FY 2027 Labor-HHS-Education-Related Agencies Bill and Homeland Security Bill

we're going to try and proceed uh we're gonna try and get the labor age bill done today if at all possible i'd like to then uh go into the opening section of the uh of the homeland bill have opening statements remarks by members maybe an amendment see that's all gonna be predicated on time come four o'clock tomorrow we have a hard stop as to allow our members on both sides are playing in the baseball game as kind of a direct order from the majority leader uh we are going to stop at four it would be my hope we can get through both bills by then i will tell you if we do not we will be coming back after the game we're gonna finish tomorrow uh and what we would probably do is is assemble sort of like thirty minutes after the game uh mister uh clyde i think actually

ok

to make sure he said to get there can i come in my uniform if i have to come back i said absolutely we have no dress code here the floor is something else but we'll probably again reconfine about thirty minutes or so uh i'll give you a sharper uh message tomorrow after the game if we need to if we don't that's that would be my preferred course but uh that's fine uh so you know we're proceeding our first order of business today

who's

i'm sorry uh ok

i'm sorry

is consideration of the labor health and human services education related agencies appropriation bill for fiscal year twenty twenty seven i'll now recognize chairman Aderholt to present the bill

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and uh good morning, ladies and gentlemen. And uh the bill that I bring before you today seeks to strike a balance between physical stewardship and maintaining necessary investments in biomedical research, America's rural health, and support for students. Uh, following President Trump's budget, we evaluated every program that was in this bill. As part of that review, we had to make some tough decisions on some so-called nice to have's. And many of which, let me say, I think are will be revisited as we uh go through deba- today's debate. However, as the nation enters nearly forty trillion dollars of debt, that's more than a hundred and twenty percent of our GDP, we would be foolish to ignore discretionary spending reductions as part of the answer. However, as we have all heard, and our Chairman Cole has said this many times and many of us have said it many times, The national debt is driven by runaway entitlement spending, not our annual appropriations process. That being said, Congress must put a priority on resources that are the greatest needs to this nation, and not to programs that, while they may be very well-intentioned, have shown limited long-term impact or sustained benefit. Our subcommittee has sought to do just that, rank at the top the programs serving those with limited access to services, bolster national security, and maintain our federal responsibilities. While this bill reduces several programs and proposes many for elimination, at the same time, it also increases support for America's biodefense infrastructure. It provides long-needed lifelines for rural hospitals and funds necessary basic science. The bill also responsibly addresses a projected fifteen billion dollar shortfall in the Pell Grant system, and provides a modest fifty dollar increase for the maximum Pell award. The bill codifies the present executive order to end diversity, equity, and inclusion policies. It builds on the success of the Big Beautiful Bill by eliminating funding for Planned Parenthood. It also protects the rights of women and girls to s- play sports and prohibits federal uh funding for uh sex, rejecting procedures and services. The bill maintains the Hyde Amendment, uh, has, as has always been the case, it prohibits funds for abortion on demand and ensures that no one is forced to participate in an abortion if doing so would violate their beliefs. This bill is not against women, it is for women, it's for families, it supports family decisions where they belong, and that's in the family. Not liberal policies that's forced upon the states and communities by the DC bureaucrats. I wanna thank my colleagues for joining me once again in supporting community projects that are funded in this bill. I'm proud of the effort to bring back this source of support for hospitals, for health centers, and for other safety net providers that I appreciate all the staff working to review these projects. The, we wanted to make sure that, uh, the ones that were eligible, uh, were reviewed and, um, uh, like I said, very thankful to the staff for helping us go through that. This bill funds nearly five hundred projects for over two hundred members. Uh, these designated funds will be deeply impactful for communities all across the nation. Uh, but bottom line is we can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good, but these are, I think, some very good uh projects and so I look forward to your support for those. In addition to the community funding uh projects, um, this subcommittee received more than thousand member request for both funding and policy request. And without being said for all the works that's gone into this bill, I want to say a a thank you to the subcommittee staff, uh, from the majority, Catherine Salmon, uh, Kirk Boyle, Emily Goff, Jaime, uh, Varela, uh, Michaela Bordeaux, and from the minority, Steven Stiglitter, Jackie Kilroy, phillip uh tiziani laurie mignon and from my personal office uh megan medley uh who has been uh right by my side for many many years and i appreciate her support uh i can't list every staff of every member that's uh been on the that's on this committee but i know that they contributed each very much to the product and i thank them for their hard work i recognize that we will have different opinions about the policies in this bill both as they relate to spending on federal programs and the legislative provisions. And there will be an ample ample opportunity to address those differences as we continue through today's mark-up. I think it would be good to have a spirited debate, but I of course remind everybody at the end of the day, we're all elected to represent the views of our constituents and we can do so in a manner that that is respectful. And I know that will be the case. I look forward to our continued discussion of these issues. as we move forward in the full committee mark-up. But before I close, I also want to recognize that this is the last Labor, Health and Human Services uh committee mark-up for some of our own subcommittee members. In particular, Julia Gel- uh Julia Letlow, uh Steny Hoyer, and Bonnie Watson Coleman. They are all been very great subcommittee members and great friends and, who I've had a chance to work with uh some for many, many, many years. Uh, I've enjoyed the unique perspective that they have brought to the subcommittee and their advocacy for issues that, uh, that they value and that they, uh, advocate for. So we will miss them and wish them well in their next steps. And with that, um, I yield back.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Uh, now I would like to recognize my very good friend, a ranking member of both the full committee and of, uh, Labor H, a gentlelady from Connecticut. It's uh

It's me.

Rosa.

It's Rosa. Right, right. Thank you so much,

Thank you.

uh, Chairman Cole, and uh above all thank you for your friendship and our opportunity to work together. I wanna say thank you to you, to Chairman Aderholt, um and I wanna begin by saying thank you to the subcommittee staff for the work on this bill. Steven Stegleiter, Jackie Kilroy, Laurie Mignon, Philip Tiziani for the minority, Catherine Salmon, Emily Goff, kirk boyle uh jaime varela michaela Bourdreau and alexandra mendewo on the majority thank you so much for all that you do to bring these bills uh to fruition i i should have started by saying the red and blue bags in front of you um uh uh you know i wanted to bring uh the the best pizza in the country from uh new haven connecticut but what you have to do then is find a place to finish you know cooking it and we didn't have a place to do that so what's in the bags are non-alcoholic beer i wish we could have done otherwise but it's non-alcoholic beer but it is um uh brewed in uh connecticut third district by athletic brewing and and at connecticut three we uh really invented um i wish we had brought the frisbees as well but we have the lollipop so we did the lollipop so that's what you have in the bags and uh so happy to share um with you Um, uh, I, let me just, uh, I th- I think this is pretty much understood of where I'm coming from on this bill. Uh, I oppose the bill we're considering today. Uh, Americans struggle to afford everything from gasoline to groceries, from utilities to health insurance, from mortgage payments to medical bills. Uh, but instead of doing anything to address the affordability crisis, uh, this bill makes the problems even worse. Affordability is not a hoax. Affordability is not a con job, despite what President Trump might claim. Clearly, the cost of living is not a problem for him or for his family. But it is a real crisis that impacts millions of Americans. It is a crisis that this bill does nothing to alleviate. And in fact, in many regards, it will only make it worse. Thanks to the President's signature piece of legislation, the one big beautiful bill, health care costs are going up and hospitals are shutting down. Fifteen million Americans will likely lose their health insurance, while the very wealthy and the large corporations continue to rake in profits, record profits I might add, and enjoy the benefits of their four and a half trillion dollar tax cut. The president wants to increase the defense budget by half trillion dollars. He claims we do not have the money for child care, for Medicare, for Medicaid because, and I quote, " we are fighting wars," end quote. Meanwhile, this bill cuts funding for education, public health, reproductive health, and job training. Horace Mann called education, and I quote, " the great equalizer." "The real safeguard of democracy." The belief in education as an inalienable right is woven into the fabric of our country. It is a promise we make to teach each succeeding generation that they will be better off than the last. Yet, this bill cuts eight billion dollars or ten percent from the Department of Education. That includes a two billion dollar cut to Title I grants, which will push thirty thousand teachers out of their classrooms and leave countless children with a worse education. Throughout history, access to a quality education has always been the pathway for the working class, middle class, and vulnerable Americans to greater prosperity and opportunity. These cuts are an attempt to undo the progress we have made, to cut off access to these opportunities. It is a step down the path toward eliminating public education. And that, I believe, is their ultimate goal. This bill eviscerates funding for employment and training programs, by three point three billion dollars, one third below the twenty twenty-six level. It eliminates funding for adult and youth job training entirely, while cutting funding for the job corps in half. As inflation outpaces outpaces wage growth and new technology upends the workforce, we ought to be investing in programs that support workers, not cutting funding and leaving them out to dry. This bill cuts the funding for health and human service programs by four and a half billion dollars. including a one billion dollar cut to the centers for disease control and prevention. The majority of these cuts target the programs that that really that combat of the HIV AIDS epidemic jeopardizing the extraordinary progress we have made toward defeating this disease. The recent Ebola outbreak threatens to become the deadliest in history because the Trump administration chose to dismantle USAID to withdraw the United States from the World Health Organization and to drastically scale back our global health footprint, this outbreak has a significant head start. Humanitarian aid workers are trying to contain the outbreak without adequate personal protective equipment, in active combat zones, waiting days just to get test results back. We are in this position because this administration tore apart our existing programs. And now we are facing the consequences. Further compounding the risk to our public health security, this bill leaves funding for the CDC global health activities stagnant, which will not be nearly enough to sustain our global presence after the State Department's decision to restructure the PEPFAR program. The bill cuts funding for title ten family planning, leaving two point six million men and women without access to preventive care services and contraception. It eliminates the teen pregnancy prevention program entirely. And it includes dozens of bi- of partisan provisions that target reproductive health care access. Even now, years after Roe is overturned and reproductive health care has become much more difficult and even dangerous to access in much of the country, this bill would restrict access even further, no matter what state you live in. This bill cuts two billion dollars in operations, funding from the Affordable Care Act marketplace, threatening health care coverage for millions of Americans. Even if you qualify for an affordable plan through the program, you will have a harder time accessing it. After the Big Beautiful Bill cut one point two trillion dollars for Medicaid and food assistance, it seems the Republican plan is to make it even more difficult to access health care in this country. This bill squeezes working families from both ends. It increases costs for daily necessities, while hollowing out health, education, nutrition, and employment programs that support the working class, the middle class, and vulnerable Americans. Additionally, the bill does nothing to protect nonpartisan research from the political influence of the president and his allies, since they took office as administration has been taking steps to condition grant funding based on political preference. They have imposed purity tests holding up crucial support for critical research at the NIH, for example, simply because it included the word, quote, gender. Now they are trying to formalize this process by issuing a new federal regulation, subjecting all grant-making across the government to political interference, not peer review, not objective merit, not empirical evidence, just personal political preference. This cannot be allowed to happen. We need to exercise our power of the purse. I have strong objections to this bill as written, and as it moves through the legislative process, I will continue working to improve it. That being said, there are some bright spots that I believe are worth recognizing. First, I'm glad to see the overall funding level for the National Institutes of Health is slightly increased under this bill, especially targeted increases for research on cancer. Alzheimer's, ALS, diabetes, women's health, and rare diseases. Second, during our subcommittee hearing on the science of reading earlier this year, I called for this committee to re-establish a national reading panel to explore ways to improve how we teach our children to read. I am pleased that this committee has answered that call, and I want to commend Congressman Harder for his advocacy on this issue. I support these provisions and applaud their inclusion. However, I remain overwhelmingly opposed to the legislation as a whole. Together, the bill undermines education, it jeopardizes public health, it limits workers' opportunities, it does nothing to address the rising cost of living living, while stripping away crucial support that helps families who are navigating the affordability uh the affordability crisis. I encourage my colleagues to oppose this legislation, and I call on our friends in the majority to work with us to craft a bill that meets the needs of the american people that the needs of the american people are facing thank you and i yield back

thank the gentlelady for her comments i now recognize myself for marks on the bill thank you uh chairman Aderholt and thank you ranking member DeLauro and uh to all our committee members uh for being here today today we take up our tenth fiscal year twenty twenty-seven appropriations measure before the full committee I'll start by saying that the significance of the labor HHS education bill is something I understand well. Having spent several years leading this subcommittee, I have a deep appreciation for both the scope of the measure and the responsibilities that come with it. As the largest non-defense funding bill considered by Congress, it touches nearly every American community and supports priorities that shape the health, education and economic opportunity of our nation. Crafting this legislation requires balancing competing needs, making difficult choices, and ensuring taxpayer dollars are directed toward effective programs. Knowing this, Chairman Adderhall has insured each provision of this legislation lays a foundation for a healthier, better skilled, and more competitive America. Appropriations is, of course, an exercise in numbers and accounts, but the true measure of our work is not found in spreadsheets alone. is found in the lives touched and the opportunities created by the decisions we make. Think about just a few of the priorities supported by this bill. A scientist pursuing the next breakthrough discovery, a student working toward a degree and a brighter future, a family seeking access to quality rural care, and a worker gaining new skills and new opportunities. This legislation recognizes that the nation's future will be shaped not only by the decisions made in this committee room, but by the people empowered by it. uh those outcomes do not happen by accident they require thoughtful investments clear priorities and a duty to ensuring federal resources are directed where they can make the greatest difference this bill does just that it supports america's continued leadership in biomedical research strengthens our ability to prepare for and respond to public health threats and support those in need of mental health and uh addiction counseling it expands access to care in rural communities supports workforce training and skills development and helps insure americans have the tools they need to succeed in a rapidly changing economy and it includes investments for district focused projects that support the needs of communities nationwide at the same time this bill recognizes that stewardship of taxpayer dollars is every bit as important as the priorities we fund. It strengthens efforts to combat fraud, streamlines duplicative programs, and focus resources on initiatives that demonstrate real value in results. The measure also reflects several long-standing principles that should always guard our work or guide our work. Expanding opportunity through school choice, respecting the role of parents, uh, preserving long-standing protections for unborn babies, and confronting uh anti-semitic and religious discrimination. In short, the bill before us advances a broad vision of American strength, one rooted in innovation, education, economic opportunity, and accountability to the taxpayers. I want to thank Chairman Aderholt, Ranking Member DeLora, and the staff uh both sides of the aisle for their hard work and expertise. Bills of this magnitude are never simple undertakings. and i appreciate the professionalism and dedication that brought us to this point i look forward to consideration and advancement of today's measure and with that i yield back i now uh recognize mister hoyer gentleman from maryland for comments on the bill

thank you very much mr. chairman uh i have been through markups on this bill as a member of the committee for about two and a half decades uh and as Majority Leader and or whip for the balance of my forty five years. So this bill as been pointed out by our our subcommittee chair and by the ranking member in the in the mark-up, first mark-up uh means a lot to me. I went on this committee the day I went on the full committee. And we chose committees. Because I believe it is the committee that is at the heart of the strength and security of America. Certainly the defense bill falls in that category, but no more than this bill. For as I've quoted Bill Nather over and over again, as long as you take care of the health of your people and the education of your children, you'll continue to live in the strongest and best nation on earth. As Chairman, lamenta- lamentably, I do not believe this bill reflects the kind of investment in that strength that this country needs. I want to thank my friend, the ranking member, for whom the annual labor health education bill has been at the center of her work uh in this Congress. Her focus, as mine has been, is on children and women's health, education, and yes, the welfare of our workers. This is the last labor HHS education appropriation I'll be working on with all of you. I wish it could be one where we meet those promises and deliver what working families expect from us. The committee chairman, the subcommittee chairman mentioned, and as has been mentioned so often by uh subcommittee chairman and the full chairman, uh you have to make tough choices. I think we all agree with that as appropriators. But the tough choices uh were made as to how much revenue you're gonna have available and what you're gonna pay for. In the big bad bill as we call it, you call it the big beautiful bill, uh according to your desires, if dynamic scoring were applied, and that's what you have suggested, that would have cost us four point seven trillion dollars in revenue. Static scoring would have been ironically less, three point eight trillion dollars. Either number is an extraordinary number and would fund the appropriation bill uh for uh at least three years. Uh sadly, we don't make hard choices. What we do is we give significant tax cuts from no money that we have in excess uh but from children national security although we don't really do it out of national security cause we make exceptions for national security but not necessarily for children people with health uh problems no hearing was had with the education secretary no hearing department of labor not a single hearing with any NIH institute director so there was no question positive to an NIH uh uh institute director what are the consequences of these cuts and i wanna join uh uh ranking member in congratulating uh uh our subcommittee chairman in making sure there wasn't a cut uh in NIH i think that's a Good policy, and I thank him for his leadership on that. Instead of working, however, on a bipartisan manner to produce a bill that helps our people access health care education and employment opportunities, the majority is using this bill to in many ways dismantle, as the ranking member said, the Affordable Care Act. To start, this bill rescinds funding from PCORI, which saves the taxpayer and helps brings costs down across our health care system. And it takes two billion dollars in user fees from the state health care exchanges. squandering money we've already collected and making it harder for those without employer provided coverage to get insurance they need. Uh, moreover, the fiscal year twenty-seven bill would severely disinvest in the youngest Americans and their families. I spoke during the subcommittee marker about a positive income in impact of three hundred and fifty million dollars for preschool development grants, programs, and a hundred and fifty million for the full service community school programs. amendments will be offered for that. Representative Torres and I each have an amendment to that effect, which I hope we will adopt. I also have an amendment to protect scientists, doctors, and medical researchers at NIH and other health and research agencies from being targeted and fired based upon political considerations, not scholarship and science. And I hope we can come together under the vision and leadership of our ranking member, to restore the funding cuts across this bill which includes the three point seven billion dollars from the department of labor including job corps and i understand mr. zinke will have an amendment to address that problem and i applaud him for it four billion dollars from hhs and one eight point one billion from the department of education education is the seed corn we're destroying that mr. chairman this bill is just another example in a long list of appropriations bills that the majority has put forward, with one simple message to the American people. You're on your own. You wanna make sure your preschoolers get the support and education they need to start kindergarten ready to learn? You're on your own. You wanna provide your family with affordable health care coverage through the York State Exchange? You're on your own. Want to access hands-on skills training through the Job Corps? and get a pathway to a good career you're on your own mister chairman we have an opportunity today to change the rhetoric from you're on your own to we're on your side let's do it i yield back

thank you gentlemen for your comments the gentlelady from ohio miss captors recognize her remarks on the bill

thank you uh chairman cole Ranking Member DeLauro and Chairman Ederhold, uh, thank you all for your hard work and our dear friend Ranking Member DeLauro detailed and spoke out against the many programs and departments which received harmful cuts in this bill. Over the weekend in my district there was a mass shooting. Twelve people were shot on Sunday while enjoying the Old West End Festival, and thanks to our dedicated first responders, no one has yet succumbed to their injuries. Uh, all of the victims are in some state of re- recovery and we pray for their full recovery. Those first responders were likely able to provide such excellent care in part, thanks to the groundbreaking research done by programs like the Center for Disease Control's Firearm Injury and Mortality Prevention research program. Yet the majority in this bill has decided this program, which has likely saved constituents, in each of our communities is no longer worthy of the twelve point five million, for a whole country, twelve point five million it received in fiscal year twenty twenty six. Instead of flat funding, uh the majority decided to eliminate its entire funding. Thus the bill provides zero dollars for the firearm injury and mortality prevention research program, Some might call that insanity, but this is what's happened.

Uh-huh.

Our country has had and endured this year two hundred and seventeen mass shootings already. Two hundred and seventeen.

Uh-huh.

And yet the majority is eliminating the firearm injury and mortality prevention program. How do you explain that? This bill just doesn't cut the obvious programs to help situations like the one in our community. It cuts wrap-around constructive community services to help prevent tragedies that unfortunately are happening. How? It eliminates all funding for the youth job training under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act state grants. It also cuts substance use treatment and prevention by fifty-eight million dollars. And it cuts mental health services my goodness, by thirty-three million dollars, um, talk to any of your sheriffs, three quarters of the persons in county jails across this country have conditions of mental illness, sometimes coupled with alcohol and drug abuse. Seventy-five percent. These programs were created with the intent to build a civil society. We are becoming an uncivil society. This bill cuts or eliminates essential programs without giving, especially our youth and others who are troubled services and support to fill the gap. Um, leaving very seriously ill people at the side of the road is actually radical. I always thought the Republican Party was a conservative party. I should know my own roads. It is becoming a radical party,

Mm.

actually cruel, and The net result is a diminishment in our way of civil life. I don't see how this bill puts America first or makes Americans healthy again. If my Republican colleagues truly believe in those slogans, then I challenge them to please amend this bill so it can actually help fragile Americans. I urge my colleagues to vote no on this bill until that happens. No. No, I'm not. Thank you and I yield back.

I thank gentlelady, uh, gentlemen from Arizona, Mister Ciscomani is recognized for remarks on the bill.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I proudly rise in support of the Labor, Health and Human Services Education and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill for fiscal year twenty twenty seven. The bill protects taxpayers by eliminating wasteful spending while safeguarding the essential programs that promote American excellence. students, young adults, the elderly, and those managing serious medical conditions all depend on the programs, and priorities that are funded in this bill. Financial aid programs like Pell Grants give Americans the boost they need to pursue their education and build a better future. As a Pell Grant recipient myself, I'm proud to support increased funding for this program because time and time again, we see recipients take the assistance and turn it into generational success. This bill also includes meaningful increases for women's health care, Alzheimer's research, cancer research, an increase in NIH funding, TRIO program increase, and the Head Start programs that deliver real measurable results to those who need them most across southern Arizona and beyond. Rural America, too, relies on the funding pack- on this funding package. This bill provides one point eighty-five billion for community health centers, five hundred and seventy five million for rural hospitals at risk of closure lifelines for some of our most vulnerable communities for sure this legislation is worth fighting for and i look forward to getting it across the finish line today thank you sir and i yield back

thank you gentlemen for your comments gentlemen from georgia mister bishop is recognized for comments on the bill

thank you mr. chairman i just wanted to take a moment to Thank you, Chairman Adelho, Ranking Member DeLauro and your staff, for all the hard work that's gone into the bill. Um, regretfully I'll have to oppose the measure, the cuts that have been proposed in the bill will make health care less affordable, education and job training less accessible, and potentially jeopardize the futures of millions of Americans. Although the President said last month that he isn't thinking about Americans' finances, even one bit, uh amidst his negotiations to end the war in Iran it is vital that members of Congress, particularly this appropriations committee use this platform to ease the affordability burdens that are being faced by the American people. The bill's provisions that weaken the Affordable Care Act, that raise interest rates for student borrowers, that slash funds for vital teacher training and education initiatives, for children in k through twelve elementary schools are not the way to go to address the challenges that Americans are currently facing. While I'm grateful for the inclusion in the manager's amendment of language that will enable Job Corps operators and campuses to accept shipbuilders, workforce development grants, equipment donations and other investments, I'm still troubled by the fifty percent cut to the program. The Trump administration has targeted the program for closure. And while I'm grateful that the Appropriations Committee has rejected this drastic step of fifty percent cut, would result in closure of many of the Job Corps centers, layoffs of Job Corps staff, and place at risk the dreams and the aspirations of thousands of promising students. It's critically important that we fully invest in Job Corps. Over sixty years it has paid tremendous dividends in terms of ensuring that people become productive members of the labor force and not become reliant on public benefits. I remain hopeful that we can work together in a bipartisan manner in the coming weeks and months to restore funding for Job Corps so that it can continue to carry out its very vital mission. Also want to mention my strong opposition to the one billion dollar cut that is proposed for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. I speak Now not just as an advocate for our nation's public health, but also in my role as dean of the Georgia congressional delegation. The CDC is one of the crown jewels of Georgia's economy, and employs thousands of people in Georgia with masters and doctoral degrees, and with students and researchers coming from across the world to study at Georgia research institutions heavily in partnership with the CDC, this organization contributes to a highly skilled workforce and a research ecosystem. The CDC stimulates immense economic activity with every dollar spent generating two dollars in epin- economic growth for Georgia. Most of the CDC's budget, however, doesn't stay in Georgia. About eighty percent of its annual appropriation goes to state and local departments, health departments across the country, and these cuts uh will be felt Uh, they will reduce disease surveillance, yield fewer immunizations and fewer screenings for breast and cervical cancer for all of our constituents. It's heartbreaking to see the damage that the Trump administration and the Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy, Jr. have wreaked upon the CDC over the past eighteen months. In fact, the New York Times ran a damning profile of Secretary Kennedy's dysfunctional leadership at the department this past Sunday. In the article, it described his little interest in managing the details of work in the department, his deep mistrust of career civil officials and low morale throughout HHS, and his disinterest in matters that are not on his priority list. In other words, this is not the best and brightest that until this administration we've come to expect from the leaders over there. The firings and the high profile resignations of top CDC leadership the departure of experienced health professionals, the politicization of scientific guidance, the disparaging of career professionals, and now the one billion dollar cut in the CDC budget do not bode well for our nation's ability to respond to emerging public health threats at home and abroad. President John F. Kennedy, the secretary's uncle, once said that the time to repair the roof is when the sun is shining. Sadly, that is a lesson both he and House Appropriations Committee seem to have forgotten. We don't want to wait for another pandemic to begin to make investments in our public health infrastructure. We want to do it now, when the conditions are favorable, so that we are not caught unprepared. Millions of lives are literally at risk by the decisions that we make today. I do applaud the significant work that CDC is doing, despite its leadership challenges to ensure that no infectious diseases are spread, as the United States, Canada and Mexico welcome guests from around the globe for the World Cup. The CDC has taken on a high-level role gathering and reporting outbreak data, sharing guidance on testing and reporting symptoms. In recent weeks, CDC officials have convened weekly calls with public health officials in the eleven US host cities and dispatched staff to assist them in person. Doctors nationwide are participating in simulations that anticipate the work. Secretary Kennedy, however, has left the department's response to Doctor uh J Bhattacharya, a health economist with no prior experience in public health, even though he's leading the CDC. I might add that he's also leading the National Institutes of Health as well. I'd also note that the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response, which is in charge of pandemic preparedness and standing up field hospitals and quarantine facilities in Kenya, is currently being run on an acting basis by John Knox, a former Los Angeles firefighter who founded a group, firefighters for freedom, uh, during the pandemic to fight vaccine mandates. With Ebola raging in the Democratic Republic of, uh, the Congo, whose team is scheduled to play in houston atlantic atlanta and guadalajara as well uh as the recent case of hantavirus uh aboard the cruise ship uh this is not the time to cut c d funding all for poor leadership i hope that the appropriations committee will reconsider the unwise cuts uh to the c d c and to the other programs that will have an adverse impact on healthcare education and job training and with that i yield back

well thank you uh it's uh it's gonna be a long day and a and a chair will be here at this o'clock but i would just ask members to try to stay within the allotted time uh gentleman from michigan mister Moolenaar is recognized to address the bill

thank you mr. chairman and i i rise in support of the fy twenty seven labor health and human services and education appropriations bill This bill provides strong funding for the national institutes of health, helping to ensure that the United States remains the world leader in biomedical research. This also includes one hundred thirty-seven million for tuberculosis prevention. Just on a personal note, I lost a constituent in my district recently who had back surgery. She, her name was Shanda Isinga, and she was having, uh, back surgery so she could spend more time with her grandchildren. Unfortunately, that bone graft material from a cadaver bone, uh, was contaminated with TB. And so I very much appreciate the focus on, uh, testing and, and screening for tuberculosis, uh, in this bill. Uh, additionally, this bill secures crucial funding to support the shared-in community hospital in my district strengthening healthcare access for rural Michiganders. I want to thank Chairman Adderhall for your leadership. on this legislation and I urge all of my colleagues to support it. With that, I yield back.

Thank the gentlemen. The gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Clyburn, is recognized for remarks on the bill.

Thank you very much, Jim and Cole, and I thank Ranking Member DeLauro and Ranking Member, Idaho, for their work on this bill. Regrettably, I rise in opposition to this bill that's currently written and urge my colleagues to oppose this measure because it simply does not meet the moment. On labor, this bill fails. On health, it fails. And on education, it fails our nation's public schools and the more than fifty million children they serve. My most recent book, about the first eight South Carolingians, black South Carolingians who served here in this body uh among them is a man robert smalls all of us i suspect most of us if not all have heard of robert smalls an interesting man who i call south carolina's most consequential person who ever lived robert smalls is among these eight born enslaved never had a formal education but he is considered by most people to be the only real civil war hero i call him the most consequential south carolinian who ever lived because it was robert smalls who introduced the resolution in the eighteen sixty eight south carolina constitutional convention that provided for free public education for all up until that time public education in this country was reserved for the elite robert smalls introduced that legislation as a former public school teacher i always revered robert smalls He was born enslaved, never formally educated, but he understood the value of education. But long before Robert Smalls, King Solomon wrote in his proverb, I think it's twenty-two, six, "Train up the child in the way it should go." and when it is older it will not depart from it why would we be cutting k through six education i have no idea we are visiting upon the public school children a sentence of a life with our proper foundations. We give all this money to higher education, all this money uh to post, secondary, even graduate studies. But when it comes to K through twelve, the foundation, we shortchange it. And this bill, we ought to be ashamed of this, takes away from early education for young people. Mister Chairman, I really feel uh that when you are under educating children at the foundational level, we are beginning to turn the clock back on what really makes us a civil nation. And now you're back.

Thanks gentlemen for his remarks. The gentlelady from Florida, Miss Wasserman Schultz is recognized for remarks on the bill.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I I also rise to speak in strong opposition to the fiscal year twenty twenty seven labor health and human services education appropriations bill. This is one of the most consequential bills our committee considers each year, constituting nearly thirty percent of all non-defense discretionary spending. It's a bill that's supposed to protect American workers, keep our country healthy, lower health care costs, and educate America's next generation. Unfortunately, this legislation achieves none of those aims and instead makes the problems we should solve in this bill a whole lot worse. And that's really disappointing because there are provisions within the bill that I have championed for years that will do a lot of good. It includes funding for drowning prevention at the CDC just as we approached peak season for drowning deaths in florida and around the nation it also continues bipartisan investments in early cancer detection and screenings like my pals act which protects access to annual mammograms for women beginning at age forty without a copay and it provides funding for the lcl hastings program for advanced cancer screening to expand preventative examinations in historically disadvantaged communities and i also appreciate the report language that strengthens cancer survivorship care including new language to help children and young adults in medicaid transition from active treatment into primary care but unfortunately that's really where the good ends the bill guts the department of labor slashing funding by twenty seven percent it eliminates key job training programs for both adults and young people leaving them without the needed skills right as artificial intelligence wipes out more jobs it eliminates the job corps the largest free education and job training program for adults in this country House Republicans love to bash colleges and universities, yet they're ripping away a vital vocation ladder into a good job. That's just short-sighted and cruel. And the bill eliminates funding for the senior community service employment for older Americans program, to help low-income unemployed seniors re-enter the workforce. With Trump's gas, groceries and utility prices rising, too many of my older constituents face no choice right now but to return to work. For the Department of Health and Human Services, It gets even worse. House Republicans continue their unending assault on the Affordable Care Act, this time cutting two billion dollars for operating the ACA insurance marketplace. How are people who are seeking quality, affordable health care going to be able to get easy access to assistance in signing up for coverage getting their questions answered? Be able being able to manage their way through their side-by-side comparisons. That's what that marketplace funding is for. And at a time when health care premiums are skyrocketing and over a million people have dropped insurance coverage because House Republicans let the enhanced premium tax cuts expire uh uh tax credits expire at the end of last year, doubling, tripling and quadrupling Affordable Care Act policies, we are leaving them twisting in the wind and adding insult to injury in this bill. At a time when health care premiums are skyrocketing, over a million people haven't have dropped over a million people have dropped insurance coverage. House Republicans want to inflict even more damage on hardworking American families. It is heartless. This bill also continues to undermine reproductive health services, eliminating title ten family planning services, gutting the healthy start program, and blocking funding for Planned Parenthood. The bill makes our country more susceptible to infectious infectious disease outbreaks, right as the health secretary peddles more deranged, unfounded conspiracies about vaccines. It slashes more than eight hundred million dollars for CDC's domestic HIV and AIDS prevention and research work cuts lifesaving funding for mental health and substance abuse treatment and decimates ARC the agency that we count on to reduce medical errors and hospital infections clearly my Republican colleagues don't care about either and this bill closes the door to opportunity for our nation's next generation it increases interest rates for five million college student borrowers while simultaneously how does that make any sense it cuts career technical and adult education programs by seven hundred and twenty-one million dollars closing another career pathway for millions of people and it leaves our most vulnerable children to fend for themselves by cutting title one grants the largest source of k through twelve education funding by almost two billion dollars the list goes on and on and i go through the sordid gory details so that you can see just how bad this this bill is and just how many people it hurts. But put simply, this bill makes our nation sicker, undermines worker protections, and sets our children and students up for failure. How anyone can support this piece of legislation is beyond me. But as we know, a budget is a document about values, it shows us where someone's priorities lie. And when somebody's budget tells you that they don't care about our country's health, education or workforce, you should believe them. I urge a no vote on this bill and I yield back.

fact gentlelady the gentleman from texas mr.

sorry my daughter

cuellar is recognized for remarks on the bill

oh god

thank you mr. chairman and i understand uh that this bill is a work in progress and i uh but i certainly wanna thank the uh chairman uh uh for the work and your staff and the ranking member also for the work and your staff on this um uh there's additional work that needs to be done so we can continue but we'll get to that at a later time but i do wanna highlight couple of things that i think uh are very important and uh that i supported are important to my area and important to every part of this uh nation first of all the child abuse hotline and national domestic violence hotlines uh i wanna thank the committee for continuing their support for the national child abuse hotline and national domestic violence hotline uh the two million dollars for the national child abuse hotline the twenty point five for the national domestic violence hotlines uh those programs are critical lifelines for children families individuals who are facing crisis situations for many victims of abuse or violence a phone call or a text message may be the first step towards safety and recovery uh the continued support reflected in this bill ensures that trained professionals remain available uh to respond to americans when they need help so thank you so much for adding that funding the second one uh second area is the gear up and the federal trio program in fact i just finished meeting with somebody a student outside from rio grande la gruya uh that is part of the trio uh program uh so i wanna say thank you for the increased funding for gear up uh, and for the federal trio programs. The bill, uh, provides three hundred and ninety-four million dollars for gear up and nearly one point two billion dollars for the federal trio programs. These programs have helped first generation and low income students prepare for and succeed in higher education. In South Texas, in my area where many students are first in their families to attend college, these programs provide critical guidance and academic support throughout the college. They've uh helped expand educational opportunities for students who may otherwise face significant barriers for completing uh their higher education. So I thank the committee. The third area I wanna cover is Job Corps. Look, I know we reduced funding. I know uh this is the beginning part. I look forward working with the um Chairman and Ranking members so we can get to where we need to get when it comes to Job Corps. The Job Corps provides young Americans with education, vocational training, workforce skills that lead directly to employment opportunities. It really provides a second opportunity for uh these kids. I've met kids in the San Marcos area and the Laredo area. In fact, just recently in the Laredo, some of those students who have struggled uh to get uh uh the traditional education and this provides a pathway toward economic independent so again i am concerned about the significant reduction in funding for job corps i understand this is a process and i look forward working with the chair and the ranking members so we can get to that proper place at a later time with that i yield back the balance of my time

thank the gentleman for his remarks on the bill the gentleman from wisconsin mr. is recognized to address the bill

Thank you very much, Mister Chairman, and I just wanna thank our subcommittee chair. Um, one of the few, I guess, maybe joys these day in Congress is when we're able to work like Congress used to work, when people can disagree on issues but you can still find some cooperation and agreement on things. Um, still happened with this bill because, um, the gentleman and his staff, uh, operate the way that hopefully Congress will again someday, w- much broader, but right now, um, I just wanna thank him. uh for uh making uh this place a little better and a little bit more the way it should be um in particular i wanna thank you for helping to insure that there is a global funding for hiv and aid something that clearly uh is having a huge impact across the globe uh i wanna thank you for the uh animal abuse uh language in multiple fronts for the nih making sure that dogs and cats and others aren't abused just to uh have testing done in cases where they're not um and i wanna thank you for uh we had a constituent who brought up an issue about a terminal disease and a drug the fda used to approve all of a sudden decided they weren't gonna allow it anymore and when you're in stage four um cancer uh it's something that you can't have a focus or test group right cause they're gonna die if they're the group the control group and to get back to that practice um is something really important and i hope the fda listens to the language that we have in here so i i i just really appreciate honestly the way congress should be and hopefully will be again um and that's the main reason i wanna stand up i mean this is an area democrats care greatly about the issues in this bill um we are concerned about you know uh of the cuts that did happen to cdc eighty percent are for us hiv and aids and and that i think is a problem the cuts for the a. c. a. health insurance plans the jobs corps cuts the nlrb cut and k to twelve education um but some of this is just gonna be our ideological differences and that's gonna make it hard to support a bill like this but um i think it's worth just standing up when someone in congress stands up and takes us back to um an era when we worked uh much better and i just really appreciate our subcommittee chair for doing that and his staff um for also doing that cause if we all wound up doing that i think we all would get up a little more in the morning and be happy to come in so um with that i yield back mr. chairman

Thank gentlemen for his remarks. The uh gentlelady from Florida, Miss Frankel, recognize for remarks on the bill.

Thank you, Mister Chair. Um, I I uh rise in strong opposition to this bill in its current form. This is the FY twenty-seven Labor, Health and Human Services and Education Funding Bill. I wanna thank uh my next door neighbor colleague for his kind remarks. So I'll move on. Uh, the bill's not without merit, but here's the thing. This bill would have real and painful consequences to the women and girls of this country. In in fact, some might say this is a war on women and girls. Our mothers and grandmothers are the heart of our families, the caregivers, the teachers, the mentors, and the people we turn to in our most important moments. Women power our economy as workers, entrepreneurs, innovators, and leaders who help build prosperity in every community. So when a woman cannot get a cancer screening, when she cannot get access to basic health care, when she cannot be in charge of her own personal health care decisions, the impact does not stop there. It affects her children. It affects her family's financial security. It affects the health and strength of the entire community. And yet this bill eliminates or dismantles programs that generations of women have counted on to stay healthy, control their own health care decisions, and build better futures for themselves and their families. Let me count the ways. First, This bill completely eliminates title ten. For more than a half century, title ten has stood as the nation's premier bipartisan, I wanted to stress that, bipartisan family planning program, helping millions of Americans access contraception, cancer screenings, STI testing treatment, infertility services, and other basic preventative health care. The bill takes away all, all two hundred and eighty-six million dollars from that lifeline. To me, that is crazy. Think what that means in real life. Imagine a mother of two working hard, doing everything right, but barely making ends meet. She depends on an affordable clinic for her health care and the ability to plan her family's future. Without access to contraception or basic care, an unattended pregnancy can mean impossible choices. How does she keep working? How does she afford child care? Uh, Uh, I mean it goes on and on. How does she provide for the children who already depend on her? Or imagine a woman whose doctor has told her that another pregnancy could put her health at risk. Access to contraception is not just about planning a family, it can be about protecting her health and her future. And that's the difference that these programs make, not in theory, but in everyday lives of women and their families. Next. This bill eliminates the teen pregnancy prevention program, a program that use evidence-based approaches to help young people make safe, healthy and informed choices. Preventing intended pregnancy should be something we all agree on. Imagine a fifteen year old girl becoming pregnant before she has even a chance to grow up herself, a child facing the responsibilities of raising a child. A teen pregnancy can change the entire course of life. for young person. Young persons are more likely to experience pregnancy related complications, face barriers, completing their education and struggle with financial hardship. Uh, so, uh, so why are we turning our backs on this? And, uh, the bill also eliminates, uh, the funding for healthy start that for more than three decades have saved lives and moms and babies in the highest rate communities with the care and support they need improving prenatal care, reducing risk and helping more babies reach their birthday so why in the world would we cut this funding and if it's not enough it's not enough this bill cuts funding for the office on women's health in half uh uh up a an office has been focused on health issues that have been too long overlooked for maternal health uh cancer screen heart disease mental health and unique health needs that a women face uh this is uh it's dumb ok i'll just say it very simply cause i'm running out of time it's dumb and then the the bill goes further canceling one billion in research aim at improving maternal health uh outcomes at a time we're supposed to be doing more to keep women healthy this women this bill does less uh and listen folks our mothers and grandmothers spent their lives caring for us the least least we can do is to make sure that every generation now and after them have the care, respect and support they deserve. I believe we can do better and I hope as we will work together as this bill uh travels to support the women and families we represent. And I yield back.

Thank you, gentlelady, for comments. The gentlelady from New Jersey, Miss Watson-Kolman, is recognized for remarks on the bill.

chairman i must rise in opposition to this bill while i appreciate the majority included my common sense amendment to insure funding for the pregnancy risk assessment monitoring system and language to support youth mental health there are too many damaging cuts and program eliminations nothing in this bill makes america healthy again sets up our workforce to thrive in this broken economy, or ensures education is attainable for all. It worsens unjustifiable racial health disparities that have devastated communities of color for generations. Americans are struggling to mitigate rising costs, seek a portable health care, and build economic security for their families. Yet this bill cuts more than nineteen billion dollars, from the very programs designed to help them succeed. As AI transforms our economy, and entire industries face disruption, this bill tells workers that they are on their own. It eliminates funding for youth and adult workforce training grants. It eliminates programs that help formerly incarcerated Americans reenter the workforce. It eliminates employment opportunities for seniors, and it wipes out the job corps. This bill will also make people sicker. Racial minorities are more likely to get sick and less likely to receive care. And this bill, it slashes funding for the Office of Minority Health by forty percent. Furthermore, black women are more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes. Yet this bill cuts maternal and child health programs by more than a hundred and twenty million dollars. And there's more. This legislation also cuts over two hundred and twenty-five million from the Ryan White HIV AIDS program and eliminate and it eliminates funding for ending the HIV Econ Ec- epidemic initiative. After decades of bipartisan progress, after years of work by advocates, researchers, physicians, and people living with HIV, this bill effectively throws up its hands and walks away. between these health cuts and the elimination of the agency for healthcare research in research and quality republicans are choosing to ignore health disparities and put their heads in the sand our commitment to educational opportunity is also abandoned thanks to this legislation with more than eight billion dollars for the department of education on the chopping block this includes funding for title one schools serving low income students, support the english language learners, and teacher training in programs that help working adults develop skills. At the same time, it reduces financial aid and work study support for students trying to afford college. Every student deserves a fair shot at success, but this bill, it makes it harder for children, for families, and for future workers to get ahead. That is not fiscal responsibility, it is failure. a responsibility. Republicans tell us they want a smaller government, but make exceptions for government interference in personal health care decisions, medical research, and education. We should be investing in opportunity, in innovation, in public health, and in economic mobility. Yet Republicans are choosing austerity, ideology, and neglect. America deserves better. I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill as it is. currently uh configured and I yield back thank you Mister Chairman.

I thank General Lee for comments uh gentlemen from New York Mister Morelli is recognized for comments on the bill.

We're ready.

Thank you uh Mister Chairman I'd like to echo the comments of many of my colleagues about the leadership of the committee and uh the ranking member and the leadership of the subcommittee I'm really grateful uh for the cooperation for the dialogue while we may not agree certainly appreciate all the the good work that you do uh and wanna thank you and certainly the staff on both sides who spend so much time uh putting together complicated bills um i rise uh because americans are facing a cost eluding crisis groceries cost more rents are up and for too many families seeing a doctor means choosing between getting care and paying their bills That's the crisis in front of us, and this bill makes it worse. Instead of lowering health care costs, this bill pulls coverage away from families by cutting nearly two billion dollars from the Affordable Care Act funding that helps families find affordable coverage. Cuts another two billion dollars from job training and adult education programs designed to help workers earn more and get ahead. And it eliminates programs designed to make child care and education more affordable for working parents. These cuts come on top of a reconciliation bill last year that stripped Medicaid coverage from millions of Americans including over fifty thousand people in my district alone who are all one bad diagnosis away from financial ruin. The cost of living crisis is real. Families know it. We know it. The question is whether the Congress is going to do something about it. Families need affordable health care, good paying jobs, and a government focused on lowering costs and creating an expanding opportunity for all. That's why we're here, sent here to do. Uh, unfortunately, this bill doesn't achieve that. And, uh, I oppose it, urge my colleagues to defeat the bill and, uh, yield back my time.

Thank the gentleman for his remarks. Uh, gentleman from California, Mister Levins, recognize for remarks on the bill.

Thank you, Mister Chairman.

Thank you, sir.

Uh,

Thank you.

with whom I co-chair the Library of Congress caucus, I encourage everyone to join our bipartisan caucus to support the library. Unfortunately, I cannot support the bill is written. Uh, the bill cuts one point nine billion dollars in funding for title one schools. I'm the proud parent of two kids in a title one school. We see every day how important title one funding is to give children from low income families a fair shot at success. i see everyday when i'm home what that funding actually means it means smaller class sizes it means counselors and tutors and teachers aids it means a real shot at success for kids who'd otherwise get left behind i wanna ask my colleagues here if you'd indulge me in this raise your hand if your kids either currently go to public school or graduated from a public school anybody i see lots of i see some over there too that's good How about if you went to a public school, graduated from public school? Lots of you. Fantastic. Thank you for indulging me in that, and I would just say even if you don't have children in public school or didn't attend public school yourself, our public schools are also central to our economy and our national security. So, colleagues, I hope we can come together on educating the next generation because our children and our children's children are counting on us to get this right. Shifting gears, I'm also deeply concerned that bill doesn't do enough to rein in the systematic dismantling of our vaccine infrastructure now this might be a little sensitive for some but how many got their flu shot this past year almost everybody you nope didn't do it alright I knew everybody wouldn't so there's a reason that my doctor and maybe yours told you to get the flu vaccine the flu changes every year the virus changes so every year scientists identify the newest strains circulating around the world figuring out how to combat them, producing hundreds of millions of doses, and then they get them into pharmacies and doctors' offices before flu season hits. It's a pretty remarkable process. It's complex, it's coordinated, and it's protected this country for decades. Well, friends, that entire process is now in jeopardy. The secretary of HHS is undermining the scientific review channels that recommend which vaccines our children should receive and the vaccines we all get throughout our lives to keep ourselves and our loved ones safe. The secretary, as you may or may not be aware, fired all seventeen scientific experts who served on the advisory committee on immunization practices. That's the panel that the CDC has relied on for more than sixty years to tell doctors and health insurers which vaccines Americans should receive and when. The newly appointed committee immediately began rolling back vaccine recommendations for our children. And then this past March, a federal judge stepped in and blocked those changes ruling that the secretary had violated federal law and how he reconstituted the committee. The court effectively froze the panel. It cannot meet now, it cannot vote, and it has no quorum. So for the first time in over six decades, there's no functioning vaccine advisory committee to guide this fall's flu season. And the secretary didn't stop there, since the ruling he's made two attempts to issue a new charter to reconstitute the committee, both of which have raised serious legal questions, Well, the administration continues to appeal the court's decision. I, for one, am glad that the courts have intervened, but a court order is not a substitute for Congress, for all of us doing our jobs. It's our responsibility to direct how federal dollars are spent. That includes making sure this bill does not leave the door open for this administration to undermine public health infrastructure that millions of families rely on. Without a functioning advisory committee, there's real uncertainty about whether flu vaccine recommendations will be issued in time whether federal programs that help us vaccinate our children will have the guidance that they need and whether insurers will cover the shots. We're heading into flu season without the scientific guardrails that have kept our country safe for generations. That is simply unacceptable. And this bill, unfortunately, does not address it. For these reasons, unfortunately, I cannot support the bill as written. I appreciate it. And I'll yield back my time.

Thank the gentleman for his remarks on the bill. Uh, gentlelady from Illinois, Zunderwood, is recognized to address the bill.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the labor, HHS and education bill that we are considering today. This bill cuts more than nineteen billion dollars from proven programs that support maternal health and family planning, prevent the spread of disease, and provide health care coverage to millions of Americans. This bill comes at a time when Americans cannot afford their health care premiums, medical research is being illegally defunded by the Trump administration, and we could be seeing the largest Ebola outbreak in history. Unfortunately, it falls short of this moment. In the past year, Republicans' big ugly bill cut a trillion dollars from health care and ended the enhanced Affordable Care Act tax credits, I thought to pass, which made health care coverage attainable for millions. Families across the country are already paying hundreds or thousands more dollars for coverage or being priced out altogether and going uninsured. I know some of my Republican colleagues agree because they voted to pass my three-year extension on the House floor just a few months ago. And yet, here we are today, considering a bill that cuts two billion dollars from the ACA Marketplace operations, even harder to get covered. Health care has never been more expensive, and yet this Republican bill would leave families out to dry. Additionally, this bill eliminates the patient-centered Outcomes Research Trust Fund, which supports critical investments in maternal health research that is already saving the lives of countless mothers. We need more research, not less, to end disparities and achieve better birth outcomes, especially for black moms. other high-risk populations. Our country is in the midst of a maternal mortality crisis, and this bill fails to meet the moment. Hospitals are closing, labor and delivery units are disappearing, and people can't afford to go to the ones that are left. We are also seeing the consequences of the Trump administration's short-sighted decision to slash critical investments in global health and foreign aid just like Democrats on this committee warned at last year's markups. And sure enough, within a year of Elon Musk bragging that Doge had, and this is a real quote, "accidentally canceled Ebola prevention", we have seen a catastrophic failure to detect and contain the deadly outbreak of Ebola in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda. Instead of investing in the public health infrastructure that has enabled us to navigate past outbreaks, the Trump administration is flailing. They are even sending Americans exposed to the virus to quarantine in Kenya, instead of bringing them home for treatment as we have safely done before. And this bill doubles down on these failures by cutting one billion dollars more from the CDC during a deadly virus outbreak. Secretary Kennedy has overseen the destruction of our public health infrastructure spread dangerous misinformation at every turn, reinstated insurance fraudsters, canceled lifesaving research, and done nothing to lower costs for the American people. As a nurse, I can tell you that RFK Jr. is the number one threat to public health in this country. Outside of HHS, the bill eliminates billions in funding for workforce development programs, cuts Job Corps in half, decimates funding that supports the education, and development of students and teachers and slashes workforce protections. And of course, it continues to try to distract the American people from the soaring cost of living and other real problems created by failed Republican policies by bullying children who just want to access health care or play sports. Secretary Kennedy told this committee that the extreme funding cuts in the bill are necessary because, quote, We've got to tighten our belt. Please. The American people can see right through that. They're spending two billion dollars a day bombing Iran and are happy to give Trump a billion taxpayer dollars for a ballroom. Republicans in Congress spent two trillion dollars on a tax cut for their wealthy friends and paid for it by cutting health care for American families. It's shameful. This bill fails our workforce. It fails our students. It fails our teachers. It fails medical researchers who are looking for cures. It fails public health experts trying to prevent the next pandemic. It fails small businesses who need affordable health care coverage. It fails moms who want to deliver healthy babies and come home safely. It fails working families trying to make ends meet. I urge my colleagues in voting no, and I yield back.

Thank you, gentlelady. The gentlelady from Pennsylvania, Miss Deans, recognized for comments on the bill.

I thank you, Chairman Cole, Chairman Adderall, ranking member DeLauro. Uh, regrettably, I rise in opposition to this most important appropriation bill, labor HHS education. I'm deeply concerned by the funding cuts proposed in this bill, particularly to behavioral health services, education, and workforce training programs. Millions of Americans rely upon these to build stable and healthy lives. You know, Martin Luther King once said, " Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health is the most shocking and inhuman." So, on health. First, the bill cuts funding for SAMHSA by ninety-one million dollars. I have to ask folks, what are we doing here? Overdose deaths are finally on the decline, dropping by twenty-seven percent in twenty-twenty-four. the largest one-year decline ever recorded. Recent CDC data suggests that trend is continuing. That's incredible, lifesaving progress. So why at this moment would we cut the funding? To save taxpayer dollars? We know that untreated substance use disorders, addiction, costs this country four hundred billion dollars every year. We also know that treating addiction saves seven dollars for every dollar that we spend. The proposal cuts funding for mental health services by thirty-three million dollars, substance use treatment services by twenty-one million dollars, and substance use prevention programs by thirty-seven million dollars. These are programs helping to keep people alive or to get into recovery, or prevent addiction altogether, also to rebuild one's life. Cutting them now risks undoing the progress we fought so hard to achieve. And I have to point out the contradiction here. Republicans propose eliminating the agency for healthcare research and quality, and PCORI, noting that other agencies like SAMSA already provide this research. I guess my colleagues across the aisle forgot that Doge fired the entire SAMSA team and ripped hundreds more from other research-focused agencies. You cannot eliminate one source of expertise weaken another and then claim the work will somehow continue. And then there's the report language blocking further study on harmful health effects of alcohol consumption. We already know excessive alcohol is a leading cause of preventable death in this country. Studying those harms shouldn't be controversial. It's what public health agencies are called to do. On NIH, I'm pleased to see that the majority recognizes the importance of biomedical research. but I'm worried about the border, the broader policy environment. There is no language in this bill to limit multi-year funding of awards, which is this administration, which this administration is using to reduce support for biomedical research despite congressional intent and strong budgets. This policy results, we know, in fewer projects and people supported by the same NIH budget, leaving promising research unfunded. There is no language enforcing the negotiated indirect cost rates. In fact, there is language in this bill that further targets universities, the engines of medical research and innovation. And there is no language in this bill to rein in an administration set on politic politicizing grantmaking process. Just this week, the president released an executive order that would convert nonpartisan civil servant positions at NIH, including program officers into at-will political employees. And last week, OMB released a rule that undermines the merit-based, expert-driven grant processes that have made NIH America's crown jewel, and American leader in science and technology. As to education and workforce, I'm a former college professor. This bill also makes significant cuts to education, reducing the Department of Education's budget budget by eight point one billion dollars and if you're wondering why that might be and i wanna refer to the terrific comments of uh my colleague mister kleibern and uh mister levin maybe you can just look to page three nineteen of project twenty twenty five it is the first sentence on the chapter entitled education and i read it and here's what it says quote mission federal education policy should be limited and ultimately the federal department of education should be eliminated couldn't be any clearer than that that is what project twenty twenty five behind this administration is driving in terms of this budget the bill cuts the federal supplemental education opportunity grant program and federal work study programs by over three that by more than three hundred million dollars each for many students programs are the difference between being able to attend college and having to walk away from it i have seen such students they have been my students but what really gets me is what happens next you would think that if we're making it harder for students to afford college we'd at least be strengthening workforce training programs and alternative pathways into good paying jobs in this country instead this bill does the exact opposite it cuts workforce innovation and opportunity uh act uh, state grants by one point eight billion dollars. Think of our economy right now, and we are going to cut one point eight billion dollars from workforce opportunity grants. Let's be clear about what's happening. This bill makes it harder for people to get a college degree. At the very same time, it takes away job training programs that help people get their education. Eliminating these opportunities, undermining undermining public health, uh, and undermining undermining, uh, the misinformed the choices that this administration is making, I simply cannot support. I certainly hope that when this bill returns, it will be in far better form for the American people. I yield back.

Thank you, General Lee, gentlemen from Indiana, Mister McMahon is recognized for remarks on the bill.

Thank you, Chairman Cole. Ranking member DeLauro and chair at a whole for the subcommittee for your work on this legislative fund, and the department's labor, health and human services, education and related agencies for fiscal year twenty twenty seven. I rise in opposition to this bill, which does not serve the American people, where we should be continuing investments in education, access to health care and protecting workers. This bill proposes to get rid of the programs that support those goals completely. Truthfully, the disinvestment in our nation family, students, and our economy is unacceptable. The majority claims the support of families and workers, and that they want to strengthen our economy in combat, raising costs of living. However, their priorities are outlined in this genera- in this legislation that reflect those values. For example, this bill further worsens actions by the administration to gut the Department of Education. This committee should be continuing investments in programs that develop teachers and pipelines and increase retention. Instead, the committee is proposing to eliminate programs that have a proven track record in supporting educators such as the teacher quality partnership and support effective instruction programs. Schools in my district are struggling to keep teachers in the classroom, and functioning with tight and shrinking budgets. We must prioritize high quality education to keep up with the growing and challenging workforce. A workforce that is also dependent on upskilling opportunities. This bill would eliminate funding for the adult youth education programs and adult education. Our economy thrives when we invest pipelines in the demand jobs and careers that create good paying jobs strong industry, and an economy that works for everyone. In addition to the services these programs provide on the job, WAIOA job training funds are used to provide access to child care and transportation which creates more opportunities in employment. Unfortunately, this bill attacks on workers on several fronts. While the administration seeks to upend regulations that keep workers safe, put their hard-earned wages at risk, and strip their rights of collective bargaining, the majority has decided that is not enough. For example, the National Labor, the National Labor Relations Board would face a ninety-four million decrease in their budget for fiscal year twenty twenty seven. The NL NLRB has been the functioning within an inadequate inadequate staffing, leaving regional field offices to manage increased caseloads. Our continued investment in the agency is not only essential, is in the best interest of our workforce and our economy. Despite these failings, I would like to acknowledge the committee's decision to include four million dollars for child sex for child sexual abuse prevention at the c d c center for energy injury prevention and control the injury center does critical work in prevention violence and injury including research to develop primary prevention practices regarding child sexual abuse the continued funding for this program will help serve that mission and i look forward to continuing the work to fully fund this priority in order to protect children from maltreatment and abuse child sexual abuse is a public health and safety issue that we have the ability to prevent. Increased investment in prevention activities at the injur injury center will help to ensure the responsibility to stop or report abuse does not rest with the children. With that, I urge my colleagues to oppose this legislation and I yield back.

Thanks, gentlemen, for your comment. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? General Layton from Washington, go ahead, Janelle. I should address the bill.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, and thank you to Chairman Adderhall and Ranking Member DeLauro, and their staff for your hard work on this bill. I'm deeply appreciative of the open lines of communication that have existed between our teams across the aisles. Um, while I do not support the underlying bill, I'm encouraged by the bipartisanship that went into drafting it, and look forward to the improvements made possible in this mark-up. Um, last year I stood in this committee and asked you all to not put the failures of adults on our children and to vote to ensure parents reserve the right to remove their children from traumatic drills i remain profoundly grateful to the parents and grandparents and people with children in their lives in this room who helped pass my amendment to require parental opt-outs of active school shooter drills and i'm so appreciative of the parents and teachers i've been able to connect with on this difficult topic since then um this year i'm profoundly grateful to see this language carried into the base text at a time when there isn't a lot or two sides of the room seem to agree on in this space this language shows me that we can at least agree on one thing um that we don't wanna see our federal dollars going to unnecessarily traumatize our children. Um I've talked a lot about bananas, so I will keep this brief. Um I am thrilled to see um language to develop low risk classification for preparing fresh foods included in this bill. Um this committee initially passed this language as an amendment to the Ag Reproposal back in April, and the bill before today includes complimentary language directing the secretary of HHS in coordination with the secretary of Ag, to make this distinction and use it to update nutrition, food safety, and food preparation regulations to reflect its common sense approach to ensure states are not hindering the ability for child care providers to serve fresh fruits in daycare. Um, this language listens to our child care providers, it makes their lives easier, and ultimately will bring down the cost of child care in this country. Um, back home in Washington state, um, our state is battling a budget shortfall that leaves schools in the impossible position to have to let our staff go. But what I'm hearing that is most troublesome to me is that our schools are letting go of our most student-facing roles first, the part-time paraeducators, cafeteria cooks, bus drivers, instead of cutting administrative salaries. Our students, especially those in need of an extra hand, rely on these educational support professionals. They are instrumental in fostering student development and setting up students for long-term success. But I am hearing stories back home, um, about superintendents getting personal showers installed in their office, because they like to go on runs during their lunch. all while our support staff are being told their part-time wages aren't part of a tighter budget. So it's great to see language included in the report, recognizing the critical work of our nation's student-facing education staff, and outlining these concerns. And I look forward to seeing schools make better decisions with our limited resources. Um, show of hands, how many of you built, um, cardboard forts when you were a kid?

No.

Yeah. Yes. Um, uh, right now I have a four-year-old who, uh, spends a lot of time with um and has found them to be the best toy in the world um the best thing we can do for young people in this country is to give them the tools they need to think creatively um i live in a rural community and um as we think about how we get shop class back in junior high ensuring that we recognize that building forts that spending time outside is part of how we get world class mechanics and technicians and carpenters in this world um there's language in this bill that acknowledges the key considerations recognizing that excellence in high school programs leads to good fulfilling jobs, is predicated on a flexible and achievable skills building, like cardboard model building with high quality instructors. So rather than, you know, asking a a school with limited resources to invest a million dollars in shop equipment for their junior high program, let's give them the flexibility. And we're doing that in this bill, uh, to ensure that these things count as shop programs and we're able to start building, um, really high quality junior high programs. um and finally because our work is never done i am glad to see this bill follows up on the directives including in last year's bill to ensure cte programs are reaching all middle grades expand dual enrollment pathways for technical work and high school welding and shop programs building a rural water and wastewater apprenticeships strengthening the recruitment training and retention of ems professionals to address work for shortages in our most underserved rural and tribal communities and i look forward to continuing to work with you all and the secretary's to bring the back these results and I yield back.

Thanks, Gentlelady, for remarks, the uh gentleman from California, Mister Harder, is recognized to address the bill.

Thank you, sure. Thank you. Uh, I'm excited to draw some attention to a real bright spot in this bill, which is the bipartisan work that it does to advance the science of reading and address our nation's literacy crisis. Uh, this is something really important to me. I have two young daughters. One of the biggest joys in my life was teaching my oldest daughter to read. Uh, and, uh, we're working our way through James and the Giant Peach right now. It has us on the edge of the seats. It is a real, uh, exciting page-turner. But this committee has a long history of doing important work on literacy. Back in nineteen ninety eight, uh, we established the National Reading Panel, uh, which put forward a comprehensive view on what the science of reading actually looked like and it spurred a nationwide change um when president bush came into office he put forward reading first no child left behind president obama took up that mantle uh with a race to the top unfortunately however over the last two decades that important work on literacy has really degraded and it's come at a cost we have paid for that neglect because right now This is the year where we are lower for graduating seniors in literacy than at any other time since we've been tracking records. A third of our seniors are graduating high school with below a basic level of liter literacy. A third of our seniors in high school can't even read, and they're going off to higher education and off to the workforce. That's a crisis. So I'm excited uh that in this bill today, we are going to restore. uh the national reading panel which i think is going to do an awful lot of work to make sure that we can update our assessments on issues like reading stamina the role of writing instruction what strong curriculum actually looks like and make sure that we can support teachers and parents in improving literacy and that's not all uh we are also going to make sure that we are highlighting the importance of literacy coaches in schools encouraging the department of education to prioritize science of reading investments when it makes grants to states and school districts. And then we also have laid the groundwork for reforms to the What Works Clearinghouse, which is a really essential resource for teachers that unfortunately has again been uh degraded because of a lot of red tape and bloat and so we have to make sure that the guidance that comes out of that clearinghouse is actually useful and actionable for folks in the classroom. Uh, this bill also commits to increasing funding for comprehensive state literacy grants by thirteen percent, and instructs the Department of Education to support, uh, programs aligned with the science of reading, supported by strong or moderate evidence. We know that this works. We have now seen a number of states, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, Louisiana, that have put forward these reforms already. And they've seen huge gains in literacy in every single state that has adopted and implemented what the science of reading actually looks like. So my hope is that we're gonna be able to reignite a national bipartisan conversation on how to improve reading and how to improve education, uh, through the work of this committee. And I really wanna thank our chair, Mister Aderholt, uh, the ranking member, Mister Loro, as well as my colleagues across the aisle, Mister Strong and Mister Guest, who have been tremendous partners in this effort. And I'm so excited, uh, about what we're gonna be able to do here to bring back, uh, education as a a real important issue that unfortunately has seen uh a lot of neglect over the last couple decades. And with that I yield back. Thank you.

Thank you gentlemen for your comments. Are there other members wishing to address the bill? Seeing none, uh I would like to recognize Chairman Ederhold to offer a manager's amendment.

Yes, Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer a bipartisan amendment that includes language, agreed to by both sides of the all for the bill and the report and i would urge my colleagues for this amendment

i assume you don't need the amendment read

and yeah we would ask for dispense the reading

without objection the reading of the amendment is dispensed with you mean to make sense of and gentlelady oh you wanna explain the amendment

no i just that's that's i think it's a bipartisan amendment it includes language both sides have agreed to and so i'd urge my colleagues for the amendment and i yield back

yeah Thank you. Gentlelady from Connecticut, ranking members recognized to address the amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, over the last few days, Chairman Natterhall and I have worked to make a number of non-controversial and technical changes to the bill, uh, and report for programs that are interested to so many members of the committee, both sides of the aisle. I appreciate the collaboration with the chair and his staff in putting the amendment together. We are in agreement and I urge the adoption of the amendment.

Thank you, gentlelady. Gentlelady from Florida, Miss Wasserman-Chilter.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise in strong support of this manager's amendment, and I'd like to especially thank Chairman Adderhall and Ranking Member DiLoro for working with me to include my key priorities to help women detect breast cancer earlier and to access the procedures that they deserve to restore physical and sensory restoration after a mastectomy. As most of you know, fighting breast cancer isn't just a professional priority of mine, it is deeply personal. That's because as I've shared, eighteen years ago, I heard those four harrowing words, " you have breast cancer." And those are words that no one ever wants to hear. You've heard me describe the weight of those words, which crushed me like an anvil. But thanks to excellent doctors and support from close family and friends, I was and remain cancer-free. Since then, I've made it my mission to use my platform and my voice in Congress to help other women facing their own battles with breast cancer. The fight against breast cancer starts with early detection, which is why I'm pleased that the manager's amendment includes language requiring the secretary to study access and coverage gaps related to three D mammography this advanced life-saving saving technology substantially improves detection rates and effectively penetrates penetrates dense breasts, which many young women have and many women of all ages has. That's crucial because it can be hard for two D mammograms to scan deeply And this advancement reduces the need for expensive, unnecessary follow-up screenings. Unfortunately, three D mammography access is limited and costs can vary significantly between health plans and based on where a woman lives. This amendment will help us better understand how extensive these gaps are, so we can help women get the high quality cancer screenings they deserve. And I'm also pleased the manager's amendment includes my language on perforator flap reconstruction and post-mastectomy sensory loss. which can really help women feel like themselves in their bodies again. Breast reconstruction after a mastectomy is not cosmetic. It is restorative. It is a woman reclaiming her body after cancer tried to take it from her. Perforator flap reconstruction uses a woman's own natural tissue to rebuild what cancer removed. And when performed by a skilled surgeon, it produces outcomes that look and feel more natural than implant-based alternatives. But too many women never even hear about this option, and too many surgeons never learn to perform it, and too many insurance plans refuse to cover it. While sensory restoration after mastectomy adre addresses something we rarely talk about, every survivor feels it, including this one. When surgeons remove breast tissue, they sever the nerves that allow a woman to feel her own body. That loss is profound, and I know that firsthand too. And that loss is permanent for far too many women, but it doesn't have to be. Surgical nerve repair techniques exist today that can restore sensation and give women back a connection to their own bodies that cancer stole. My amendment shines a light on both of these issues so that every woman who faces a mastectomy knows what her options are knows what she deserves and knows that this Congress sees her. I stood in her shoes eighteen years ago. I know what it means to fight to feel whole again. And I come to this committee today not just as a member of Congress, but as a survivor as a survivor, who refuses to stop fighting until every woman gets the care the information and the dignity that she deserves. So many of these advances weren't available when I battled breast cancer at forty one. We must mainstream helping women get the best treatment possible that has become essential standard practice, not a luxury. And very quickly, I also want to thank Representative Pocan for his amendment. preventing convicted human traffickers from participating in the h two b visa program and to chairman aderholt for including this amendment in the manager's package a federal visa program should never be a pipeline for exploitation not on our watch not now and not ever thankfully representative pokan's amendment which is in the manager's amendment fixes this problem and i urge my colleagues to support the manager's amendment appreciate your indulgence and i yield back

thank you gentlelady for comments gentleman from texas mister Cuellar is recognized for comments on the manager's amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the uh chairman and the ranking member for putting together this um manager's amendment and this is uh certainly a snapshot of what the appropriations committee is supposed to be doing and it's working together, so I thank both of them and their staff. I wanna talk about two uh provisions that got added. Uh, one comp- uh provision deals with the outcome based program review which i've been asking that every uh appropriation bill uh have this and as you know it's uh very simple to the point that it calls that for all the agencies under this bill that they review all their existing regulations and internal policies administrative requirements to identify what is outdated what's duplicative and what's not needed that is uh unnecessarily burdensome and find opportunities for cost savings eh and better program uh delivery. If we spend a dollar, let's get the bank for one dollar. So I certainly wanna thank them uh for adding this. The other one is uh is the energy workforce development language um uh that got added uh the adoption and the implementation of the energy and um natural resource career cluster within the state and local career technical education. A strong domestic energy workforce is critical to supporting our net uh nation's energy, reliability, economic uh competitiveness, and infrastructure resilience. This provision supports efforts to expand access to career opportunities across the energy sector and I'm talking about oil and gas, oil and gas uh career opportunities by strengthening the workforce pathways for students and workforce. In South Texas, the oil and gas industry continues to play a vital role. in job creation and economic growth. In fact, the pay is higher than the state average for the ones that work for the oil and gas industry. And ensuring students have access to this workforce training opportunities aligned with the industry's needs, that will help address the workforce shortages and support the region's long-term energy sector. So with that, I want to thank the Chairman and the ranking member and I yield back the balance of my time. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

thank the gentlemen for their remarks gentlelady from florida miss franklin is recognized for remarks on the manager's amendment

thank you mister chair well this manager amendment actually includes i think an extraordinary collaboration between doctor harris and myself i know you don't think it's possible but it is

i know

i thank him i don't know where he is but i do thank him he's actually uh been the driving force here uh it's to prohibit hhs from using any funds in this act to continue a deeply concerning a medicare prior authorization uh program that allows private companies to second guess doctors by using artificial uh intelligence to determine whether seniors can access care their physicians have already determined that they need and we've already seen the consequences of these barriers physicians are reporting that patients are being denied services that are covered under medicare's own guidelines seniors are waiting longer for care left in pain uncertainty and frustration while paperwork and artificial intelligence stands between them and treatment and these are for treatments for seniors living with parkinson's disease sleep apnea chronic pains mild conditions diabetic wounds and other serious illnesses and a delay in treatment can mean a worsening illness loss of independence, a trip to the hospital, or even the difference between life and death. And listen, we I think we all agree, Medicaid was built on a a uh simple promise that after a lifetime of work, Americans should be able to get the health care they have earned and prior authorization by artificial intelligence is uh putting the judgment of doctors and the needs of patients uh behind i i uh i urge the adoption of this amendment and i yield back

i thank the gentlelady for her remarks gentlemen from new york mister espia is recognized for remarks on the manager's amendment

thank you uh mister chairman this uh manager's amendment is much needed since the uh original bill has so many um loopholes and problematic provisions uh for my district including uh over twenty thousand students in my district that have received pell grant uh twenty five percent of the residents live under the poverty level and uh and of course the original bill does very little to address that issue and uh of and of course the district is also home to two hundred and fifty thousand immigrants making it up to be thirty three percent of the overall population this is a community that continues to contribute to our economy and our city so we knew we need do um we need to do more through these types of uh amendments uh and unfortunately the original bill doesn't do that we have english language learners and the original bill does away with these programs and the bill the original bill also rescinds funding for job training and workforce development so Thank you for any efforts to um make uh some sense of this uh assault and at and of course this is an effort that we must push forward together. Thank you.

Thank you gentlemen for your remarks, General Leigh from Illinois and Mister Underwood is recognized for remarks on the Manager's Amendment.

Thank you Mister Chairman, I rise in support of the Manager's Amendment because it includes several important provisions that I advocate. Now, this amendment will block the Department of Education's misguided decision to reclassify nursing as a nonprofessional degree with lower caps on student loans. This rule would saddle students with mountains of debt and put advanced nursing careers out of reach for many. America needs more nurses, not fewer. But this decision would worsen our nursing shortage and put more of a strain on our health care system especially in rural and underserved areas.

Mm-hmm.

This amendment ensures that no funds from this bill can be used to enforce the Trump administration's misclassification of nursing degrees. It's a good start, but unfortunately it does not go far enough. The Trump administration's harmful student loan rules hurt dozens of professionals and will lead to workforce shortages in a wide range of healthcare fields and other industries threatening public health, and raising costs on everybody. The entire rule must be blocked or rescinded. The manager's amendment also includes my language, supporting NIH research to develop strong standards for prenatal and postnatal vitamins. Eighty percent of maternal deaths are preventable. That is a shameful statistic for one of the richest nations in the world. While we face this preventable crisis, the last thing that moms need to worry about is whether the prenatal or postnatal that they're taking or working, or if they're just snake oil. This provision will help ensure that supplements advertised to benefit pregnant and postpartum individuals actually provide the benefits that they say they will. Moms deserve to know that the vitamins that they take to protect themselves and their babies are helping them not creating any additional risk. I am also very pleased that the manager's amendment includes my provision to ensure the Trump administration can no longer shut down Job Corps campuses with no explanation or recourse. Job Corps has helped generations of young Americans learn trades, earn certifications, find employment, and build stable futures. But it's so much more than just a training program, it's a lifeline. It provides education, housing, meals, health care, counseling, and stability for young people who are working hard to build a better future and contribute to their communities. The Trump administration has jeopardized that effort by making sudden arbitrary closure decisions that threaten everything that these students are working towards. This amendment will put an end to the chaos and restore some stability to these essential programs. My community saw firsthand how devastating these actions were. The Joliet Job Corps center was forced to close with no warning. More than fifty dedicated Job Corps employees in Joliet were suddenly laid off. and twenty students were effectively thrown out on the street, forced to relocate to a shelter for temporary housing. Last year, Mister Zinke and I worked on a successful amendment to stop these types of closures, and I'm very glad to say that the Joliet Job Course Center has since reopened. This amendment would add even stronger protections to make sure no community has to experience what mine did. I urge my colleagues to support the manager's amendment and I yield back.

Thank you, gentlelady, do any other members seek recognition to speak on the amendment? Seeing no others, I recognize oh, I'm sorry, yes, Miss Kepter, you're recognized.

I thank the gentleman very much and very briefly since energy was mentioned in terms of energy workforce, I thought it would be important to place on the record, first of all, the acknowledgement of how important energy really is in the energy workforce of the future, but I wanted to state for the record we're talking about not just oil and gas, as important as they are in coal, but

Mm-hmm.

I think the problem with oil and gas is the problem with gas. fission energy, advanced fission, fusion energy, hydrogen, renewable fuels, advanced solar, thermal recovery, back of the grid, supply lines, oil, and coal, and gas have been some of the major ones in the past century. But looking forward, there's a whole lot more on the horizon. Back of the grid supply requires special skills as we prepare new sites to do that, and we need people who are experts in advanced building materials, as well as energy conservation systems. So there's a lot more we can do even with um uh heat recovery and uh new systems that are being installed in homes today, it's just remarkable. Uh, though I don't live in Arizona, I know how homes are being built to face uh the sun and heating water at the same time in those homes and helping to air condition those homes. So there's a lot of new responsibilities that come to us as a country as we move toward a uh self-sufficient energy future, and it involves much more than the traditional sources, and I just wanted to put that on the line. Uh, we have an exciting energy future ahead of us as a country. and it's diversified so that there's true competition. Thank you and I yield back.

Thank you, General, Lady. Uh, any other members seek recognition on the amendment? Saying none, I recognize Chairman Eitelholz for uh one minute to close on the amendment.

Yep, I just again, this is a bipartisan amendment, includes language that both sides have agreed to. As you have just heard, I'd urge my colleagues to force this amendment and I yield back the balance of my time.

Thank you. The question is on the amendment. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye. All those opposed say no. They put in the chair, the ayes have it, and the amendment is adopted. And uh, yes, uh, I believe you have an amendment?

That I do, Mister Chairman, thank you, thank you.

Alright. There's an amendment on the desk.

I I have an amendment at desk and I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed.

Alright, uh, so so ruled, um, you're recognized for your amendment.

OK. Um, I rise to offer an amendment. to block the Trump administration's most recent and brazen attempt to politicize all grantmaking across the federal government. Over the last fifteen months, we have seen the Trump administration, uh, sow chaos across the country. Last year, Elon Musk and Doge canceled billions of dollars in grants, including grants for lifesaving NIH research, public health, substance use treatment, education programs, housing, renewable energy, and the list goes on. Now OMB is trying to codify that chaos and politicization of federal funding into a federal regulation. OMB's proposed rule would require all federal grants to be approved by the president's political appointees, who would require that grants would quote " advance the president's policy priorities" end quote. Excuse me? The Constitution is clear. Congress holds the power of the purse. This committee, the Appropriations Committee, determines how to allocate funding for grants, for NIH research, for public health, for substance use or education. It is not the President's policy priorities, whatever they may be. This is our responsibility. Our colleagues on the authorizing committees determine the activities that are authorized under federal statute or the recipients who are eligible to raise funding under a federal program. It is the executive's branch, that's their job, to execute the laws that we pass, not to manipulate the process to advance a partisan agenda. Over the last year, federal judges have blocked many of the administration's efforts to illegally cancel grants or divert funds to favored political allies. Judges have ruled that cancellations were arbitrary and capricious and ordered the grants to be reinstated. OMB's proposed rule is an effort to enshrine arbitrary and capricious grant cancellations as standard operating procedure. The rule would encourage political appointees to terminate grants in the middle of a project simply because they and no one else believe the grants may be quote " inconsistent with program goals or agency priorities". No findings of fraud or non-compliance would be required, just the whims of an unelected political appointee. And OMB's proposed rule would dismantle the peer review process that has driven our scientific and technological progress since the end of World War Two. Our scientific agencies including the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, Department of Energy and NASA, rely on independent experts to review the scientific merit merit of a research proposal. The best science rises to the top, but not under this proposed rule. OMB's proposed rule specifically dir- directs political appointees to seek out ways to ignore and to override the scientific peer review process. They could pick and choose grants based on political favoritism instead of scientific rigor. Our scientific research agencies are the best in the world. They are the best in the world because they do not award funding based on political ideology or cronyism. NIH, NSF, Department of Energy, NASA. These scientific agencies have seeded advances in health care, chemistry, physics, computing, technology, renewable energy, and the list goes on. But our advantage as the scientific leader of the world relies on funding the best ideas, the most innovative ideas, the ideas with the greatest potential to cure disease or create a technological breakthrough. Turning our scientific agencies into factories, a political patronage, would be a disaster. The lost knowledge, the lost breakthroughs would be delayed for years or even gone forever. Mister Chair, h h my colleagues forgotten what their districts looked like just a year ago. Members of Congress were lambasted by their constituents, furious constituents who were irate at the disruption, unpredictability and the chaos that Elon Musk, an unelected billionaire and Russ Vogt unleashed on the country with the Doge chainsaw and Project Twenty Twenty five. Many of my colleagues chose to cancel town halls and meetings with constituents so they didn't have to face public accountability. But the lesson from last year is to stand aside, let Russ vote codify disruption, unpredictability, and chaos through this rule. But I have to say, I don't think you understood the outcry. We are here in a position today to turn this around as the appropriations committee, which is what our job is. I urge a yes vote.

Thank you, General Lee, for amendment. Gentlemen uh from Alabama, Mr. Adelholz, recognized. respond to the amendment.

Thank you, Chairman. I'll rise to oppose the gentlelady's amendment. Um, this amendment would block the Trump's administration's proposal, as it's already been said, to reform the framework for federal agencies' competitive grantmaking. Uh, the administration's proposal seeks to strengthen oversight and increase transparency into the federal grant system.

Thanks.

It seeks to ensure federal grants align with uh agency priorities that are best interest of the nation.

Well done.

OMB is currently seeking public comment on this proposal, so this matter would be best addressed through the formal process. And with that, I'd urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment.

Thank the gentlemen. The gentleman from Maryland, Mister Hoyer, is recognized to address the amendment.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chairman. I wrong i- I rise in very strong support of this amendment. This is not reform being talked about, it's additional politicization of the federal government and of the decisions being made by the federal government. Each agency has a specific and unique expertise on grant making in its area of jurisdiction. Mr. Vogt, otherwise known as OMB, should not be imposing uniform regulations across all departments and agencies Guidance is one thing, but regulation is another. Political appointees shouldn't certainly not be carrying out a centralized, partisan review of all discretionary grants as this bill would impose. It's not reform, it's control, it's authoritarianism. The peer review process for scientific-based grants, scientific-based grants, has been the gold standard for generations. and why our government is unique in so many ways with respect to other governments around the world. This would take peer review, merely advisory, in favor of political review. Moreover, allowing agencies to terminate funding at any time due to political considerations would have profound consequences on research organizations carrying out funded work. Ladies and gentlemen, Congress has a duty to carry out its oversight and account ability, an accountability role, by ensuring that this administration and any administration cannot simply decree harmful policies across every agency. Again, you talk about accountability, you talk about waste, fraud and abuse, uh, you don't talk about politicization. You talked about weaponization uh in the Biden administration, and then we have the most weaponized government in our history confronting us today. Its int- its intention, as stated, streamlining agencies work, but su- they're suffocating it, not streamlining. This is the most anti-government administration we have ever seen, one of whose policies aim not to deliver for the American but to deliver for the president alone and his policies. Not necessarily based upon the facts or science or any other objective criteria. There seems to be one uniform guidance. Do what we say or don't do it. The regulations being imposed across government are dangerous and misguided and are meant to deter applicants discourage grant funding and impose the president's whims. It's an exercise, as I said, in authoritarianism that should have no place under our constitutional uh republic. The president deserves to have his policies carried out. Uh, but by the way, the policies that he carries out, the founders believe were going to be articulated by this body, the Congress of the United States. It is in a way a test for Congress. Are we going to assert our position? Or are we going to allow our position and the opinion of experts to be shunted aside, ignored, and implement only the policies that the president, who may or may not be expert on these issues, but we have employed peer review to make sure that we do what facts tell us to do, not what political whims suggest we do. And I hope that we will have a yes on this amendment, and I thank the gentlelady for offering it.

Thank you gentlemen for his remarks. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, a gentleman from Alabama is recognized for one minute to close.

uh yeah i'll be very brief again uh omb is currently seeking a public comments for this proposal and uh so that may we best address in that formal process and with that i urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment and yield uh yield back the balance of my time

i'm sorry that was a general ladies amendment

it's ok

and uh i was uh gone for a while and i'm sorry i missed that so

it's all good here for the general it's all good it's all good

i apologize and general ladies recognize the one minutes close

yeah thank thank you general and

let me i'll try to move this as quickly as i can I don't understand why anyone on this committee, on an appropriations committee, which everyone seeks to sit on because it is the central nerve center of our government. Why do you want to sit on this committee? Why do you want to give any president, any president, Democrat or Republican, any OMB director, Democrat or Republican, the power, uh, seating the power of the purse to, uh, uh, uh, to, uh, to, uh, and, and in this case, to unelected political appointees. My gosh, find another committee. It is Article one, section nine, clause seven, the Constitution is clear, Congress holds the power of the purse. Why do you wanna give it up? The executive's job is to execute the laws that we passed, not to manipulate uh p- uh uh the grant making according to political ideology. I I have comments from Research America, from the triple AS statement on OMB ru- the OMB rule. Uh, what they're talking about is they were destroying American science by going down this road. I I want to suggest to the general public, please make your comments heard if there's general rulemaking there. Overwhelm. Overwhelm the institution with your with with your complaints about this. OMB's proposed rule is an effort to enshrine This administration's arbitrary and capricious approach to federal funding. The political appointees take control of the grant-making progress. Peer review is no longer binding. Act uh uh act of grants can be terminated at any time for any reason. Gender, research, and related topics are banned as grant conditions. Applicants can be denied based on organization affiliations. OMB claims direct binding authority over all of the agencies. Uh, this would dismantle the scientific peer review process. It's been the foundation of our scientific research agencies. That's NIH, NSF, NASA, and others. I just ask my colleagues, please, do not be complicit in destroying American science. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Thank you, General Leidy. I tried to make up for my mistake by being exceptionally generous. with the time but uh again i apologize to my friend the question is now on the amendment

especially generous thank you

offered by the gentlelady from connecticut all those in favor say aye

aye

all those opposed say no

no

paying the chair the no's have it roll call has been requested sufficient support has been demonstrated the clerk will call the roll

mister adderhall no mister adderhall no mister aguilar

thank you sweetheart

no mister alford no it's true mister alford no mister Amodei no mr. amity no mrs. bice mr. bishop

yes

mr. bishop aye mr. calvert

no

mr. calvert no mr. carter

no

mr. carter no mr. case mr. case aye mr. siskamani

aye no

mr. siskamani no mr. klein

no

mr. klein no mr. cloud

no

mr. cloud no mr. kleiburn

nothing to think of going on here

mr. clyde

negative

mr. clyde no mr. cole

no

mr. cole no mr. qar miss dean mr. loro

aye aye

mr. loro aye mr. diaz-ballart

oh oh no

mr. diaz-ballart no mr. edwards

no

mr. edwards no mr. lz miss eskebar miss eskebar aye mr. espayot mr. fleishman

no

mr. fleishman no miss frankl miss frankl aye mr. franklin

no

mr. franklin no mr. guest mister guest no mr. harder

aye

mister harder aye doctor harris doctor harris no mrs. hinson mister hoyer

aye

mister hoyer aye mister ivy mister joyce

no

mister joyce no miss captor

aye

miss captor aye mr. lolota miss lee

aye

miss lee aye miss letlow mister levin miss molloy miss molloy no miss mccullum

aye

miss mccullum aye miss ming

aye

miss ming aye mr. molinar

no

mr. molinar no mr. moar

aye

mr. moar no mr. morelli

aye

mr. morelli aye mr. mervan

aye

mr. mervan aye mr. newhouse

no

mr. newhouse no miss perez

aye

miss perez aye miss pingree

aye

miss pingree aye mr. pokan

aye

mr. pokan aye mr. quigley mr. quigley aye mr. reichenthaler mr. reichenthaler no mr. rogers

no

mr. rogers no mr. rutherford mr. shreve

no

mr. shreve no mr. simpson

aye

mr. simpson aye mr. strong

nice we have no questions and then we'll play

mrs. torres

aye

mrs. torres aye miss underwood

aye

miss underwood aye mr. valadeo mr. valadeo no miss wasserman-schultz miss wexel-mitchell aye missus watson- coleman

aye

missus watson- coleman aye mister womack mister zinke

no

mister zinke no

are there any members wishing to vote or change their vote gentlelady from pennsylvania

aye

miss dean aye

gentlemen from new york

alright alright

mister espiat aye

gentlemen from california

aye

mister levin aye

alright

uh gentlemen from florida no

mister rutherford no

gentlemen from texas no

mister l z no

gentlemen from arkansas

mister walmack no

gentlemen from new york

no mister

mister lolota no

gentlemen from south carolina

aye

mister kleiburn aye

gentlemen from texas

aye

mister quayre aye

gentlemen from california mister aguilar

aye

mister aguilar aye

ok gentlemen from lady from oklahoma

no

mrs. bias no

ok gentlemen from alabama

no

mister strong no

gentlemen from maryland

aye

mister ivy aye

are there other members wishing to cast their vote or change their vote seeing none the clerk will tally on this vote the ayes are twenty nine and the noes are thirty two the oh gentleman from arizona check this

we voted no

uh you're uh identified as having voted no are there again other members wishing to vote or change their votes against seeing none

um

or for tally oh sorry this vote the ayes are twenty nine and the no's are thirty two The amendment is not adopted. Gentleman from Georgia, Mister Clyde, is recognized for the purposes of an amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk and I ask unanimous consent that the clerk dispense with the reading.

Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with. The gentleman is recognized for remarks on his amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. I rise today in support of my amendment to flat fund the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. niaid by reducing its budget by one hundred million dollars in return spending for the national institutes of health the overarching agency for niaid to its fiscal year twenty twenty-six enacted level only in washington is a reduction of an increase considered a cut in spending make no mistake this is simply an amendment to flat fund it is not a cut i wish it was a cut but it's not As our Chairman mentioned in his opening remarks, our national debt is approaching forty trillion dollars and over one hundred and twenty percent of our gross domestic product. Therefore, Congress should be focused on identifying opportunities to slow the growth of government spending and rein in Washington's spending habits. This amendment reflects that principle. It does not eliminate NIAID funding, nor does it prevent the agency from carrying out its important core mission. It trims the increase totaling one point five percent while restoring overall NIH funding to fiscal year twenty twenty six levels. This effort is warranted as the NIAID mismanaged taxpayer funded grants and withheld information from the public during the COVID-19 pandemic. Prior to the pandemic, the NIAID directed millions of dollars to funding in funding to EcoHealth Alliance, which supported research conducted at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. recent investigations and studies have concluded that the wuhan institute was the most likely origin of the pandemic however under doctor fauci the niaid worked to discredit and dismiss that possibility rather than fully investigate it further under doctor fauci the niaid also advocated for very restrictive public health measures including vaccine and mask requirements government mandated lockdowns and school closures Thankfully, Doctor Fauci is gone, and so are these draconian measures, but we must still hold accountable the bureaucracy that enabled Doctor Fauci and these disastrous policies. Simply put, the COVID-19 pandemic is over, and it's past time that our budgets reflect that reality and reduce our spending. However, this bill increases NIAID levels above FY twenty-six enacted, which is more than eight billion dollars above pre-pandemic levels. Although I believe we should cut NIH funds to, at a minimum, more towards the pre-pandemic levels of fiscal year twenty nineteen, my amendment would simply reduce NIH's top-line to fiscal year twenty twenty-six enacted levels. Only in Washington would that be called a cut. You can't cut what you don't have yet. This is a modest decrease to help ensure better fiscal responsibility and bureaucratic accountability. As our debt continues to skyrocket, we must take these necessary steps to reduce our federal spending, and we must put guardrails on institutions like NIAID that have failed to be accountable to the American people. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back.

Thank the gentleman for his amendment. The uh gentleman from Alabama, Mister Adderholz, recognized to address the amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I rise to oppose the uh gentleman's amendment. Uh, the bill before us includes reductions in uh many other programs But uh I, like many of you, I don't support reduction of this area of research funding. The bill includes basic scientific research into infectious, aller allergic and immune diseases to drive treatments and cures. It includes funding for my colleagues' priorities, including research to Lyme and tick bone diseases, uh food allergies, um and a universal influence inf- influence of vaccine. Uh I look forward to working with the gentlemen. and um on his goal to see additional funding reductions but uh again i uh would not support reduction of this area and uh therefore i would oppose the amendment yield back

thank you gentlemen general linday from connecticut mister lor is recognized to address the amendment

thank you very much chairman thanks mr. chairman um i rise in strong opposition to this amendment and i i would just say if if you're worried about the national debt. Please reconsider your support of the four and a half trillion dollars uh that you may have voted for for tax credits for the wealthiest uh in the nation and for the biggest corporations. Let's find a way to deal with how we save lives. Um, my grandfather died in four days, thirty-six years old from the Spanish flu in nineteen seventeen, leaving six children with my grandmother. Thank God we had the foresight of the uh it it it with COVID of understanding what was needed in terms of a vaccine and how we moved as quickly as we did. In my opening remarks, I said one of the bright spots in this bill is a modest increase in funding for NIH research. Um, and I thank the chairman for opposing this, this amendment would wipe out the entire funding increase for NIH research. specifically by cutting one hundred million dollars from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, or NIAID. It would cut funding for research on infectious diseases, while an Ebola outbreak threatens to become the deadliest in history, in part due to the Trump administration's misguided choice to dismantle USAID, withdraw from the World Health Organization, and drastically scale back our global health footprint. but also because we do not have a vaccine for the strain of Ebola driving this outbreak. You know, during the two thousand fourteen outbreak of Ebola in West Africa, it was N IAID and Dr. Fauci who led the phase one human safety trials at the NIH clinical center to ensure vaccine candidates were safe and generated the required immune response. NIAI NIAI AID funding contributed to the development of antibody-based therapies like ZMAP to combat viral hemorrhagic fevers such as Ebola and Marburg. And NIAID supported research to develop rapid point of care diagnostics for Ebola. NIAID research has been critical to developing the MRNA technology that has led to lifesaving vaccines, including the COVID vaccines that saved millions of lives. The COVID vaccines would not have been possible without the decades of basic research at NIAID, under the direction of Doctor Fauci. NIAID research has been instrumental in developing antiretroviral therapy which has transformed HIV from a fatal diagnosis into a manageable health condition. Malaria, RSV, Hepatitis A, the list goes on. I'm a strong supporter of research and it's and what we need to be doing is to developing a universal flu vaccine, which would be a game changer for health care. Denying the funds necessary for these efforts and eh as we were able to develop the COVID vaccine as quickly as possible because of the years of investment uh in NIAID. that we were able to move as quickly to be able to save millions of lives. That is what we are about here, is saving lives, and NIAID has been instrumental in doing that over the years. I urge my colleagues, uh, as the chair and myself, reject this amendment.

Thank you, General Leidy. The General Leidy from Minnesota. Mr. Collins recognized to speak on the amendment. i apologize my friend will come back to you yeah that's fine ok

i thank the ranking member for some of the examples that she gave but i'm gonna give a different example and one that is really misunderstood by the public at large um this proposal is to cut a hundred million dollars from um niaid i i think it's pretty uh pretty irresponsible at a time when americans are facing cuts to their healthcare at every turn. Let's take a few minutes and talk about celiac disease. I'm the chair of the Celiac Caucus. And it's a particularly troubling uh disease to talk about with people, because it's an autoimmune disease. It's been with us since the beginning of time, but really got recognized in the nineteen forties by the Dutch. Uh there was this uh shortage of uh wheat available to make bread, and all of a sudden some of the doctors noted there were clusters in families, where all of a sudden children were thriving. Uh they didn't have brittle bone, they weren't sick, they were, gaining weight they were they were doing well and then after the war when the wheat got reintroduced they started saying hey there's some kind of connection here so the nineteen forties that we really started kind of understanding what was going on research uh here in the united states has really been an afterthought um it we didn't uh start even talking about it very openly until uh until the early two thousands and a lot of you will see the the symbol of wheat with uh a symbol through it and i'll tell you we went through a lot of um people at basiliac went through a lot of um just crazies things being said to them like oh well here's gluten-free water for you well there we know there's no gluten in water but it became kind of a fad to just label everything as gluten-free and then it would then people say oh so you're on a no-carb diet gluten is in ice cream it's in everything that that's probably on this table right now that i'm looking except for the the fruit fruit on this table. And the research that's been happening with that has been, um, pretty transformative. People are starting to understand more about the disease. It has impact. It's something you can actually die from. It triggers other autoimmune diseases. They're very serious, Graves' disease, and I said in some children, the ability to thrive. So, when I hear about cutting a hundred million dollars, uh, to do this research, um, for me that's one in one hundred Americans, um, that have celiac uh disease, uh that Washington isn't very fond about finding a treatment, finding even h- a way in which uh you can uh be tested for it more efficiently, doctors even know about it to test for it. So, when you talk about not having no treatment period, um that means that there's never gonna be likely an improved drug for celiac disease, because private philanthropy, they aren't gonna fill the uh hundred million dollar hole. so when we cut it it we're we're making a choice we're making a choice for people who have celiac disease uh just don't eat gluten that's that's good enough for you so i don't see this is about efficiency i see this is about abandoning for uh future patients when you cut federal funding that will make researchers withdraw grants they shutdown labs they abandon ongoing trials and for emerging fields like celiac disease that's not belt tightening it is truly a death sentence, because you just can't pause and pick up science later on. So, um, I wanna just, you know, just really say that, um, you know, when you choose to cut in areas like that, it means we're choosing not to cure people. And researchers are on the verge of therapies and the, uh, the ranking member meant some that, that could be transformative in people's lives. And gluten could be, uh a tolerance in which uh we could transform children's lives and adults' lives not to live with pain and misery and other uh modern uh autoimmune diseases so i rise in uh in in support of defeating this amendment soundly with that i yield back

thank you gentlelady and gentlemen from maryland is recognized to address the amendment

uh uh thank the uh subcommittee chairman for opposing this amendment um he does not need my defense Uh, but I'm gonna give it anyway. Cuz I had the opportunity to serve a long time on this committee and hear Doctor Fauci repeatedly.

Jeez.

Um. George Bush, President Bush was asked who his heroes were. And George Bush responded One of them was Doctor Anthony Fauci. One of the most respected virologist in the world. Among his peers. Uh, uh, among public authorities, not just in this country but throughout the world. Now my friend mentions that, uh, only in Washington. he knows and i know uh that the cost of doing things uh goes up every year it's called inflation now it maybe moderate inflation or heavy inflation uh and therefore we have both parties now we apply it across the board and Uh, very frankly, it's applied very generously to the Defense Department. Because of course, the cost of doing something yesterday uh, is not the same as it is today and tomorrow. And therefore we need to increase the Defense Department. But when it comes to keeping not only our population safe, but the world's population safe, in terms of allergy to infectious diseases, and by the way, I presume some of you have heard of Ebola. which is raising its very ugly ugly and very dangerous head as we speak so that this is not a time to call retreat on USAID's activities. The world is becoming more vulnerable, not less. Uh, and uh I know that for whatever reasons Well, I know the reasons. President Trump didn't like Tony Fauci because Tony Fauci told the truth. And that's sometimes inconvenient. Sometimes inconvenient. And as a result, uh, this seems to be a continuing focus on the truth and the inconvenience of the truth being articulated. So I would hope and I thank you thank the subcommittee chairman, he didn't do it for the reasons I articulated, I know that, uh but uh uh for opposing this amendment so that we proceed in a way that will keep America safer and the world safer. Are you back?

No, I'm not keeping the same now gentlemen are there others wishing to address the amendment the uh gentleman from texas is recognized to address the amendment

uh i was struck by the comment that falchi told the truth uh i was was that when he was telling us to wear masks or when he was telling us not to wear masks was it when he said that two weeks would stop the spread was it when he said that vaccines would stop the spread that it would stop transmission that it would stop you getting it all these things were false So he made a lot of errors. One thing that this agency did fund, that uh the American people understand, is it funded a Wuhan lab in China, uh, that was doing gain-of-function research. And uh, certainly it deserves the oversight and scrutiny that this committee is giving it. I yield back.

Thank the gentleman for his comments. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, again, I say only in Washington is a reduction of an increase considered a cut. This is not a cut, this is simply flat funding. If there's one agency that has been responsible for funding Doctor Fauci and his disastrous policies during the pandemic, both causing and making the pandemic worse, it's NIAID. We don't need to be increasing its funding, and with that I ask, uh, that we support this amendment and I yield back thirty three seconds

thank the gentlemen uh the question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from georgia all those in favor say aye

aye

all opposed say no

no

no

opinion is chaired by the no's have it and the amendment is not adopted uh just a quick note as you note we have votes going on we're gonna skip ahead a couple of amendments in agreement with the uh minority to try and find a shorter uh uh a a matter that might not be quite as robust in debate we don't know but cause you're free to say whatever you wanna do but i would uh and then immediately after this we will recess go and i would ask you to return as quickly as possible after the vote series is over and will resume uh i would now recognize chairman adderhall to offer a republican en bloc amendment

yes sir uh rise to off an amendment put together by uh my colleagues to improve this bill and i think uh many of you uh know your and uh we've worked with you to get uh this language in there i want to uh thank member offices for providing these important amendments that uh were some really good ideas to the bill on the port and i urge a yes vote on the amendment and i yield back

i'm assuming you don't want the amendment read

uh it's we will disregard the rating

the objection

dispensed

uh the green amendment is dispensed with it's not dispensed it's not dispensed Uh, Gentlelady from Connecticut, uh, Mister Law is recognized to respond to the amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment, uh, the Republican unblock amendment would add yet another writer to the bill, in this case to block the Department of Labor from issuing new H two A prevailing wage determinations. A fundamental premise of the H two A program is that employment of foreign guest workers must not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of similarly employed U. S. workers. Prevailing wage standards prevent the undercutting of local labor markets. Once again, at a time when inflation is rising faster than wages, the majority chooses to undermine the wages of American workers. Urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment.

Thank you, General Leidy, for your comments. Are there others wishing to address the Republican en bloc amendment? Seeing none, uh, Mister Adel Holt is recognized for one minute to close.

i'll just be very brief just say uh ask for support uh and uh for ask for support of uh the uh the Republican unblock and uh yield back

thank the gentleman the question is now on the amendment all those in favor say aye

aye

all opposed say no

no

opinion of the chair of the ayes have it and the amendment is adopted uh votes again as you know have been called the committee will now recess again please return promptly once the vote uh series has uh been completed

good it's good yeah it's good and long time

the uh committee will come to order Gentlelady from connecticut is recognized for the purpose of an amendment

thank you mr. chairman i have an amendment at the desk and i ask that unanimous consent be

Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentlelady recognized for remarks on her amendment.

I rise to offer an amendment to defend our power, our power, this committee's power of the purse, and block the Department of Education's unlawful inter-agency agreements that scatter the functions of the Department of E- uh, uh, Education across a complicated web of federal agencies. Make no mistake, the Trump administration's reckless inter-agency agreements create pointless red tape, bureaucracy and duplication. Their true purpose is to take apart federal support for public education, to dismantle public education. And we saw in this room not that long ago, earlier uh today, where there was a show of hands who p- people whose kids went to public school who in fact they went to public school. Ninety percent of our children are in public school, and yet this administration wants to dismantle public education, and they're doing it piece by piece. In the fiscal year twenty twenty-six appropriations bill that we enacted four months ago this committee made clear that the Department of Education had no legal authority to transfer its statutory responsibilities to other agencies. But Secretary McMahon, who has not yet appeared before this committee, and OMB Director Russ Vogt continue to twist and bend the law to the great detriment of our nation's public schools and the children and the families who count on them. It is outrageous and unacceptable for the Trump administration to offload the management of education programs designed to help children read, write, learn math, apply science, and explore history to the Department of Labor, an agency whose expertise is to train workers for existing jobs and to track economic data. Children are learners, not economic cogs to fill employment pipelines. And we have seen firsthand how the Trump administration's inter-agency agreement between the departments of education and labor have caused trio programs to suffer, diverting the programs from their core mission of college access and success. Does the administration serious believe it will be more efficient for schools to navigate the eleven, eleven separate inter-agency agreements that are now in place with various federal entities instead of working with one department of education? Are they under the impression that asking a dwindling number of increasingly demoralized federal workers to administer additional programs that they are not familiar with, or to split time between multiple agencies. It it's unbelievable that this is going to make anything easier for anyone. No, their true goal is to undermine federal support for public, elementary, secondary, and post-secondary education, ending the dreams and the aspirations of our children. We are the Appropriations Committee. We cannot stand idly by and watch a lawless executive ignore the laws of this body to the detriment of the American children and families. We hold the power of the purse. We cannot allow families to who count on education as their best path to social mobility and economic opportunity to be thwarted in that desire to see their kids be successful and to pursue the American dream. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment. And I yield back.

Thank you, Gentlelady, for her amendment, the uh, General of Alabama, Mister Adderholz, recognized to address the amendment.

Yes, Mr. Chairman, uh, I rise to oppose the gentlelady's amendment, um, as you know the Department of Education has implemented these inter-agency agreements to right size the bloated federal education bureaucracy, and return education back to the States. The department is leveraging the subject matter expertise of these federal partner agencies. such as the Department of Labor and the Treasury in improving the administration of the federal programs to benefit students and their grantees. These inter-agency agreements are about making a priority for efficiency and delivering uh of programs and services. And so with that, I would urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment and I yield back.

I thank the gentlemen. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Not, the gentlelady is recognized to close.

Efficiency. Let's talk about efficiency. Do we re- do we really believe that it will be more efficient for schools to navigate eleven separate inter-agency agreements that are now in place with the various federal entities instead of working with one department of education? That is the height of inefficiency. It's like food safety in this nation. We've got fifteen agencies that deal with food safety, and when there is a recall, everybody is blaming everybody else. And isn't it that elementary and secondary kids are gonna be under the jurisdiction of the Department of Labor, when they don't know, excuse me, jack about elementary and secondary education? Do we, playing fast and loose with the education of our children, you know, as I I said, e- e- education is that great equalizer. It opens up the ability for for youngsters to be able to to realize their dream and their aspirations. And we opened up the corridors of knowledge to our children, and most of whom we know attend public schools. And now what this administration would do is to pull that rug out from under them. No. We are not going to allow them to do that. Not on our watch. We cannot do that and hamstring youngsters and their ability for their success in their future. It is wrong-headed and it is once again, let us turn education back to the purview of the rich who could afford it. We had we have indeed, through Pell Grants and others, said to working families, middle class families, you can get your kids to school and they can succeed. And now we are turning that around. It is unconscionable that this is a road we will go down and I yield back.

Thanks, Gentlelady, the question's now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from Connecticut. All those in favor say aye.

Aye. Aye.

All opposed say no.

No.

Can you share the no's habit?

Aye.

Roll call.

Roll call has been requested, sufficient support has been demonstrated, clerk will call the roll.

Mister Adderhall.

No.

Mister Adderhall, no, Mister Aguilar.

Aye.

Mister Aguilar, aye, Mister Alford.

Aye.

Mister Alford, no, Mister Amodei. Missus Bice. Missus Bice, no, Mister Bishop.

Aye.

Mister Bishop, aye, Mister Calvert. Mister Carter. Mister Carter, no, Mister Case. Mister Siskamani. mr. klein

no

mr. klein no mr. cloud mr. kleibrun mr. kleid

negative

mr. kleid no mr. kohl

no

mr. kohl no mr. quayar miss dean

aye

miss dean aye mr. laro

aye

mr. laro aye mr. diaz-ballart mr. diaz-ballart no mr. edwards mr. edwards no mr. lz mr. lz no miss eskabar

aye

miss eskabar aye mr. espayat mr. fleischman miss frankel mr. franklin mr. franklin no mr. guest

no

mr. guest no mr. harder

aye

mr. harder aye doctor harris mrs. hinson mr. heuer mr. ivy mr. joyce

no

mr. joyce no miss captor

aye

miss captor aye mr. lolota

no

mr. lolota no miss lee miss lee aye miss letlow mister levin miss milloy miss milloy no miss mccollum miss levin miss mccollum aye miss ming miss ming aye mr. molinar mr. molinar no mr. moore

no

mr. moore no mr. morelli

aye

mr. morelli aye mr. mervan mr. newhouse mr. newhouse no miss perez miss perez aye miss pingree mr. pocan sorry mr. pocan aye mr. quigley aye mr. quigley aye mr. reichenthaler mr. reichenthaler no mr. rogers no

no

no mr. rogers no mr. rutherford no no mr. rutherford no mr. shreve no mr. shreve no mr. simpson mr. simpson no mr. strong no mr. strong no miss soares

how do you spell it

missus soares aye miss underwood miss underwood

yeah

miss underwood aye mr. valadeo mister valadao no miss wasserman schultz miss wasserman schultz aye missus watson kuhlman missus watson kuhlman aye mister womack mister womack no mister zinke

are there any members uh wishing to vote or change their vote gentlemen of california

i vote no

mister calvert no

gentlemen from tennessee

mr. chairman i vote no

mister fleishman no

gentlemen from arizona

no

mister siskamani no

gentlemen from maryland

no

doctor harris no

gentleman from texas who is responsible for this delay but it's worth it

wow

it's great stuff thank you very much

this is the second wave of mexican food so sorry about this guys uh we still need voting hours though

mister quayre aye

gentleman from california

aye thank you wait

mister levin aye

a gentleman from new york

alright alright

mister espiat aye

gentleman from maryland

mister ivy aye

a gentleman from indiana

aye

mr. mervan aye

gentleman from texas

no

mister cloud no

but it's all kind of official

oh there oh gentlelady from florida

i miss frankel aye i

gentleman from south carolina

uh

mister kleibern aye i think it's my local

are there other members wishing to vote or change their votes seeing none the clerk will tally how's the gentleman from montana recording

zinke no

i'm sure he's mmm

how's the gentleman from maryland recording

mister hoyer aye

and are there other members wishing to vote or change their vote

again clerical is on the way ok

she's going

this vote the uh aye's are twenty six the no's are thirty two the amendment is not adopted gentleman uh gentlelady from connecticut mr. lor is recognized for an amendment

thank you mr. chairman let's just see if we can make it three for three right um i have an amendment at the desk and i ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be just

without objection the reading of the amendment is dispensed

mmm

with and the gentlelady is recognized for her remarks on her amendment

a rise to offer an amendment to protect health insurance coverage for millions of Americans. Last year, the Trump administration and House Republicans passed the President's signature piece of legislation, Mm-hmm. the one big, beautiful bill, which cut Medicaid and nutrition assistance by one point two trillion dollars. That bill will push fifteen million Americans off their health insurance. And all of this just to pay for tax cuts for billionaires and big corporations. But apparently more than one trillion dollars in health care cuts in the Big Beautiful Bill were not enough. This bill today continues the Republican assault on the Affordable Care Act and jeopardizes health care coverage for millions of Americans. Republicans have voted to repeal or undermine the Affordable Care Act nearly seventy times, including refusing to extend the enhanced premium subsidies that help families afford health cover- coverage on their own. Republican efforts to sabotage the ACA have already hurt families and small businesses with millions of Americans dropping their ACA health plans this year and millions of Americans switching to skimpier plans that have astronomical out-of-pocket costs just to stay covered while cutting back on basic necessities just to give you uh an idea from around the country of what a sixty-year-old couple making eighty five thousand dollars uh and let us say they are semi-retired they enrolled in the a c a marketplace coverage because they are not eligible for medicare just yet and a lot of large employers no longer provide retiree coverage in mister valadao's california district this couple would not qualify for the state's uh efforts to cover the lost subsidies so their assurance premiums would increase by nearly twenty three thousand dollars this year Let's move southeast. This couple in Mister Siskamani's Arizona district would not be hit as bad. Their premiums only increased by eighteen thousand dollars. And finally, we crossed the country to Mister Edwards' North Carolina district, and yikes! This couple's premiums increased nearly twenty nine thousand dollars. Who has that kind of money? Are they supposed to wipe out their savings for one year of health insurance. This hypothetical couple is real. They are my constituents, Mel- Melaine and Tom from Brantford, Connecticut. Their premiums went up nearly thirty-six thousand dollars. They had to decide whether to make less money despite enjoying their work to continue to qualify for premium subsidies or earn more money and pay the full freight. At least I can look them in the eye and say I did everything I could to oppose the big, beautiful bill, and they know it. But Republicans voted for this. The Trump administration and House Republicans are squeezing American families from both ends, increasing the cost of necessities, including health coverage, as they reduce the benefits in their existing health plans. Now, in this bill, The Republican majority is terminating two billion dollars that is necessary to operate the ACA health insurance marketplace. The bill cuts two billion dollars that supports families, small businesses, and individuals who need assistance enrolling in an ACA health plan, which given the skyrocketing premiums due to the big beautiful bill,

Mm-hmm.

people need more help now weighing their options. So what are you doing now? Cutting the funding that pays for the navigators who help people choose the best coverage for them and their families this bill would cut funding for ACA outreach and education the information that helps people know where and how to get health coverage it cuts oversight of the plan so we know what is working and what isn't. Even if you qualify for an affordable health plan through the ACA, you will have a harder time accessing it. And critically, This bill would cut funding for oversight of agents, brokers, and health plans. That is how CMS identifies fraud. But this bill could cut funding that protects the ACA marketplace from fraud. For last year, the Trump administration and House Republicans have claimed to care about fraud in federal programs, always talking about fraud. But if that was true, you would increase funding for oversight. But this bill eviscerates funding to clamp down on fraud. This bill is yet another Republican assault on health care coverage and the Affordable Care Act. By terminating two billion dollars that is necessary to operate the ACA, health insurance marketplace, it would jeopardize health care coverage for millions of Americans who are covered by these plans. My amendment would strike the provision in the bill that terminates these funds. It would restore funding to operate the ACA health insurance marketplace. I earned support for this amendment. So millions of Americans will not be at risk of losing their health care coverage. I yield back.

Thank you, Gentlelady, for amendment, uh, the gentleman from Alabama, Mister Adderhall, just recognized to respond to the amendment.

Yeah, I'd like to rise to oppose the gentlelady's amendment, um, since passage of the Affordable Care Act, uh, insurers participating in the federally facilitated exchange pay user fees to CMS. Over time, CMS has accumulated substantial unobligated balances from these collections that exceed the amount needed to support exchange operations. This provision simply rescinds excess excess balances while preserving CMS's ability to uh continue administering the exchanges. It is a common sense accountability measure that prevents unnecessary accumulation of the unused balances so on that, I would urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment.

Thank you gentlemen, are there others wishing to address the amendment? Gentlelady from Ohio is recognized.

Thank you. Mister Chairman, I rise in strong support of the uh, Deloro amendment. This amendment would strike a rider which rescinds almost two billion dollars in funds needed to ensure the continuous and smooth operation of the affordable care marketplace. Proceeding this latest attack, the majority's refusal to quickly act on the inspiring enhanced premium tax credits under the Affordable Care Act last year, and the numerous other attacks to the ACA marketplace over the years, it is clear the majority wishes to destroy affordable health insurance coverage for millions of Americans, in fact, at least fifteen million. Fifteen million people, families, without health insurance. Last year, the Affordable Care Marketplace effectively provided affordable health insurance coverage to twenty five million small business owners, farmers, young people and Americans just trying to make ends meet during a cost of living crisis. But this year due to the expiration of the enhanced premium tax credits, more than a million people have already dropped their health insurance. This is not a win. This is not something to gloat about. This is a callous, heartless attack. on health insurance for people in our districts, especially the majority's districts. In fact, more than three in four Affordable Care Act Marketplace Enrollees live in States President Trump won in twenty twenty four. This one point nine billion dollar recession will disproportionately hurt your constituents, and I can guarantee you they're hurting mine. These people are already struggling to make ends meet and forcing them to decide between paying a gas bill getting food on the table paying their electric bill, and their family's health care coverage is really cruel. Cruel. We must not just ensure the continuation of the affordable care marketplace, but also ensure it has the necessary funds to be successful and operational. Because you know what? When people get sick and they end up in the emergency room, they're gonna end up costing the country more. I encourage all of my colleagues to support the Deloro amendment. It is humane. Thank you and I yield back, urging urging support.

Thank you, gentlelady. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, once again, this amendment would protect of ACA health insurance coverage for millions of American families. The Republicans have voted to repeal or to undermine the Affordable Care Act nearly seventy times. The President's signature piece of legislation, it's the one big beautiful bill, is leading millions of Americans to losing their health plans. In this bill, Republicans have cut two billion dollars from the funds to operate the ACA health insurance marketplace. This cut would jeopardize a c a health coverage for millions of families the amendment would remove this attack on the affordable care act it removes the attack it's just not on it it's on an act but it is about uh uh an attack on americans health care and i you will have to explain to your constituents why you voted uh uh to um uh uh just uh uh allow this to go forward and why you would continue to allow their health care costs to go up and uh i don't know how understanding they're gonna be about about this i suspect uh as earlier on uh they will be less than understanding um but those are the consequences that you will have to deal with i yield back.

thank you gentlelady the question is now on the amendment

aye

those opposed say no

no

being in chair of the no's have it

roll call

roll call has been requested sufficient support has been demonstrated the clerk will call the roll

mister adderhall

no

mister adderhall no mister aguilar

aye

mister aguilar aye mister alfred mister alfred no mister amity mrs. bice mrs. bice no mister bishop

no

mister bishop aye mister calvert mister calvert no mister carter

no

mister carter no mister case mister siskamani

no

mister siskamani no mister klein mister cloud

no

mister cloud no mister kleiburn

uh

mister kleiburn aye mister kleid

nay

mister kleid no mister kohl mister kohl no mister kway r

no uh

miss dean

aye

miss dean aye mister loro

aye

mister loro aye mister diaz-ballart

no

mr. diaz-ballard no mr. edwards mr. elzie mr. elzie no miss eskebar miss eskebar aye mr. espayat

aye

mr. espayat aye mr. fleishman mr. fleishman no miss frankel

no

miss frankel aye mr. franklin mr. franklin no mr. guest

aye

no

mr. guest no mr. harder

aye

mr.

mr. harder aye dr. harris dr. harris no mrs. hinson mr. heuer

aye

mr. hoyer aye mr. ivy

aye

mr. ivy aye mr. joyce

no

mr. joyce no miss captor

aye

miss captor aye mr. lolota

no

mr. lolota no miss lee miss lee aye miss letlow mr. levin

aye

mr. levin aye miss milloy

no

miss milloy no miss mccullum

aye

miss mccullum aye miss ming

no

miss ming aye mr. molinar

no

mr. molinar no mr. moore mr. moore no mr. morelli

aye

mr. morelli aye mr. mervan mr. newhouse

no

mr. newhouse no miss perez

no

miss perez aye miss pingree miss pingree aye mr. pokan

hmm aye

mr. pokan aye mr. quigley mr. rashenthaler

yeah

mr. rashenthaler no mr. rogers mr. rogers no mr. rutherford

no

no

mr. rutherford no mr. shreve

no

mr. shreve no mr. simpson mr. simpson no mr. strong mr. strong no mrs. torres

aye

mrs. torres aye mrs. underwood mrs. underwood aye mr. valadao

aye

mr. valadao no miss watts schultz miss wattsman schultz aye mrs. wattson coleman

aye

mrs. wattson coleman aye mr. womack mr. womack no mr. zinke mr. zinke no

are there any members wishing to vote or change their vote gentlemen from north carolina

chairman

mr. edwards no

gentlemen from y

mr. case aye

gentlemen from illinois

aye

mister quigley aye

gentlemen from texas

aye sir

mister quayre aye

are there others wishing to record or change their vote seeing none the clerk will tally on this vote the ayes are twenty seven and the no's are thirty one the amendment is not adopted gentleman from maryland mr. hoyer is recognized for the purpose of an amendment

thank you very much mr. chairman i ask that so much the reading of the amendment be considered the reading of all the amendment

without objection the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman is recognized for remarks on his amendment

thank you uh thank you mr. chairman i offered this amendment in subcommittee and then withdrew it but uh we will have a vote on it uh today this program is a program that uh i talked to uh senator nelson ben nelson from nebraska about and we started this program in twenty O seven uh so about uh twenty years ago just short of twenty years ago uh this program is designed to assist our local school systems with full service schools uh we build these schools they cost a lot of money uh you build a high school nowadays you're talking somewhere in the neighborhood thirty to fifty million dollars uh depending upon how large and uh we're excited um so these are essentially community facilities uh and obviously they offer education but they also offer other kind of services to the community uh in terms of uh large rooms for meetings gymnasiums for uh uh the community to offer recreational facilities etcetera etcetera etcetera you all understand the concept uh the the last amendment that i spoke um we were talking about freezing at uh last year's level um last year's level was a hundred and fifty million dollars the year before that was a hundred and fifty million dollars the year before that was a hundred and fifty million dollars and the year before that was a hundred and fifty million dollars. So essentially this has been frozen and uh I suggest that we keep it at the figure that it's been at for four years uh and obviously uh my same rationale applies that system becomes more eh expensive but to the extent the community uh supplements greatly these resources from the federal government uh they will be uh having to eat those but i really do believe that we ought not to abandon this program which the congress has supported for the last uh four years at its present level uh including last year and as a result i think that uh uh the senate will undoubtedly come up with a number that uh approaches this and i would urge all of us to support a program which seeks to utilize as efficiently and effectively and as broadly these facilities that we built we call them schools but they're really community centers uh and this program provides for assisting communities in making their facilities available to the widest possible uh group of citizens uh to not only educate their children uh to have places for recreation places to have meetings and uh frankly health services as well uh which we uh do offer but only in head start do we offer uh dental services and many of these dental services use their facilities but are volunteer services I know in my jurisdiction we have uh a number of the the dental association participates uh in programs that are charitable in nature so um mister speaker I would urge that we adopt this amendment and restore the full service school program which we've had for now some twenty years to the uh place where it is not zero funded but funded at last year and the year before and the year before and the year before levels thank you

thank you gentlemen uh our the uh gentleman from albama mister errol just recognized Rise to the amendment.

Oh, I uh rise to oppose the gentleman's uh amendment uh states and localities, not the federal government, are the best suited to determine what kinds of services are needed for children and their families. Uh, that said, I understand the personal importance of uh this uh full service community schools is to the gentleman from Maryland. And I certainly pledge to work with him as we move through the process, but I would have to urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and I yield back.

Thank you, gentlemen. Gentlelady from Connecticut, Mister Lohr is recognized to address the amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, if you give me a moment before I address the um address the um um amendment. Uh, I wanna take this opportunity to uh uh to really say congratulations to my colleague, Steny Hoyer, uh, extraordinary career in the Congress, uh, uh, since my first day in office thirty-five years ago, uh, Steny has been just really a rock. in the House of Representatives, a real staple, a thoughtful partner in legislating, a patient sounding board for ideas or complaints, I might add, and an honest broker. He's able to weave together the disparate cores of a uh uh uh uh of an and at times unruly Congress. Um, and I can assure you there is no stronger defender of the House of Representatives as an institution than Steny Hoyer. Steny was on this committee when I arrived in the Congress. and it has been my privilege to work alongside him ever since. He is one of the most effective negotiators, legislators, and dealmakers, uh, that - that I have known. It's been a remarkable career, as I said. He has played a role in just about every piece of major legislation produced by the democratic majority in the past two decades. And even before that, as chief sponsor of the American Americans with Disabilities Act. The institution will not be the same without you. Uh, Mister Hoyer, congratulations on all that you have accomplished, my friend, really.

Thank you.

It's extraordinary career. Thank you. Uh. And I rise in strong support of - of - of my colleague's amendment. Um, this bill eliminates one hundred and fifty million dollars uh for full service community schools, a funding level that increased by tenfold during my time as chair of this committee. uh in in in in in twenty twenty three uh it was originally started earlier like four point seven um of a million dollars and then it grew to about seventeen and over the years that i served i was able to take the the funding to a hundred and fifty and why have i paid attention for this cause community schools have been a central focus for me on this subcommittee i

mmm

i have seen the potential of these types of programs i i i i worked and i really volunteered it was after i finished graduate school i didn't have a job so i went to what was one of the first community schools in the nation the conti doctor harriet conti community school in new haven connecticut which is right across the street from my house so i went there everyday i was a substitute teacher uh and uh there i headed up the statewide conference on the value of community schools These these schools open at six o'clock in the morning. They're mothers, fathers, grandma, grandmas, grandfathers. It's six a. m. There's kids there later in the evening. There are teens playing basketball. Um, uh, it w- it is, as - as my colleague has pointed out, a center for community, uh, activity. Uh, I worked there for a time as a teacher teaching calligraphy and modern dance. Believe it or not, at the time, uh, I was an aspiring tap dancer and I'd give up all of this if I could be a tap dancer, you know, on a Broadway stage. Uh, and by teaching dance and the visual art of calligraphy, I saw how programs that make use of a full body, the feet, the hands, the head, they might not only allow children to develop more sophisticated social and emotional skills, they also prepare them to step outside of their comfort zones and to learn more more holistic ways to respond to unforeseen challenges. I know how successful full-service community schools and the quote " whole child" approaches to learning can be, which is why funding for these interventions is one of my top priorities. In New Haven, students served by the Clifford Beers Community Center benefitted from this federal program, receiving after-school program, in-school clinical mental health counseling, and family stipends for food, groceries, housing, clothing, and uniforms. While Linda McMahon, and Russ Vogt stole one and a half million dollars from Clifford beers, I was pleased to work with our Governor Lamont to make sure Connecticut's state emergency fund would cover all discontinued amounts for these important activities. While I am speaking in enthusiastic support of Congressman Hoyer's a- amendment, let me be clear to my to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. You will not succeed. I'm telling you, you're not gonna succeed in cutting and eliminating funding for community school. uh in any bipartisan appropriations agreement that gets signed into law. My friends, I feel so passionate about this issue, I witnessed it, I was there, I taught there, I I I I I just spent a good part of my career in the community school. It's not gonna happen on our watch. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Thank you, General Leidy. The chair would observe the general in a complimentary way, the gentlelady Remains a gifted tap dancer.

Right.

Now with that the gentlelady from the bottom of the sea is recognized to address the amendment.

I had. Thank you, Mister Chairman, and um I associate myself with the ranking members' comments about my dear friend, Steny Hoyer, and he and I have been tag teaming on this issue since I've been a member of Congress. Uh, before I ran for Congress I was the president Communities and Schools of Nevada. And many of you may have a Communities and Schools program in your district. It's the nation's most effective dropout prevention program. And it's really designed around the model of the community school prog, uh, uh, model. Uh, access to wrap-around student support services is incredibly important and life-changing for students of any age. Uh, in my home state of Nevada, we're currently ranked one of the top three states most in as our funding levels uh educate you know school funding levels are well below the national average and support for this program helps supplement that shortfall uh that's why supporting this amendment is so important uh full service schools are one stop shops they integrate academics with comprehensive health social and support services like healthcare food mental health not just for students but also for their families. And let's be clear, when students can't meet their needs off of school grounds, they come to school and proceed to struggle with academics mental and physical health. In Nevada, over a hundred thousand students live in poverty with a twenty-five percent chronic absenteeism rate a fully researched a fully resourced full-service community school program help schools bridge those gaps. Kids learn better when their basic needs are met. Chronic absenteeism, which is something I think we're all struggling with in our uh home school districts, declined uh thirty percent more on average than at comparison schools, those that had community schools programmed. And suspension rates decreased by an average of fifteen percent. Students at community schools improved their English scores equaling thirty-six additional days of learning and math scores equating to forty-three additional days of learning more than what would have happened at comparative schools. At the age of twenty-seven, students who attended community school programs earned an average of a thousand one hundred and forty dollars more a year than students who had not. To me, this is in a, uh, you know, when we look at federal grant programs, to me this is uh, an efficient and an effective use of federal money. These programs help schools meet students' needs where they are all in one place. Let's face it, every child deserves a fair chance to succeed in funding this program. Make sure that no students fall through the cracks just because of circumstances they face outside of the classroom. Thank you and I yield.

Thank you, General Leidy. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? seeing none the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close

uh thank you mr. chairman in subcommittee when i offered this amendment i quoted two people uh one was frederick douglass frederick douglass was born a slave on the eastern shore and he said uh it is easier to build strong children than it is to repair broken men ted agnew was elected governor the same year i was elected to the state senate and in his inaugural address in january of sixty seven he said the cost of failure far exceeds the price of progress both frederick douglass and agnew were saying the same thing if you do not bring up a child so that that child is healthy educated, and ready to participate as a positive citizen, you're gonna pay a lot more. And you and I and everybody in this committee knows that to be the case. Cuz you've seen it firsthand. Cutting out this hundred and fifty million is penny-wise and very pound-foolish. Unfortunately, the pound-foolish that it is is the children of our country. i urge you to support this amendment

thank you gentlemen the question is now on the uh amendment offered by the gentleman from maryland all those in favor say aye

aye

aye

all those opposed say no

no i'm

can you share the no's habit

yeah thank you all

roll call is requested sufficient support has been demonstrated carly will call the roll

mr. adderhall

no

mr. adderhall no mr. aguilar mr. aguilar aye mr. alford mister alford no mister amity mrs. bice mrs. bice no mister bishop

aye

mister bishop aye mister calvert mister calvert no mister carter

uh k

mister carter no mister case mister case aye mister siskamani

fine

mister siskamani no mister klein mister cloud mister cloud no mister kleiburn

alright

mister kleiburn aye mister kleid mister kleid no mister kohl

no

mister kohl no mister qar

aye

mister i miss dean mister

mmm lora uh aye aye

mister loro aye mister diaz-ballart mister edwards mister edwards no mister lz mister lz no miss escobar

aye

miss escobar aye mister espat

ah

mister espat aye mister fleischman mister fleischman no mister frankl

oh says who aye

mister frankl aye mister franklin

oh i'm

mister franklin no mister guest mister guest no mr. harter

yes aye

mister harter aye doctor harris doctor harris no mrs. hinson mrs. hinson no mr. hoyer

no mister hoyer

aye

mister hoyer aye mister ivy

aye

mister ivy aye mister joyce mister joyce no miss captor miss captor aye mr. lolota

no

mr. lolota no miss lee

aye

miss lee aye miss letlow mister levin

aye

mister levin aye miss malloy

miss

miss malloy no miss mccullum

aye

miss mccullum aye miss ming

aye

miss ming aye mister molinar mister molinar no mister moore

no

mister moore no mister morelli mr. Morelli

aye

mister morelli aye mister mervan

aye

mister mervan aye mister newhouse mister newhouse no miss perez miss perez aye miss pingree miss pingree aye mister pokan

aye

mister pokan aye mister quigley mister quigley aye mister russenthaler mister russenthaler no mister rogers

yeah

no

mister rogers no mister rutherford mister rutherford no mister schrieff

no

no mister schrieff no mister simpson mister simpson no mister strong mister strong no mrs. torres no

no no

mrs. torres aye miss underwood aye miss underwood aye mr. valadeo

no

mr. valadeo no miss washington schultz miss washington schultz aye mrs. watson coleman mrs. Watson Coleman aye mr. womack mr. womack no mr. zinke

yes

aye no no

no

mister zinke no

are the members wishing to vote or change their vote gentlelady from pennsylvania

miss dane aye

gentleman from florida

no

mister diaz-ballart no

are there others wishing to record their vote or change their vote seeing none the clerk will tally gentleman from nevada

yeah secretary please record me as a no

mr. amity no

again are there others wishing to change or record their vote

i'm gonna take this

on this vote the ayes are twenty eight the no's are thirty three the amendment is not adopted gentleman from maryland mister hoyer is recognized for the purpose of an amendment

thank you very much mr. chairman i i ask this so much to read the amendment be considered the reading of all the amendments

uh did you i'm sorry did you request it not be read

correct

ok now without objection the reading of the amendment is dispensed with the gentleman is recognized for remarks on his amendment

uh this is a pretty straightforward amendment and i would hope that you all of us would think about this as if the president of the united states was not a member of our party and that you would want appointees to federal spots made on the basis of uh talent, experience, and ability. Uh, this amendment uh deals with the schedule order that the president has issued, not applying to federal employees who are scientist, doctors and medical researchers at NIH and other research agencies. Now, if there were a democratic president, you would probably want scientists, researchers, and doctors uh in the federal government to be judged not upon their political inclination but on their professional and academic skills these individuals by their very nature are apolitical i don't mean that they don't have political views i mean that they do not bring those political views to their decision making process at the end of the term uh the first term of the president uh missed a vote proposed making fifty thousand additional people beyond that which the president already appoints as political appointees uh to carry out his or her policies all all his so far um they now they rather than uh fifty thousand i think they're down to somewhere less than twenty thousand that they're talking about at this But this amendment would say you cannot apply a political criteria uh to scientists, doctors, researchers, and other professionals uh who bring a skill and an expertise to their service in the federal government. We did this a long time ago when we adopted the Civil Service Reform Act. Because we did not want political hacks running very important agencies and departments of our government. We're having that discussion right now in the United States Senate. Mister Pulte does not qualify under any of the criteria for the Director of National Intelligence. under law notwithstanding that the president has appointed him to replace miss geber there are substantial questions being raised in the senate about that appointment because not because personal ones but he does not qualify or have the experience necessary to assure our security as a nation as the director of d n i that's what people are worried about this is not nearly i would think as controversial because none of you henry i had once told a story but i'm gonna change it uh you're going into a serious operation uh and uh you're gonna have a heart transplant and you're on the gurney and Henry Hynde describes you being rolled into the uh uh to the operating room, and you look up at the doctor and say, " Doctor, are you a Democrat or are you a Republican?" You don't give a damn what you care about his or her competency to do the job that you're expecting them to do. That's what this amendment says we ought to expect. Not politics. but performance not politics but expertise and so i urge this not a money amendment uh and it does contravene russell vote's uh desire to have the most uh uh uh of the civil service uh subject to firing and hiring at will by any president of the united states but that's not what our government is about it is what a lot of other governments that we look down upon are so i urge mr. chairman and i wanna appreciate your previous remarks that that amendment was very important to me as you pointed out i look forward to working with you on it but i would hope that you could see fit uh to support this amendment uh so that we could have a civil service particularly in the technical areas based upon merit

Thank the gentlemen, the gentlemen from Alabama, Mr. Adderhall, is recognized to address the amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I um, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. Um, I um, appreciate his comments, but this amendment would strike the new scheduled policy career authority, which would move an important tool for securing accountability in federal workforce. The American people expect those in positions of significant policy influence are responsive to elective leadership and faithfully carry out the policies chosen by voters through their elected representatives. Schedule policy career is narrowly focused on employees whose duties involve policy influencing functions. It does not affect the vast majority of career civil servants who perform essential government services on everyday basis. Striking this provision would preserve a system in which officials who play a substantial role in shaping policy can be insulated from meaningful accountability to an elected president. So, therefore, I'd urge my uh colleagues to oppose this amendment and I yield back.

Thank you, gentlemen. Before we proceed with the debate, I wanna take a personal privilege as one of our former colleagues from this committee at the back of the room, now the president of the University of South Alabama, uh joe bonner and uh so it's good to have you back had he stayed he would have been in this chair now and uh fortunately made a wiser career choice uh leaving the rest of us behind but uh joe good to see you again my friend uh and one other thing i forgot to do earlier uh this is ken calvert's birthday

oh oh mmm

so

ok

he does get to this your birthday song it doesn't last too long hey my birthday song it doesn't last too long hey

hi

hey thank you

i appreciate the members indulgence thank you very much uh with that uh uh i recognize my good friend mr. lor to address the amendment

welcome back joe i rise in strong support of this amendment Earlier this afternoon, I offered an amendment to block the administration from politicizing federal grant-making so federal grants could not be canceled on the whim of a political appointee. And now,

Still, why listen to this?

my good friend offers an amendment to block the administration from politicizing the civil service, so federal employees cannot be fired on the whims of political appointees. I would remind everyone once again of the chaos that Elon Musk and his unelected Doge staff was unleashed on the country last year. Most of his Doge staff had no experience, none, with the agencies they were allowed to wreak havoc on. And yet, Doge was given the power to fire thousands of civil service employees whose expertise was critical to making their agencies run smoothly and to serve the taxpayers. Doge fired specialized personnel at the National Nuclear Security Administration until senior officials with actual experience explained that the personnel were critical to national security. They had to hastily reverse the firings of three hundred fifty employees with high-level security clearances. Doge fired scientists at the Department of Agriculture who were responsible for responding to bird flu. The department had to scramble to rehire them. And now, the Trump administration wants to implement the doge uh debacle across the entire federal government, making it easier to fire career staff based on political ideology, not on merit. This administration wants to institutionalize cronyism so that federal employees will be loyal to a political party instead of loyalty to the country. As my good friend said, this policy is intended to grease the skids toward even more corruption. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Thank you, gentlelady. The gentlelady from Minnesota, Miss McCollum, is recognized to address the amendment.

Thank you, sir. uh i appreciate what the chairman of the subcommittee said about this is not all employees but these are senior level employees who are going to have um significant oversight in uh how an office is run and reviewing the staff that work underneath them so currently in the epa scientists have continually faced intense pressure to alter downplay Particularly regarding, in this case, chemical safety. Um, the reports uh from former EPA and the Office of Public Safety, Pollution Prevention, highlight several things going on. And here's just examples of what these employees are being told to do by by their supervisors, who are the political appointments. Downplaying health risks. Scientists report being pushed by their supervisors to remove or minimize mentions of serious health hazards. Technical alterations. Staff are asked to change uh testing parameters to minimize um uh s- contact scenarios. For example, a supervisor may have asked a scientist to model safety chemical based on one finger's worth of exposure instead of two-handed contact, to avoid triggering the risk that could be involved to uh people in the future. Reassignments. Senior experts who refuse to compromise their findings have been reassigned to non-oversight roles being replaced by less experienced employees. Retaliation. Broader scientific uh interference. So scientists when they look at something, especially when it comes to health, they look at race, they look at gender, they look at age, they look at a lot of things. Scientists are now uh reportedly being ordered to admit omit considerations of how chemical impacts disproportionately affect specific racial groups. research and funding i could go on you get the gist of this it's i understand what the chairman is trying to do that the administration has the right to appoint certain people to be at a certain place but without oversight without proper um scrutiny on to what they're doing without knowing what the the clear context of how these supervisors these political appointees are gonna have uh watch over reign or what uh scientists and other employees are gonna be able to bring forth without fear of retaliation fear of losing a job fear of being blacklisted in the future i i have to say that i strongly agree with the amendment before us and i thank thank the author for bringing it and with that i yield back

thank you gentlelady are there others wishing to address the amendment seeing none the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close

thank you very much mr. chairman uh the chairman uh the subcommittee chairman mentioned accountability. If accountability were the issue, frankly, uh I want you to think back on how many amendments we have offered in this committee. In almost every bill to require accountability. Accountability of the administration, accountability of others. If this were about accountability for the professional performance of one's duty, that would be one thing. But this is not about accountability for professional services. It's about political accountability. Are you doing what I think ought to be done if I'm the president of United States? IE, I think, uh as the gentlelady mentioned, uh, releasing water from this particular, uh, reservoir is unhealthy. Let's just say the professional who does that, not a political appointee, the manager of the plan, if you will. And the president says, no, I think it's healthy, I don't want you to r- I want you to release it. Well, if you politically don't respond yes, sir, then you're subject to removal. Now, if you're not performing your job properly, you can be removed. You can be, right, we're not talking about malfeasance or misfeasance. under the law now if you perpetrate any of those two you can be fired does it take it some time yes it does but it should take time when somebody gives twenty years service uh to the people of the united states so i would urge that uh uh we pass this amendment and keep accountability which we have but take politics out of it i have a hanging in my office what John Kennedy said, let us not seek the Republican answer or the Democratic answer. Let us seek the right answer. And I would substitute that, not the public political answer, but the right answer. I urge adoption of the amendment.

Thank you, gentlemen. The question's now on the amendment offered by the gentlemen from Maryland. All those in favor say aye.

Aye. Aye.

All opposed say no.

No.

Bringing the chair of the no's, Abbott.

yeah roll call

roll call has been requested sufficient support has been demonstrated the clerk will call the roll

mr. adderall

no

mr. adderall no mr. aguilar

i

mr. aguilar aye mr. alford mr. alford no mr. amadei

i no no

mr. amadei no mrs. bice mrs. bice no mr. bishop

no

aye

mr. bishop aye mr. calvert

no

mr. calvert no mr. carter mr. carter no mr. case

aye

mr. case aye mr. siskamani mister siskamani no mister klein mister cloud mister cloud no mister kleiburn

aye

mister kleiburn aye mister kleid mister kleid no mister kohl

no

mister kohl no mister quayar mister quayar aye miss dean miss dean aye mister loro

mister laurel no

mister loro mr. loro aye mr. diaz-belart mister edwards mister edwards no mister lz

i'll take reality

miss escobar

hi

miss escobar aye mr. espiat aye mr. espiat aye mr. fleishman no we're not only mr. escapade mr. fleishman no miss frankl

hi

miss frankl aye mr. franklin mr. franklin no mr. guest

hi

no

mr. guest no mr. harder

hi

aye

mr. harder aye dr. harris

yes

dr. harris no mrs. hinson

well

mrs. hinson no mr. hoyer

where is the winner

yes

mr. hoyer aye mr. ivy mister ivy aye mister joyce

who is who is next

no

yeah

mister joyce no miss captor aye miss captor aye mister lolota

no

mister lolota no miss lee no aye miss lee aye miss letlow mister levin mister levin aye miss milloy aye no miss milloy no miss mccullum aye miss mccullum aye miss ming aye miss ming aye mister molinar mister molinar no mister moore mister morelli

aye

mister morelli aye mister murvan

aye

mister murvan aye mister newhouse mr. newhouse no miss perez miss pingree mister pokan

aye ok

mister pokan aye mister quigley mister quigley aye mr.

aye

reichenthaler

no

mr. reichenthaler no mr. rogers mr. rogers no mr. rutherford mr. rutherford no mr. shreve mr. shreve no mr. simpson mr. simpson no mr. strong mr. strong no mrs. torres

yeah yeah

aye

mrs. torres aye miss underwood

yeah who's that

mr. valadao mr. valadao no miss washington schultz

yeah i'm sure

mrs. watson coleman

aye

mrs. watson coleman aye mr. womack mr. womack no mr. zinke

no

mr. zinke no

are there any members wishing to record their vote or change their vote gentlelady from washington

aye

miss perez aye

Gentlelady from florida

miss washington schultz aye

are there other members wishing to record their vote or change their vote seeing none the clerk will tell gentleman from west virginia

mr. moreno

mmm thank you yeah yeah no problem so i'm gonna take thank you this one

i'm gonna take this one

sorry

i'm gonna take this one this one my last like six months ago yeah

on this vote the ayes are twenty six and the noes are thirty one the amendment is not adopted gentleman from wisconsin mister pokan is recognized for the purpose of amendment

i have an amendment at the desk and i'd ask that be considered read

without objection the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman is recognized for remarks on his amendment

thank you mr. chairman um so i have an amendment at the desk that would restore the nlrb funding from two hundred million that's in this budget to uh two hundred and ninety four million dollars which is what uh they should have and i'm not sure i really understand the deepness of the cut on this one because the president in his own budget uh put in two hundred and eighty five million five hundred and ninety nine thousand so eighty five million plus more than we uh have it in this budget and it's not that like you're taking a pro business stance by not funding it in fact you're kind of taking a pro inefficiency stance because businesses also benefit from the funding that happens at lrb um unions are legal in this country and as long as they're legal and people sign up to have an election uh you're gonna have to deal with those um but also for people who workers in your constituents uh in your districts um who have unfair labor practices or other things that they bring to the nlrb you wanna have that responded to but if you're a business and there's an organizing drive and i just had a saint mary's hospital seventy three percent of the nurses uh signed uh to have a union election uh they did just get one after waiting quite a bit from the nlrb but by dragging it out you're dragging out costs for everybody the for the business cause they're gonna have to keep paying lawyers uh during that time that they're waiting to have that election so they know where it's gonna be you're dragging timeout for the workers and at the end of the day all we're doing is making the entire system more inefficient and more costly for both business and labor which is probably why the president himself put two hundred and eighty five million dollars in his fiscal year twenty seven request i i can tell you that staffing has not kept pace with their workload their field staffing has declined by a third in the last decade their caseload per employee has increased increased by forty six percent um and they're just not able to keep up with the budget they have right now much less if we lower it to two hundred million so i didn't put an offset in here cause you can put whatever offset you want we've and that's a separate debate to have but i do think this is one where just we may be making a mistake in the guise of trying to make a point we are not pro business by doing this uh we're not pro worker by doing this we're just pro efficiency or maybe pro law firm cause those are the only folks that are gonna benefit from the extension of carrying out this rather than having a election after people have uh gotten by following law if you don't wanna have union elections you can certainly try to change the law on that but doing it this way um i i think is inefficient and it hurts again business and labor and as someone who for thirty seven years was a business owner who had a union shop i can tell you i've been on both sides of it i understand why this uh is not a good idea and i'm just trying to offer that uh experience of thirty seven years here um i i think the reason the president uh said that and his board members by the way said called a two hundred million budget two hundred billion dollar budget would have their words disastrous consequences for operations so i i just offer that with the hopes of uh maybe we'll take a look at this and realize this may be a little too deep of a cut the message may not be sent that we think we're sending and at the end of the day um you can be both pro business and pro labor by making sure you have an agency that runs efficiently And if you wanna do other things, you can do that through the law, through statute, but uh just defunding the agency doesn't benefit anyone. And with that, I yield back, Mr. Chairman.

Thank the gentleman for his amendment. The gentleman from Alabama, Mister Adhold, is recognized to respond to the amendment.

Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman, uh, I'm gonna have to rise to oppose the gentleman's amendment. Uh, let me add that uh this bill maintains two hundred million in funding for the National Labor Relations Board, but uh the this cut will it will still allow the national labor relations board to preserve its core functions and allow it to remain responsible stewards of the taxpayer dollars uh therefore based on that um and the overall number of the bill and no offset i'd i'd urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and yield back the balance of my time

thank you gentlemen the gentlelady from connecticut mr. Lora has recognized her respond to the amendment

i rise in strong support of the amendment last year we celebrated the nineth anniversary of the National Labor Relations Act, a landmark law that has secured the freedom of workers to represent themselves in the workplace.

Mm-hmm. Right.

And the Congress designated the National Labor Relations Board to defend it.

Oh, yeah. Yeah.

The NLRB's role is to ensure that workers can form or join a union,

Right.

be represented by that union in collective

Right.

bargaining and be free from retaliation for doing so. These are basic rights. Rather than providing vital resources, so the NLRB can reduce substantial case backlogs, combat unfair labor practices, and protect workers' collective bargaining rights, House Republicans propose a staggering ninety-four million dollars, thirty-two percent cut, effectively gutting the agency. Incapacitating the NLRB at such a scale will allow unscrupulous corporations to violate workers' rights, uh, their rights to unionize, to fight for better wages, to keep up with rab- rapidly rising costs. What do House Republicans' plans to gut the NLRB say about their priorities? Do they want us to advance a bill that answers to the wealthy and the well-connected, instead of working families who are struggling with our country's cost of living crisis? Gutting the NLRB is an attack on workers' rights. It is not a serious attempt to restore jobs or boost economic growth. Purely and simply, incapacitating the nlrb will accelerate a race to the bottom that will only do further harm to families who are struggling to make ends meet i urge my colleagues to support the amendment

back to gentlelady are there other members wishing to address the amendment seeing none the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close

thank you mr. chairman i i again i would just talk about the workload as the example of why you really can't reduce the budget and say that's enough uh two hundred and thirty seven employer uh petitions uh have been introduced and uh that far outpaces the previous high of sixty two in fiscal year sixteen and uh union election petitions have doubled since fiscal year twenty one so their workload is significantly up um so all we are doing is prolonging the process for business and labor which again at the end of the day the people who benefit are some law firms but not the workers and not the company owners and i uh hope that we will support this amendment and i yield back

thank you gentlemen the question is now on uh the amendment offered by the gentleman from wisconsin all those in favor say aye

aye

all those opposed say no

aye

no

can you chair the no's have it

roll call

roll call has been requested sufficient Board has been demonstrated. Clerk will call the roll.

Mister Adderhall.

No.

Mister Adderhall, no. Mister Aguilar.

Aye.

Mister Aguilar, aye. Mister Alford.

No.

Mister Alford, no. Mister Amaday.

No. No.

Mister Amaday, no. Mister Spice. Mister Spice, no. Mister Bishop.

Aye.

Mister Bishop, aye. Mister Calvert.

No.

Mister Calvert, no. Mister Carter. Mister Carter, no. Mister Case.

Aye.

Mister Case, aye. Mister Siskamani. Mister Klein. mister cloud mister kleibern

aye

mister kleibern aye mister kleid

nay

mister kleid no mister kohl

no

mister kohl no mister quayar miss dean miss dean aye mister loro

aye

mister loro aye mister diaz-ballart

no

mister diaz-ballart no mister edwards

no

mister edwards no mister lz miss eskabar miss eskabar aye mister espayat

aye

mister espayat aye mister fleischmann mr. fleischman no miss frankel miss frankel aye mr. franklin mr. franklin no mr. guest mr. guest no mr. harder mr. harder aye dr. harris dr. harris no mrs. hinson mr. heuer

aye

mr. heuer aye mr. ivy

aye

mr. ivy aye mr. joyce mr. joyce no miss captor mr. lolota

no

mr. lolota no miss lee

aye

miss lee aye miss letlow mister levin mister levin aye miss moly

aye

miss mccullum miss mccullum aye miss ming miss ming aye mister molinar mister molinar no mister moore mister morelli

aye

mister morelli aye mister mervan

aye

mister mervan aye mister newhouse mister newhouse no miss perez miss perez aye miss pingree

aye

miss pingree aye mr. pokan

aye

mr. pokan aye mr. quigley mr. quigley aye mr. russenthaler

aye no

mr. russenthaler no mr. rogers

oh

mr. rogers no mr. rutherford

uh

mr. shreve

no

mr. shreve no mr. simpson mr. simpson no mr. strong

no

mr. strong no mrs. torres

aye

mrs. torres aye miss underwood

aye

miss underwood aye mr. valadeo mr. valadao no miss wasserman schultz

no

mrs. Watson coleman mrs.

aye

Watson coleman aye mr. womack

no

mr. womack no mr. zinke

no

mr. zinke no

are there any members wishing to record their vote or change their vote gentlelady from utah

i wish to record their vote but

miss. miloy no

gentleman from texas

no

mr. cloud no

gentleman from arizona

sorry

no no please

mr. syskemani no

gentleman from texas

the other gentleman from

there's many gentlemen in the back

mr. quayreit

yeah thank you

are there other members oh gentlelady from florida

miss westman-schultze

are there other members wishing to record their vote or change their vote

mister rutherford

mister rutherford have you been recorded

mister i've been here for long enough

mister rutherford votes no

ok again others wishing to record or change their vote seeing none score with a tally

oh

mmm really

oh get ready i'm not gonna find it

miss captor i don't know my name

oh gentle lady from ohio

yes i can turn on my old yes

miss captor i

on this vote the ayes are twenty eight the no's are thirty the amendment is not adopted

yes

uh gentlelady from florida miss frankl is recognized for the purpose of an amendment thank you

thank you mr. chair i have an amendment at the desk as unanimous in consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with

without objection the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her amendment

alright you can repeat after me

my

my my my

mmm

uh we could do better than that this my amendment is very simple mr. chair it strikes two harmful provisions in this bill hide and Weldon. They have one thing in common. They take very deeply personal healthcare decisions away from women and put politicians in charge. At the heart of this debate is very simple. Who should decide when or whether a woman should start or grow a family? I believe the answer is clear. Women should be trusted to make the decisions about their own bodies their own futures, their own families, but the people they trust. And let's be clear what Weldon and Hyde do. The Hyde Amendment denies millions of women, especially women with lower incomes, the ability to make their own reproductive healthcare decisions, simply because they rely on federal healthcare coverage. Hyde creates a two-tier system in America, one people with money can access a full range of reproductive care and another where women struggling to pay rent to buy food

mmm

support their families deny that same freedom a woman's ability to decide whether or when to start a growth family their family should not depend on their income should not depend on her zip code or their insurance card in her wallet another working two jobs a woman serving her country a family already facing impossible choices should not have fewer options because politicians decided that only those who can afford it can get care. And the Weldon amendments take us further down the wrong path. It actually allows healthcare institutions to put their own ideological policy ahead of a patient's needs, restricting access to abortion care, coverage, information, referrals, and even when a woman is facing her hardest moment in life. A moment that calls for facts, that calls for compassion, it calls for medical care. It doesn't call for politicians standing over her shoulders. Hyde and Weldon are out of date, out of touch with the lives that women live today, as mothers and grandmothers, caregivers, members of our military, and breadwinners for their These provisions do not protect life. They block access to health care. They deepen inequality. They silence medical judgment. And they take important personal decisions away from women and the people they trust,

Mm-hmm.

and put the politicians in charge. So, let's get back to where we started. Who should decide? Who should decide whether a woman is ready to start or grow a family? who should decide whether a mother can safely continue a pregnancy? Who should decide what is best for a family facing the most personal and painful moments in their life? The answer should not be Congress. It should not be politicians. It should be women with the people they trust. And I yield back.

Thank you, gentlelady. The gentleman from Alabama, Mister Aderholt, is recognized to address the amendment.

Thank you, Chairman. Uh, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment, uh, to strike the Hyde and the Walden amendments. Uh, it's been almost five decades, uh, that the Hyde amendment has represented a long-standing and a bipartisan principle that Americans who have sincere and profound moral objections to abortion should not be compelled to subsidize it with their taxpayer dollars. Uh, I know our nation remains deeply divided on the issue of abortion itself. However, Hyde has served as an important point of consensus by simply respecting the conscience of millions of Americans. As one of the many millions of Americans who steadfastly support the right to life, urge this committee to maintain our long-standing consensus that Americans should not be required to fund elective abortions. Likewise, the L- the Weldon Amendment protects the conscience rights of Americans by prohibiting federal state and local government discrimination against health care entities that decline to pay for or provide coverage for of abortion. I would hope that we all agree that at a very minimum that pro-life Americans should not be subject to discrimination for their sincere and their deeply held views on the right to life. Therefore, I respectfully ask my colleagues to reject the amendment. Now you go back.

Thank you, gentlemen. The gentlelady from Connecticut, Miss Flores, recognized to address the amendment.

I rise in strong support of this amendment, which strikes a discriminatory policy that has been perpetuated for over forty years. The radical supermajority on the Supreme Court's ruling overturning Roe v. Wade was not about protecting life. It was all about stripping agency and dignity away from women. And that has been the result of the Hyde Amendment for decades. When Medicaid covers the cost of pregnancy-related care, including abortion, it means patients can make informed decisions. Currently, thirty states and the District of Columbia, though not by their choosing, deny state funding to women seeking access to abortion. As a result, millions of women in these states are hostage to their geography. With the radical Supreme Court decision, it is more important than ever that we act to empower all women to make these decisions. This amendment also strikes the Weldon Amendment, which prioritizes a health provider's beliefs over a patient's health needs. It gives power to determine women's health choices to institutions, insurance companies, hospitals, or any kind of health care facility or organization, rather than leaving that decision to a woman. The Weldon Amendment has been used to block efforts to expand abortion coverage by threatening critical federal health dollars. If this debate was truly about protecting life, every member in this room would vote against this bill. It cuts funding for public health, reproductive health, education, job training, and more. But the interest in protecting life doesn't seem to extend beyond pregnancy. Arguing that these riders have been law for decades and therefore we are prevented from making changes is disingenuous. Oh yeah. The activist Supreme Court disregarded, they disregarded science and decades of legal precedent and the will of the majority of the American people to strip away a woman's fundamental and constitutional right to make her own health decisions. The decision to get an abortion should be made by a woman and her family in consultation with her doctor and in accordance with her own faith. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and I yield back.

Thank you, gentlelady, gentleman from Georgia is recognized to address the amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, I rise today in strong opposition to this amendment, which would strike long-standing pro-life protections in the labor HHS bill. Since nineteen seventy-six the Hyde amendment has been passed annually with bipartisan support as an appropriations rider to prohibit the use of federal funding for abortions except in cases of rape, incest, or to preserve the life of the mother. If you've ever supported a labor HHS bill that actually became the law of the land, then you have voted in favor of this amendment. Additionally, the Helms amendment is a conscience protection that prevents HHS funding recipients from discriminating against entities because they refuse to provide an abortion that violates their beliefs. This is an essential and non-controversial first amendment protection. In fact, a twenty twenty-three Knights of Col- Columbus, Morris poll found that seventy-seven percent of Americans believe doctors, nurses, and other health care professionals with religious objections to abortions should not be legally required to perform them. Let's be clear. This appropriations bill is supposed to be about funding essential federal health care support and investing in critical research to support life. Yet this amendment is antithetical to that purpose. Rather than increasing support for lifesaving measures, this amendment seeks to make the federal government and every American taxpayer an accomplice to the intentional murder of unborn babies. The size, location, and level of development of a human being should never determine a person's value or right to life. In or out of the womb, an innocent child has an unalienable God-given right to life. After all, and I've said this before, in the Declaration of Independence, our nation's birth certificate, the first and most fundamental unalienable right mentioned is the right to life. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal. that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. And the very first one mentioned is life, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men. That's the responsibility of government to s- to secure life. Bottom line, forcing pro-life Americans to subsidize the evil practice of abortion on demand, or allowing conscience violations to occur, or actually enabling conscience violations within the purview of our federal programs is simply unacceptable. Actually, it's unconscionable and it must be permanently prohibited. I urge all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to oppose this amendment, and I yield back.

Thank you, gentlemen. Are there uh others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Respecting women means respecting their lives. their health and their ability to make deeply personal decisions. And this bill takes away that that ability to make those decisions about her own body. Uh, women lives are very complex, very complex. Their health, their families, and their futures deserve respect, not political interference. Uh, and respect means trusting women to make their own personal decisions. If we really value women, and the central life that they, the role that they play in families and communities, we must respect their dignity and their freedom to make personal medical decisions. Uh, support this amendment. If you are a woman, or you love a woman, whether it's your mother, your sister, your aunt, or even some grandmothers, support this amendment. And I yield back.

Thank you, General Leidy. The uh question is now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from florida all those in favor say aye

aye aye

all opposed say no

no no

opinion of the chair of the no's have it

oh god we get it now

and the amendment is not adopted gentlelady from florida miss franklin is recognized for the purpose of an amendment

he's not very quick today ok that thank you mister chair here well here we go again i have an amendment at the desk a shenanigans consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with

without objection the reading of the amendment is just

ok this is really a my my my

feel that means

over on top of the my oh so sorry mister chair

just let me uh Quickly run through technicalities. Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with. The gentlelady is recognized to uh make remarks on her amendment.

Uh, thank you, Mister Chair. I appreciate that. All right. Um. The obsess- the obsession, the obsession with inserting anti-abortion policies into healthcare is on steroids in this bill. Uh, so let's be clear about my amendment. This is about improving healthcare by stopping political ideology, stopping political ideology from controlling healthcare. It's about protecting patients, trusting doctors, supporting science, and making sure that medical decisions are guided by medicine, not an agenda overriding science. My amendment is simple, and it's lifesaving. it removes dangerous provisions that threaten medical research, medical training, and the ability of patients to get the care they need. They are put, uh, politicians in the middle of the most personal and complicated decisions a woman can face. And this is why we call them poison pills. Poison pills, because they're gonna make people sicker, especially women. Pregnancy is more dangerous, and take away the care their families depend on and this is what happens when government substitutes and replaces medical judgment it's not healthcare it's politics now one deadly rider listen to this one deadly rider attacks life-saving medical research the kind of science that gives families hope when they when they receive a devastating diagnose research that helps us lead to medical breakthroughs through including vaccines and advances in cancer and hiv, alzheimer's, diabetes and pregnancy complications. Another writer, another one of these poison pills, uh interferes with medical training, making it making it harder for future OBGYNs to learn how to respond to miscarriages, pregnancy complications and emergencies. Another blocks funding for Planned Parenthood health centers, trusted providers that millions um Americans rely on for cancer screenings, birth control and preventative care. And another will keep going. Another prevents doctors from giving patients full information about their reproductive health options and another another poison pill opens a door to lawsuits against states and communities trying to protect access to care, putting a provider's refusal ahead of a patient's need. Now, some of my colleagues, now they might say, these provisions, these poison pills protect life. I say, protecting life means protecting the health and safety of women carrying life. It means valuing the mother, her health, her future, her family. It means trusting women, mothers, families, and doctors to make the most personal and difficult medical decisions. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment so we can get back to a bill that this should be about, right? In helping people live healthier lives, not pushing a political agenda. S- support this amendment. I yield back.

Thanks, Gentlelady, for amendment, uh, gentlemen from Alabama, Mister Adderholtz, recognized to respond to the amendment.

Thank you, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, I rise again in opposition to this amendment. uh this amendment would uh gut numerous pro-life uh nondiscrimination and conscious protection provisions that are in the bill for example uh this amendment eliminates conscious and nondiscrimination protections for medical students under this bill students cannot be required to participate in training to perform or assist in the performance of an induced abortion however this amendment removes a provision that prevents taxpayer dollars from going to Planned Parenthood, which is the largest facilitator of abortions in the nation. Americans should not be forced to pay tax or taxes to support an organization that violates their conscience regarding the right to life. Moreover, the amendment strikes protections for title-teen grantees who cannot get uh who in good conscience refer of patients for abortions. Grantees funded with taxpayer dollars should never be required to refer someone for abortion in violation of their deeply held and their sincere beliefs. And again, while members may disagree over the right to life for the unborn, I would hope that we can at least at this point agree that Americans should not be required to violate their conscience, to pay for or train or refer for abortions. Therefore, I would uh pose the gentlelady's amendment and I would ask my colleagues to do the same and to vote no. I yield back.

Thank you, gentlemen. The gentlelady from Connecticut. Mr. Lohr has recognized her uh to respond to the amendment.

I rise in strong support of this amendment. Republicans continue to impose their extreme ideology on women and this bill is a laundry list of their extreme demands. The supposed party of smaller government is placing themselves squarely in the doctor's office, taking health care decisions away from women. In this bill, Republicans include poison pill writers to block funding to Planned Parenthood health centers. And they block funding for policies intended to help women who live in states that have enacted total bans on abortion. They also impose a gag order on title ten health clinics, banning them from merely providing information on abortion options. That is outrageous. Republicans would block doctors from providing accurate and comprehensive information to women. This bill also includes a dangerous provision that would lead to fewer physicians receiving clinical training to provide a needed abortion. That means a woman with a life-threatening pregnancy would be less likely to find a physician to save her life or protect her ability to have children in the future. And this bill includes a poison pill rider to amend the Public Health Service Act

Mm-hmm.

to create a private right of action to pursue monetary damages against a doctor, a hospital, or another health care entity for " an actual or threatened violation" of the Weldon amendment. Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, and took away a constitutional right that was in place for more than fifty years this was in place for fifty years no one seems to worry that that was overturned for fifty years and yet hide which is forty years oh my god if you tamper with hide you are uh uh really in you're violating uh uh some uh uh some imp a principle uh that you can't touch something that was in place for forty years. But you could sure as hell overturn constitutional amendment that was in place for fifty years, where it regards women's health. Robocop- Republicans have led efforts to enact total abortion bans in thirteen states and partial bans in twenty-eight states. And as my colleague from Florida has indicated, this is about trust, and respect for women, which apparently does not exist, that they can make the decisions that face their health, that we don't make those decisions for women. Women make them for themselves with their families and with their faith, and not leave it to others who would demean and disrespect who women are. We are not second class citizens. We are citizens who have the right to make the decisions about our health, our health situations, and not have to rely on people in this body to make the political decisions based on their own personal political ideology. That has no place in the health decisions in women's lives. I yield back.

And, Jim Alayde, are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close.

Thank you, thank you, Mr. The extreme ideology embedded in this bill is like a venomous snake, a venomous steak, endangering the lives of American women who must be trusted to make their own personal health care decisions. support this amendment, let's get rid of the poison in this bill. And I yield back.

Thank you, gentlelady. The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from Florida. All those in favor say aye.

Aye. Aye.

All opposed say no.

No.

No.

Penny, the chair of the no's have it. Roll call has been requested. Sufficient support has been demonstrated. Clerk will call the roll.

Mister Adderhall.

No. No.

Mister Adderhall, no. Mister Aguilar.

Aye.

Mister Aguilar, aye. Mister Alford.

No.

mr. alford no mr. amadei

no

mr. amadei no mrs. bice

no

mrs. bice no mr. bishop

no

mr. bishop aye mr. calvert

no

mr. calvert no mr. carter mr. carter no mr. case

aye

mr. case aye mr. siskamani

no

mr. siskamani no mr. klein

no

mr. klein no mr. cloud

no

mr. cloud no mr. kleibern

aye

mr. kleibern aye mr. clyde

nay

mr. clyde no mr. cole

no

mr. cole no mr. cuillard

no

mister no miss dean ok no i think we're on break every minute miss dean aye mr. loro aye mr. loro aye mr. diaz-ballart no not yet mr. diaz-ballart no mr. edwards no mr. edwards no mr. lz mr. lz no miss eskebar we have to bring mr. eskebar down there if i can miss eskebar what miss eskebar sorry sorry miss eskebar aye mr. espiat aye mr. espiat aye mr. fleishman no mr. fleishman no miss frankel

aye

miss frankel aye mr. franklin mr. franklin no mr. guest

no

mr. guest no mr. harder

aye

mr. harder aye dr. harris dr. harris no mrs. hinson

no

mrs. hinson no mr. heuer

aye

mr. heuer aye mr. ivy

aye

mr. ivy aye mr. joyce

dr. harter

miss captor

aye

miss captor aye mr. lolota

mr. copter

mr. lolota no miss lee

aye

miss lee aye miss letlow mister levin

aye

mister levin aye miss milloy miss milloy no miss mccullum miss mccullum aye miss ming miss ming aye mister molinar

no mmm

mister molinar no mister moore mister moore no mister morelli

aye

mister morelli aye mister mervan

aye

mister mervan aye mister newhouse mister newhouse no miss perez miss perez aye miss pingree miss pingree aye mister pokan

aye

mister pokan aye mister quigley

aye

mister quigley aye mister russenthaler mister rogers

no

mister rogers no mister rutherford

no

mister rutherford no mister shreve mister shreve no mister simpson mister simpson no mister strong mister strong no mrs.

no

torres

aye

mrs. torres aye miss underwood

aye

miss underwood aye mister valadeo mr. valedillo no miss washerman schultz miss washerman schultz aye mrs. Watson coleman mrs. Watson coleman mrs. Watson coleman aye mr. welmack mr. welmack no mr. zinke mr. zinke no

are there any members wishing to vote or change their vote uh gentlemen from south carolina

vote

he's recorded

ok gentlemen from georgia have you already voted i'm sorry you are i'm my mistake i'm just sort of anybody that's standing up are there any members gentlemen from uh of idaho ok clerk will call an italian on this vote the i's are twenty seven and the o's are thirty three the amendment is not adopted we're going to go ahead and uh

oh you mean

i'm gonna take

i'm

take a uh recess votes have been called committee will now go to recess uh please return promptly after the votes and we'll resume thank you

go

committee will now reconvene the uh gentlelady from new jersey miss watson coleman is recognized for the purpose of an amendment

mmm Let me do as i'm directed here, sir. I was told to move from this location when I speak. Thank you very much for recognizing me. I do have an amendment at the desk and I ask unanimous consent to consider it read.

Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentlelady is recognized for her marks on her amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. My amendment would restore funding for the reintegration of ex-offenders program that is at the Department of Labor. Too many returning citizens are facing significant barriers to employment and economic stability. This especially includes people of color who are less likely to receive a job offer than their counterparts. In the midst of an affordability crisis that has disproportionately affected marginalized communities, this is especially debilitating. Once someone serves their time, They deserve a fair chance to become part of their community again. And I wanna also add, and we hope that they become taxpayers and not have to rely upon taxes from others, in order to exist. The reintegration of ex-offenders program provides a proven pathway to successful re-entry. Investing in this program helps set individual secure jobs, reduces the likelihood of re-offending, and strengthen the communities to which they return. According to the Federal Bureau of Prisons, in twenty twenty five, forty six thousand five hundred and fifteen incarcerated people were released. Wiping out funding for this program could lead to two thirds of formerly convicted people returning to prison within three years. Not only would this cost taxpayers more money, but these are also missed opportunities for people to reintegrate but and also to contribute to the economy. And this should be the focus, not keeping these facilities filled in order to line the pockets of the donors and the executives running them. This issue has been a priority of mine for years. As far back as when I was Majority Leader in the New Jersey State Assembly, I sponsored a legislative package that enabled formerly incarcerated individuals to safely enter the workforce after completing their sentencing. We have an opportunity here to break the cycle of recidivism. And with that, I yield, I ask for support, and I am thankful for the opportunity to share my concerns here. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, gentlelady, for amendment. Uh, gentlemen from Alabama, Mr. Adelholz, recognized to respond to the amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and uh as much as I would like to uh support the Gentlelady's amendment I'm gonna have to oppose it. Uh there are many competing priorities in this bill, and uh I'm sure that many of us could find something that we would like to have, or fund, uh to provide additional resources for. Um, this bill ha- has tries to make a priority for federal resources for programs which there is clear federal role and have demonstrated effectiveness. of Labor reported findings of a randomized control trial to evaluate this program. That evaluation found that there was no evidence that the program reduced recidivism and limited evidence of the program's impact on employment outcomes for participants. And again, uh, it I I would love to be able to support, but I'm gonna have to urge my colleagues to oppose and I yield back.

Thank you, gentlemen. Gentlelady from Connecticut. Mister Law is recognized, uh, to respond to the amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, before I uh respond to the amendment, I just would like to congratulate my dear friend, Bonnie Watson Coleman, r- remarkable career in public service. It's really is incredible. It's been wonderful to work side by side with you. Um, tireless commitment to fighting for the most vulnerable Americans, not only in New Jersey but across this country. She has been a relentless advocate, housing, health, equity, civil rights, the dignity of work, the abolition of poverty, uh, and making sure there was economic opportunity for all. From the New Jersey Division on Civil Rights, General Assembly, to the House of Representatives, she leads, uh, my friends, with compassion, and she wants to uplift the voices of those who have gone, uh, for too long, uh, being unheard. She's guided by her faith. She's driven by an unwavering moral clarity. That inspires resilience in her allies. and reluctance in her adversaries. I'm grateful to call you a colleague and blessed to call you a friend. We'll miss your partnership next Congress, but we got a few more months to go, my friend, so congratulations on an incredible career. Thank you.

Mm-hmm.

Um, and I rise in support of the gentlelady's amendment, the Department of Labor's re-entry employment opportunities, the Rio program provides critical funding to local workforce boards. community colleges and non-profits to deliver job training opportunities for youth and adults transitioning out of the justice system. There are few programs that are more evidence-based in the labor age bill. Rigorous DOL commissioned evaluations of re-entry employment opportunity initiatives that shows about a twenty-two point seven percent reduction in re-arrest rates compared to the national average. Furthermore, according to Mathematica, by successfully shifting individuals into high-demand vocational fields, the REO framework drives an eleven percent long-term decrease in re-offending. In my district, thanks to the support from REO, the workplace provides comprehensive workforce preparation, job placement services for justice-involved individuals in the New Haven area. The workplace actively enters correctional facilities, months before the individuals release to help to build a customized career plan, develop immediate job readiness training. Once these individuals return home to the New Haven region, this critical grant bridges the gap to stable employment. It funds hands-on technical training, industry recognized prudentially, and targeted wage subsidies that incentivize local businesses to hire them. These programs have a profound impact. on my constituents and countless other Americans around the country, reentering the workplace and society. That is why we cannot accept my Republican colleagues' reckless proposal to eliminate REO. We need to fully restore re-entry employment opportunities, re- uh re- uh uh uh restore that funding. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and I yield back.

Thank you, General Leidy. Are there additional members wishing to address the amendment us gentleman from maryland is recognized

thank you mister chairman uh i fully support this amendment i my experience when i was a local prosecutor was that this was a key component um in a a variety of ways with our uh criminal justice reform efforts in prince george's county and i saw evidence of that in washington d. c. as well but you know at the end of the day Ninety nine point nine plus percent of these guys are usually coming out. And what that means is, one way or the other, they're gonna be back in our community.

Uh-huh.

And the question is whether we want them to come out, sicker and slicker, with no hope for any kind of effort or opportunity, to reintegrate into the, into the society, or do we wanna help them make a successful transition, back into our communities. And so, you know, what we tried to do, and I did it we tried to do without any money but i can tell you that doesn't work very well but we tried to do it just with the faith community because we didn't have any funding for the effort at the beginning and this is twenty plus years ago when uh there was a lot of reluctance to do these kinds of programs um and so we had some initial success with it but knew that we could grow the program and do better if we had funding to do that and what we found was that when people came out and there were couple of components that worked for the guys that i dealt with directly i went to when we kicked off this program i actually went to the jail um and met with them at at and the chaplain was there and when i sat down with him and i said this is state's attorney glenn ivy this is the office that puts you all in here that didn't get the meeting off to a great start i must say uh but he quickly calmed them down and explained to them why i was there and what i told them was that we're gonna try and kick this program off but i needed a commitment from them because what would happen if they came out and seriously re-offended was the the people that they were leaving the behind in jail the friends their colleagues um their brothers would get screwed you were gonna be blocking off their opportunity to have a chance to come out and have a successful transition into the community and i also told them that my career hinged in large part on what you do and i asked them have you all ever heard of willie horton and they all had And I said, " Look, I'm the state's attorney. I'm running on making the community safe. If one of you all comes out in my program and does something crazy, my career is over. So I want a commitment from each and every one of you today that you're gonna try and stay on the right track." And as far as I know, they did. Here I'm twenty five years later and, uh, I haven't had a Willie Orton ad yet, so hopefully it'll stay on that path. But the key I think for us to understand is that a lot of these guys When they went into jail, they were on the wrong track, obviously. But many of them when they come out have figured it out. They made a transition, they've learned from what's happened, to the extent we have programs in the jail that help them. And they're more in the federal system than they are in state systems, but there's a lot of stuff that helps them figure out you made a mistake, there are opportunities out there if you get back on the right track. And this is the part we're asking for now. There are people and programs that will help you get on that right track. And my experience was if we could help them find a job or get into a training program, for many of them, a commitment in the faith community, and for many of them as well, some kind of relationship. Many of these guys had girlfriends or wives that were waiting for them when they came out, families that were waiting for them, sometimes children that were waiting for them. If we put those three pieces together, we were able to have successful transitions with these young men. uh or sometimes older men so i'd i'd encourage you i know there's tough uh tough budgetary times i know this is a challenge but this is the type of program that can really make a difference and this is one where if you vote no you won't have a willie horton moment like i might for sure but if you vote yes you won't either and you can transform lives in a way that just leaving them out there by themselves will never do and the ripple effect of that i ran into a guy i'll stop with this Couple years ago actually, we, my wife and I went out to dinner, the danger of being a prosecutor is you frequently run into people who say, that's Glenn Ivey, he locked me up.

Oh.

And you never know how that conversation is gonna go after that. But this is one of those where the guy came over and he sa- he was he he was actually the waiter for our table. And he said that, you know, Mister Ivey, I got locked up years ago and um When I came out, which was not that long ago, cuz he'd been in jail for a while, um, the programs that you guys had helped to put in place helped me get reestablished in the community. And the faith community piece that you guys had helped to set up, cuz his church hadn't been involved with this when we, when he first went to jail, but it was when he came out. I helped, that helped me make this transition. It's not perfect. You know, uh, I'm not gonna make a million dollars, but at least I'm trying and I, so far I'm on the right track. Can you all continue to help other folks? That's the ask today. And with that, I yield back.

Nice job.

Thank you, gentlemen. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close.

Thank you very much, uh, Mr. Chairman. First of all, let me just say thank you to, uh, Miss Delora. It has been a pleasure working under your leadership, believe me. i thank you and i value our friendship uh secondly let me say how much respect i have for mister um adderhall we worked together on a two fifty but i don't agree with you i don't know what report you read i'm very suspect of it but it is it is untrue that this program is not worth it to our economy to our communities to our families and in fact it does impact recidivism and i know this even from my work in new jersey We called our hearings counting the costs because we recognize that the cost of incarceration and re-incarceration was much much more expensive than any investment we could make on these individuals coming back into the community. So with that in mind, I ask my colleagues to consider the value of investing in our families, investing in our future, and supporting my amendment. Thank you. I yield back.

thank the gentlelady the question is now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from new jersey all those in favor say aye

aye

aye all opposed say no no paying the chair to know his habit know his habit roll call is requested sufficient support is demonstrated the clerk will call the roll

mister adderall

no

mister adderall no mister aguilar

i

mister aguilar aye mister alford mr. alford no mr. amadei mrs. bice mr. bishop

aye

mr. bishop aye mr. calvert

no

mr. calvert no mr. carter

no

mr. carter no mr. case mr. syskemani mr. klein mr. cloud mr. kleiburn mr. kleid

nay

mr. kleid no mr. kohl

no

mr. kohl no mr. queyar miss dean

aye

misteen aye mister loro

aye

mister loro aye mister diaz-balart

no

mister diaz-balart no mister edwards mister edwards no mister elsie

no no

miss eskebar mister espiat mister fleischman mister fleischman no miss frankel

no

aye

miss frankel aye mister franklin mister franklin no mister guest

no

no

mister guest no mister harder mister harder aye doctor harris

no aye

doctor harris no mrs. hinson mister hoyer

aye

mister hoyer aye mister ivy mister ivy aye mister joyce

aye

miss captor

aye

miss captor aye mister lolota

no

mister lolota no miss lee miss lee aye miss letlow mister eleven mister eleven aye miss molloy

aye no

miss molloy no miss mccullum miss mccollum aye miss ming

aye

miss ming aye mr. molinar mr. molinar no mr. moore

no

no

mr. moore no mr. morelli

aye

mr. morelli aye mr. mervan

it's real

mr. newhouse

well

mr. newhouse no miss perez miss pingree miss pingree aye mr. pokan mr. pokan aye mr. quigley

aye

mr. quigley aye mr. russenthaler mister rogers

yes

mister rogers no mister rutherford mister rutherford no mister shreve

no

no

mister shreve no mister simpson mister simpson no mister strong

no

mister strong no mrs. torres

aye

mrs. torres aye miss underwood

aye

miss underwood aye mr. valadeo hmm miss wasserman schultz

aye

miss wasserman schultz aye mrs. Watson Coleman this is Watson Coleman aye mr. womack

aye

mr. womack no mr. zinke mr. zinke no

no

any uh members wishing to vote or change their vote gentlemen from south carolina

uh-huh

mr. kleiburn aye

gentlemen from new york

aye

mr. espiat aye

Gentlelady from texas

aye

miss eskibar aye

and gentlelady from washington

aye

miss perez aye

gentlemen from uh virginia

mister klein no

gentleman from texas

mister l z no

Gentlelady from oklahoma

yes

miss mrs bice no

gentleman from ohio

no

mister joyce no

gentleman from arkansas

arizona

did i say arkansas arizona actually you have my deepest apologies gentleman from arizona

mister syscomone no

Gentlelady from iowa

mrs. hinson no

gentlemen gentlemen from hawaii

aye

mister case aye

uh gentlelady uh did

oh those are lovely

yeah she was

ok uh again are there any other members or gentlemen from california

mr. valadao

no

no doubt it's no blood

mister valadao no

any other members wishing to vote or change their vote saying none clerk will tell us miss vote the ayes are twenty six the no's are thirty one the amendment is not adopt Gentlelady from new jersey miss watching coleman is recognized for an amendment general oh

did you recognize me

yes ma'am

i'm terribly sorry

that's quite alright

thank you mister chairman i have an amendment at the desk and i ask unanimous consent that it be dispensed with, that we dispense with the reading of it.

Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with. The gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. My amendment would restore funding for the CDC racial and ethnic approaches to community health program. CDC funds fifty organizations in thirty-two states and the District of Columbia to carry out the racial and ethnic approaches to community health program. in the fiscal year twenty twenty five cycle mister sismani misters sismani joyce fleishman womack zinke clive and molinar eight six hundred and eighty thousand dollars went to each of your districts miss bice five hundred thousand dollars went to your district and then there are so many more but i'll leave it at that addressing health disparities should be bipartisan And past funding has gone to Republican and Democratic districts alike. REACH aims to improve health, prevent chronic diseases, and reduce health disparities among racial and ethnic populations with the highest risk or burden of chronic disease. Erasing such a program is erasing acknowledgement that health disparities exist. We know that black women die from child birth complications at a higher rate in this country, than in any other high income country the rate of colorectal cancer is twenty percent higher among black men and fourteen percent higher among black women compared to white men and women according to the cdc in twenty twenty three the average life expectancy at birth for black americans was seventy four years compared to seventy eight point four years for all races we have so much more work to do to alleviate these health disparities. Choosing to halt research on this is both ignorant and injustice to our communities. I encourage my colleagues to consider the health of all of our Americans, think about the ongoing work in your districts, and support my amendment. And thank you, I yield back.

Thank you, General Lay, the gentleman from Alabama. Mister Adderall, just recognized to respond to the amendment.

Yes, all. Thank you. Thank you, Mister. Chairman, and uh I um again relate to rise to oppose the gentlema- lady's amendment. She's a great member of our subcommittee and uh certainly been a good friend, but uh while I recognize that the chronic diseases disproportionately impact certain racial and ethical minorities, the CDC reach program impact remains unclear. Uh, this bill provides funding for programs that benefit the intended target populations, uh, but uh I do look forward to working with the gentlelady as we

thank you gentlemen gentlelady from connecticut Mr. Lohr is recognized to respond to the amendment

I rise in strong support of the amendment this bill eliminates funding for the racial and ethnic approaches to community health program at the centers for disease control and prevention all people should be able to reach their full health potential However, health gaps exist among racial and ethnic minority groups. These groups may have a higher rate of disease, early death, and health care costs and a lower quality of life. The REACH program was created to allow recipients to plan and carry out local, culturally appropriated programs, use improving strategies to help improve health, prevent chronic diseases, and reduce health disparities. The program's goal is to make healthy eating an active, an active living more accessible and affordable for those with the highest risk or burden of chronic diseases. Such diseases include high blood pressure, heart disease, type two diabetes, and obesity. The REACH program was intended to address a variety of racial and ethnic minority groups, uh, African American, Hispanic, Asian American, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, American Indian, and Alaska Native. The bill before us eliminates all of the funding for this effort except for the funding that focuses on Indian country. I disagree with this approach. Does the REACH grantee at Southern Connecticut State University in my hometown of New Haven, Connecticut not deserve support? One focus of Southern's REACH grant is nutrition standards in New Haven food pantries. They created a nutrition ranking system based on a stoplight system to encourage clients to make healthier choices. Pretty easy. They also partnered with the Coordinated Food Assistance Network to increase the accessibility and distribution of healthier foods. And guess what? It worked. More nutritious food was available in low-income neighborhoods, and therefore pantry users chose healthier options with a stoplight as their guide, Why just one community, the Indian community, why are the others excluded? The entire population needs to be funded if we are going to continue to address these health challenges. My constituents deserve to have these programs continue just as much as any individual in Indian country, and I applaud that. I want to say a thank you to Congresswoman Watson Coleman for offering this amendment And I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I yield back.

Thank the gentlelady. The gentleman from Georgia, Mister Bishop, is recognized to address the amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, I strongly support Representative Watson Coleman's amendment to restore funding for the CDC's racial and ethnic approaches to community health, the REACH program. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention serves as the cornerstone of our nation's public health system, leading vital efforts in disease surveillance, prevention, emergency response, and public health education. Drastic reductions in CDC funding risk stabilizing our country's public health infrastructure at a time when robust prevention and response capabilities are more important than ever. When something deadly is spreading, the CDC is often the only thing standing between that danger and our families. The REACH program is specially important because it focuses on health disparities among racial and ethnic minorities. Its goal is to make healthy eating and active living more accessible and affordable for priority populations. Many of its culturally tailored initiatives have proven to be highly effective in improving health and preventing chronic diseases like obesity, type two diabetes and heart disease. Obesity, type two diabetes and heart disease do, absolutely do disproportionately burden racial and ethnic minority groups, driven not by biology alone,

Mm.

but by systemic inequities, social determinants of health, and barriers to quality of care. African American adults, for example, have a sixty percent higher rate of diagnosed diabetes and are one and a half times more likely to experience a stroke than non-Hispanic white adults. They're also nearly eighty percent more likely to die from diabetes complications. Among Hispanic Latino adults, they are roughly one point seven times more likely to be diagnosed with diabetes compared to non-Hispanic uh white adults, with a particularly high prevalence of obesity among certain subgroups like Mexican Americans. Addressing these intersecting health crises requires understanding why and how these occur. After all, you cannot fix what you cannot measure. These disparities require initiatives like the REACH program to tackle them. In Georgia, the REACH program has promoted among African-American and Latino populations improved nutrition and eating of more fruits and vegetables, increased physical activity and tobacco cessation. Reducing funding for these initiatives makes no sense unless you consider it in the context of the war that the trump administration is waging on medical and health disparities research the administration has moved to eliminate the c. d. c.'s office of health equity and the c. m. s. office of minority health directors of key research bodies such as the national institute of minority health and health disparities have been targeted for removal or administrative leave the trump administration agenda poses long-term and widespread threats to our capacity to research, report on, and prevent the disproportionate burden of sickness, injury, and premature death, borne by racial and ethnic minorities. Medical schools and accrediting bodies have been pressured to drop race and gender-based considerations pushing to dismantle diversity efforts in the healthcare workforce pipeline viewed in connection with the many other priority reductions in funding that we are seeing in this year's appropriations bills it is clear that this administration is not just taking steps

mmm

that will eliminate a better quality of life for minority racial and ethnic groups in america but will ultimately eliminate life itself this committee and congress should not be complicit in this nefarious scheme This is Project twenty twenty five in action. Mister Chairman, we should be narrowing the health gaps between racial and ethnic groups, not widening them. I urge support for this amendment. I yield back.

I thank gentlemen. Are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is obvious that there is a concern and acknowledgement that disparities in the research and the impact of health care on certain communities exist. Otherwise, we would not have had uh uh Miss Dolores speaking out so vividly about our Native American population then I support that effort that is being placed on their behalf. I just simply can't understand if you can acknowledge that those disparities exist based upon the data how you don't acknowledge that it exists in other communities including mine and latino in other communities i think that's unfair and i wish that you would recognize that and support my amendment with that i yield back thank you

i thank the gentlelady The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from New Jersey. All those in favor say aye.

Aye. Aye.

All those opposed say no.

No.

Paying attention to no's habit.

Aye.

Um, roll call's been requested, sufficient support has been demonstrated. Who wants to call the roll?

Mister Adderhall.

No.

Mister Adderhall, no, Mister Aguilar. Mister Alford.

No.

Mister Alford, no, Mister Amaday.

No.

Mister Amaday, no, Mister Spice. mister bishop

aye

mister bishop aye mister calvert

no

mister calvert no mister carter mister carter

no

mister carter no mister case

aye

mister case aye mister siskamani mister siskamani no mister klein mister cloud mister kleiburn

are

mister kleiburn aye mister kleid

negative

mister kleid no mister kohl

no

mister kohl no mister kwayar miss dean

aye

miss dean aye mr. loro

bye

mr. loro aye mr. diaz-ballart

hmm

mr. edwards

edwards

mr. edwards no mr. diaz-ballart

no

mr. diaz-ballart no mr. elzey miss escobar miss escobar aye mr. espiat

no aye

mr. espiat aye mr. fleischman

mr. falange no

mr. fleischman no miss frankel miss frankel

aye

miss frankel aye mr. franklin

no

mr. franklin no mr. guest

no

mr. guest no mr. harder mr. harder aye dr. harris dr. harris no mrs. hinson

no

no

mrs. hinson no mr. hoyer

aye

mr. hoyer aye mr. ivy mr. joyce

no

mr. joyce no miss captor miss captor

i aye

miss captor aye mr. lolota miss lee

aye

miss lee aye miss letlow mister levin mister levin aye miss molloy

aye no

miss molloy no miss mccollum

aye

miss mccollum aye miss ming

it's really good