[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 140 (Tuesday, September 10, 2024)]
[House]
[Pages H5109-H5117]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1398, PROTECT AMERICA'S INNOVATION 
AND ECONOMIC SECURITY FROM CCP ACT OF 2024; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION 
   OF H.R. 1425, NO WHO PANDEMIC PREPAREDNESS TREATY WITHOUT SENATE 
      APPROVAL ACT; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1516, DHS 
 RESTRICTIONS ON CONFUCIUS INSTITUTES AND CHINESE ENTITIES OF CONCERN 
ACT; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 7980, END CHINESE DOMINANCE OF 
 ELECTRIC VEHICLES IN AMERICA ACT OF 2024; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION 
OF H.R. 9456, PROTECTING AMERICAN AGRICULTURE FROM FOREIGN ADVERSARIES 
 ACT OF 2024; AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 9494, CONTINUING 
               APPROPRIATIONS AND OTHER MATTERS ACT, 2025

  Mr. LANGWORTHY. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, 
I call up House Resolution 1430 and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 1430

       Resolved, That at any time after adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 
     XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 1398) to establish the CCP Initiative program, 
     and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall 
     be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration 
     of the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to 
     the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and 
     controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 
     Committee on the Judiciary or their respective designees. 
     After general debate the bill shall be considered for 
     amendment under the five-minute rule. In lieu of the 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the 
     Committee on the Judiciary now printed in the bill, an 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the 
     text of Rules Committee Print 118-45 shall be considered as 
     adopted in the House and in the Committee of the Whole. The 
     bill, as amended, shall be considered as the original bill 
     for the purpose of further amendment under the five-minute 
     rule and shall be considered as read. All points of order 
     against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. No 
     further amendment to the bill, as amended, shall be in order 
     except those printed in part A of the report of the Committee 
     on Rules accompanying this resolution. Each such further 
     amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the 
     report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the 
     report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 
     the time specified in the report equally divided and 
     controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be 
     subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand 
     for division of the question in the House or in the Committee 
     of the Whole. All points of order against such further 
     amendments are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of 
     the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report 
     the bill, as amended, to the House with such further 
     amendments as may have been adopted. The previous question 
     shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as

[[Page H5110]]

     amended, and on any further amendment thereto to final 
     passage without intervening motion except one motion to 
     recommit.
       Sec. 2.  At any time after adoption of this resolution the 
     Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare 
     the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on 
     the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 
     1425) to require any convention, agreement, or other 
     international instrument on pandemic prevention, 
     preparedness, and response reached by the World Health 
     Assembly to be subject to Senate ratification. The first 
     reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of 
     order against consideration of the bill are waived. General 
     debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one 
     hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 
     minority member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs or their 
     respective designees. After general debate the bill shall be 
     considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. An 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the 
     text of Rules Committee Print 118-44 shall be considered as 
     adopted in the House and in the Committee of the Whole. The 
     bill, as amended, shall be considered as the original bill 
     for the purpose of further amendment under the five-minute 
     rule and shall be considered as read. All points of order 
     against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. No 
     further amendment to the bill, as amended, shall be in order 
     except those printed in part B of the report of the Committee 
     on Rules accompanying this resolution. Each such further 
     amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the 
     report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the 
     report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 
     the time specified in the report equally divided and 
     controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be 
     subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand 
     for division of the question in the House or in the Committee 
     of the Whole. All points of order against such further 
     amendments are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of 
     the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report 
     the bill, as amended, to the House with such further 
     amendments as may have been adopted. The previous question 
     shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and 
     on any further amendment thereto to final passage without 
     intervening motion except one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 3.  At any time after adoption of this resolution the 
     Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare 
     the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on 
     the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 
     1516) to establish Department of Homeland Security funding 
     restrictions on institutions of higher education that have a 
     relationship with Confucius Institutes, and for other 
     purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed 
     with. All points of order against consideration of the bill 
     are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and 
     shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by 
     the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
     Homeland Security or their respective designees. After 
     general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment 
     under the five-minute rule. In lieu of the amendment in the 
     nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on 
     Homeland Security now printed in the bill pursuant to Part II 
     of House Report 118-319, an amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 
     118-46 shall be considered as adopted in the House and in the 
     Committee of the Whole. The bill, as amended, shall be 
     considered as the original bill for the purpose of further 
     amendment under the five-minute rule and shall be considered 
     as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, 
     as amended, are waived. No further amendment to the bill, as 
     amended, shall be in order except those printed in part C of 
     the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
     resolution. Each such further amendment may be offered only 
     in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a 
     Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, 
     shall be debatable for the time specified in the report 
     equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
     opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be 
     subject to a demand for division of the question in the House 
     or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order against 
     such further amendments are waived. At the conclusion of 
     consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall 
     rise and report the bill, as amended, to the House with such 
     further amendments as may have been adopted. The previous 
     question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as 
     amended, and on any further amendment thereto to final 
     passage without intervening motion except one motion to 
     recommit.
       Sec. 4.  Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
     order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 7980) to amend 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude vehicles the 
     batteries of which contain materials sourced from prohibited 
     foreign entities from the clean vehicle credit. All points of 
     order against consideration of the bill are waived. The 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the 
     Committee on Ways and Means now printed in the bill shall be 
     considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be 
     considered as read. All points of order against provisions in 
     the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall 
     be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any 
     further amendment thereto, to final passage without 
     intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally 
     divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
     member of the Committee on Ways and Means or their respective 
     designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 5.  Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
     order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 9456) to amend 
     the Defense Production Act of 1950 with respect to foreign 
     investments in United States agriculture, and for other 
     purposes. All points of order against consideration of the 
     bill are waived. The bill shall be considered as read. All 
     points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. 
     The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
     bill and on any amendment thereto to final passage without 
     intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally 
     divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
     member of the Committee on Financial Services or their 
     respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 6.  Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
     order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 9494) making 
     continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2025, and for other 
     purposes. All points of order against consideration of the 
     bill are waived. The amendment printed in part D of the 
     report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution 
     shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall 
     be considered as read. All points of order against provisions 
     in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question 
     shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and 
     on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without 
     intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally 
     divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
     member of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective 
     designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York is recognized 
for 1 hour.
  Mr. LANGWORTHY. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield 
the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. 
During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the 
purpose of debate only.


                             General Leave

  Mr. LANGWORTHY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their 
remarks.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. LANGWORTHY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 1430 provides for consideration of six 
measures: H.R. 1398, H.R. 1425, H.R. 1516, H.R. 7980, H.R. 9456, and 
H.R. 9494.
  The rule provides for H.R. 1398 to be considered under a structured 
rule, with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair 
and the ranking minority member of the Judiciary Committee or their 
designees, and provides for one motion to recommit.
  The rule also provides for H.R. 1425 to be considered under a 
structured rule, with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled 
by the chair and the ranking minority member of the Committee on 
Foreign Affairs or their designees, and provides for one motion to 
recommit.
  The rule also provides for H.R. 1516 to be considered under a 
structured rule, with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled 
by the chair and the ranking minority member of the Committee on 
Homeland Security, and provides for one motion to recommit.
  The rule further provides for consideration of H.R. 7980 under a 
closed rule, with 1 hour of debate equally divided between the chair 
and the ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means, and 
provides for one motion to recommit.
  The rule further provides for consideration of H.R. 9456 under a 
closed rule, with 1 hour of debate equally divided between the chair 
and the ranking minority member of the Committee on Agriculture, and 
provides for one motion to recommit.
  Finally, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 9494 under a 
closed rule, with 1 hour of debate equally divided between the chair 
and the ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations, and 
provides for one motion to recommit.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and in support of the 
underlying legislation. The rule before us provides for consideration 
of five measures aimed at protecting the American people from the 
greatest threat to our sovereignty, our national security, and

[[Page H5111]]

our prosperity: the Chinese Communist Party.
  Let's start with H.R. 1398, the Protect America's Innovation and 
Economic Security from CCP Act of 2024. This bill will reestablish the 
CCP Initiative at the Department of Justice, an effort that was 
originally established by President Trump which successfully combatted 
espionage, hacking, and theft of American trade secrets.
  Do you know what? It worked. Under Trump's leadership, we saw 45 
individuals convicted or plead guilty to espionage, but in yet another 
surrender to the woke mob, the Biden-Harris administration, with zero 
justification, shut it down. They shut it down cold. They claimed it 
stoked anti-Asian bias. That argument is not just wrong, but it is an 
insult to every American.

                              {time}  1230

  Shutting down the China Initiative proves that this administration 
cares more about appeasing the extreme left than it does our national 
security.
  H.R. 1398 will get us back on track, despite President Biden's and 
Vice President Harris' refusal to do so.
  Now, while the Biden-Harris administration is shutting down efforts 
to prosecute spies, they are bending over backward to negotiate a new 
pandemic accord with the WHO, an organization that sold out the United 
States and the world to the Chinese Communist Party during the COVID-19 
pandemic.
  As of now, the pandemic accord the Biden-Harris administration is 
negotiating with the World Health Assembly is intended to tie our 
country to responsibilities and obligations overseen by an organization 
that lied for and covered for the Chinese Communist Party as it 
deceived the world about the origins and the spread of COVID-19.
  Now, let's not forget how, at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 
2020, the WHO director general visited Beijing and praised China for 
setting a new standard for outbreak control.
  Simultaneously, the CCP was busy arresting citizens for spreading 
rumors of a COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan. That was in the first months of 
2020. The WHO went along with the CCP's propaganda, and millions died 
from a pandemic whose spread could have been contained far earlier.
  H.R. 1425, the No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty Without Senate 
Approval Act, would require that any pandemic-related convention of the 
WHO that purports to bind the United States must be considered and 
ratified by the Senate as a treaty subject to the requirements of 
Article II of the U.S. Constitution.
  Mr. Speaker, hardworking American taxpayers should not be subjected 
to sweeping new international agreements that could tie them to 
organizations like the WHO and policies that run contrary to their own 
interests without any real say in the matter.
  Additionally, under the rule, House Republicans have brought forward 
H.R. 1516, the DHS Restrictions on Confucius Institutes and Chinese 
Entities of Concern Act. Since 2005, the Chinese Government has 
sponsored Confucius Institutes at American universities, ostensibly to 
teach Chinese language and facilitate cultural exchanges. However, 
these institutes are a cover for the CCP's global influence and 
propaganda campaign. I have seen it in my own district. This bill will 
cut off homeland security funding for any university that maintains 
relationships with these entities.
  Mr. Speaker, let's be clear: The Chinese Communist Party's ultimate 
goal is to build the most advanced military in the world by 2049, and 
they are stealing our intellectual property to do so. House Republicans 
simply will not stand by idly and let that happen at our higher-
learning institutions.
  Next under the rule, we are considering H.R. 7980, the End Chinese 
Dominance of Electric Vehicles in America Act of 2024, which would put 
an end to the Biden-Harris sellout to China in the name of a Green New 
Deal. The Inflation Reduction Act opened the door for Chinese companies 
to profit from electric vehicle tax subsidies, leaving American 
families to foot the bill for these policies while China laughs all the 
way to the bank.
  We have seen the Biden administration's game. They claim to be tough 
on China, but behind closed doors, they are cutting deals that enrich 
the CCP.
  In its rulemaking on the electric vehicle tax subsidy, the Biden-
Harris administration decided that unofficial ties to the Chinese 
Communist Party were perfectly fine for the Chinese entity wishing to 
qualify.
  Now, apparently my colleagues on the other side of the aisle and the 
Biden-Harris administration have little understanding of how Communist 
China works. Unofficial or official, for a company to operate and be 
successful, it must be subservient to the interests of the Chinese 
Communist Party.
  H.R. 7980 will put an end to this asinine America-last policy and 
ensure that vehicles with batteries sourced from foreign prohibited 
entities, like those connected to the CCP, do not qualify for this tax 
credit.
  Additionally, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 9456, the 
Protecting American Agriculture from Foreign Adversaries Act. There are 
40 million acres of America's farmland in the hands of foreign 
entities. As a Representative of the hardworking, family farmers in 
western New York and the southern tier, I know firsthand the impact 
that foreign entities gobbling American farmland can have on the 
success of our domestic farmers. It is driving the entry costs of 
potential new farmers to be higher with each passing year.
  The land where American farmers grow our food, fuel, and fiber is 
precious and should be treated as such. H.R. 9456 will ensure that the 
Secretary of Agriculture has a seat on the Committee on Foreign 
Investment in the United States and will require that the American 
people have a full understanding of just how much investment in our 
agricultural land is being pursued by China and entities connected to 
the Chinese Communist Party.
  This legislation, of which I am a proud cosponsor, is an important 
first step in ensuring that the CCP, through its loyal entities, is not 
able to buy up our most precious commodity, our land, thereby 
threatening our national security, our sovereignty, and our ability to 
feed ourselves. Food is security and will always be national security.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, the rule before us includes consideration of 
H.R. 9494, a continuing resolution to extend government funding at 
current levels through March 28, 2025. To date, the House has passed 
legislation to fund more than 70 percent of our Federal Government 
operations for fiscal year 2025. Meanwhile, Senate Democrats have 
failed to bring a single fiscal year 2025 appropriations bill to the 
floor.
  This continuing resolution avoids a government shutdown, but it also 
includes the SAVE Act, requiring proof of United States citizenship to 
vote in Federal elections.

  Democrats' open-border policies have turned our country into a 
sanctuary for illegal aliens, and now my colleagues on the other side 
of the aisle want them to vote. The SAVE Act ensures that only American 
citizens decide America's future.
  The Democrats' open-border policies have brought nothing but chaos 
and destruction to our communities as millions of illegal aliens have 
flooded into this country. The left's refusal to secure our borders is 
deliberate and a direct threat to our democratic institutions, as a 
growing number of noncitizens are registered to vote and have been 
found to vote in our local, State, and Federal elections.
  By allowing noncitizens to vote, Democrats dilute the voice of every 
American citizen, undermining what should be a free and fair election.
  Mr. Speaker, our country was built on the principles of freedom, 
fairness, and justice. This administration's policies are a slap in the 
face to every immigrant who has followed a legal path to citizenship, 
who has respected our laws, and who has earned their right to 
participate in our democracy. That is something we should all agree on, 
we should all support, and we should all fight for. It is simple common 
sense.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this rule, and I reserve 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Langworthy) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield 
myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this entire Republican majority has been one gigantic, 
complete, total failure, a complete mess from day one with the majority 
in charge. It is an embarrassment.

[[Page H5112]]

  We have 8 weeks left in the 118th Congress to do our legislative 
work, and instead of doing something to make life better for anyone or, 
hell, even the bare minimum, by stopping a government shutdown, we are 
considering a no-good stopgap resolution that extends funding into 
2025.
  My colleagues have to love this: The gentleman from New York is on 
the floor today trying to convince everyone to vote for the bill when 
Republicans cannot even convince their own Members to vote for it. 
Seriously, every minute I look at my phone, I see another Republican 
defecting.
  Mr. Speaker, the Republican manager is wasting his time debating me. 
He needs to be debating his Republican friends who are coming out 
against the bill in droves. Clearly, the majority doesn't have the 
votes for this awful plan, so why are we wasting time here in this 
House on a bill that has no chance whatsoever of ever becoming law?
  Mr. Speaker, this is embarrassing for the Republican side of the 
aisle. It is mid-September. Republicans said the majority would get all 
12 separate appropriation bills done before we left for the August 
break. That is yet another broken promise, among a long list from 
Speaker Johnson, to add onto all the broken promises from Speaker 
McCarthy before him.
  House Republicans are once again showing their deep disrespect for 
the veteran community by proposing a 6-month CR that shortchanges the 
VA Cost of War Toxic Exposures Fund by $12 billion. That is morally 
reprehensible and just plain cruel. These are our veterans who we are 
talking about. How the hell can Republicans turn their backs on our 
veterans?
  To be clear, this is the Republican playbook: a big promise, and it 
gets broken. Republicans promised we will have a robust, effective 
appropriations process, and it gets broken. Republicans promised to 
continue supporting our veterans, and it gets broken.
  Now we are headed into another potential shutdown, all because 
Members on the other side of the aisle want to play political games. To 
make matters worse, Mr. Speaker, Republicans have jammed the SAVE Act 
onto the CR because why not mix up government funding with more 
ridiculous conspiracy theories about voter fraud?
  I know why my colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to bring 
this bill to the floor. Republicans are worried the majority won't win 
in November without pushing conspiracy theories.
  Mr. Speaker, let's set something straight: Noncitizens cannot vote in 
Federal elections. Let me repeat that: Noncitizens cannot vote in 
Federal elections. If they vote, it is illegal. It is a crime.
  Guess what? They have done studies. Even conservative institutes say 
there is no evidence that noncitizens voted illegally in large enough 
numbers to shift the outcome of any election.
  We all know what this is about. It is not about voter fraud. This is 
part of their Project 2025 plan to undermine the vote count and take 
total control of the government.
  Mr. Speaker, the majority wants power whether Republicans win or lose 
at the ballot box, and so my colleagues on the other side of the aisle 
will claim voter fraud, whatever happens, the facts be damned.
  Do Republicans really want to talk about the threat of voter fraud?
  Let me remind the American people: The only ones committing voter 
fraud in an attempt to overthrow an election are Republicans. We have 
seen this movie before. Following Trump's loss in the 2020 election, he 
and his cronies allegedly conspired to overturn the will of the 
American people by submitting fake electors to falsely certify that 
Trump won the election. He didn't win the election. He lost the 
election.
  What did those efforts get them: Dozens of people across four States 
have been indicted over this election fraud scheme.
  Republicans want to talk about the threat of voter fraud. Give me a 
break. Republicans are the threat.
  This horrible CR will never become law the way it is structured. We 
are really just here wasting more time after House Republicans failed 
to do what they should have done months ago.
  This rule before us today would also bring to the floor five bills 
that Republicans claim will target China, five bills that are actually 
weak on China, five ineffective bills that don't get the job done and 
don't represent a real attempt to actually address some of the very 
serious concerns we have about the PRC.

  Mr. Speaker, I have been a critic of China's human rights record for 
decades, longer than some of my colleagues have been in Congress. Hell, 
I was sanctioned by the Chinese Government in July. I can't travel to 
China. My wife can't travel to China. My son can't travel to China. My 
daughter can't travel to China. I can't even converse with any Chinese 
officials.
  I have written strong, effective bills that would hold the PRC 
accountable, and so they don't like me. They sanction me, and I wear 
that sanction as a badge of honor.
  Let me be clear: These bills that the gentleman referred to are not 
about taking a strong stance against China. They are poorly written, 
weak bills that don't get the job done. It is like they are written for 
a press release. I am sorry. That is because they are meant for a press 
release and not about serious legislating.
  Believe it or not, we can strengthen our national security. We can 
stand up to China on human rights, and we can support our veterans and 
make sure they get the care that they need.

                              {time}  1245

  We can fund the government. We can do all of that and more if we work 
together. That is what people want. They want us to behave like adults. 
Sadly, Republican leadership is more interested in sound bites and FOX 
News headlines heading into November than they are about governing.
  I say they would rather put politics ahead of progress but, Mr. 
Speaker, Project 2025 isn't just politics. It is weird. It is shameful. 
It is deeply dystopian. It is dangerous stuff.
  Americans are tired of this garbage, and I think they are about to 
make some very different choices starting November.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would remind Members to refrain 
from engaging in personalities toward nominees for the Office of the 
President and also maintain decorum on choice of vernacular.
  Mr. LANGWORTHY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  In case my colleague on the other side of the aisle has a case of 
amnesia, earlier this year, 195 Democrats proudly voted ``no'' on the 
passage of H.R. 8580, the fiscal year 2025 Military Construction-
Veterans Affairs appropriations bill.
  This legislation includes $337.4 billion for the VA, $75.5 million 
above President Biden's own budget requests and $30.2 billion more than 
the fiscal year 2024 levels. It allocates $112.6 billion for medical 
care for our veterans.
  Mr. Speaker, 195 House Democrats, including my colleague from 
Massachusetts, voted ``no'' on this bill, with Senate Democrats 
refusing to even bring up the bill on the floor.
  Every day they delay is a day that veterans across America are left 
wondering if their healthcare, their benefits, and their essential 
services will be there next year. This is simply unacceptable.
  Senator Chuck Schumer could bring this bill forward tomorrow. We 
could get this done for our veterans tomorrow, but, instead, Senate 
Democrats have decided to play politics with the lives of our Nation's 
heroes, labeling this vital funding as dead on arrival and offering no 
alternative while the clock ticks down.
  Mr. Speaker, it is time that my Democratic colleagues across the 
aisle stop playing politics in this Chamber and in the upper Chamber 
prioritize what really matters. Veterans across this Nation depend on 
the services provided by the VA. Let's stop the hysteria and the 
political games.
  Let's pass this continuing resolution, avoid a shutdown, and continue 
our work to fully fund the VA. Our veterans have given everything for 
us, and I am asking my colleagues to give them the support that they 
deserve.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Burgess), distinguished chairman of the Rules Committee.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the Representative from New York 
for yielding me the time.

[[Page H5113]]

  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule. I rise in support of the 
underlying bills, in particular, H.R. 9494 to provide continuing 
funding for the Government of the United States for the next 6 months.
  House Republicans have done the work of funding our Federal agencies. 
Our Appropriations Committee has passed all 12 bills out of committee. 
Five of those have passed on the floor. Over 70 percent of the funding 
for the Federal Government has already been passed by the House.
  Unfortunately, the Senate continues to stall. To be clear, the Senate 
has not passed a single appropriations bill. Funding does expire at the 
end of this month. September 30 occurs the same time every year just 
like Christmas and Halloween. It should not be a surprise to the 
majority leader of the United States Senate.
  With funding expiring at the end of this month, it is unfortunate but 
necessary to pass a continuing resolution so that the government 
continues to operate while the other body continues to stall.
  Here is another thing: I, frankly, do not understand why the 
President of the United States would even consider vetoing this 
legislative measure while Members of his own party refuse to come to 
the table to negotiate with Republicans.
  House Republicans will not be responsible if there is an 
appropriations lapse. If there is an appropriations lapse, that falls 
squarely on the shoulders of the other body and the Democrats in 
charge.
  This is why I will be supporting the passage of the continuing 
resolution. We have to put personal politics aside and do what is right 
for everyday Americans.
  We also have the opportunity in this legislation to pass the SAVE 
Act, which will ensure that only American citizens have a voice in our 
elections. It is against the law for teenagers to buy alcohol, but 
sometimes they do, or try to. That is stopped because they have to show 
an ID at the counter.
  We understand that it is illegal for people who are not citizens to 
vote in Federal elections, and yet sometimes people try. Sometimes they 
are not even aware that they are not supposed to do that, but this will 
ensure that only American citizens vote in American elections.
  Unfortunately, in the Rules Committee yesterday, they said the quiet 
part out loud. Why would the border czar allow 12 million undocumented 
individuals into this country over the last 3\1/2\ years? The answer 
is, they want them to become voters. The SAVE Act prevents that from 
happening.
  Eighty-six percent of Americans support the concept that American 
citizens only should be voting in American elections.
  Thanks to the Biden-Harris administration, illegal immigrants not 
only have a free pass across our border, but soon to our ballot boxes. 
Election security is national security. The choice is simple: Vote for 
election integrity or vote for foreign influence and rising crime.
  For my part, I believe we need to pass this commonsense legislation 
today. We need to pass it this week.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to support this rule today and the 
underlying legislation that only American citizens vote in American 
elections.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  It is unbelievable. All we heard last night and all we are hearing 
now on the House floor from the other side is that it is the Senate's 
fault. That is the reason why House Republicans aren't doing their job 
and that is why they are pushing this misguided CR is because of Senate 
Democrats. We heard that again today.
  Guess what: Even Republican Senators hate this CR plan.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include a link to an article 
in the Record from NewsNation titled, ``House GOP government funding 
plan gets chilly reception from Senate Republicans.''
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Duarte). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McGOVERN. The link is: https://www.newsnationnow.com/the-hill/
house-gop-government-funding-plan-gets-chilly-reception-from-senate-
republicans/
 Mr. Speaker, their own Republican colleagues are worried that this 
``measure requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote could 
complicate the stopgap funding bill's path,'' and that this ``comes 
dangerously close to risking a shutdown.''
  Here is an idea: If Republicans are so serious about the CR, maybe 
they should have done some work to shore up support within their own 
party.
  However, let me just talk about how Republicans feel about this CR.
   Tom Massie on the Rules Committee tweeted: ``I am voting Hell No on 
the `continuing resolution and the other matter act' this week. I don't 
care which bright shiny object is attached to it, or which fake fight 
we start and won't finish.''
  The gentleman from New York decided to talk about national security. 
Here is another news flash for the gentleman: The top Republican 
national security expert in the House, the Republican chairman of the 
House Armed Services Committee,   Mike Rogers, says he is a ``no'' on 
the CR. He says it is bad for the Pentagon. He hopes other HASC members 
will vote ``no'' too.
  That is your top guy on national security. He is voting ``no.''
  It is reported from Melanie Zanona that ``Representative Cory Mills 
says he has informed the whip team that he is a no on the 6-month CR 
plus SAVE Act. Also says there are `quite a few' other Republicans who 
are against it who haven't said so publicly yet.''
  Matt Rosendale tweets: ``1 year later, the same old theatrics by the 
D.C. cartel. I have never voted for a CR, and I never intend to.''
  John Bresnahan reports that Representative   Jim Banks is a ``no'' on 
the CR.
  Jordain Carney reports that Representative Burchett says he is 
currently a ``no'' on the CR plus SAVE plan. He says there are many, 
many others that want to vote no.
  Marjorie Taylor Greene is a no on everything, so she is no on this, 
as well.
  I have to be honest with the gentleman, your problem isn't House 
Democrats or Senate Democrats; your problem is House Republicans. You 
can't even get consensus amongst your own Members of your own party.
  This is ridiculous that we are here debating this rule to bring up a 
CR that is going nowhere fast.
  Last night in the Rules Committee, Representative Massie said: ``This 
SAVE Act isn't going to save anything.''
  Representative Massie, as everybody knows, is a prominent leader in 
the Republican caucus. He says, and particularly because ``it ain't 
never going to become law. It's a false promise to get all the 
Republicans half pregnant. Then you're going to get fully pregnant by 
the end of September when you vote for this CR. . . . '' That is not 
going to have--``I hate to break it to you, and I'm not telling you 
anything special. I hate to break it to the Republicans, you ain't 
getting the SAVE Act.''
  Then he concludes by saying: But ``This is political theater,'' 
folks. I have to tell you, it is bad political theater, and it is 
pathetic.
  Here we are at this late day approaching a government shutdown and we 
get this garbage.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New 
Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez), a distinguished member of the Rules 
Committee.
  Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank Ranking Member McGovern for 
pointing out what we heard last night.
  This is all political theater. That is what we heard last night. That 
is what we are hearing on the floor today, but is that what I heard 
when I was in New Mexico? No. In New Mexico, what I heard in the fields 
and at the markets was ranchers and farmers actually anxiously asking 
about the farm bill. What I heard was veterans who marched in the Bean 
Day parade describing how their health would suffer dramatically if we 
don't pass the VA supplemental. Families told me they want Congress to 
work together on a bipartisan matter, which this is not. They want us 
to work together to make their lives better.

[[Page H5114]]

  We have 12 legislative days to do Congress' basic job: Fund the 
government, fund veterans' programs, fund emergency programs, pass a 
farm bill.
  Instead of funding our Nation's obligations, the Republicans are 
toying with a government shutdown, yet again. Instead, the Republicans 
Armed Services Committee chair called this temporary funding terrible. 
Your own chair of Armed Services called this terrible.
  Their CR also fails to fund disaster relief as wildfires, hurricanes, 
and floods devastate the countryside. Businesses and neighbors in New 
Mexico and across the country won't get the emergency relief 
they deserve unless Congress funds FEMA.

  Instead of living up to their obligations, Republicans are using this 
funding deadline to make it harder for American citizens to vote. They 
have included their voting restriction bill as a poison pill on this 
CR.
  What is the real-life consequence of their voting restriction bill? 
With a military ID, you can fight and die for this country, but 
Republicans won't let you use it alone to register to vote.
  Why would House Republicans make it harder for servicemembers, for 
recently married or divorced women, for Native Americans, and for rural 
Americans to register and vote?
  Republicans and their Presidential campaigners are fabricating a lie 
that noncitizens vote to sow fear and distrust of our elections. They 
are pushing their Project 2025 agenda today.
  New Mexicans don't want us to make it harder for them to vote. They 
are concerned about how hard it is to live. Yesterday, in the Rules 
Committee, a Republican witness said we could wait until later to take 
care of veterans funding. Why wait?
  Instead of do-nothing messaging bills and a politicized CR that is 
going nowhere, we should prioritize our veterans now. We should 
prioritize disaster relief funding now. We should pass a farm bill that 
helps our rural communities now.
  Mr. Speaker, this rule fails our military. It fails our veterans, 
families, and neighbors. I urge a ``no'' vote now on this rule.

                              {time}  1300

  Mr. LANGWORTHY. Mr. Speaker, we heard a lot of fiction there. We have 
heard false and frankly ridiculous claims that the SAVE Act makes it 
harder for certain Americans, including our servicemembers, to vote.
  If my Democratic colleagues took the time to actually read the bill, 
they would see that under the SAVE Act, servicemembers can show their 
passport, birth certificate, military ID, record of service, or any 
combination of these other options as proof of citizenship.
  There is absolutely nothing in this legislation that restricts or 
complicates voting for our servicemen and -women. To suggest otherwise 
is just patently false, but it is also insulting. It implies that those 
who serve our country, those who risk their lives to defend our 
freedoms, are somehow less capable of meeting these simple and 
straightforward requirements.
  Mr. Speaker, our servicemen and -women deserve better. They sacrifice 
for our Nation, and we owe it to them and to all Americans to uphold 
the integrity of our elections by enforcing the laws of our land. 
Instead, Democrats across the country are unwilling to do so.
  Take my own State, New York. A noncitizen can register to vote 
without a Social Security number, without an ID. Before coming to 
Congress, I fought against New York City's outrageous attempts to allow 
noncitizens, including illegal aliens, to vote in local elections.
  In the face of what States like New York are doing, what the District 
of Columbia has tried to do, and with millions of illegal aliens 
flooding into our country under the Biden-Harris administration, we 
need these safeguards in place today.
  Just last month, the State of Texas announced it had removed 6,500 
noncitizens from their voter rolls, with nearly 2,000 of those 
noncitizens recorded to have a voter history. Virginia also removed 
6,000 noncitizens from their voter rolls.
  Mr. Speaker, we cannot take the issue of voter fraud lightly. We 
cannot rely on the honor system, as much as the other side of the aisle 
thinks it is A-OK to not require a photo ID in this country to vote.
  We can't take the honor system for our Federal elections, especially 
when we have millions and millions of illegal immigrants residing in 
this country and thousands of noncitizens registered to vote across 
this country.
  Make no mistake, the flood at our southern border, the 10 million 
encounters at our southern border, isn't by accident. It was at the 
stroke of 94 separate executive actions with Joe Biden's pen, with 
Kamala Harris cackling in the background, that this has happened.
  Bet your bottom dollar that if somehow, by some miraculous effort, 
they have the White House, the Senate, and the House next year, they 
are going to get to work lickety-split on the biggest amnesty plan this 
country has ever had. They will all be voters, mark my words.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  My God, the Republicans must be really afraid of losing the November 
election if the conspiracy theories are already starting up this early.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an 
article from the Cato Institute titled: ``Noncitizens Don't Illegally 
Vote in Detectable Numbers.''
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Massachusetts?
  There was no objection.

                [From the CATO Institute, Nov. 25, 2020]

         Noncitizens Don't Illegally Vote in Detectable Numbers

                          (By Alex Nowrasteh)

       One of the most frequent and less serious criticisms that 
     comes across my desk is that immigration is bad because non-
     citizens vote illegally in such large numbers that sway 
     elections. A new report by James D. Agresti, pushed by some 
     news outlets, argues that the number of noncitizens who 
     illegally voted in 2020 substantially increased Biden's vote 
     share but did not affect the outcome of the election. It has 
     been illegal for non-citizens to vote for federal elected 
     officials since 1996, so these noncitizen voters would all be 
     breaking federal law. Is the Agresti paper reliable? Are 
     large numbers of noncitizens voting in federal elections to 
     such an extent that several states voted for Biden as a 
     result?
       No, but to understand why you have to follow how the 
     Agresti paper arrived at its conclusion. The Agresti report 
     relies on a peer-reviewed academic paper by political 
     scientists Jesse T. Richman, Gulshan A. Chattha, and David C. 
     Earnest that was published in 2014 that estimates the rate at 
     which noncitizens voted for president in 2008. Their paper 
     relies upon responses to the Cooperative Congressional 
     Election Study (CCES) for the 2008 election that found a 
     substantial proportion of noncitizens voted in that year. The 
     Agresti paper combined two figures from the Richman, Chattha, 
     and Earnest paper to get their primary estimate that 15.8 
     percent of noncitizens voted in 2008. Agresti then apples 
     that 15.8 percent rate to the non-citizen population in swing 
     states in 2020 to reach their conclusion.
       The big problem, as explained in two succinct pieces, is 
     that non-citizens voting illegally is a small subset of a 
     small population of Americans measured in the CCES survey. In 
     the CCES survey, as in any survey, a certain number of 
     respondents click the wrong box. Thus, some respondents will 
     incorrectly click that they are non-citizens by accident and 
     that they voted. Or they will make any number of other 
     errors. This general problem is called measurement error and 
     it afflicts every survey. These errors are common in surveys, 
     but if it surveys enough people and there isn't a tragic flaw 
     in design that causes large numbers of people to make the 
     same error, then it doesn't matter much for the final result.
       The problem is that the authors focused on a small number 
     of non-citizens in a very large survey that likely 
     accidentally said they were noncitizens who voted when they 
     were really citizens who voted. The CCES survey asked about 
     20,000 people how they voted and about 19,500 of them said 
     that they were U.S. citizens. Since the CCES is about federal 
     elections, it oversamples citizens who can vote and under 
     sample non-citizens who can't vote. In fact, the number of 
     reported non-citizens in the CCES survey who said they voted 
     in a federal election is just about exactly the number who 
     should have misidentified themselves as non-citizens in such 
     a large survey:
       This problem arises because the survey was not designed to 
     sample non-citizens, and the non-citizen category in the 
     citizenship question is included for completeness and to 
     identify those respondents who might be non-citizens. We 
     expect that most of that group are in fact non-citizens (85 
     of 105), but the very low level of misclassification of 
     citizens, who comprise 97.4 percent of the sample, means that 
     we expect that 19 ``non-citizen'' respondents (16.5 percent 
     of all reported non-citizens) are citizens who are 
     misclassified. And, those misclassified people

[[Page H5115]]

     can readily account for the observed vote among those who 
     reported that they are non-citizens [emphasis added].
       Survey misuse, misdesign, and misinterpretation is a 
     serious problem that we all witnessed right after the 2020 
     election. This strain of research appears to be another 
     instance of that. There are likely many problems with 
     America's voting system and there is no doubt that a non-zero 
     number of non-citizens illegally voted, but there is no good 
     evidence that noncitizens voted illegally in large enough 
     numbers to actually shift the outcome of elections or even 
     change the number of electoral votes.

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, at a press conference on the SAVE Act, the 
Speaker of the House said: ``We all know, intuitively, that a lot of 
illegals are voting in Federal elections, but it has not been something 
that is easily provable. We don't have that number.''
  Mr. Speaker, this body legislates based on facts, not on intuition or 
conspiracy theories. Maybe it is time for House Republicans to get 
serious about their jobs and stop making laws based off their absurd 
conspiracy theories.
  Again, I say to the gentleman after that little rant that maybe he 
needs to be talking to his Republican Members, who all have basically 
said that the inclusion of the SAVE Act on this horrific CR is 
basically a gimmick. It is a gimmick to get people to look someplace 
else and not look at the fact that Republicans are not doing their job.
  If we want to talk about an insult to our men and women in uniform, 
then I hope that they will join with me in defeating the previous 
question. If we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment 
to the rule to include $12 billion that our Nation's veterans need for 
their healthcare, $12 billion that the House Republicans decided, 
intentionally, to leave out of their partisan continuing resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, with this unserious and unacceptable continuing 
resolution, Republicans are not only risking disaster assistance and 
domestic investments, but they are also shortchanging veterans and 
jeopardizing their care.
  An additional $12 billion is needed before the new year to maintain 
medical care for veterans. That is just a fact.
  The House Republican bill does not include a single dollar of the $12 
billion needed, shortchanging veterans and jeopardizing the medical 
services they need and have earned.
  Mr. Speaker, our veterans deserve our support. It is our 
responsibility to provide the care that they have earned. This 
inadequate continuing resolution does not meet the moment, which is why 
I am giving my Republican colleagues the chance now to do the right 
thing and include the funding for our veterans in this continuing 
resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include the text of my 
amendment in the Record, along with any extraneous material, 
immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Massachusetts?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, there were lots of things that were left 
out of this CR, and the Republicans came up with a manager's amendment 
to try to address that, but they left out the $12 billion for our 
veterans.
  They left out $12 billion for our veterans. I don't understand that. 
There is no explanation for that. It is so wrong.
  To discuss our proposal, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from California (Mr. Ruiz).
  Mr. RUIZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the Republican-
led, 6-month continuing resolution that will devastate veterans and 
jeopardize their care.
  In 2022, when I helped lead the passage of the Honoring our PACT Act 
through Congress, we promised veterans with exposures to toxic burn 
pits and other toxins that they would be taken care of. In fact, just 
last week, I hosted my annual Veterans University, and I heard from 
veterans directly about the life-changing impact PACT Act benefits have 
had on their lives.
  An additional $12 billion is needed before the new year to maintain 
this medical care for veterans, but this CR bill provides zero dollars 
for veterans' medical services and restricts access to the medical care 
they earned and deserve.
  According to the Office of Management and Budget, without the $12 
billion, the VA would have insufficient funding to maintain medical 
care operations for veterans through fiscal year 2025.
  The additional funds requested for the toxic exposure fund is largely 
due to the overwhelming increase in PACT Act enrollment. Our veterans 
need the medical care.
  The success of the PACT Act has been evident in my district alone, 
where over 5,200 veterans have filed a claim.
  Without this funding, the VA needs to begin addressing any potential 
shortfall as early as the first quarter of fiscal year 2025.
  This continuing resolution pulls the rug from under the feet of 
veterans who are finally receiving access to care and benefits that 
they have fought for for almost a decade.
  The extreme House Republican majority seems uninterested in those 
commitments to veterans, and they are shortchanging veterans $12 
billion.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question.
  Mr. LANGWORTHY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am going to reiterate the fact. It is very simple. 
House Republicans have passed their Veterans appropriations bill. We 
passed it above the request of President Biden or whoever is drafting 
the President's requests at this hour.
  The people who have had a lot to say in this Chamber today, they all 
decided to vote ``no.'' They voted ``no'' for our veterans' healthcare. 
They voted ``no'' for opportunities to expand veteran benefits.
  They did it for politics. They did it because it wasn't their idea. 
This House Republican majority has funded the VA above and beyond 
President Biden's request for the last 2 fiscal years, and we are very 
proud of that fact, and we will continue to do so.
  Mr. Speaker, my colleagues across the aisle have expressed outrage 
over the inclusion of the SAVE Act in today's continuing resolution, 
but let's be clear: The American people overwhelmingly disagree with 
their position.
  According to a 2022 YouGov poll, nearly two-thirds of Americans 
support requiring proof of citizenship to vote in elections, and even 
more telling, 48 percent of Democrats--yes, Democrats--agree that proof 
of U.S. citizenship should be required.

  In 2022, a Gallup poll further underscored that 79 percent of 
Americans favor photo identification requirements to vote, and that 
includes 53 percent of Democratic voters.
  Just this year, the Pew Research Center found that 81 percent of 
Americans want all voters to show government-issued photo 
identification to cast a vote, and 69 percent of Democrats back this 
commonsense safeguard. Why won't they? That is the question. What are 
they afraid of to require someone to prove who they say that they are?
  These aren't poison pills. This isn't partisanship. They are 
overwhelmingly bipartisan views shared by a vast majority of 
commonsense Americans.
  Yet, my colleagues would rather cater to a fringe element in this 
country within their party than listen to the clear will of the 
American people. Instead of supporting reasonable safeguards to protect 
our elections and prevent foreign interference, they continue to block 
widely supported measures. They claim to be defenders against foreign 
interference in our election, yet today, they turn their back on 
protecting the sanctity of the vote.
  The numbers don't lie, though. Under the Biden-Harris administration, 
at least 4.6 million illegal aliens have been released into our 
country, with 1.8 million got-aways. We don't know where they are. We 
don't know who they are. We don't know why they are here. Those are 
just the ones that we are aware of.
  With millions of illegal immigrants, including violent criminals, now 
residing in the United States, we cannot afford to ignore the critical 
need to ensure that only American citizens decide the future of our 
Nation.
  This isn't just about policy. It is a moral imperative to protect the 
foundational rights of American citizens.
  It is time for our Democratic colleagues to put aside their 
partisanship and listen to 81 percent of the American people who 
support this and stop

[[Page H5116]]

threatening a shutdown over commonsense election safeguards.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Oh, my God. I don't even know where to begin, to be honest with you. 
There is just so much there.
  First of all, let me read from a letter that the Secretary of Defense 
sent to all of us here in Congress. He said: ``A 6-month CR would set 
us significantly behind in meeting our pacing challenge highlighted in 
our National Defense Strategy, the People's Republic of China. The PRC 
is the only global competitor with both the intent and capability to 
change the international order. The PRC does not operate under CRs. Our 
ability to execute our strategy is contingent upon our ability to 
innovate and modernize to meet this challenge, which cannot happen 
under a CR. Asking the Department to compete with the PRC, let alone 
manage conflicts in Europe and the Middle East, while under a lengthy 
CR, ties our hands behind our back while expecting us to be agile and 
to accelerate progress.'' That is what the Secretary of Defense sent to 
Congress.
  Republicans are here with a bunch of fake anti-China bills that will 
never become law, but what they are actually doing is hurting our 
national security.
  This approach, their CR, is hurting our national security. It is not 
just the Secretary of Defense saying that. As I said earlier, the 
Republican chairman of the House Armed Services Committee has said it, 
and that is why he is opposing the Republican CR, so let's get that 
straight.
  The other thing is, on the SAVE Act, it is true that a military ID 
alone is not sufficient to meet the criteria of the SAVE Act. Is that 
how we thank the men and women who serve our country?
  In fact, many Americans don't have the kind of identification 
required to be able to comply with the SAVE Act, but that is even 
beside the point because, as Republican after Republican has said, this 
is a gimmick. This is going nowhere. This is just a sound bite during 
an election. This is not real. This is all theater. That is not me 
saying it. It is Republican after Republican saying that.
  In terms of helping our veterans, let me tell you, Republicans keep 
talking about the $112 billion in the bill for VA care, but guess what? 
These dollars were already provided in last year's bill.
  Both VA and OMB say that these dollars are insufficient and that they 
need an additional $12 billion or our veterans' care will be affected. 
That is what has been said to Republicans and Democrats over and over 
again.

                              {time}  1315

  Mr. Speaker, this bill provides zero additional dedicated funding for 
vets with toxic exposures. Zero. I don't understand why, when you are 
trying to fix some of the omissions in the manager's amendment that was 
put in in the Rules Committee, this could not have been added. These 
are our veterans. These are people who have served our country. These 
are people who have been exposed to toxic chemicals who are battling 
with all kinds of illnesses and diseases.
  The least we can do is make sure the funding is there so they can get 
adequate healthcare. This bill provides none of that $12 billion. I 
don't understand what my Republican friends are thinking.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LANGWORTHY. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time I have 
remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts has 6 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to 
close.
  Mr. Speaker, we have 3 weeks left to ensure that our government 
doesn't shut down. Instead of working with Democrats to keep the 
government open, what we have here is an awful, cynical, partisan 
continuing resolution that has exactly zero chance of becoming law. 
Hell, as I said earlier, it may not even pass the Republican-controlled 
Congress.
  It is like Republicans won't even try to get the job done. They have 
passed 4 appropriations bills out of 12. That is it, and they want a 
trophy for that. I mean, it is pathetic how little work has been done 
in this House.
  Again, they have sent a grand total of four appropriations bills to 
the Senate, although listening to them last night at the Rules 
Committee, you would think they had completed all their work and 
everything is wonderful. Imagine thinking 30 percent was a passing 
grade. It is pathetic.
  At the end of the day, the Republican majority has failed the 
American people, and the Republican majority has failed the American 
people miserably. They want to condition keeping our government open on 
a Project 2025 pipe dream to disenfranchise millions of Americans at 
the ballot box. Let me be clear, the SAVE Act is not about targeting 
undocumented immigrants. It is about suppressing the vote of millions 
of American citizens.
  Again, I point out what happened in the last election. The person who 
shall not be named by name lost but didn't want to accept the loss and 
instructed people to go out there and to submit fraudulent electors to 
try to stoke all these conspiracy theories.
  Multiple people are now under indictment for trying to overturn the 
legitimate results of the last election. The threat to our democracy, 
the threat to our election integrity, is the Republicans.
  My friends are willing to rip $12 billion away from our sick veterans 
all to play political games. What is wrong with them, Mr. Speaker? They 
are pursuing poorly written, bad bills that are soft on China when we 
could be doing the real work, teaming up across the aisle to strengthen 
our national security. It is a joke. It is a joke. It is embarrassing. 
All they bring to the table is destruction, disruption, dysfunction, 
and the dystopian Project 2025. Every measure before us today is a bad 
deal.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so 
we can help our veterans. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the 
rule and on the underlying bills.
  Mr. Speaker, we have to do better. If the government shuts down 
because of their dysfunction, real people in this country get hurt. We 
need to come together and get our work done. Enough of this partisan 
garbage.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would remind Members to refrain 
from engaging in personalities toward nominees for the Office of the 
President.
  Mr. LANGWORTHY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to 
close.
  These accusations, Mr. Speaker, are not just dishonest, they are a 
pathetic act of desperation. In their scramble to smear Republicans, 
they have dug up some obscure policy document that was never endorsed 
by President Trump, or any House Republican for that matter.
  Now they have thrown everything they can against the wall, hoping to 
scare the American people with their usual tactics of lies, deception, 
and paranoia. This, Mr. Speaker, is the Democratic playbook for 2024. 
When you are failing, manufacture some more fear.
  The reality is stark. Democrats are in complete disarray. They are 
heading into November on a runaway train. Mr. Speaker, it would be 
laughable if their policies didn't have such dire impact on the 
American people.
  Now, in a desperate, flailing attempt to distract from their 
catastrophic record of the last 3\1/2\ years, they are trying to shift 
the focus away from the wreckage they have left in their wake. Their 
policies have bankrupted this country, emboldened our enemies, thrown 
our borders wide open, and crushed the American people under the weight 
of skyrocketing costs and economic insecurity.
  Here is the thing, Mr. Speaker: Americans are just smarter than that. 
No matter how much they try to spread their undiagnosed cases of Trump 
derangement syndrome, no matter how many obscure documents they try to 
pin on House Republicans, they can't run from their abject record of 
failure. The American people see it. They feel it every day at the gas 
pump, at the grocery store, when they are

[[Page H5117]]

paying their insurance bill, when they are trying to buy a new car, 
when a young family is trying to get into their first home. In their 
wallets, in their communities, in the safety of their communities, they 
feel it. Democrats can't hide from the disaster they have created, and 
no amount of finger-pointing is going to change that.

  Mr. Speaker, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have made 
it clear that they would rather play political games as we work to fund 
the government and avoid a shutdown. They would rather hoot and holler 
about spending levels in one department than vote for a commonsense 
appropriations bill or to create a stopgap so that we can continue our 
work and make sure that we don't have a shutdown. They would rather 
stand in full-blown opposition to straightforward provisions that would 
deter voter fraud and ensure our elections are fair, free, and 
protected as a fundamental right of real American citizens.
  My colleagues would also like to stand before us today and oppose 
commonsense legislation that ensures that we put America first in our 
dealings with our greatest adversary, China, and any entity or 
international organization that is connected or subservient to the 
Chinese Communist Party.
  We must do what the Biden-Harris administration has time and time 
again refused to do in its policies toward China--put the interests and 
the needs and the security of the American people absolutely first.
  Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the rule before us today.
  The material previously referred to by Mr. McGovern is as follows:

 An Amendment to H. Res. 1430 Offered by Mr. McGovern of Massachusetts

       In Section 6, after ``accompanying this resolution'' insert 
     ``and the amendment specified in section 7 of this 
     resolution''.
       At the end of the resolution, add the following:
       Sec. 7. The amendment referred to in section 6 is as 
     follows:
       ``Page 23, after line 5, insert the following new section:
       In addition to amounts otherwise available for such 
     purposes, there are appropriated, out of any money in the 
     Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for investment in the 
     delivery of veterans' health care associated with exposure to 
     environmental hazards, the expenses incident to the delivery 
     of veterans' health care and benefits associated with 
     exposure to environmental hazards, and medical and other 
     research relating to exposure to environmental hazards, as 
     authorized by section 324 of title 38, United States Code, 
     $12,000,000,000, which shall remain available until September 
     30, 2029.''

  Mr. LANGWORTHY: Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and 
I move the previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous 
question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question are postponed.

                          ____________________