Providing for Consideration of H.R. Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, Agriculture, Rural Development, Energy and Water Development, Financial Services and General Government, Interior, Environment, Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Act, and for Other Purposes

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, by the direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 555 and ask for its immediate consideration.

The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: H. Res. 555

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 4502) making appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2022, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. An amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 117-12, modified by the amendment printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective designees; (2) the further amendments described in section 2 of this resolution; (3) the amendments en bloc described in section 3 of this resolution; and (4) one motion to recommit.

Sec. 2. After debate pursuant to the first section of this resolution, each further amendment printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules not earlier considered as part of amendments en bloc pursuant to section 3 of this resolution shall be considered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, may be withdrawn by the proponent at any time before the question is put thereon, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question.

Sec. 3. It shall be in order at any time after debate pursuant to the first section of this resolution for the chair of the Committee on Appropriations or her designee to offer amendments en bloc consisting of further amendments printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution not earlier disposed of. Amendments en bloc offered pursuant to this section shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 30 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective designees, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question.

Sec. 4. All points of order against the further amendments printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules or amendments en bloc described in section 3 of this resolution are waived.

Sec. 5. House Resolution 188, agreed to March 8, 2021 (as most recently amended by House Resolution 508, agreed to June 30, 2021), is amended by striking "July 30, 2021" each place it appears and inserting (in each instance) "September 22, 2021".

Sec. 6. (a) At any time through the legislative day of Friday, July 30, 2021, the Speaker may entertain motions offered by the Majority Leader or a designee that the House suspend the rules as though under clause 1 of rule XV with respect to multiple measures described in subsection (b), and the Chair shall put the question on any such motion without debate or intervening motion.

(b) A measure referred to in subsection (a) includes any measure that was the object of a motion to suspend the rules on the legislative day of July 26, 2021, or July 27, 2021, in the form as so offered, on which the yeas and nays were ordered and further proceedings postponed pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX.

(c) Upon the offering of a motion pursuant to subsection (a) concerning multiple measures, the ordering of the yeas and nays on postponed motions to suspend the rules with respect to such measures is vacated to the end that all such motions are considered as withdrawn.

Sec. 7. Notwithstanding clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on a vote by the yeas and nays on the question of adoption of a motion that the House suspend the rules offered on the legislative day of July 26, 2021, or July 27, 2021, may continue to be postponed through the legislative day of September 22, 2021.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, yesterday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 555. The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 4502, the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, Agriculture, Rural Development, Energy and Water Development, Financial Services and General Government, Interior, Environment, Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Act, 2022, under a structured rule.

The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their designees. The rule self-executes a manager's amendment from Chairwoman DeLauro, makes in order 229 amendments, provides en bloc authority for the chairwoman or her designee, and provides one motion to recommit.

The rule provides the majority leader, or his designee, the ability through July 30 to en bloc requested roll call votes on suspension bills considered on July 26 or 27.

The rule also provides that requested roll call votes on suspension bills considered on July 26 or 27 may be postponed through September 22, 2021.

Finally, the rule amends H. Res. 188 to provide recess instructions, suspension authority, and same day authority through September 22, 2021.

Madam Speaker, if you care about protecting our seniors and taking care of our veterans and military families; if you care about fighting climate change and combating gun violence; if you care about closing health disparities and creating good paying jobs; and if you care about our economy not only rebounding from the COVID pandemic, but being strengthened for years to come, then the underlying measure is a lifeline. Because these seven appropriations measures provide landmark funding to deal with our Nation's most pressing issues.

It turns the page on an era where the prior administration demanded disinvestment in seemingly everything that helped all but the wealthiest of the wealthy. And now we are working with the Biden administration to stand up for our workers and to rebuild the middle class.

It is no secret that the appropriations process can seem a little arcane. But this measure is truly historic, Madam Speaker.

I want to make two points here in particular. First is what is not in here. Finally, after more than 40 years, the Hyde amendment is nowhere to be found. And let me say, it is about damn time. Because however we feel about abortion, we should not deny health coverage just because someone is working to make ends meet.

More than half of the women affected by the Hyde amendment are women of color. Nearly one-third are Black, 27 percent are Latina, and one- fifth are Asian American and Pacific Islanders, as well as indigenous women also covered by Medicaid.

That is what inequality looks like, Madam Speaker, and I am proud that we are confronting it. The decision about whether to get an abortion is a deeply personal one. We don't know the circumstances. But I do know this: we should not defer to the politicians and special interest groups who want to impose their values on others. We should trust women and families to make their own decisions about what is best for them.

It is about justice. It is about freedom. And it is about respecting women's personal autonomy.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Rosa DeLauro for leading the way on this, and I want to recognize the many Congresswomen, in particular, who have waged a sometimes lonely battle year after year after year to make this day a reality.

Second, Madam Speaker, I want to recognize language that is included here, which will help combat hunger across America. This measure expands access to healthy foods like fruits and vegetables to more than 6 million people through the WIC program. It ensures that more than 40 million people in SNAP-eligible families get benefits that they desperately need. And it also makes key investments in child nutrition programs, like school meals. This is incredibly important since we all saw the COVID crisis lay bare the truth about hunger in America.

The lines outside our food banks included some of the most affluent cars from the wealthiest neighborhoods, because no one is immune from food insecurity.

It is an epidemic in every State and every congressional district in this country. Even before the COVID pandemic hit, there were more than 35 million people who were going hungry in this country, including 10 million children.

The United States is the richest country on the face of the Earth. That anybody--anybody--goes without food is unconscionable, Madam Speaker.

I have often said that we have everything we need to end hunger in America. We have the food, the know-how, and, yes, the money. The only thing we lack is the political will. Hunger is a political condition.

I think that is finally beginning to change, Madam Speaker.

For the last several months, the Rules Committee has acted as a kind of select committee on hunger, holding hearings, roundtables, and site visits, all to develop a road map to eradicate hunger in this country by 2030, as the United Nations has called for.

I am more convinced than ever that, with a holistic approach and the full weight of the Federal Government, a hunger-free America is within our grasp.

This rule makes in order my bipartisan amendment to provide $2.5 million for a White House conference on food, nutrition, hunger, and health. The conference will bring together the heads of food banks, hospitals, government agencies, educators, farmers, the faith-based community, people with lived experiences, our business community, anybody who has anything to do with finding a solution, not to hold an event that is essentially a press release, but to develop a real plan to tackle this, something with benchmarks that better connects the dots between all the different Federal programs and expands successful local and State initiatives.

The first and only time such a conference was held was the same year we put a man on the Moon, over 52 years ago. It developed and strengthened many programs we still rely on, like SNAP, WIC, and the National School Lunch Program.

A hunger conference for the 21st century can finish what was started so many decades ago by Senators George McGovern, Senator Bob Dole, and others.

Senator Dole wrote to Ranking Member Cole and me recently, saying: ``I remain proud of the work Senator McGovern and I did then, and I endorse your effort to secure a second White House conference to identify the next frontier of programs to finally end hunger in America.''

I believe we can do big things, and I hope that we can do them in a bipartisan way.

Madam Speaker, we can combat hunger; we can confront climate change; we can stand up for women's reproductive rights; and we can take care of the most vulnerable among us. This bill is proof of that.

I urge all of my colleagues to join with us in supporting this rule and the underlying measure so that we can build a more just and equitable future for every single American.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, before I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Morelle), I want to point out, for the record, the last time we had a government shutdown was when we had a Republican Congress and a Republican President, so I am not so much worried about that.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Morelle), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a July 14 Media Matters article entitled, ``FOX News' Obsession with Critical Race Theory, by the Numbers.'' [From Media Matters, July 14, 2021] Fox News' Obsession With Critical Race Theory, by the Numbers (By Lis Power)

Update (7/14/21): Following the publication of this study, Media Matters continued to track mentions of ``critical race theory'' on Fox News. In June, there were 901 mentions on the network, the highest number of any month and an increase from 537 mentions in May. In the past 3\1/2\ months there have been over 1,900 mentions of critical race theory on the network. Original Study

Critical race theory, to those who can actually define it, is an academic and legal framework that examines the impact of systemic racism on American society. For conservatives however, it's the latest boogeyman they can use to scare people into thinking America's children are being ``indoctrinated'' by ``woke'' leftist teachers. And while that is not even remotely the case, this idea is exploding on Fox News and in Republican-run state legislatures, leading to legislative bans in many states and skyrocketing mentions of critical race theory on the network.

As Media Matters has previously noted, Fox News' current obsession with ``critical race theory'' has been a year in making. What once was a slow trickle of monthly mentions has developed into a full blown assault. Since February, month over month mentions of the theory have more than doubled on Fox News as the network has begun to spin an illusion of what it is and where it's being taught (in reality, critical race theory is not generally taught in K-12). Coverage of the theory sharply increased in March, with 107 mentions on the network according to data from Kinetiq media monitoring service. The following month, network figures and guests mentioned it 226 times, and by May, the number had increased to 537 mentions. Not even halfway through June, there's already been 408 mentions on the network.

Just last week, Fox mentioned ``critical race theory'' a record 244 times--an increase from the previous record high of 170 mentions the week before.

Fox has admitted its reason for this souped-up coverage: the 2022 midterm elections. And in order to drum up outrage, the network has repeatedly amplified a lie that critical race theory teaches that one race is ``inherently superior to another.'' More recently, in its continued efforts to demonize it, Fox News has promoted a pamphlet that echoes the white nationalist ``Great Replacement'' conspiracy theory.

Fox's obsession with what it defines as ``critical race theory'' has frequently crossed the threshold into the absurd and overly dramatic. Fox host Tucker Carlson called it ``a cult,'' while host Will Cain said it is ``modern-day Jim Crow.'' Fox contributor Miranda Devine claimed that teaching the theory would ``warp the minds of American children'' and ``is a recipe for social upheaval and mental illness.'' Fox's Newt Gingrich said it was being driven by ``people who want to brainwash your child.''

By labeling everything that has to do with race ``critical race theory,'' Fox is attempting to shut down conversations about race and racism--which is ironic given the network's claims that it champions free speech. And even though many conservatives who lambast it don't have a clue what the theory actually is, their efforts are working as 21 states are either introducing bans or have banned what they call ``critical race theory.'' Many educators in those states have argued that the bills and laws would essentially ``whitewash history'' and have criticized legislators for making it difficult to have necessary conversations about race. Methodology

Media Matters searched transcripts in the Kinetiq video database for all original programming on Fox News Channel for the key phrase ``critical race theory'' from June 2020 through June 13, 2021. We counted each instance of the phrase as a single mention.

Methodology update (7/14/21): Data now includes midnight episodes of Fox News @ Night (which recently shifted its time slot) and all new programming from June 14 through July 11, 2021.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, apparently my Republican friends and their allies in the media need a new scare tactic because they don't want to talk about things like the economy or how we put people back to work or how we crushed the virus. But we are not going to debate on whether racism exists in America because it does.

We are not going to debate whether we should teach our kids racism is wrong. We should.

We are not going to debate whether individual States and schools can decide what their kids learn. They can.

And we sure as hell are not going to be lectured about racism by the party that is trying to dismantle the Voting Rights Act that Martin Luther King and John Lewis paid for with their blood.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Roybal-Allard), the distinguished chairwoman of the Committee on Appropriations' Subcommittee on Homeland Security.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, think about what we are dealing with as we gather here on the House floor. We have a pandemic that we are trying to crush, we have a crumbling infrastructure, and what do my friends want to talk about? A FOX News talking point.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a July 23 ABC News article entitled: ``Martin Luther King, Jr., the KKK, and More May Soon Be Cut from Texas Education Requirements.'' [From ABC News, July 23, 2021] Martin Luther King, Jr., the KKK, and More May Soon Be Cut From Texas Education Requirement (By Kiara Alfonseca)

Some lessons on the civil rights movement, white supremacy, the women's suffrage movement and Martin Luther King Jr. may soon be cut from Texas' public education requirements, according to legislation being considered in the state--one of several bills targeting critical race theory around the country.

The Texas Senate has passed Senate Bill 3 in a continued effort to proscribe education on racial inequality in K-12 education. It removes several Texas Education Code lesson requirements that were proposed by Democrats in prior education legislation to be implemented in the upcoming school year. It also stipulates that lessons cannot teach that ``one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex'' or make students ``feel discomfort, guilt, [or] anguish'' about privilege or systemic racism.

The concept critical race theory, an academic discipline that analyzes how racism is perpetuated in U.S. laws and policies, has become a lightning rod for conservatives around the country amid the racial reckoning spurred by George Floyd's death.

At least 26 other states have introduced or implemented similar legislation on race education by Republican lawmakers, echoing concerns about racial division.

Opponents say that children should not be made to feel responsible for past injustices based solely on the color of their skin or be forced to accept the idea that the United States and its institutions are not only structured racially but perpetuate that racism.

Some teachers interviewed by ABC News have said critical race theory isn't being taught in grades K-12 and instead is reserved for academic institutions. Some Texas educators told ABC they believe the fight against ``critical race theory'' is a veiled attempt to turn back the clock on racial equality.

The new legislation, SB3, would remove several staples of U.S. history education from state requirements, according to Ovidia Molina, the president of the Texas State Teachers Association.

The state currently requires teaching ``the history of white supremacy,'' ``the institution of slavery, the eugenics movement, and the Ku Klux Klan, and the ways in which it is morally wrong; the Chicano movement; women's suffrage and equal rights; the civil rights movement'' and more.

However, SB3 would cut those requirements--a move that some teachers say signals a growing effort to remove specific lessons from classrooms.

``Specifically editing out that you can't teach that white supremacy is morally wrong--that is deeply concerning,'' said Jennifer Lee, a teacher in Killeen, Texas. ``I think the angle here is just . . . preserving the ideals behind white supremacy.''

Though the new legislation doesn't necessarily ban these lessons from being taught, removing them from the list of requirements means they may come under scrutiny due to the vague, anticritical race theory language of this bill.

Gov. Greg Abbott already signed anti-critical race theory into law in June with HB3979--stating that teachers are banned from linking systemic racism to the ``authentic founding principles of the United States.'' But teachers and advocates say it is so vague that it could infringe on their ability to have truthful dialogue about history and racism with their students.

SB3 was added to the state legislature's special session after Abbott signed HB3979 into law, saying said ``more must be done'' on critical race theory in schools.

And SB3 has been called troubling by education groups including the National Education Association for its potential to censor teachers and students in the classroom. `Provide guardrails' against `animosity'

Defenders of the bill, including Republican state Sen. Bryan Hughes who sponsored the bill, say that some lessons on racial inequality blame white students for systemic racism and creates tension between students of different backgrounds.

``This bill is meant only to provide guardrails against imposing division and animosity on our students,'' Hughes said before the July 16 Senate vote. ``Since [critical race theory] is so prevalent in higher education and since we see it popping up in public schools, that's why it needs to be addressed.''

Other proponents of anti-critical race theory bills, such as Florida Gov. Ron Desantis, have said that some lessons on race could lead to the ``indoctrination'' of public school students toward progressive political leanings.

Ovidia Molina, the president of the Texas State Teachers Association, said that students have so much to gain from education about America's racial history, including those that would be erased by this new legislation.

``We want to keep honesty in education,'' Molina said. ``We want to make sure that we teach our students the truth, the whole truth, the good, the bad, the failures, the successes.''

Molina said teachers have spoken up at hearings and called their local legislators to denounce the new legislation--but said lawmakers are not listening.

``They don't know what's happening in our public schools,'' Molina said. ``We still want to celebrate women's suffrage, we still want to celebrate the Chicano movement, we still want to celebrate people of color, so that our students see themselves in the history and so they see themselves in the future.''

The Texas Education Agency did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Molina said that Texas districts have yet to announce what punishment for teaching these subjects might look like for teachers. Concerning shift toward `patriotic' education

Some teachers told ABC they are worried about retaliation, termination, or other forms of punishment. But others are more concerned about what this shift toward more ``patriotic'' education means for their students.

``One of the first things Hitler did was start to reform education and impact the way that history is taught. One of the first things Mussolini did was go through and incorporate patriotic education,'' Lee said. ``Education has always been that first line of defense in preserving a certain way of thinking.''

Former President Donald Trump, among several other conservatives, have become proponents of ``patriotic'' education in response to critical race theory and The New York Times' 1619 project--which dissects the founding of the United States of America and its legacy of slavery. Trump's proposed ``1776 commission'' aims to envision U.S. history in a positive light, instead of through a condemnatory, racial lens.

A school bus is seen outside Condit Elementary School in Bellaire, Texas, on Dec. 16, 2020. San Antonio teacher Christopher Green said he believes that lessons on race, inequality and oppression are vital to helping children navigate the world and understand our society.

``Rather than adding a more diverse perspective to the teaching of history, it's eliminating things that really need to be in there to understand the full picture of the American story,'' Green said.

The bill will now be headed to the state House, but it will likely be stalled due to protests from Texas Democratic representatives. They have fled the state in protest of new voting restrictions, meaning there won't be enough members to conduct business according to House rules.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, many of my Republican colleagues think they can interfere with everything from what our teachers teach in school to what happens between women and their doctors.

This is from the party who pretends to be the party of local government. One of my colleagues on the Republican side in an interview yesterday said that we should have cameras in the classroom to monitor what teachers do every single minute. So the party that claims to be the party of liberty and the party of local government wants to be the party of super-big government and control everybody's life.

Give me a break. Let me close with that.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Ross), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from North Carolina.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Let me just say that I think that it will be a lot easier for us to be able to accommodate the gentleman if he could control members of his own party from trying to disrupt and derail everything that we try to do here.

Suspension votes, which are really pretty noncontroversial, that usually pass overwhelmingly, we have had to impose a new rule to be able to consider them in order to be able to overcome their objection to every single one of them. And now they are even objecting to that; bipartisan bills, Republican bills.

Unfortunately, there is a concerted effort on behalf of some in the minority to try to stop all of the people's business, and we are going to move forward and get the people's business done. That is what we are doing here today, and we will continue to do that.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Trone).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, we can talk about polls. I have a poll here that just recently came out that shows the exact opposite of that.

But rather than talk about polls, we should be talking about values, and a majority of Americans believe that women should not be denied reproductive healthcare because they can't afford it. They believe that people should not be denied healthcare because, you know, they are working hard to try to make ends meet.

So, I mean, here's a poll that just came out that shows the exact opposite of that, an overwhelming majority of Americans believe that Medicaid should, in fact, cover women's reproductive healthcare.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I am very proud of this process. The shameful process was when my friend's party was in control of the House and the White House, and they shut the government down. That is what people don't want to see happen ever again.

By the way, I mean, these bills do things like tackle hunger, they lift up our rural communities, they rebuild health and safety infrastructure, they invest incredibly important dollars in the National Institutes of Health and medical research to try to find cures for everything from Alzheimer's to Parkinson's disease, to get a better handle on how we can deal with future pandemics. It creates and sustains good-paying jobs, it grows opportunities through education. It advances equal treatment for women.

There are so many important, good things in here that, by the way, I think are bipartisan everywhere in the country but in this Chamber, and so this is what the American people want. This is what they voted for. I am proud of the Appropriations Committee, Chairwoman DeLauro, and all of those who put the American people front and center on our agenda.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Lois Frankel).

Ms. LOIS FRANKEL of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this bill that invests in the love and commitment we have for our families, from the very young to the very old.

It gets our children off to a good start with historic funding for pre-K and child care, and makes sure all children have access to high- quality public education regardless of their ZIP Code.

We want our children to have a chance to live out their dreams, so we make unprecedented investments in Pell grants for college students, including DACA recipients.

And our grandparents have given us so much. To help them age with dignity and comfort, the bill increases funding for home and community- based services and research on Alzheimer's and other conditions that impact older Americans.

And, of course, we want our families to be safe and healthy, so this bill doubles funding for research on gun violence, pluses-up mental health treatment, and makes historic investments in combatting climate change and protecting Florida's Everglades, drinking water for millions.

And this is a country that honors our veterans. I am proud to champion Centers of Excellence for Student Veteran Success programs that help veterans transition from Active Duty to civilian student life.

And today we celebrate reproductive freedom with historic investments in Title X Family Planning program, which provides health service to millions of low-income patients in our most underserved communities, and we eliminate provisions blocking the use of Medicaid funding for abortion.

No matter how we feel about abortion, politicians should not deny someone's health coverage just because they are struggling financially. Women must have the freedom to decide when and if to become a parent. This is monumental.

This is a bill filled with love and hope and justice that lifts up our families. I am proud to support it.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

People always ask: Why don't you work together? How do you work with that? To come down here and to lecture us about deficits or about budgets, give me a break.

When the gentleman's party was in power, when they controlled the House, the Senate, and the White House, they gave us a $2 trillion debt because of a tax cut that went to wealthy people, to big corporations.

When they controlled the House, the Senate, and the White House, they shut the government down. They couldn't even agree amongst themselves. It was the first time in history that we ended a Congress with a government shutdown.

When they lost power, they gave Democrats a government that was shut down. We had to clean up the mess, and we continue to do that.

In all of the years of disinvestment when they were in charge with Donald Trump, we are now trying to put the people first. That is what this is about.

I am proud of this bill. I am proud of the investments in medical research, in our families, in our children, in our senior citizens, and in our veterans. That is what this is all about. These bills are being brought to the floor.

I hate to tell the gentleman that is what we are doing; they are coming to the floor. He can vote ``no'' on them and go home and explain to his constituents why he voted against their interests, but that is what we are doing.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, earlier I referred to when one of my Republican colleagues came to the floor and had a meltdown. I commented: How do you work with that? Coming to the floor and yelling and screaming and scolding and distorting and trying to find the worst possible version of everything, that never accomplishes anything. It never does.

Madam Speaker, I would never characterize my colleague from Oklahoma that way. When we get to a final product, he will be part of the solution because he respects this institution, and he understands the importance of give and take. We have some very strong disagreements in the Rules Committee but I never question his integrity, and he never questions my integrity or anybody else's on the committee. I wish there were more people like him, quite frankly, in this Chamber.

Madam Speaker, to hear some of my friends on the other side today, you would think that the sky is falling.

What is so controversial about trusting women to make their own healthcare decisions, free from politicians and special interest groups trying to control them?

What is so controversial about confronting climate change, or making America the world's clean energy superpower?

Or helping our farmers in our rural communities?

Or making sure our veterans have the support and the care that they have earned when they return home?

Apparently, since Democrats proposed it, this minibus is a bridge too far for some. But I have to tell you, to most Americans, what is included here is just common sense.

I am proud that we are doing our work and keeping our government funded, and doing so in a way that respects women's autonomy and builds a more just and equitable future.

Madam Speaker, too many of these issues can't wait another day, another year, another decade for us to act, so I urge all of my colleagues to support this rule and this minibus so that we can meet the scale of the challenges that we face today and put the building blocks in place to grow our economy for years to come. That is what these bills are all about.

Someone earlier described them as bills filled with hope and love. They are. This is about putting our families first. This is about respecting our kids, understanding that our children are 100 percent of our future. This is about understanding that we have a climate crisis, and we have to do something about it. This is about respecting equity and justice and things that, quite frankly, should be shared values.

Madam Speaker, I know that there are some disagreements here. We will all get through this, work it out, and get to a conclusion, but the final product will be much, much better because of what we are doing on this House floor today.

Madam Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bill.

The material previously referred to by Mr. Cole is as follows: Amendment to House Resolution 555

At the end of the resolution, add the following:

Sec. 8. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the bill (H.R. 4698) to prevent the use of Federal funds to advance discriminatory concepts, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The bill shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and on any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Labor; and (2) one motion to recommit.

Sec. 9. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the consideration of H.R. 4698.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source