Providing for Consideration of H.R. Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, and Providing for Consideration of H.R. No Funds for Iranian Terrorism Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. MASSIE. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 869 and ask for its immediate consideration.

The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: H. Res. 869

Resolved, That at any time after adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 5893) making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce and Justice, Science, and Related Agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective designees. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. An amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 118-12 shall be considered as adopted in the House and in the Committee of the Whole. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as the original bill for the purpose of further amendment under the five-minute rule and shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived.

Sec. 2. (a) No further amendment to H.R. 5893, as amended, shall be in order except those printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, amendments en bloc described in section 3 of this resolution, and pro forma amendments described in section 4 of this resolution.

(b) Each further amendment printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules 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, shall not be subject to amendment except as provided by section 4 of this resolution, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole.

(c) All points of order against further amendments printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules or against amendments en bloc described in section 3 of this resolution are waived.

Sec. 3. It shall be in order at any time for the chair of the Committee on Appropriations or her designee to offer amendments en bloc consisting of further amendments printed in part A 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 20 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 except as provided by section 4 of this resolution, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole.

Sec. 4. During consideration of H.R. 5893 for amendment, the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective designees may offer up to 10 pro forma amendments each at any point for the purpose of debate.

Sec. 5. At the conclusion of consideration of H.R. 5893 for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill, as amended, to the House with such further amendments as may have been adopted. 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 one motion to recommit.

Sec. 6. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 5961) to freeze certain Iranian funds involved in the 2023 hostage deal between the United States and Iran, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. In lieu of the amendment recommended by the Committee on Foreign Affairs now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 118-14, modified by the amendment printed in part B 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 Foreign Affairs or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. MASSIE. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the ranking member of the Rules Committee, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), 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. MASSIE. House Resolution 869 provides for a structured rule for consideration of H.R. 5893, the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act and a closed rule, H.R. 5961, the No Funds for Iranian Terrorism Act.

We have a structured rule for H.R. 5893, which makes in order 119 amendments for consideration on the floor. This rule provides the chair and the ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations limited en bloc authority and provides one motion to recommit.

We have a closed rule for H.R. 5961. Debate for this bill will be evenly divided over 1 hour between the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the rule provides one motion to recommit.

Madam Speaker, I urge Members to support House Resolution 869 in the spirit in which it was created, one that allows for robust debate and gives Members the opportunity to submit amendments for consideration on this floor, as many amendments were included in this rule as possible.

We are encouraging debate on the floor and for Members to fight for their priorities. There is absolutely no reason not to support this rule. Let's not forget what we have been committed to fighting for these last several months, bringing all 12 appropriations bills to the floor.

The days of Christmas omnibus bills are over. We still have more work to do to fight against inflated budgets and the growing national debt, but the step we are taking this week that prevents a Christmas giveaway on the House floor in an omnibus is a major step in the right direction.

This is what the American people expected of us. This is what we were elected to do, discuss and debate appropriation of taxpayer dollars.

Speaking of appropriations, this is our 12th appropriations bill, 12 of 12. Finally, here we are.

Do I wish this were done in a timelier manner? Of course.

Do I wish the government functioned more efficiently for the sake of the constituents we each represent? Absolutely.

We find ourselves now completing this process in the manner in which it was intended--draft, amend, debate, and vote. No Member can say today that they did not have the opportunity to participate in this process, and no Member can argue that these appropriations were not brought forward in an open and transparent manner.

I applaud the relative committees and everyone in the GOP Conference who has worked so hard to bring this bill and all of the appropriations bills forward to get this work done.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, to say that the Democrats spend like drunken sailors is an insult to sailors.

This bill cuts wasteful spending. If there is any scorecard to be kept between Democrat Speakers and Republican Speakers, it should be on spending. I would like to note that 40 percent of all of the national debt--which, by the way, is approaching $34 trillion--40 percent of all of the national debt that exists today, from the beginning of our country until this moment, was incurred under one Speaker. That was Speaker Pelosi.

If we are keeping score here, it should be about wasteful spending, deficit spending, and debts. We can blame Presidents for it, but the reality is, Congress--in fact, the House of Representatives--has the power of the purse. We need to look at ourselves when we look at that debt, and this bill is a good step toward reducing deficits.

The Commerce, Justice, Science and related agencies appropriations bill provides net new spending of $58.383 billion for programs under the jurisdiction of the subcommittee, which is $23.765 billion below FY23 enacted levels. That is a large cut. Maybe it is not large enough, but it is what has upset the other side of the aisle, that is for sure.

You can disguise it as anything you want, but they are really upset about this bill because it cuts spending. Not the kind of cuts to spending where we pretend to cut spending, where we have some baseline that is actually increasing spending, and then we reduce the baseline. No, I am talking about actual cuts in real dollars. That is what this bill does, and that is why they are so excited, that is why they are so angry about this rule and this bill.

By the way, this rule allows for 119 amendments. When they say those are extreme amendments, what do those amendments do? They cut more. That is what the amendments do. None of those amendments increase spending. I think that is what they are upset about on the other side of the aisle is that not only have we brought forth a bill that cuts $23 billion of Federal spending, we are allowing 119 amendments to cut even more spending.

Let me talk about the priorities in this bill. By the way, Congress has the power of the purse, and we complain about a lot of things the executive branch does, but then we, too, will frequently turn around and fund the things that we complain about. This bill actually defunds some of the things that we have been complaining about.

I and several Members of Congress had the great fortune to share breakfast with Justice Antonin Scalia before he passed away. One of my colleagues asked Justice Scalia: When are you going to help us restore constitutional balance of government? Scalia scoffed at him. He said: What are you talking about? You are the most powerful branch. In fact, every tool you need is right there in the Constitution to restore constitutional balance of government.

Another of my colleagues said, but impeachment is so unwieldy, and we can never get that through the Senate. Scalia said: I am not talking about impeachment. I am talking about the power of the purse. It is right there in the Constitution. You have it. You are the most powerful branch, and quit complaining about the things you are funding or quit funding the things you are complaining about. That is what this bill does.

It eliminates more than 70 unnecessary and wasteful programs and initiatives, including 14 polarizing diversity, equity, and inclusion offices and programs. I don't find diversity, equity, and inclusion in the Constitution. It is just not in Article I, Section 8. It is not there for us to do, and so we are eliminating those programs.

It defunds at least 15 executive orders. What are executive orders? Are they laws? No, they are not laws. The lawmaking authority is here. We should probably defund every executive order, but this defunds 15 of them--rules, memoranda, and other Biden administration policies that usurp our congressional authority to make law.

This bill reduces wasteful spending on climate change initiatives.

It prevents the FBI from using its construction balances to build a new headquarters. Why is that important? It is important because they have become weaponized against the American public, showing up at school board meetings and targeting parents and saying they are terrorists. They don't need a new headquarters.

It rejects the administration's plans to replace the Department of Commerce and Department of Justice vehicle fleets with electric vehicles, saving taxpayers nearly $54 million.

This is what we are doing in this bill. We are using the power of the purse. There are 119 amendments. None of those amendments increase spending. I can tell you, we went through all of them. Maybe that is why they are upset that some of their amendments didn't make it in there because maybe they were trying to spend more money. I am sorry, we are not going to do that.

Mr. Speaker, let me point out that my colleague from Kentucky is right that Social Security is a legal and moral obligation to seniors. Let me also point out that every time we engage in deficit spending and spend too much money, we cause inflation.

When we have the Fed create dollars out of thin air so we can launder them through banks and then borrow them back from ourselves, we are really causing inflation.

What does inflation do to those Social Security checks? It reduces the value of those Social Security checks.

This bill is actually a step in reducing inflation by reducing Federal spending, and that will be to the benefit of those seniors who are going to be living on a fixed income.

We all know there is a cost-of-living adjustment applied to Social Security, but the reality is it is not keeping up with inflation.

Inflation is so rampant now due to the spending that we have engaged in in Congress. There is a moral imperative for us to reduce spending because it trickles down. Inflation is very detrimental to our seniors. That is why we have to pass this bill.

If I had a nickel for every time the other side of the aisle uses the word ``extreme,'' I would buy you lunch today. It must be poll tested. ``Extreme'' must be good for them in the polls.

Let me tell you what is extreme and what every American thinks is extreme: $33.7 trillion is extreme. The fact that we are now paying, this year, a trillion dollars in interest on that debt, on that national debt, that is extreme.

Spending money we don't have is extreme. Funding an FBI that targets its own citizens who have done nothing wrong, funding the censorship of speech of Americans, that is extreme. The American people know that is extreme.

The inflation that is caused by this is extreme, and it is affecting everybody. The cost of transportation, the cost of food, and the cost of housing are skyrocketing. That is extreme.

Now, my colleague mentioned that we didn't allow every amendment in this rule. Well, as the ranking member of the committee, surely he knows not every amendment is in order. We have certain rules in the Rules Committee, and a lot of these amendments, unfortunately--and I have to tell some of my friends this--failed our own test.

For instance, they weren't germane to the underlying bill. Americans don't want amendments tacked onto bills that have nothing to do with the underlying bill, so the amendments have to be germane. We are protecting the American people when we keep this process for allowing amendments that are only germane.

The amendments to spending bills, as a rule--it has been a rule since I came here 11 years ago--they can't increase spending, yet unfortunately some of my colleagues introduced amendments that do sometimes intentionally, sometimes unintentionally, but especially the Democrats like to increase spending. We can't allow those amendments.

Finally, we don't allow the amendments that try to legislate on an appropriations bill. We don't allow you to change laws on a bill that has to do with spending. That is the primary reason most of those amendments that the other side is always complaining about are not in this bill. There are 119 good amendments that were allowed that we will debate later today and that we will vote on in transparency and full light of day, not snuck in at the last moment. The American people will get to see how they are being represented through these 119 amendments.

This appropriations bill, I would like to point out, satisfies some of our constitutional obligations. Adam Smith said there are three primary roles of government: to provide for the national defense, to fund public infrastructure, and to institute a system of justice. It is that third obligation that we are fulfilling here today with this bill.

Then we have some constitutional obligations beyond that that are fulfilled in this bill. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, intellectual property, which is in Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the Constitution. That is an obligation of Congress, to provide for the protection of intellectual property. That is in this bill.

The Bureau of the Census is funded in this bill. We are directed by the Constitution to have a census every 10 years, so that is another function in this bill.

This bill funds the National Institute of Standards and Technology, sometimes called NIST. This used to be called the Bureau of Weights and Measures. The Constitution, Article I, Section 8, directs Congress to establish the weights and measures so that we are not all using in this country a different set of weights and measures.

There are many constitutional obligations provided in this bill, many necessary roles of government, some things that aren't technically in the Constitution, but we agree publicly that these are in the benefit of our country. For instance, NASA is funded in this bill.

I look forward to the passage of this rule because there are 119 amendments that are going to expose 430-plus Members of this body to their voters.

How is that? Well, each of these amendments gets 10 minutes of debate. If so ordered, there will be recorded votes on these amendments. They address issues fundamental to our rights.

There will be amendments in this debate after this rule passes on protecting the First Amendment to the Constitution, the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, will we allow our government to censure us on social media. They have been doing it through NGOs and private organizations and research grants. I don't think we should allow it. I don't think it is constitutional. You can't launder a violation of the First Amendment. There will be a debate on that after this rule passes because of this rule.

There will be a debate on whether you support the Second Amendment, the right to keep and bear arms. There is an amendment that we will debate when this rule passes that prohibits the ATF from using funds to maintain a database. They are prohibited already, but they keep trying to do it, so we have to defund them from that.

There is even an amendment--I am particularly fond of this debate that is coming up--to prevent Federal funds from being used to prosecute a Presidential candidate. We look like a banana republic when our justice system indicts candidates for President to try to bring down their poll numbers. This is something that you do in Third World countries.

In any event, there are 119 amendments. I think the other side is against this rule because they don't want to have these debates. They surely don't want to have to vote because that record will be for all time. Every 2 years, each of us faces our voters with those records that will be created today as a result of this rule.

Mr. Speaker, the word of the day is ``extreme'' because the other side uses it in every sentence.

Let me tell you what is extreme: Violating the First Amendment, the principles of freedom of speech and freedom of religion. That is extreme, and that is going to be addressed in this bill and this rule, utilizing the power of the purse. Violating the Second Amendment rights of Americans, their God-given rights to defend themselves; that is extreme. This bill addresses that. This rule provides for robust debate on that issue.

Extreme is violating the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution and the rights there enshrined. Violating the 10th Amendment and Federalizing our police forces. That is extreme. These are the things that Americans find extreme. These are the things that are addressed in this rule and in the underlying bill using the power of the purse.

The most extreme thing--and I do have to say that the Democrats are really good at this form of extremism--the most extreme thing is to continually spend money we don't have, to borrow until they won't lend us any money, and then to print money so we can spend more of it. Extreme is putting ourselves $33.7 trillion in debt. When I say ourselves, I mean, the American taxpayers. They are on the hook for this.

Even if you don't pay taxes, if you have worked a hard life, you have saved and you have got money in the bank and you are relying on your Social Security, what is extreme is the inflation that we have created through out-of-control spending in this Chamber over many, many years. Both parties are guilty of it. It is extreme because it hurts every American when we devalue the dollar through extreme spending.

What does this bill do?

It cuts spending.

This fight is really simple. The disagreements between both sides of the aisle--we can argue about the minor issues--but the major issue is: Do you want to expand government? Do you want it to be more prevalent in your life? Do you want to pay more taxes? Do you want to put your grandkids in hock?

If you do, vote for that side of the aisle.

If you want to put us on a path to fiscal responsibility, if you want to have open debates, if you want to have 72 hours to see what is in the bill, if you don't want to have to vote for a bill to find out what is in it, then you are with this side of the aisle. You should support this rule. I urge adoption of this rule.

The material previously referred to by Mr. McGovern is as follows:

An Amendment to H. Res. 869 Offered By Mr. McGovern of Massachusetts

At the end of the resolution, add the following:

Sec. 7. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the resolution (H. Res. 178) affirming the House of Representatives' commitment to protect and strengthen Social Security and Medicare. The resolution shall be considered as read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the resolution and preamble to adoption without intervening motion or demand for division of the question except one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means or their respective designees.

Sec. 8. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the consideration of H. Res. 178.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source