The Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2027

oh my god ages eight twelve eight twelve nine ten eleven eleven twelve eighteen thirteen sixteen seventeen eighteen six sixteen seventeen eighteen seventeen eighteen seven seventeen seventeen seventeen eighteen seventeen sixteen six seven i believe what you said eighteen sixteen seven sixteen seven eighteen sixteen seven sixteen seven sixteen seven eighteen sixteen seven sixteen seven now i believe that what you said eighteen sixteen seven sixteen seven eighteen sixteen seven sixteen seventeen eighteen sixteen sixteen wait what would you do sixteen seventeen sixteen seventeen seventeen eighteen ok seventeen yeah before we did you ready

Yeah, let's go.

Good. The committee will now come to order. Today the House Budget Committee will consider the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year twenty twenty seven, which is the first step to unlock the reconciliation process. Uh, first let me thank the ranking member, but also every colleague, uh, for your time, for, I'm sure, making some um, some scheduling changes, and my apologies for any incompletions. Uh, again, uh, to my ranking member, thank you for working with us to develop a structure for this mark-up, uh, that, uh, closely follows what we've done in the past with the goal to have a mark-up with, where both sides will have an opportunity to debate the framework for the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year twenty twenty seven. And again, thanks to everybody for your cooperation. Consistent with the agreement that I've reached with, uh, Mister Boyle without objection, and I'll go through a series of points. The ranking member, Mister Boyle, and I will each have five minutes to make opening statements. After opening statements, we'll have ten minutes for a technical and factual question. And I want to emphasize technical questions, uh, to uh, to address to the majority of staff regarding the budget resolution. The document will be considered as read and open for amendment at any point. The amendments considered by the committee will be those submitted pursuant to the agreement I made. with ranking member Boyle. Debate time for each amendment will be limited to ten minutes. Debate time will be evenly divided between the sponsor of the amendment and the member opposed. The proponent of the uh amendment will have one minute reserved at the end to close. The chairman may be authorized to declare recess at any time, and the committee roll any request for a roll call vote on an amendment. I would like to thank everyone joining us here today as we undergo the most important duty of this committee and in accordance with the congressional budget act of nineteen seventy four considering uh the annual concurrent budget resolution. Okay. Now, I'm gonna yield myself such time as I may uh uh need. And then I'm gonna let you have as much time in fairness as you may need, mister ranking member and my friend. So, good to see you this morning. Um. A little context. I always think that's important for our discussions. After four years of lawlessness, incompetence, and what I think most Americans believe was a radical agenda, after suffering one self-inflicted crisis after another from the border chaos to the cost of living crisis, forty year high inflation, to the projection of weakness on the world stage, the American people said enough. In twenty twenty four, the historic election, the American people overwhelmingly elected Donald Trump and unified Republican leadership here in Washington. From day one, President Trump has hit the ground at mock speed and moved with more purpose and urgency than any president in modern history. certainly in my lifetime. He has secured the border and stopped the flow of crime, criminals, and drugs that have been pouring into our communities and threatening the safety of our families. He has rebuilt the military, refocused the military, not on woke ideology, but on war fighting, on providing for the common defense, and peace through strength. He stopped the unfair trade practices that were perpetrated on our great nation, leveled the playing field for our farmers and ranchers and manufacturers, and our workers. He declared war on fraud, one million dollars every minute of every hour of every day for a year. is what is leaking in fraud out of the people's government, and he has a whole of government attack on that five hundred plus billion dollars a year in fraud. He's ended the gravy train, free rider, foreign dependence on America's defense, and uh, and a whole lot of other things that are making America safer, stronger, and more prosperous. For our part, Republicans in Congress passed the first reconciliation bill. No help from our Democrat colleagues to stop what would be the largest tax hike in history. But we advanced what was the largest tax cut in history, providing permanent tax relief to hardworking Americans. We also in reconciliation, one, ended the green new disaster that was crushing American families, consumers with high energy prices, and weakening our country. So we're restoring American energy dominance. We rooted out record savings in waste, fraud, and abuse. One point six trillion dollars, that's twice as much as any Congress in the history of the United States. And I think Probably most importantly, we made the largest investment in the history of our country in national defense and border security. So, we boosted the pay of our troops along with their morale. And, uh, most importantly, uh, we strengthened our military to provide for the common defense. All of this All of this in the face of what I believe is unprecedented Democrat obstruction. So let me make that case. Exhibit A. The first longest shutdown in America's history. We had an agreement. We put forward a clean continuing resolution to fund the government. That is, we said let's fund the government at what we agreed to fund it last year until we agree on The Democrats said no, for the first time ever, and shut the government down. Here were their demands. Repeal the safeguards for the American tax dollars to stop them from flowing to people who are not eligible or who are here illegally, or are capable of working who refuse to work. So repealing the work that we did to root out waste, fraud and abuse, that was their demand. Secondly, and later in the process, they demanded that that we extend a COVID era fraud ridden program that had defrauded taxpayers by the tens of billions of dollars. Those were their unreasonable and ridiculous demands. Fast forward. Government shutdown too. Democrats held hostage the American people, safety, and the Department of Homeland Security. Our Coast Guardsmen who protect our ports. Our Border Patrol who stand in the gap and risk their lives to defend our sovereign border. CISA agents who protect us against cyber attacks. All of it shut down because of the, what I would say is, unserious and even dangerous demands that would have returned our country back to wide open border chaos and it would have imperiled the safety of our law enforcement. We had to use reconciliation two point O just to fund homeland security. My Democrat colleagues would not do that unless we defunded ICE and CBP. So we had to use reconciliation as Republicans only, not a single Democrat, to open up homeland and fund ICE and CBP. Not one Democrat. to fund ice and cbp. Now we're at reconciliation three point O. We still have obstruction. I think as recent as two days ago, maybe it was yesterday, democrats in the senate said no, collectively, to what is historically a bipartisan national defense authorization act, which basically are the policies that undergird the entire pentagon and america. They've also held up FISA. Uh, which is a critical tool for our intelligence agencies to protect the American people. And I can keep going down the list, but the message is loud and it is clear to me that we're not going to get any help from our Democrat colleagues to do what I believe are two critical things to finish the fight that we said we would undertake for the people who gave us unified Republican leadership. And here's the first and most important one. Support our troops in time of conflict. We can debate where we are, why we're there. You can't debate supporting our sons and daughters in uniform who salute the Commander-in-Chief and risk their lives for our freedom, for our security, for our ideals, for our interests, anywhere, This is a defense supplemental. It should be bipartisan. We should be able to work collectively to stand with our troops. It will not happen, ladies and gentlemen, and if we don't use reconciliation to just give baseline readiness. Not Star Wars and Golden Dome and transformative modernizing of the military, just the bombs, bullets, and battle. readiness for our men and women in uniform to finish the fight successfully, and return home safely. That's it. Sixty-seven billion supplemental defense should be regular order. We're gonna use reconciliation because we're not going to let our troops be held hostage like we saw our Coast Guardsmen and Border Patrol, et cetera. Secondly, we're going to strengthen our food supply. We're not going to allow instability and a lack of resilience in the food supply, food security is national security, we're not gonna be begging China or anybody to feed our families. Thirdly, we have to do something to give confidence to the American people that there is in fact free, fair, and accurate elections. We have a crisis in confidence in our elections. Say what you want about corruption and fraud, where it is, in pockets, pervasive. We have a public crisis in confidence. This may be the greatest threat to our republic. And voter ID is not about politics, it's about public confidence. And it's an eighty-twenty issue. And we have put it on the floor, Mister Walker, we have put it on the floor repeatedly and gotten zero help from our Democrat colleagues. Basic safeguards, fundamental safeguards. You need a voter ID to buy a, a, a, you know, a six pack of beer. You gotta show your ID to check in a hotel. Later on we'll probably all be on an airplane. We'll have to show our ID. And yet we're not getting any support to do that, to give confidence and integrity to elections. Um, look. Voter ID is essential to the integrity of our elections. Integrity in elections is indispensable as part of our representative government. Every law passed by Congress, every judge confirmed, every president sworn into office derives their legitimacy from the confidence Americans have in our elections. If Americans lose confidence in elections, they will lose confidence in our government, and even worse, they will lose confidence in their share of this great republic. We celebrate two hundred fifty years. We all probably re-read the Declaration of Independence. Just governments, the only just governments derive their power from the consent of the governed. You cannot have the consent of the governed. You cannot have the consent of the governed, nor can you have a just government if people don't have confidence, tens of millions of people, in the transfer of the will of the people to their representative uh leadership in this great nation. And until we address that, guys, we are walking on shaky ground and uh we are hanging by a And so, yes, we are gonna use reconciliation to make a run at doing what we think will save this country for our f- children's future and, uh, for the remainder of this century. I can't think of a more important thing to to work on. So, look, that's the outline, mister ranking member, um, and, uh, we are united and we are rallying to finish what we started when the American people sent us here. Uh, that may be different, from most congresses that may be different for republicans in the past but this is not your granddaddy's republican party and this is the mighty house republican committee and this is a unified republican leadership and we're gonna get the job done we appreciate your time i know i went a little over my five minutes but i'll let you have as much time as you want it's a blessing it's a blessing in the end

uh thank you mister chairman um i wasn't planning on on starting like this but you know listening to you talk reminded me of one of the things i used to love to do when my daughter was younger she's twelve now but when she was much younger i would love to read her fairy tale stories and i would try to come up with the most imaginative wildest most creative fairy tale i could come up with mister chairman i give you credit the fairy tale you just told was so imaginative i could never come up with something as wild so i'm going to instead uh in in the twelve minutes that uh that i have um attempt to stick to the facts the facts of what are actually in the republican reconciliation three point O america last you know one thing as divisive as the twenty twenty four election may have been one thing that actually both democrats and republicans agreed on the Democratic nominee for president and the Republican nominee for president both agreed on, the polls were overwhelmingly clear, the top issue for the American people was affordability, that costs post-pandemic had gone too high, that America had become unaffordable, and that that campaign was about who would lower costs. President Trump ran around my state of Pennsylvania more than any other state in promising to lower costs, and I quote his exact words, I will lower costs on day one. Here we are, more than eighteen months later. Are costs any lower? Of course not. In fact, they are through the roof. And they are through the roof specifically because of failed Trump Republican policies. first the trump tariff taxes they have dramatically increased costs on the american people because of the trump tariff taxes the average american household paid nearly one thousand seven hundred dollars more last year for goods than they did the year before directly attributable to the trump tariff taxes that was last year what does president trump and his republican allies in congress, a reckless, idiotic, preemptive war on Iran. Gas prices were two ninety-eight a gallon nationally on February twenty eighth, the day before the war began. Within thirty days, they rose more than fifty percent. And indeed are now still more than forty percent higher than what they were a few months ago. But it's not just gas prices. It's food prices. It's the prices for consumer goods. on and on we go. Now, you might think, given that the top issue in the twenty twenty-four election was affordability, and that the top issue today is affordability, you might think the majority would want to spend time in a reconciliation bill addressing the number one issue on voters' minds. Well, I can tell you forty-seven pages in their bill six thousand five hundred sixty words and not one word on bringing down costs for the American people not one word instead we have tens of billions of dollars for the most unpopular war in American history so over the last eighteen months we have seen where republicans priorities are trillions of dollars in tax cuts for billionaires tens of billions of dollars for war and absolutely nothing for the American people. Now, one of the the other facets of the chairman's fairy tale on Donald Trump was to make him sound like he's George Washington and Abe Lincoln rolled into one. If this president was doing that well, then, geez, I guess. poll ratings must be through the roof the american people must be overjoyed so let's take a look at the president's report card let's see who the people believe in this argument trump's handling of the economy according to fox news thirty one percent of the american people approve sixty eight percent disapprove trump's handling of inflation twenty seven percent approve seventy three percent disapproval the worst numbers since the carter presidency trend on the economy seventeen percent of the american people think it's getting better fifty three percent think it's getting worse there are more there's more polling data here i could cite it's the same exact story by an overwhelming margin two to one even three to one the american people know that this is a failed presidency And this has been a failed Republican majority. He promised to lower costs on day one. He hasn't done that. In fact, he's not even trying. So this side will stand proudly united in opposition. If there is ever an attempt from the other side to actually address the affordability crisis in this country, then you will have willing partners. who want to work with you. But it is quite clear from the last reconciliation, as well as this reconciliation, we have a president and a majority who couldn't care less about the affordability crisis facing this country. With that, I yield back.

I think the ranking member, if any other members would like to submit a written statement for the record, I'll hold the record open until the end of the day to accommodate those members who may not have prepared written statements. We will now uh slash factual q and a session of the concurrent resolution on the budget uh for fiscal year twenty twenty seven we have our witness at the table now mister brad Watson uh the director of budget review the majority staff is available to only answer technical questions i guess we emphasize that because we anticipate some non-technical questions but we're gonna focus them on technical members may have uh or if any questions begin to stray from that then we will refocus or uh i'm prepared to just uh to gavel it down. there'll be plenty of time for members to debate in the later mark-up and so now let's open it up for any member who has questions uh actually i'm gonna recognize uh mr. boyle

oh you guys want to start

yeah to to kick us off

yeah well first uh as mr. Watson i hope recalled i i actually uh try not to argue policy points with with staff and instead save those uh discussions in debate

thank you

uh for for members but i do wanna flash out a little bit more about what is in here because the reporting publicly the last seventy two hours um was all over the place in terms of where things would land and even in the last twenty four hours this is dispute between your republican senate brethren and and what's here as of are there any offsets whatsoever in this bill?

Um, so the budget resolution would provide reconciliation instructions, um, that provide a maximum, um, level of deficit, um, increase of ninety-five billion over ten years. That's the maximum allowed in terms of the reconciliation instructions over the ten year period. The budget resolution, um, in the aggregate, all components of the budget resolution combined would propose to reduce the deficit by seven point seven trillion dollars over ten years.

I'm sorry. I can you walk us through magically how this would increase the deficit by up to ninety five billion dollars, and yet somehow achieve deficit reduction?

Yes, sir, the budget resolution um would propose uh the following uh four set of sets of policies. First, the budget resolution would provide discretionary uh spending restraint that would save two point five trillion dollars over ten years, relative to the CBO baseline. Second, the budget resolution

Uh can you, sorry, let me let me stop you at number one,

Yes, sir.

since that's a I think the biggest chunk. Can you briefly describe how exactly this would be achieved? Because it does seem, and I won't debate this point with you, but it does seem as if this is a fuzzy math.

Yes, sir, the budget resolution on discretionary spending would propose an allocation uh that would grow by two percent in FY twenty twenty seven. So the allocation for the Appropriations Committee in FY twenty twenty seven would be one point six six two trillion dollars.

Okay.

From there, that level of spending would uh be frozen for two years. Uh, that would be the allocation then for twenty twenty nine then thereafter spending would grow by one percent overall in the aggregate compared to cbo's baseline that math leads to two point five trillion of savings for discretionary spending

i have further questions but knowing that we're on the clock i wanna yield to any of my colleagues um for questions they may have uh do i so i yield to mister scott

just very briefly do those numbers account for inflation

The um discretionary uh spending allotment would be set at a two percent growth in twenty twenty seven that is the nominal growth increase in twenty eight and twenty nine the policy is you would have a freeze.

The question is nominal growth so that if inflation is three percent you don't kept not only don't keep up with inflation you actually cut low inflation.

Under the budget act uh the budget committee sets a nominal amount this budget resolution sets a nominal amount of one point six six two trillion.

yeah i i in terms of process uh

yeah i'm gonna recognize some folks you can just raise your hand

ok thank bonnie watson coleman

yes

it's bonnie watson coleman

thank you i i understand it just suggesting that we're going to uh achieve these goals through

for sure

limitations on spending over the next uh decade

yes

is there any instructions on where

well under the budget acts the budget committee is given the authority to set a three O two a allocation to the appropriations committee under the budget act and under this budget resolution the appropriations committee retains all flexibility and all authority all responsibility to make spending decisions

so the answer to my it so the answer is generally yes so where will these savings and spending come from

the uh policy of the budget resolution is to set a discrepancy

i think we talking about process and i'm interested in knowing how you going to how we're proposing to accomplish this because it's about a spending decrease and so i wanna know

sure i think it's a good question

given this administration's experience with the decreases in spending in important important programs is your discussion or direction on the specific areas in which we try to accomplish this spending because thank you

if if if i may on on the discretionary side just to put a fine point on it we have the discretionary levels like we have kept discretionary flat for three years saving almost a half a trillion i'd say collectively because some of that was cr but but it it's a top line not specifics the the appropriations committee. then start to uh

Thanks, Chairman. You understand that my concern is that the experience with this administration

Yeah, I do.

is that we cut that which is important for the cost of living and the safety and security of the people of this country at the expense of billionaires, and the President pocketing his money.

Uh, I thank the General Lady and now yield to Miss Jayapal from Washington for questions.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, there are several versions of the Save Act and uh President Trump has demanded that congress include a limitation on mail-in ballots, uh, a a ban on mail-in ballots that affect places like my state that have legislated mail-in ballots. This additional requirement is not in the House past version of the save act. Do the policy assumptions that are made in the instruction to the committee on house administration include this additional requirement for the ban on mail-in ballots?

Under the budget resolution, the house administration committee is given an instruction of ten billion dollars and the committee would

But does it include the ban on mail-in ballots?

No policies are articulated and you can back me up or not, but no policies, we set the top line, we set the budget targets on revenue expenditures, we let the authorizing committees then develop a policy. So we're not

So in other words, it's not a full, it's not a full accounting of what that ban that's been demanded.

That's right. It's not.

There's so so so that could cost a lot more money. if that is included in the policy version which is not accounted for in the in the accounting version of this bill.

Well, the under the budget act and under this budget resolution, the house administration committee would have to um fit legislation that would fit within the budgetary parameters of the reconciliation instructions, providing the ten billion dollars.

And the budget resolution includes an instruction to the house, the committee on house administration, presumably accommodating the president's demand for his election interference legislation. Have House Republicans received any assurances from your Senate counterparts that this legislation is compliant with the bird rule?

That

Well, the, I'm just gonna answer that the bird rule is a function of the Senate and so the Senate will sort of, what I would call, litigate any uh bird rule issues with the parliamentarian, with uh Democrat and Republicans, both engaged in the process. It it's not a function of the house. In fact, uh, early in the first reconciliation I tried to meet with the parliamentarian, and she wouldn't even meet with me. So that, uh, it it's reserved as a privilege motion for the Senate.

Uh-huh. My question was whether you've received any assurances that this is compliant, or are we just wasting time today talking about things that are not gonna be compliant?

Well, it it it has a material budget impact. And so, you know, there's no way to know like you all had a minimum wage increase in in a reconciliation bill. that was something you anticipated would be compliant, it was scrubbed out as non-compliant. We had some things scrubbed out of the first one, uh, that did not comply with board rules. So, uh, we won't know until it's over there, but I would just assure my friend that we have put, uh, uh, monies around the provisions of, uh, of the save act, if you will, and that, that is a material budget impact. But it will be, uh, litigated like everything else by the parliamentarian in the city.

Mister Watson, you're being replaced by, uh, Mister

yeah mister now yield to mister mcgarvey from the commonwealth of kentucky

thank you mr. chair i see we're short on time so i'll try to be brief use a lot of uh big words big numbers here but i think we can break this down pretty simply um this bill right the deficit refers to the amount we are spending year over year for what we don't have right so it that's our number ok the debt is the actual debt of the country

yes sir yes sir

so the decrease in the deficit

Under the budget resolution, there'd be compared to CBO baseline approximately eight trillion dollars of debt reduction compared to the CBO baseline.

So it adds to the debt, yes.

Okay.

The debt would, in nominal terms, grow, but it would grow by less than it otherwise would, yes.

Again, using big words, in nominal terms, the debt gets bigger, right?

The debt would, uh, grow, but by less than under the CBO baseline.

S- s- bill increases the debt of the country.

Well, I would say that

Yes, is what you would say.

Yeah, well, compared to the CTI baseline,

Okay, perfect. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

we're reducing debt by twenty four percentile.

Okay, okay. And the

I I'll give uh listen,

uh

I I took some time explaining stuff, my colleagues may not like this, but if you you need another twenty, thirty seconds. Miss Escobar, did you have is that

Yeah, uh

Miss Escobar, did you have a question or two?

I was gonna say

Yes.

Okay. Go ahead.

Okay, thank you.

You can you can go over time about thirty seconds.

So, the budget resolution provides for a total discretionary level,

Well the the Budget Act, under the Budget Act, um the budget resolution sets through to a allocation,

So the answer is yes, right?

The uh three O two A allocation being one point six six two trillion would be below the amount of appropriations um through

So so the house would have to make two hundred billion dollars of cuts.

The amount of

Yeah, let me answer that question, if I may, a little more directly. It is not unusual for the budget committee to come in with a lower top-line number than the appropriators. Mm-hmm. And uh, what happens is that is meted out and negotiated before it goes to rules, and sometimes it is uh, reconciled in rules before it gets to the floor. So, where that ultimately lands, you're right. Yeah. There is a there is a higher number of spending being uh, uh, con being uh, worked out at the appropriations level. We have a lower number for

thank you mister chairman there's some fellow i'm on the appropriations committee

yeah sure sure

and we just went through the appropriations process this means there would have to be two hundred billion dollars of cuts

yes yes

additional cuts

the appropriators spent uh ten percent higher than last year which is twice the average increase in discretionary spending we have put basically the cbo baseline uh as uh our top line and we will work closely with our appropriators to figure out what the best final number is.

And just as a footnote, this is also almost a hundred and fifty billion dollars below the president the president's discretionary request.

OK. Alright, we are over we g- generous two minutes, I gave that from my opening remarks. I may feel guilty about those long opening remarks. Uh, if there are uh no additional questions, concludes Q and A. Uh, again, thank you to the uh majority staff. Brad, thanks a lot. Good job. The committee will now proceed to the consideration of the budget aggregates, functional categories and other appropriate matters. This text is identical to the tables distributed to all members and posted on-line yesterday. Under committee rule ten, the committee will consider a document containing the budget aggregates, functional categories and other components of the budget resolution. Amendments may be offered to this document subject to the agreement between the majority and minority. After this document has been approved, it will be incorporated in the ne into the text of the concurrent resolution on the budget for final vote on whether the report uh is measure uh whether to report the measure to the house. The committee will now begin the amendment process. The document will be considered as read and open for amendment at any point. Pursuant to the agreement laid out earlier today, debate on any amendment offered will last ten minutes per amendment, with time equally divided. Uh, here's how it's broken down. The proponent of the amendment amendment will have

I have an amendment at the desk.

The clerk will designate the amendment, staff will uh distribute copies of that amendment. And uh we'll pause here until that's distributed.

Amendment number one, to adjust. spending in function five fifty offered by mr. boyle do you have a manual

no so so we don't do this so you just i think it's a little right here it's good this is this is your this it's good come on Miss, Mister Boyle, you are now recognized for four minutes.

Thank you. Um. As we may all recall, uh, uh, almost exactly one year ago, last Fourth of July, President signed into law Republicans' uh original reconciliation bill, which essentially included more than five trillion dollars worth of tax cuts, most of which are skewed to go to the very top one one hundredth of one percent and included in that were cuts of more than nine hundred billion dollars to healthcare in this country, most of those cuts coming from Medicaid. It was projected at the time by Congressional Budget Office that more than fifteen million Americans would lose their healthcare, some like Kaiser uh found that it would be seventeen million, those numbers were disputed by the other side, well here we are a year later and already eight million people have lost their health care. And bear in mind the Medicaid cuts haven't even taken effect yet. The Medicaid cuts will begin come this December. So my amendment is very simple. We have already seen eight million Americans lose their health care. Let us act now before another eight million also lose their health care due to these Medicaid cuts. This resolution would accommodate the necessary level of Medicaid funding by requiring the wealthy in corporations to pay their fair share, reversing the tax cuts for billionaires and ultra-millionaires that were part of PL one nineteen dash two one. It's very simple. We cannot balance our books or attempt to come close to balancing our books on the backs of the poor and the working class and the middle class in this country. The damage in terms of the greatest loss of health care in American history has already been severe over these last six months. We must act now and pass this amendment or eight million more people will lose their health care beginning this December. With that, I yield the reserve.

Um,

Um, I think I yield.

yield. Um, thank you.

Mister Chairman.

Mister Carter is recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Mister. Thank you, Mister Chairman. Mister Chairman, the health provisions within the one big beautiful bill protect and strengthen Medicaid. They do not cut Medicaid. They protect and strengthen Medicaid for the most vulnerable whom the program was designed to serve. Low income pregnant women, children, those with disabilities, and the Allegations that Republicans cut Medicaid are simply untrue. Medicaid spending will still grow. It'll still grow over twenty percent over the next decade, but on a much more sustainable fiscal path. The nonpartisan independent Congressional Budget Office confirmed that those that those that Democrats allege are losing Medicaid coverage are only individuals who were already ineligible for the Illegal immigrants are able-bodied adults without young dependents refusing to work. Mister Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to submit into the record a letter from CBO on changes to insurance coverage under H R one the one big beautiful bill.

It's a word.

CBO also confirmed that three point seven million people who Democrats say will be uninsured will still have access to federally subsidized health insurance, through Medicaid, Obamacare tax credits, or employer-sponsored insurance. The one big beautiful bill's acts common sense Clinton-style Medicaid work requirements are a policy Democrats would have embraced not so long ago. As a reminder, the Medicaid community engagement requirements apply only to able-bodied adults without dependence under fourteen. If you're working, learning, serving, or moving toward work for at least twenty hours a week, Medicaid will still be there for you. In fact, a new report from HHS shows that Medicaid work requirements are estimated to lift three million people three million people out of poverty by incentivizing employment. What's more, the one big beautiful bill act rains in Medicaid money laundering through provider tax and state-directed payment reforms, restores eligibility checks to insure decreased individuals, deceased individuals, do not remain on the roles and invest fifty billion dollars in the Rural Health Transformation Fund to support access to care for Americans in rural areas. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act also makes meaningful progress toward a more personalized health care system that prioritizes patients through expanding HSA eligibility to include those enrolled in bronze and catastrophic plans, direct primary care arrangements, and pre-deductible telehealth. Mr. Chairman, Republicans were proud to support these reforms to improve the Medicaid program and is sure it serves America's most vulnerable. Mister Chairman, as you know, for many years I served as a pharmacist, and I worked diligently on this Medicaid program, and I saw the abuses in the Medicaid program, I saw them firsthand. What we did was improve this for the people who need it, the people who deserve it, the most vulnerable in our society. It is indeed a safety net program intended for those per people. What we did in one big beautiful bill act was simply to get people off of that program who should not have been on it in the first place. We put them on other programs that are more appropriate for them. In other words, we saved Medicaid. We saved one of the fastest growing programs in our appropriations budget. And I'm very proud of the work that we did. At that time, I was chair of the health subcommittee on energy and commerce. that propose those changes. And I'm very proud of the work that we did. I think that we have improved it. I think we've made it better for future generations. And I yield back. And I urge a no vote on this.

Uh, thank you, the gentleman from George and the balance of time, just to r- remind folks uh because I this is this is a false narrative on the big beautiful bill. We put in measures that would prohibit ineligible, illegal, uh uh and folks who are capable This is what the American people expected from Republican leadership in this town. And to my friend's point from Georgia, by doing that, rooting out the waste, fraud and abuse, we are we are making these programs more sustainable for the most vulnerable. And I contrast that with President Biden who signed with the stroke of a pen executive order, allowing illegal immigrants to uh, Medicaid funding. And, uh, nine thousand per illegal immigrant, that's more than we spend on Medicaid for our own citizens. And with that, uh, I I yield. Uh, now, are there any, uh, oh, no, Mister Boyle gets a one minute closer. Yeah. Mister Boyle, one minute.

Well, let's, uh, in the final minute, let's just look at the facts, uh, of what have has already happened. In the six months since the big ugly laws enactment, more than six thousand five hundred workers have been laid off at hospitals, and a hundred and fifteen hospitals and clinics have shut their doors or eliminated services like maternity care, primary care, or behavioral health services. The Medicaid cuts that will again occur beginning in December, they would newly expose fifty-five rural hospitals across twenty-six states to be at serious risk of closure, leaving three hundred eighty rural hospitals across the nation with such risk. Furthermore, Republican steep cuts to state Medicaid budgets would pressure states to scale back eligibility for nursing home care and force them to sharply curtail or even end Medicaid home and community-based services. For those reasons and more, I urge all of my colleagues to adopt this amendment.

I thank the gentlemen, the questions on agreeing to the amendment amendment offered by Mister Boyle. All those in favor say aye.

Aye. Aye.

Those opposed, no.

No.

In the opinion,

Well, I asked for a recorded vote.

A roll call vote is requested. Pursuant to the bipartisan unanimous consent agreement, we will postpone the roll call vote until later in the mark-up. Are there any other amendments?

I have an amendment at the desk, Mister Chairman.

The clerk will designate the amendment. Staff will distribute copies of the amendment, will pause, and then let Mister Doggett uh uh provide his opening remarks.

Thank you.

Amendment number two on affordable care act tax credits offered by Mister Doggett.

May I proceed, Mister Chairman? Sure. Uh yield uh four minutes to Mister Doggett from Texas. Just as Trump launches a war in the name of peace, his obedient Republican followers preach the dangers of excessive debt while increasing it at every opportunity. They added trillions of dollars of debt last year and just billions with this outrageous proposal. It's not a democratic group, indeed it is an independent and generally conservative committee for a responsible federal budget that declared in condemning this proposal yesterday that this scheme " abandons any semblance of fiscal discipline making a mockery out of the budget process." They call what you republicans are doing right now as quote " the height of hypocrisy". So very, very Trump-like. So, as he talks so tough, Donald Trump is simply too weak to stand up to Benjamin Netanyahu, as had President George W. Bush and so many other presidents, who recognize the dangers to American families and the world economy of launching an unnecessary attack on Iran. recklessly ignoring his own civilian and military advisors, well aware that he had a submissive Republican Congress that would let him get away with just anything. Trump began Operation Epic Folly. He has failed on his war objectives, providing us neither nuclear safety nor the regime change that he promised. Instead, he has strengthened those he now calls " Iranian scum" who can project even more power than before this So what does it cost us? Moody Analy- Moody's analytics estimates about eleven hundred dollars for each American family so far in higher gas prices, higher groceries, higher airfare, and higher interest rates since epic folly began. Now he wants Americans who are already suffering to pay again for all the resources that he's wasted in a quagmire a war that he doesn't know how to get out of. This morning's news headlines indicate he's thinking now that he'll escalate the war. This is the war he told us five months ago we had already won. It's in what is becoming a Netanyahu-type endless war. Now, uh, the Republicans say that they are concerned with family's budget but do nothing about it. Well, Donald Trump seems to be very concerned about his own budget, raked in two point three billion dollars in a single year. in what must be the most corrupt presidency of any in American history. The American people can decide what to call a foreign government that's wiring money to the president's family business as the same president sets foreign policy and his sons are involved in transactions from Venezuela, to Kyrgyzstan, from drones to SpaceX. Today we have a desperate bill that Republicans are offering to save themselves from growing public awareness that Trump is nothing but a charlatan. He lied about lower prices that he would bring and so much more. One of those areas where the most damage has been done is with regard to health care. Millions of Americans had affordable health care. Now they only have Trump nothing care. After Republicans voted to take away affordable tax credits, consumers are left with soaring cost. The nothing care crisis does not stop there because the Republican Medicaid cuts, uh, are already leading to the elimination of services for the disabled and many others. Health clinics are closing, staff are being laid off, and about uh four hundred and fifty hospitals are at risk of closing. This bill does absolutely nothing to stop this growing Republican created healthcare crisis. My amendment would restore the tax credits that help a mother seeking care or a sick child or a cancer patient who needs chemo chemo. Unlike this sorry bill, it's fully paid for,

I thank the gentleman from Texas. Is there a member who would like to claim time in opposition?

Sure.

Uh, Mr. Moore from Utah. Five minutes.

Thank you, Chairman. Um. To, uh, well I've The gentleman from Austin where I first where the first time i ever got to enjoy a breakfast taco alongside a very cold topo chico a wonderful place a wonderful state uh i view him a friend colleague and member of two of both of the committees of which i'm on i view him to be a very serious person but this amendment is not a serious amendment and i'm gonna share a little bit as to why first off don't shoot the messenger here but these this amendment process that we get into in these debates These are all predetermined. Everybody's gonna vote yes and everybody's gonna vote no against these things on both sides of the aisle. Right? So we're just doing this as as part of the game of Washington politics. I think everybody understands that there are moments where we get real serious amendment debate. Uh, this is not gonna be one of them. The reason why I view this amendment as a non-serious amendment is because when the Democrats had the White House House and Senate, they did not even do this to make uh the enhanced Obamacare premiums, the COVID premiums, uh, the, the, uh, of, of Obamacare tax subsidies, they only made them for four years. They only did this during, uh, from twenty twenty one, and they set the timeline to expire within a few years. They weren't fully engaged on this process either. And there are tax policies that we do, Republicans, that we did by Republican-only bills that we think will have potential staying power, and, but it's good to assess it after a few In the last few years. So, giving all potential benefit of the doubt, the enhanced subsidies that were done in two thousand one, if you wanna take an assessment period of that, and then say whether or not to make them permanent, it's the clear decision not to make these permanent, for one reason and one reason only. Zero dollar premiums enable an enormous amount of fraud. Even if they would have put five bucks on these. There could have, we could have thwarted a ton of people getting signed up. Probably they didn't even know they were getting signed up. Insurance companies were taking taxpayer dollars in the billions. Going in for a simple blood checkup work. They weren't even going in for anything in this system. So, Republicans did not extend that last year. And it was the right decision. Because all the fear monitoring and everything that's gone on, HHS has even confirmed most of the uh in the individuals who didn't, the in the enrollments, they were ineligible remol- enrollments anyway. Uh, allegations that letting the COVID era temporary Obama extension expire would kick millions off their, health insurance is simply untrue. Right? Republicans did not get rid of Obamacare. It, and letting that expire last year. They got rid of that four year plan that the Democrats put in place that when you actually get to assess it in an honest way, you would say, wow, that actually created, um, hikes in premiums. It has not slowed down the cost of healthcare. The premiums have continued to skyrocket. It's just that now people are gonna have to have a little bit of skin in the game. Right? So, Obamacare, the the the tax element of it is still in place. It's the enhanced portion. It's the stuff that Democrats actually didn't make permanent. We let that expire. And now, through this amendment, they're saying, oh, let's do it permanent now. When Republicans have the White House houses, like, that's not gonna happen. This is an unserious amendment. Um, this is proven to, to help, to, to make it so premiums continue to skyrocket while, um, and and Costco. Everybody's concerned about costs, both sides of the aisle. Uh, we had a plan to put, to, to, to, to lower premiums by eleven percent and save thirty seven billion, by actually making the Affordable Care Act work better. But every Democrat voted against that.

And, And, as I recall, as I recall, the Democrats who extended these made them temporary. the Democrats who extended these made them temporary.

With respect to my colleague from Utah with whom I enjoy working,

Mm-hmm.

uh, there's nothing imaginary or unrealistic about this amendment. For the mother who's out there trying to get her child care. For the cancer patient who needs chemo, uh, and doesn't know how they're gonna get it anymore. Because millions, literally millions of Americans have lost their access to a family physician because of these cuts. And this could be resolved in this very bill, but Republicans have refused to do it. The fraud problem, if fraud could pay for our government, I'm sure we would have already had it paid for, was insurance brokers that President Biden suspended and President Trump reinstated, not those people who are trying to get care. Uh, the problem is that this Trump regime is based on lies. He lied about having a better health care plan. He lied about lowering cost on day one. He lied about uh uh the war that he says we already won, that is now endless, and which this bill is funding and Americans are funding. Every time they go to the gas pump or open the fridge, they're paying the Trump war tax for a war that should never have been started. I yield back.

Uh, thank the gentlemen, and uh, question now is on agreeing to the amendment offered by my colleague from Texas, Mister Doggett. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye. Those opposed no. In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it. No. Ask for recorded vote. Recorded vote. Roll call vote is requested pursuant to our agreement. We will postpone the roll call until later in the mark-up. Are there any other amendments?

Mister Chairman.

Mister Scott.

Thank. Mister Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Uh, Cler- Clerk will designate the amendment and distribute copies. We'll pause for just a few thirty seconds here and then I'll yield you your first four minutes.

Amendment number three on student loans, offered by Mister Scott.

OK, Mister Scott. Why don't you uh, go ahead and launch out four minutes, five rebuttal, one minute closure. I yield.

Thank you, thank you, Mister Chairman. Mister Chairman, prices are too high for groceries, housing, healthcare, child care and every other necessity. Families are paying more, businesses are facing greater uncertainty. and americans are wondering how they're gonna keep up the problem is that instead of focusing on lower costs for working families administration and majority of this committee on the other side of the aisle have pursued policies that have made the situation worse with tariffs and wars of choice of increased costs and the passage of the big ugly bill shows how they will cut spending they cut healthcare food assistance and education funding while adding four point seven trillion dollars to the national Now they wanna give the president another seventy three billion more to wage another endless war. And to the general lady from North uh to New Jersey, uh when they declare without any specificity that they're gonna just cut spending by two trillion dollars, without suggesting where those cuts are gonna come from, we have to assume they'll be where they always come from. Health care, nutrition, and education. So this amendment addresses a part of the big ugly that limits students' access to federal student loans and eliminate repayment plans, increasing the cost of higher education for students and families. These changes include eliminating parent-plus loans, ending income-driven repayment as we know it, changing student loan eligibility so fewer students will qualify, forcing students to pay interest on loans while they're still in school, slashing Pell Grant funding, and placing severe limits on the loan amounts that have the effect of eliminating opportunities for students to achieve credentials for the highest paying jobs, especially those that require licenses, such as physicians and lawyers, physician's assistants, and nurse practitioners, and many others. Programs to support higher education create opportunities for students to attain more schooling, which ultimately allows them to improve their lives and increase their lifetime earning potential but potential. Our colleagues voted to eliminate these opportunities to find Yeah. Yeah.

four minutes five minutes actually

i i don't really think the problem we have in this country is um not enough people going to college i mean right now uh the best jobs are not are not those jobs and i think we've misled the younger generation to allow them to do that and to get further and further in debt chasing degrees that don't have value in any event rolling back the one big beautiful bills they'll ask student loan provisions would add three hundred and fifty billion dollars in president biden student loan cancellation scheme incentivized skyrocketing tuition but also punished working class taxpayers of of of an amount over a hundred and eighty billion the one big beautiful bill streamline the student debt repayment plans saving taxpayers two hundred and seventy billion dollars one big beautiful bill set annual and aggregate loan limits for graduate boroughs and parents of undergraduate students these limits would prevent students and parents from over borrowing while saving over forty four billion dollars and i have run into my district these people who have over borrowed for graduate degrees and are just stuck and i think the only reason you wanna give them more money is to prop up some of the some of the people who make their money

mmm

um teaching and administering uh these degrees who like i said they're making money on people offering uh a service that doesn't have value. Uh, additionally, one big beautiful bill delayed the close school discharge and borrower defense rules which had been abused by the Obama and Biden administrations through expanded claim eligibility to provide additional loan forgiveness ahead of the midterm elections in sixteen and twenty-two. These actions brought forth over sixteen billion in savings. Rolling back these critical improvements at the Department of Education would be counter-productive to all the great work Congress congressional republicans and the trump administration have worked so tirelessly on i urge a no vote and then i would ask that uh we submit a paper here uh cut white colleges are slashing n b a prices

oh

um like it be submitted to the committee

oh

so ordered so ordered

thank you

are you you're done you

yep

mr. scott one minute

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman has said essentially that when students get relief, it burdens taxpayers, but when the wealthy get trillions of dollars in tax cuts, it doesn't burden anybody. Uh, that's nonsense. The federal student loan program supports millions of students in affording higher education college education expands opportunity and boosts workforce productivity and studies have shown that college degree dramatically increases employment and wages income driven repayment plans, in particular, have made it possible for students to affordably pay back their debt after they finish schooling. We must undo the cuts to these programs, which will allow students to afford their loans and be able to make other investments in their future just like buying homes. This amendment will reject the extreme Republican cuts and affirm support for increased funding for educational uh opportunities and reduce the cost for families. Mr. Chairman, I'd hope we'd adopt the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Uh, thank you gentlemen, the questions on the uh table for agreeing to the amendment offered by Mister Scott, all those in favor, aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, no.

No.

In the opinion of the chair, the no's happen.

Request reported.

Roll call votes requested and presented to our agreement, we'll uh consider that later in the uh mark-up. Are there any other questions?

Amendments?

I'm sorry, amendments.

Mister Chairman.

Or questions if you have a question.

Sure.

I have, Mister Chairman.

Mister Peters, uh

Uh, I have an amendment to the desk.

Great.

Amendment number four, to add a policy statement on immigration and customs enforcement and customs and border protection offered by Mister Peters.

Mr. Chairman.

Four minutes to my friend from California.

Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. The last time this Republican majority passed a budget reconciliation bill, the process was so rushed that the bill never even came before the budget committee. Senate Republicans decided to borrow seventy billion more dollars for immigration and customs enforcement, or ICE, and customs and border protection, or CBP, with no real guardrails on how that funding could be used. Uh, they already incidentally not incidentally had a hundred fifty billion dollars in the bank that had not been used yet from the big beautiful bill. The House Republicans just went along for the ride on the extra seventy billion dollars for borrowed for an agency that's gunned down four people in the streets this year alone. Last November, I introduced legislation called the Stop Excessive Force in Immigration Act, which will improve transparency and accountability in immigration enforcement. Immigration enforcement should protect the public, not trample on people's constitutional rights, and put Americans Americans and their communities at risk.

Mm-hmm.

I started working on the bill after twenty fully armed federal agents stormed a small neighborhood restaurant in my district. It was filled with families, people enjoying dinner. The agents threw the owner against the wall, handcuffed all the employees, and used flashbang grenades on concerned bystanders outside the restaurant. Why terrorize hardworking, law abiding people? It makes no one safer. It makes Americans less safe.

Yeah.

My amendment is clear that if Republicans wanna pour more billions of dollars into ICE and CBP there have to be basic rules for transparency and accountability. Americans have a right to hold ICE and CBP to common sense standards. ICE and CBP agents do not get a pass to conduct dangerous and unchecked enforcement operations. If Republicans wanna borrow more money, these agencies must operate in a way that upholds the basic training and standards we deserve from any member of the law enforcement community, whether they're local police, sheriffs, or or uh state state police. Americans have been harmed and even killed in immigration enforcement actions. These tragedies raise serious concerns about use of force training and oversight. Cannot continue to borrow million billions of dollars for these agencies if, as if they have a blank check. We need to address the clear failures first. Officers who wear masks and fail to identify themselves during enforcement actions make it difficult to investigate misconduct and hold individuals accountable. If you enforce the law, you should follow the law. You should be identi identifiable to the public. This amendment ensures that C C B P, an ICE agency, will wear We also have to protect and safeguard sensitive locations. Immigration enforcement around schools, hospitals, child care facilities, and places of worship create fear and instability among families and children across the nation. Children should not have to worry about being permanently separated from their family when going to school or seeking medical care. My amendment also ensures that enforcement practices do not violate first amendment rights or target individuals for lawful activities requires that immigration enforcement

I thank the gentleman from California. Is there a member who would like to claim time in opposition? Mister McClintock, I yield five minutes to you

Thank you.

and one minute for rebuttal at the end.

Uh, mister Thank you. M- Mister Chairman, for four years, the Democrats' deliberate deliberately opened our nation's borders and allowed more than ten million illegal aliens to enter. The impact was devastating, hospitals overrun with illegals demanding care, food pantries and homeless shelters overwhelmed, classrooms packed with non-English speaking students, rampant child sex and labor trafficking, hundreds of thousands of Americans dead from fentanyl poisoning, suppressed wages for working families, a hundred and sixty billion dollars in welfare to support this population and worst of all, the introduction of the most violent criminal gangs and cartels in the world, into our neighborhoods and communities. President Trump reversed these ruinous policies by simply enforcing our existing immigration laws. Illegal border crossings immediately plunged by more than ninety-five percent. The largest illegal mass migration in history is now followed by the largest legal deportation in history. although it's being obstructed by the vicious and often violent mobs, incited and encouraged by our democratic colleagues. Now virtually every democrat in Congress has voted repeatedly to defund immigration and customs enforcement. And now we have this amendment that would make it uh impossible for them to enforce these laws that's their aim and that's the question Americans will have to answer in the upcoming election do you really want to allow the democrats to reopen our borders? And here's the ultimate. When a criminal is in custody and turned over to ICE, that can be done safely, securely, and without incident. But when that criminal is released back into our neighborhoods, squads of officers have to be deployed, force must often be used, and the consequences can be deadly. To ICE officers, to accomplices, to bystanders, and to the targets themselves. A number of fatalities and injuries could have been avoided if the aliens had been turned over to ICE while in custody. You cannot lament their deaths while defending the policies that killed them, unless of course, your alternative is to stop enforcing immigration laws altogether, and return to the Biden days of wide open borders. Now here's the fine point of it. This amendment requires federal judicial warrants for immigration enforcement. Well, here's what the Democrats are well aware of, but hope the American people are not. Federal judicial warrants do not exist for immigration enforcement. Illegal presence is a civil matter. It's enforced by administrative warrants. So the Democrats are proposing a requirement that would make it impossible to arrest illegal aliens on private property. But that's not enough for them. This amendment would also place a staggering number of public places off limits as well. For example, under this amendment, if a MS thirteen member enters your child's school, he becomes untouchable. It makes it impossible to arrest an illegal who has just received a final order of removal by a court, in that. This amendment also declares open season on ice officers by the violent mobs the Democrats have incited. Last year, a Democrat member of Congress doxed an ice officer to a violent mob in California which then set upon him and put him in the hospital. A Democrat member of Congress is currently indicted for assaulting federal law enforcement officers at an ice facility. Ice officers don't want to wear a mask to protect themselves and their families. Violent mobs, And with respect to detention, remember that deportation is not a punishment, it is an administrative act removing a person with no legal right to be here. Illegal aliens detained by ICE are free to leave detention at any time for any country that will accept them. They're just not allowed to remain in our country. Illegals are detained only as long as it takes to arrange for their transportation. This amendment is a Trojan horse. The Democrats have failed to defund ICE. Now they seek to make it impossible for ICE to enforce our immigration laws. But without enforcement, we have no immigration laws. Without immigration laws, we have no border. And without a border, we have no country. Do the Democrats not understand this? Or is this their actual aim? I yield back.

I thank the gentleman from California and now yield, Mister Peters, his uh minute for his closing remarks.

Here's what we understand. Two people, two more people, this this month, um people who are hardworking, just trying to feed their families presented no threat to this country. This is not about whether or not we enforce the immigration laws, this is about how we enforce the immigration laws. And we're very comfortable with police being trained, police abiding by certain standards, police de-escalating force, and not murdering people in the streets, uh when when something goes wrong, and and even the wrong the the the people that they weren't even after. So we're not we're not asking for We're asking for appropriate enforcement. I think all of us should understand that. All of us are comfortable with the training we give local police and sheriffs to do just that. That's all we're asking for out of these uh ice and border patrol agents. The other thing is, I hear a lot of talk about fiscal responsibility. We now have about two hundred twenty billion dollars in unspent funds for this effort. Uh, we've we've funded these these folks more than the United States Marines. If we wanna be physically responsible, let's take that money and give it to the United States Marines, cuz we have a issue with funding the defense, uh, a nice pay-for.

thank the gentlemen um folks the vote's been called we went from two votes to three votes we're gonna push pause here and take a a short recess so we can get our uh work done over there in the chamber and then we will resume so the committee stands in recess subject to the call of the chair

you can go oh should i

you know what should we just vote for all yeah let's let's go ahead

i i have a feeling you're hearing we'll hear the no's a lot louder than the s's

i can only hear in my

despite what our eyes are clearly showing us

uh i've i can only hear in my right ear uh the questions on agreeing the amendment offered by my friend mr peters uh all those in favor aye aye

aye

aye aye those no in the opinion of the chair the overwhelming no's have it

uh ask for a recorded vote and a hearing aid

ok the roll calls uh requested we'll uh take it up at the end of the uh hearing we stand in recess do you wanna do more like content yeah alright so for me i'm all about community podcasts i think part of content yeah uh yeah go deeper and add more Four to one. The committee will come to order. The committee will resume debate on amendments submitted pursuant to the bipartisan unanimous consent agreement. Um, we'll resume with the question, are there any amendments?

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

Mister Panetta, the clerk will designate the amendment, the staff will distribute the copies of your amendment, in about fifteen seconds we'll get you to launch into your opening remarks, and then uh I will uh respond.

Just give me the signal, thank you.

Amendment number five on tariffs offered by Mister Panetta.

Good to go.

Yes, I yield uh four minutes to my friend from California, Mister Panetta.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, although my amendment would not improve the way the Republican majority votes on the House floor and speeds up time, uh, I do have an amendment that would strike the administration's tariffs under section one twenty-two and three O one,

Mm-hmm.

and sort of reorient this budget towards a sounder economic policy. Now, as you know, or as I believe, the budget resolution paves away for ninety-five billion in spending and adds almost one hundred billion to the four trillion in debt that this committee allowed in last year's partisan reconciliation bill. And it an issue that we're hearing over and over and over from many, many constituents across the country, and that's affordability. Americans are being crushed by rising costs of housing, health care, food and fuel, which have only gotten worse since this president took office, uh, mainly, mainly because of his tariff policy. Ideally, the budget should be an opportunity for us to reassert Congress's control of the power policies that actually help our constituents. But there is nothing, nothing in this budget that would reduce the high cost for Americans and combat inflation. Instead, we're spending the limited amount of time that we do have left in Congress on the hundred and nineteenth on funding the President's pet projects, including the war in Iran, the war against voting, and the war against free trade, with a tariff policy that has imposed significant costs that hurt American businesses of all sizes, especially when it comes to our farmers. So my amendment, straightforward, would strike down those tariffs and restore our congressional power over trade. This resolution allows up to twelve billion in assistance for farmers, which merely compensate for the consequences of a bad trade policy. They do not address the underlying problem. I know you of all people, Mister Chairman, believe that our farmers deserve support. They work hard, they put food on our tables, and they feed the world. Don't get me wrong, they'll take a bailout. But you know as well as I do, they do not want another insufficient government check to make up for an an injurious trade policy. Instead, they want market access, they want less regulation, they want legitimate reform to our system of immigration, and they do not want tariffs. Now, I admit, we've given up our authority over the past few decades. Democrats and Republicans are responsible for this. We put ourselves in a position so that when we have a president that has a forty year fetish for tariffs, he puts in place illegally these types of tariffs that hurt our consumers our businesses and our farmers. I believe, as Congress, the Article-one body, we shouldn't roll over and accept a terrible tariff policy from an the executive branch, and then attempt to paper over those consequences with more federal spending. Instead, we should push back and pursue policies that expand opportunity, strengthen American competitiveness, and give Americans a stable economic environment that they deserve. That's why I'm offering this amendment to strike the president's tariffs under section one twenty-two and three O one, and reassert Congress's control over the power of the purse. My amendment would push back on these tariffs and show the constituents that we will not support economic policies that harm them. This admen- amendment advances the three goals of of making sure that our farmers deserve access to markets, American families deserve lower costs and taxpayers deserve better stewardship of their dollars. And I urge my colleagues to support it and yield back.

I thank the gentleman, and now we'll claim time in opposition and recognize myself for five minutes. Uh, let me start by saying there is no better friend to me, a Republican from West Texas, than uh, Jimmy Panetta, Democrat from California. Uh, I have the highest respect for not just what you do for your constituents and your producers uh as a champion for agriculture but the way you do it and that is difficult to do in washington you're a true statesman and so before i tear in a little bit to this issue i want you to know uh i i not only value i treasure our friendship and the work we did on trade together with usmca and some other issues now ok um anytime i hear a a democrat colleague of mine talk about affordability i have to uh respond with oh how rich has it been uh so long ago that we've forgotten the twenty one percent increase in cumulative prices on everyday goods for american people gas groceries et cetera that would be uh the largest uh working person tax we've seen in our lifetime the inflation tax Um, it was driven by two things, flooding the market with federal monies, stimulus monies, et cetera, trillions of dollars. Um, it was also because on the supply side they were being crushed, our job creators, with high taxes, regulations. We, uh, the labor market crunched because Democrat policies were waiving work requirements for able-bodied adults. And there was a whole of government attack on oil and gas, which is the eighty percent of the s- the the source of energy that turns the cranks in our economy. So it it w- it was no surprise that these policies failed, and everyone suffered as a result. Now, what's even more rich than that point is uh the criticism of President Trump on trade, and and here's why. Not that there can't be criticism in debate, but President Joe Biden with all due respect and the Democrats for four years did nothing on trade, like They did nothing on trade. There wasn't a single, Joe Biden traveled the globe.

Oh, yes.

He had a lot of meetings, but there wasn't a single trade deal to come out of it in four stinking years. Think about that. Nothing. In fact, he did worse because he didn't enforce the bipartisan USMCA deal that we worked out together and when you don't enforce it it's not worth the paper it's written on and what what happened we reverted back to um we reverted back to, the quotas from Canada, the preferential treatment from Mexico, and it hurt us because he was asleep at the wheel. Um, he was weak on enforcing the China trade deal. We had big ag in energy purchases among other things. They went away because nobody put any pressure or held China accountable. And so that record is a an abysmal record from uh the president Joe Biden and Democrat leadership. Now, with respect to one twenty-two and IEPA and the various tools, the president has lots of tools, as you know, to uh uh implement um tariff policies, in this case what the president refers to as reciprocal trade, which, you know, I think he's upended conventional thinking on free trade, where we have been naively accepting the premise that as long as we're getting cheap stuff, then free then it's free trade and it's good for the American people. Meanwhile, we've been scammed and cheated, and had unfair practices perpetrated on us for decades, and it has put us in a in a big hole. This president used IEPA as the tool, as the authority. The courts did say that's not the authority that's appropriate. He then transitioned or is in transition with uh section one twenty-two on the way to section three O one, which is the unfairness uh uh provision and authority that that he has and other presidents have utilized. So, now the appellate court recently the federal us circuit court of appeals in just last month said that uh the one twenty two transition uh uh to the three O one tariffs are quote likely to succeed on the merits but but let's also look at president biden's record the one thing i can say he did with respect to trade is that he expanded on what president trump did with three O one so if three O one's are illegal uh then and inappropriate for the president then joe biden is guilty too because he basically took uh what we had placed in terms of three O one tariffs on automobiles, steel, semiconductor, aluminum batteries, et cetera on china and uh and expanded that. So uh i- i think that uh uh my my time's up i'll i'll respect the time. President trump's strong in fair trade practices are benefiting us with lower deficits and uh higher exports, open markets and uh I think the American people see that and and support it. I yield the uh one minute uh closing.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Look, uh this administration made some simple promises when it came into office. Release Epstein files, no forever wars, and reduce cost. Clearly, this is administration of broken promises, especially when it comes to reduced cost. Now, look, I'm not here to defend the Biden policy on trade. I'm here to look forward. I'm here to make sure that this administration upholds its standards, especially when it comes to free trade. Now look, I what's a little frustrating is I understand that you sit there and say there's a trade deficit. We Americans allowed that trade deficit. Don't blame other countries. If you're gonna do it, blame us in the sense that we allowed that trade deficit because we want cheaper prices. It's a no-brainer. That's why we did that. That's why we're in this position. But you don't impose illegal tax policies, trade policies, excuse me, tariff policies in order to do that. just like the Supreme Court found in the IEPA decision, and just like a recent uh trade court found under section one twenty two, that it's irrelevant and inappropriate to impose that. Look, I'm not saying three O one is illegal. I'm saying it's used to impose tariffs that are inappropriate. That's why I put forward my amendment. And finally, if I may in the last ten seconds, or getting over there,

Okay.

um, Congress needs to take back its authority. Article one, section eight, clause three gives Congress the power over foreign We have given that up. It's beyond time to take it back. And when we don't, we have the example of these types of tariffs which create these types of taxes on the American public and raise prices. That's why I support this amendment and I ask my colleagues to do it as well. I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Miss, uh, uh, uh, Mr. Panetta, great last point. I agree. Congress should exert its constitutional and statutory authority on trade. We don't do that enough either side. Couldn't agree more. Glad we could end on something we agreed, but I oppose your amendment. Let me be clear.

aye

aye

no

in the opinion of the chair the no's have it ask for a court of vote roll call is requested and we'll take it up at the end of the the hearing any other amendments

miss chair i have an amendment at the desk

miss ballant the clerk will designate the amendment the staff will distribute copies of the amendment and uh in about fifteen seconds or so we'll uh give you

Amendment number eight being considered sixth to strike reconciliation instructions to the Committee on Armed Services and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence offered by Ms. Ballant.

The gentlelady from Vermont is uh recognized for four minutes.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, I wanna start by um addressing something that was said by a colleague on the other side earlier in this hearing. And he said this was all a game. Yeah, I'm gonna go listen to it.

Yeah, I'm gonna go listen to it.

It's all a game, that we play our parts, and it's not real. And it's, it's not a game, actually. It's not a game at all. It's deadly serious. And I think Americans are disgusted when we think of the work that we do here as a game. And it's truly astounding that we're here again considering a highly partisan budget resolution for a third Republican reconciliation bill that increases costs and does nothing to help the people back home. So let's level set. What are we doing here? Why are we here today? This is about waging war, a war that we were told for the last five months isn't really a war. The bulk of this budget budget resolution gives an additional seventy three billion dollars for President Trump's unauthorized and very unpopular war in Iran. I want to note how reckless and opaque and careless this resolution process has been. The committee was. the text of the budget resolution um at the last minute, just twenty-four hours before, and were supposed to rubber-stamp ninety-five billion dollars in uh spending. And some Republican members of this committee themselves weren't even involved in the negotiations of what would be in this resolution. I can't imagine that you're all happy about that. My colleagues constantly howl that the deficit is is one of the nation's greatest challenges. Yet this resolution contains no substantive ideas for how to pay for this massive increase in spending. Meanwhile, we hear constantly that we can't possibly afford health care or food for Americans. And my colleagues use the deficit as a pretext to excuse increasing hunger and deepening poverty in the They preach fiscal responsibility, and yet, when it comes to approving tens of billions of dollars in additional Pentagon spending, they're a rubber stamp that there's always time for more war. The president himself said it. "We're fighting wars. We can't take care of daycare, Medicaid, Medicare." Congress never authorized this war. In fact, the House passed a war powers resolution directing the to end U S military involvement in Iran if he didn't secure explicit authorization from Congress and for Republican members even cross the aisle to join us on that vote. But now this committee wants to approve seventy-three billion dollars in additional funding for a war that Congress didn't approve, and Americans don't want. Republicans are in charge of Congress. And they have repeatedly written a blank check for however much Donald Trump wants to pay for any of his pet projects and priorities. They have given up the people's power spelled out in Article one of the Constitution. Our power as members of Congress is the people's power. That's why I'm introducing an amendment that would prohibit any spending on unauthorized wars striking the seventy-three billion dollars in spending dedicated to the war in Iran. This budget resolution reflects Republican priorities. It's to bankroll this impulsive and reckless war and leave the rest of us holding the check. It's insulting. And I want to remind everyone, this president promised he'd end wars, that he'd end wars. It was one of his main campaign promises. He said, " I'm gonna end wars, I'm not gonna start them." It was

I think the gentlelady and uh uh ask if there are any members who wanna claim time in opposition. Uh, the gentleman from Michigan uh General Jack Bergman, recognized for five minutes.

You know, I'm sitting here deja vu a little bit. Um, fifty Three years ago I was sitting in Vietnam, wondering why we were underfunded, because politicians were not um supporting us when we were in the fight that they uh it was legitimate fight, but I here I am in a different role fifty some year half a century later. It's interesting, I see some things never change. But the bottom line is the world has changed around us, and not every nation is friendly to us, and tough choices are just that and it requires leadership. Uh, this amendment for the following reasons. The funding for armed services in HPSI is necessary to support our troops and supply them with the munitions and anything else they need to fight, win and return home safely. The funding amount addresses immediate needs, not way far out. Democrats won't allow us to fund even basic components of national se- of national security, basic components, not enhanced. They shut down ICE and Border Patrol for over seventy days. We know that. Now they wanna jeopardize our national security. We aren't spending thirteen billion sending, excuse me, thirteen billion to the Intel Committee just for fun. The sixty billion to the Armed Services Committee is just to get us back to a minimal baseline of military readiness and capability. The funding provided in this budget replenishes munition stockpiles, They're supporting our troops at a critical time and sustaining the long-term needs of our country. This is just common sense defense. Democrats would prefer to put national security at risk rather than negotiate with Republicans. The Senate Democrats blocked the traditionally bipartisan NDAA on July fourteenth over the Iran conflict. Some of this makes no sense. And I still am able to channel myself and my colleagues wondering when we were in harm's way, oh, what was going on with the with the divide in Congress. And with that, I urge, strongly urge a no vote on this amendment. With that, I yield back.

General Jack Bergman, we are uh grateful and honored to serve alongside of uh such a patriot. Thank you for your service. Uh, Miss Ballant, you have uh one minute uh for your closing statement.

With all due respect, Mr. Chair, I am sick and tired of hearing from my colleagues on the other side that Democrats wanna put national security at risk. Tired of it. When I've got family members of people who are in harm's way right now, in the Middle East, who are put in harm's way in Venezuela, who don't have confidence that we are making smart decisions about how we spend our military money. So please, spare me. The bottom line is that this budget resolution is a poorly planned, poorly drafted, backdoor, to pay from president trump's decision to start a war with iran is irresponsible he didn't know how he was gonna get out of it and we see it played out every single day on the news we deserve so much better than that and i yield back

i thank the gentlelady um her the questions on agreeing to her amendment offered uh miss ballant from vermont all those in favor say aye

aye aye

all those opposed no

no

and the opinion of the chair that no Ask for a court of vote. A roll call vote's requested. Again, we'll postpone the roll call votes until uh later in the mark-up. Are there any amendments?

I have one.

The clerk will uh designate Miss Watson-Coleman's amendment. The staff's going to distribute copies and then I will uh in fifteen seconds or so ask Miss Watson-Coleman to uh begin her opening remarks.

Amendment number six, being considered seventh, to adjust spending in function seven fifty, offered by Miss Watson Coleman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

And gentlelady from New Jersey uh has fi- uh four minutes and then a closing at the end.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, um and I offer this uh amendment for so many reasons. For one reason I am really concerned that I've spent so much time in this uh building and in this room today.

Just just

This to the delusional narrative of my republican colleagues in support of the most incompetent administration, rife with corruption, greed, evil, and making our country uh less safe and definitely hated on all stages. But I want to thank you for giving me this opportunity to present this amendment, because it's very simple. It would strike the outrageous excess of obscene funding supplements to the ICE budget that were included in the republicans' last. to reconciliation packages which have not reduced costs and have made us less safe in this country. This administration's track record has proven that they cannot be trusted with what is essentially an enormous slush fund to put our communities at further risk. Just one month ago, the Congress gave ICE and CBP an additional seventy billion dollars in the second reconciliation on top of the one hundred and forty billion they were given in the One big ugly bill. And what has been the result of supercharging Trump's immigration terror machine? At least fifty five people have died in ICE custody since Donald Trump, Stephen Miller, Kristi Noem and Mark Wayne Mullen turned this agency into a source of fear for communities across our country. Three people have died just in one week. Lorenzo Salgado, a woo-ha of Austin of Houston, Texas, was killed during a traffic when an ice agent fired through the passenger window of his van and he wasn't even the person they were looking for on monday twenty six year old john sebastian duron of billford maine was shot and killed also by ice agents firing through the windshield and the very next day a man in saint augustine florida died when ice agents chased him and he was struck by a passing tractor trail There have been at least three other instances like this in the last year. It's been six months since Rene Good and Alex Petty were killed by an ICE agent in the streets of Minneapolis. Good was killed when an ICE agent shot her through her window shield, windshield and side window. And everything that has happened, we are still dealing with undeaded, untrained and unrestrained ICE agents who are thug-like actions against citizens and undocumented immigrants alike. This is all at the behest of leadership that has shown little regard to either the constitution or human dignity. And I have to wonder, where are the billions in tax dollars going? Where are the body cameras that this congress paid for? The officers in Maine didn't have them, so we have to know footage of what transpired. Fifty five people have died, thousands more have suffered from inhumane conditions at facilities that are more akin to internment camps than prisons, including Delaney Hall in my state of New Jersey. It is obvious that ISIS actions have descended our communities into a raging fire. My amendment takes the gasoline out of the arsonist's hands. How many lives will be enough? How much wasted taxpayer money will be enough? And how much hatred and fear will be enough? I say enough is already enough, and I reserve.

I thank the gentlelady and ask if there are any members who would like to claim time in opposition. The gentleman from Kansas, Mister Estes, is recognized for five minutes.

Well, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, this this amendment rescinds money that was provided to ICE and CBP in the One Big Beautiful Bill and the Secure America Act. I guess it wasn't enough that Democrats wanted to zero out the ICE and border protection and the appropriations bill, this Now they wanna zero it out from reconciliation. You know, the DA the Department of Homeland Security funding in the big beautiful bill was to clean up the mess created by the Democrat border crisis crisis under the Biden administration you know these were month after month of hundreds of thousands of illegal border crossings. President Trump shut that down, now the Democrats wanna take away the funding. We can't allow that border cras- crisis to happen again, and we must remain vigilant in monitoring how cartels, human human traffickers and other bad actors, which apparently seems to have some support uh by my Democrat colleagues, respond to the changes President Trump has brought to our border. Our nation is safer today because of President Trump's leadership and the passage of the first reconciliation bill. Keeping the border secure has to be a top priority, and it's our responsibility as members of Congress. And let's not forget about reconciliation two point O. That reconciliation bill that we had to do because the Democrats shut down the Department of Homeland Funding for seventy The reconciliation bill provided multiple years of funding to guard against the Democrats' efforts to defund border security. It to support funding helps support keeping border crossings at historic lows. Department of Homeland Security and CBP announced thirteen consecutive months of zero releases at the border. Funding also helps fund ICE and Border Patrol despite the Democrats' outright refusal to do so. Let us not forget that while Democrats held DHS workers hostage in their crusade against pain, ice and CBP earlier this year, four terrorist attacks happened. On March first, twenty twenty six, a naturalized citizen from Mauritania, motivated by extreme ideology, opened fire at a crowd in Austin, Texas, killing three people and injuring several others. On March seventh, twenty twenty seven, two suspects with stated allegiance to ISIS, attempted to detonate two improvised explosive devices in near the New York City mayor's residence in Manhattan, New York. On March twelfth, twenty twenty six, a Lebanese-born naturalized American citizen ran his vehicle into the Temple Israel synagogue in West Bloomfield, Michigan in an attempted target attack on the Jewish community. And on March twelfth, twenty twenty six, uh uh uh Mohammad Baler Jaller Jaller, who had a prior conviction for attempting to aid ISIS, opened fire at Old Dominion University in North York, Virginia, killing one person and injuring others.

I think the gentleman, um, this Watson Coleman has one minute to close. Watson.

Take that minute to say how sick and tired of I am of the absurdity of the lies that my republican colleagues continue to uh offer. I don't know if it's because my colleagues are afraid of this corrupt president or if they believe in this inhumanity of this country. It is a lie that we are safer. It is a lie that we are protecting people in our country. And it is a lie that our nation is respected on the international stage. I urge my colleagues to sign on to and to support this amendment, because there must be some humanity deep down inside of your fears, and I yield back.

I thank the gentlelady uh from New Jersey. The questions are on agreeing to the amendment offered by Miss Watson-Coleman. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Those opposed no. In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it.

No.

We'll roll call uh we'll uh roll all these votes uh to the to the end, as we've agreed to. Are there any other amendments?

Mister Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Uh, Miss Mrs. Omar has an amendment, clerk, designate that amendment for us, staff, uh please distribute the copies and then uh give me about fifteen seconds and we'll pitch you the ball.

Amendment number seven, being considered eighth, to adjust spending,

i yield to the gentlelady from minnesota uh four minutes and then a minute uh to close

thank you mister chairman my amendment would reverse the snap cuts from the big ugly bill congressional republicans got what they wanted last year they made the largest cut to snap benefits in the program's history now they have kicked millions of americans off at a time when the price of groceries is only going up by burdening families and states with more paperwork and administrative costs. Since that bill became law, SNAP participants has fallen by more than four million people nationwide. And at least one and a half million children no longer receive SNAP benefits. Children in all of our districts will go hungry because of the reckless decisions made by So I ask my republican colleagues to just think about what has already happened in your own states this past year. In Texas, two hundred and ninety-one thousand children have lost SNAP benefits. In California, one hundred and fifty-six thousand children have lost SNAP benefits. In Louisiana, eighty-three thousand children have lost SNAP benefits. In Ohio, fifty thousand children have lost SNAP benefits. In Michigan, fifty-one thousand children have lost SNAP benefits. In Kansas, ten thousand children have lost SNAP benefits. This will only get worse. But instead of funding nutrition assistant, this resolution hands sixty billion dollars to the Pentagon to fund an illegal war. Instead of asking the wealthy to pay up a fraction of what they have already been given, Republicans are taking food away from children's and families in their own districts. My amendment would stop this madness and provide vital resources to the people who need it. It is long past time to restore and protect SNAP. I urge my colleagues to support support this amendment and I yield back.

I thank the gentlelady. Is there a member who would like to claim time in opposition? Gentleman from Virginia, Mister Klein, is recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. I rise. Uh, this amendment would repeal the snap reforms enacted in the one big beautiful bill and raise taxes on hardworking Americans to offset these reforms achieved by that law. By eliminating these important reforms, the amendment would undo the work of President Trump and congressional Republicans to restore accountability and prioritize work in snap, preserving the program for those who truly need it. Republicans support a strong safety net, but it must be accountable. fiscally responsible and focused on helping Americans move toward self-sufficiency. States are long overdue to have some level of responsibility when it comes to the administration of SNAP benefits. In twenty twenty five alone, nearly eleven percent of SNAP payments over ten billion dollars were made improperly by states, including my own Commonwealth of Virginia. The problem has steadily worsened. Since twenty nineteen, the national snap SNAP payment error rate has nearly doubled, rising from six point eight percent to nearly eleven. States with persistently high payment error rates should be held accountable. Taxpayer dollars intended for vulnerable Americans should not be lost because of inadequate safeguards or poor administration. I'm sure the gentlelady from Minnesota would agree. Requiring states with high payment error rates to contribute modestly to the cost of SNAP benefits as included in H. R. one incentivizes them to be more efficient administrators, minimize improper payments, and ensure SNAP benefits go to The one big beautiful bill also reinforced work as the pathway out of poverty by strengthening SNAP work requirements. SNAP should be a bridge to independence, not a permanent destination. In twenty twenty-two, only sixteen percent of able-bodied adults without dependence who are required to work twenty hours a week, SNAP- satisfied the SNAP work requirement. Before H R one, most able-bodied adults without dependence were not subject to work requirements due to geographic wave-range a massive loophole in the work requirement that allows States like California, Illinois, Nevada, and the District of Columbia to completely waive work requirements, undermining congressional intent. By strengthening work requirements and closing loopholes like geographic waivers H R one helped restore work and self-sufficiency as core principles of the program while preserving benefits for the most vulnerable members of our society. Overall, repealing these reforms would move SNAP in the wrong direction and weaken the term sustainability of the program for americans who depend on it most republicans are committed to protecting safety net programs for those who are truly in need while promoting self-sufficiency to create a thriving economy full of employed workers more broadly these policy questions belong before the authorizing committees not in the budget resolution before us today we have full confidence in our colleagues on authorizing committees to protect these policies which strengthen snap and restore fiscal responsibility In addition, repealing the tax relief enacted in H R one would be devastating for American families, for American workers, and for American small businesses. These reforms prevented massive tax increases, strengthened economic growth, and gave families and job creators the certainty they need to succeed. Reversing them would mean higher taxes, less investment, fewer jobs, and slower economic growth. These tax cuts protected the average taxpayer from a twenty-two percent or seventeen hundred dollar tax hike. One year after enactment, the OB BBA is already delivering measurable results across the American economy and providing needed relief for workers and families. Record tax refunds in twenty twenty-six averaged nearly thirty-three hundred dollars up eleven percent from twenty twenty-five allowing Americans to keep more of their hard-earned tax dollars. Ninety-seven percent of filers received a tax cut this past filing season who would have otherwise owed taxes, absent the working family's tax cuts. Tax relief was concentrated among American families and workers earning under two hundred thousand dollars. Ninety-six percent of filers receiving a tax cut earned less than two hundred thousand dollars and nearly seventy percent of filers receiving a tax cut, earned less than a hundred thousand dollars. Democrats continue to repeat tired, false narratives. The US has one of the most progressive tax codes in the developed world, according to the Fraser Institute. The OBVBA and its predecessor, the TCJA, both maintained this progressivity. On corporate taxes, Democrats again ignore the facts, at thirty-five percent the US had the highest corporate tax rate among developing developed nations. TCJA cut it to twenty-one percent bringing in line with global peers. At a time when families continue to face higher costs due to the Biden administration's failed economic policies Congress should protect tax relief that we passed last year not take it away. I urge a no vote and I yield back.

I thank the gentlemen and now recognize Miss

why i hope the the gentleman knows that over a hundred thousand uh people in virginia have already been kicked off

ok

um their snap benefits and the state already have financial penalties for having high error rates and error does not equal to fraud uh and i just want you all to understand that this program is essential for people to have access to food. We are talking about food, life-saving nes- necessary um item for humans to exist. Uh, and when you talk about uh, tax cuts um, for people's hard-earned money, you gave a trillion dollars in tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires while you're starving American children. That doesn't sit well with me, it doesn't sit well with my constituents, and I hope it doesn't sit well with you either. urge you all to support this amendment.

I thank the gentlelady from Minnesota. The question's now on agreeing to that amendment offered by Miss Omar. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye. All those no.

No.

Or opposed, no. Uh, the opinion of the chair that no's have it. Ask for a quarter vote. The vote will uh, that is, the roll call vote's requested and we'll roll all that at the last uh part of the hearing. Any other amendments? Miss Capter, uh, the clerk will designate your amend amendment and distribute copies of it. And why don't you just go after about ten seconds and, uh, you get the first four minutes. We'll have a rebuttal and you'll close with a minute. Just go at at your leisure.

Amendment number nine on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program offered by Miss Capter.

Thank you very much. Um, Mister Chairman and members, I offer a life support amendment to assure the American people who live in tough straits have enough food to eat. Inflation is rising due the undeclared war on Iran and the Trump administration tariffs in places like I represent on Canada and elsewhere. Economists estimate already the average household is already paying two thousand three hundred dollars more per year for food plus what is required to pay for basics like the water bill and the utility bill. Must I remind our colleagues you already cut SNAP benefits, food benefits, and a prior reconciliation bill including the big beautiful bonanza bill, I like to call it, the billionaire bonanza bill. Uh, we saw Elon Musk just became a trillionaire. Meanwhile, thousands and thousands of people across the district that I represent and I dare say every single person on this committee represents, uh, they can't afford basics, starting with food. I would like to urge my colleagues to go to any food bank in your district, I'll go with you, or a church group, or Salvation Army, the good-hearted people trying to help feed the needy in our country. And who are those needy? Well, those who are disabled and ill, lot of them are in wheelchairs. If you don't have people like that in your district, come to mine. Children, children, hungry children, senior citizens, especially those who live on less than two thousand five hundred dollars a month. How would you like to live on less than two thousand five hundred dollars a month? Hmm, disabled vets, they even have a special day for veterans. A lot of these distribution sites, working people who don't to buy what members of congress can buy. These are people who clean your offices, they wash your cars, they're sales clerks in these mega stores that can't afford to buy what they push across the counter as you go in and uh, and buy something. So, food is really basic. And your amendment um or your bill, simply takes more away from those who have so little. Um, I think we as a Congress should reject further Republican extreme cuts to SNAP, and it is clear you have no hesitation in cutting nutrition benefits to families, and you make it for hard you make it harder for people to get along. Um, forcing states to either pay for the program themselves, or frankly kicking people off. I can guarantee you every single food bank and church outlet and Salvation Army group that I represent uh they are all having more and more people flock in. So something isn't working at the national level. I really urge my colleagues to support this amendment, but more importantly, when you go back home to your districts, go visit some of these churches. Go visit the Salvation Army. Go visit those that are helping to collect extra food for veterans. You're gonna find an America that you haven't discovered before. So, my amendment rejects Republicans' continued betrayal of Americans who rely on SNAP to keep food on their table, and it rejects further extremist cuts to SNAP, and I would ask for your support. I yield back.

I thank the gentlelady from Ohio. I is any member uh does any member wish to claim time in opposition? Mister from Oklahoma, uh I recognize uh my friend now for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm gonna make this expedited the more the words the less the meaning um ultimately this amendment is unnecessary it's politically motivated the budget resolution has nothing to do or directs anything in regard to snap I think most of us recognize that a resolution sets top-line framework dollar uh accounts it is not direct policy and so there is a a spending element that the house uh ag committee is going to take up but it's not a reduction and so

right

I just wanna reiterate, this is unnecessary, it's politically motivated, and we don't do policy on a fiscal framework. I urge a no vote.

Well, four minutes uh remaining, I won't take the bait, uh and I will yield back to Miss Guenter for her one minute closing.

Uh, thank you uh, Mister Chairman and members. I just wanna put something on the record here. The state that I represent has seen a seven point three four percent decrease in snap participants the uh billionaire bonanza bill was enacted uh a year ago. And these figures are of this past March. Uh, specifically in July of twenty twenty-five, when OBRA was passed, uh, there were one million, four hundred and forty-six thousand uh uh one million, four hundred and forty-six thousand Ohioans participating in SNAP as of March twenty-twenty. Uh, six, that number has fallen uh to one million, three hundred and thirty-nine thousand. It's below that. now because this these numbers were taken a few months ago. But uh according to census data right now, one of eight Americans are estimated to be food insecure, and you don't have to believe the census. All you have to do is take your car and go somewhere to these distribution sites and see what's happening across this country. Maybe Oklahoma's exempt, I don't believe that it is, but um I would just ask for consideration of my amendment and a yes vote to stand up for people in our country who can't afford the price of food today, and those numbers are rising from coast to coast. I yield back.

I thank the gentlelady. The question's on agreeing to the amendment offered by Miss Capter. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chairs, the uh no's happened.

No. Cool.

Uh, recorded vote is being requested, and pursuant to our agreement, we'll roll that all up at the end. Are there other amendments? Miss Jayapal from Washington, the clerk will designate your amendment and distribute copies, and I'll just say after he's finished, go at your uh leisure for four minutes and then a one minute closing.

Amendment number ten on Medicaid offered by Miss Jayapal.

Should I go ahead, Mister Chair? Oh. Thank you, Mister Chairman. Uh, my amendment would stop Republicans from stripping Medicaid from the sixty seven million Americans that rely on the program, by blocking Republicans from making any further funding cuts or changes that put more barriers in the way of Medicaid enrollment. Budgets are a series of choices, and over and over again, Republicans make it clear that they do not care about the American people and their struggles. Instead, they prioritize propping up the wealthiest Americans and giant corporations that fund their campaigns. Last year, in the big bad betrayal bill passed by Republicans, in order to give four trillion dollars in tax breaks for corporations and the wealthy, Republicans slashed health care from over eight million Americans with drastic cuts and changes to Medicaid and the ACA. They kicked four million people off of basic food assistance by slashing SNAP. Three point eight million still stand to lose Medicaid or children's health insurance coverage. And as a result of ACA rollbacks, Americans are facing health insurance spiking by fifty eight percent. In the richest country in the world, Mister Chairman, nine percent of Americans are completely uninsured, and roughly twenty five percent are underinsured, meaning even if they've got insurance, they can't afford their medical bills. That's why we have over two hundred and twenty billion dollars in medical debt in America. That is over one hundred and sixteen million people in America who are uninsured or underinsured. Now, Republicans are making another choice. Instead of helping Americans afford health care or gas, groceries, housing, they want us to give another seventy-three billion dollars in your taxpayer dollars to this illegal forever war of choice in Iran. Another seventy-three billion dollars to the Pentagon, the only federal agency that has never passed an audit, has actually failed eight audits and is full of waste, fraud, and abuse. We simply cannot allow Donald Trump and Republicans to continue to steal from the American people. Donald Trump promised to quote " love and cherish Medicaid", but he lied, just like he has on so many things. Just a few months ago he made his priorities clear again, when he said quote, " It is not possible for us to take care of daycare, Medicaid, Medicare, all of these individual things at the federal level because we're fighting, wars. Let's be clear. This war on Iran is illegal, it has already killed fourteen US service members, and injured many more. It's killed thousands of civilians in Iran and Lebanon, and displaced millions more. Gas prices are back up. And everything costs more. But are Republican colleagues doing anything to address this affordability crisis? No. They just wanna do the bidding of Donald Trump again, who says that affordability is quote " a hope". The simple truth is that my colleagues are prioritizing an illegal war over lowering costs for families or reversing Medicaid cuts. Medicaid is the single most important program helping kids and working families, including pregnant women and children with disabilities. Medicaid and CHIP cover nearly forty percent of all children and more than forty percent of all births. Medicaid also provides one year of postpartum coverage in nearly every state with little or no out-of-pocket costs. Medicaid is the primary payer of long-term services and supports for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. These services help people live full and independent lives, and they include assistance with daily living activities, meal preparation, medication management, and other life-saving services. It's also the single largest payer in the country for behavioral health services, helping people with mental health and substance use disorders. At a minimum, this protects Medicaid and refuses to allow Republicans to

I think the gentlelady, uh, is there a member who would like to claim time in opposition? Gentleman from the Keystone State, Mr. Smucker, uh, five minutes.

Thank you. Thank you, Mister Chairman, and uh, Mister Eipol uh, talked uh, my friend Mister Eipol talked about um a number of issues, but I'd specifically um like to talk about medicaid and what is included in this amendment and i agree with um much of her statement particularly um the the ending when you talked about the importance of medicaid to people who truly need that uh disabled uh pregnant women children and so on uh and i think uh most people on both sides of the aisle would agree that um medicaid uh is important for people who truly need it um, and I think most of us are, uh, proud to be in a country where there is truly a safety net safety net for, um, individuals, uh, who need it. Um, where I do, uh, what, where I do not agree, uh, is with this notion that republicans in the one big beautiful bill reduced the spending to Medicaid. In fact, uh, spending for Medicaid is going to increase each year even after um the changes that were made um in the affecting uh cost of Medicaid in one big beautiful bill. In fact, it's going to increase more than the cost of inflation in each year for the next uh ten years, which is the period that we looked at um in that bill. Uh well over it's gonna be uh you know we're spending last year I think about six hundred and sixty in reimbursement six hundred and sixty billion in reimbursements uh to states. uh one trillion according to cbo even um after what we did what we've done in in the one big beautiful bill what we tried to accomplish in one big beautiful bill and mr. eipel talked about uh waste fraud and abuse uh in the department of defense i agree with her on that too we should be looking at that the department of defense hasn't hasn't passed an audit in years and so i completely agree with that but i'd love to hear democrats talk about waste in some of these other programs as well because to the extent that there that it exists and i'm gonna give some examples that means that someone who really needs it isn't getting um those dollars and that's what we were trying to get at in the in the one big beautiful bill um and that's why i'm i'm grateful for this war on fraud that the president has um um you know embarked on uh and uh for some of the work that the uh department uh cms and uh medicare medicaid uh have have already undertaken um some of the examples of fraud are absolutely staggering um there was a the the the twenty twenty six healthcare fraud takedown uh which is a name of a coordinated effort among agencies charged uh just hear this four hundred and fifty-five defendants who robbed the federal government of six point five That's six point five billion dollars that should have gone to vulnerable Americans who need the dollars, and instead went to uh fraudsters. They impersonated physicians. They hurt patients by providing unnecessary services. They stole Medicare beneficiary identification numbers. They used the guise of medical services to run money laundering schemes. That's not what Medicare should be used for. Between twenty nineteen and twenty twenty four, the number of hel- hel- home health providers in California rose sixty-six percent, about twice as much as nationwide. In South Florida, there are twenty times more durable medical equipment providers than McDonald's franchises. Twenty times more durable, uh, uh, medical equipment providers than McDonald's franchises. To rein in that fraud, CMS has announced a six-month moratorium on enrollment of new dma providers california's spending on in-home health care has soared to thirty three billion from fourteen billion in two thousand nineteen in response cms has suspended nine hundred hosp hospice and home health care agencies suspected of fraud just in the city of los angeles out of a total of eighteen hundred hospice hospice and home health providers half half of them probably were fronts for criminal organizations. How do we know that? Only four percent, only four percent of those nine hundred hospice providers literally called CMS back to contest them being dropped from uh from reimbursement. These are criminal organizations that are stealing money from Americans who are vulnerable and who need those dollars. That's what we're trying to get at with the changes that have been made in the one big beautiful bill. So Republicans in Congress stand behind the Trump administration in aggressively combating healthcare fraud. We think all hard-earned American taxpayer dollars that are being spent should go to America's most vulnerable and not stolen by fraudsters. This amendment would hamstring those efforts in my view, and so I urge a no vote.

I thank the gentleman and yield Miss Jayapal one minute and now thirty seconds.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Well, I appreciate my friend across the aisle. I would love to work with him.

Mm-hmm.

until they pass an audit. Um, they should really be have to pay every time they fail an audit, but Republicans have continued to increase spending to the Pentagon, as we're doing here. Um, I hope we can change that. Let me speak to this question of uh of what actually happened with the big bad betrayal bill. And this is according to the CBO. um, the recent Republican budget packages slashed federal Medicaid spending by roughly a trillion dollars over a decade representing the largest cuts to the program in its sixty year history and the way um that this was done was not by going after fraud from institutional providers my colleague is correct that there's, I can't see see you over there I'm trying to look over my microphone, uh my colleague is correct that there's a lot of institutional fraud of the fraud that's committed within Medicaid, it is primarily institutional fraud. But you're not going after the institutional fraud. You're putting in barriers to stop people from actually accessing Medicaid. And that is a big part of the problem. We're kicking people off of Medicaid when there's actually the studies by the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General, say that intentional fraud committed by the individuals receiving Medicaid benefits is exceedingly rare. The vast majority of fraud is coming from institutional actors like pharmaceutical providers or diagnostic labs or other corporations that are involved. That's not what the big bad betrayal bill went after. It went after individuals who are actually getting the health care that they desperately need. And so I think that when we come back to this, the reality is we kicked a lot of people off of health care, off of Medicaid with the big bad betrayal bill, and that's why I hope we can pass my.

Only because you're my classmate, Miss Jayapal, would I let you would I give you thirty extra seconds and go another thirty.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. Appreciate you.

Uh, sit back and hear the dialogue, respectful and thoughtful between two classmates. Um, uh, look, uh, Miss Jayapal's questions on on, uh, or the questions on agreeing to her amendment, all those in favor, aye.

Aye.

All those no, opposed no.

No.

The no's have it. i thought you might i thought you might uh want a roll call vote we're gonna roll all votes to the end of the mark up thank you miss jaipal any other questions or amendments rather

mister chair i have amendment at the desk

ok the clerk will designate miss choo's amendment the staff will distribute copies and miss choo after we hear from our clerk uh at your leisure uh you have uh, your first four minutes.

Amendment number eleven on the Affordable Care Act, offered by Miss Chu.

My amendment would prevent Republicans from doing any further damage to the Affordable Care Act than they have already by prohibiting future attempts to reduce ACA enrollment or benefits. This amendment is necessary because Republicans have spent years and taken every possible opportunity to attack the a c a and the americans who rely on it their big ugly bills slashed more than one trillion dollars for medicaid and affordable care act coverage which has already resulted in eight million americans losing their health insurance and when you combine the big ugly law with republicans refusal to extend the enhanced a c a tax credits they will ultimately kick fifteen million americans off the rolls while doubling premiums for over twenty million Americans. For my constituent Laura from Pasadena, it was more than double. Her monthly premium for the least expensive plan on the marketplace jumped from fifty-six dollars to five hundred and fifty-two dollars an eight hundred and eighty-six percent increase. My amendment simply says enough. If Republicans truly have no plans to further weaken the Affordable Care Act, then they should have no problem supporting this amendment. But I also want to address a glaring and inexcusable omission from this budget, disaster aid for those who were devastated from various disasters such as um hurricanes in North Carolina, floods in Texas, and wildfires such as in my California district, the Eaton fire specifically affecting Altadena and Pasadena. Last January, this Eaton fire destroyed these communities, six thousand single family homes and tragically took the lives of nineteen of our neighbors, the majority of whom were elderly and disabled, like Anthony Mitchell, senior, a sixty-eight year old father, grandfather, and great-grandfather who was known for bringing people together, and his son Justin who was born with cerebral palsy and lit up the room with his smile. Anthony and Justin both died waiting for help they would never receive. Now, eighteen months later our communities are struggling to recover. Today, two out of three Eaton and Palisades fire survivors have not yet returned home. Of the six thousand homes that were destroyed, half have yet to initiate their rebuilding process at all. And every single day that aid is delayed, recovery becomes more expensive and exhausting for survivors who can't afford it. But there is a simple solution to ending this suffering. President Trump and Republicans can fulfill Governor Newsom's disaster supplemental request in four without political strings attached. A supplemental funding request that is a fraction of what Republicans are demanding today and would provide much needed funds to accelerate rebuilding and ensure full recovery we need to help Americans at their lowest point in their lives instead this committee is considering a budget that ignores disaster survivors while continuing to make life harder for working families. Every day I speak to my constituents who have endured the unimaginable and heard are doing everything in their power to rebuild their lives. They are simply asking their government to keep its promise. And that's why I find the legislation we are considering today to be so egregious and offensive. We do not need billions more for an illegal ineffective war. We do not need billions to disenfranchise legal voters. But what we do need is to help survivors right now. Every day that we continue to delay this aid is a feckless abdication of the responsibility we were all sworn to uphold.

Chair, thanks. Uh, Ms. Chu, is there a member who would like to claim the time in opposition to the amendment? Mr. Dow is recognized for five minutes.

Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. and I just wanna say that I strongly oppose this amendment. And let's be clear about what this does. This amendment would make it harder to improve a program that continues to face serious questions about improper payments, eligibility verification, and program integrity. This would effectively protect Obamacare from meaningful oversight by requiring a sixty percent threshold before the House could even consider improvements to the system. This is not a thoughtful, Mr. Chairman, this is an exercise in protecting an ideological agenda that is hurting our constituents. Congress has a duty to ensure taxpayer subsidies are reserved for those who are legally eligible and who have knowingly enrolled in coverage. When concerns arise about improper enrollments, weak eligibility controls, or billions in federal spending, our response should be greater oversight, not procedural roadblocks. And my colleagues continue to mock our reconciliation bill. And I think that we should take a look at the things that they're telling you, that they don't support. Because that's what, what Democrats are doing by saying they're mocking this bill. But what they're saying is, th- they don't support no taxes on tips, no taxes on overtime. They support raising taxes on senior social security. And they support unchecked fraud, robbing taxpayers. That's exactly what they are doing. And my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, Mister Chairman, they love to talk about coverage, as if that is all that health care is. But we all know this isn't the case. All you need to do is look at the plans on the Obamacare exchange, the premiums, the out-of-pocket maxes, the deductibles. It is ridiculous, and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle know it. If you notice, it's always the middle class that gets squeezed. If you're poor, in this country, there's Medicaid. If you're wealthy, you can withstand bad policy.

Thank you, Miss Chiu, who's recognized for one minute to close.

Let me re-emphasize what this committee could be doing Let me re-emphasize what this committee could be doing to We could be working to make life more affordable for working class families struggling to get by. We could be restoring health care coverage to millions of Americans who are stripped of it just to bankroll billionaire tax cuts.

Yeah.

We could be advancing aid for natural disaster survivors to rebuild and heal from the darkest days of their lives. But we're not doing any of that.

OK.

This is a slap in the face to the countless people who need health care to fight cancer, diabetes, and other diseases. It's a slap in the face to the countless survivors in my district and across the country who have experienced the unimaginable and are begging for help. We do not abandon people after disaster. We do not make people's lives fall apart. We must do everything in our power to support and uplift them in their greatest time of need. Today, we could have done that. But we clearly are not. And so, if, yeah, I understand the current instructions don't indicate further changes being made to the ACA. If that is the case, why not reaffirm it with this amendment and ensure that it's safeguarded? I urge support by my amendment and I yield back.

The question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by Ms. Chu. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye.

Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it.

I ask for a recorded vote.

A roll call vote is requested pursuant to

chair i have an amendment excuse me i believe it's amendment twelve

clerk will designate the amendment the staff will distribute copies of the amendment

amendment number twelve to add a policy statement on taxpayer funds offered by mister tonko

do we wait a little please ok mister

thank you sir my amendment will ensure that no taxpayer funds are given to any individuals who assaulted law enforcement on january sixth of twenty twenty one one of donald trump's first actions upon resuming the office of the presidency was to pardon the more than sixteen hundred insurrectionists who stormed the capital on january sixth this violent mob ripped ripped down doors broke through windows and beat law enforcement officers to storm the capital to prevent the peaceful transfer of power, the hallmark of our democracy. I will never forget the extraordinary bravery of law enforcement to keep the light of democracy alive for us all. Our democracy held, but at tremendous cost. More than one hundred and forty law enforcement officers were injured and five officers died because of the horrific events of that day. Now, more than five years later, this president has attempted to reward those same violent criminals with taxpayer dollars. This is a dizzying level of executive overreach that is representative of this entire administration. This budget does nothing to change that reality or rein in this out of control president. In fact, this whole process has been a complete and total farce. The administration has resumed bombing Iran, prolonging the president's illegal war of choice. We haven't even received a proper estimate of the monet monetary cost of this conflict from the department of defense and this resolution is set to give them a blank check for seventy three billion dollars more. As the president has spent billions on bombs working Americans are struggling with rising costs at home. Worse it's clear that those hardships could not be further from his mind. He has been dismissive of the real pain facing everyday Americans who are stuck with the consequences of this reckless reckless action. Instead, he's been attempting to secure a one point eight billion dollar slush fund for his allies on the taxpayers' dime. Under the terms set out by Trump himself, thousands of individuals who claim the government was weaponized against them would be eligible for settlements from this fund. That would include the hundreds of insurrectionists who assaulted law enforcement on January sixth. These people are not victims, they are violent criminals, and taxpayers should not be forced. to foot the bill for their actions. That is theft from the American people on the terms of a president who has dismissed the struggles of everyday Americans at every turn. While the administration claims that this slush fund has been withdrawn, they do not all seem to be on the same page, and so this is preventative therapy. In particular, the president does not seem to be on that page. We must pass my amendment to absolutely ensure that this theft does not take place

Thank you. Is there a member who would like to claim the time in opposition to this amendment?

Thank you.

uh, Mr. Gil of Texas is recognized for five minutes.

Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is not a serious amendment. It's entirely unrelated to the matter that we're working on before the committee. Uh, today, this committee is considering the fiscal year twenty twenty-seven budget resolution which in addition to setting budget aggregates and levels of new budget authority and outlays for the functional categories, provides reconciliation instructions for authorizing committees notably not direction directives on Justice Department litigation. I think rather than debating the budget before us, Democrats are again attempting to re-litigate January sixth through an amendment that falls entirely outside the scope of this resolution. I don't think that any American should ever be targeted by the federal government because of their politics their beliefs or their association with the president. But for years Americans watched the Biden administration weaponize the justice system eroding confidence in our nation's principle of equal justice under the law. Americans watched the Biden administration use the Face Act to go after a- to go after peaceful pro-life advocates, including elderly grandmothers, while churches and pregnancy cent- resource centers were vandalized and att- and attacked with virtual impunity. That's not equal justice under the law, that is lawfare, we saw that and we're sick of it. And it's exactly why so many Americans lost faith in our justice system. If the federal government broke the law or abused its authority, victims deserve due process, but those deliberations on how that should operate shouldn't be litigated through this committee. Uh, it should be done elsewhere, as we all know. Um, so I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, but let's also be really clear here. The reason that Democrats are opposed to this reconciliation bill is not because of an anti-weaponization fund, and it's certainly not on the principle of fiscal prudence. This is the same party that last presidency passed the American Rescue Plan, which increased our debt by almost two trillion dollars with zero pay-fors. The reason that the other side of the aisle is opposed to this legislation is because it has the Save America Act in it, And we have seen time and time again, Democrats fighting against Republican efforts to ensure that illegal aliens are not voting in our elections, which is particularly relevant, by the way, after four years of Democrats intentionally and deliberately flooding our country, with over ten million illegal aliens. Republicans are wanting to put some sanity back into public policy. It makes me wonder perhaps if any of our friends on the other side of the aisle, uh, who have so many great ideas for where our our government money should go, would support the Save America Act if - if we attached perhaps funding for puberty blockers for three year olds to it. What if we attached a - a provision that defunded the police? Would they support the Save America Act then? They're talking about national security. Instead of funding national security, what if we defunded America's military? Would we get support for this reconciliation What if we abolished prisons? What if we abolished the Senate as the Democratic Socialists of America are proposing, the new leaders in the Democrat Party? What if we gave food stamps, Medicaid, and free housing for illegal aliens, the things that the other side of the aisle shut the government down over last fall? What if we provided funding to give teenagers abortions without parental consent at taxpayer expense? Would that get our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to support this bill. I don't know, um, but I think that this amendment is not serious, it's not germane, uh, to what we're discussing, and I would like to ensure that illegal aliens are not voting in our elections, that our military is funded properly, uh, and that we can bring sanity back to our country. So that said, I, uh, I yield back, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you for yielding. Mister Tonko is recognized for one minute to close.

Thank you, sir. While America is fully aware of the disingenuous nature of this administration, a reach to alternative facts when they need to reinforce their thinking, total myths and lies that uh uh and manufactured uh stats that uh enforce their uh thinking, uh and their legislative agenda. Look, we knew, heard the pledges, cut costs by day one, no forever wars, instead what do we get? A re-involvement in uh in a heightened sense with uh Iran, a denial of nutrition programs for innocent, victims taking a chainsaw to healthcare coverage for tens of thousands of individuals in each of our districts. Look, we heard it all today, characterizing Trump as stopping the gravy train while he made some two point four trillion dollars outside the office presidency in just one year this all points to the hypocrisy the disingenuous and callous nature of this administration. It is time for us to deal with facts to address the needs of our American

thank you the question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by mister tunco all those in favor say aye

aye

aye

those opposed no

no

and the opinion of the chairs knows how but

uh request a recorded

a roll call vote is requested pursuant to the bipartisan unanimous consent agreement we will postpone the roll call vote until later in the markup are there any other amendments

this chairman i have an amendment at the desk

The clerk will designate the amendment, the staff will distribute copies of the amendment.

Amendment number thirteen to adjust spending in function nine twenty, offered by Mister McGarvey.

Mister McGarvey of Texas is recognized for four minutes.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, from the great Commonwealth of Kentucky, I'm happy to deliver these remarks. Um, to paraphrase Maya Angelou, when someone shows you who they are, believe them. Forget what the Republicans are saying here today, Watch what they do. Last July, Republicans cut more than a trillion dollars from Americans' healthcare. Those cuts haven't even gone into effect yet. Already a birthing center and specialty clinic in Louisville Kentucky are closing and threatening to close. Last month, Republicans forced through seventy billion dollars for ice. This is on top of the hundred and seventy billion dollars that they gave them the year before. And then just last week, untrained ICE agents who have enlisted in Trump's personal army, shot two more Americans dead on our streets. Now? Republicans have brought us back here again to write Donald Trump a ninety-five billion dollar check to pay for his Iran war, which continues to make all of us poorer and our world less safe, no matter how many times he declares victory. By the way, Republican budget staff testified earlier today that this bill is going to increase the debt of our country by, You guessed it. Ninety five billion dollars. They are showing you who they are. Believe them. They will do nothing today to make your next trip to the grocery store or gas station less painful. Nothing to make your health insurance premiums cheaper. Nothing for those of you with young kids or aging parents. Or both. Because none of those things benefit Donald Trump, and all the Republicans do here is Donald Trump's bidding. The last eighteen months they have hurt. Trump's policies have driven inflation higher and made the cost of everything go up. It's relentless. It's exhausting. But while your family's bottom line took a beating in twenty twenty five, Donald Trump reported making two point two billion dollars. A man who spent years playing a billionaire t- on TV while reporting losses to the IRS, won the presidency and finally turned a profit. He sleeps in the White House. He flies on Air Force One. But President is just a title. His real job is selling crypto. He sold meme coins that left his own supporters holding the bag while his family became five hundred million dollars richer. He sold nearly half his crypto company to Emirati investors for another five hundred million bucks. And then he goes around and he openly brags about not prosecuting crypto crimes. Every scheme is different. Pattern's always the same. Donald Trump turns public office into private profit. He sells access to the White House for a living and now he's We all watched in horror last year as he tore down the East Wing, the White House. But even worse now is watching him solicit donations from billionaires, tech and tobacco companies, defense contractors, and dozens of individuals and firms who profit from decisions made by our government. Even now, as he collects secret private money for his ballroom, he's trying to use nearly four hundred million dollars in taxpayer funds to pay for it too. Taxpayers didn't ask the president to tear down the White House. Taxpayers must not be forced to pay for rebuilding it as a personal monument. This amendment, make sure they won't. We should block this funding. We must demand transparency from Trump or any president on a project like this. I don't expect to rein in all of Donald Trump's corruption in just one amendment. But let's start here. by supporting this amendment. I reserve.

Sure. Thanks, Mister McGarvey, and thanks for the correction on this date. I was so confident I said Kentucky, I had to ask staff, like why is why is he correcting me? So apologize for that. Uh, is there a member who would like to claim the time in opposition to the amendment?

Mister Chairman.

Mister Stutzman is recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. Uh, you know, the I I just have a hard time understanding the fixation that the democrats have with the ballroom. Um, this to me is one of those pieces where we could be supportive in a bipartisan manner because hopefully not anytime soon, but someday there's going to be a democrat president in the white house again. And uh, you know, we we know that past presidents have made changes to the white house that were needed right now you could argue that some maybe weren't needed uh franklin roosevelt overhauled the west wing he added a second floor a larger basement and a swimming pool does the white house really need a swimming pool you could argue no but i'll tell you what the ballroom is for people it's for larger gatherings it's for events and i'm sure everyone at this in this room on this committee has been to an event at the white house whether it was with president obama or whether it was president biden whether it was president trump or president bush before that uh to me this is something that is has even become personal uh i was at the white house correspondence dinner sitting towards the back when we just sat down starting our salads eating uh, our dinner, I was sitting beside a lady who, uh, had, uh, immigrated from Ukraine, and we were talking about the fact that she, in this country, Americans in this country have such access to elected officials. And all of a sudden we heard gunshots go off about sixty to seventy-five feet behind us right outside the center doors, and a, a, a madman, another madman is, uh, is trying to get in to assassinate the president of the united states and in that moment whether you were republican whether you were democrat whether you were conservative liberal it didn't matter because our lives were in danger we didn't know what was going to happen in that moment and thankfully the uh the secret service did their job no one was uh was killed or injured badly um but this is the third assassination attempt on this president, the president of the United States. And if we can't all agree, Republicans and Democrats, that the security of our president is a high priority, something is wrong in this town. And the fact that President Trump is is willing to find private dollars, also using public dollars for, and I would encourage you to to see the plans of what uh the uh the plans are to build more safety and security for those attending the white house i mean if you go down to the white house for a christmas event or for the easter egg roll uh we all know the entrance into that uh a particular um amazing property but there's ways that we can be sure that people are even safer and it's not just about president trump and uh and so to me trying to defund this and take the is short-sighted, I think it's petty, uh, this is something that we can all appreciate, uh, as Americans, and, uh, it's gonna be used for future generations. Working together, we can keep this side. Ask Democrats and Republicans to defeat this amendment. Let's actually find a a spot where we can say, this is gonna be used by Democrats down the road, this is gonna be used President Trump by the time it's finished. And and so the fixation of President Trump just needs to stop at some point because political violence sadly has become more common than it ever should be. Yet a lot of this violence has has been driven by violent rhetoric, particularly those on the far left. There's numerous examples, eighty-six, forty-seven, I I there was a teacher from Indiana that stood outside the White S- White House. She was a teacher with students with her at a trip to Washington DC with a shirt that said eighty six forty seven calling people to fight back in the streets calling trump a nazi obama uh states that motives were unclear before condemning the white house correspondence dinner shooter so this is the sort of stuff that just needs to stop and together let's just show the american people that there is a moment and a place where we can come together as americans and celebrate the greatness of america our democracy our constitution uh, our republic. And that's where the White House uh ballroom can be a place for us to celebrate that. So I would ask that you defeat this amendment and I'll yield back.

Thank you. Mister McGarvey from the great Commonwealth of Kentucky is recognized for one minute to close.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, and I appreciate my colleagues' calls for bipartisanship. I would just say this amendment is not about right versus left, this amendment is about right versus wrong. I'll start off with the President's own words about this ballroom. Quote, what, "it won't interfere with the current building. It'll be near it but not touching it. And it pays total respect to the existing building, which I'm the biggest fan of." This is before he ripped it down past the studs, ripped apart the people's house, not his house, didn't ask Congress if he could do it, and didn't have a way to pay for it. Let's get to the pay-fors because that seemed to be an issue for my colleague who wanted to talk about safety concerns. The four hundred million dollars in this budget that is going towards Trump's personal ballroom is actually being taken away from the Secret Service, which is tasked with protecting the President of the United States. If you're worried about security, you should put that four hundred million dollars back in the hands of the Secret Service agents who put their life on the line for the President. But I opened this by saying, when someone shows you who they are, believe them. Watch how my colleagues vote on this amendment. See who believes that no president should use his office to enrich himself and his family by billions. See who believes our government should not be for sale to

Question is not agreeing to the amendment offered by Mister McGarvey. All those in favor say aye.

Aye. Aye.

Those opposed, no.

No.

The opinion of the chairs, the no's have it.

Request a recorded vote.

Roll call vote is requested. Pursuant to the bipartisan unanimous consent agreement, we will postpone the roll call vote until later in the mark-up. Are there any additional amendments?

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

The clerk will designate the amendment, the staff will distribute copies of the amendment.

Amendment number fourteen to adjust spending in function two seventy, offered by Mister Ama.

Mister Ama of Rhode Island is recognized for four minutes.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, my amendment would reverse the energy cuts in the big ugly law that are driving up costs and making it more expensive for working families to power their homes and fuel their Two years ago, President Trump made a promise to rapidly drive prices down. I think it's pretty clear that that hasn't happened. Under his so-called leadership, energy prices have gone in one direction, that's up. First, Trump worked with Republicans to pass his big ugly law, which gutted the Inflation Reduction Act's energy programs and tax credits, programs that were working to lower energy costs for Americans. Then, because that didn't seem to hurt working families enough, Trump launched an illegal war with Iran to jack up Euro Now, they're asking Americans to pay for a war that has made lives more expensive. Since Trump launched his unauthorized war of choice, Rhode Island families have spent an extra three hundred fifty dollars on gas, and that's part of nearly a thousand dollars in higher costs families have struggled to shoulder since the start of this war. Democrats have shared statistics, brought in experts, and introduced people who have felt the pain of these actions. It hasn't changed how Republicans vote. It hasn't changed what Republicans are prioritizing. It doesn't change the fact that they'll keep pushing for an unpopular agenda that nobody asked for. So, look, I'm done talking to the people in this room. I'm gonna address the American people. America, your Republican members aren't listening to you. Time and again, you tell your elected officials that you need lower costs and more opportunity. You need an end to foreign wars and a safety net to catch you if you fall. What are Republicans doing? Finding more money for Trump's war of choice, supporting tariffs to jack up your costs and rip away your health care. Meanwhile, Trump is making billions more off the American people. Now, they're taking even more of your money to pay for a farm bailout that's only necessary because their high prices have made it hard for America's farmers to stay afloat. Once again, the party that claims to be about fiscal responsibility is ramming through a bill that would cause the deficit to balloon, just like the cost of the taxpayer funded ballroom. They're putting it on you, the taxpayer's credit card, because they have no way to pay for it. And that's on top of the roughly four point seven trillion dollars they added to the national debt in their big ugly law last year. Now, look, I didn't think they could be any more indifferent uh to your pain, but as icing on the cake, they're trying to make it harder for you to vote too. You deserve lower costs and more opportunity. Instead, Republicans are burying the nation in a mountain of debt while actively tracking up prices. I ask my colleagues, how does this budget makes make the lives of the American people better? How? I know the answer. It's clear. It doesn't. I yield back.

Thank you for yielding. Is there a member who would like to claim the time in opposition to the amendment? Miss

Mr. Chairman.

Miss Howchun.

Mister Chairman, Thank you. this amendment is a democratic messaging effort, plain and simple. It's a half-hearted redistribution of wealth that would take economic growth that House Republicans fought so hard to deliver in the Working Families Tax Cuts Act. House Republicans worked very hard to restore an energy strategy built on affordability and American production. Democrats want to reverse course and put us right back where we were under President Biden. We know what those policies looked like. By the end of President Biden's term, the ban on oil and natural gas leasing had cost our economy more than thirty-three billion dollars in lost GDP. American families paid more to heat their homes and fill up their gas tanks. Manufacturers faced higher energy costs and Americans were left with a less reliable electric grid. The Working Families Tax Cuts Act, put an end to that failed approach. It repealed more than five hundred billion dollars in wasteful Green New Deal spending. It reopened our federal lands for oil and gas leasing, and it invested in reliable American energy, including in nuclear power and biofuels. Nuclear energy will be essential to powering America's future. It provides the stable and abundant energy needed to support the American manufacturing resurgence. and the technological innovation we are seeing under President Trump's leadership. For states like Indiana, that's especially important. Affordable and reliable energy powers our manufacturers, supports our farmers, and keeps costs down for hard-working Hoosiers. Democrats want to revive the same failed policies that weakened our energy security and drove up costs. Republicans are focused on American energy done.

Thank you for yielding. Mister Amo is recognized for one minute to close.

Mister Chairman, the multiple times rebranded uh big beautiful bill working families tax cut act is the working families price increase act and my amendment is simple. reverse Trump and Republicans' big ugly cuts that jacked up Rhode Islanders' energy bills. It would make it easier for Rhode Islanders to fill up their gas and heating oil tanks, and it would start restoring some of the roughly one point seven million construction jobs threatened by Republicans' war on clean energy. Unlike the Republicans' plan, I'm not saddling working families in the nation with higher costs and more debt. My amendment is paid for by making the uber-wealthy and corporations pay their fair share, including the President. I urge my Republican colleagues to see the light. Stop jacking up costs on Americans that are barely scraping by. Stop blindly following Trump's campaign to increase costs. Carry on a chaotic war and hurt our democracy. A vote for my amendment is a vote to make life more affordable. I yield back.

Question on agreeing to the amendment offered by Mister Amo is on the table. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, no. No. In the opinion of the chair, the no's haven't. Request to record a vote. Roll call vote is requested pursuant to our agreement. We'll postpone all roll call votes until later in the mark-up. The committee now will vote on postponed roll call votes. Committee will now vote on the amendment offered by my friend and ranking member, Mr. Boyle. The clerk will designate the amendment.

Amendment number one offered by Mister Boyle.

I know, okay. The clerk will call the roll. are there any

miss

go ahead

mister norman

ok pause

mister norman mister mcclintock mister mcclintock mister growthman mister growthman mister smucker mister smucker no mister carter mister carter no mister klein mister klein no mister bergman mister bergman no mister roy mister roy mister stutsman mister stutsman no mister moore of utah

nay

mister moore of utah no mister estes

no

mister estes no mister berkeen

no

mister berkeen no mister obernolte

no

mister obernolte no mister kerry

no

mister kerry no mister edwards no mr. edwards no mr. clyde negative mr. clyde no miss houchin no miss houchin no mr. mcdowell no mr. mcdowell no mr. gill no mr. gill no mr. moore of north carolina

no

no mr. moore of north carolina no mr. boyle aye mr. boyle aye mr. doggett aye mr. doggett aye mr. scott aye no mr. scott aye mr. peters aye mr. peters aye mr. pinnetta mr. pinnetta miss watson coleman miss watson coleman aye miss plaskett miss plaskett miss eskobar miss eskobar miss miss omar miss omar aye miss ballant miss ballant aye miss captor miss captor aye miss jaya paul mr. ayapal aye miss choo

aye

miss choo aye mr. tonko

aye

mr. tonko aye mr. mcgarvey

aye

mr. mcgarvey aye mr. amo

aye

mr. amo aye mr. chairman

no

mr. chairman no

mclintock no

how is mclintock recorded and and how is penetta recorded mclintock first

mr. chairman mr. mclintock is not recorded

mclintock no

mr. mclintock no

how is mr. penetta

Mister Chairman, Mister Panetta is not recorded.

Aye.

Mister Panetta, aye.

Any other members wish to vote who haven't voted or change their vote? If not, the clerk shall report.

Oh, no, I I got a vote.

Mister uh Mister uh Bailey. Mister Bailey. How is the gentleman from Wisconsin, Mister Grothman, No. recorded?

Mister Chairman, Mister Grothman is not record recorded.

No.

Mister Grothman, no.

Mister Mister Bailey, once again I apologize people are coming in. How's Mister Briceen recorded?

Mister Chairman, Mister Briceen is recorded as no.

OK.

Yes.

Thank you. Just wanted to double check on Briceen. Clerk shall report.

Mister Chairman, on the vote there were fourteen ayes and nineteen no's.

The no's have it, the amendment is not agreed to, the committee will now uh vote on the amendment offered by Mister Doggett from the Good. great state of Texas clerk will uh redesignate that amendment. I'm gonna go for that one.

Amendment number two offered by Mister Doggett.

I'm gonna go for the second one. I'll be the senator.

And now the clerk will call the roll.

Mister Norman.

No.

Mister Norman, no. Mister McClintock.

Sorry? Okay, dark.

Mister McClintock, no. Mister Grothman.

No.

Mister Grothman, no. Mister Smucker. Mister Smucker.

No.

Mister Smucker, no. Mister Carter.

Nice.

No, you're good. Come on. I'm sorry, I jacked that chair down so hard. Mister Carter, no. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry.

No. Mister McCl

I'm sorry. Mister Klein. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry.

No.

I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm so sorry. I'm so sorry. I'm so so sorry. I'm so so sorry. Mister Klein, no. Mister Bergman. I'm so so sorry. I'm so so sorry. I'm so so sorry. I'm so so sorry.

No.

Mister Bergman, no. Mister Roy. I'm so so sorry. I'm so so sorry. I'm so so sorry. I'm so so sorry. I'm so so sorry. Mister Roy. Mister Stutsman.

no

mister stutsman no mister moore of utah mister moore of utah no mister esses

no

mister esses no mister berkeen

no

mister berkeen no mister obernoltee

no

mister ober obernoltee no mister carey

no

mister carey no mister edwards

no

mister edwards no mister clyde

negative

mister clyde no miss houchen

no

miss houchen no mister mcdowell

no

mister mcdowell no mister gill

no

mister gill no mister moore of north carolina

no

mister moore of north carolina no mister boyle

aye

mister boyle aye mister doggett

aye

mister doggett aye mister scott

aye

mister scott aye mister peters mister peters aye mister pineta

yes

mister pineta aye miss watson coleman miss watson coleman aye miss plaskett miss plaskett miss escobar miss escobar escobar miss omar miss omar aye miss ballant miss ballant aye miss captor miss captor aye miss jaipal miss jaipal aye miss chu miss chu aye mister tonko

aye

mister tonko aye mister mcgarvey

aye

mister mcgarvey aye mister amo

aye

mister amo aye mister chairman

no

mister chairman no

any members wish to change their vote or who haven't voted not clerk Please report.

Mister Chairman, on the vote there were fourteen ayes and twenty noes.

In the opinion of the chairs, uh not in the opinion, the facts are that the no's have it. Uh, the committee will now vote on the amendment offered by my friend, Mister Scott, uh from Virginia. Clerk, redesignate the amendment, please.

Amendment number three offered by Mister Scott.

Clerk. please call the roll

mister norman

no

mister norman no mister mcclintock

no

mister mcclintock no mister growthman

no

mr growthman mister growthman no mister smucker mister smucker no mister carter

no

mister carter no mister klein

no

mister klein no mister bergman

no

mister bergman no mister roy mister roy mister sussman

no

mister sussman no mister moore of utah

nay

mister moore of utah no mister estes

no

mister estes no mister berke no mr. no mr. obernolte no mr. obernolte no mr. carey no mr. carey no mr. edwards no mr. edwards no mr. clyde negative mr. clyde no miss houchin no miss houchin no mr. mcdowell no mr. mcdowell no mr. gill no mr. gill no mr. moore of north carolina no mr. moore of north carolina no mr. boyle aye mr. boyle aye mr. doggett aye mr. doggett aye mr. scott aye mr. scott aye mr.

aye

mr. peters aye mr. penetta

good

mr. penetta aye miss watson- coleman

aye

miss watson- coleman aye miss plaskett miss plaskett miss escobar miss escobar miss omar

aye

miss omar aye miss ballant

aye

miss ballant aye miss cepter

aye

miss cepter aye miss gyapaul

aye

miss gyapaul aye miss choo

aye

miss choo aye mr. tonko

so aye

Mister Tonko, aye. Mister McGarvey, aye.

Aye.

Mister McGarvey, aye. Mister Amo, aye.

Aye.

Mister Amo, aye. Mister Chairman.

No.

Mister Chairman, no.

Any members wish to change their vote? If not, uh clerk please report.

Mister Chairman, on the vote there were fourteen ayes and twenty nos.

The no's have it, the amendment is not agreed to. The committee will now vote on the amendment offered by my friend Mister Peters from California. clerk please redesignate the amendment

amendment number four offered by mister peters

please call the roll

mister norman

no

mister norman no mister mcclintock

no

mister mcclintock no mister growthman

no

mister growthman no mister smucker

no

mister smucker no mister carter

no

mister carter no mister klein

no

mister klein no mister bergman

no

mister bergman no mister roy mister roy mister stutzman

no

mister stutzman no mister moore of utah

no

mister mr. moore of utah no mr. estes no mr. estes no mr. brequin no mr. brequin no mr. obernalte no mr. obernalte no mr. carey no mr. carey no mr. edwards no mr. edwards no mr. clyde no mr. clyde no miss houchin

no

no miss houchin no mr. mcdowell mr. mcdowell no mr. gill no mr. gill no mr. moore of north carolina no mr. moore of north carolina no mr. boyle

aye

no mr. boyle aye mr. doggett aye aye mr. scott

aye

mr. scott aye mr. peters

aye

mr. peters aye mr. penetta mr. penetta aye miss watson-colman

aye

miss watson-colman aye miss plaskett miss plaskett miss escobar miss escobar miss omar

aye

miss omar aye miss ballant

aye

miss ballant aye miss captor

aye

miss captor aye miss jaipal

aye

miss jaipal aye miss chu

aye

miss chu aye mr. ta miss miss

Aye.

Mr. Tonko, aye. Mr. McGarvey,

Aye.

Mr. McGarvey, aye. Mr. Amo,

Aye.

Mr. Amo, aye. Mr. Chairman.

No.

Mr. Chairman, no.

Anybody wanna change their vote? If not, um, call the roll.

Mr. Chair, on the vote there were fourteen ayes and twenty noes.

Noes have it, amendment's not agreed to. Committee will now vote on the amendment offered by Mr. Panetta for

amendment number five offered by mister peneta

uh please call the roll

mister norman

no

mister norman no mister mcclintock

no

mister mcclintock no mister growthman

no

mister growthman no mister smucker mister smucker no mister carter

no

mister carter no mister klein

no

mister klein no mister bergman

no

mister bergman no mister roy mister roy mister stutsman

no

mister stutsman no mister moore of utah

no no no

mister moore of utah no mister estes

no

mister estes no mister brequin

no

mister brequin no mister obernaltey

no

mister obernaltey no mister carey

no

mister carey no mister edwards

no

mister edwards no mister clyde

no

mister clyde no miss houchin

no

miss houchin no mr. mcdowell

no

mr. mcdowell no mr. gill mr. gill no mr. moore of north carolina

no

mr. moore of north carolina no mr. boyle

no hi

mr. boyle aye mr. doggett

uh

mr. doggett aye mr. scott mr. scott aye mr. peters mr. peters aye mr. penetta mr. penetta aye miss watson coleman miss watson coleman aye miss plaskett miss plaskett miss eskobar miss eskobar miss omar miss omar aye miss ballant miss ballant aye miss captor miss captor aye miss jaya Paul miss jaya Paul aye miss choo Mr. Chu, aye. Mr. Tonko, aye.

Aye.

Mr. Tonko, aye. Mr. McGarvey, Mr. McGarvey, aye.

Yes.

Mr. Amo, Mr. Amo, aye.

Aye.

Mr. Chairman.

No.

Mr. Chairman, no.

Are there any members who want to change their vote? If not, clerk, please report.

Mr. Chairman, on the vote there were fourteen ayes and twenty nos.

The nos have it, the amendment's not agreed to. The committee will now move to vote on the amendment offered by Ms. Ballant. Uh, the clerk will redesignate the amendment.

amendment number eight considered sixth offered by miss ballant

please call the roll

mister norman no mister norman no mr. mcclintock no mr. mcclintock no mr. growthman

no

no mister growthman no mr. smucker no

no

mr. smucker no mr. carter no mr. carter no mr. klein no mr. klein no mr. bergman no mr. bergman no mr. roy mr. roy mister sussman no mister sussman no mr. moore of utah no mr. moore of utah no mr. esses no mr. esses no mr. berkeen no mr. brekeen no mr. obernalte mr. obernalte no mr. carey ok so we'll have to get mr. carey no mr. edwards we'll have to get a new card mr. edwards no mr. clyde ok mr. clyde no miss howchin no miss howchin no mr. macdowell mr. howchin no mr. macdowell no mr. macdowell no mr. gill we'll have to get a new card mr. gill no mr. moore north carolina mr. gill no mr. moore north carolina no there's no more cards mr. moore north carolina no mr. boyle mr. moore north carolina no mr. boyle mr. boyle aye mr. doggett mr. boyle aye mr. doggett mr. doggett aye mr. scott mr. dogged aye mr. scott no that's it mr. scott aye mr. peters mr. scott aye mr. peters i'm sorry mr. peters aye mr. panetta mr. peters aye mr. panetta mr. panetta mr. panetta aye miss watson coleman

maybe

miss watson coleman aye miss plaskett

what

miss plaskett miss escobar miss escobar miss omar miss omar aye miss ballant miss ballant aye miss captor miss captor aye miss jia paul miss jia paul aye miss choo miss choo aye mr. tonko mr. tonko aye mr. mcgarvey mr. mcgarvey aye mr. amo mr. amo aye mr. chairman

no

mr. chairman no

any member want change their votes if not uh clerk please report

mister chairman on the vote there were fourteen eyes and twenty no's

the no's have it the amendment's not agreed to the committee will now vote on the amendment offered by miss Watson Coleman the clerk will now redesignate the amendment

amendment number six considered seventh offered by miss Watson Coleman

please call the roll

mister norman

uh no

mister norman no mr. mcclintock

no

mr. mcclintock no mr. growthman

no

mr. growthman no mr. smucker no mr. smucker no mr. carter no no mr. carter no mr. klein no mr. klein no mr. bergman no mr. bergman no mr. roy mr. roy mr. stutsman

no

no mr. stutsman no mr. moore of utah no mr. moore of utah no mr. estes no mr. estes no mr. bernalte no mr. bernalte no mr. obernolte no mr. kerry no no mr. kerry no mr. edwards no mr. edwards no mr. clyde

no

mr. clyde no miss houchin

no

miss houchin no mr. mcdowell

no

mr. mcdowell no mr. gill

no no

mr. gill no mr. moore of north carolina

no

mr. moore of north carolina no mr. boyle

no

mr. boyle aye mr. doggett

no

mr. doggett aye mr. scott

no

mr. scott aye mr. peters

no

mr. peters aye mr. panetta mr. panetta aye miss watson coleman miss watson coleman aye miss plaskett miss plaskett miss escobar miss escobar miss omar miss omar aye miss ballant miss ballant aye miss captor miss captor aye miss jaipal miss jaipal aye miss chu miss chu aye mister tonko mister tonko aye mister mcgarvey mister mcgarvey aye mister amo mister amo aye mister chairman

no

mister chairman no

any member wish to change their vote if not uh please Uh, report out.

Mister Chairman, on the vote there were fourteen ayes and twenty no's.

The no's have it, the amendment's not agreed to, and the committee will now vote on the amendment offered by Miss Omar and the clerk will redesignate the amendment.

Amendment number seven, considered eighth, offered by Miss Omar.

Uh, clerk, please call the roll.

Mister Norman.

Oh, no.

Mister Norman, no. Mister McClintock.

No.

Mister McClintock, no. Mister

No.

Mister Grothman, no. Mister Smucker.

No.

Mister Smucker, no. Mister Carter.

No.

Mister Carter, no. Mister Klein.

No.

Mister Klein, no. Mister Bergman.

Mister No.

Mister Bergman, no. Mister Roy. Mister Roy. Mister Stutzman.

No.

Mister Stutzman, no. Mister Moore of Utah. Mister Moore of Utah, no. Mister Estes.

No.

Mister Estes, no. Mister Brikkeen.

No.

Mister Brikkeen, no. Mister Obernolte.

No.

Mister Obernolte, no. Mister Kerry.

No.

Mister Kerry, no. Mister Edwards.

No.

mr. edwards no mr. clyde

no you're not

mr. clyde no miss houchin

no

miss houchin no mr. mcdowell mr. mcdowell no mr. gill

no

mr. gill no mr. moore north carolina

no

mr. moore north carolina no mr. boyle

aye

mr. boyle aye mr. doggett mr. doggett aye mr. scott

no you're not

mr. scott aye mr. peters

no

mr. peters aye mr. panetta

yes

mr. panetta aye miss walter coleman

aye

miss walter coleman aye miss plaskett miss plaskett miss escobar miss escobar miss omar miss omar aye miss ballant miss ballant aye miss captor miss captor aye miss jaipal miss jaipal aye miss chu miss chu aye Mr. tonko Mr. tonko aye Mr. mcgarvey Mr. mcgarvey aye Mr. amo Mr. amo aye Mr. chairman

no

Mr. chairman no

anyone wish to change their votes if not uh clerk please report

Mister Chairman, on the vote there were fourteen ayes and twenty nos.

The noes have it. The amendment's not agreed to. Committee will now vote on the amendment offered by Miss Capter. The clerk will redesignate the amendment.

Amendment number nine offered by Miss Capter.

Please call the roll.

Mister Norman.

Uh, no.

Mister Norman, no. Mister McClintock.

No.

Mister McClintock, no. Mister Grothman.

No.

Mister Grothman, no. Mister Smucker.

No.

Mister Smucker, no. Mister Carter.

No.

Mister Carter, no. Mister Klein.

No.

Mister Klein, no.

no no

mister bergman no mister roy mister roy mister stutsman mister stutsman

no

mister stutsman no mister moore of utah mister moore of utah no mister estes

no

mister estes no mister berkeen

no

mister berkeen no mister obernoltey

no

mister obernoltey no mister kerry

no

mister kerry no mister edwards

no

mister edwards no mister clyde

negative

mister clyde no miss houchen

no

miss houchen no mister mcdowell

no

mister mcdowell no mr. gill

no

mr. gill no mr. moore of north carolina

no

mr. moore of north carolina no mr. boyle

aye

mr. boyle aye mr. doggett

aye

mr. doggett aye mr. scott

aye

mr. scott aye mr. peters

mr. peter

mr. peters aye mr. pinetta mr. pinetta aye miss watson coleman

aye

miss watson coleman aye miss plaskett miss plaskett miss escobar miss escobar miss omar

aye

miss omar aye miss ballant

aye

miss ballant aye miss cepter Miss Capter, aye. Miss Jayapal.

Aye.

Miss Jayapal, aye. Miss Chiu.

Aye.

Miss Chiu, aye. Mister Tonko. Mister Tonko, aye. Mister McGarvey.

Aye.

Mister McGarvey, aye. Mister Amo.

Aye.

Mister Amo, aye. Mister Chairman.

Chair's no.

Mister Chairman, no.

Anyone wanna change their vote? Uh, clerk, please report.

Mister Chairman, on the vote there were fourteen ayes and twenty nos.

The noes have it, the amendment's not agreed to. The committee will now vote on the amendment offered by Miss Jayapal.

amendment number ten offered by miss gyipal mister norman

no

mister norman no mr. mcclintock

no

mr. mcclintock no mr. growthman

no

mr. growthman no mr. schmucker mr. schmucker no mr. carter

no

mr. carter no mr. klein

no

mr. klein no mr. bergman

no

mr. bergman no mr. roy mr. roy mr. stutsman

no

mr. stutsman no mr. moore of utah Mr. Moore of Utah, no. Mr. Estes.

No.

Mr. Estes, no. Mr. Brickeen.

No.

Mr. Brickeen, no. Mr. Obernolte.

No.

Mr. Obernolte, no. Mr. Carey.

No.

Mr. Carey, no. Mr. Edwards.

No.

Mr. Edwards, no. Mr. Clyde.

Negative.

Mr. Clyde, no. Miss Houchin.

No.

Miss Houchin, no. Miss McDowell.

No.

Mr. McDowell, no. Mr. Gill.

No.

Mr. Gill, no. Mr. Moore of North Carolina.

No.

Mr. Moore of North Carolina, no. Mr. Boyle.

Aye. Aye.

Mr. Boyle, aye. Mr. Doggett.

Aye.

Mr. Doggett, aye. Mr. Scott.

Aye.

mister scott aye mister peters

aye

mister peters aye mister peneta

yes

mister peneta aye miss watson coleman

aye

miss watson coleman aye miss plaskett miss plaskett miss escobar miss escobar miss omar

aye

miss omar aye miss ballant

aye

miss ballant aye miss captor

no

miss captor aye miss jaipal

aye

miss jaipal aye miss chu

aye

miss chu aye mister tanko

aye

mister tanko aye mister mcgarvey

aye

mister mcgarvey aye

aye

mister amo aye mister chairman

miss press no

mister chairman no

anybody wanna change their vote if not please report

mister chairman on the vote there were fourteen ayes and twenty no's

the no's have it the amendment's not agreed to the committee will now vote on amendment offered by miss chew clerk please redesignate the amendment

amendment number eleven offered by miss chew

call the roll

mister norman mister norman no miss

vote

oh

mr. mclintock no mr. growthman

no

mr. growthman no mr. smucker mr. smucker no mr. carter

no

mr. carter no mr. klein

no

mr. klein no mr. bergman

no

mr. bergman no mr. roy mr. roy mr. stutsman

no

mr. stutsman no mr. moore of utah

no

mr. moore of utah no mr. estes

no

mr. estes no mr. berkeen

no

mr. berkeen no mr. obernoltee

no

mr. obernoltee no mr. carey

no

mr. carey no mr. edwards mr. edwards no mr. clyde

no you're not

mr. clyde no miss houchin

yeah

miss houchin no mr. mcdowell

no

mr. mcdowell no mr. gill

no

mr. gill no mr. moore of north carolina

no

mr. moore of north carolina no mr. boyle

aye

mr. boyle aye mr. doggett

aye

mr. doggett aye mr. scott mr. scott aye mr. peters mr. peters aye mr. panetta

yeah

mr. panetta aye miss watson coleman

aye

miss watson coleman aye miss plaskett miss plaskett miss escobar miss escobar miss omar miss omar aye miss ballant miss ballant aye miss captor miss captor aye miss jaipal

I said what it was like.

miss jaipal aye miss chu miss chu aye mister tonko mister tonko aye mister mcgarvey mister mcgarvey aye mister amo mister amo aye mister chairman

Chair's no

mister chairman no

anyone wish to change their vote if not

Mister Chairman, on the vote there were fourteen ayes and twenty noes.

The noes have it. Uh, the amendment is not agreed to. The committee will now vote on the amendment offered by Mister Tonko. And, uh, the clerk will redesignate the amendment and call the roll.

Amendment number twelve, offered by Mister Tonko. Mister Norman.

No. No, for Tonko.

Mister Norman, no. Mister McClintock. Mister McClintock, no. Mister Grothman. Mister Grothman, no. Mister. mr. smucker no mr. carter

smucker yeah

mr. carter no mr. klein

no

mr. klein no mr. bergman

no no

mr. bergman no mr. roy mr. roy

texas

mr. stutsman mr. stutsman no mr. moore of utah

no

mr. moore of utah no mr. estes

no

mr. estes no mr. berkeen

no

mr. berkeen no mr. obernaltey

no

mr. obernaltey no mr. carey

no

mr. carey no mr. edwards

no

mr. edwards no mr. clyde

nice

mr. clyde no miss houchin no mr. McDowell

no

mr. McDowell no mr. gill mr. mcgill mr. gill no mr. moore of north carolina

no

mr. moore of north carolina no mr. boyle

aye

mr. boyle aye mr. doggett

aye

mr. doggett aye mr. scott

aye

mr. scott aye mr. peters

i don't need this

mr. peters aye mr. penetta mr. penetta aye miss watson coleman miss watson coleman aye miss plaskett

oh ok

miss plaskett miss escobar miss escobar miss omar so if we have miss omar aye miss ballant we just have to have two voices so miss ballant aye miss captor so then we can see if that case was miss captor aye miss jaipal miss jaipal aye miss chu so then we can see if that case was miss chu aye mr. tonko

aye

mr. tonko aye mr. mcgarvey mr. mcgarvey aye mr. amo mr. amo aye mr. chairman

no

mr. chairman no

if no members wanna change their vote then uh clerk please report

On the vote there were fourteen ayes and twenty noes.

The noes have it, the amendment is not agreed to. The committee will now vote on the amendment offered by my friend, Mister Garvey, the clerk will now redesignate the amendment.

Amendment number thirteen offered by Mister McGarvey.

Please call the roll.

Mister Norman.

No, good.

Mister Norman, no. Mister McClintock.

No, good, good.

Mister McClintock, no. Mister Grothman.

No.

Mister Grothman, no. Mister Smucker.

No. No.

Mister Smucker, no. mister carter nod mister carter no mister klein no mister klein no mister bergman jim no mister bergman no that's right mister roy say right after this mister roy after this though i can mister stutsman no

no

say in my mister stutsman no mister moore of utah so yeah mister moore of utah no mister estes oh did you know you were gonna say jim mister estes no i think you were gonna say mister brykeen i am not sure mister brykeen no mister obernolte

no

mr. O'neill mr. carey no mr. edwards

no

no mr. edwards no mr. clive so so no so

hey

mr. clive no miss houchin miss houchin no so

ok

miss houchin no mr. mcdowell great you are mr. mcdowell no mr. gill that's excellent mr. gill no mr. moore of north carolina no mr. moore of north carolina no mr. boyle aye mr. boyle aye mr. doggett aye mr. doggett aye mr. scott mr. scott aye mr. peters mr. peters aye mr. penetta mr. penetta aye miss watson coleman miss watson coleman aye miss plaskett miss plaskett miss escobar miss escobar miss omar miss omar aye miss ballant miss ballant aye miss captor

aye

miss captor aye miss jia paul miss jia paul aye miss choo

aye

miss choo aye mr. tonkoe

aye

mr. tonko aye mr. mcgarvey

aye

mr. mcgarvey aye mr. amo

aye

mr. amo aye mr. chairman

No.

Mister Chairman, no.

Right.

Anyone wish to change their vote? If not, clerk please report.

Mister Chairman, on the vote there were fourteen ayes and twenty noes.

The noes have it, the amendments not agreed to. The committee will now vote on the amendment offered by Mister Amo. Please redesignate the amendment.

Amendment number fourteen offered by Mister Amo.

Uh, call the roll, please.

Mister Norman.

No.

mr. norman no mr. mcclintock no mr. mcclintock no mr. growthman no mr. growthman no mr. smucker mr. growthman no mr. smucker no mr. smucker no mr. carter mr. smucker no mr. carter no mr. carter no mr. klein mr. carter no mr. klein no mr. klein no mr. bergman mr. klein no mr. bergman no mr. bergman no mr. roy mr. bergman no mr. roy mr. roy mr. roy no no mr. stutsman mr. stutsman mr. stutsman no mr. moore of utah mr. stutsman no no mr. moore of utah no mr. estes no mr. estes no mr. bernalte no no mr. bernalte no mr. carey no no mr. carey no mr. edwards no mr. edwards no mr. clyde negative mr. clyde no miss houchin mr. clyde no miss houchin no miss houchin no mr. mcdowell miss houchin no mr. mcdowell no mr. mcdowell no mr. gill mr. mcdowell no mr. gill no mr. gill no mr. moore of north carolina mr. gill no mr. moore of north carolina no mr. moore of north carolina no mr. boyle mr. moore of north carolina no mr. boyle aye mr. boyle aye mr. doggett mr. boyle aye mr. doggett aye mr. doggett aye mr. scott mr. doggett aye mr. scott aye mr. scott aye mr. peters mr. scott aye mr. peters aye mr. peters aye mr. panetta mr. peters aye mr. panetta no yeah mr. panetta aye miss watson coleman mr. panetta aye miss watson coleman miss watson coleman aye miss plaskett miss watson coleman aye miss plaskett miss plaskett miss plaskett miss escobar miss escobar miss omar

aye

miss omar aye miss ballant

aye

miss ballant aye miss captor

aye

miss captor aye miss jaipal

aye

miss jaipal aye miss shu

aye

miss shu aye mister tonko mister tonko aye mister mcgarvey

aye

mister mcgarvey aye mister amo

aye

mister amo aye mister chairman

no

mister chairman no

any member wish to change their vote if not uh bert please report

mr. chairman On the vote there were fourteen ayes and twenty noes.

The noes have it. The amendment is not agreed to and since there are no further amendments, I recognize the Vice Chairman, Mister Schmucker from Pennsylvania.

Sorry about that. I move the committee adopt the budget aggregates, functional categories and other appropriate matters.

Questions on the

aye aye aye

those opposed no

no no

in the opinion of the of the chair the ayes have it pursuant to committee rule ten I now call up the text of the concurrent resolution on the budget the legislative text incorporates the budget aggregates functional levels and other relevant items as previously agreed to I recognize vice chairman mister schmucker for a motion to order the concurrent resolution reported to the house

Mr. Chairman,

Questions on ordering the concurrent resolution on the budget to be favorably reported to the house. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Those opposed no.

No.

No.

No.

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.

Request to report a vote.

Um, Mister Clerk, um, call the roll.

Good.

Mister Norman.

Yes.

Mister Norman, aye. Mister McCliff.

aye

mr. mcclintock aye mr. growthman

why i didn't see

mr. growthman aye mr. smucker

aye

mr. smucker aye mr. carter

aye

mr. carter aye mr. klein

aye

mr. klein aye mr. bergman

aye

mr. bergman aye mr. roy mr. roy mr. stutsman

aye

mr. stutsman aye mr. moore of utah

aye

mr. moore of utah aye mr. estes

aye

mr. estes aye mr. berkeen

yes

mr. berkeen aye mr. obernolte

oh

mr. obernolte aye mr. carey mr. carey aye mr. edwards mr. edwards aye mr. clive mr. clive aye miss howchun miss howchun aye mr. McDowell mr. McDowell aye mr. gill mr. gill aye mr. moore of north carolina mr. moore of north carolina aye mr. boyle

no

mr. boyle no mr. doggett mr. doggett no mr. scott

no

mr. scott no mr. peters mr. peters no mr. penetta mr. penetta no miss watson coleman miss watson coleman no miss plaskett miss plaskett

all right

miss escobar miss escobar miss omar

no

miss omar no miss ballant

no

miss ballant no miss captor

no

miss captor no miss jaipal

my brother no

miss jaipal no miss chu

no

miss chu no mr. tanko

no

mr. tanko no mr. mcgarvey

no

mr. mcgarvey no mr. amo Mister Amo, no. Mister Chairman.

We done? Yes.

Yes.

Mister Chairman, aye.

Any member wish to change their vote or a member who hasn't voted, if not, clerk please report.

Mister Chairman, on the vote there were twenty ayes and fourteen noes.

The ayes have it and the motion is to agree to the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year twenty twenty seven and it's ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives. I note for the

Up, Mr. Chairman, uh, I ask for the requisite Ah, you can hear me. I ask for the requisite number of days to submit minorities, the requested grant.

The the request is granted.

You are Here, read this now.

I note for the record that the quorum is present. I recognize Vice Chairman, Mister Spuck, Smucker of Pennsylvania.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that staff are authorized to make

That objection is so ordered. Good job. Thank you.

I don't I don't wanna hear anything. I'll go here. Yeah.

He's supposed to

This concludes.

Alright, I gotta get out of the way.

Uh, as the Vice Chairman uh, or not Vice Chairman,

Right.

Ranking Member uh leaves, me thank him especially with my colleagues present we could not have done this it could have gone on day they have that basically control over that process he was willing to do this in an expeditious fashion continues to set a great tone not only for this committee but for the united states congress and for that uh uh i'm very grateful for his friendship and his leadership so thank you mister uh ranking member boyle and that concludes today's

thank you

business of the house budget committee I wanna thank everybody for their cooperation. God bless America. The committee stands adjourned.