Providing for Consideration of H.R. Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act; Providing for Consideration of H.R. Sharri Briley and Eric Edmundson Veterans Benefits Expansion Act of and Providing for Consideration of H.R. Smithsonian American Women's Xiii with Respect to Consideratoin of Certain Resolutions Reported From the Committee on Rules
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. JACK. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1300 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: H. Res. 1300
Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 1041) to amend title 38, United States Code, to prohibit the Secretary of Veterans Affairs from transmitting certain information to the Department of Justice for use by the national instant criminal background check system. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Veterans' Affairs 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 Veterans' Affairs 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. 6047) to amend title 38, United States Code, to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to increase the dollar amounts for the payment of certain disability compensation and dependency and indemnity compensation under the laws administered by the Secretary. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Veterans' Affairs now printed in the bill, 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 Veterans' Affairs 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. 1329) to permit the Smithsonian American Women's History Museum to be located within the Reserve of the National Mall, 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 House Administration now printed in the bill, 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 House Administration or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
Sec. 4. Con. Res. 33.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. JACK. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez), 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
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Committee on Rules met and granted a rule providing for consideration of a few measures.
First, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 1041, the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act, under a closed rule. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Veterans Affairs, or their respective designees, and provides one motion to recommit.
Additionally, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 6047, the Sharri Briley and Eric Edmundson Veterans Benefits Expansion Act of 2026, under a closed rule. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Veterans Affairs, or their respective designees, and provides one motion to recommit.
The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 1329, the Smithsonian American Women's History Museum Act, under a closed rule. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on House Administration, or their respective designees, and provides one motion to recommit.
Finally, the rule provides for the flexibility to consider a rule related to reconciliation on the same day it is reported from the Committee on Rules in order to expeditiously consider such legislation if it is received from the Senate.
Mr. Speaker, passage of my resolution today allows us to take important action this week. My resolution allows us to consider legislation affecting veterans, military families, and future generations.
This week, the House has an opportunity to take action on behalf of those who answered our country's call to serve, the families who stand beside them, and the stories that help define who we are as Americans.
Mr. Speaker, the rule before us also provides consideration of H.R. 1041, the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act, introduced by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Bost), my friend and colleague.
Chairman Bost has long been a strong advocate for veterans and military families. Yesterday, during discussion of this legislation, we spent time talking through the practical consequences of an issue affecting veterans across our country.
Mr. Speaker, I thought Chairman Bost helped paint an important picture, and I believe it is worth sharing with the House today, while certainly to address the 250,000 veterans who have been affected by this issue, but sometimes understanding legislation begins by thinking about just one person and sharing their story. Picture for a moment a veteran navigating the lasting effects of military service. Maybe they are balancing appointments, recovery, family responsibilities, and challenges associated with service-connected injuries. They are not a danger to themselves. They are not a danger to anyone else, but they simply reach a point where they recognize something many Americans recognize from time to time: I just need a little help. Maybe they speak with fellow veterans at The American Legion, a local VFW Post, or another veterans service association. Maybe they visit Veteran Affairs seeking support, and maybe they are having difficulty managing finances while focusing on their recovery.
The VA then determines a fiduciary may help manage their benefits. This isn't uncommon. A fiduciary is exactly that--someone assigned to help oversee financial matters.
Under the current framework, assignment of a fiduciary results in veterans being reported by VA bureaucrats to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, otherwise known as the NICS list, despite never being determined to be a danger to themselves or anyone else.
Once entered into that system, veterans can lose their Second Amendment constitutional rights, despite never receiving the same process or legal findings applied to nonveterans.
Mr. Speaker, that is the issue before us.
Earlier this year, President Trump's Department of Veterans Affairs, led by a great Georgian, the Secretary of Veteran Affairs, Doug Collins, took important steps to restore fairness for veterans. The Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act builds on that progress by establishing lasting protections under law.
Simply put, this legislation ensures veterans seeking support through the VA are not subjected to different treatment solely because they sought assistance while navigating the lasting effects of military service.
The Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act consists of several important provisions.
Section 2 restores due process protections and ensures that the assignment of a fiduciary alone cannot automatically result in placement onto the NICS list, which prohibits firearm access. If you are a veteran at home seeking assistance from the VA, this means asking for help no longer creates uncertainty surrounding your constitutional rights that you defended in uniform. You can seek support. You can focus on recovery. You can continue moving forward with the benefits the Constitution affords you.
Section 3 ensures that veterans previously affected have their records corrected and updated. It rights a wrong and corrects an injustice. If this issue affected you or your family, this legislation creates a path to address concerns that may have followed you for years.
Section 4 clarifies that assistance in managing financial matters alone cannot serve as the basis for different treatment. Seeking support should never result in different treatment.
I applaud the many organizations that have stepped up to help us consider this legislation and advocated for its passage, including the National Rifle Association, the Gun Owners of America, and the National Shooting Sports Foundation. Their leadership and partnership throughout the consideration of this legislation will yield success today. Their advocacy helped elevate this issue and move it forward, beyond just a concept and a debate, for families and military families across the country.
Mr. Speaker, the rule before us also provides for consideration of H.R. 6047, the Sharri Briley and Eric Edmundson Veterans Benefits Expansion Act of 2026. While military service may come to an end, for many veterans and families, the responsibilities and challenges associated with that service can continue for years.
Mr. Speaker, I would ask the House to think back to the veteran we were just discussing. Now, imagine that same veteran returned home from catastrophic service-connected injuries. Recovery did not end after leaving the battlefield. Instead, recovery became a part of everyday life. Medical appointments became routine. In-home care became necessary. Family members stepped into caregiver roles, and financial responsibilities continued arriving every month.
For veterans and families, that reality continues for many years after military service ends. That is exactly why Congress must act.
Mr. Speaker, legislation receives a name for a reason. This legislation before us bears the names of Sharri Briley and Sergeant Eric Edmundson because their experiences help explain why stronger support matters.
After losing her husband, Army Chief Warrant Officer Donovan ``Bull'' Briley, during the battle of Mogadishu, Sharri Briley experienced responsibilities no military family should have to navigate alone. At just 24 years old, while serving our country near the Iraq-Syria border, Sergeant Edmundson's vehicle struck an improvised explosive device, an IED. The blast caused catastrophic injuries that fundamentally changed the course of his life. By the grace of God, Sergeant Edmundson survived.
Today, years later, Sergeant Edmundson and his family continue navigating the lasting effects of injuries sustained in service to our country. Their experiences remind us of an important reality: Military service often creates responsibilities carried not only by veterans but by entire families.
Simply put, H.R. 6047 strengthens support for catastrophically injured veterans, caregivers, surviving spouses, and military families. The Sharri Briley and Eric Edmundson Veterans Benefits Expansion Act consists of several important provisions.
Section 2 increases compensation for catastrophically injured veterans requiring regular in-home care. If you are that veteran at home, navigating daily care, appointments, adaptive equipment, and financial strain associated with severe service-connected injuries, this legislation provides approximately $10,000 annually in additional support. That support helps offset costs that families experiencing such burdens carry every day.
Section 3 strengthens support available to caregivers and military families. If your spouse, parent, child, or loved one helps care for you each day, this legislation recognizes an important reality: Military service often affects entire families.
Section 4 ensures these reforms are implemented effectively.
Section 5 expands eligibility requirements for Guard and Reserve servicemembers by reducing qualifying Active-Duty requirements for VA home loan eligibility. If you are a Guard or Reserve servicemember at home, this legislation expands opportunities for homeownership and helps more military families achieve the American Dream.
Mr. Speaker, finally, the rule before us provides consideration of the Smithsonian American Women's History Museum Act, introduced by my colleague, Nicole Malliotakis of New York, one of the most respected members of the House Republican Conference.
The vision for the Smithsonian American women's history museum is straightforward but important: to preserve, research, and share the stories, experiences, and contributions of women whose leadership, sacrifice, and service built our country.
On December 27, 2020, President Trump signed legislation into law, taking an important step toward making that vision a reality. That reflected something many Americans already understand: The story of our country cannot be fully told without the stories of the women who shaped it.
While Congress and President Trump established a path forward for the museum, the project stalled because one important piece remained unfinished: The museum still does not have a permanent home on The National Mall because the original law prohibited it from being located within the Reserve. The Smithsonian American Women's History Museum Act helps complete that work.
Mr. Speaker, all of us can think of women whose strength, sacrifice, and example led us to who we are today: a mother, grandmother, teacher, mentor, leader, or someone whose example shaped our own story.
In many ways, these stories became part of our country's story, too. For generations, American women shaped our country through military service, public service, education, science, innovation, leadership, and sacrifice. That is why Congress must act.
Mr. Speaker, simply put, the Smithsonian American Women's History Museum Act moves this project from authorization toward reality by providing a path for the museum to be built alongside other Smithsonian museums at a place of historic and national prominence.
The Smithsonian American Women's History Museum Act consists of several important provisions.
Section 2 removes restrictions preventing the museum from being located within the Reserve on The National Mall, designates the south monument site, and allows the Smithsonian to move forward with planning and construction.
Section 2 also facilitates transfer of the land to the Smithsonian Institution and establishes planning and reporting requirements to ensure transparency and accountability as the project moves forward.
If your family visits our Nation's Capital years from now, a child walking through those exhibits may learn about a scientist, teacher, servicemember, entrepreneur, or national leader, and even be inspired to change our country, too.
I applaud Representative Malliotakis for her leadership on this effort.
Mr. Speaker, this week, the House has an opportunity to act on behalf of veterans seeking fairness, military families carrying lasting responsibilities, and future generations who deserve to understand the stories that helped shape our country. These measures address different issues, but they are connected by a simple principle: We should honor service; we should support families; and we should preserve the stories and values that continue shaping our country.
For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to support my resolution, which is provided for consideration in this legislation.
Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ.
President Trump has not used his first 18 months in office to reduce costs or end foreign wars like he promised--quite the opposite. Last week, he said he doesn't ``think about Americans' financial situation.''
His priorities have never been the American people. His administration's priorities are the Trump name, his wealth, his war, and his profits. Everything he does costs Americans more money and more pain.
Let's recap the administration's actions in just the last few days. They created a $1.8 billion slush fund to pay off January 6 insurrectionists, who beat law enforcement officers in this very building. Taxpayers will foot that bill. Trump toured his dream ballroom that will cost taxpayers at least $1 billion. He traded stocks worth up to $750 million and then promoted the companies he bought.
We are in the 82nd day of Trump's war that is costing Americans over a billion dollars a day. Because of his war, gas prices have skyrocketed to $4.55 a gallon. Farmers are going bankrupt, and Americans can't afford groceries.
Trump gets away with all of this because House Republicans stand hip to hip with him. House Republicans' bills this week are proof, once again, that Trump calls the shots in this House.
Some of these bills had bipartisan promise, but Republicans poisoned them. For instance, for more than a decade, a bipartisan group of our colleagues fought to establish the women's history museum and put it on The National Mall. Women led this fight. We worked across the aisle because of our shared belief that women's history is integral to our Nation's story. Then, after decades of working together on building both a women's history museum and a Latino history museum on The National Mall, Republicans suddenly changed the bill.
The White House directed Republicans to amend the bill, so Trump and his ballroom committee could determine what the museum looks like, where it should be placed, and even what we can talk about in the women's museum.
Yesterday in the Rules Committee, I asked the Republican chair of the House Administration Committee why he gave Trump this control. He refused to answer my questions because there is no good reason.
Before they hijacked the museum, 127 Democrats proudly cosponsored that bill. Now 146 Members of Congress have signed a letter opposing it until it is restored to its original version. These Members--these Members want us to tell a story of how women marched, protested, and were jailed so that they could vote and the story of women who fought in our Revolutionary War and continue to defend our country today.
Women deserve to be the ones to tell our story, not Trump and his ballroom buddies.
My colleagues should reject this partisan bill and return to the original, bipartisan version that honors the diverse contributions that women made to this country. One man should not dictate what women's history looks like.
This rule also makes in order two bills from the Veterans' Affairs Committee. Democrats and Republicans agree that we should increase benefits for disabled veterans and their surviving family members. These soldiers gave their limbs, vision, and mobility for our Nation. We owe veterans the benefits that truly reflect their sacrifice. But we should reject Republicans' choice to pay for those benefits by making it more expensive for veterans to stay in their homes.
That is what the Republicans' Sharri Briley and Eric Edmundson Veterans Benefits Expansion Act does. It pays for the needed increases in disability benefits by making housing more expensive for veterans. Republicans' choices are all wrong.
Now is not the time to make housing harder to get when, thanks to Trump's war, tariffs and inflation, mortgage rates are averaging at 6.75 percent, the highest rate since last July; when gas and utility bills are skyrocketing; and when more than 10,000 veterans have lost their homes since Trump's administration shut down a VA program that helped veterans avoid foreclosure. There are another 90,000 veterans currently behind on their mortgages or in the foreclosure process who, thanks to Trump's administration, won't be able to use that program.
Now more than ever, we should make it easier for veterans to keep their homes. Yet, instead of pushing back against Trump's attacks on veterans' housing, Republicans chose to make housing more expensive.
Republicans have the money for tax breaks for billionaires but not veterans' housing, money for a White House ballroom but not veterans' housing, money for a $1.8 billion slush fund but not veterans' housing. Those are Republicans' priorities, and they are all wrong.
Mr. Speaker, I just want to make sure everybody at home knows what is before us. I find it notable, and I am sure we will debate H.R. 1041, the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act, but just to comment on H.R. 6047, the Sharri Briley and Eric Edmundson Veterans Benefits Expansion Act, this bill has meaningful, meaningful reform, and it enables veterans to live a much better life.
It significantly increases the monthly benefits rate for catastrophically, service-connected disabled veterans with a traumatic brain injury or other service disabilities that require regular, around-the-clock, in-home medical care, offering an additional $10,000 annually. It raises survivors' VA benefits by an extra 1.5 percent over 2 years, providing an extra couple hundred dollars to over 500,000 survivors.
Since 1993, Congress has not adjusted DIC aside from inflation. This is meaningful, and it has a great impact on veterans across the country, notwithstanding the fact that it also expands the eligibility requirement for National Guard and reservists from 90 days of Active Duty service to 14 days of Active Duty service with a 1 percent fee. This would allow more Members of the Guard and Reserves, generally younger members, to be able to live the American Dream by owning their first home.
Over 500,000 survivors, National Guard and reservists, and thousands of catastrophically disabled veterans and their families will be positively impacted by this bill.
Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, we think that we should do all of these. We think we should increase the disability benefits for veterans. We agree on that.
Yet, what we are taking issue with is just the additional disability compensation, if you look at the score, what do they cost? It is $1 billion.
What else costs $1 billion? It is that ballroom. What else costs $1 billion? Actually, more than $1 billion--$1.8 billion. It is their slush fund. That is where we have a disagreement. We think we should do this, but we don't think we should cut veterans' housing to pay for it.
They are willing to pay for ballrooms and slush funds, but they want to cut veterans' housing in order to provide these needed benefits. We agree that these are needed increases in benefits.
Mr. Speaker, to address this issue more fully, I suggest that if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to adopt an amendment to H.R. 6047, authored by Ranking Member Takano, which would strike the sections of the bill that would raise fees on veterans who want to refinance their homes and replace these fees with a reduction in the estate tax exemption from $15 million to $14.5 million.
There is an easy question: How do we pay for this? How about asking the millionaires to help out a teeny bit for our veterans. Yet, under this Republican-controlled government, there is always money for the tax cuts to the rich, funding illegal wars, forking over $1 billion for Trump's ballroom, or the latest insanity of creating that $1.8 billion slush fund to pay out to January 6 insurrections and other Trump allies.
Yet, none of that spending by Republicans is paid for. It is on the backs of American taxpayers. It is on the backs of our children and grandchildren. Yet, when it comes to veterans, Republicans say that we have to offset the bill's cost by jacking up their home loan fees.
Scaling back the estate tax exemption by $500,000 after Republicans tripled it in their big, ugly bill isn't going to make a big difference to the heirs of all of those wealthy parents, but that alone would fund the benefit increases for disabled veterans and survivors in this bill without penalizing veterans who are just trying to stay in their homes and afford their mortgages.
Mr. Speaker, I just want to list some of the organizations that stand with us, hoping this bill is considered for debate and final passage later today.
It is helpful for the Record to note that The American Legion endorses this legislation. The Wounded Warrior Project endorses this legislation. Paralyzed Veterans of America endorses the legislation. Vietnam Veterans of America endorses this legislation.
AMVETS, the Elizabeth Dole Foundation, Gold Star Spouses of America, Inc., the Military Order of the Purple Heart of the USA, National Association of County Veterans Service Officers, The Independence Fund, Quality of Life Foundation, Veterans Multiple Sclerosis Alliance, and National Military Family Association all support this legislation, which to me illustrates why its passage is so important. Again, I stand with those groups, as do many of my colleagues.
I suspect this will receive wide bipartisan support. What we are doing today is debating the rule, the resolution that enables us to consider that legislation. We can have that debate, but we can't do it unless we pass the rule, which is why our side feels so fervently responsible for helping move this issue forward to solve these issues for veterans.
Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ.
Vets are now losing their homes because of it.''
Mr. Speaker, I don't know what the Representative is referring to with respect to trans-obsessed bills. This resolution has nothing whatsoever regarding that legislation. That was passed 2 weeks ago. I assume the Representative is just 2 weeks too late.
That having been said, I do want to spend a little bit more time talking about H.R. 1041, Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act. I think this is owed a lot of contemplation, deliberation by people watching at home. As I mentioned before, 250,000 veterans, a quarter of a million people, who served our country in uniform, have been subjected to an injustice. We have the ability to correct that today.
I walked you through, the viewer at home, but just picture a veteran who is navigating those lasting effects of military service, and they may be having a hard time trying to pay for their bills or trying to figure out a way to make ends meet. So they reach out to The American Legion, the VFW, many of the organizations, by the way, who endorse the other veterans legislation that we discussed and the other side so passionately opposes.
However, nonetheless, take yourself into this picture. The veteran is going into The American Legion hall, having a conversation, and they say: Hey, why don't you reach out to the VA?
They do so, and the VA says: Okay, let's see what we can do.
They end up appointing a fiduciary to help them manage their benefits. For over 30 years--I should say, 28 years, but nearly 30 years, that veteran has then been subjected to an unconstitutional process that we can correct today because when that happens and when someone is appointed a fiduciary to help them manage their benefits, they have been sent to the NICS list, which is administered by the Department of Justice, the FBI, which prohibits the owning and ownership of a firearm. To me, that is a grave injustice. The people who put on the uniform of our country and served our country to defend our constitutional rights should be afforded the exact same constitutional rights that we have.
Mr. Speaker, I just want to encourage everyone to remember reading this resolution, there are three bills we are just looking to have a vote on today. The other side is trying to block consideration of this legislation. I hope some will cross the aisle and help us achieve this later.
Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the Rules Committee, Republicans voted down Ranking Member McGovern's amendment, which was intended to stop what might be the most dangerous corruption scheme in modern American politics, the abuse of the Judgment Fund, the little known government account that is now being turned into a political slush fund.
Yes, I am talking about the $1.8 billion, you know, almost twice as much as we need to pay for the disability benefits. It is a $1.8 billion slush fund.
Before yesterday, most Americans might never have heard of the judgment fund. It is something that was created that is funded by the taxpayer, so I want Americans to know a little bit more about this.
It is intended to fund legitimate legal settlements, but Republicans are now blessing a system where a President and his own Justice Department, his Attorney General, his private lawyer, can create a law, make a deal, settle that lawsuit, and then send Americans' money wherever they want without congressional oversight.
That is what we were saying yesterday. It is like, no, Congress, under our Constitution, controls the purse. We are the ones who decide where America's money goes because we have to stand up in front of them every 2 years and explain ourselves. Well, Republicans never have townhalls, so they never stand in front of their constituents, but we do.
What they have just done is say: No, we are going to bypass that, and we are going to send $1.8 billion to Trump's allies. We control the money. You don't have a say, and we are going to make all of those men and a couple of women who came in here, who beat our law enforcement officers, the same people you walk before every day--those Capitol Police were beaten, and 140 of them went to the hospital. Now, we are giving them money because we created the system.
I think it is important that Americans know what they are blessing. They are blessing a slush fund that any President can just make up a lawsuit, enter a settlement, and have collusion. This is how the Mafia works. You hand out money. The problem is that the Mafia, in this sense, is getting their money from your taxpayer dollars.
Let's sound the alarm. This is corruption of the most egregious manner. We should not operate like a Mafia in the United States.
I want to debate this resolution before us today, but I will comment briefly. With respect to President Trump, first and foremost, over the 4 years of his first Presidency, he was subjected to persecution unlike any President before, which probably led to the now at least three assassination attempts.
I welcome the other side joining us in not just condemning those but helping us ensure that he is not subjected to that type of threat going forward.
What I will say, with respect to the ballroom, is that there was a bipartisan group of individuals who came down and said this was necessary. Presidents from both parties have extolled the virtue of having a safe space not just to host functions but to ensure that the President and members of our country, who serve our country, are protected in those environments.
We saw that, unfortunately, on full display just a month ago when a shooter tried to rush a dinner, at which the President and many other Republicans and Democrats were congregating, with the explicit purpose of assassinating members of President Trump's administration. I welcome the calls of condemnation from the other side and look forward to hearing them in the gentlewoman's rebuttal.
What I would say is the issue before us today, just a good reminder, there are three bills on which we are seeking to have a vote. We are seeking to have a voice and an opportunity to vote on this legislation today. You can vote however you want. This rule allows us to have that opportunity.
As I mentioned before, this gives us a chance to help veterans who have suffered catastrophic injuries. That is one of the pieces of legislation we are voting on today. This has the ability to restore the constitutional rights of 250,000 veterans who have had their rights stripped from them because of legislation that was passed 28 years ago that has been interpreted in a certain way ever since. This legislation enables us to build a museum honoring America's women and all the contributions they have made to this incredible country that we all enjoy today.
I just remind folks that that is what we are debating, and that is what we are voting on. I welcome conversations about each, but that is the question before us.
Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ.
We are debating today what Republicans' priorities are and what we are going to be voting on this week in the House.
That is the question I ask: Where are Republicans' priorities? Their bills highlight where their priorities are, and what is coming up this week highlights where their priorities are.
We have already talked about how they are going to be taking from Peter to pay Paul, except Peter and Paul are veterans who deserve both their housing and their disability benefits.
They are also going to be bringing to the House floor this week--not through this rule, but probably another one--maybe $72 billion worth of spending that is not paid for.
Mr. Speaker, the Representative mentioned, or rather alleged, that the legislation before us this week is not an American priority, so I think we should just dissect the three bills under consideration.
First and foremost, Mr. Speaker, is it not a priority for us to ensure that the constitutional rights our veterans fought to defend are conferred on to them?
Is that not a priority for us to correct an injustice inflicted upon our veterans?
Is it not a priority for us to pass legislation that will help strengthen benefits and help catastrophically injured veterans that is broadly supported across the veterans community including veterans service organizations like The American Legion, Wounded Warrior Project, and Paralyzed Veterans of America?
Those groups and those associations support our legislation.
How is that not a priority?
Lastly, how is it not a priority to ensure that we honor America's women by building the museum that has rightly deserved to be built for many years?
We are going to take action to do that today.
I will just note, too, the Representative mentioned many things about President Trump. But, yet, I still wait to hear from the other side the broad condemnation of the relentless persecution that has led to attack after attack, after attack on President Trump and his family. It is unfair to him, and it is one of the reasons why, as the Representative noted, later this week we may be considering--we will see what happens in the Senate--but we may be considering legislation that is going to help pay our law enforcement officers in the Federal Government. That is a priority for us and always has been for us.
Again, Mr. Speaker, when you look at what we are debating this week, we are trying to help veterans get their constitutional rights back. We are trying to help veterans through bills that are endorsed by every veteran service organization that serves our Nation's veterans, and we are trying to build a museum that we have been trying to build for 6 years. I think all three are priorities for our country.
Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ.
Mr. Speaker, let's go through sort of where we have Trump's name.
Trump's name is now on the Kennedy Center without congressional approval. Trump's name is now on the United States Institute of Peace, and Trump has destroyed part of the White House without congressional approval, and he is putting up his ballroom.
Do you know what, Mr. Speaker?
These places don't belong to Trump or any President. They belong to the American people. As Judge Leon said when he ruled against the White House ballroom construction: ``The White House does not belong to any one man--not even a President.''
I think that the women's history museum does not belong to Trump. It belongs to the American people and the women whose blood, sweat, and tears paint the picture of America, and to the Haudenosaunee Clan mothers who controlled decisions over war and the economy.
Mr. Speaker, for those of you who don't know who those are, that was the Iroquois Federation. They were the inspiration for our Constitution. The only thing that was different was our Constitution didn't include and recognize women the way that the Haudenosaunee Clan mothers were recognized.
I want to have a museum where Deborah Sampson, a woman who disguised herself as a man to fight in the Revolutionary War, is discussed, not divided, but discussed about this was the fervor of those women during the Revolution who served as spies, who served as soldiers, and who served to actually win our Revolutionary War.
I want to honor Jeannette Rankin of Montana, the first woman to serve in Congress who served before women were even allowed to vote.
Do you know what, Mr. Speaker?
She was a Republican. Let's honor her.
Their stories deserve to be told, but they deserve to be told in a museum that is designed, that is built, that is located, and that talks about issues that the women of America have decided, not any one President.
That is why we are rejecting their partisan proposal and we are urging a return to the original bipartisan bill.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. JACK. Malliotakis), who is one of the most respected voices in the House Republican Conference.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. JACK. Mr. Speaker, first, I would say the colleague to whom my colleague from New Mexico referenced was speaking about a bill that already passed 2 weeks ago, so I think he was 2 weeks too late for debate.
Malliotakis).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. JACK. Mr. Speaker, again, that is one of the reasons why my colleague is one of the most respected voices in the House Republican Conference, one of the best debaters we have.
Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ.
Mr. Speaker, this week has been about what Republicans value and who they are willing to hurt to give Trump more power and more money.
In July, Republicans found money for billionaire tax breaks when they passed the big, beautiful bill. They found money for another war in the Middle East. Now, they want us to vote for a billion dollars for Trump's ballroom and more money for ICE's terror campaign, but when we need to increase benefits for disabled veterans, Republicans say veterans have to pay for it themselves.
When women want a museum that tells their own story, Republicans hand control to Donald Trump. When families struggle with groceries, rent, gas, and utility bills, Trump says he doesn't even think about their financial situation.
That is the Republican agenda: everything for Trump, everybody else on their own.
Republicans in Congress refuse to stand up to Trump. They refuse to stand up for their constituents. They have no courage.
Now, Republicans want to give Donald Trump power over where the Women's History Museum should be located, what it looks like, and what we talk about.
A museum dedicated to the story of American women should not be controlled by a man who is mentioned more than 38,000 times in the Epstein files. It should not be controlled by a man who was found guilty of sexual abuse.
Mr. Speaker, in closing, the rule I have presented today, House Resolution 1300, enables this House of Representatives to carry out its responsibilities and consider legislation affecting veterans, military families, and future generations.
Before I close, Mr. Speaker, I ask the House to think one more time about that veteran we discussed today. Think about the veteran who walks into the VA simply looking for support. Think about that veteran navigating recovery, appointments, and the lasting effects of military service. Think about the spouse, the parent, or the loved one who quietly stepped forward and carried responsibilities that military service brought home. Think about the families who continue showing up every day with strength, perseverance, and grace because for many military families, service does not simply end when the uniform comes off.
Mr. Speaker, throughout this debate, we discussed different bills addressing different issues, but each measure before us reflects a simple principle: When the brave men and women of our country answered the call to serve, they did so without hesitation. When they return home, they should know their country will stand beside them with that same commitment.
That means protecting constitutional freedoms. That means strengthening support for veterans and military families, and that means preserving the stories and experiences that help tell the story of our country.
To the veterans and military families watching today, these issues are not abstract. They are your lives. These are your experiences, and these are the responsibilities Congress has an obligation to take seriously.
Mr. Speaker, this rule allows this House of Representatives to move forward and continue delivering on those responsibilities. For those reasons, I urge my colleagues to support the rule.
The material previously referred to by Ms. Leger Fernandez is as follows:
An Amendment To H. Res. 1300 Offered By Ms. Leger Fernandez of New Mexico
In section 2, insert ``and the amendment specified in section 5 of this resolution'' after ``accompanying this resolution''.
At the end of the resolution, add the following new section:
``Sec. 5. The amendment referred to in section 2 of this resolution is as follows:
Page 5, strike line 20 and all that follows through page 6, line 10 and insert the following: (and redesignate accordingly): SEC. 3. REDUCTION OF ESTATE TAX EXEMPTION.
In the case of estates of decedents dying or gifts made during the period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and ending on December 31, 2031, section 2010(c)(3)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall be applied by substituting `$14,500,000' for `$15,000,000'.''.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source