[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 70 (Tuesday, April 21, 2026)]
[House]
[Pages H3006-H3013]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1220
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4690, RELIABLE FEDERAL
INFRASTRUCTURE ACT; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H. RES. 1182,
EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR RURAL COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE UNITED STATES AS
STEWARDS OF THE ENVIRONMENT, MAJOR SUPPLIERS OF UNITED STATES ENERGY
RESOURCES, CRITICAL PROVIDERS OF FOOD PRODUCTION AND MANUFACTURING
CAPACITY, AND DRIVERS OF NATIONAL ECONOMIC STABILITY, AND RECOGNIZING
THE WORK OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN THE 119TH CONGRESS IN
SUPPORT OF THOSE VITAL COMMUNITIES; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R.
1897, ESA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2025; AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF
H.R. 5587, HARNESSING ENERGY AT THERMAL SOURCES ACT OF 2026
Mr. ROY. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 1189 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
[[Page H3007]]
H. Res. 1189
Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 4690) to
amend the Energy Conservation and Production Act to repeal
certain Federal building energy efficiency performance
standards, and for other purposes. All points of order
against consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment
in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on
Energy and Commerce 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 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 without intervention of any point of order to consider
in the House the resolution (H. Res. 1182) expressing support
for rural communities across the United States as stewards of
the environment, major suppliers of United States energy
resources, critical providers of food production and
manufacturing capacity, and drivers of national economic
stability, and recognizing the work of the House of
Representatives in the 119th Congress in support of those
vital communities. The resolution shall be considered as
read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on
the resolution and preamble to adoption without intervening
motion or demand for division of the question except 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.
Sec. 3. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in
order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 1897) to amend
the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to optimize conservation
through resource prioritization, incentivize wildlife
conservation on private lands, provide for greater incentives
to recover listed species, create greater transparency and
accountability in recovering listed species, streamline the
permitting process, eliminate barriers to conservation, and
restore congressional intent. All points of order against
consideration of the bill are waived. In lieu of the
amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the
Committee on Natural Resources now printed in the bill, an
amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the
text of Rules Committee Print 119-23 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 Natural Resources or their
respective designees; and (2) 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. 5587) to amend
the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 to waive the requirement for
a Federal drilling permit for certain activities, to exempt
certain activities from the requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and for other purposes. All
points of order against consideration of the bill are waived.
The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by
the Committee on Natural Resources 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 Natural Resources or their
respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 1
hour.
Mr. ROY. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Neguse),
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. ROY. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 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 Texas?
There was no objection.
Mr. ROY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, last night, the Rules Committee met and produced a
rule providing for consideration of four pieces of legislation.
The rule provides for consideration of H. Res. 1182, expressing
support for rural communities across the United States, under a closed
rule, with 1 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.
The rule further provides for consideration of H.R. 4690, the
Reliable Federal Infrastructure Act, under a closed rule, with 1 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 provides for one motion to recommit.
The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 5587, the HEATS Act,
under a closed rule with 1 hour of debate equally divided and
controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on
Natural Resources or their respective designees and provides for one
motion to recommit.
The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 1897, the ESA
Amendments Act, under a closed rule with 1 hour of debate equally
divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the
Committee on Natural Resources or their respective designees and
provides for one motion to recommit.
Now, Madam Speaker, as the House of Representatives works to deliver
on critical issues for the American people, we urge our colleagues to
pass this suite of bills that I just described.
As I already talked about, we have a resolution to support our
Nation's rural communities. We have legislation to unlock geothermal
energy. We have legislation to repeal burdensome energy mandates on
Federal buildings, and we have a fix to the Endangered Species Act.
Now, I anticipate some of the arguments my colleagues on the other
side of the aisle will make, and I would just note something that is
critically important, this is going to raise issues about why we are
bringing up a resolution, for example, with regard to support for our
rural communities.
The fact is, if you look at what has been happening over the last 16
months, you will see that the Republican House of Representatives has
led on numerous issues, issue after issue, month after month.
We started this Congress by passing legislation, the Laken Riley Act,
to ensure that we can have adequate and full enforcement by ICE and by
our Border Patrol men and women who are securing our country, by
improving that law to ensure that people can be adequately removed.
Importantly, it included the sue act which will allow States, such as
my home State of Texas, to be able to defend our homes by suing the
Federal Government when it fails to secure the border, as occurred
under the previous President and the previous Secretary of Homeland
Security.
Fast-forward to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, a piece of
legislation that made permanent tax rates so that we can have growth
and economic opportunity for the American people, lower taxes for
millions of Americans to ensure that we can actually grow this economy
and compete worldwide.
We had legislation in that bill that removed some of the onerous
subsidies that were undermining reliable energy in Texas and around the
country with the green new scam subsidies that were making energy more
expensive for the American people.
We had reforms to our programs, whether it was Medicaid or whether we
are talking about food stamps. By the way, those reforms are probably
going to make it easier for us to move a farm bill in the coming weeks.
We had significant resources that were put aside for our defense, to
modernize our military after it languished under the previous
administration, and we had language that is enabling us to fund ICE and
Border Patrol right now, which brings me to my final point.
What we have been able to pass has been hitting a wall, a wall in the
Senate, of Democrats who refuse to do the job the American people sent
us here to do. We had over 40 days of shutdown in the fall, 40 days
where we had to deal with the lack of pay and resources for the people
who defend our country, including TSA at airports. We are currently in
over 60 days of shutdown of
[[Page H3008]]
our Homeland Security operations, which we are using funds that we had
the foresight to put forward to be able to use to backfill in order to
keep operations going to fund Border Patrol and ICE, to fund TSA, to
fund the Coast Guard, and to fund FEMA when our colleagues on the other
side of the aisle refused to do it. This is what we are dealing with
every single day in the United States Congress.
Consequently, yes, we are going to be able to tell the American
people and have a resolution for the people in rural communities, that
we are passing legislation that benefits them, that enables them to
have more affordable energy, that enables them to be able to have lower
taxes, and to be able to provide better homes for their families.
What we aren't going to do is allow Democrats to be able to get past
or allow them to get away with shutting down our ability to do our job
in this country, and that is precisely what they have been doing.
We are going to move legislation this week that is going to provide
greater energy resources by harnessing energy and thermal sources. We
are eliminating permitting restrictions and making it easier to do
that.
We are going to put forward the Reliable Federal Infrastructure Act,
where we have got barriers to our ability to have reliable energy to
provide energy for our Federal buildings, and the ESA Amendments Act,
which makes dramatically needed and necessary improvements to the
Endangered Species Act, which has been standing in the way of our
ability to provide energy and to provide greater freedom for the
American people.
Madam Speaker, the Republican leadership and the Republican
Conference in this House of Representatives have been fighting to
deliver for the American people, and we have been obstructed by two
things: our colleagues on the other side of the aisle and Democrats in
the Senate who are using an artificial 60-vote threshold to deny the
American people the ability for us to have the changes that they sent
us here to Washington to do.
We are going to continue to go down this road. This week is another
step in going down this road, and that is why I am going to be urging
my colleagues to support this rule and to support the legislation that
we put forward under the rule.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let me first just say congratulations to my colleague from Texas (Mr.
Roy) for congratulating himself. It is a special thing here in the
House of Representatives. Apparently, if you work hard enough, you can
introduce a resolution congratulating yourself and your colleagues for
the resolutions or the bills that you have passed. It is a
participation trophy, a Mike Johnson participation trophy, that my
colleague from Texas is a proud recipient of along with the other
members of the House Republican Conference.
Madam Speaker, it has been 15 months now, 15 months since this
Republican majority and the President were elected into office. For
nearly a year and a half, Republicans have presided over what is now
widely considered to be one of the least productive Congresses in the
modern history of our country.
{time} 1230
Since President Trump took office, only 86 pieces of legislation have
been signed into law. Of course, of those 86, many bills have harmed
tragically, profoundly the American public.
Fifteen million Americans have lost access to health insurance since
President Trump took office. Millions of Americans are going hungry
because of lost SNAP benefits that my colleagues are so proud to have
enacted. The country is now involved in yet another deeply unpopular
war in the Middle East.
President Trump campaigned on lowering gas prices and no new wars, he
said. Of course, that couldn't have been further from the truth.
Last week I stood in this exact same spot and I posed a very simple
question, Madam Speaker: Would Republicans continue to waste our time
on self-congratulatory, commemorative, meaningless resolutions,
saluting themselves, applauding themselves?
Apparently, that was a rhetorical question. We have our answer. The
answer is H. Res. 1182. I encourage everyone watching to go online and
read the resolution that we are here to debate this week, ``recognizing
the work of the House of Representatives in the 119th Congress.''
This is what Republicans choose to spend their time on: resolutions
congratulating themselves, giving themselves a pat on the back,
participation trophies. It is an utter absurd waste of time, and it is
illogical.
It is nonsensical that Republicans would choose to spend their time
for the second week in a row on a resolution that does nothing, changes
nothing, accomplishes nothing, but congratulating themselves for what
they would describe as a job well done.
They have the audacity to suggest that they are supporting rural
communities. I represent a district that is one-third rural. Let me
tell you, families are struggling in northern and western Colorado as a
result of the policies that the Republican Conference have implemented,
as a result of President Trump's reckless and extreme agenda.
It is no wonder that President Trump is deeply unpopular, the most
unpopular President in the modern history of our country.
I simply say to you, Madam Speaker, that I suspect we will have some
debate about the underlying bills that my colleagues have introduced
and are asking this august Chamber to consider, bills that weaken a
variety of different environmental standards, bills that weaken
protections for endangered species. They are not the kind of matters
that are coming up at my townhalls in Colorado. Perhaps my colleague
from Texas has a different experience in his district.
What I am confident of is that no citizen in our country, no
Republican--I am not talking about the politicians here in Washington,
D.C. I am talking about their voters--would think that it would be a
prudent use of our time to pass self-congratulatory resolutions.
Honestly, I hope if there are folks watching, Republicans watching
this--I understand we will have principled disagreements about a wide
variety of policy matters and proposals that this House ought to
consider, but just understand something: They are squandering their
majority.
They are not here debating immigration or gas prices or healthcare
costs or any number of priorities. They are not here debating
legislation that, frankly, I am likely to oppose, but nonetheless would
be legislation and priorities that Republican voters might care about.
They are not here debating that. We are here wasting time handing out
another participation trophy to the 218 Members of the House Republican
Conference.
Madam Speaker, I ask my friend, my colleague on the other side of the
aisle, it may just be easier next time to put this into a press
release. Put it into a letter. We will help you and that way we can get
back to the business of the House.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I note my colleague invoked that we could be down here
debating, for example, immigration. Well, this Republican House has
stood up to defend our borders and defend this President and defend
this administration's active enforcement of our laws at the border of
the United States in the face of willful resistance by Democrats who
refuse to fund it.
That is the actual truth. We know this because we are now in day 63
or something to that effect or higher than 60 days of a shutdown of the
Department of Homeland Security after enduring over 40 days shutdown in
the fall.
Republicans are having to move money around in order to pay our men
and women in Border Patrol and ICE so that they can do their job and be
able to fund TSA, FEMA, and the Coast Guard.
My colleagues on the other side of the aisle say we keep offering
amendments and bills to fund it. No. They have rejected our bills to
fund the entirety of the Department of Homeland Security because they
are trying to keep it hostage for political purposes.
[[Page H3009]]
This Republican Congress, as I said, passed the Laken Riley Act. This
Republican Congress, as I said, passed funds in the big, beautiful bill
last summer to ensure that we can secure the border of the United
States. This Republican Congress has been backing up the President and
Department of Homeland Security in doing the job that Joe Biden and
Alejandro Mayorkas would not do.
Now, we see the ramifications of this in continuation as we see
Americans losing their lives while people are in our country who should
not be. There was a woman in Florida, a mother, who walked out of the
convenience store because her car was being destroyed by a Haitian who
had come here and was operating under a temporary program. This
individual bludgeoned this American to death, this mother, with a
hammer in front of the convenience store, and I am met with utter
silence from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. I am met
with utter silence while we tried to ensure that we fund the men and
women responsible for securing us against these individuals.
Now we are having to figure out how to backdoor find a way to fund
these important, core constitutional responsibilities in defending the
United States of America because our Democratic colleagues refuse to do
it. They refuse and are willing to create chaos for the American people
and endanger the American people for crass political purposes.
The American people observe this. They know this. They see what we
are doing and, yes, we are going to move important legislation this
week, critical legislation this week to do what our Democratic
colleagues also do not want to do: free up the American entrepreneur to
produce energy for the American people. We are getting barriers and
regulations out of the way. We are getting barriers and regulations,
obstacles that stand in the way of people who actually know how to
produce energy.
As a Texan, I know what that looks like. I have had to fight and deal
with the abuse of the Endangered Species Act to prevent the ability of
us to be able to have frac sand and to be able to go out and produce
the energy and the oil and gas that we need, that right now is
providing the independence that gives us the freedom to not be reliant
on people around the world.
That is what we are doing this week. That is what we have been doing
for the last 16 months. There is one obstacle for the American people's
prosperity, and that is the Democratic Party.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1240
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, first, I will say with respect to the shutdown of DHS,
I find it exceedingly rich that my colleague would say what he said
when, last night, he voted against an amendment in the Rules Committee
that would have enabled this body to consider the bill that passed the
United States Senate twice on a unanimous basis to fund the Department
of Homeland Security.
Ted Cruz didn't object. Mike Lee didn't object. No Member of the
United States Senate objected to that bill. If it were put on the floor
for a vote, it would pass with an overwhelming two-thirds majority
today.
He knows it. You know it, Madam Speaker. So, spare me these
complaints that somehow Democrats are responsible. It is contradicted
by the clear facts and procedural history.
Madam Speaker, I will also say, with all respect to my colleague,
that the gentleman covered a lot of topics: immigration, Joe Biden, gas
prices, and Joe Biden again. What is fascinating is that the resolution
that the gentleman has offered, or, rather, that he is being asked to
debate today, has nothing to do with any of it.
``Resolved, That the House of Representatives, through policies . . .
has demonstrated support for the prosperity and economic growth of the
United States.'' They are saluting themselves. What are we doing here?
Again, I understand that the gentleman from Texas does not decide
what bills we debate on the floor, so I am talking to Speaker Johnson.
If he wanted to, he could put a bill on the floor today to pay TSA
agents. He could put a bill on the floor regarding healthcare costs. We
could spend all week debating hundreds of bills that have been
introduced by Democratic Members and Republican Members. He has decided
to force the House to vote on this press release instead for the second
time.
What is this obsession with the House recognizing House Republicans?
We get it. They are proud of themselves. Everyone understands that. Can
we move on?
That, to me, is the absurdity of what we are debating here on the
floor today. I am hopeful that this will be the last week, but I am not
optimistic.
Last week, I thought it was a joke. I said that maybe next week, we
will debate a resolution congratulating House Republicans for passing
the congratulatory resolution that they passed last week. Apparently,
that was not a joke.
If the Speaker is listening, I didn't mean that literally. I think we
should stop with the self-congratulatory resolutions so that Mr. Roy
and I can actually debate the underlying policies and the challenges
that are facing the country.
Yet, this is not that.
Madam Speaker, before I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr.
Tran), I just will explain that if we defeat the previous question, I
intend to offer an amendment to the rule to adopt the Senate amendment
to H.R. 7147, which was and is the bipartisan Senate compromise bill
that I just referenced a few moments ago that the Senate unanimously
passed twice now.
I understand Mr. Roy is vehemently against that bill. I get it. I
understand that he believes that the bill that Mike Lee and Ted Cruz
didn't object to doesn't satisfy his ideological goals. I understand
that.
Yet, I suspect that the vast majority of the Republican Conference
would pass that bill today if we had an opportunity to. The good news
is that we hope to create that opportunity by ultimately defeating the
previous question and enabling the House to be able to consider that
bill.
Spare us more debates on commemorative resolutions, and let's fund
the government.
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 Colorado?
There was no objection.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from California (Mr. Tran).
Mr. TRAN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Colorado for
yielding.
Madam Speaker, the Department of Homeland Security has been shut down
for 66 days, the longest shutdown in history. Yet, this shutdown is
solely the choice of the House majority, my Republican colleagues.
Madam Speaker, 1 month ago, the Senate passed a bill that funded TSA
agents responsible for security at our airports, the cybersecurity
officers who protect us from online threats, the servicemembers in our
Coast Guard, and FEMA disaster assistance as we get closer to hurricane
and wildfire seasons.
This bill will also give us time to continue negotiating much-needed
reforms to ICE and border protection. Americans from New York to
Minneapolis to L.A. have watched as their neighbors have been wrongly
arrested, beaten, and even killed in broad daylight.
ICE agents need to be held accountable and focus on deporting violent
criminals, not creating terror in our schools, hospitals, or our places
of worship.
While the Senate continues to make progress, my Republican colleagues
have been sitting on their hands, ignoring the fears and suffering of
our constituents.
How does that even serve the American people? Being stubborn in the
face of terror does not serve the American people.
It is past time for this body to take action to fund our public
safety infrastructure and get back to work for the people. Let's pass
this DHS funding bill, and I urge all of my colleagues to
[[Page H3010]]
defeat the previous question so that we can bring it to the floor.
Mr. ROY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I note that there are three pieces of legislation that
are coming to the floor that will make meaningful differences for the
American people.
The Harnessing Energy At Thermal Sources Act is adding to a laundry
list of things that we have done over the last 15 or 16 months to try
to free up energy production in the United States. It amends the
Geothermal Steam Act to streamline the permitting processes. A constant
theme is the barriers to the American people being able to go out
through their entrepreneurial spirit and produce energy that is
affordable. In many instances, it makes dramatic improvements in terms
of its cleanliness.
Currently, geothermal operators on non-Federal land that produces any
quantity of Federal resources, like federally owned mineral estates,
must comply with permitting, even if the Federal share of the mineral
estate is trivial.
This would alleviate that burden and others by clarifying that the
geothermal exploration or production on non-Federal lands is not
subject to NEPA, the ESA, or the National Historic Preservation Act
permitting processes. It doesn't change anything specific to our
ability to produce them and the royalty structures, and it keeps in
place important safeguards while allowing geothermal to be built out.
Madam Speaker, these are important, important changes for the people
out there trying to produce them. We act like this is trivial. We act
like this isn't a big deal for the ability of the American people to
have affordable energy and for our business leaders to be able to go
out and produce alternative energy sources.
The Reliable Federal Infrastructure Act repeals a 2007 mandate that
Federal buildings reduce their use of fossil fuels by 2030 by, I think,
90 percent. These mandates came at a time when we thought that the
United States would run out of oil.
Obviously, we had the shale revolution. We have the ability to be
able to produce significant cleaner energy in the production of natural
gas. We need reliable energy to be able to keep our buildings
operating.
An overreliance on subsidized, unreliable wind and solar, including
in my home State of Texas, has created difficulties with having
reliability on the grid and, in many instances, has not produced any of
the so-called improvements in terms of green energy that were promised.
We want to reduce those barriers, reduce the burdens, and be able to
ensure that we are able to proceed.
Madam Speaker, the final point is the ESA Amendments Act of 2025. The
ESA Amendments Act of 2025 makes the first major reform to the broken
Endangered Species Act.
Again, as I mentioned before, working with businesses in Texas, we
have had numerous issues where that has been a major barrier to our
ability to be able to get energy in production.
In the 50 years since the ESA was signed, only 3 percent of the
listed species have ever recovered. It doesn't mean that we shouldn't
be working and finding ways to make sure that we can protect certain
species, but we often are listing certain species that aren't going to
have a chance of recovery and that are actually used as a weapon and a
tool of the left to stop the ability of us to be able to produce
affordable energy for the American people.
{time} 1250
The American people sit at home wondering why they can't afford goods
and services, can't afford cars, can't afford energy, can't afford to
be able to pay for their families. It is almost always tied back to the
regulatory state and the burdens placed upon them by this body and by
bureaucrats in this town.
What we have been trying to do for the last 16 months is unwind even
just a fraction of those burdens. Yet we are met with constant
resistance by our colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
I know that we talk about gas prices and how they are at a point
right now where we all want them to go down as we are dealing with the
conflict with Iran, but they were $6 a gallon nationally under the
previous administration. Now they are somewhere around $4 a gallon, and
we want them to go down. We certainly can do that.
The best way to do that is to have massive production of oil and gas
in the United States. We have tankers that are coming to the United
States to get oil and gas. We have the ability to produce oil and gas
if we get the regulatory climate such that they can do it, and that is
what we are trying to do with this legislation.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, a lot to respond to. Apparently, my colleague from
Texas wants the American people to believe that the reason they are
paying astronomically high prices for gas is because the protections
for bald eagles and humpback whales are too strong; that we need to
weaken protections for endangered species, and lo and behold, we do
that, gas prices will drop. It has nothing to do with the war in Iran.
It couldn't possibly be connected to the unconstitutional war that the
President has decided to wage. It must be the protections for bald
eagles. I am sure that is the case.
Give me a break. The American people know better.
They have the audacity to lecture the House, lecture their colleagues
on the other side of the aisle about affordability when, right now,
everything is getting more expensive.
For families back home in Colorado, the families that I am privileged
to represent, times are tough. Costs for everything are going up.
Health insurance, car insurance, appliances, gasoline, you name it, the
price is going up.
I am sure it will come as great solace to those families that House
Republicans have decided this week that the best way to address it is
to pass a resolution congratulating themselves for the work that they
have done. I am sure that is going to solve the problem. Republicans
are on the case.
Again, with all respect to my colleague, I think he has been given an
impossible assignment today: to defend that resolution. I suppose that
is why he focused on some of the other bills that we are considering
today, because that resolution is indefensible.
I suspect my Republican colleagues aren't necessarily watching today.
I think me and my colleague from Texas are the only two Members of
Congress in this Chamber. Nobody else is here--oh, of course, the
Speaker as well--three Members. There is nobody else who will be here
to debate this resolution.
I hope that some of my Republican colleagues, perhaps, may watch some
of this and maybe decide tomorrow to vote against the rule because
voting for the rule is an endorsement of Speaker Johnson's strategy to
waste everyone's time, to waste our time, and to waste your time, and
fundamentally, more than anything else, to waste the American people's
time when there are real issues of consequence that merit our
attention, our scrutiny, our inquiry, and our work.
The best way to stop this Chamber from debating meaningless and
needless self-congratulatory resolutions is for a few Republicans to
vote against the rule and to suggest that maybe there are some other
issues that they would like this body to consider.
I hear a lot--you see all of this on social media all the time--my
Republican colleagues who will demand votes on this legislation and
that legislation, a laundry list of Republican priorities, none of
which the House is considering, none of it. I guess we will find out,
but I look forward to--I don't look forward, actually. I bemoan the
fact. I suspect maybe Mr. McGovern will be managing that rule next week
when we do the congratulatory resolution on the resolution for the last
resolution. We will have someone else debate that one because I suspect
Mr. Roy and I will have grown tired of engaging in this debate.
In any event, Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROY. May I inquire as to how much time each side has remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas has 15 minutes
remaining.
Mr. ROY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
[[Page H3011]]
Madam Speaker, I would note to my colleague from Colorado that the
previous administration racked up a rather undistinguished list of
antireliable energy policies and results. President Biden closed the
Keystone XL pipeline on day one and rejoined the Paris Climate Accords,
handicapping our industry.
In the final days of the administration, he used the stroke of a pen
to grow a national monument by 85 percent and closed off thousands of
acres to reliable energy production.
He closed off the Gulf of America to new oil and gas leasing. It is a
decision thankfully reversed in the Big Beautiful Bill Act last summer.
He singlehandedly paused the exportation of liquefied natural gas,
recognizing that LNG has the ability to free up the rest of the world
from reliance on numerous of our enemies around the globe, and to
create wealth and jobs and opportunities in the United States.
Biden's Department of Commerce sought to limit how fast boats could
go in certain waters because of the Endangered Species Act. NOAA also
abused the Endangered Species Act to deny oil leases.
Meanwhile, we have bills on the floor this week to try to reverse
those issues. We have been dedicated to passing energy reform for the
last 16 months. Just last week, we sent a number of bills to reform the
Clean Air Act. There is issue after issue, some of which are recounted
in the resolution the gentleman seems so hung up on spending time
worrying about, when we have bill after bill that we are passing, some
of which have become law and passed through the Senate and gotten to
the President, but many of which are hung up by a Democratic Senate
obstructionist that has the inability to actually move anything because
of an artificial 60-vote threshold.
That is the simple reality. We are being hamstrung by resistance to
our ability to deliver on the things that the American people sent us
here to deliver upon.
The gentleman brought up the issue with respect to, I suppose, the
motion to recommit that would be offered and that was offered as an
amendment last night in committee. I wholly recognize that, yes, I
opposed that amendment and have opposed it before because I do not
believe that we should fund a Department of Homeland Security
specifically isolating and pulling out Border Patrol and ICE. I just
don't believe we should do that. I think it is wrong. I think we are
setting a bad precedent. I think we are setting up a structure in which
we are going to start saying we are going to have X pieces of these
important--by the way, these are core functions that defend our way of
life, defend our community, and defend our country. We can have debates
about their policies. I understand that my colleagues want to add
riders and want to add changes and impact policies attached to the
funding, but we are setting a terrible precedent by going down the road
of saying we are going to carve out and say that we are not going to
fund Border Patrol and ICE, which is the resistance. The American
people understand that, because we have an obligation to fund all of
the Department of Homeland Security. I believe that, and I think that
is something that we should do. Whether we do that this way or whether
we have to backdoor it through reconciliation, I am not sure I care. I
think we should do it through appropriations, but I don't believe we
ought to isolate it. We will see what the Senate does. We will see what
the House does.
I am going to continue to stand up on the principle that Border
Patrol and ICE should be funded fully through the appropriations
process as the entire Department of Homeland Security should, whether
it is FEMA, TSA, and every other function like Coast Guard, but that we
should do it together: debate the policy, offer amendments on it, and
move on.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, first and foremost, I would just say the approach that
my friend from Texas describes is wrong and imprudent and whatever
adjectives he might characterize it as. That is the approach that
Senate Republicans took, so the argument is best made to your
colleagues in the upper Chamber. Republicans control the Senate, not
Democrats. They passed that bill. They sent it here to the House, not
once, but twice.
{time} 1300
I understand that my colleague from Texas opposes that bill, and he
has explained the reasons why he opposes it. I believe, as I said
previously, that the vast majority of this House would vote in favor of
that bill, which is why it ought to come up for an up-or-down vote. Let
the chips fall where they may, no pun intended.
I will say this, Madam Speaker: I have been keeping meticulous count.
I have a little, I guess you could call it, Biden bingo card here. I
like to keep track. My colleague from Texas has mentioned Biden six
times, six times and counting, in the last couple minutes.
I get it. I understand. He does not like Joe Biden. I understand. The
message is received. Joe Biden isn't President anymore. Republicans
have been in charge for 16 months. Republicans have had the majority
for 16 months. Republicans have had complete control in Washington, the
Senate, the Presidency.
What do Republicans have to show for it? Republicans have meaningless
resolutions, whereas clause after whereas clause: We are wonderful. We
have passed this resolution. We passed this bill. We are frustrated
that some Senate Democrats have opposed it.
That is it.
This is 16 months of work.
Again, I would just say to you: I certainly can say very confidently
that citizens in our country are not satisfied or pleased or heartened
by the way in which this body is functioning. I think my colleague from
Texas knows that too.
For the Republican voters out there, for those who believe in the
House Republican Conference's policies or, you know, perhaps share
their worldview, share their ideology, I am here to tell you they are
not pursuing that agenda either. It is not that I disagree in this
instance with the substance of what they are pursuing; it is that they
are not pursuing any substance; it is that we are just wasting time.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would note that the reason that the former President's name comes
up is because the lingering impacts of the previous administration
continue. I mean, I already mentioned you have got the mother in
Florida, but I can mention dozens and hundreds of examples of American
citizens that have died as a result of people who were let in under the
previous administration's policies, people who have died here today in
America, policies we are trying to reverse and that we are trying to
enforce against.
The lingering effects are fairly profound. I can assure you that the
American citizens getting killed at the hands of criminals allowed into
our country by the previous administration do not take solace in the
fact that we now have a new administration, yet that administration is
being hamstrung by virtue of my colleagues on the other side of the
aisle's unwillingness to fund the very entities that try to stop the
danger and the attacks on the American people.
That is what this is all about. That is what this all boils down to.
Again, I can assure you that the people I represent, the people I
talk to across the State of Texas, are thrilled with tax cuts. They are
thrilled with regulatory relief. They are thrilled with our actions in
Venezuela. They are thrilled that we are reestablishing our strength in
the Western Hemisphere and around the globe. They are thrilled that we
are standing up to the cartels. They are thrilled that we designated
the cartels as terrorists. They are thrilled that we stopped the flow
at the border. They are thrilled that we have been enforcing the law
and removing dangerous aliens. They are thrilled that our military has
the highest recruitment and the highest enlistment in a generation
because people actually believe in our country again. They are thrilled
in the direction that this administration and this Congress wants to
go, and they recognize that my colleagues on the other side of the
aisle are throwing up barrier after barrier
[[Page H3012]]
after barrier to be able to carry out the fundamental function of
government, which is to defend the United States, defend our border,
and do our job.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Again, my colleague from Texas has spoken with great passion, great
passion about any number of issues and policies that he favors and he
would like to see accomplished. None of that has anything to do with
the resolution that we are debating today. We might as well just--we
can set aside a different time for Mr. Roy and I to engage in that
debate.
Today, we are debating the resolution that is before us, a resolution
that does nothing, achieves nothing, and changes nothing. As I said, it
is a participation trophy.
I wish that I would have proposed perhaps a motion to recommit that
would maybe change the name of this resolution to the participation
trophy. We will have to think of that for next week. I have no doubt I
will have another opportunity because I imagine that Speaker Johnson is
going to keep this going for the next 7 months.
I am very curious about what participation trophy House Republicans
intend to hand out to themselves next week. This week's was--I think
rural America was the caveat that they added. Last week's was the big,
beautiful bill--or not the big, beautiful bill. That is what Mr. Roy
called it today. They changed it last week to the working families bill
or something to that effect.
So anyway, we will have to see. I don't know. Maybe next week's
resolution will be a commemorative resolution to congratulate House
Republicans on the 14-day FISA extension that they passed, and we can
spend a half an hour talking about all the ways that House Republicans
have changed the country for the better. They are so desperate to
convince Americans that they decided that a House resolution is a tool
for them to make that case.
Again, there are better ways, Mr. Speaker, to spend this body's time.
I can't imagine that our Framers--that James Madison would have
thought that this is how the House of Representatives would be
functioning 250 years later. I can't possibly believe that.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I regret that our time for debate has come to a close. I
will note, as I did last week, the fact that not a single member of the
House Republican Conference is willing to come down to the floor and
debate in support of these bills is telling. It tells you all you need
to know. For those that are watching in the gallery and all of those
who might be watching from home on C-SPAN, there are 218 members of the
House Republican Conference, 218. None of them, save for my colleague
from Texas, were willing to come to the floor to speak in support of
the resolution congratulating themselves for the work that they have
done this year, not one.
What is even more fascinating, because, of course, as you know, Mr.
Speaker, this resolution is a long resolution, four or five pages,
whereas clause after whereas clause recounting all of the bills and the
resolutions that were passed last spring and last fall and last summer,
and this winter, they gave this resolution to the newest member of the
House Republican Conference. He has been in Congress for like 6 days, I
think. He was sworn in last Tuesday or Wednesday.
I get it. I understand why they gave this resolution to the new guy.
You know, it is a tough assignment to say your first bill is going to
be a bill congratulating the rest of us for a job well done. That is a
tough assignment.
Mr. Speaker, rural America is struggling. I know I don't need to tell
you that. Rural farmers in my State are struggling. The cost of
everything is going up. Trump's burdensome tariffs forced costs to
skyrocket a year ago.
In 2025, 15,000 farms closed, 15,000 farms. The rate of bankruptcy
for America's farmers has never been higher. It has never been higher.
I challenge any of my Republican colleagues, those who, like me,
represent rural communities and farmers and ranchers, I challenge them
to go take this resolution to their constituents. Ask them whether they
think that this House deserves applause and plaudits and credit and
congratulations for a job well done.
{time} 1310
I am pretty sure I know the answer. I urge my colleagues, if they,
like me, are sick and tired of this place wasting time functioning in
this dysfunctional way, then oppose the previous question, oppose the
rule, oppose the underlying bills, and join us so that we can get back
to the serious issues that face the American people.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I would note that we are talking about rural America.
Last summer, when we passed the largest tax savings for the American
people in history, it included significant savings with respect to the
death tax that cripples American farmers, and not a single one of my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle supported that.
We advanced that legislation. We advanced that tax reduction so that
American farmers can pass down their farms to the next generation
without having to give it up because of the burden of Federal
Government.
My colleague invoked the Founders, that they couldn't imagine we
would be here having this discussion. I, in fact, think that the
Founders would be quite pleased to see us on the floor reversing the
regulatory state and reversing the burdens being placed on the American
people that are limiting their ability to do what God gave them the
ability to do.
That is what we are doing with respect to getting these barriers in
the Endangered Species Act: the energy mandates on the Federal
buildings, putting us into unreliable power rather than reliable power,
and allowing ourselves to have geothermal production without barriers
that stand in the way of the American people doing what they do best.
That is absolutely what the Founders would have envisioned us doing
on the floor of the House of Representatives. I am proud to be doing
that. I am proud of what we have been doing the last 16 months.
As I said before, the people whom I talk to when I go home to Texas
are thrilled that our border is secure. They are thrilled our
enlistments are up with our military. They are thrilled we are standing
up to cartels. They are thrilled we are removing bad actors in this
country.
They are thrilled we are removing the bureaucratic state. They are
thrilled we are firing Federal bureaucrats. They are thrilled we held
flat spending for discretionary spending for the last 3 years. They are
thrilled that we have tried to make sure that we have money aside to be
able to do what our Democratic colleagues refuse to do.
Today, I urge adoption of this rule, a rule to put forth legislation
that will help the American people in the face of opposition from my
colleagues here.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
The material previously referred to by Mr. Neguse is as follows:
An Amendment To H. Res. 1189 Offered By Mr. Neguse of Colorado
At the end of the resolution, add the following:
Sec. 5. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the
House shall take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R.
7147) making further consolidated appropriations for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2026, and for other
purposes, with the Senate amendment thereto, and consider in
the House, without intervention of any point of order, a
motion that the House recede from its amendment and concur in
the Senate amendment. The Senate amendment and the motion
shall be considered as read. The motion shall be debatable
for one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and
ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or
their respective designees. The previous question shall be
considered as ordered on the motion to its adoption without
intervening motion.
Sec. 6. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX and clause 8 of rule XX
shall not apply to the consideration of the motion.
Sec. 7. The Speaker is directed to sign the enrolled bill
no later than one calendar day after adoption, and the Clerk
is directed to present the bill to the President immediately
upon signature by the Senate President.
[[Page H3013]]
Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move
the previous question on the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Wied). 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. NEGUSE. 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 will be postponed.
____________________