Fiscal Year 2027 Legislative Branch Bill

Subcommittee will be in order. Welcome to the subcommittee markup of the fiscal year 2027 Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill. So welcome Chairman Cole, Ranking Member DeLauro, and Ranking Member Meng. Not only are we marking 250 impressive years for our country, but we're also marking a remarkable recovery that has been ushered in since President Trump returned to office. Here in Congress, we're once again continuing our work of improving and moving appropriations bills that meet the needs of the American people and that support the administration's efforts. That's why I'm proud to present the fiscal year 2027 CJS legislation, which carries on our work of right-sizing federal government to ensure Washington, D.C. is working on behalf of our citizens and not against them. The bill before us today provides a total of discretionary allocation of 77.341 billion, a $670 million decrease in spending below the fiscal year 2026 enacted level. To support President Trump's fight against fraud, the bill provides $30 million to the Department of Justice's new National Fraud Enforcement Division. With this funding, malicious actors that seek to defraud American citizens and their hard-earned money will be held accountable. No longer will these fraudsters operate in the shadows. Unfortunately, fentanyl and other opioids continue to ravage our communities and neighborhoods. To counter this devastation, this bill increases funding for the DEA within Department of Justice. I applaud DEA for taking down multiple cartel leaders, and with the funding provided in this bill, DEA's efforts will be strongly supported moving forward. Additionally, this bill also includes strong funding for our federal law enforcement components, which are working to secure our nation from threats. The fiscal year 2027 bill also strongly supports the men and women in blue that protect our families by increasing funding for state and local law enforcement. From increased funding levels for the Byrne JAG formula program to the COPS hiring program, the fiscal year 2027 legislation follows President Trump's example of putting our law enforcement first. Additionally, the 27 bill continues to bolster programs that support everyday Americans, including strong funding for more accurate weather forecasting and alerts and trade practices that herein benefit our communities. To ensure America is the leader in space exploration, the 27 CJS bill also maintains strong funding levels for NASA. With the recent success of Artemis II, it's a critical time to invest in human space exploration and ensure that American astronauts are the first to return to the moon. With its sights on Mars, NASA will lead the way to the next frontier and safeguard our national security by ensuring America maintains a competitive advantage over China. The legislation also protects and reinforces constitutional rights such as the Second Amendment by reining in and refocusing the ATF and fully supporting DOJ's new Second Amendment section. Overall, the provisions and funding levels in the fiscal year 2027 bill focus resources on protecting our families, our neighborhoods, and our nation. I want to thank all of the subcommittee members for their participation in budget hearings these past few weeks, including one this past Monday. Our subcommittee has been busy. I also want to thank Ranking Member Meng for her continued partnership over the last few months. Additionally, I would like to acknowledge Chairman Cole for his skilled leadership, and I might add, very successful leadership. Navigating 12 bills through committee is no easy task, and Chairman Cole does it with expertise. Also want to thank Ranking Member DeLauro for her determined advocacy, and finally, thanks to both the majority and minority staff for assisting with the development and production of this year's bill. I now recognize Ranking Member Meng for any opening remarks.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I know that you and I share many of the same priorities, however, I must strongly oppose this appropriations bill. It turns its back on struggling communities and hardworking Americans, weakens our ability to fight crime, and jeopardizes our nation's competitive edge. I want to be clear, the billions of dollars in cuts in this bill are not just numbers on a page, they are choices, and they are the wrong choices. As written, this bill abandons our fundamental responsibility to keep Americans safe and our economy strong. At a time when Americans are worried about gun violence and hate crimes, this bill delivers a devastating blow to law enforcement agencies and programs that protect them. We can't claim to prioritize public safety while simultaneously guting the agency responsible for policing illegal firearms. Yet the bill before us today decimates funding for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which would lose more than 1,000 personnel who work with our state and local law enforcement to keep illegal guns off our streets, catch dangerous criminals, and prevent gun crimes. This bill also contains numerous policy riders that would make it more difficult to keep dangerous guns out of the hands of criminals and more difficult for local law enforcement to quickly trace many of the guns that are found at crime scenes. The legislation before us today leaves our communities more vulnerable to violence by zeroing out community violence intervention and prevention grants, as well as hate crime prevention and prosecution grants. And the Justice Department's Community Relations Service, which for more than 60 years has worked honorably to help mediate and end community conflicts across our country, is eliminated. I believe that all of this is the wrong approach for the CJS appropriations bill. We should also be doing much, much more to address the cost of living crisis that is hurting American families. But this bill sharply cuts funding for the agencies and programs that create jobs, boost American small businesses, and advance our economy. Economic Development Administration grants are cut by 36 percent, abandoning rural and distressed communities desperately in need of economic help and well-paying jobs. The bill slashes funding for the Minority Business Development Agency, taking away opportunities from American entrepreneurs. It cuts funding for the International Trade Administration by nearly 25 percent, greatly weakening opportunities to help American businesses expand exports and fight unfair trade practices by other countries. Moreover, the Legal Services Corporation, which provides basic civil legal assistance to the poorest American families, seniors, and veterans, is cut by more than half. Under this funding level, nearly three million fewer people will receive help with their legal problems, including 6,400 in my district alone. This bill abandons our most vulnerable constituents who can't afford a lawyer when they're facing eviction, seeking safety from domestic violence, or are denied benefits that they've earned. Perhaps most short-sighted of all, this bill disinvests in the scientific research that drives American innovation, technological leadership, and economic competitiveness. For decades, the United States was a destination for the world's top researchers to come and do their best work. Now we are beginning to lose our own scientific talent to opportunities overseas as a result of this administration's attacks on science and universities. This bill would only compound these problems. It cuts the NSF by more than $1.7 billion, abandoning the next generation of scientists and engineers at exactly the moment our competitors are investing more in theirs. This bill also cuts NASA's science account by nearly $1.3 billion. Furthermore, the bill also makes huge cuts to the National Institute of Standards and Technology, which has helped American industry overcome technical challenges, develop new manufacturing techniques, and advance the cutting edge of emerging technologies. I disagree with this bill's approach, as I have said repeatedly, I believe we should be doubling down on the investments in science that grow our economy and incentivize advancements that improve life for all Americans. I thank the Chairman for his work on the bill, but given its serious shortcomings, I cannot support it. I urge my colleagues to oppose this legislation and come back to the table to produce a bill that actually delivers for the American people. We should be investing in public safety, economic opportunity, and American innovation. Those are not partisan priorities, they are our responsibility, and they should be our shared goals as Americans. Thank you, and I yield back.

I now recognize the distinguished Chairman of the full committee, Mr. Cole, for any remarks.

Thank you, Chairman Rogers, and thank you to Ranking Member Meng, excuse me, it's early. Meng, and certainly my good friend Ranking Member DeLauro and to all the members on both sides of the aisle on this critical subcommittee. From the front lines of law enforcement to the frontiers of space, this fiscal year 2027 Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies bill covers a full spectrum of priorities that keep our nation safe, competitive, and prepared for the future. This wide policy scope, of course, matters, but clarity of mission and discipline in investments are ultimately what deliver results. The measures before us is focused on the fundamentals: protecting the American people, enforcing the law, and investing in the capabilities that keep our nation secure and competitive. It right-sizes government while refocusing agencies on their core missions, ensuring taxpayer dollars are spent with purpose. It strengthens federal, state, and local law enforcement, combats fentanyl, and ensures our justice system has the tools to deliver accountability. And it reiterates security as its cornerstone. From the safety of our communities to the growing threats posed by cyber actors and transnational criminal networks, this bill ensures we are prepared to confront challenges wherever they arise. We further protect U.S. innovation from theft, reinforce export controls, and invest in the critical technologies that will define the future, including artificial intelligence and advanced manufacturing. These priorities take direct aim at Communist China's efforts to exploit our research and steal our ingenuity while strengthening America's economic and technological edge. This is critically important. With the success of Artemis II, we saw America not just compete, but once again lead, push the boundaries of what is possible, and set the pace as the world watches. It is why we continue to support innovation and NASA in this legislation to guarantee we keep making history. We do all this while upholding discipline. We eliminate wasteful programs and misguided policies and ensure that government upholds the constitutional rights of the American people. Everyone knows Chairman Rogers is a steady and driving force in appropriations. This bill reflects that leadership, delivering results that put public safety, responsibility, and American strength first. I thank him, Ranking Member Meng, and staff on both sides of the aisle for their hard work. I look forward to advancing this legislation. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Thank you, Chairman Rogers, and thank you to Ranking Member Meng, excuse me, it's early. Meng, and certainly my good friend Ranking Member DeLauro and to all the members on both sides of the aisle on this critical subcommittee. From the front lines of law enforcement to the frontiers of space, this fiscal year 2027 Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agency Bill covers a full spectrum of priorities that keep our nation safe, competitive and prepared for the future. This wide policy scope, of course, matters, but clarity of mission and discipline in investments are ultimately what deliver results. The measures before us is focused on the fundamentals, protecting the American people, enforcing the law, investigating, or investing in our capabilities that keep our nation secure and competitive. It right-sizes government while refocusing agencies on their core missions, ensuring taxpayer dollars are spent with purpose. It strengthens federal, state and local law enforcement, combats fentanyl and ensures our justice system has the tools to deliver accountability. And it reiterates security as its cornerstone. From the safety of our communities to the growing threats posed by cyber actors and transnational criminal networks, this bill ensures we are prepared to confront challenges wherever they arise. We further protect U.S. innovation from theft, reinforce export controls and invest in the critical technologies that will define the future, including artificial intelligence and advanced manufacturing. These priorities take direct aim at Communist China's efforts to exploit our research and steal our ingenuity while strengthening America's economic and technological edge. This is critically important. With the success of Artemis II, we saw America not just compete but once again lead, push the boundaries of what is possible and set the pace as the world watches. It's why we continue to support innovation and NASA in this legislation to guarantee we keep making history. We do all this while upholding discipline. We eliminate wasteful programs, end misguided policies and ensure that government upholds the constitutional rights of the American people. Everyone knows Chairman Rogers is a steady and driving force in appropriations. This bill reflects that leadership, delivering results that put public safety responsibility and American strength first. I thank him, Ranking Member Meng and staff on both sides of the aisle for their hard work. I look forward to advancing this legislation. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

Gentleman yields back. And I now recognize the distinguished Ranking Member of the committee, Ms. DeLauro, for her remarks.

Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. And thank you for your work along with Ranking Member Meng, and thank you to Chairman Cole. The subcommittee, the minority staff, Bob Bonner, Nora Faye, Jamie Weiss, Faye Cobb, your counterparts on the majority side, Rob Yaver, Liz Porter, Chris Eckhart, Nick Mitchell, and Mike Miller, we thank you all for your work and for making all of this possible. I oppose the bill we are considering this morning because it makes Americans less safe, erodes our economic and scientific competitiveness, and hurts working families who are struggling to keep up with rising cost of living. The Trump administration's trade policies have been nothing short of disastrous. Since he took office, the President has imposed, withdrawn, reimposed, and then been forced by the Supreme Court to remove again a series of haphazard, harmful, and extremely costly tariffs. Throughout 2025, these tariffs cost American families upwards of $1,700 in higher prices. The Trump trade wars were waged in the name of boosting domestic manufacturing in America, yet from February 2025 through February of this year, the U.S. lost over 88,000 manufacturing jobs. That is more than 100 manufacturing jobs per day, a fact that Secretary Lutnick was unaware of when he testified before this committee last week. Across the board, the Trump economy is hurting working families. The first year of President Trump's second term was the worst year for American job growth since the final year of his last term. And this bill before us does nothing to change the track that this country is on. In fact, it would make our problems worse. By cutting $144 million in funding, 36 percent, from the Economic Development Administration programs, this bill reduces investments that create jobs and revitalize distressed local communities, rural communities in particular. From 2018 to 2024, the EDA created or retained more than 727,000 jobs, spurred more than $80 billion in private investment. We should be increasing our investment in programs like this, not scaling back support when the American people need it most. This bill cuts $142 million in funding from the International Trade Administration, which fights unfair trade practices in other countries and supports American businesses trying to expand their exports. Unfair trade practices were another reason given for President Trump's trade wars. Yet, the Republican proposal is to take resources away from a very pivotal agency that combats these same tactics. This bill not only harms Americans' financial security, but their physical safety as well. By defunding the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, this bill would significantly weaken our ability to track down illegal arms dealers, intercept gun smuggling, and capture dangerous criminals who put American lives at risk. The more than $280 million cut to ATF's budget would force the agency to reduce their workforce by more than 1,000 positions. These officers work around the clock to keep us safe, but the Republican proposal is to put them out of a job. On top of defunding the ATF, this bill cuts funding for justice grants, including a $50 million cut to the juvenile justice grants. It fully eliminates funding for community violence intervention and prevention, hate crimes prevention, law enforcement de-escalation and training, and police-community relations grants. These are tools. They are tools that local law enforcement depend on to make our community safer. The bill weakens our scientific competitiveness by cutting billions of dollars from scientific research, technology development, STEM education across the National Science Foundation, NASA, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. Earlier this month, my Republican colleagues alongside Democrats and the American people celebrated the remarkable success of the Artemis mission. This was a groundbreaking achievement, the furthest manned spaceflight from Earth in over 50 years. Now, Republicans are proposing to slash funding for NASA science, aeronautics, and education initiatives. The bill also cuts funding to the National Science Foundation by $1.8 billion, further undermining efforts to support basic scientific research, cutting-edge technology development, and STEM education. These cuts represent a failure, a failure to invest in the future, to ensure that the next generation of world-class engineers, inventors, researchers, and technicians are educated here in the United United States and can bring their expertise to American companies. If we want to see more scientific and technological successes like the NASA Artemis missions, as well as other innovations that will make our country more economically competitive, we need to sustain funding for the people and the scientific and technological investments that make such American innovations possible. Lastly, the bill decimates the Legal Services Corporation by cutting its funding by more than half. Their work helps veterans, seniors dealing with financial exploitation and consumer fraud, people with disabilities, renters who are facing evictions or living in deplorable housing conditions, and victims of domestic violence. For every dollar we invest in the Legal Services Corporation, we get $7 in return. This cut is foolish. I oppose the bill because it makes Americans less safe, does nothing to bring down costs for working families, and weakens our scientific and economic competitiveness. I urge my colleagues to oppose the measure and to work on a bipartisan basis to craft a bill that meets this moment. Thank you and I yield back.

Do any other members wish to make opening remarks?

Sorry.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I can't see the clock, so I'm going to have to assure times frequently will flag me when I've gone on for too long.

You have 30 seconds remaining. [Laughter.]

That'll be there'll be bipartisan support for that. I do want to thank the chairs and the ranking members for their work on this. There's a lot to like in this bill. There's a lot that I have concerns about, and I'm hoping that between now and full markup we'll have a chance to work on some of those things. I just want to point some of them out. The issue with respect to what's happening at the Department of Justice to me is extremely significant. I know we talked a little bit about fraud and the administration's focus on prosecuting fraud cases and I shared that when I was at the Department of Justice, it was certainly an important function and they have a lot of talented lawyers there who are doing great work and are some of the best in the world, I think, at what they do. Unfortunately, we've lost 3,400 prosecutors from the Department of Justice in the past year and a half, and I think they've brought in about 800. And it's going to be hard to replace those prosecutors quickly because they all need extensive FBI background checks. So the risk that we're looking at is having a lot of criminal cases, we've talked about others, gun violence and the like, we're all concerned about terrorism, fentanyl prosecutions, and gang transfer of drugs and guns into the United States and what that's doing. But we can't handle those cases if we don't have the prosecutors to do it. So I think that's a huge issue that we need to look at. And in putting those cases together, many of them involve FBI agents and ATF agents. And as you just heard from the full committee ranking member, the cuts to ATF are devastating. You cut the agents there by half, which means we have half the capability to bring these kinds of cases forward. And violent crime, I think, is something that we're all worried about and concerned about and want to find ways to address. Cuts to the FBI or what they're the shift in their focus, frankly. They haven't necessarily cut FBI agents, but they've moved them away from the violent types of street crime and gang violence issues that they're so good at. Also, they're experts in fraud prosecutions as well. Shifting them away from those those kinds of cases and investigations means we're going to have fewer of them and we're likely to be less successful when we do prosecute them. Briefly, I'll touch on a few other things. The cuts to NIST, and I know it's a complicated agency and I can't sit here and tell you fully exactly what they do, but I know that they're critical to the United States' competition with respect to AI and quantum computing. Cuts to that agency is beyond shortsighted. Thank you. And I think it's critical for us to make sure that it's fully funded because making sure that they have full funding and our agencies like NSF, I think, is important as well. So if we want to maintain our leadership with respect to the competition with China, having leadership that is guided by top-notch research, I think, is critical and we get it from those types of agencies. The commitment to NASA I deeply appreciate overall. I think Mr. Isaacman's been a breath of fresh air in his jump into the administrative role and leadership role there at that agency. I think there have been cuts to science and the funding for some of the budgets that I have deep concerns about. I've got an installation in my district, it's not as big as Congressman Strong's installation over there, but the NASA Goddard installation's doing great work. We've got the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, Nancy Grace Roman, I'm sorry, space telescope that is on time and under budget. In fact, it's ahead of schedule. And one of the things that Mr. Isaacman pointed out, in fact, we've going to have the essentially kind of a kickoff where we send it off to where it's going to be launched. Love to invite you all to come to that if you'd like to to join in seeing that effort. But I think overall, my focus will be on, you know, when we get to the amendment process, the issue of guns, of gun violence, making sure we have a strong team in place at the investigator and prosecutor level to handle those cases effectively. And we have to fund those people to make sure it stays in place. And we've got some problems to fix, frankly, given what's developed at the Department of Justice in the past year and a half. Haven't had a chance to hear from the acting Attorney General. I can recall when AG Bondi was here, she promised that the types of cuts that have been made would not be made. And I'm deeply disappointed that that has not been the case. And then finally, I'll point to a couple of other things I'd like to look at. MBDA is one of those in particular. International trade and our competition with China. I see Mr. Quigley sleeping on the job down there, but I see my red light now, but so I'll stop. But I look forward to working with you all. Oh, and Judge, I want to thank you too again for your support for the funding for public defenders. I think your support there's been pivotal and I deeply appreciate it. And with that, I yield back.

Gentleman yields back. Any remarks, Mr. Morelle?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I sincerely mean this, I want to thank you for your courtesies and for the way you conduct this subcommittee and also to Mr. Cole for the great job that he's been doing in conducting the full committee hearings and certainly want to thank my dear friends, Ranking Member DeLauro and Ranking Member Meng for their leadership and their work. I will just be brief, but I want to pick up on something that others have said, including Mr. Ivey, which is, you know, not hearing from the Attorney General, not hearing from the Director of the FBI, not hearing from the Director of or the Administrator for DEA, Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. As we are doing our work of determining what our recommendations ought to be on spending levels to the full committee, it seems hard to be able to do that or justify any of this without being able to answer questions from the people who are charged with the stewardship over federal dollars. And so I'm deeply, deeply troubled by that. I'm also disappointed in the legislation proposing deep and damaging cuts to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, this agency central to enforcing federal gun laws and preventing illegal firearms trafficking. This budget cuts billions, as has been said, from the National Science Foundation, one of the country's most important engines for scientific discovery and innovation. I agree with Mr. Ivey, I thought that Director Isaacman was very informative, I appreciated him being here, but a lot of that centered on the need to continue to invest in science and innovation and discovery. This budget slashes funding for the Economic Development Administration, which has been instrumental in creating economic growth, jobs, and investment in our country. And I think these cuts will have real and lasting consequences, will weaken public safety efforts, halt cutting-edge research, hinder economic development. As appropriators, we have a responsibility to scrutinize these bills and ask whether these reductions support national priorities. And I don't think we've had that opportunity, not because of the Chair, but I think the administration has not been forthcoming in sending people here so we can ask them those questions. And I think these cuts are not in line with, at least in my view, what the priorities are of the American people. But again, thank you for what I know is hard work to you and your staff and with that, I will yield back, sir.

Are there members wishing to be heard? Ms. Dean.

Thank you, Chair Rogers, thank you, Chairman Cole, Ranking Members DeLauro and Meng, thank you for the work that you have done and continue to do. I too have to rise in opposition to this bill. The bill harms our economy, small businesses, and makes every American less safe by cutting programs our local law enforcement agencies rely upon. And it further erodes our nation's scientific leadership. Since taking office, President Trump has imposed the highest tariff rate on American families since the Great Depression. Despite the Supreme Court striking down those tariffs as illegal, President Trump continues and will continue to find new ways to impose his illegal tariffs on American families. Instead of addressing the affordability crisis, this bill guts programs so many small businesses rely upon to keep prices down. For example, this bill cuts the Economic Development Administration by $144 million below FY 26 level, greatly reducing our investment in programs that create jobs, help small businesses thrive, and revitalize distressed community at the local level. This bill cuts the International Trade Administration by $142 million below FY 26, reducing our investment in the primary agency tasked with promoting American exports and fighting the unfair trade practices of other countries. That makes it harder for American businesses to compete abroad. The bill further erodes our nation's science leadership, the position in science by cutting programs designed to cultivate our next generation of scientist. For example, the bill cuts NASA STEM engagement programs by $59 million below FY 26 and eliminates two of NASA's four STEM initiatives. This bill makes America less safe by eliminating programs that so many of our local law enforcement rely upon. It guts the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives, ATF, by $285 million compared with FY 26. ATF works with local law enforcement agencies to prevent and prosecute violent crime and illegal gun trafficking. As is this funding level would force ATF to reduce its workforce by hundreds of positions, making our communities less safe. Crimes are inherently more violent when guns are involved, and this bill strips resources local law enforcement agencies rely upon to keep guns off our streets. At a time when antisemitism is rising, bafflingly, this bill eliminates the funding for hate crime prevention grants. Again, this bill eliminates funding for community violence intervention and prevention grants, despite the clear evidence demonstrating their efficacy in reducing violent crime. Let me tell you a good story from Pennsylvania. In Pennsylvania and in my home city of Philadelphia, homicide rates are down 35 percent since 2022. That's not an accident, that's not a coincidence. In 2022, we, a bipartisan Congress, passed the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which funds community violence intervention and prevention grants. We should not eliminate such grants. We want to help communities save lives, hundreds of lives saved over the course of these years. I hear a lot about states' rights and federalism from my colleagues across the aisle. When I think about the federalist approach to reducing violent crimes, I do not envision sending masked federal agents into our cities to carry out military-style operations on civilians. Rather, I think about programs like community violence intervention and prevention programs. That gives states, localities, and local law enforcement the resources, the tools that they need to address their specific needs at the local level. Finally, I am disheartened to see the cruelty behind the massive cuts to Legal Services Corporation, which provides legal assistance to underserved communities. This bill funds Legal Services Corporation at $272 million below FY 26, which was already unacceptably low. Americans are struggling to afford groceries, gas, utilities, rent, and this bill makes those problems worse. Finally, I want to echo what some of my colleagues have said, we are appropriators, we should have heard from FBI, DEA, ATF. How about the National Science Foundation? All of those should have been before this committee as we consider this bill and appropriations. For all of these reasons, Mr. Chairman, I thank you for your good work, but I will be voting no. I yield back.

Gentlelady yields back. Is there a member that wishes to be heard? Mr. Mrvan.

Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Chairman Cole, Ranking Member DeLauro, and the subcommittee Chairman Rogers and Ranking Member Meng for the opportunity to speak on Fiscal Year 27 Commerce, Justice, and Science Appropriations Bill. The federal programs under this subcommittee are essential to ensuring public safety, growing our economy, and maintaining our national security. The majority will claim that these are responsible cuts to governing government spending, limiting waste, fraud, and abuse, however, these actions have only proven to leave necessary services that people rely on hanging in the balance and disrupt livelihoods of everyday Americans. We must do all we can to uphold public safety and protect our communities. I have been a staunch supporter of the efforts to strengthen state and local police response to crime, and I am deeply concerned by the lack of funding for programs such as the community violence intervention and prevention or law enforcement de-escalation training grants, which strengthen the relationships and encourage safer interactions between law enforcement and the communities they serve. I joined the committee to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to develop legislation that reflects the needs of our communities. Unfortunately, this legislation does not include the necessary investments in departments, agencies, and programs to ensure the safety and security of everyone in this nation, regardless of their background, zip code, or economic status. Instead, the majority would rather cut education and research and deny survivors of violence the services they need to recover from partners and environments that threaten their safety. For example, in my district, 3,700 people are at risk of losing access to essential legal services including 914 children and 212 survivors of domestic violence. These individuals and the cuts of the proposed programs in the Legal Service Corporation, under this bill, the LSC would receive its lowest appropriation since 1983. Additionally, this legislation weakens our economy by shifting costs on the households rather than protecting working families. Specifically, the proposal decreasing the funding for the International Trade Administration by $142 million. Maintaining a level playing field in global trade market is relied upon well-funded ITA. Additionally, during a time where industry and consumers are asking for lasting certainty in our markets, we need the ITA to fulfill its purpose in combating unfair trade and increasing our capacity of export of American goods. It would also gut the Economic Development Administration, decreasing funding by 144 million below the previous enacted level, stifling revitalization efforts for communities across Northwest Indiana. It's because of these reasons that I cannot support moving this legislation forward, and I urge my colleagues to join me in opposition. Thank you and I yield back.

Mr. Cline.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise in full support of this bill before the CJS subcommittee. I think this bill goes farther than any other to protect our constitutional rights, especially our Second Amendment rights, and to rein in government overreach and weaponization. In our Declaration of Independence, it says the purpose of government in the very beginning, it says to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men. And so I commend the Chairman and the entire staff for their very hard work in an excellent bill and I encourage all members to both on both sides of the aisle to support this bill and I yield back.

Thank you. Thank you. Is there other members who wish to be heard? Seeing no amendments, I now recognize Mr. Strong, Vice Chairman of the subcommittee, for the purpose of making a motion.

Mr. Chairman, I move that the bill be favorably reported to the full committee.

Question is on the motion. Those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Those opposed say no.

No.

The ayes have it, the motion is agreed to.

May I ask for a recorded vote?

Request is for recorded vote. That's a sufficient number raising their hands, the clerk will call the roll.

Mr. Alford.

Aye.

Mr. Alford votes aye. Mr. Carter.

Aye.

Mr. Carter votes aye. Mr. Cline.

Aye.

Mr. Cline votes aye. Mr. Clyde.

Aye.

Mr. Clyde votes aye. Ms. Dean.

No.

Ms. Dean votes no. Mr. Ivey.

No.

Mr. Ivey votes no. Ms. Meng.

No.

Ms. Meng votes no. Mr. Moore. Mr. Moore. Mr. Morelle.

No.

Mr. Morelle votes no. Mr. Mrvan.

No.

Mr. Mrvan votes no. Mr. Rogers.

Aye.

Mr. Rogers votes aye. Mr. Shrive.

Aye.

Mr. Shrive votes aye. Mr. Strong.

Aye.

Mr. Strong votes aye. Mr. Cole.

Aye.

Mr. Cole votes aye. Ms. DeLauro.

No.

Ms. DeLauro votes no.

Have all members voted? Any member wish to change their vote? On this vote, the ayes are eight, the noes are six. The bill is favorably reported to the full committee. I ask that unanimous consent that staff be permitted to make technical and conforming changes to the bill and report. Without objection, so ordered. Copies of the bill and report with the technical and conforming changes will be delivered to all full committee members' offices no later than three business days before the full committee markup. Thank you very much for everyone, that concludes today's markup, committee now stands adjourned.

Good morning, sub, the subcommittee on Legislative Branch will now come to order. Welcome to the subcommittee markup on fiscal year 2027 Legislative Branch Appropriations Bill. Welcome Chairman Cole, Ranking Member DeLauro, and Ranking Member Espaillat. I recognize myself for my opening statements. I'm pleased to introduce fiscal year 2027 branch appropriations bill for the subcommittee's consideration. I'd like to begin by thanking Ranking Member Espaillat for the respectful and bipartisan process as we've worked together to develop the fiscal year 27 bill. I'd also like to thank each of our subcommittee members for being actively engaged in the appropriations process this cycle that has resulted in the bill that we present for consideration this morning. As we begin, I would like to remind our members that this bill marks the first step of many towards providing final fiscal year 27 funding for the offices and agencies within the legislative branch of our government. As we worked within our allocation, we did our best to respond to the priorities of the members in executing their constitutional duties while supporting the operations of the Congress, the Capitol complex, and the people who serve it. This bill provides 5.4 billion for the House and joint items in keeping with longstanding tradition we leave the Senate items for the other body's consideration. I want to take a moment to highlight a few highlights of this bill, all of which are priorities for members on both sides of the aisle. First, we are maintaining the new and existing security programs at the levels recommended by the House Sergeant at Arms and providing them with requested funds to continue their operations. This bill also increases essential funding for the U.S. Capitol Police by over 55 million. This is an important investment in the women and men who spend their days protecting the seat of democracy at the Capitol complex. We thank each and every one of them for all they do to protect the members, our visitors, constituents, and staff. The bill under consideration today also increases funding for the Office of Legislative Counsel to assist all member offices. It provides additional resources for the green and gold congressional aide program, which is popular among all members, and increases the members' representative allowance to account for rising costs across the nation and to assist with workforce retention and institutional knowledge. Members on both sides of the aisle prioritized this account when submitting their requests for this bill. The bill also supports the addition of new primary services for female members of Congress through the Office of Attending Physician, continues the ongoing initial investment for critical renovation of the Rayburn House Office Building, and provides for the employees and programs of the Library of Congress and essential services they provide for Congress. I want to thank the subcommittee staff on both sides for their work, from the majority, Laurie Riley and April Lyman, and for the minority, Faye Cobb. Again, thank you to all the members for their requests, contributions, engagement, which resulted in the fiscal year 2027 Legislative Branch bill. I look forward to continuing to work together in days ahead as we move the bill through the legislative process both here in the House and in final negotiations with the Senate. Now recognize Ranking Member Espaillat for his opening remarks.

Thank you, good morning everybody. Thank you Chairman Cole, Ranking Member DeLauro, and Chair Valadao and members of the committee. Before I begin, I want to thank the staff on the minority, majority subcommittees for your work on this bill. I also want to recognize my colleague and good friend, Steny Hoyer, it has been an honor to serve with you, Mr. Hoyer, and in this subcommittee you have been a true, a true champion. Congratulations on an extraordinary career that we all wish we could just be like you. I want to be just like you when I grow up. And Mr. Chairman, as you noted, the interim allocation for the Legislative Branch Committee is $7.3 billion, yet this bill, excluding the Senate items, provides just $5.4 billion, $125 million below the last year and far below our request. I approach this process in good faith, ready to work across the aisle to strengthen the institution. And yes, there are areas of progress: modest increases for MRA, the Library of Congress, the Capitol Police, along with continued support for member security programs. But those gains are overshadowed. The GAO is the guardian of taxpayer dollars and a cornerstone of congressional oversight. In fiscal year 2026 alone, GAO's work generated nearly $63 billion in cost savings. This bill cuts GAO by 25 percent, a whopping 25 percent, and includes a rider that weakens its ability to hold the executive branch accountable. Let's be clear about what that means. Over 1,000 public servants could lose their job. A thousand people could lose their jobs. These are not targeted efficiencies; they are indiscriminate cuts that will significantly impair GAO's ability to carry out its core mission. That is not just a cut; it's a direct hit on congressional oversight. I am also deeply disappointed that the bill once again shuts out DACA recipients from working in the legislative branch, even as they already serve in our offices and contribute to this great institution. If we believe in opportunity, we should be opening doors, not shutting them down. This bill also falls short on investing in our aging infrastructure and on building a workforce that reflects the diversity of the American people. Bottom line, this bill does not meet the moment. It weakens oversight, limits opportunity, and underinvests in this institution. For those reasons, Mr. Chairman, I cannot support this bill. I urge my colleagues to come back to the table and produce a bill that strengthens Congress and the people we serve. I yield back.

Thank you, Mr. Espaillat. I now recognize the distinguished gentleman from Oklahoma, the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Cole, for his remarks.

Thank you, Chairman Valadao. And I thank Ranking Member Espaillat and Ranking Member DeLauro, of course, my very good friend. Mr. Hoyer, I too add my name to the accolades in your direction. When I grow up, I'd like to be like you too.

My suggestion, don't grow up. [Laughter.]

Well, I have had the good pleasure of serving with you longer than anybody else in this room other than my good friend Ms. DeLauro. And it's been a delight every day. You bet. And thank you. What we're considering this morning goes to the very foundation of American governance. This bill is about whether the People's House and Congress overall has the capacity, the security, and the discipline to do its job and to do it well. The fiscal year 2027 Legislative Branch Bill ensures we can meet our constitutional obligations to the American people. It invests in the capacity and services that support our constituents, upholds key institutions that support democracy, and ensures oversight throughout the government. The measure makes clear that every dollar must be justified. We rein in unnecessary spending, redirect resources to core functions, and hold programs and contracts to a higher standard. That's what responsible governance looks like. Additionally, at a time when political violence has unfortunately become all too common, this bill also puts security front and center. It resources the Capitol Police who stand watch over this complex every single day, helping ensure visitors, staff, and lawmakers are safe. Whether in D.C. or during in-district proceedings, the protection of constituents and members is a priority. At its core, the legislation is about trust: trust that Congress will serve the American people effectively, steward taxpayer dollars responsibly, and uphold the constitutional role with distinction. Chairman Valadao has put forward a bill that meets that standard, one that strengthens this institution, reinforces accountability, and ensures we're prepared to carry out the work the American people sent us here to do. I thank Chairman Valadao, Ranking Member Espaillat, and the dedicated staff on both sides for their contributions. I look forward to having another bill advanced to the full committee as we work to uphold Article I and complete our FY 27 work. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

Thank you, Chairman Cole. I now recognize the distinguished ranking member of the full committee, Ms. DeLauro, for her remarks.

Thank you so much, Chairman Valadao. I thank you and the Ranking Member Espaillat and my good friend Chairman Cole. You know, again to the chair and ranking member of the subcommittee, thank you so much for the work that you do and to the staff, Faye Cobb in the minority and counterparts in the majority, Lori Rowley and April Lyman. I say it often and over and over again, we don't get here without you guys. So much appreciative of the work that you do. To my colleague and friend Steny Hoyer, I want to say a thank you to you for your commitment to your constituents through your commitment to this institution, for understanding the nature and the power of this institution to help to make a difference in their lives. And with every day you have served, that's what your goal has been, is to utilize this institution, push the edge of that envelope so that it responds to the needs of the folks that you represent and who put their trust in you. So thank you so much. Thank you. I oppose the bill we're considering this morning because it opens the door, in my view, to more corruption by the Trump administration. It weakens government oversight, undermines the power of the purse by making it easier for the executive branch to withhold funding that Congress approves, and does not allow for Dreamers to work in the legislative branch. The Trump administration has been one of the most corrupt presidencies in history. Since he took office, President Trump has used his office to make himself $1.4 billion richer, at least. His family has cut business deals with foreign governments: Saudi Arabia, Oman, UAE, and India have all cut lucrative deals with the Trump family, adding to his personal wealth while he makes global decisions that are supposed to be in the public interest. Qatar even gifted him a $400 million jet, which he will keep after he leaves office. The corruption is not even hidden anymore; it is done in the open with pride. He has made millions of dollars in settlements from lawsuits against media companies, which his hand-picked FCC director is in charge of regulating and who has openly threatened the broadcast licenses of news organizations whose coverage has been critical of the president. He is currently suing the IRS for $10 billion while his personal defense lawyer serves as the Acting Attorney General of the United States. The First Lady was paid $40 million directly by Amazon for the rights to a documentary about herself. And the Trump family has made at least $867 million through their crypto company, which offers anyone a venue to give money directly to the Trump family anonymously. A company backed by the UAE announced a $2 billion investment in the Trump's crypto company, and then two weeks later the president granted the UAE access to advanced microchips. What a coincidence. As working families around the country struggle just to get by, as the cost of living continues to rise, the Trump family has made a killing, and this bill allows them to get away with even more. This bill effectively defunds the Government Accountability Office, a government watchdog that roots out waste, fraud, and abuse. GAO's work delivers real results and more than pays for itself. In fiscal year 2026 alone, it generated nearly $63 billion in cost savings. This 25 percent cut in funding, $200 million, would weaken oversight of this administration and increase the risk of mismanagement of taxpayer dollars. These steep reductions would force at least 1,000 layoffs at GAO, diminishing its ability to hold agencies accountable. That stacks the deck in favor of anyone who would abuse positions of public trust for their own private gain. My Republican colleagues have often bemoaned what they believe to be a gross mismanagement of taxpayer dollars. So I do not know why their solution to that stated problem is to defund the government agency that is responsible for improving government efficiency and reducing waste, fraud, and abuse. This bill also fails to allow American residents who were brought to this country as young children to work in the legislative branch. DACA recipients, Dreamers, are American in every way that matters. They were raised here, many serve in our armed forces. Failing to allow Dreamers to serve their country in the legislative branch is injustice to them and a disservice to all of us. We deprive ourselves of the talent, intelligence, and commitment that they could bring to this institution, and we deny them a fair opportunity to serve the only country they have ever really called home. I encourage my colleagues to oppose this measure and to work in a bipartisan fashion to craft a bill that cracks down on corruption, improves government efficiency, and corrects this historic injustice for Dreamers. Thank you, and I yield back.

Thank you, Ms. DeLauro. Do any other members wish to make opening remarks? Gentleman from Maryland is recognized.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank the chairman, the big chairman, for his kind remarks. We have served together. I have respect for him and I look forward to working with him in the last eight months of my career on improving the impact of this committee, I mean the big committee, and return it, frankly, to a place where it is in fact a decision-maker and is given priority by the leadership in the House on both sides of the aisle. I want to thank my friend from New York, the ranking member, for his leadership on our side, and I certainly want to thank the ranking member, and I agree with her remarks, all of her remarks. I also want to thank the staff on both sides for their hard work. As I have said so often, we have an extraordinary staff. It is very badly underpaid, and if it were in the private sector and did the same kind of quality work that they did, they'd be making substantially greater salaries. This bill is critically important, but it is very badly undersourced. The ranking member and the ranking member of the full committee have made observations, I'll perhaps repeat those. But I want to say in a broader sense, the legislative body is woefully under-resourced to confront an extraordinarily large executive department over which the founding fathers thought that we would be a check and a balance. Not only are we not a check and a balance, but the executive department has refused to come before our committees. And we are marking up with almost no oversight. But I want to congratulate you, Mr. Chairman of this subcommittee. I think we've had more hearings than any other committee. God bless you. But we are woefully underfunding for the capacity of our job. So we could substantially increase, we could double the legislative budget and not be able to do the job of overseeing a huge executive department. And we ought to all be concerned about that, whatever the administration is, that we do not have the capacity, we don't have the resources, we don't have the staff to know what the devil's going on in the executive department, again, whether it's a Democratic administration or Republican administration. And we ought to be concerned about that. I'm leaving, but you guys who are going to be here for some period of time, you're much younger than me, ought to be concerned about that. We fail to do the right by our employees, by those who are working to make Congress work more efficiently, and I send that. Then this institution will suffer and will have trouble recruiting and retaining people. We have a good retirement system and that's why probably most of them stay, because all of them could be getting more money someplace else. And very frankly, when they leave, they automatically start making more money. Frankly, I'm disappointed that we are once again advancing the bill that does not adequately invest in making Congress work for the people. While I'm glad that it includes additional $50 million for MRA accounts, allowing for us to... and by the way, we are giving to agencies $179 billion in the last reconciliation bill and if this reconciliation passes, we're going to give them three years. Mr. Chairman, big Chairman, we don't have any oversight over that. That is a undermining of the appropriators' responsibility to oversee budgets.

Would the gentleman yield?

I would be glad to yield to my friend.

Thank you. I thank my friend. I agree with you 100 percent. And I've made that abundantly clear. But I have to say, I don't know what choice is left when my friends decide not to fund the important law enforcement agency. The Border Patrol, I don't know why what the problem is there because we've had nine months with no known illegal entries. And I feel the same way about ICE. Reforms have been made, the head of the agency has been changed. Look, we see this and it's certainly not your responsibility in terms of this, it's the Senate where the hold up is. It's their decision, their rules, and our people are part of that as much as anybody else. And I've made that abundantly clear. But your basic point is correct. I think giving anybody three years of money, including presidents I don't support or I do support, is the wrong thing to do. But I also think leaving critical law enforcement agencies unfunded, and particularly at a dangerous moment, is the wrong thing to do. And we have tried every way we know to do that. And we've been able to do it through the House, we have not been able to do it through the Senate. And again, I hold our senators as accountable for that as I do their counterparts in the other party. But again, your basic point is correct. Yield back, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to get on my high horse.

I think we're both sort of there on the horse together. Mr. Chairman, I agree with you and I think you and I feel the same way. We are undermining the appropriation process egregiously by these reconciliation bills, whoever does it, to do the appropriation work. We did it, you do it. And the only difference I would have with you, we had a bill on the floor introduced by Ms. DeLauro, which funded everything but those two agencies. And we should be able to have passed that bill so that we wouldn't be talking about customs, excuse me, the Coast Guard, FEMA, other agencies that are in DHS other than those. We have, and as you pointed out the other day, Mr. Chairman, in committee, the differences are not appropriation issues. They are authorizing issues. And we should be able to get to a point where we make a compromise. I agree with you 100 percent. And frankly, if you and Ms. DeLauro were in the room, we would have done it on the procedures to assure constitutional conduct by ICE and Border Patrol. I know my time has expired, but the Chairman was very gracious. And I thank the gentleman. Let me, once we are again turning this bill into a policy piece when it comes to members' COLA freeze. And I'm going to offer an amendment on that. Members have not received a pay raise for 18 years if we did this again in fiscal year 27. If we're going to make it possible for regular people, not just the wealthy, to step forward, we need to make an adjustment in that. As we have done for our federal employees, for our staff, who were but for Ms. Pelosi's action taken as Speaker, not constraining them to the pay that we receive. Now most, a lot of our staff make a lot more money than we do. Appropriately so. Members and their families too have to contend with the inflation we've seen as a result of, we all know we have really substantial cost increase over the 18 years that we're talking about. Yet we're making the same thing. This won't affect me. I'll be out. And guess what happens in January and the January thereafter? I start getting a COLA. Now Mr. Chairman, I have five things I'm going to talk about. I could have offered amendments for each one so I could get five minutes on each one. I'm not going to do that. I'm going to offer two out of the five. But I do want to mention GAO. Particularly yourselves, Mr. Chairman, on your side of the aisle speak about waste, fraud, and abuse. GAO is the specific agency charged with the responsibility of getting rid of waste, fraud, and abuse. And you cut it 26 percent. I don't get that. You cut IRS enforcement very substantially. Not in this bill, in the other committee I'm on. My point being, you are restraining the ability of the government to oversee and root out waste, fraud, and abuse. Mr. Chairman, I'll cease and desist because you're getting nervous about the time that I take. But let me make this observation, Mr. Chairman, and to our ranking member. And all of us ought to be concerned about this. I heard the Chairman and the ranking member over and over and over again say we rely on the subcommittees. My premise is we don't rely on the subcommittees. Because if we relied on the subcommittees, we would take more than a half an hour to consider the recommendation we're making to the full committee. The work is done in the full committee, which I think undermines the ability of the subcommittee to dwell and use the expertise theoretically the subcommittee should be bringing to the table and recommend to the full committee after full discussion and an opportunity to debate the issues. I'll yield on that and then I'll offer some amendments.

Any other members wish to make opening remarks?

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

There's an amendment at the desk, the clerk will read the amendment.

Which one is it?

COLA.

Okay. It strikes... In the bill on page 37, strike section 210.

Mr. Chairman, without objection the reading of the bill, well, it was read. The gentleman is recognized now for five minutes.

Mr. Chairman, I want to raise another issue. This is an amendment that will strike the section of the bill which says that the COLA adjustment in January of next year will be obviated. It will not happen. It'll be the 18th year that we will not have had an adjustment. A COLA, as all of you know, keeps you even. That's what a COLA does. It's not a pay raise, it's you keep even. Now there's a court case pending that is going to deal with that, which says that the Constitution requires that that be done. We have now for 18 years obviated that. I will tell you for 15 or 20 years before that, I worked with every leader on the other side of the aisle to assure that we would get a COLA. Now the COLA is limited to less than federal employees get. So it's a modest amount just to keep members even. And we ought to vote on that on the floor. And we ought not to ask any member on either side of the aisle who has a politically tough race to vote on that because it's so easy to demagogue. And that's what we did for some two decades. Then we stopped doing that. Frankly, we were in charge at that point in time, but we could not get bipartisan buy-in to have a vote on that very issue. Saying to members who could not be subject to being demagogued that we want you to help with that on both sides of the aisle. We could not reach a bipartisan agreement so we haven't done it. To the detriment of members. And to the detriment of those members particularly who aren't rich members. So Mr. Chairman, I would hope that we would strike that language. I'm not going to ask for a vote on that. Because you need to work that. You need to talk to members. I haven't done that. Now I've talked to a lot of members over the years about this as everybody in this room knows. But the court is dealing with this. They have already made a judgment that constitutionally, like the judges ruled in their own case, that we could not limit cost of living adjustment because it was effectively a cut in your salary. And the reason the founders didn't want that done was because they didn't want political retribution in the form of cutting salaries of members during the course of their terms. So I don't know how much time I have left on this amendment, but let me say also on the GAO again, I'm not offering an amendment on that. I will probably offer an amendment on that in the full committee, but we ought not to have cuts in the agency that is looking at waste, fraud, and abuse. I yield back and I withdraw the amendment. Ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.

Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn. Are there any other amendments?

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at desk.

Without objection, the clerk will read the amendment.

In the bill, insert at the appropriate place the following language: A, in general, section 83313 of title 5, United States Code, is amended. One...

Mr. Chairman, I...

Without objection, so much of the reading of the amendment is dispensed with. The gentleman is recognized for five minutes to address the amendment.

This amendment, Mr. Chairman, I'm offering would insert the language of the Capitol Police Retirement Reform Act into the bill. The piece of legislation was introduced by my friend and our late colleague, Gerry Connolly. Gerry knew the service and sacrifices of our brave U.S. Capitol Police officers as I do and as I think every member on this committee does. Many were his constituents, many live in my district as well. During my time as Democratic Whip and Majority Leader for 20 years, I got to spend every day with them and came to regard many of them as dear friends, but extraordinarily able and committed and courageous people. This amendment would provide a phase-in of counting overtime towards retirement pay based on the length of service. Currently, unlike at many other federal law enforcement agencies, none of the overtime worked by U.S. Capitol Police officers counts toward base pay for retirement purposes. I hear all the time from USCP officers that overtime hours are long. We all know that. They're understaffed. And last night, for instance, our clerks worked a long time. Already since the January 6th attack of the Capitol, we've been losing dedicated, highly qualified, and experienced officers. The more who go, the more the force will have to rely on overtime to close the gaps. It's incumbent upon us to solve this problem and do right by those who risk their lives every day to keep us safe and to protect our democracy. I'm going to withdraw this amendment as well and we'll consider it at the full committee. But I bring it up here for two reasons. Number one, to put everybody on notice that I'm going to offer that and for you to think about whether or not our Capitol Police ought to be, unlike other federal police who get credit for overtime, the Capitol Police do not. Whether or not you think that's fair for our Capitol Police. So Mr. Chairman, I will withdraw that amendment. But before I yield my time, I will say I'm also very concerned about the Librarian of Congress. I've talked to the Speaker about this. The Librarian of Congress should not be appointed by the President of the United States nor subject to removal by the President of the United States. The Librarian of Congress is the Librarian of Congress. Not of the White House, not of the executive department, of Congress. We changed the architect some years ago so that the architect is now appointed by the Congress of the United States in a bipartisan fashion. And so I'm going to offer an amendment in the full committee if in fact it is not already resolved because this is an authorizing issue. I get that. But we are the funders of the Library of Congress and we therefore ought to make some comments of our own. Now again, I'm not going to press this to a vote because I think we need more notice and people need to think about this more. But I am going to do it in the full committee, which I understand is going to be, Mr. Chairman, the week we come back. Is that... yeah. So it's going to be pretty soon. But I would hope that everybody would think about that because it is the Library of Congress. And I've talked to Speaker Johnson about that and he indicated to me, it was a private conversation, that he was sympathetic. I think he was a little stronger than that, but I'll say that for the purposes of this discussion. And I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.

Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn. Seeing no further amendments, I now recognize Mr. LaLota for the purpose of making a motion.

Mr. Chairman, I move the bill be favorably reported to the full committee.

Questions on the motion. Those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Those opposed say no.

No.

The ayes have it, the motion's agreed to.

Ask for a recorded vote.

The recorded vote has been requested. All members in favor of a recorded vote, please raise their hands. Well done. Excellent. A sufficient number in support of a recorded vote is ordered. The clerk will call the roll. You almost got me.

Mr. Espaillat.

No.

Mr. Hoyer.

No.

Mr. LaLota.

Aye.

Ms. Maloy.

Aye.

Mr. Quigley.

No.

Mr. Strong.

Aye.

Mr. Valadao.

Aye.

Mr. Cole.

Aye.

Ms. DeLauro.

No.

On this vote, the ayes are five, the noes are four. The bill is favorably reported to the full committee. I ask unanimous consent that the staff be permitted to make technical and conforming changes to the bill and report. Without objection, so ordered. Copies of the bill and report with the technical changes and conforming changes will be delivered to all full committee members' offices no later than three business days before the full committee markup. Thank you very much everyone. That concludes today's markup and the committee now stands adjourned.