Emergency Security Supplemental to Respond to January 6th Appropriations Act, 2021
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. WOMACK. Madam Speaker, before I get to my prepared remarks, let me just respond to my friend from Ohio. When he speaks, he makes it sound like that what went on here yesterday on the vote on the 1/6 commission was not bipartisan.
Let me remind the gentleman that the work of John Katko on our side and Bennie Thompson on the Democratic side was absolutely bipartisan. There was a give-and-take for both sides. When the final vote was taken yesterday, yes, there were only 35 Republican votes, but I think that would qualify as a bipartisan vote yesterday. So to categorically suggest to the people who might be listening or watching today that that was one-sided is certainly inaccurate.
I agree with my friend from Washington that we need a better idea of how we are going to spend money before we do what Washington always does, and that is just throw a lot of money at the problem. So, naturally, I rise in opposition to this partisan security supplemental. It is certainly not bipartisan in its workup because there hasn't been any negotiation, as we saw with Mr. Thompson and Mr. Katko yesterday.
This is just my opinion, but I believe that one of the biggest failures that led to what happened on 1/6 was a failure to act on intelligence that we knew. I supported that bipartisan commission because I want to see the intelligence. I want to see what was being said by all of our experts in the run-up to 1/6. I think part of the problem on January 6 was the fact that we did not act on intelligence that we knew.
If the National Guard was needed, there is a protocol in place to activate the National Guard.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. WOMACK. There is a protocol in place. We ought to exercise it. The way you do it is you act on intelligence.
I also oppose creating the $250 million slush fund for future unknown costs. Let's understand what our security needs are before we throw a bunch of money at the problem.
It also includes funding for the judiciary and the District of Columbia that is unrelated to the January 6 attacks. The security of our Federal courts is extremely important, but that can be addressed through the regular appropriations process. We ought to do that.
Finally, I am disappointed the bill was not marked up by the Appropriations Committee and that the majority has prohibited amendments to improve the bill.
Madam Speaker, it is not going to surprise you or anybody else that I am not a big fan of this bill. I urge a ``no'' vote. Let's go back to the drawing board. Let's bring some sanity back to this process.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source