Providing for Consideration of H.R. Law-Enforcement Innovate to De-Escalate Act; Providing for Consideration of H.R. Undersea Cable Protection Act of Providing for Consideration of H.R. Securing America's Critical Minerals Supply Act; and for Other Purposes

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LANGWORTHY. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1042 and ask for its immediate consideration.

The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: H. Res. 1042

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2189) to modernize Federal firearms laws to account for advancements in technology and less-than-lethal weapons, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 119-18 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 among and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective designees and the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.

Sec. 2. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 261) to amend the National Marine Sanctuaries Act to prohibit requiring an authorization for the installation, continued presence, operation, maintenance, repair, or recovery of undersea fiber optic cables in a national marine sanctuary if such activities have previously been authorized by a Federal or State agency. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Natural Resources now printed in the bill 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 Natural Resources or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.

Sec. 3. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 3617) to amend the Department of Energy Organization Act to secure the supply of critical energy resources, including critical minerals and other materials, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Energy and Commerce now printed in the bill 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 Energy and Commerce or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.

Sec. 4. Each day during the period from February 10, 2026, through July 31, 2026, shall not constitute a calendar day for purposes of section 202 of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622) with respect to a joint resolution terminating a national emergency declared by the President on February 1, 2025, April 2, 2025, July 30, 2025, or August 6, 2025.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LANGWORTHY. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Neguse), 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. LANGWORTHY. Mr. Speaker, last night, the Rules Committee met and reported out a rule providing for consideration of three measures.

The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3617, the Securing America's Critical Minerals Supply Act, under a closed rule, with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, or their designees, and provides for one motion to recommit.

The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 261, the Undersea Cable Protection Act, under a closed rule, with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and the ranking minority member of the Committee on Natural Resources, or their designees, and provides for one motion to recommit.

The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 2189, the Law- Enforcement Innovate to De-Escalate Act, under a closed rule, with 1 hour of debate equally divided among and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their designees, and the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means or their designees, and provides for one motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and in support of the underlying legislation. The rule before us once again exposes a fundamental divide in the House. Republicans are focused on protecting American lives, American infrastructure, and American national security. Democrats are focused on protecting bureaucracies, activist pressure campaigns, and the broken systems they created.

For years, Democrats have governed by slogan instead of substance. They talk about safety, but undermine law enforcement. They claim to care about national security, but allow infrastructure critical to that mission of security to decay. They give lipservice to the need to reshore our supply chains, while time and again supporting policies and legislation that ensure that America remains dependent on our foreign adversaries.

Their opposition to the rule today undermines and underlines the stark contrast between the left's words and their actions, which threaten to undermine our country.

Mr. Speaker, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2189, the Law-Enforcement Innovate to De-Escalate Act. Every single day, law enforcement officers are asked to make split-second decisions in dangerous, unpredictable situations. In those moments, officers should have access to every appropriate tool available to de-escalate encounters, protect themselves, and save the public's lives.

Yet standing in their way is outdated Federal law. Under current statute, less-than-lethal devices like tasers are still treated like firearms. That classification no longer reflects modern technology, modern training, or modern policing. It creates unnecessary barriers for law enforcement agencies across this country.

These devices are designed to temporarily incapacitate an individual without causing serious or permanent injury. They play a critical role in real-world law enforcement encounters by giving officers a nonlethal option to defuse potentially violent situations and protect both officers and the public at large.

Because these de-escalation tools are misclassified under Federal law, the consequences are real. Law enforcement agencies and communities face higher costs, procurement delays, and unnecessary regulatory hurdles, including taxes and rules written over 50 years ago that were never intended to apply to modern, less-than-lethal technology.

At a time when departments are investing in better training, accountability, and modern technology to reduce fatal encounters, access to less-than-lethal alternatives should be expanding, not shrinking. Federal law should be keeping pace with innovation, not trapping law enforcement in the past.

Mr. Speaker, the Law-Enforcement Innovate to De-Escalate Act updates this outdated framework and acknowledges a simple fact. Law enforcement officers need access to better tools in order to do their job safely and effectively.

The bill ensures less-than-lethal devices are treated for what they are, which are tools in de-escalation, not firearms. It draws clear lines, focuses on devices designed to incapacitate without causing serious injury, and explicitly prevents any device that would be converted into a lethal weapon from falling under the new definition.

Democrats will claim that this bill is dangerous. They always do. The real danger is forcing our law enforcement officers into a false choice between using deadly force or no force at all. If we are serious about reducing violent encounters and saving lives, we should be focused on giving officers more options to de-escalate situations when seconds matter.

Mr. Speaker, the rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 261, the Undersea Cable Protection Act of 2025. This bill is about infrastructure most Americans will never see but every single one of us rely on every single day. From sending an email to making a phone call to moving money across the globe, undersea cables are the backbone of the modern world.

In fact, undersea cables carry more than 95 percent of global internet traffic. They support military communications. They move trillions of dollars in financial transactions and keep the global economy functioning.

Protecting this infrastructure is not just about speed or convenience. It is about national security. Route diversity matters. When too many cables are forced into the same landing areas, vulnerabilities increase. Adversaries take notice.

Despite their importance, undersea cable projects face duplicative and unnecessary regulatory hurdles. Even after projects receive all required Federal and State approvals, agencies can still demand additional authorizations, slowing installation, maintenance, and repair work that is critical to keeping these systems secure.

We see this pattern far too often in Washington. Projects are approved, but delays pile up anyway. Timelines slip. Responsibility gets passed around. Bureaucracy grows, while real-world risks go unaddressed.

We saw the same pattern play out in upstate New York. Micron is making a historic investment in bringing advanced semiconductor manufacturing back to the United States, creating thousands of good- paying jobs and strengthening domestic supply chains critical to our national security.

Yet, even after clearing one of the most stringent State environmental review processes in the country, the project is subjected to duplicative Federal reviews that reached the same exact conclusions again and again. Those delays were not about environmental risks. They were bureaucratic duplication, years of lost time before construction could even begin.

That is not environmental protection. It is regulatory paralysis. It is the same kind of post-approval delay and second-guessing that puts critical projects, including our undersea cable installation, maintenance, and repair, at risk.

At a time when adversaries are actively probing undersea infrastructure, Washington should be focused on protection, resilience, and readiness, not red tape.

That is exactly what the Undersea Cable Protection Act of 2025 does. It prevents agencies from piling new permitting requirements onto projects that have already been reviewed and approved. It allows installation, maintenance, and repair to move forward without unnecessary delay, while preserving coordination and oversight.

Nothing in this bill weakens environmental laws. Nothing strips oversight and accountability. It simply says that once the government has completed its review, it should not keep finding ways to slow down critical security infrastructure.

If Democrats were serious about national security, we could pass this on suspension. They would support protecting the infrastructure that carries our communications, our commerce, and our defense information. Instead, they will continue to defend a broken process that leaves critical assets exposed and America more vulnerable than it should be.

Mr. Speaker, the rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 3617, the Securing America's Critical Minerals Supply Act. Critical minerals are essential to modern life. They are used in defense systems, energy infrastructure, manufacturing, and the advanced technologies that power our economy and keep this country secure. Without reliable access to these materials, everything built on top of them becomes vulnerable.

Yet for years, Washington policies have discouraged domestic production and pushed our supply chains overseas. The result was predictable. The United States became dangerously dependent on foreign sources for critical minerals, often controlled by adversarial nations that do not share our interests or our values.

American jobs were lost and supply chains weakened. Foreign governments gained leverage over materials our economy and national defense rely on every single day. That is the damage this Congress is now working to reverse.

Energy security has been a core national security concern before. After the oil crises of the 1970s, Americans learned the hard way what happens when adversaries control the resources our economy depends on.

Today, we face a similar threat not just in energy but across the next generation of industries like artificial intelligence, advanced manufacturing, and defense systems that all rely on critical minerals.

After decades of degrowth policies that drove energy production, mining, and refining all overseas, our adversaries exploited those vulnerabilities. The result is an economy that leaves American families exposed to decisions made in places like Communist China.

We have already seen this play out. Communist China has taken steps to restrict exports of key minerals including antimony, which is essential to defense manufacturing for systems like radar. That is not a theoretical risk. It is active leverage being used against the United States today.

Under President Trump, the United States has begun to change course by prioritizing domestic production, strengthening supply chain security, and treating critical minerals as a strategic national interest.

H.R. 3617, the Securing America's Critical Minerals Supply Act, builds on that effort. It forces the Federal Government to take a hard look at where America is vulnerable, improves coordination across agencies, and ensures securing critical minerals is treated as a priority, not as an afterthought.

The bill strengthens the Department of Energy's role in identifying supply chain risks and supporting responsible domestic production, refining, and processing, so America is not forced to rely on adversaries for materials essential to our economy and to our defense.

Let's be clear about what this bill does not do. It does not eliminate environmental review. It does not lower standards. It simply says America should be able to responsibly produce what it needs here at home instead of outsourcing our future to foreign powers.

Instead of trying to score political points, Democrats should support efforts to close the supply chain vulnerabilities that Communist China actively exploits to the detriment of the American people.

If Democrats were serious about supply chain security and national defense, this is exactly the kind of bill that they would support. Instead, they spent years defending policies that left America exposed. Republicans are choosing strength, security, and self-reliance. Democrats choose dependence and delay.

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

Mr. Speaker, my colleagues across the aisle would love to scapegoat everything on the President's tariff authority. The question of affordability, which they have all of a sudden gotten into their hands, is rich given that they presided over the worst inflation spike in 40 years.

Under President Joe Biden, families paid more for everything, for food, housing, transportation, and energy. It all exploded on their watch when they ran three Houses of government.

Energy prices surged roughly 20 percent. In many parts of the country, electricity rates rose 30 percent. Democrats didn't just miss the problem. They caused it, and then they put their hands over their face and pretended like everything was okay.

Those weren't abstract numbers. Those were kitchen table realities, and they remain kitchen table realities for working families, who are lectured by Democrats to be patient. Meanwhile, this transitory inflation--their claim--they just spent trillions of dollars more and inflamed the problem all the more.

The difference today could not be any clearer. Gas prices are coming down. They are at their lowest level in 4 years. Real wages are rising again. Regulatory costs are finally being rolled back after years of Democrats using regulations as a weapon against affordability.

President Trump and congressional Republicans are cleaning up the mess left behind, undoing the damage of the Biden economic policies, restoring confidence, and rebuilding an economy that works for people who actually earn a paycheck.

That brings us to the rule before us today. The three bills under this rule all address affordability in the real world. They reduce unnecessary delays that drive up costs. They protect the infrastructure Americans rely on every single day. They support domestic production, so families are not left paying more because Washington chose delay, dependence, and dysfunction.

Mr. Speaker, I want to remind my friends on the other side of the aisle that the Supreme Court heard arguments on November 5 on this very issue of whether the Trump administration has the authority to impose the tariffs under the debate right here. Our extension of the tolling days is something Democrats did themselves back in the 116th and the 117th Congress.

Unlike when they did it, ours has a clear end date, sunsetting in a matter of months, unlike the blanket prohibitions of COVID NEA resolutions under Democratic rule.

This extension will allow the Supreme Court the time necessary to provide a ruling on this extremely consequential issue. It is just amazing to hear the arguments about affordability when they presided over an era of government that exploded our national debt, exploded prices, not to the tune of $1,000 but tens of thousands of dollars on Americans across the board, and they still tried to convince people that their policies had nothing to do with it.

That is why this House is in Republican hands, the U.S. Senate is in Republican hands, and the White House is in Republican hands. That is because it was part of the mandate given by the American people to reset the global trade order and to renegotiate unfair trade deals that have happened over decades. Both Republican and Democratic administrations alike took advantage of the American worker, chased our jobs overseas, and ruined our supply chains. All of those things happened.

The tariffs have been an important tool that the President has been able to use to create real trade deals, opening up markets for American products. We have seen it firsthand. We have new trade deals around the globe. America has come from a position of strength because of this tool, not a position of weakness. We can't allow that weakness to prevail.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2189 does not allow felons or violent criminals to gain access to anything new. It does not override State or local law, and anyone barred from possessing these devices today remains barred tomorrow.

What this bill actually does is correct an outdated Federal classification that treats tasers like deadly firearms. That outdated and absurd classification has driven up costs, created delays, and made it harder for law enforcement agencies to access less-than-lethal tools designed to specifically de-escalate situations and to save lives.

Democrats are calling that clarity a loophole. In reality, the only thing that this bill closes is the gap between outdated law and modern policing. Instead of supporting officers who want safer alternatives to deadly force, Democrats are trying to scare the public with cherry- picked statistics and misleading claims.

Let's be honest. If Democrats were truly concerned about public safety, they would not oppose a bill that encourages de-escalation and reduces the likelihood of fatal outcomes and encounters.

Despite all this rhetorical nonsense about policing in the United States, Democrats are standing in the way of this commonsense measure. They cannot seem to support legislation that empowers law enforcement in any way, even when it keeps communities safe.

However, this pattern is not stopped with this bill. Across all three bills before the House today, the choice is the same. Republicans are offering practical solutions to strengthen public safety, protect critical infrastructure, and secure our supply chains that our national security depends on, and Democrats are choosing, again, to delay, to distort, and to defend broken systems and outcomes.

Mr. Speaker, it has become impossible to ignore a defining feature of today's Democratic Party, and that is Trump derangement syndrome, which is a real disease. No matter what legislation is before this House, no matter how unrelated it is to President Trump, Democrats find a way to twist the debate back to him--his personality, what they hate about him--not the text of the bill, not any of the real-world problems families are facing, just Trump over and over and over. Every time they do that, American people pay the price.

When inflation exploded in 2022, after trillions of dollars in Democratic spending overheated the economy, families were drowning in higher grocery bills, higher gas prices, and higher rents. All of it exploded, went out of control. It is a matter of fact. It is not a matter up for debate. It happened in this country.

Democrats were not focused on fixing those things. Instead, they are focused on their latest Trump obsession. When the border collapsed and millions of illegal immigrants poured into communities across our country, Democrats once again ignored the consequences of their own policies. Instead of securing the border or addressing affordability, they leaned harder into the same tired talking points and hysteria about President Trump.

Voters saw right through that in the last election, and Democrats lost the popular vote. They lost the electoral college. They lost every swing State on the map. Yet, even after that decisive rejection, Trump derangement syndrome remains completely untreated.

Instead of course correcting, Democrats continue to defend wasteful programs, failed policies, bloated bureaucracy, while reflexively opposing every effort that President Trump and House Republicans are making to clean up the mess that they created.

Here we are again today listening to the same theatrics. The American people are no longer entertained by those theatrics. They are focused on results: lowering costs, securing the border, strengthening energy independence, restoring accountability in Washington, reshoring American jobs, and bringing manufacturing here back to the United States of America that their failed policies over decades have chased away.

While Democrats remain stuck in the year 9--we are going on year 10-- of Trump derangement syndrome, Republicans are focused on governing and delivering results for working families. Mr. Speaker, I would like to once again remind my colleagues of what is actually in the rule before us today.

The rule provides for consideration of three commonsense bills: the Law-Enforcement Innovate to De-Escalate Act, which we have talked about; the Undersea Cable Protection Act of 2025; and H.R. 3617, the Securing America's Critical Minerals Supply Act, which will strengthen our domestic critical mineral supply chain so we can be stronger here at home and across the world.

Mr. Speaker, for years, Democrats told the American people not to believe what they could see with their own eyes. They said that crime was under control, our infrastructure was secure, our supply chains were resilient, and our energy systems were just fine.

The legislation under the rule today takes real steps toward fixing broken systems, supporting our law enforcement officers, protecting critical infrastructure, and rebuilding supply chains right here at home.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the rule before us today.

The material previously referred to by Mr. Neguse is as follows: An Amendment to H. Res. 1042 Offered by Mr. Neguse of Colorado

Strike section 4.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source