from Wyoming (Ms. Hageman) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Wyoming.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment No. 61 to
H.R. 4367, which would prevent the DHS from implementing its ``climate
literacy strategy.''
Mr. Chair, it seems that there is nothing that Mr. Mayorkas and his
Department won't do to distract from carrying out their central mission
of defending the U.S. homeland, a mission at which they have failed
miserably.
The climate literacy strategy states its objective is `` . . . to
develop a climate literate DHS workforce, ensuring all employees across
the Department have a sufficient and up-to-date understanding of
climate change and its relevance to the DHS mission.''
That is flatout hogwash.
The DHS states it will develop and administer this climate literate
workforce through its program for climate change professionals, which
DHS calls the ``CCP'' for short. No, I am not making that up.
It will also have a Department-wide website for sharing climate
change information, have climate change trainings, and develop a
community of practice to champion and share climate discussions.
I will use the word again: This is hogwash.
There are no resources to build a wall, no resources to apprehend
illegal aliens, which have numbered over 10 times the population of the
State of Wyoming since Joe Biden took office, no resources to stop
terrorists from crossing our borders, but, of course, under Mr.
Mayorkas' so-called leadership, there are vast sums of money available
for promoting climate hysteria to ensure access to the newest climate
propaganda and developments.
I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of amendment No. 61.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment. It
ensures that all employees across the Department have a sufficient up-
to-date understanding for climate change.
If we keep in mind, one of the agencies under DHS is FEMA. What does
FEMA deal with? Climate, hurricanes. All this strategy does is it
blocks the

[[Page H4693]]

Department from studying or even understanding one of the most pressing
issues.
Again, just understand, we can't put our heads in the sand and say
there is nothing happening on that, yet in times of crisis during a
natural disaster we expect the Department to deliver on its mission and
make decisions during evolving circumstances.
All it does is understand the evolving environment. That is all.
I will vote ``no'' and encourage my colleagues to do the same.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, again, with all due respect, it is not the
DHS' responsibility to deal with climate. In fact, the DHS has
absolutely no capacity to do that whatsoever.
What the DHS' responsibility is is to protect the homeland from the
invasion that we are seeing on the southern and northern borders.
My constituents are sick and tired of this. Not a cent of money
should go to distracting the DHS employees from their jobs of defending
this country.
I urge all of my colleagues to support my amendment, strip every last
penny from this bone-headed initiative, and force the DHS to actually
do its job.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Wyoming (Ms. Hageman).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 62 Offered by Ms. Hageman

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 62
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert
the following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used for the Department of Homeland Security's
Environmental Justice Strategy.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentlewoman
from Wyoming (Ms. Hageman) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Wyoming.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment No. 62,
which would prevent the DHS from carrying out its environmental justice
strategy, whatever that nonsensical word salad means in today's
parlance.
Similar to the climate indoctrination boondoggle I addressed when
addressing my prior amendment, this is yet another angle being taken by
Secretary Mayorkas and the DHS to worship at the altar of the so-called
climate change instead of actually focusing their attention and
resources on the gross incompetence that this administration calls
border security.
While this administration continues to use newspeak to extol the
virtues of this so-called environmental justice agenda, the reality is
that Joe Biden, Mayorkas, and others in this administration are
responsible for vast amounts of energy poverty around the world.
What this administration is not pursuing is environmental justice. It
instead, has an affirmative goal of universal government-imposed
wretchedness. This is what happens when you staff an entire
administration with people who have never held a job in the private
sector--a collapse of your supply chain, your energy resources, and
ultimately, your prosperity.
Environmental justice isn't any such thing. It is an Alice in
Wonderland level of gaslighting that is destroying our ability to
produce energy, grow food, and provide affordable housing.
Congress' power is in the purse, and we must exercise that power by
ensuring that there are no funds going to anything that doesn't secure
our border. For my colleagues across the aisle, 11,000 illegal border
crossings a day does not count for border security.
I urge my colleagues to support amendment No. 62, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment, and I
encourage my colleagues to vote ``no.''
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Again, Mr. Chair, I think that I have made my point with
these three amendments. The purpose of the DHS and Mr. Mayorkas is to
secure our border and protect the homeland. He has failed. There is no
other thing that our DHS should be doing except specifically that.
For that reason I urge that my colleagues support amendments 60, 61,
and 62, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Wyoming (Ms. Hageman).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 63 Offered by Mr. Huizenga

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 63
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert
the following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available in this Act
may be made available to administer, implement, or enforce
the ``Funding the Asylum Program With Employer Petition
Fees'' section of the proposed rule entitled ``U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services Fee Schedule and Changes
to Certain Other Immigration Benefit Request Requirements''
(88 Fed. Reg. 402).

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to
protect farmers, the agricultural business, and small businesses
throughout west Michigan, and, frankly, across America from a costly
new fee.
Along with a host of additional fee increases for H-2A and H-2B
visas, the Biden administration has proposed a brand-new $600 per-
petition fee, Mr. Chair, on employers seeking visas for temporary
workers.
This impacts a wide range of guest worker categories, such as H-2A
and H-2B. H-2As, of course, are used for temporary agricultural work,
and H-2Bs are usually used in the tourism industry. Frankly, I know my
friend from Texas has been very involved in the H-2B and H-2A space. We
have had this discussion before.
Furthermore, the administration--not me, not Republicans--but the
Biden administration itself is dubbing this increase the ``asylum
program fee.'' This $600 fee will be coming directly out of the pockets
of farmers and small businesses and funneled to the asylum process
backlog caused by this administration's failed border policies.
In April of this year, six Republicans and six Democrats from
Michigan--nearly our entire delegation--joined together to oppose this
increase in a bipartisan letter to Secretary Mayorkas requesting that
he reconsider reimplementing this fee and other significant fee
increases that we view as harmful.
Making ends meet in the face of soaring prices and record inflation
is hard enough. The Federal Government should not be inventing
additional costs that raise prices for consumers and make it harder for
family farms and small businesses to keep their doors open.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support
this commonsense amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
Again, this amendment would strike a section within a proposed rule.
Proposed rules have no force of law.
If enacted, the administration would just simply rename the section
and continue to execute the fee rules as currently as they are trying
to do that.
Let's keep in mind USCIS is a fee-funded agency. Except for a small
portion, they don't get appropriations. They work on fees. We have to
find the right balance on the fees and where we add those fees.
Again, I understand what you're trying to do, but I think this
amendment

[[Page H4694]]

will strike a proposed rule, and I don't think this is the right way to
address this. I do understand what you are saying, but based on that, I
would ask that we vote ``no,'' and I encourage my colleagues to do the
same.
I would say this as the ranking member, if Chairman Joyce would want
to sit down with me, I would be happy to sit down and have this
conversation.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Chair, I wish the gentleman hadn't necessarily
yielded back his time because I would have loved to have a little bit
of a colloquy on this.
I fully understand the USCIS is a fee-based institution. It takes in
those fees.
In addition to the $600 per petition fee, they also had proposed a
tripling of a fee for the named employee. If you are putting in--and
the gentleman knows this issue very well. If you have a particular
person that you are requesting to come into the country, this
administration tripled that fee. If you have an unnamed person for an
H-2A or an H-2B, they doubled that fee increase.
I had an amendment that was going to attempt to address those two
issues, as well. The Rules Committee ruled that nongermane. We can have
that discussion outside of that, but they did rule this particular
proposal and this amendment as germane, as relevant to this discussion.
While we have seen a fee already that is in place be increased, we
are not able to do that, but this is a brand-new fee that the
administration, again, has labeled the ``asylum program fee.''
We all know that there are serious issues at the southern border, and
it is something the gentleman has talked about pretty extensively. I
just don't see how penalizing small businesses and people who are using
the system legally and increasing their costs which are going to be
passed along to the general public, how that makes sense in this case.
I talked to a farmer back in southwest Michigan who regularly employs
about 100 seasonal temporary workers. It doesn't take a math genius to
figure out 100 H-2A visas with a $600 fee, that is $60,000 in
additional fees that this farmer is going to have to put up front
before they have done the harvest, before they have actually reaped any
of the benefit of the work.
That is why I believe this is so crucially important to U.S.
agriculture.

{time} 2215

While I understand the gentleman may oppose this particular amendment
as it is sitting, I hope he wouldn't oppose the spirit of this. I would
love to work with him on this because I do believe we need to address
this issue.
Mr. Chair, I again urge all of my colleagues to vote for this
amendment. I believe it is a commonsense amendment.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 64 Offered by Mr. Nehls

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 64
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. NEHLS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert
the following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used for the Office for Civil Rights and Civil
Liberties of the Department of Homeland Security.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Nehls) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. NEHLS. Mr. Chair, my amendment would prohibit funds for the
Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at the Department of
Homeland Security.
Under Joe Biden, the Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at
the Department of Homeland Security, also known as CRCL, has become a
corrupt, woke, and anti-ICE component of DHS.
The CRCL is responsible for advancing equity at the DHS. As part of
this principle, DHS created its first-ever equity task force in 2021.
One of the task force's so-called accomplishments was reversing the
public charge. I call it public disaster.
President Donald J. Trump rightfully defined ``public charge'' as an
immigrant who receives one or more designated public benefits for more
than 12 months within a 36-month period. He rightfully included food
stamps, housing vouchers, and Medicaid as benefits that would
disqualify an immigrant from receiving a green card.
Trump's rule protected the American taxpayer and put Americans first.
Joe Biden and his woke CRCL continue to put Americans last.
Under Joe Biden, through the CRCL, his administration has made it
easier for illegal aliens to receive Federal benefits at the expense of
hard-earned tax dollars.
The CRCL said President Trump's rule ``had a chilling effect on
immigrants of color and individuals with disabilities with respect to
their willingness to seek any form of assistance from the Federal
Government.'' This decision, folks, had nothing to do with skin color
or disabilities.
It is clear that DHS's Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties is
catering to these immigrants in an attempt to get their votes. To me,
it is criminal.
Perhaps even more troubling, bureaucrats at the CRCL have deep ties
to the abolish ICE movement, which seeks to stop deportation of illegal
aliens. In fact, CRCL chief Shoba Wadhia has led the charge with pro-
open border and anti-enforcement activities for years. She even
advocated to take away funds from ICE and CBP.
Prior to joining CRCL, she also suggested that even the most violent
illegal alien felons should not be deported. Let me say that again. The
chief of CRCL at DHS doesn't believe that violent illegal aliens,
felons, should be deported. Tell me how that makes sense.
Let me be clear. Someone who immigrates illegally is an illegal
alien. Ms. Wadhia advocates against using the term ``illegal
immigrant'' and suggests using the term ``noncitizens'' or ``migrants''
instead.
Ms. Wadhia has no business leading this office.
Other CRCL policy advisers have also directly supported the abolish
ICE movement or worked with other organizations that have. These people
are not concerned with defending our homeland.
I remind my colleagues on the left that DHS has a vital mission to
ensure a safe, secure, and prosperous homeland. It is abundantly clear
that the DHS Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties is doing the
exact opposite. We must defund this woke, corrupt, anti-ICE office
within the DHS.
Mr. Chair, I urge all of my colleagues to support my amendment, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment, with
all due respect to my colleague, the former sheriff, as my brother is a
former sheriff on the border.
I ask that if we have differences in opinion, instead of just
eliminating this office of civil rights, I would remind our colleagues
that this Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties covers the 260,000
personnel who work for DHS. That is, it covers the 43,000 U.S. Coast
Guard employees and the 59,000 CBP personnel. That includes Border
Patrol and OFO, who are the men and women in blue. It covers 16,800 ICE
personnel, including HSI agents and immigration enforcement officers;
58,000 TSA personnel; 19,300 FEMA employees; and 6,300 Secret Service
personnel. All of those employees are under Homeland.
Again, I do understand we might have some differences, and I will be
the first one to say let's sit down and have a bipartisan conversation
to address those concerns. To eliminate the office, I would say that
would not be the right policy.
Again, I remind folks, at 10:23, that we passed the Homeland
appropriations on June 21. We should have been doing this at 10:23 on
June 22 instead of doing this tonight.
I don't think there is a conference committee on the Senate side. We

[[Page H4695]]

ought to be focusing on how to keep the government open.
With all due respect to my good friend from Texas, the former
sheriff, we might have some differences, but I will be the first one to
sit down with him and figure out how we can address these issues.
Mr. Chair, for those reasons, I ask my colleagues to oppose this
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. NEHLS. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Nehls).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. NEHLS. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas will
be postponed.

Amendment No. 65 Offered by Mr. Nehls

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 65
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. NEHLS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk as the designee
of Mr. Norman.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. The salary of Jonathan Davidson, Chief of Staff
of the Department of Homeland Security, shall be reduced to
$1.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Nehls) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. NEHLS. Mr. Chair, my amendment reduces the salary of Jonathan
Davidson, the chief of staff of the Department of Homeland Security, to
$1.
His salary last year was $158,500. With his new role, it will be at
least $180,000. $180,000 for this guy, and he does nothing.
In a short stint in his role, he has completely failed in upholding
his mission, a complete dereliction of duty under his leadership at DHS
with the invasion that is currently happening at our southern border.
Just in his first month on the job, there were over 232,000
enforcement encounters at the southwest border. This is a 36.5 percent
increase in traffic.
Mr. Chair, 101,000 single individuals, with the majority of these
persons being military-age males, were encountered at our border just
in the month of August. This isn't effective leadership, and we need to
hold DHS officials accountable. This guy needs to be unemployed.
We have written DHS 15 times this Congress to conduct oversight over
the board. Again, we request documents and information to understand
the Biden administration's plans, if any. We never get anything.
My point is this: This guy's salary needs to be reduced to $1 because
that is all he is worth.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
Again, getting information from Homeland can be frustrating. I have
been frustrated, also. I agree that they should be providing
information.
Sometimes we disagree with the policy on how to secure the border.
Sometimes I disagree with my Republican friends. Sometimes I disagree
with my Democratic friends. Again, it is a difference in policy that we
can work out.
To go after a specific person by name is against the Constitution,
the Bill of Attainder Clause, where you should have due process before
this step is taken. Targeting salaries is unconstitutional, as pointed
out by the United States v. Lovett, a Supreme Court case from 1946.
There is another way to address this. I will be happy to sit down
with my good friend from Texas to address this.
Mr. Chair, at this time, I respectfully oppose this amendment, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. NEHLS. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Nehls).
The amendment was agreed to.

Vacating Demand for Recorded Vote on Amendment Offered by Mr. Burchett

Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent that the
request for a recorded vote on amendment No. 24 be vacated to the end
that the amendment be withdrawn.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the request for a recorded vote
on amendment No. 24 offered by the gentleman from Tennessee is vacated
and the amendment is withdrawn.
There was no objection.

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings
will now resume on those amendments printed in part B of House Report
118-216 on which further proceedings were postponed, in the following
order:
Amendment No. 13 by Mr. Correa of California.
Amendment No. 23 by Ms. Wasserman Schultz of Florida.
Amendment No. 25 by Ms. Escobar of Texas.
Amendment No. 29 by Mr. Clyde of Georgia.
Amendment No. 39 by Mr. Biggs of Arizona.
Amendment No. 40 by Mr. Biggs of Arizona.
Amendment No. 41 by Mr. Biggs of Arizona.
Amendment No. 42 by Mr. Biggs of Arizona.
Amendment No. 43 by Mr. Biggs of Arizona.
Amendment No. 48 by Mrs. Boebert of Colorado.
Amendment No. 49 by Mrs. Boebert of Colorado.
Amendment No. 50 by Mrs. Boebert of Colorado.
Amendment No. 51 by Mr. Castro of Texas.
Amendment No. 64 by Mr. Nehls of Texas.
The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the minimum time for any
electronic vote after the first vote in this series.

Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Correa

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 13, printed in part B of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Correa), on which
further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by
voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 206,
noes 223, not voting 10, as follows:

[Roll No. 442]

AYES--206

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Auchincloss
Bacon
Balint
Barragan
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Budzinski
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Dingell
Doggett
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fletcher
Foster
Foushee
Frankel, Lois
Frost
Fulcher
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Landsman
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Leger Fernandez
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Lynch
Mace
Magaziner
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Mfume
Morelle
Moskowitz

[[Page H4696]]

Moulton
Mrvan
Mullin
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Quigley
Raskin
Ross
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan
Salinas
Sanchez
Santos
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Stevens
Strickland
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Underwood
Van Orden
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)

NOES--223

Aderholt
Alford
Allen
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bean (FL)
Bentz
Bergman
Bice
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Bowman
Brecheen
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Calvert
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Chavez-DeRemer
Ciscomani
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Collins
Comer
Crane
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
D'Esposito
Davidson
De La Cruz
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donalds
Duarte
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Edwards
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Ezell
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Flood
Foxx
Franklin, C. Scott
Fry
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garbarino
Garcia, Mike
Gimenez
Gomez
Gonzalez-Colon
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Hinson
Houchin
Hudson
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Jackson (TX)
Jacobs
James
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Kean (NJ)
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kiggans (VA)
Kiley
Kim (CA)
Kustoff
LaHood
LaLota
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Langworthy
Latta
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (FL)
Lee (PA)
Lesko
Letlow
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Luttrell
Malliotakis
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McCormick
McHenry
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (OH)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Mills
Molinaro
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Moran
Moylan
Murphy
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Ogles
Omar
Owens
Palmer
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Pressley
Ramirez
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Salazar
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Self
Sessions
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Strong
Tenney
Thompson (PA)
Tiffany
Timmons
Tlaib
Turner
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Wagner
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (NY)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Yakym
Zinke

NOT VOTING--10

Bush
Carter (TX)
Gonzales, Tony
Luna
Moore (WI)
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan
Schakowsky

{time} 2255

Mr. MIKE GARCIA of California, Messrs. WALTZ, GROTHMAN, CURTIS,
PFLUGER, FITZPATRICK, KEAN of New Jersey, GARBARINO, D'ESPOSITO, and
LAWLER changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Ms. PINGREE, Ms. McCLELLAN, Messrs. PHILLIPS, GRIJALVA, NORCROSS, Ms.
DeLAURO, Mr. VARGAS, Mrs. DINGELL, Mses. TITUS, CLARKE of New York,
Messrs. DAVIS of Illinois, SANTOS, and Ms. CHU changed their vote from
``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 23 Offered by Ms. Wasserman Schultz

The Acting CHAIR (Mrs. Cammack). The unfinished business is the
demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 23, printed in part B of
House Report 118-216 offered by the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms.
Wasserman Schultz), on which further proceedings were postponed and on
which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 209,
noes 220, not voting 10, as follows:

[Roll No. 443]

AYES--209

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Auchincloss
Balint
Barragan
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Budzinski
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Dingell
Doggett
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fletcher
Foster
Foushee
Frankel, Lois
Frost
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Kamlager-Dove
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Landsman
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Lynch
Magaziner
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Mfume
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Mrvan
Mullin
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Ross
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Stevens
Strickland
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Underwood
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)

NOES--220

Aderholt
Alford
Allen
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bean (FL)
Bentz
Bergman
Bice
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Calvert
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Chavez-DeRemer
Ciscomani
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Comer
Crane
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
D'Esposito
Davidson
De La Cruz
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donalds
Duarte
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Edwards
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Ezell
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Flood
Foxx
Franklin, C. Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garbarino
Garcia, Mike
Gimenez
Golden (ME)
Gonzalez-Colon
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Hinson
Houchin
Hudson
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Jackson (TX)
James
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kiggans (VA)
Kiley
Kim (CA)
Kustoff
LaHood
LaLota
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Langworthy
Latta
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (FL)
Lesko
Letlow
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Luttrell
Mace
Malliotakis
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McCormick
McHenry
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (OH)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Mills
Molinaro
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Moran
Moylan
Murphy
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ogles
Owens
Palmer
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler

[[Page H4697]]

Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Salazar
Santos
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Self
Sessions
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Strong
Tenney
Thompson (PA)
Tiffany
Timmons
Turner
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Van Orden
Wagner
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (NY)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Yakym
Zinke

NOT VOTING--10

Bush
Carter (TX)
Collins
Gonzales, Tony
Luna
Moore (WI)
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

{time} 2259

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 25 Offered by Ms. Escobar

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 25, printed in part B of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Escobar), on which
further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by
voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 444]

AYES--210

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Auchincloss
Balint
Barragan
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Budzinski
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Dingell
Doggett
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fletcher
Foster
Foushee
Frankel, Lois
Frost
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Landsman
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Lynch
Magaziner
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Mfume
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Mrvan
Mullin
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Ross
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Stevens
Strickland
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Underwood
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)

NOES--220

Aderholt
Alford
Allen
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bean (FL)
Bentz
Bergman
Bice
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Calvert
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Chavez-DeRemer
Ciscomani
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Collins
Comer
Crane
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
D'Esposito
Davidson
De La Cruz
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donalds
Duarte
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Edwards
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Ezell
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Flood
Foxx
Franklin, C. Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garbarino
Garcia, Mike
Gimenez
Golden (ME)
Gonzalez-Colon
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Hinson
Houchin
Hudson
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Jackson (TX)
James
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Kean (NJ)
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kiggans (VA)
Kiley
Kim (CA)
Kustoff
LaHood
LaLota
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Langworthy
Latta
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (FL)
Lesko
Letlow
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Luttrell
Mace
Malliotakis
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McCormick
McHenry
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (OH)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Mills
Molinaro
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Moran
Moylan
Murphy
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ogles
Owens
Palmer
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Salazar
Santos
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Self
Sessions
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Strong
Tenney
Thompson (PA)
Tiffany
Timmons
Turner
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Van Orden
Wagner
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (NY)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Yakym
Zinke

NOT VOTING--9

Bush
Carter (TX)
Gonzales, Tony
Luna
Moore (WI)
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

{time} 2303

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 29 Offered by Mr. Clyde

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 29, printed in part B of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Clyde), on which
further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by
voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 108,
noes 320, not voting 10, as follows:

[Roll No. 445]

AYES--108

Allen
Amodei
Arrington
Babin
Balderson
Bean (FL)
Bergman
Biggs
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Buchanan
Buck
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Cammack
Carey
Carter (GA)
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Comer
Crane
Curtis
Davidson
DesJarlais
Donalds
Duncan
Edwards
Emmer
Fallon
Ferguson
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Johnson (LA)
Jordan
Joyce (PA)
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Langworthy
Latta
Lesko
Loudermilk
Mann
Massie
McClain
McClintock
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Mills
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Moylan
Nehls
Norman
Ogles
Owens
Palmer
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rose
Rosendale
Roy
Santos
Self
Sessions
Smith (MO)
Smucker
Spartz
Steube
Tenney
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Drew
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Westerman
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Yakym
Zinke

[[Page H4698]]

NOES--320

Adams
Aderholt
Aguilar
Alford
Allred
Armstrong
Auchincloss
Bacon
Baird
Balint
Banks
Barragan
Beatty
Bentz
Bera
Beyer
Bice
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Bucshon
Budzinski
Calvert
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carl
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
De La Cruz
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Duarte
Dunn (FL)
Ellzey
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Estes
Evans
Ezell
Feenstra
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fletcher
Flood
Foster
Foushee
Foxx
Frankel, Lois
Franklin, C. Scott
Frost
Gallagher
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Mike
Garcia, Robert
Gimenez
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Gottheimer
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Guest
Guthrie
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Hill
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houchin
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Hudson
Huffman
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson (TX)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Joyce (OH)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Kustoff
LaHood
LaLota
Landsman
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Luttrell
Mace
Magaziner
Malliotakis
Manning
Mast
Matsui
McBath
McCaul
McClellan
McCollum
McCormick
McGarvey
McGovern
McHenry
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Meuser
Mfume
Miller (OH)
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moore (WI)
Moran
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Mrvan
Mullin
Murphy
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Ross
Rouzer
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rutherford
Ryan
Salazar
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scalise
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Stevens
Strickland
Strong
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Van Duyne
Van Orden
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wagner
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wenstrup
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Williams (NY)
Wilson (FL)
Womack

NOT VOTING--10

Barr
Bush
Carter (TX)
Gonzales, Tony
Luna
Lynch
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

{time} 2306

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 39 Offered by Mr. Biggs

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 39, printed in part B of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs), on which
further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by
voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 446]

AYES--147

Aderholt
Alford
Allen
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Balderson
Barr
Bean (FL)
Bergman
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Buchanan
Buck
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Comer
Crane
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson
De La Cruz
DesJarlais
Donalds
Duarte
Duncan
Emmer
Estes
Ezell
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Flood
Franklin, C. Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Garcia, Mike
Gimenez
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Houchin
Hudson
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Jackson (TX)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (PA)
Kelly (MS)
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Langworthy
Lesko
Luetkemeyer
Luttrell
Malliotakis
Mann
Massie
Mast
McClain
McClintock
McCormick
McHenry
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Mills
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Murphy
Nehls
Norman
Ogles
Owens
Palmer
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rose
Rosendale
Roy
Santos
Scalise
Self
Sessions
Smith (MO)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Stefanik
Steil
Strong
Tenney
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (NY)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Yakym
Zinke

NOES--282

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Amodei
Auchincloss
Bacon
Baird
Balint
Banks
Barragan
Beatty
Bentz
Bera
Beyer
Bice
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Bucshon
Budzinski
Calvert
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Dunn (FL)
Edwards
Ellzey
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fletcher
Foster
Foushee
Foxx
Frankel, Lois
Frost
Gallagher
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Gottheimer
Granger
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Joyce (OH)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Kustoff
LaHood
LaLota
Landsman
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latta
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Loudermilk
Lucas
Lynch
Mace
Magaziner
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McCaul
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Mfume
Miller (OH)
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moore (WI)
Moran
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Moylan
Mrvan
Mullin
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Rogers (KY)
Ross
Rouzer
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rutherford
Ryan
Salazar
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Steel
Stevens
Strickland
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib

[[Page H4699]]

Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Van Orden
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wagner
Walberg
Waltz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Womack

NOT VOTING--9

Bush
Carter (TX)
Gonzales, Tony
Luna
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan
Steube

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

{time} 2309

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 40 Offered by Mr. Biggs

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 40, printed in part B of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs), on which
further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by
voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 447]

AYES--160

Aderholt
Alford
Allen
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Balderson
Barr
Bean (FL)
Bergman
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Buchanan
Buck
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Comer
Crane
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson
De La Cruz
DesJarlais
Donalds
Duarte
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Ezell
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Franklin, C. Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Garcia, Mike
Gimenez
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Houchin
Hudson
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Jackson (TX)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (PA)
Kelly (MS)
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Langworthy
Latta
LaTurner
Lesko
Loudermilk
Luetkemeyer
Luttrell
Malliotakis
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McCormick
McHenry
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Mills
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Moylan
Murphy
Nehls
Norman
Ogles
Owens
Palmer
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rose
Rosendale
Roy
Santos
Scalise
Schweikert
Self
Sessions
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Strong
Tenney
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (NY)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Yakym
Zinke

NOES--270

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Amodei
Auchincloss
Bacon
Baird
Balint
Banks
Barragan
Beatty
Bentz
Bera
Beyer
Bice
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Bucshon
Budzinski
Calvert
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Edwards
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fletcher
Flood
Foster
Foushee
Foxx
Frankel, Lois
Frost
Gallagher
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Gottheimer
Granger
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Joyce (OH)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Kustoff
LaHood
LaLota
Landsman
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Lucas
Lynch
Mace
Magaziner
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Mfume
Miller (OH)
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moore (WI)
Moran
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Mrvan
Mullin
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Rogers (KY)
Ross
Rouzer
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rutherford
Ryan
Salazar
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Steel
Stevens
Strickland
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Van Orden
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wagner
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Womack

NOT VOTING--8

Bush
Carter (TX)
Gonzales, Tony
Luna
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

{time} 2312

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 41 Offered by Mr. Biggs

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 41, printed in part B of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs), on which
further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by
voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 448]

AYES--168

Aderholt
Alford
Allen
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Balderson
Banks
Bean (FL)
Bentz
Bergman
Bice
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Buchanan
Buck
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Comer
Crane
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson
De La Cruz
DesJarlais
Donalds
Duarte
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Ezell
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fleischmann
Franklin, C. Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garcia, Mike
Gimenez
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Houchin
Hudson
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Jackson (TX)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (PA)
Kelly (MS)
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Langworthy
Latta
LaTurner
Lesko
Loudermilk
Luetkemeyer
Luttrell
Mace
Malliotakis
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McCormick
McHenry
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Mills
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Murphy
Nehls
Norman
Ogles
Owens
Palmer
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)

[[Page H4700]]

Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Santos
Scalise
Schweikert
Self
Sessions
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Strong
Tenney
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Van Orden
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (NY)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Yakym
Zinke

NOES--261

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Amodei
Auchincloss
Bacon
Baird
Balint
Barr
Barragan
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Bucshon
Budzinski
Calvert
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Edwards
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Fletcher
Flood
Foster
Foushee
Foxx
Frankel, Lois
Frost
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Joyce (OH)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Kustoff
LaLota
Landsman
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Lucas
Lynch
Magaziner
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Mfume
Miller (OH)
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moore (WI)
Moran
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Moylan
Mrvan
Mullin
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Norcross
Norton
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Rogers (KY)
Ross
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan
Salazar
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Steel
Stevens
Strickland
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wagner
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Womack

NOT VOTING--9

Bush
Carter (TX)
Gonzales, Tony
Luna
Nickel
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

{time} 2315

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 42 Offered by Mr. Biggs

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 42, printed in part B of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs), on which
further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by
voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 449]

AYES--164

Aderholt
Alford
Allen
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bean (FL)
Bentz
Bergman
Bice
Biggs
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Buchanan
Buck
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Comer
Crane
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson
De La Cruz
DesJarlais
Donalds
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Emmer
Estes
Ezell
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Franklin, C. Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garcia, Mike
Gimenez
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Houchin
Hudson
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Jackson (TX)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (PA)
Kelly (MS)
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Langworthy
Latta
LaTurner
Lesko
Loudermilk
Luetkemeyer
Luttrell
Mace
Malliotakis
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McCormick
McHenry
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Mills
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Murphy
Nehls
Norman
Ogles
Owens
Palmer
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Santos
Scalise
Self
Sessions
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Strong
Tenney
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Van Orden
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (NY)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Yakym
Zinke

NOES--265

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Amodei
Auchincloss
Bacon
Baird
Balint
Barragan
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Bucshon
Budzinski
Calvert
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Duarte
Edwards
Ellzey
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fletcher
Flood
Foster
Foushee
Foxx
Frankel, Lois
Frost
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Joyce (OH)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Kustoff
LaLota
Landsman
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Lucas
Lynch
Magaziner
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Mfume
Miller (OH)
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moore (WI)
Moran
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Moylan
Mrvan
Mullin
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Rogers (KY)
Ross
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan
Salazar
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Steel
Stevens
Strickland
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wagner
Wasserman Schultz
Waters

[[Page H4701]]

Watson Coleman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Womack

NOT VOTING--9

Bush
Carter (TX)
Gonzales, Tony
Luna
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan
Webster (FL)

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

{time} 2318

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 43 Offered by Mr. Biggs

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 43, printed in part B of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs), on which
further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by
voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 450]

AYES--162

Aderholt
Alford
Allen
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bean (FL)
Bergman
Bice
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Buck
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Comer
Crane
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson
De La Cruz
Donalds
Duarte
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Ezell
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fleischmann
Franklin, C. Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garcia, Mike
Gimenez
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Houchin
Hudson
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Jackson (TX)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (PA)
Kelly (MS)
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Langworthy
Latta
LaTurner
Lesko
Loudermilk
Luetkemeyer
Luttrell
Mace
Malliotakis
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McCormick
McHenry
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Mills
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Murphy
Nehls
Norman
Ogles
Owens
Palmer
Perry
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Santos
Scalise
Schweikert
Self
Sessions
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Strong
Tenney
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Westerman
Williams (NY)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Yakym
Zinke

NOES--264

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Amodei
Auchincloss
Bacon
Baird
Balint
Barragan
Beatty
Bentz
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Bucshon
Budzinski
Calvert
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Edwards
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Fletcher
Flood
Foster
Foushee
Foxx
Frankel, Lois
Frost
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Joyce (OH)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Kustoff
LaLota
Landsman
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Lucas
Lynch
Magaziner
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Mfume
Miller (OH)
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moore (UT)
Moore (WI)
Moran
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Moylan
Mrvan
Mullin
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Rogers (KY)
Ross
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan
Salazar
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Steel
Stevens
Strickland
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Van Orden
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wagner
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wenstrup
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Womack

NOT VOTING--12

Buchanan
Bush
Carter (TX)
Craig
Gonzales, Tony
Luna
Peltola
Pence
Pfluger
Radewagen
Sablan
Webster (FL)

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

{time} 2320

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 48 Offered by Mrs. Boebert

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 48, printed in part B of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs. Boebert), on
which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes
prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 451]

AYES--159

Aderholt
Alford
Allen
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Balderson
Barr
Bean (FL)
Bentz
Bergman
Bice
Biggs
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Buchanan
Buck
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Comer
Crane
Crawford
Davidson
De La Cruz
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donalds
Duarte
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Emmer
Estes
Ezell
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Foxx
Franklin, C. Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Gimenez
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Houchin
Hudson
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Jackson (TX)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Kelly (MS)
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Langworthy
Latta
LaTurner
Lesko
Loudermilk
Luetkemeyer
Luttrell
Mace
Malliotakis
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McCormick
McHenry
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Mills
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Murphy
Nehls
Norman
Ogles
Palmer
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Santos
Scalise
Self
Sessions
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steil
Steube
Strong
Tenney
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Van Orden
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)

[[Page H4702]]

Webster (FL)
Westerman
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Yakym
Zinke

NOES--269

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Amodei
Auchincloss
Bacon
Baird
Balint
Banks
Barragan
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Bucshon
Budzinski
Calvert
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crenshaw
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
Curtis
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Dingell
Doggett
Edwards
Ellzey
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fletcher
Flood
Foster
Foushee
Frankel, Lois
Frost
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Mike
Garcia, Robert
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Kustoff
LaLota
Landsman
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Lucas
Lynch
Magaziner
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Mfume
Miller (OH)
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moore (UT)
Moore (WI)
Moran
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Moylan
Mrvan
Mullin
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Owens
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Rogers (KY)
Ross
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan
Salazar
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Steel
Stefanik
Stevens
Strickland
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wagner
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wenstrup
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Williams (NY)
Wilson (FL)
Womack

NOT VOTING--10

Bush
Carter (TX)
Gonzales, Tony
Griffith
Luna
Nunn (IA)
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

{time} 2323

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 49 Offered by Mrs. Boebert

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 49, printed in part B of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs. Boebert), on
which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes
prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 452]

AYES--161

Aderholt
Alford
Allen
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bean (FL)
Bergman
Bice
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Buchanan
Buck
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Comer
Crane
Crawford
Davidson
De La Cruz
DesJarlais
Donalds
Duarte
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Emmer
Estes
Ezell
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Foxx
Franklin, C. Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Gimenez
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Houchin
Hudson
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Jackson (TX)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (PA)
Kelly (MS)
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Langworthy
Latta
LaTurner
Lesko
Loudermilk
Luetkemeyer
Luttrell
Mace
Malliotakis
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McCormick
McHenry
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Mills
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Murphy
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Nunn (IA)
Ogles
Palmer
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Santos
Scalise
Schweikert
Self
Sessions
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Stauber
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Strong
Tenney
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Westerman
Williams (NY)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Yakym
Zinke

NOES--267

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Amodei
Auchincloss
Bacon
Baird
Balint
Barragan
Beatty
Bentz
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Bucshon
Budzinski
Calvert
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crenshaw
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
Curtis
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Edwards
Ellzey
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fletcher
Flood
Foster
Foushee
Frankel, Lois
Frost
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Mike
Garcia, Robert
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Joyce (OH)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Kustoff
LaLota
Landsman
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Lucas
Lynch
Magaziner
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Mfume
Miller (OH)
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moore (UT)
Moore (WI)
Moran
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Moylan
Mrvan
Mullin
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Owens
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Rogers (KY)
Ross
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Spartz
Stansbury
Stanton
Steel
Stevens
Strickland
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Van Orden
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wagner
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wenstrup
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Womack

[[Page H4703]]

NOT VOTING--10

Bush
Carter (TX)
Gonzales, Tony
Griffith
Luna
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan
Salazar

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

{time} 2326

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 50 Offered by Mrs. Boebert

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 50, printed in part B of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs. Boebert), on
which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes
prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 453]

AYES--161

Aderholt
Alford
Allen
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bean (FL)
Bentz
Bergman
Bice
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Buchanan
Buck
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Comer
Crane
Crawford
Davidson
De La Cruz
DesJarlais
Donalds
Duarte
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Emmer
Estes
Ezell
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fleischmann
Foxx
Franklin, C. Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Gimenez
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Houchin
Hudson
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Jackson (TX)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (PA)
Kelly (MS)
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Langworthy
Latta
LaTurner
Lesko
Loudermilk
Luetkemeyer
Luttrell
Mace
Malliotakis
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McCormick
McHenry
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Mills
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moran
Murphy
Nehls
Norman
Ogles
Palmer
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Santos
Scalise
Self
Sessions
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Strong
Tenney
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Yakym
Zinke

NOES--268

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Amodei
Auchincloss
Bacon
Baird
Balint
Barragan
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Bucshon
Budzinski
Calvert
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crenshaw
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
Curtis
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Edwards
Ellzey
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Fletcher
Flood
Foster
Foushee
Frankel, Lois
Frost
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Mike
Garcia, Robert
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Gottheimer
Granger
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Joyce (OH)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Kustoff
LaLota
Landsman
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Lucas
Lynch
Magaziner
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Mfume
Miller (OH)
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moore (UT)
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Moylan
Mrvan
Mullin
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Owens
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Rogers (KY)
Ross
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan
Salazar
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Steel
Stevens
Strickland
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Van Orden
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wagner
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Williams (NY)
Wilson (FL)
Womack

NOT VOTING--9

Bush
Carter (TX)
Gonzales, Tony
Griffith
Luna
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

{time} 2330

Mr. McGOVERN changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 51 Offered by Mr. Castro of Texas

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 51, printed in part B of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Castro), on which
further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by
voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 454]

AYES--211

[[Page H4704]]

Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Ross
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Stevens
Strickland
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Underwood
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)

NOES--220

Aderholt
Alford
Allen
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bean (FL)
Bentz
Bergman
Bice
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Calvert
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Chavez-DeRemer
Ciscomani
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Collins
Comer
Crane
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
D'Esposito
Davidson
De La Cruz
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donalds
Duarte
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Edwards
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Ezell
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Flood
Foxx
Franklin, C. Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garbarino
Garcia, Mike
Gimenez
Golden (ME)
Gonzalez-Colon
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Hinson
Houchin
Hudson
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Jackson (TX)
James
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Kean (NJ)
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kiggans (VA)
Kiley
Kim (CA)
Kustoff
LaHood
LaLota
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Langworthy
Latta
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (FL)
Lesko
Letlow
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Luttrell
Mace
Malliotakis
Mann
Mast
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McCormick
McHenry
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (OH)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Mills
Molinaro
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Moran
Moylan
Murphy
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ogles
Owens
Palmer
Perez
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Salazar
Santos
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Self
Sessions
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Strong
Tenney
Thompson (PA)
Tiffany
Timmons
Turner
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Van Orden
Wagner
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (NY)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Yakym
Zinke

NOT VOTING--8

Bush
Carter (TX)
Gonzales, Tony
Luna
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

{time} 2333

Mr. MRVAN changed his vote ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 64 Offered by Mr. Nehls

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 64, printed in part B of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Nehls), on which
further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by
voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 455]

AYES--182

Aderholt
Alford
Allen
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bean (FL)
Bentz
Bergman
Bice
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Buchanan
Buck
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Calvert
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Collins
Comer
Crane
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson
De La Cruz
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donalds
Duarte
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Edwards
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Ezell
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fleischmann
Foxx
Franklin, C. Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garcia, Mike
Gimenez
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Houchin
Hudson
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Jackson (TX)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (PA)
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kim (CA)
Kustoff
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Langworthy
Latta
LaTurner
Lesko
Loudermilk
Luetkemeyer
Luttrell
Malliotakis
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McCormick
McHenry
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (OH)
Miller (WV)
Mills
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Moran
Moylan
Nehls
Norman
Ogles
Owens
Palmer
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Santos
Scalise
Scott, Austin
Self
Sessions
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Strong
Tenney
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Van Orden
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Yakym
Zinke

NOES--247

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Amodei
Auchincloss
Bacon
Balint
Barragan
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Bucshon
Budzinski
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Dingell
Doggett
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Fletcher
Flood
Foster
Foushee
Frankel, Lois
Frost
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Joyce (OH)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
LaLota
Landsman
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Lucas
Lynch
Mace
Magaziner
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Mfume
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Mrvan
Mullin
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Ross
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan
Salazar
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Stevens
Strickland
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wagner
Wasserman Schultz
Waters

[[Page H4705]]

Watson Coleman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Williams (NY)
Wilson (FL)

NOT VOTING--9

Bush
Carter (TX)
Gonzales, Tony
Luna
Murphy
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

{time} 2337

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

personal explanation

Ms. BUSH. Madam Chair, I was not present during today's first or
second vote series. Had I been present, I would have voted: YEA on Roll
Call No. 417, NAY on Roll Call No. 418, NAY on Roll Call No. 419, NAY
on Roll Call No. 420, NAY on Roll Call No. 421, NAY on Roll Call No.
422, NAY on Roll Call No. 423, NAY on Roll Call No. 424, NAY on Roll
Call No. 425, NAY on Roll Call No. 426, NAY on Roll Call No. 427, NAY
on Roll Call No. 428, NAY on Roll Call No. 429, NAY on Roll Call No.
430, NAY on Roll Call No. 431, NAY on Roll Call No. 432, NAY on Roll
Call No. 433, NAY on Roll Call No. 434, NAY on Roll Call No. 435, NAY
on Roll Call No. 436, YEA on Roll Call No. 437, NAY on Roll Call No.
438, YEA on Roll Call No. 439, YEA on Roll Call No. 440, NAY on Roll
Call No. 441, NAY on Roll Call No. 442, YEA on Roll Call No. 443, YEA
on Roll Call No. 444, NAY on Roll Call No. 445, NAY on Roll Call No.
446, NAY on Roll Call No. 447, NAY on Roll Call No. 448, NAY on Roll
Call No. 449, NAY on Roll Call No. 450, NAY on Roll Call No. 451, NAY
on Roll Call No. 452. NAY on Roll Call No. 453, YEA on Roll Call No.
454 and NAY on Roll Call No. 455.

{time} 2345

Amendment No. 66 Offered by Mr. Norman

The Acting CHAIR (Mrs. Miller-Meeks). It is now in order to consider
amendment No. 66 printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. NORMAN. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. The salary of Kristie Canegallo, Deputy Secretary
of Homeland Security, shall be reduced to $1.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from South Carolina (Mr. Norman) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina.
Mr. NORMAN. Madam Chair, my amendment reduces the salary of Kristie
Canegallo, Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security, to $1.
A little background on who she is:
She has served as Chief of Staff at DHS since January 2022.
She recently took on the role of Deputy Secretary in July of this
year.
Her job is to oversee the agency and work to advance the Department's
mission and organizational priorities.
Her salary in 2022 was $183,100.
As stated, her job is to oversee and enforce the mission of DHS,
which is to safeguard the American people, our homeland, and our
values.
Dereliction of duty, as this is simply not the case.
She is the number two individual at DHS. Her job is to assist the
priorities of Mayorkas in securing our homeland, our values, and our
people. She has simply been asleep at the switch and has not done the
job.
Our homeland is less secure now than it was when she came into this
role. In her first year in her role at DHS, over 2.76 million illegal
individuals crossed the border. These were just the ones that they came
in contact with.
In addition, 1.4 million individuals have been encountered, according
to DHS, since January 1 of 2023.
We are witnessing an invasion of our homeland before our very eyes,
and my Democratic colleagues are acting like it is a normal Wednesday
with business as usual.
Is this effective leadership? No, it is not. This is a crisis in this
country. This is an invasion. It is against our Constitution. It is
against our core values that this country was built on.
Thus, that is the reason I am asking to cut the salary to $1, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment, and
I urge Members to vote ``no.''
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. NORMAN. Madam Chair, as we look at the challenges this country
faces, we look at the reasons why our border is unsecure, why our
national security is at risk, and it is because of the inaction of
people in prominent roles such as Ms. Canegallo.
The only reason that she is in the job is for political reasons,
which is to keep the power of the Democratic Party.
These illegals are getting drivers' licenses, they are getting Social
Security numbers, and it is completely against everything that this
country stands for.
For that reason, I hope Members will support this.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has the only time remaining.
Mr. NORMAN. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Norman).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from South
Carolina will be postponed.

Amendment No. 67 Offered by Mr. Norman

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 67
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. NORMAN. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. The salary of Kimberly O'Connor, Executive
Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, shall be
reduced to $1.

[[Page H4706]]

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Norman).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from South
Carolina will be postponed.
The Chair recognizes that amendment 68 will not be offered.

Amendment No. 69 Offered by Mr. Norman

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 69
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. NORMAN. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert
the following:
Sec. __. The salary of Blas Nunez-Neto, Assistant
Secretary for Border and Immigration Policy, shall be reduced
to $1.

Amendment No. 70 Offered by Mr. Ogles

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 70
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. OGLES. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert
the following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used to carry out Executive Order 14019 (86 Fed. Reg.
13623; relating to promoting access to voting), except for
sections 7, 8, and 10 of such Order.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Tennessee (Mr. Ogles) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee.
Mr. OGLES. Madam Chair, I rise in support of my amendment to prohibit
taxpayer money from being used on President Biden's nakedly political
executive order allegedly promoting access to voting.
This dangerous executive order instructed a wide range of agencies,
including the Department of Health and Human Services and the Small
Business Administration to engage in voter turnout operations. Think
about that for a moment, the government is engaging in voter turnout.
Worse, it instructs agencies to partner with approved third-party
organizations to assist them in their voter registration and other
election-focused efforts.
Who will approve these organizations? What criteria will be used? The
executive order doesn't say.
Congress has never granted the administration any authority to
approve such groups or specify criteria therein.
This executive order is blatantly illegal.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 0000

Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
This order on voting access will ensure that all Americans can
exercise their right to vote, including voters in underserved
communities; voters who are younger or older, in rural and urban areas;
servicemembers and veterans; and other folks like voters with
disabilities or language access concerns.
Madam Chair, I ask that we oppose this amendment, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
Mr. OGLES. Madam Chair, I agree with my colleague that I, too, would
like all to participate in the voting process, all demographics across
all spectrums.
It should also be noted that there are already provisions in the law
to allow for soldiers deployed to vote.
Madam Chair, I urge adoption of my amendment, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ogles).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 71 Offered by Mr. Ogles

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 71
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. OGLES. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert
the following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used for the Homeland Intelligence Experts Group.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Tennessee (Mr. Ogles) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee.
Mr. OGLES. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to
prohibit funding for the so-called Homeland Intelligence Experts Group.
The conduct of certain members of the intelligence community, who
behaved as political hacks, quite frankly, rather than sources of
unbiased information, has undermined Americans' faith in government.
That concerns me.
Some of these officials peddled obvious falsehoods in an effort to
undermine the American people's confidence in the election of 2016, and
some meddled in the 2020 election, as well.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
This amendment would undermine a recent effort by the Secretary--in
fact, I believe it was only announced a few days ago--to convene
private-sector experts in homeland and national security, some widely
recognized, including former senior intelligence officials, who will
provide the DHS with a wide range of views and perspectives on the
Federal Government's intelligence enterprise to DHS' I&A and the Office
of the Counterterrorism Coordinator. All

[[Page H4707]]

we are trying to do is get information from experts.
Madam Chair, I say that we vote ``no'' on this amendment, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
Mr. OGLES. Madam Chair, at a time when we see dysfunction in
government and, quite frankly, in Congress, it is important that we
restore faith in institutions.
At a time when there are ongoing investigations into, say, the Hunter
Biden laptop, it is important that we let due process work its way and
not interject so-called experts.
With that being said, I encourage, at a time when we desperately need
to restore faith in institutions, let's do that thing. Let's trust the
process as we move forward.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ogles).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 72 Offered by Mr. Pfluger

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 72
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. PFLUGER. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act may be made available to administer,
implement, or enforce a ``Remain-in-Texas'' policy.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Pfluger) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. PFLUGER. Madam Chair, I rise in support of my amendment to block
any potential remain in Texas policy.
It appears Democrats are starting to realize the severity of the
border crisis. On August 8, Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey
declared a state of emergency due to an influx of illegal aliens. I
think the number was 7,500. The next day, New York City Mayor Eric
Adams stated that the illegal alien influx was ``not sustainable'' and
would ``destroy New York City.''
All it took for the President to realize there was a crisis at the
border was a little complaining from his Democrat donors. They don't
mind the border crisis as long as it stays far away from their blue
State.
What is the President's solution? Instead of securing the border, the
Biden administration is considering instating a remain in Texas policy.
You heard that right--not a policy to thwart illegal immigration but
one that would punish Texas and force our State to be the sole provider
for millions of illegal immigrants crossing our southern border every
single year.
Liberal sanctuary cities, like New York, that openly obstruct Federal
immigration laws and have policies in place to shield criminals from
Immigration and Customs Enforcement should not be immune to the crisis
at our collective southern border.
President Biden's remain in Texas policy must remain in the trash
can. My amendment ends this administration's attempt to force Texans to
bear the brunt of the immigration crisis.
Secure the border and vote ``yes'' on this amendment.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition to this
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition, with all due respect
to my good friend from Texas.
First of all, this program is not in existence, so why are we going
to try to prohibit funds for something that doesn't even exist?
One of the things that we ought to be looking at is trying to find an
expedited way of removing folks who are not supposed to be here. As I
said before, if you get 100 people before an immigration judge, you
will see that 89 to 90 percent, generally speaking, are going to be
rejected because, again, the law is very specific as to what
persecution is.
What I am hoping the administration is trying to do is to make sure
that we expedite removals. If you expedite removals, that is the
repercussion that we all have been talking about. That is the
consequence that we all have been talking about.
To say no funds will be used--for what? That program is not in. We
need to fund expedited ways to remove people who, after they have their
day in court, should be removed.
With all respect to my good friend from Texas, I urge my colleagues
to vote ``no,'' and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. PFLUGER. Madam Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Burgess), my good friend and colleague.
Mr. BURGESS. Madam Chair, I thank Representative Pfluger for yielding
and for working on this issue. It is so critically important.
Maybe the President didn't have an absolute plan in mind, but he did
say he wanted people to remain in Texas and not bother the mayor of New
York City and the Governor of Massachusetts.
The gentleman knows this really well that that rainy Saturday we were
working on this up in the Rules Committee, the President said he was
going to veto the Homeland Security appropriations bill. Veto the
Homeland Security appropriations bill when the Governor of
Massachusetts says we have an emergency, the mayor of New York says we
are losing our city, and he is going to veto the Department of Homeland
Security appropriations bill?
This policy that Mr. Pfluger is attempting to prevent is wrong. The
President should not have articulated it, and he certainly should not
have articulated that he is going to veto the bill to protect the
border.
Governor Abbott had to declare an invasion. He had to declare an
emergency. He is having to spend Texans' billions on doing the job the
United States Government should be doing. We need to fund this bill and
pass this bill.
Mr. PFLUGER. Madam Chair, I also thank my colleague from Texas on the
other side of aisle for bringing up a good point, that we should be
thinking about how to remove people who come across illegally.
That is exactly what Border Patrol agents told me just this past
weekend when I was in Eagle Pass. Their solution, which was the last
solution of the administration, was deportation.
I think my colleague was actually the one on TV about a week ago who
said--and I am not necessarily quoting exactly what my colleague said--
until you see the images of people being deported, they are going to
continue to come.
I couldn't agree with him more, that those images need to happen
because that is the message that we need to send.
So, no, we don't need a remain in Texas policy. We need a remain in
Mexico policy. We need to go back to the policies of the previous
administration that were working before we had millions of people
coming into this country illegally because they know that the border is
wide open.
This is a symptom. Let's get to the root cause. Let's send H.R. 2 in
the form that we passed it here in the House to the Senate and to the
President and secure our border once and for all. Enough is enough.
Madam Chair, I urge a ``yes'' vote on this, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Pfluger).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 73 Offered by Mr. Rosendale

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 73
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. ROSENDALE. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. ___. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to carry out the Department of Homeland Security
memorandum titled ``Worksite Enforcement: The Strategy to
Protect the American Labor Market, the Conditions of the
American Worksite, and the Dignity of the Individual''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman

[[Page H4708]]

from Montana (Mr. Rosendale) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Montana.
Mr. ROSENDALE. Madam Chair, my amendment No. 73 would prohibit funds
from being used to enforce Secretary Mayorkas' memo prohibiting
workforce immigration enforcement.
With the stroke of a pen, Secretary Mayorkas eliminated a key method
of interior enforcement and required our Immigration and Customs
Enforcement agents, the ICE agents, to fight with one hand tied behind
their back.
Right now, there are over 16.8 million illegal aliens in our country,
and estimates suggest that upward of 65 percent of the illegal aliens
are employed.
Businessowners and ranchers in Montana work hard to ensure they are
in compliance with Federal immigration law, and this memo punishes law-
abiding businesses that refuse to hire illegal aliens.
Additionally, Americans should not be expected to compete in the
labor market with illegal aliens who are depressing wages and keeping
good-paying jobs away from American citizens.
President Biden and Secretary Mayorkas' refusal to allow ICE to do
their job and enforce our Nation's laws is a clear dereliction of duty
and presents risk to our country's national security.
Simply put, my amendment would allow ICE agents to do their job
enforcing immigration law with the most effective methods possible.
Under President Trump, workforce enforcement operations were common
practice, making it clear to illegal aliens and the employers that
there would be consequences for breaking the law, putting all
businesses on a level playing field.
It is time we protect small business owners and workers and force
Secretary Mayorkas to let ICE do its job.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in
personalities toward the President.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition to this
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I stand against this amendment. I am in
opposition. I support ICE. I support enforcing the law.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. ROSENDALE. Madam Chair, Secretary Mayorkas acknowledges the
threat of illegal labor in his memo ending workplace enforcement:
``Unscrupulous employers create an unfair labor market. They also
unfairly drive down their costs and disadvantage their business
competitors who abide by the law.''
These businesses are not abiding by the law. The illegal aliens who
are working there are not supposed to be employed. It is not fair to
the labor market. It is not fair to the Americans who wanted to have
these positions. It absolutely does suppress the wages and hurts
everyone.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

{time} 0015

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Montana (Mr. Rosendale).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 74 Offered by Mr. Rosendale

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 74
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. ROSENDALE. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. The total amount of appropriations made available
by this Act is hereby reduced by $8,722,000,000.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Montana (Mr. Rosendale) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Montana.
Mr. ROSENDALE. Madam Chair, my amendment No. 74 will reduce the total
amount of funds appropriated by this bill to move our country toward
fiscal responsibility, bringing spending toward fiscal year 2022
levels.
We all know that we are facing a $33 trillion national debt, and at
the spending levels that are being proposed by the appropriation bills
that we have been going over the last several days, we very easily
could be facing a $3 trillion addition to that debt by the time we add
the interest in.
It is clear that President Biden and Secretary Mayorkas have no
interest in securing our border or enforcing immigration law. Instead,
this administration is spending money to encourage illegal immigration
through illegal migrant parole programs and cooperation with far-left
NGOs.
Additionally, Secretary Mayorkas has issued countless memos
handicapping law enforcement efforts from ICE and CBP.
I have gone down there and visited the border myself several times.
As long as President Biden refuses to enforce immigration law and stop
the invasion at our southern border, DHS should not be rewarded with a
budget increase.
President Trump secured the border and provided for our national
defense with significantly less money. It is abundantly clear that
Biden's border crisis is a deliberate policy choice by this
administration and not a funding issue.
This country, again, is $33 trillion in debt. We cannot afford to
continue business as usual, primarily when President Biden and
Secretary Mayorkas use taxpayer dollars to prevent our border from
being secured.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Madam Chair, I appreciate my colleague's concern
about the rampant Federal spending by the Democrats and this
administration. However, this amendment is not the way to address the
larger problem we face.
This bill makes targeted cuts to wasteful spending, eliminates
funding for woke programs, and prohibits funding for policies and
programs that encourage illegal immigration. In contrast, this
amendment would indiscriminately cut the top-line spending of the
Department of Homeland Security by $8.7 billion, which is a 14 percent
reduction to the discretionary funding in this bill.
These cuts would not be targeted to specific programs or activities.
Instead, it would be left to the Biden administration to decide how and
where to apply these reductions. Unfortunately, this administration
would likely align such reductions into its proposals in the
President's budget request.
The first cut the administration will make is to eliminate the $2.1
billion for the border wall, followed by the 16,500 additional
detention beds that were funded in this bill.
Funding for Border Patrol staffing would be slashed, as would funding
for additional ICE deportation officers.
All the critical border security investments and immigration
priorities we have included in this bill will be stripped out in favor
of continuing the status quo.
Let's ensure that this bill we pass on the floor does what the Biden
administration has failed to do--act to address the border security
crisis, which has been raging for the last 2\1/2\ years.
Let's remember that true border security comes with a price tag, and
I think we should all be willing to pay.
Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment,
and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROSENDALE. Madam Chair, in 2020, the DHS bill appropriated $67.8
billion. In 2022, the DHS bill appropriated $75.538 billion. The 2024
DHS appropriation bill includes $91.5 billion.
While I certainly respect the work that has been done in that
committee, we all are going to have to take a haircut. If not, we are
going to add $3 trillion a year to the national debt. Over the next 5
years, that will rise to $50 trillion.
Madam Chair, $50 trillion in just 5 years, not 20 years, not 50
years, and it will cost 50 percent of the annual revenue in interest
payments alone to service that.

[[Page H4709]]

If you think that we are making difficult decisions right now, when
50 percent of the revenue that we collect on an annual basis is going
to service that loan, we are going to have to make massive changes to
the way that we run the Federal Government, and every single person in
the country is going to feel it. It is going to be dramatic pain.
All I am asking is that we reduce by $8.7 billion. I can't believe
that I am saying only $8.7 billion.
Again, I respect the work that has been done, but these are some
difficult decisions that need to be taken care of, and I am willing to
do my part to help us get there.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Madam Chair, I appreciate the concerns of the
gentleman from Montana, but I maintain that I urge my colleagues to
vote ``no'' on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Montana (Mr. Rosendale).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Montana will
be postponed.

Amendment No. 75 Offered by Mr. Roy

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 75
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. ROY. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this act may
be used to implement, enforce, or otherwise carry out
Executive Orders 13678 (``Revision of Civil Immigration
Enforcement Policies and Priorities''), 14010 (``Creating a
Comprehensive Regional Framework To Address the Causes of
Migration, To Manage Migration Throughout North and Central
America, and To Provide Safe and Orderly Processing of Asylum
Seekers at the United States Border''), or 14012 (``Restoring
Faith in Our Legal Immigration Systems and Strengthening
Integration and Inclusion Efforts for New Americans'').

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Roy) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. ROY. Madam Chair, the amendment I put forward prohibits funding
in this act to President Biden's executive orders that put needless
limits on immigration enforcement, scale back sound asylum policies,
and establish its own set of immigration directives that Congress has
not passed.
The executive orders that President Biden put in place as soon as he
got into the White House have had an enormous negative impact on the
ability of Border Patrol and ICE to carry out their job--in particular,
ICE.
The results are pretty clear. Deportations of criminal aliens
plummeted by 62 percent between fiscal year 2020 under President Trump
and fiscal year 2021 under President Biden. It went from 150,000,
103,000, all the way to 38,000 under Biden.
The fact of the matter is this is not shocking. When you issue
executive orders that place restrictions on the ability of ICE to do
its job, shockingly, it can't do its job.
Congress, Article I in the Constitution, has not only the power but
the duty to tell Article II in the Constitution: Hey, you don't get to
use the funds that we are appropriating to not do your job.
This amendment would simply say to the President of the United States
and the Secretary that we have this crazy idea that maybe, just maybe,
the President should follow the law instead of issuing executive orders
to undermine the ability of law enforcement personnel to do their job,
leaving the American people exposed to dangers, fentanyl pouring into
our communities, and criminal aliens being able to carry out crimes on
the streets of the country.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I oppose this amendment, respectfully, to
my friend from Texas.
I am looking at the language, and I assume that the first executive
order that is referenced is 13678. That one deals with authority for
criminal investigators of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and
Explosives issued by President Obama, so I assume that is not the
correct one. You are probably looking at 13768, which deals with ICE.
Nevertheless, even though he is referring to the wrong one here, this
amendment is not doing what I think he intends to do. All I am saying
is I trust ICE to prioritize and limit their resources where they can
focus on the greatest threat.
Again, if we are worried about the border, I would emphasize that for
the last 2 fiscal years, we have added $2.4 billion to CBP budget
authority, over a 15 percent increase.
I would say that except for two Members, who are not present here
today, on the Republican side, everybody voted ``no.''
Again, I ask you to focus on what we have. I assume that the
executive order that he is referring to--I would ask you if you want to
withdraw the amendment and bring it back, we will consider it tomorrow.
Otherwise, I would oppose this amendment, and I yield back the
balance of my time, with all due respect to my good friend from Texas
(Mr. Roy).
Mr. ROY. Madam Chair, I appreciate my friend from Texas, and I will
certainly review the amendment. I am not going to withdraw it.
I want to review the amendment and see if the reference is somehow
incorrect, but the intent of the amendment--and it is now, I am being
told, a leg counsel drafting error on the number, so it is probably the
number that my friend is referring to.
The purpose of it is very clear, which is to turn away the executive
orders of the President of the United States that have been undermining
our security.
The gentleman, I think, properly referenced the number. I think on
that one, given that there is a drafting error, and I have three other
amendments that accomplish the same thing, I am actually going to
withdraw the amendment.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time and withdraw the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is withdrawn.

Amendment No. 76 Offered by Mr. Roy

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 76
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. ROY. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act
shall be used to terminate the Department of Homeland
Security's Migration Protection Protocols.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Roy) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. ROY. Madam Chair, the amendment that we have in front of us
prohibits funding from the act to be used to terminate the Migrant
Protection Protocols. This is one of the most important things that we
need to address.
H.R. 2, which this body, led by Republicans, passed in the spring,
addresses the need to return to use of Migrant Protection Protocols to
put in place the return to Mexico and remain in Mexico policies of the
previous administration, which, when combined with the use of title 42
authority, were effective in eliminating the flow coming across our
border.
When the current administration completely abandoned on day one the
use of Migrant Protection Protocols, the reality is we have seen the
resulting chaos at our border.
It is hard for anybody who is objectively looking at the state of our
border to find any defense for the current

[[Page H4710]]

policies of the administration allowing the abject failure to occur.
This amendment would assert our Article I authority to say to the
President that the President must not use funds to terminate the
Migrant Protection Protocols--that is, we should not be funding the
failure of this administration to do its job.
Very simply put, as we put forward in H.R. 2, the choices before us
should be to detain, to put in expedited removal, or to put in a
migrant protection protocol-type system, remaining in Mexico.
Otherwise, you have what we have, which is an utter disregard for the
border using parole authority wrongly--instead of on a case-by-case
basis, mass releases under parole.
We have the use of asylum, not for persecution but rather as a
blanket release into the United States, to the point of 2 million
releases over the last 2\1/2\ years under this administration.

{time} 0030

This is a very simple policy that we can adopt as a Congress to
restrain the abuse of this administration.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I claim time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I do not believe in catch and release, and
I certainly want to give our men and women everything they need to
have, and that is why it is important that we address this issue.
Your amendment deals with a program called remain in Mexico. The only
problem is, we can't stop the funds in that program because it got
terminated in February 2021. We had an opportunity to vote on this on
May 22, but we did not bring this up at that time. Except for two
Members, everybody voted ``no'' on this on the Republican side, and it
is a little bit too late for this.
Madam Chair, I would say to my good friend from Texas, I do support
the MPP, I do support it, but this program is gone. I think we need to
have a little bit of discussion if we are going to be looking at ways
to stop folks from coming in.
I would remind folks what happened in 2015 and what happened in 2019
under President Trump and under President Obama, that is, we worked
with Mexico, not to keep them there, but actually for them to secure
their southern border with Guatemala. We need to do that again.
If we are able to do that, I think we should be able to address that
issue. I do support MPP, but this amendment is trying to stop funding
for something that doesn't exist. For that reason, I will ask my
colleagues to vote ``no,'' and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. ROY. Madam Chair, the termination of this program resulted in a
decrease by 64 percent for illegal alien apprehensions between ports of
entries or found inadmissible at ports of entry.
Border encounters with Central American families--the main driver of
the crisis for the better part of the first 2 years, comprised the
majority of the MPP-amenable aliens--dropped by 80 percent.
A report found MPP to be ``an indispensable tool in addressing the
ongoing crisis at the southern border and restoring integrity to the
immigration system.''
The purpose of the amendment is to ensure that we are not continuing
to fund the ending of the kinds of programs that could be successful--
that is the point. We are putting restrictions on the extent to which
the administration can ignore the tools that it should be using.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 77 Offered by Mr. Roy

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 77
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. ROY. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to carry out the Department of Homeland Security
memorandum titled ``Guidelines for Enforcement Actions in or
Near Protected Areas''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Roy) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. ROY. Madam Chair, the amendment before us is pretty simple. It
prohibits funding from this Act to carry out the Department of Homeland
Security's memo titled ``Guidelines for Enforcement Actions in or Near
Protected Areas.''
The Biden administration issued a memo prohibiting ICE from arresting
illegal migrants in most public places. If you look at a map, there are
literally circles drawn that pretty much cover an entire geographic
region. Effectively, they are making it impossible for ICE to do its
job.
It is purposeful, and this amendment is pretty simple: Don't use
money to do this stupid thing.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I claim time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, we had an opportunity for the last 2 fiscal
years to put $2 billion to support CBP, including ICE, and that was a
15 percent increase. We had an opportunity to vote on it, and there
were folks that did not support these particular moneys for Homeland.
I have full faith in the men and women that work for DHS, they are
capable of carrying out their Federal law enforcement responsibilities
and of carrying out their statutory authorities.
This amendment is not needed. I support ICE and they will carry out
the work that needs to be done so they can enforce immigration law.
Madam Chair, I ask my colleagues to vote ``no,'' and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. ROY. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 78 Offered by Mr. Roy

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 78
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Mr. ROY. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be
used to implement any of the following executive orders:
(1) Executive Order 13990, relating to Protecting Public
Health and the Environment and Restoring Science To Tackle
the Climate Crisis.
(2) Executive Order 14008, relating to Tackling the Climate
Crisis at Home and Abroad.
(3) Section 6 of Executive Order 14013, relating to
Rebuilding and Enhancing Programs To Resettle Refugees and
Planning for the Impact of Climate Change on Migration.
(4) Executive Order 14030, relating to Climate-Related
Financial Risk.
(5) Executive Order 14057, relating to Catalyzing Clean
Energy Industries and Jobs Through Federal Sustainability.
(6) Executive Order 14082, relating to Implementation of
the Energy and Infrastructure Provisions of the Inflation
Reduction Act of 2022.
(7) Executive Order 14096, relating to Revitalizing Our
Nation's Commitment to Environmental Justice for All.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Roy) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. ROY. Madam Chair, this amendment prohibits--as I have done in a
number of our other appropriations bills, successfully so far. This
amendment prohibits any of the funding in the Homeland Security
appropriations bill from being used to carry out President Biden's
executive orders on climate change.
These executive orders are pursuing a climate fetish to the detriment
of our ability to have national security and energy security. It is
driving up the prices of energy and making us more

[[Page H4711]]

dependent on China and foreign sources of energy. It is making lives
more difficult for the American people.
Alejandro Mayorkas, the Secretary of Homeland Security, has literally
said, the climate crisis is the most prominent threat we face.
Meanwhile, we have had 6 million migrant encounters, 2 million releases
in our country, and 70-some-thousand Americans die from fentanyl
poisoning. There are little girls and migrants getting abused in the
sex trafficking trade and getting distributed through the United
States. That is what the Secretary focuses on. It is absurd. This is
pretty simple: Stop doing that.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I claim time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I stand in opposition, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. ROY. Madam Chair, I appreciate the brevity of my colleague, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 79 Offered by Mr. Tiffany

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 79
printed in part D of House Report 118-216.
Mr. TIFFANY. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used in contravention of section 642(a) of the Illegal
Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996
(8 U.S.C. 1373(a)).

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Wisconsin (Mr. Tiffany) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. TIFFANY. Madam Chair, my amendment would prevent State and local
governments who refuse to cooperate with Federal immigration
authorities from being able to obtain Federal funds under this Act.
These so-called sanctuary city policies are nothing new. They are
also illegal. In fact, they have been illegal since Bill Clinton signed
a law making them illegal in the 1990s.
As we have seen in recent months, these misguided policies serve as a
magnet for illegal aliens--overwhelming schools, hospitals, and other
local services.
New York Mayor Eric Adams recently conceded that the tidal wave of
illegal immigrants flooding into his sanctuary city will cost Big Apple
residents a staggering $12 billion. He went on to say the influx will
destroy his city.
But there is more to this issue than dollars and cents. Because these
policies prevent local law enforcement from reporting illegal aliens to
ICE, police are often forced to release foreign criminals from custody
who, of course, go on to target new victims. That doesn't just put
sanctuary cities at risk, it puts every other neighboring community at
risk, too.
Madam Chair, why are Americans being forced to finance the dangerous
and illegal policies of sanctuary cities like New York and Chicago?
Why are we being asked to pick up the tab for the problems these
jurisdictions are bringing upon themselves?
It is time to stop rewarding bad behavior.
If you make an affirmative decision to violate Federal law, then you
should be prepared to forego Federal funds.
Madam Chair, I ask for a ``yes'' vote, and I reserve the balance of
my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I claim time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. TIFFANY. Madam Chair, I would just conclude by saying, let's take
New York City as an example. In the Natural Resources Committee today
we had a hearing in regards to a national park in New York that is now
being used as an encampment for illegal aliens. What is next?
Is it Yosemite next? Is it Yellowstone next? Is it the national
seashore that is in my district, the Apostle Islands National
Lakeshore. Where next will they do this?
Plus, they ignore the NEPA process, something that the other side
talks constantly about--we must follow the NEPA process. They are
gutting it.
It shows what the goals of the Biden administration are. It is the-
ends-that-justify-the-means mentality. They will do anything to
continue the invasion of our country.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Tiffany).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 80 Offered by Ms. Malliotakis

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 80
printed in part B of House Report 118-216.
Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to provide assistance to the Department of Defense to
house persons at military installations in the United States,
except in the case of a major disaster declaration made
pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), or for
U.S. Coast Guard personnel.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentlewoman
from New York (Ms. Malliotakis) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. Madam Chair, my amendment would prohibit any funds
from being used by the Department of Homeland Security to assist the
Department of Defense to house illegal immigrants at military
installations within the United States, specifically, referring to
Coast Guard bases.
I had an amendment earlier today that passed by voice vote with no
opposition. The reason why this is needed, unfortunately, is because
the Governor of New York State, which I represent, sent a letter on May
12 to President Biden requesting that national parks as well as
military installations and naval resources in and across the northeast
be utilized as available space to maintain critical and essential
public services to shelter and house migrants.
I know that it is hard to believe that in a post-9/11 world, the
Governor of New York, of all places, would actually want to house
citizens of other countries on our military installations, but sadly,
that is the reality of what my Governor is requesting of the
administration.
It is not the first time that this has been considered. Under the
Obama administration, they had identified a number of bases that were
accommodating individuals who were citizens of other countries,
including the Army base in Fort Sill, Oklahoma, an Air Force base in
San Antonio, Texas, and a naval base in southern California.
I think it is particularly important to note that we found roughly
250 individuals on the terror watch list at the southern border, but
that does not include those individuals who are among the 1.7 million
who have entered our country without any interaction with our
government or our law enforcement.
There is a concern there that we didn't know who they are, where they
are, and what their intentions are. They could very well turn up in New
York City and try to demand housing because our mayor continues to
incentivize illegal immigration and people to come to New York City to
do so.

{time} 0045

Mr. Chair, I think, again, in a post- 9/11 world, it would be
ridiculous to allow citizens of other countries to become residents of
our military installations. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.

[[Page H4712]]

Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I think I know what my friend from New York
is trying to get to, but, again, I would ask that she please look at
the language here. The language says section, and then there is a
blank, followed by ``None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to provide assistance to the Department of Defense to house
persons . . . '' Persons.
What do we mean by persons? Undocumented? Military folks? Or do we
only house animals? But it says any person at military installations
except if they are there because of the Stafford Act or U.S. Coast
Guard personnel. Even that ``personnel,'' that means personnel, a Coast
Guard officer can stay there, but their families or dependents cannot
stay there.
Again, I know what they are trying to get at, but I think this
language, the way it was drafted by the attorneys, will probably do
more harm because, again, you cannot house any person except for
Stafford or Coast Guard personnel, but not their families.
Again, I don't know if you want to withdraw that or if we could
consider this, but the way this is drafted, I would ask her to please
look at this carefully.
For those reasons, I would oppose this amendment, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Malliotakis).
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. JOYCE of Ohio. Madam Chair, I move that the Committee do now
rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Tiffany) having assumed the chair, Mrs. Miller-Meeks, Acting Chair of
the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported
that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R.
4367) making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for
the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes, had
come to no resolution thereon.

____________________