    [Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 37 (Tuesday, February 25, 2025)]
    [House]
    [Pages H781-H790]
    From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

          PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.J. RES. 20, PROVIDING FOR
     CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF
     ENERGY RELATING TO ``ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM: ENERGY CONSERVATION
        STANDARDS FOR CONSUMER GAS-FIRED INSTANTANEOUS WATER HEATERS'';
          PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.J. RES. 35, PROVIDING FOR
     CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL
     PROTECTION AGENCY RELATING TO ``WASTE EMISSIONS CHARGE FOR PETROLEUM
       AND NATURAL GAS SYSTEMS: PROCEDURES FOR FACILITATING COMPLIANCE,
    INCLUDING NETTING AND EXEMPTIONS''; AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF
     H. CON. RES. 14, CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR
                                      2025

      Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
    call up House Resolution 161 and ask for its immediate consideration.
      The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                                  H. Res. 161

           Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be
         in order to consider in the House the joint resolution (H.J.
         Res. 20) providing for congressional disapproval under
         chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule
         submitted by the Department of Energy relating to ``Energy
         Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for
         Consumer Gas-fired Instantaneous Water Heaters''. All points
         of order against consideration of the joint resolution are
         waived. The joint resolution shall be considered as read. All
         points of order against provisions in the joint resolution
         are waived. The previous question shall be considered as
         ordered on the joint resolution 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 Energy and
         Commerce or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to
         recommit.
           Sec. 2.  Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in
         order to consider in the House the joint resolution (H.J.
         Res. 35) providing for congressional disapproval under
         chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule
         submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to
         ``Waste Emissions Charge for Petroleum and Natural Gas
         Systems: Procedures for Facilitating Compliance, Including
         Netting and Exemptions''. All points of order against
         consideration of the joint resolution are waived. The joint
         resolution shall be considered as read. All points of order
         against provisions in the joint resolution are waived. The
         previous question shall be considered as ordered on the joint
         resolution 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 Energy and Commerce or
         their respective designees; and (2) 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 concurrent
         resolution (H. Con. Res. 14) establishing the congressional
         budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2025
         and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal
         years 2026 through 2034. The first reading of the concurrent
         resolution shall be dispensed with. All points of order
         against consideration of the concurrent resolution are
         waived. General debate shall not exceed three hours, with two
         hours of general debate confined to the congressional budget
         equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking
         minority member of the Committee on the Budget or their
         respective designees and one hour of general debate on the
         subject of economic goals and policies equally divided and
         controlled by Representative Schweikert of Arizona and
         Representative Beyer of Virginia or their respective
         designees. The amendment printed in the report of the
         Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be
         considered as adopted in the House and in the Committee of
         the Whole. The concurrent resolution, as amended, shall be
         considered as read. After general debate the Committee shall
         rise and report the concurrent resolution, as amended, to the
         House. The previous question shall be considered as ordered
         on the concurrent resolution and amendments thereto to
         adoption without intervening motion except amendments offered
         by the chair of the Committee on the Budget pursuant to
         section 305(a)(5) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to
         achieve mathematical consistency. The concurrent resolution
         shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question
         of its adoption.

                                  {time}  1215

      The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Indiana is recognized
    for 1 hour.
      Mrs. HOUCHIN. 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

      Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
    may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.
      The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
    gentlewoman from Indiana?
      There was no objection.
      Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and in
    support of the underlying legislation.
      Last night, the Rules Committee met and produced a rule, House
    Resolution 161, providing for the House's consideration of several
    pieces of legislation, including a closed rule for H. Con. Res. 14, the
    budget resolution.
      The rule provides for 2 hours of debate for the Committee on the
    Budget or their respective designees to debate the congressional budget
    and an additional hour equally divided and controlled by Representative
    Schweikert of Arizona and Representative Beyer of Virginia or their
    respective designees to debate economic goals and policies.
      The rule further permits the chair of the Committee on the Budget to
    offer amendments in the House to achieve mathematical consistency and
    provides that the concurrent resolution shall not be subject to a
    demand for division of the question at its adoption.
      Additionally, the rule provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 20, a
    CRA relating to the DOE's water heater rule, under a closed rule. The
    rule provides for 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by
    the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or
    their respective designees and provides for one motion to recommit.
      Finally, the rule provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 35, a CRA
    relating to EPA's methane tax, under a closed rule. The rule provides
    for 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and
    ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their
    respective designees and provides for one motion to recommit.
      Mr. Speaker, notable among the bills this rule provides for is the
    House budget resolution, H. Con. Res. 14. This budget resolution marks
    the first step for House Republicans to advance President Trump's
    America First agenda.
      We have heard plenty of fear-mongering and flatout dishonesty from
    Democrats and their liberal media allies about what is included in this
    resolution. To be clear, this resolution unlocks the path forward to
    deliver on our promises to the American people.
      Over the next hour, Members are going to hear all of the identity
    groups

    [[Page H782]]

    the Democrats want my colleagues to believe this bill hurts. Members
    will hear them say that Republicans are abandoning the middle class and
    cutting benefits. None of that is true.
      The truth is, there is not one single cut in this bill to any
    specific program or benefit. The truth is the Democratic Party
    abandoned the middle class for the liberal elite class a long time ago.
    The election last November should have been a wake-up call that the
    American people don't believe them anymore, nor should they.
      The Democrats are desperate for attention and for power. Don't give
    it to them.
      Let's set the record straight about what this budget resolution
    actually accomplishes.
      It will provide funding for border security, provide for our national
    defense, and restore American energy independence. It will provide tax
    relief for working families.
      On border security, Biden's open-border policies resulted in over 8.5
    million encounters at the southern border since 2021, a 500 percent
    increase in illegal crossings, and over $115 billion in costs to State
    and local governments. Most tragically, Biden's border crisis allowed
    unprecedented amounts of deadly fentanyl into our communities, killing
    over 100,000 Americans.
      Next, this bill enables us to permanently protect tax relief.
    President Trump's Tax Cuts and Jobs Act provided critical relief to
    middle-class families and small businesses. Americans are still
    experiencing high prices because we are still recovering from
    Bidenomics.
      Prices are up 21 percent. Real wages have declined by more than 3
    percent. Mortgage rates have skyrocketed. Credit card delinquencies
    have risen by over 50 percent. Bidenomics cost American families more
    than $11,000 every year for the last 4 years.
      Next, this budget resolution prioritizes energy independence. Under
    President Trump's first administration, the United States was energy
    independent for the first time in 40 years. That stopped the day Joe
    Biden took office, and American families have been hurting ever since.
      Under President Biden, the American energy production was severely
    restricted. Federal lands were blocked from responsible energy
    development, and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve was drained.
      Simply put, again, the budget resolution is a framework that will
    allow us to deliver on the demands of the American people to secure the
    border, eliminate wasteful spending, revitalize Biden's broken economy,
    and safeguard our economic prosperity by providing permanent tax relief
    for working families. I hope our Democratic colleagues will join us in
    those efforts.
      This budget resolution kicks off the reconciliation process and
    allows our work to begin. Once adopted, our committees and the entire
    House will begin detailed work to achieve these important goals for the
    American people.
      Mr. Speaker, this rule also provides for consideration of two
    Congressional Review Act measures: H.J. Res. 20 and H.J. Res. 35.
      H.J. Res. 20 provides for congressional disapproval of the rule
    submitted by the Department of Energy relating to energy conservation
    standards for consumer gas-fired instantaneous water heaters.

      The rule we seek to overturn with this legislation effectively bans
    certain natural gas water heaters from the market, placing unnecessary
    financial burdens on consumers, especially seniors and low-income
    households.
      H.J. Res. 35 provides for congressional disapproval of the rule
    submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to natural
    gas facilities. The EPA's rule imposes a significant fee on methane
    emissions from oil and natural gas facilities. The fee is essentially a
    pass-through cost to consumers that will raise prices, harm domestic
    energy production, and increase our reliance on other countries to meet
    our own energy needs.
      Mr. Speaker, I look forward to the consideration of these important
    pieces of legislation. I urge the passage of this rule, and I reserve
    the balance of my time.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
      Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. Houchin) for
    yielding me the customary 30 minutes.
      Mr. Speaker, before I get into my statement, let me begin by saying
    that I keep on hearing from the other side that this is just a budget
    resolution and that it doesn't have any actual policies in it. Yet, the
    gentlewoman referred to all the tax cuts.
      Can she point me to where the resolution says anything about tax
    cuts? Of course, the answer is that it doesn't.
      What it does is simply instruct our tax-writing committees to write
    legislation to spend $4.5 trillion, just as it instructs our SNAP
    committee to cut $290 billion and our Medicaid committee to cut $880
    billion.
      Republicans cannot have it both ways and pretend that the harms
    aren't real while the tax cuts are, but we know the harms are real. We
    know what is planned, and we have seen the leaked document.
      Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, it looks like facts and truth have
    absolutely no place in this administration or in this Republican Party.
    We already knew that this administration lies like a rug.
      First, we heard that the United States was sending $50 million worth
    of condoms to Hamas, which was a lie.
      Then we heard it was Ukraine that started the war, not Russia, which
    is another lie.
      Then we heard that the terrible plane crash here in Washington
    happened because of diversity programs, which was also a lie.
      Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. Houchin) wants us to
    believe that not a single thing in the budget she is arguing for is
    going to hurt anyone at all and that there isn't a single tax giveaway
    to billionaires in their budget.
      Guess what, Mr. Speaker. It is simply not accurate.
      We all saw this coming. We did. Last month, at Trump's inauguration,
    who was in the front row? It wasn't people on Medicaid. It wasn't
    factory workers. It wasn't nurses or teachers or firefighters. It
    wasn't even his own Cabinet. It was the richest people in the world,
    and that is who this Republican budget helps.
      It steals from taxpayers and funnels the money to those at the very
    top. Imagine stealing from school meals for kids so that billionaires
    could get another tax giveaway.
      Last night, in the Rules Committee, the gentlewoman claimed: No, no,
    no. Democrats can't prove there are any cuts in this budget. Except,
    Mr. Speaker, we can. We can. Let me lay it out as simply as I can for
    people.
      The Republican budget cuts, for example, $330 billion from programs
    related to education, and the same Representative who wrote this
    budget, the chair of the Budget Committee, Mr. Arrington, also wrote
    this document right here, Mr. Speaker, which I have in front of me. It
    says in black and white that those education cuts include $12 billion
    from school meals. How dare my colleagues on the other side of the
    aisle.
      Mr. Speaker, I am sorry that the gentlewoman doesn't like these
    facts, but they are facts.
      School meals are just one example. This budget makes deep, deep cuts
    to Medicaid, including long-term care; deep cuts to food assistance for
    hungry families; and deep cuts to Pell grants. These cuts are going to
    hurt people.
      I ask the gentlewoman a simple question: Whose side is she on? Does
    she want to stand with the school kids in her district who rely on
    school meals to get through the day, or does she side with the
    billionaires who are getting another tax giveaway in this budget?
      Does she stand with the 178,119 constituents in her district who are
    on Medicaid? Does she stand with the thousands and thousands of kids in
    her district who rely on school meals, or does she stand with the
    greedy corporations who are price gouging struggling families?
      I know where I stand, Mr. Speaker, and we are going to fight like
    hell to oppose this awful Republican budget because we know whose side
    we are on. We are going to fight like our constituents' lives depend on
    it because they do.
      Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
      Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
      Mr. Speaker, I commend the other side for finally saying that some of
    these things that they have been harping on for the last several hours
    and 24-

    [[Page H783]]

    hour segments is not true. There is nothing in this budget resolution
    that presumes cuts to specific programs. Our Democratic colleagues
    admitted this much themselves last night.
      Mr. Speaker, this legislation simply provides flexible spending
    targets for authorizing committees to best determine what is feasible
    within their jurisdiction.
      I remind my Democratic colleagues that this resolution is the first
    step in a process to let reconciliation begin, when the real work will
    happen in the committees. If my colleagues have concerns about
    potential cuts being proposed once the authorizing committees begin
    their work, there will be ample opportunity to debate, provide
    amendment, and find opportunities in the reconciliation instructions
    for common ground.
      Unlike my friends on the other side, we don't view the Rules
    Committee as the first stop in the legislative process, but, rather,
    the last. We should let the committees do their work and not prejudge
    the outcomes or make baseless accusations and presumptions.
      Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina
    (Mr. Norman), my friend.
      Mr. NORMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank Congresswoman Houchin for leading
    this debate, and I rise in full support of the House budget resolution
    as introduced by Chairman Arrington.

                                  {time}  1230

      What our viewers, both in the balcony and watching this by TV, are
    going to see is two different worldviews.
      My friends on the left think tax money is their money, that you
    shouldn't know where it is spent in any shape, form, or fashion.
      Where they want to spend our tax dollars, which is now being
    uncovered by Elon Musk, is on a variety of things, but it began 4 years
    ago with the invasion of the border.
      My friends from the left, the minute the Biden administration took
    office, opened the gates for over 170 different countries to let
    everybody and anybody into this country. My friends on the left allowed
    400,000 unaccompanied minors to come into this country, and we don't
    know what happened to them. It is not good, though.
      They claim to sympathize with people in this country, but what about
    sympathy for the children? They did nothing to stop the invasion at the
    border. They had words, but that is all it was.
      They want the American people to know that it is their money to spend
    on illegal aliens' free college tuition, putting it on the backs of the
    everyday working man.
      This is the first step in a long journey of what we are voting on
    today. From the very first day I set foot in this Chamber, I have
    always promised my constituents that I would do everything within my
    power to reinstate fiscal sanity to our great Nation.
      What is worse than a bankrupt country? How does that help children?
    How does that help single moms? It doesn't. That is what this bill
    attempts to stop or at least begin the process of healing.
      We now suffer from World War II levels of indebtedness and pay more
    on interest than we do on our national defense, to the tune of over
    $880 billion in interest.
      Unfortunately, many Members of Congress have demonstrated a complete
    lack of fiscal discipline and will try to spoil a strong bill that
    President Trump himself has endorsed.
      This budget resolution enables us to reach over $4.5 trillion in tax
    cuts for hardworking Americans and more than $2 trillion in spending
    cuts, a concept that Congress has been foreign to for way too long.
      With a historic trifecta, since the Republicans were elected by 77
    million people to control the House, the Senate, and the executive
    branch, we have the opportunity to deliver on our promise to America.
    We must do what is best for them, including raising the debt ceiling by
    $4 trillion to prevent Democrats from using a fiscal crisis to hold
    Trump's agenda hostage.
      The Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Ciscomani). The time of the gentleman
    has expired.
      Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 2 minutes to the
    gentleman from South Carolina.
      Mr. NORMAN. Mr. Speaker, due to the previous Biden administration's
    failed security measures, included in our budget is $300 billion in
    critical and urgent funding for strengthened border security and our
    Armed Forces.
      America is paying twice. We pay to ship illegals over here. We pay to
    feed illegals over here. We pay to house illegals over here. Now, we
    are having to take them back. We are for immigration, but the right
    way.
      All in all, this package, combined with economic growth unleashed by
    the America First agenda, can ensure it will provide a deficit-neutral
    outcome, including seven times the amount of cuts that were initially
    unveiled. For every dollar that Republicans surpass the goal of
    spending cuts, there will be another dollar in tax cuts.
      I am proud to support this budget that finally implements fiscal and
    budgetary constraints on Congress. It is the first step to unlocking
    the reconciliation process ahead of us.
      Previously, under Democrats' failed leadership, which we had 4 years
    of, nonsense welfare programs ate at the budget, allotting billions for
    mindless spending.
      The American people have had enough, which is why we are in the new
    age of the golden age.
      Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for allowing me to speak and for
    putting this argument up.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
      Mr. Speaker, there are just a couple of points I will make.
      I am still waiting for the gentlewoman from Indiana to tell me where
    the tax cuts are in this budget. My colleagues can't have it both ways.
    They can't say there are all these tax cuts in this budget, yet there
    are no cuts. The reality is, there are cuts in this budget.
      To the gentleman who just spoke from South Carolina, he may need a
    reminder. Maybe he could do a townhall in his district. He might get an
    earful. Mr. Speaker, 74,000 of his constituents received coverage under
    the Affordable Care Act.
      By supporting this resolution, he is betraying the 148,948
    constituents in his district who depend on Medicaid for their essential
    care and the 85,000 constituents in the Fifth District who rely on SNAP
    to put food on the table.
      Maybe do a townhall and listen to constituents rather than just big
    donors.
      Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida
    (Ms. Wasserman Schultz).
      Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
    yielding.
      Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose the Republican budget resolution that
    utterly betrays middle-class Americans and threatens to explode the
    deficit.
      This deceitful budget would gut Medicaid, schools, and affordable
    housing, all so Republican billionaire donors can get more tax breaks.
      Instead of cutting costs for families, it undermines veterans'
    benefits and forces millions more families to live paycheck to
    paycheck. Instead of lowering prices at the pharmacy or the
    supermarket, this budget will bleed Americans dry. Billionaires get a
    windfall, and taxpayers get stuck with the bill.

      This budget would swipe food from seniors and children, and in my
    district, ACA healthcare premiums would leap by almost $500. A 60-year-
    old Broward County couple with a household income of $85,000 would see
    their ACA premiums jump $16,000 a year, a 226 percent increase.
      How does this Republican rip-off help American families? Long story
    short, it won't.
      I urge my colleagues to reject this billionaire buyout budget that
    would crush working families, make Americans less safe and secure, blow
    out the debt, and devastate lifesaving resources that families need.
      Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from
    North Carolina (Ms. Foxx), chairwoman of the Rules Committee.
      Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
      Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule, which provides
    consideration of the fiscal year 2025 budget resolution.
      Our Nation stands at a fiscal crossroads, one where we are beckoned
    to answer a simple yet pertinent question: What path will we choose to
    go down? The answer to that question is clear: We must embark upon a
    path that restores the fiscal health and vitality of the Nation.

    [[Page H784]]

      Many have lobbed spurious caricatures and distorted criticisms at
    this budget resolution, but the truth is that it will work to put the
    Nation back upon a sound footing where it belongs.
      Last night at the Rules Committee, we caught Democrats dead to
    rights. A Democrat tried to refer to the alleged ``cuts'' in our debate
    but instead admitted that ``it is not there.''
      That is right. It is not in the budget resolution. You simply cannot
    find programmatic cuts in any respect, and I stand here to tell the
    truth about this budget and the rule we need to get it across the line.
      From shielding Americans from the greatest tax increase in history to
    supporting the military, allocating resources to the Trump
    administration to secure the border and to trimming wasteful programs,
    our budget resolution has solutions that the American people expect and
    demand.
      President Trump specifically requested ``one big, beautiful bill,''
    and House Republicans have answered that request with a constructive,
    full-bodied product.
      Now, let's juxtapose our beautiful bill with the failed
    reconciliation schemes passed by Democratic Congresses.
      They used it to pass ObamaCare, robbing Medicare of over $700 billion
    of funds in the process and kicking Americans off their health
    insurance plans after promising to keep them.
      They hijacked the process to pass the so-called American Rescue Plan
    to waste over $2 trillion in taxpayer funds, fueling the greatest
    inflation rates in generations.
      Lastly, they used the reconciliation process just a few years ago to
    pass one of the worst pieces of legislation in the modern era, the so-
    called Inflation Reduction Act. That catastrophe of a bill was a one-
    way ticket to financial ruin. It wasted money on green energy schemes,
    punished companies that proudly develop American energy, and ironically
    drove up costs for every American family.
      I will let our deficit-reducing, border-securing, tax cut-preserving,
    American energy-strengthening budget stand against the failed record of
    congressional Democrats any day of the week.
      The truth is that Americans win under the Trump agenda and this
    budget. This blueprint is a framework on which Congress can deliver the
    agenda the American people want and deserve.
      Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the rule and the underlying
    resolution.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
      Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman is talking about what was said in the
    Rules Committee last night. I will take a couple of minutes to talk
    about how people voted in the Rules Committee last night.
      We gave Republicans a chance last night in the Rules Committee. We
    said if they really don't believe that this budget cuts funding for
    school meals, if they really believe what they are saying, then they
    can vote to ensure the American people that they are not going to steal
    school meals from kids in order to give tax breaks for millionaires.
    Every Republican voted no, every single one of them.
      Then, Democrats offered an amendment to protect Medicaid. Medicaid,
    as you know, Mr. Speaker, covers 41 percent of all births in the United
    States, nearly half of children with special healthcare needs, and five
    in eight nursing home residents. We asked them not to cut Medicaid in
    order to fund tax breaks for billionaires. Every Republican voted no.
      Then, Democrats offered an amendment to extend tax cuts for people
    making under $400,000 while ensuring that corporations and billionaires
    pay their fair share. We asked Republicans to continue tax cuts for
    only those who need it the most because those are the tax cuts they let
    expire while their tax cuts for greedy corporations were made
    permanent. We asked them to prioritize working families over greedy
    corporations. Every Republican voted no.
      Then, Democrats offered an amendment preventing tax giveaways for
    people earning over $1 million a year. Every Republican voted no.
      We wanted to see if there was anyone so rich that Republicans don't
    think they deserve a tax giveaway, so we asked them to vote against tax
    breaks for people earning over $100 million per year. We asked them to
    side with factory workers and firefighters over hedge fund managers and
    billionaire bankers. Every Republican voted no.
      We even offered an amendment preventing tax cuts for people with a
    net worth of over--get this--$1 billion. Every Republican voted no.
      They betrayed their constituents. They voted to steal from the
    American people in order to protect tax breaks for billionaires.

      Again, this is about whose side you are on. Republicans showed us
    last night with their votes whose side they are on, and it is not the
    working people of this country.
      Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
      Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
    from Georgia (Mr. Jack).
      Mr. JACK. Mr. Speaker, in addition to the budget resolution, which I
    support, I rise today in support of the rule for H.J. Res. 20, a
    resolution authorized by the Congressional Review Act that will enable
    our Congress to repeal a job-killing Biden administration regulation
    that would ban and eliminate noncondensing tankless water heaters, an
    American product made by blue-collar American workers in the heart of
    my congressional district in Georgia.
      This regulation was passed in the midnight hours of the Biden
    administration on December 26, after Christmas and weeks after
    Americans soundly rejected the Biden-Harris regulatory regime
    administration, putting in peril the livelihoods of hundreds of my
    constituents the day after Christmas.
      To put this into perspective, noncondensing tankless water heaters
    account for 40 percent of our country's tankless water heater market. A
    majority of those noncondensing tankless water heaters are manufactured
    in my congressional district by an incredible company called Rinnai
    America Corporation.
      These water heaters are the most advanced and efficient noncondensing
    tankless water heaters on the market. Perhaps most importantly, Rinnai
    America is the only company that builds noncondensing tankless water
    heaters on American soil.
      Rinnai America is headquartered in my hometown of Peachtree City, and
    3 years ago, it opened a state-of-the-art facility in Griffin, Georgia,
    two cities I proudly represent in this Congress.

                                  {time}  1245

      Over 500 of my constituents are working to manufacture and market the
    very water heaters the Biden administration attempted to outlaw. This
    job-killing regulation imposed by the Biden administration is yet
    another painful example of the left's war on hydrocarbons.
      The purpose of this regulation is to try to single out and eliminate
    an American manufacturer of noncondensing tankless water heaters.
    Effectively, the Biden administration and the government were trying to
    alter the market on their own by picking winners and losers, which is
    something that consumers should do, not unelected nameless bureaucrats.
      Mr. Speaker, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have spent
    an enormous amount of time the past few weeks trying to convince
    Americans they are the party of blue-collar American workers.
      Well, in the spirit of bipartisanship, I encourage my Democratic
    colleagues to join me in support of this resolution to protect and
    champion hundreds of blue-collar American jobs in the heart of our
    country. To my Republican colleagues, let's join together as a team and
    end this war on hydrocarbons now.
      President Trump's White House has explicitly endorsed this
    resolution, and I urge all of my Republican colleagues to join us and
    vote for this critical legislation to empower consumer choice and
    champion American manufacturing.
      I will close by saying, we expect this vote later this week. I hope
    everyone in this House joins me in support of this legislation in
    defense of blue-collar American workers.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
      We are here talking about billions of dollars of cuts to Medicaid,
    school meals, and food for children, and this guy is talking about
    tankless water heaters. I mean, read the room.
      I should just say that by supporting this budget resolution, he is
    betraying

    [[Page H785]]

    125,952 constituents in his district that depend on Medicaid for their
    essential care.
      Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman from Rhode
    Island (Mr. Magaziner).
      Mr. MAGAZINER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to Donald Trump,
    Elon Musk, and House Republicans stealing trillions of dollars from the
    middle class to fund massive tax cuts for billionaires. Instead of
    focusing on the cost of living or making America safer, Republicans are
    planning a massive giveaway to the rich, with working people picking up
    the tab.
      They want $2 trillion in tax cuts for people making more than
    $500,000 a year by extending Trump's 2017 tax plan. That is $2 trillion
    for people making more than $500,000 a year.
      How are they going to pay for it?
      By cutting Medicaid.
      That is healthcare for 77 million Americans, 80,000 Rhode Islanders,
    including seniors, children, and people with disabilities.
      Nursing homes and community health centers all across this country
    will shut down.
      It is not just healthcare. This bill takes money from education,
    farmers, and small businesses, all for billionaire tax cuts. These
    Republicans are not fighting for the middle class. They are fighting
    for Donald and Elon's rich friends at Mar-a-Lago, and the middle class
    is paying for it.
      I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
      Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
    California (Mr. Costa).
      Mr. COSTA. Mr. Speaker, I strongly oppose this rule that enables a
    reckless Republican budget resolution to go forward. Let me tell you
    why.
      Republicans claim to be lowering costs, but their plan, in my view,
    does just the opposite.
      Let me bring it all home. In California's 21st Congressional District
    which I have the honor and privilege to represent, the wonderful people
    in the San Joaquin Valley, 456,532 people could lose their Medicaid
    under this rule and budget resolution.
      Under this rule and resolution, 131,000 people could lose their SNAP
    benefits.
      Over 25,000 people could lose coverage through the Affordable Health
    Care Act. We have made remarkable progress as a result of the
    Affordable Health Care Act, reducing the number of people without
    insurance in our constituency to less than 10 percent. That would be
    changed.
      There would be $3 million in energy and conservation funds that would
    be withheld from farmers in my district.
      If you want to put the American people first, we must reject this
    debacle and begin on a real bipartisan basis to pass a budget that fits
    the American people.
      Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
    Minnesota (Ms. Morrison).
      Ms. MORRISON. Mr. Speaker, today I rise on behalf of the nearly 80
    million Americans across the country who get their health insurance
    through Medicaid.
      I rise as a physician who has cared for patients for more than 20
    years, and I implore my colleagues to recognize that health insurance
    is not just a throwaway line item that you can scratch out in a budget.
    It is the difference between being able to receive the lifesaving
    healthcare people need or not.
      Medicaid is the single largest source of healthcare coverage in the
    United States. Medicaid covers nearly half of all children, and it is
    the largest insurer of kids with disabilities. Medicaid is a vital
    source of prenatal and postpartum care for women, and it covers more
    than 40 percent of births in our country.
      The Republicans' dangerous proposal today is selling out the health
    and wellness of kids, families, seniors in nursing homes, and people
    with disabilities.
      Why? To make room for tax breaks for millionaires? This is wrong. We
    cannot stand for this.

      We need our colleagues across the aisle to stand up for our children
    and families.
      Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I notice there are not a lot of people on
    the other side wanting to defend this budget.
      I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Gomez).
      Mr. GOMEZ. Mr. Speaker, the Republican budget can be summed up in
    three simple words: defund, defraud, and deceive.
      First, the Republicans want to defund social safety net programs
    working families rely on, like Medicaid, school meals, and food stamps.
      In my district alone, 425,000 individuals depend on Medicaid for
    their healthcare. That includes kids and people with disabilities.
      Second, Republicans want to defraud the American people by taking
    money from working families to hand out massive tax breaks to
    billionaires and corporations who pay little to no taxes.
      Finally, they are trying to deceive the American people by claiming
    that they are not cutting any programs, but we know at the end of the
    day that their budget will include cuts to Medicaid and programs that
    families depend on.
      Republicans need to step up because this is not just a blue State or
    a Democratic issue. This will cut benefits, healthcare benefits, for
    hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Americans across the
    country, including 171,000 in Arizona's Sixth District.
      We need Republicans to step up and not be shameful and pass this
    budget.
      Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I don't know if the gentlewoman wants to
    give us some of her time because we have a lot of speakers over here. I
    guess not.
      Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms.
    Tokuda).
      Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the House
    Republican budget resolution, a blatant attempt to strip healthcare and
    food aid away from everyday Americans.
      With up to $2.5 trillion in Medicaid cuts and $230 billion slashed
    from SNAP, this budget plan would leave millions of families and
    seniors without essential support. Rural America would suffer the most.
      Nationwide, more than 12 million rural Americans rely on Medicaid,
    and SNAP participation is higher in rural areas than urban ones. In my
    home State of Hawaii, over 350,000 people rely on Medicaid, and nearly
    one in five depend on SNAP to eat. Rural Americans, who live in 181 of
    our congressional districts, red and blue, already face some of the
    harshest health disparities, living 3 to 10 years less than their urban
    counterparts. These cuts will only deepen such inequities and leave
    them with no safety net.
      Let me be clear. These cuts will cost lives. These are not just
    numbers. They are real people. They are our neighbors, our
    grandparents, and our children. At a time when too many are struggling,
    Republicans are delivering tax breaks to billionaires on the backs of
    our working families.
      Americans in rural America deserve better. Our country deserves
    better. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
      Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
      Let me just say, by the way, Mr. Speaker, how is that mandate going
    for you guys now that voters are realizing that you betrayed them?
      Let's look at some newspapers from around the country: ``Georgia
    Congressman confronted by angry crowd over support for Trump's
    agenda.''
      This is from The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: ``U.S. Rep. Rich
    McCormick was peppered with boos and catcalls throughout a townhall
    meeting in Roswell late Thursday, as hundreds of critics jeered the
    Republican for backing President Donald Trump's agenda during his first
    month in office.''
      There is another one. ``U.S. Rep. Glenn Grothman faces hostile crowd
    in Oshkosh townhall meeting.'' That is in Oshkosh, Wisconsin.
      ``Protesters urge Rep. Scott Perry to say no to Medicaid cuts.'' That
    is in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
      ``Outside Congressman's office, protesters make noise over potential
    Medicaid cuts.'' That is from Representative Ryan Mackenzie's district
    in Salisbury Township in Pennsylvania.
      I could spend an hour reading these into the Record, Mr. Speaker.
    Republicans are getting chewed out at all of

    [[Page H786]]

    their townhalls. Something is happening in this country right now, and
    you can feel it. People are waking up to the betrayal, and they are
    angry. They have a right to be angry.
      My Republican colleagues need to remember that when they vote for
    this budget, they are on record. They have made it clear that they
    serve the billionaires and not their voters.
      Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
    Sorensen).
      Mr. SORENSEN. Mr. Speaker, looking around this room, I ask: Shouldn't
    our government benefit those we represent back home?
      However, what is being presented by my Republican colleagues today is
    a plan that would gut healthcare for 152,483 of my neighbors at home
    who depend on Medicaid, more than 66,000 kids under the age of 19. Ten
    thousand seniors back home rely on Medicaid in Illinois' 17th District
    for their nursing home coverage.
      While you may see this as a numbers game in a budget, I see families.
    I see neighbors. I see loved ones.
      Let me let you in on a secret because there aren't any Republicans in
    this room. There are more Republican constituents of mine that are
    calling my office saying: We may have voted for Donald Trump, but we
    didn't vote for him to do this.

      This is cruel and unusual punishment to single out everyday
    Americans, making them go without.
      Also, billionaire donors and big corporations get tax breaks to make
    them more wealthy.
      Let's get back to doing the work for the American people who need us
    to do this work the most.
      Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time both sides
    have remaining.
      The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts has 12\3/4\
    minutes remaining.
      The gentlewoman from Indiana has 12 minutes remaining.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I note the gentlewoman doesn't seem to
    have any other speakers. I was wondering whether she might want to lend
    us some of her time.
      Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California
    (Ms. Pelosi), the Speaker Emerita, a powerful leader in the Democratic
    Caucus and for the country.
      Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for
    his exuberant presentation of opposition to this budget. I thank him
    for all the amendments he proposed to improve upon it. Sadly, the
    Republicans didn't accept just one.
      Here we go again. The last time the Republicans had a majority in the
    House and Senate and President Trump in the White House, they passed a
    terrible bill that was a tax cut for the rich that gave 83 percent of
    the benefits to the wealthiest people, the top 1 percent in our
    country, and added $2 trillion to the national debt.
      This year, they are doubling down on that, $4 trillion to the
    national debt, and they call that fiscal sanity. They are doing it by
    steering taxpayer dollars from Medicaid to give additional tax breaks
    to billionaires and big corporations.
      People think of Medicaid sometimes as a poor children's program, and
    that would be sufficient justification for it all, but it is a middle-
    income benefit. Seniors who need long-term healthcare need Medicaid.
      Members should listen to their constituents and hear what they have
    to say about what it means to their fiscal well-being. Listen to
    constituents. The numbers are staggering.
      By voting for this cruel bill, they are betraying hardworking
    Americans by raising costs for all those already struggling to make
    ends meet. The President said he was going to reduce the cost of
    living. He didn't. He said he would reduce inflation. He didn't.

                                  {time}  1300

      Mr. Speaker, indeed a vote for this budget is a vote against
    Medicaid, ripping away healthcare from children, people with
    disabilities, and seniors. It is a vote against SNAP, as the
    distinguished chairman indicated, taking food out of the mouths of
    babies.
      They do that with glee while President Trump and congressional
    Republicans are choosing to protect billionaires, by the way, who
    benefit from Medicaid with people cleaning their homes.
      The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
    gentlewoman from California.
      Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, we are led and unified by Hakeem Jeffries.
    We are united in our commitment to work for working families. That is
    why I urge a ``no'' vote on this extreme measure, and I thank the
    distinguished chairman for his leadership.
      Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the
    Record an article from the Economic Policy Institute titled: ``The
    House Republicans' plan to cut Medicaid to pay for tax cuts for the
    rich would slash incomes for the bottom 40 percent.''
      The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
    gentleman from Massachusetts?
      There was no objection.

            [From the Economic Policy Institute, February 19, 2025]

    The House Republicans' Plan To Cut Medicaid To Pay for Tax Cuts for the
               Rich Would Slash Incomes for the Bottom 40 Percent

                                (By Josh Bivens)

           The clearest legislative priority of the Trump
         administration and the Republican-led Congress is to keep
         taxes low for the richest households and corporations. Last
         week, House Republicans submitted a budget resolution that
         calls for $800 billion in cuts to Medicaid--the program that
         provides health insurance for low-income Americans--to help
         pay for extending the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA),
         which primarily benefits the highest earners. President Trump
         endorsed the House plan earlier this morning, despite vowing
         yesterday to not cut Medicaid.
           Besides being unfair, the cost of this overall tax cut
         would be large enough to put huge stress on other parts of
         the economy, no matter how it is paid for. But the costliest
         way to pay for this would be to enact large cuts in spending
         programs like Medicaid that provide benefits to economically
         vulnerable families. These cuts would equal almost 11 percent
         of all Medicaid spending over the proposed time period.
           In a forthcoming report, we highlight just how damaging
         these Medicaid cuts would be for typical families. Health
         coverage is expensive in the U.S., and the value of
         Medicaid's coverage is equal to a huge share of the total
         income of poorer families. In fact, a family health insurance
         plan in private markets can cost more than what the bottom 20
         percent of families earns in an entire year.
           Figure 1 below shows the House budget resolution's average
         cut to Medicaid benefits for the bottom 40 percent of the
         income distribution, expressed as a share of average income.
         It also shows how much extending the TCJA's expiring
         provisions would boost incomes for these groups and the top 1
         percent. The upshot is that the bottom 40 percent would be
         unequivocally worse off: Proposed cuts to Medicaid would
         reduce incomes for the bottom 40 percent more than extending
         the TCJA would boost them--and the lowest-income households
         would fare the worst. Strikingly, this is true even as the
         full $880 billion in Medicaid cuts would only pay for about
         20 percent of the total cost of the TCJA--other cuts and
         economic damage falling on non-rich families stemming from
         tax cuts for the rich would still be forthcoming. Meanwhile,
         the TCJA boosts the incomes of the top 1 percent
         significantly, while these households do not rely in any way
         on Medicaid.
           A table from our forthcoming report is reproduced below--it
         shows the cuts to Medicaid expressed as a share of total
         money income for the bottom 40 percent of the income
         distribution for each state. States with more generous
         Medicaid coverage will see larger cuts, while states that
         have been stingier to date with Medicaid will see smaller
         cuts. But in every single state, the proposed cuts are a
         disaster for the incomes of the bottom 40 percent. This
         policy trade-off of thousands of dollars in cuts for the
         bottom 40 percent in exchange for tens or even hundreds of
         thousands of dollars in tax cuts for rich families
         crystallizes the Republican priorities.

      Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, this article details how these cuts would
    hurt working families more than any tax relief that they might receive.
      Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New
    Mexico (Ms. Stansbury).
      Ms. STANSBURY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to oppose this so-called
    budget resolution which is one of the greatest heists in American
    history as they loot the Treasury to give permanent tax breaks to
    billionaires at the expense of millions of Americans.
      We are talking about cuts to healthcare, Medicaid, and Medicare.
    Literally a quarter of a million New Mexicans will be unable to access
    care.

    [[Page H787]]

    There will be cuts to income and food assistance, billions of dollars
    that go to families to keep food on the table and a roof over their
    head and to give tax breaks to billionaires. They are going to cut
    vital programs that go to our lowest income and most vulnerable
    families.
      As a native New Mexican who grew up in a single-parent home in a low-
    income family, I know exactly what this means. These cuts are cruel.
    They are unnecessary. They are undemocratic, and they will blow a hole
    through our deficit spending by $4 trillion. This is not a budget
    resolution.
      This is a blueprint for suffering or, as Elon Musk put it over the
    weekend, the spoils of war. These guys don't care how many people they
    hurt or how many families are going to suffer. It is about power and
    greed, and the GOP is enabling them.
      We will not sit down and do it. We will not support this budget
    resolution. We will not give them one single vote. I will not be
    silenced because we will continue to fight.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in
    the Record a letter to Speaker Johnson, signed by eight Republicans,
    titled: ``Protecting American Communities in the Budget Reconciliation
    Process.''
      The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Bice). Is there objection to the
    request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?
      There was no objection.

         Re Protecting American Communities in the Budget
             Reconciliation Process.
         Hon. Mike Johnson,
         Speaker, House of Representatives,
         Washington, DC.
           Dear Speaker Johnson: As Members of the Congressional
         Hispanic Conference, and those who represent sizeable
         Hispanic populations, we are writing to express our concerns
         regarding possible funding decisions stemming from the House
         Budget Resolution's committee instructions advanced on
         February 13, 2025. While we fully support efforts to rein in
         wasteful spending and deliver on President Trump's agenda, it
         is imperative that we do not slash programs that support
         American communities across our nation, nor underfund
         critical programs necessary to secure the border and keep our
         communities safe.
           Founded in 2003, the Congressional Hispanic Conference is
         the only Member organization of Hispanic Republicans in
         Congress and is committed to ensuring that the Republican
         party welcomes all who believe in faith, family, and the
         American Dream. Hispanic Americans played a decisive role in
         securing a Republican majority in 2025, having helped flip
         key districts, delivered historic gains in border
         communities, and put their faith in our party to fight for
         them. That trust wasn't given--it was earned.
           Moreover, the American people--as a whole--put their trust
         in us. People of all backgrounds cast a vote of confidence
         for our party. That is why we are eager to deliver on
         President Trump's historic mandate.
           We support the highest possible funding for border security
         to achieve the long-term border security agenda items by
         President Trump that we fully support. Collectively our
         members represent over half of the southern border and it is
         our constituents who have felt the brunt of the border
         crisis. We must fully fund and support efforts to:
           Complete the border wall, hire and retain border security
         personnel, and invest in border security technology.
           Increase ICE detention capacity, end catch-and-release
         policies, and enforce immigration law.
           Integrate and improve communications systems, as well as
         provide resources for rural sheriffs, police departments, and
         state and federal law enforcement agencies affected by the
         border crisis.
           We also fully stand behind efforts to:
           Reauthorize the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act to protect the Child
         Tax Credit, defend small businesses, and prevent reckless
         taxation.
           As we consider reconciliation cuts, we must be strategic.
         We need to uphold fiscal responsibility while ensuring that
         essential programs--programs that have empowered Americans to
         succeed--are not caught in the crossfire.
           The House Budget Resolution proposed $880 billion in cuts
         to programs under the jurisdiction of the House Committee on
         Energy and Commerce, with Medicaid expected to bear the brunt
         of these reductions. Nearly 30 percent of Medicaid enrollees
         are Hispanic Americans, and for many families across the
         country, Medicaid is their only access to healthcare.
         Slashing Medicaid would have serious consequences,
         particularly in rural and predominantly Hispanic communities
         where hospitals and nursing homes are already struggling to
         keep their doors open. Moreover, the possibility of cutting
         Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) funding
         threatens hospitals that serve low-income and uninsured
         patients.
           Additionally, the House Committee on Education and the
         Workforce has been tasked with cutting $330 billion, where
         federal aid for higher education--such as Pell Grants--may be
         a target for reductions. Hispanic students make up a
         significant share of Pell Grant recipients, many of whom are
         first-generation college students striving for a better
         future for themselves, their families, and our nation. In the
         2015-16 academic year alone, 82 percent of full-time Latino
         students relied on grants and loans, including Pell Grants,
         to afford college. If we are serious about empowering the
         next generation and strengthening our workforce, we must
         facilitate, and not undermine, opportunities that help
         students succeed.
           Finally, the House Committee on Agriculture has been
         directed to cut $230 billion. While we fully support efforts
         to eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse, we must ensure that
         assistance families rely on this programs--such as SNAP--
         remain protected as nearly 22 percent of Hispanic families
         rely on this critical program as a temporary safety net
         during difficult times. Not to mention the support that SNAP
         provides to families of all backgrounds across our nation.
           Hispanic Americans stood with us because we stood up for
         them on the issues that matter: border security, economic
         opportunity, and a government that works for the people, not
         against them.
           We look forward to working with you and our colleagues on a
         responsible approach to these budget discussions where we can
         both eliminate government waste while ensuring we do not
         undermine programs that support working-class Americans.
         Hispanic Americans are the future of the Republican Party,
         and they are closely watching to see if we will govern in a
         way that honors their values and delivers results.
               Sincerely,
         Tony Gonzales;
         Monica De La Cruz;
         Juan Ciscomani;
         James Moylan;
         Nicole Malliotakis;
         David Valadao;
         Rob Bresnahan, Jr.;
         Kimberlyn King-Hinds
           Members of Congress.

      Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, this letter makes clear that they know
    that Medicaid, Pell grants, and SNAP will face harmful cuts if this
    budget passes.
      Madam Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an
    amendment to the rule to provide for consideration of an amendment to
    the budget resolution which prevents tax cuts for billionaires if
    Medicaid is cut by a single cent.
      Madam Speaker, 72 million Americans, including 30 million children,
    rely on Medicaid for critical healthcare and other lifesaving services.
    With this budget resolution, House Republicans are betraying the most
    vulnerable Americans to give tax breaks to billionaires.
      Representative Gray submitted an amendment that would prevent
    Republicans from betraying Medicaid recipients in order to give
    billionaires tax breaks. It shouldn't be controversial.
      I offered that amendment last night in the Rules Committee and, to my
    shock, every single one of my Republican colleagues voted against it,
    standing with billionaires over Medicaid recipients.
      I am now giving every House Republican a chance to go on the record.
    Voting ``yes'' on the previous question means my colleagues want to cut
    taxes for billionaires, even at the expense of vital Medicaid coverage.
    Voting ``no'' gives my colleagues an opportunity to ensure that
    Medicaid is protected. It is that simple.
      Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my
    amendment into 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. Madam Speaker, to discuss our proposal, I yield 3
    minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Gray), the sponsor of
    this legislation.
      Mr. GRAY. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
      Madam Speaker, I rise today conflicted about what is happening in our
    government and across the country. Like many Americans, I find myself
    frustrated with government that doesn't work, lines that are too long,
    services that are too hard to navigate, and roads that don't get fixed.
      This shouldn't be a partisan issue. All of us here today should be in
    favor of making our government work better and strengthening programs
    that our constituents rely upon. In fact, some of my Republican
    colleagues, led by Congressman Tony Gonzales, wrote in a letter to
    Speaker Johnson that the proposed cuts to Medicaid within this budget
    would have serious consequences, particularly in rural and

    [[Page H788]]

    Hispanic communities where hospitals and nursing homes are already
    struggling to keep their doors open.
      One of those communities where hospitals are struggling to stay open
    is mine in California's Central Valley. Over 450,000 people in my
    congressional district rely on Medicaid for their health coverage. The
    Central Valley is also experiencing a healthcare shortage, forcing
    people to drive across the country, across county lines, across the
    State, waiting for hours to see a provider.
      These proposed cuts to Medicaid only stand to worsen the crisis.
    Let's be clear. These cuts wouldn't just impact individuals covered by
    Medicaid. In my congressional district, 59 percent of individuals are
    covered by California's Medicaid program. That means that doctors and
    hospitals in my district rely on Medicaid for nearly two-thirds of
    their revenue. Without that revenue, these providers would not be able
    to keep their doors open. In fact, Madam Speaker, there is an entire
    county I represent with a population of 162,000 people who have no
    hospital at all to go to because it had to close.
      I submitted an amendment to this resolution to ask a simple question.
    Is it such a priority to fund tax cuts for individuals with over $1
    billion in net worth that we would enact devastating cuts to healthcare
    for rural and low-income communities?
      This proposal would steal from the poor to give to the rich. Even if
    my colleagues don't think that is a problem, Madam Speaker, this
    literally makes healthcare coverage worse for every single person
    living in rural America. I have spent the majority of my career in
    public service, working to make healthcare better, both more accessible
    and more affordable. This proposed budget does the opposite.
      My amendment to the proposed budget would prevent consideration of
    any legislation that would result in cuts to Medicaid in order to
    provide such tax cuts. Unfortunately, that amendment was blocked from
    consideration by members of the Rules Committee last night.
      To my Republican colleagues who agreed that we must protect Medicaid,
    I hope they will join me in support of this amendment should I have the
    opportunity to offer it here.
      Madam Speaker, this is my commonsense solution to honor the trust our
    constituents put in us when they sent us to Congress. I urge my
    colleagues to oppose the previous question and support this amendment.
      Mrs. HOUCHIN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
    consume.
      Madam Speaker, the ranking member has discussed a number of votes
    taken at the Rules Committee markup last night. Once again, the budget
    is the first step in the process, not the last. Many of these
    amendments will have the opportunity to be debated thoughtfully and ad
    nauseam, I have no doubt, in the authorizing committees.
      The Democrats are speaking fear, not facts. Saying something that is
    false over and over again does not make it true. These amendments can
    be given consideration in the committees of jurisdiction. That is the
    process of regular order.
      Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I say to the gentlewoman that Republican
    Members are raising concerns about these cuts. Maybe we can share some
    of those press clippings with her.

      Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr.
    Cohen).
      Mr. COHEN. Madam Speaker, this budget is about the millionaires, the
    trillionaires, the people earning over $400,000 a year, and giving them
    a $4 trillion tax cut over the next 10 years. It is not about working
    people. It is about hurting working people, hurting the poor, hurting
    people with disabilities, and hurting children.
      What this Congress is looking at doing, because of Musk and Trump and
    the Republican colleagues here that I share this floor with, is cutting
    programs that help the public.
      In October, Elon Musk incorporated United States of America, Inc., in
    Texas. What that means is it shows his mentality. He thinks he owns
    this government. He has bought it. He has been given it. He doesn't
    care about anybody else. He is the only stockholder.
      America is not a stockholder. Americans are the people who give him
    the money to give it to the trillionaires and billionaires who were
    first in President Trump's inaugural crowd. They were first in the
    crowd. They are first in his mind. They are first in his heart. They
    are his people.
      Mrs. HOUCHIN. Madam Speaker, I will reiterate that saying something
    false over and over again doesn't make it true.
      Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I say to the gentlewoman the facts do
    matter. Her Members are complaining about the cuts in the Republican
    budget. Read them.
      Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute in the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms.
    Dexter).
      Ms. DEXTER. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this rule
    which allows for consideration of the Republicans' extreme budget that
    slashes funding for vital programs like Medicaid, SNAP, and Federal
    housing assistance to bankroll $4.5 trillion in tax breaks for
    billionaires and big corporations.
      Last week, I got a devastating call from Susan who lives in Sandy,
    Oregon. She and her husband worked all their lives and saved diligently
    for retirement but had a single accident that wiped out their savings.
    They are now in their seventies and rely on Medicaid, SNAP, and utility
    assistance to just make ends meet each month.
      The legislation in front of us today would rip these benefits from
    Susan and her husband, denying them access to healthcare, forcing them
    to ration their food, and jeopardizing their ability to remain in their
    home. For what? To line the pockets of the ultrawealthy, to pad the
    bottom line of corporations already raking in profits.
      I offered six commonsense amendments to this bill to safeguard
    critical programs for people like Susan and so many Oregonians like
    her. Republicans rejected every single one of my amendments.
      The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
      Ms. DEXTER. Madam Speaker, as has been true all along, they have no
    interest in protecting America's middle class.
      The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman is no longer recognized.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, may I inquire of the gentlewoman how
    many more speakers she has? I can't remember the last time she had one.
      Mrs. HOUCHIN. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is
    remaining.
      The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts has 2\1/4\
    minutes remaining.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
      Madam Speaker, a majority of Americans now say that Donald Trump is
    doing a bad job at handling the economy. I don't blame them. Prices are
    going up on everything in large part because of Trump's tariffs.
    Meanwhile, wages for workers have not kept pace with inflation for
    decades. Home ownership is slipping out of reach for more and more
    people.
      I will end this debate where we began. Whose side are my Republican
    colleagues on? Talk is cheap, Madam Speaker. This place runs on hot air
    from corrupt politicians whose only care in the world is where their
    next campaign check comes from.
      Last night in the Rules Committee, Democrats gave Republicans a
    chance to show whose side they are on. Every single one of them voted
    against protecting Medicaid so they could give tax breaks to
    billionaires. That is how they voted.
      Every single one of them voted against protecting the child tax
    credit so they could give tax cuts to billionaires. Every single one of
    them voted against protecting food assistance for hungry families so
    they could give tax breaks to billionaires.

      The gentlewoman can claim whatever she wants. The truth is this
    budget betrays the middle class in favor of tax giveaways for
    billionaires. It gives trillions in handouts to the ultrawealthy,
    billionaires, and greedy corporations to the tune of $314,266 each
    every year for the top 0.1 percent.

    [[Page H789]]

    That is an average. Some of them will get millions.
      That is a bigger giveaway to the ultrarich than most people make in a
    year. To pay for it, they are stealing from the American people. They
    are stealing from Americans. They are betraying the people who voted
    for them. This is the betrayal on a scale I don't think we have ever
    seen before.
      Madam Speaker, I am going to fight to expose it and to stop it. I
    have said this over and over again. We need tax relief for workers, not
    the ultrarich. We need to preserve Social Security and Medicare, not
    gut them to pay for corporate handouts. We should protect Medicaid and
    food benefits for working families because we know these are programs
    that people rely on and need when times get tough.
      The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
      Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, you can shut me up but you can't silence
    the voice of the American people.
      The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is no longer recognized.

                                  {time}  1315

      Mrs. HOUCHIN. Madam Speaker, despite what Democrats may claim, the
    American people know the Biden-Harris administration caused enormous
    damage to our economy, weakened our national security, allowed millions
    of illegal immigrants and deadly fentanyl to flood across our southern
    border, and crippled American energy independence. That is exactly why
    voters rejected their failed leadership in the last election.
      Once again, this resolution does not cut a single specific program or
    benefit. The Democrats are speaking fear, not facts, and saying
    something over and over again that is false does not make it true.
    Democrats have told these lies before and were proven wrong.
      The Democrats want to continue 4 more years of Bidenomics. We want to
    put us on a path to prosperity. These are the same people claiming that
    there is no waste, fraud, or abuse in Washington.
      This resolution will begin a process that sets a fiscal framework to
    meet the agenda the American people demanded in November.
      Let's talk about some of their claims, that this is a handout to
    billionaires. It is their party that abandoned the middle class by
    spending like crazy. Not extending the 2017 Trump tax cuts would be the
    ultimate betrayal of the middle class. The average taxpayer in my
    district, in the Ninth District of Indiana, would see a 26 percent tax
    hike if the tax cuts the Democrats oppose expire.
      A family of four making $67,000, the median income in my district,
    would be a $1,289 tax increase. More than 6 million people were lifted
    out of poverty under Republican tax reform, dropping the poverty rate
    to 10.5 percent, the lowest in U.S. history.
      They claim this budget slashes food assistance. This resolution makes
    no changes to current law, no cuts in benefits, zero.
      They claim costs will go up. We will reverse Biden's spending spree
    and bend the curve on mandatory spending that is driving our debt.
      Inflation skyrocketed 21 percent under the Biden administration. That
    is why 77 million Americans voted for President Trump, to fix the
    economy and rein in Washington's waste, fraud, abuse, and reckless
    spending.
      Let's go with facts, not fear. This resolution doesn't say the words
    ``SNAP'' or ``Medicaid'' or ``school lunch'' once.
      We are cutting waste, fraud, and abuse for people who are here
    legally. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act helped people get off SNAP, which is
    a good thing. A GAO report last year showed improper payments could be
    costing the Federal Government more than $500 billion annually.
      I am not here to fight with my colleagues on the other side of the
    aisle. I am here to fight on behalf of the American people, and that is
    exactly what we are going to continue to do.
      In the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, my friends want to scare the American
    people into thinking that this is a tax cut for billionaires to detract
    from the fact that the 2017 tax cuts under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act
    have been extremely successful.
      Let's look at what has made it a success. By every conceivable
    measure, American workers and the economy were better off. Americans
    earned bigger paychecks, unemployment for every group was at a historic
    low, and poverty dropped to its lowest level in history.
      The 2017 Trump tax cuts lowered tax rates for all Americans. In fact,
    the lowest earning individuals gained the most benefit. The bottom 20
    percent of earners, those with incomes up to $26,000, saw their Federal
    tax rate fall to the lowest point in 40 years.
      Earnings under $100,000 received an average cut of 16 percent, while
    the share of taxes paid by the top 1 percent increased. This is not
    simply a tax cut for the rich.
      Finally, if these tax cuts expire, it will devastate our Nation's
    families, workers, and small business owners. The average taxpayer
    would see a 22 percent tax hike, meaning on average they will pay
    $1,695 more in taxes; 40 million families will see their child tax
    credit cut in half; and 26 million small businesses would be hit with a
    43.4 percent top tax rate. This is over 20 points higher than what
    businesses pay in Communist China.
      Because of House Republicans and President Trump, American workers
    enjoyed the fastest wage growth in a decade. This spread to Americans
    across the income distribution with lower-wage workers experiencing 50
    percent higher wage growth than high-income workers. Higher wages led
    to a rapid growth in household income. Just 2 years after enactment of
    the tax cuts, real median household income rose by over $5,000.
      In total, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act's pro-growth policies helped
    contribute to 3 percent growth in 2018 and 2.6 percent growth in 2019,
    well above CBO's pre-Tax Cuts and Jobs Act projections of 2.2 percent
    and 1.7 percent respectively.
      Meanwhile, we have seen what Bidenflation has cost American families.
      Again, this budget resolution does not cut a single specific program
    or benefit. The budget resolution sets a framework. It is a first step
    toward delivering on the America First agenda and getting our country
    back on track.
      We will secure our border. We will rebuild the American economy. We
    will unleash American energy and safeguard our financial future.
      Madam Speaker, 77 million Americans voted for this agenda, and it is
    our job to deliver on those promises.
      I look forward to moving these bills out of the House this week. I
    ask my colleagues to join me in voting ``yes'' on the previous question
    and ``yes'' on the rule.
      The material previously referred to by Mr. McGovern is as follows:

      An Amendment to H. Res. 161 Offered By Mr. McGovern of Massachusetts

           Strike all after Sec. 2 and insert the following:
           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 concurrent
         resolution (H. Con. Res. 14) establishing the congressional
         budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2025
         and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal
         years 2026 through 2034. The first reading of the concurrent
         resolution shall be dispensed with. All points of order
         against consideration of the concurrent resolution are
         waived. General debate shall not exceed three hours, with two
         hours of general debate confined to the congressional budget
         equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking
         minority member of the Committee on the Budget or their
         respective designees and one hour of general debate on the
         subject of economic goals and policies equally divided and
         controlled by Representative Schweikert of Arizona and
         Representative Beyer of Virginia or their respective
         designees. After general debate the concurrent resolution
         shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule.
         The amendment specified in the report of the Committee on
         Rules accompanying this resolution shall be considered as
         adopted in the House and in the Committee of the Whole. The
         concurrent resolution, as amended, shall be considered as
         read. No further amendment shall be in order except the
         amendment specified in section 4 of this resolution. Such
         amendment may be offered only by Representative Gray of
         California or a designee, shall be considered as read, shall
         be debatable for 10 minutes 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 the amendment in section 4
         are waived. After the conclusion of

    [[Page H790]]

         consideration of the concurrent resolution for further
         amendment, the Committee shall rise and report the concurrent
         resolution, as amended, to the House with such further
         amendment as may have been adopted. The previous question
         shall be considered as ordered on the concurrent resolution
         and amendments thereto to adoption without intervening motion
         except amendments offered by the chairman of the Committee on
         the Budget pursuant to section 305(a)(5) of the Congressional
         Budget Act of 1974 to achieve mathematical consistency. The
         concurrent resolution shall not be subject to a demand for
         division of the question of its adoption.
           Sec. 4.The amendment referred to in section 3 is as
         follows:
           Add at the end of title V the following:

         SEC.___.POINT OF ORDER AGAINST MEDICAID CUTS TO FUND TAX
                       BREAKS FOR THE WEALTHY.

           It shall not be in order in the House of Representatives to
         consider any bill or joint resolution, or amendment thereto
         or conference report thereon, that would--
           (1) reduce tax liability for any taxable year beginning
         after 2025, compared to taxable years beginning during 2025,
         for any individual taxpayer whose net worth exceeds
         $1,000,000,000; and
           (2) reduce coverage for individuals enrolled under the
         Medicaid program under title XIX of the Social Security Act,
         shift the responsibility for funding such program or for
         coverage under such program to States, or include a net
         reduction in Federal funding for such program.

      Mrs. HOUCHIN. Madam 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. Madam 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.

                              ____________________