Tom Cole

Mr. COLE

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Ross), my good friend, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to begin my remarks in a positive way by discussing H.R. 4350, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022. I am glad that this bill has not been poisoned by all the partisanship that has plagued the House for the past year, and that, as they have done for the past 61 years, the House Armed Services Committee came together and produced a bill that both Republicans and Democrats can support. We saw this in the overwhelming 57-2 vote to report the bill out of committee. This outcome wasn't always assured, Mr. Speaker. Unfortunately, President Biden proposed a defense budget number that was woefully inadequate for America's defense needs. At a time when we are facing new and emerging threats around the globe, from the Middle East, to Afghanistan, to the South China Sea, we cannot afford to underfund our national defense. Chronic underfunding of national defense was a hallmark of the Obama- Biden administration, and it appears that President Biden himself is determined to continue down that path. Fortunately, both the House and Senate Armed Services Committees disagreed, and the House now has before it a bill that fully funds our defense needs for the coming fiscal year. The bill before us funds continued acquisition of ships to ensure the U.S. Navy can meet its mission. It funds the procurement and development of new weapons systems, which ensures that our military will be well-prepared to meet any new and emerging challenges in the coming years. And it provides our servicemembers with a 2.7 percent pay raise. And perhaps most important of all, it includes many provisions designed to provide much-needed oversight of President Biden's bungled withdrawal from Afghanistan. America deserves answers about the decisions that were made and the resulting failures of leadership that occurred at all levels. Thanks to this bill, they can be assured that they will get them. And while I do not support every provision in the NDAA, I want to applaud the good work of the House Armed Services Committee. I think their process should serve as a model for all committees in the House. In an age when so much legislation is produced by one party behind closed doors in leadership offices, the committee did the hard work and produced a bill that both parties can support. Indeed, it is truly refreshing to be considering this bill today, and I want to commend Chairman Adam Smith and Ranking Member Mike Rogers for their good work and bipartisan working relationship. Unfortunately, the next measure I will discuss isn't nearly so positive. This bill is a continuing resolution to fund the government through December 3, 2021. But rather than advancing a clean, negotiated CR, the majority is using the bill as a vehicle to push through a suspension of the national debt limit. This is a nonstarter with Republicans, as the majority well knows and, as such, I expect all Republicans will oppose it. Since taking control of the Presidency and the Senate in January, the majority has been on a spending spree unlike any other in our history. Earlier this year, the Democrats rammed through a partisan $1.9 trillion reconciliation bill, ostensibly about COVID relief, but really about pushing forward a laundry list of progressive policies. Last week, 13 authorizing committees met on another partisan reconciliation bill, this one larded up with a whopping $3.5 trillion in progressive policies like those found in the Green New Deal. And sadly, even that wasn't enough for some committees, who, according to the CBO, spent more than double what the budget resolution told them to. These bloated spending measures come on top of normal Federal spending and on top of the large bipartisan COVID-19 relief packages passed last year. The last suspension of the debt limit covered all the spending that was done in the past, along with the first 9 months of the Biden administration. But since then, the majority has opened the national checkbook. They have done so with only Democratic votes. That is their prerogative. After all, they control the White House, the House of Representatives, and the Senate. But since the majority is spending this money over Republican objections, and without Republican cooperation, it is up to the majority to raise the debt limit. They should not expect Republican votes to help them cover their out-of-control spending. Mr. Speaker, it is a sad state of affairs that what should be a relatively simple measure to fund the government is being used in this manner. I urge my friends across the aisle to rethink this plan, and I hope they will come to their senses before government funding runs out nine days from now. Our last bill covered by this rule is somehow even more partisan and controversial than the CR. This is H.R. 3755, which the majority is pitching as a simple codification of the Supreme Court decision of Roe v. Wade. In reality, this measure goes far beyond that. It is the greatest threat to the protection of innocent, unborn life that we have seen in over 50 years. The bill before us preempts any State law that seeks to protect life, including policies that those who identify as pro-choice support. Instead, every single State would be required to allow abortion on demand at any time up to the point of birth. No more would States be able to protect conscience rights; no more would they be able to ban barbaric procedures like dismemberment abortions; and no more would they be able to prevent abortions targeting fetuses with Down Syndrome, which 70 percent of the American people oppose. I would call on all Members, Republicans and Democrats, to reject this measure. Protecting the unborn has always been one of my highest priorities as a Member of Congress. We need only to look at the Declaration of Independence for a reminder that the right to life is one of those inalienable rights endowed upon all of us, even unborn children, by our Creator. I urge this House to remember those words, remember the unborn, and to reject this egregious attack on life. Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to the rule and two of the underlying bills, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Obernolte), my good friend.

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Jacobs), my good friend.

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith), my very good friend and the distinguished Republican ranking member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Jackson), my good friend, and a distinguished member of the House Armed Services Committee.

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by thanking my good friend from North Carolina. We don't agree obviously on the rule, we don't agree on every piece of legislation, but I appreciate the civility and the quality of the debate. Mr. Speaker, to me, as I look at both the rule and the underlying legislation, the phrase that immediately comes to my mind is the good, the bad, and the ugly. Let's start with the good. There is no question that the National Defense Authorization Act is a product of bipartisan cooperation of the highest order on the House Armed Services Committee. Nobody got everything they wanted, but there are a lot of things in there that both sides worked together on to achieve. I particularly want to commend Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Rogers for the manner in which they approached this bill. I want to commend them for the additional $25 billion. I know that the chairman didn't support that, but obviously many Democratic Members did. I think that was an important sign that the country is united on the idea that we need to spend more on defense in these very dangerous times. Again, the quality of the compromise and some of the legislation that is included in this is extraordinarily important. The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Speier) mentioned the issue of sexual assault. It is addressed in this bill in a bipartisan, thoughtful way. I thank her for her tireless work on that very important subject. I also thank those Members that worked hard to reposition our defense where we focus on our emerging threats, our near-peer threats of China and Russia while also dealing with North Korea, Iran, and the threat of global terrorism. It is a good bill. Not everybody will support it, but I think it will get overwhelming support on both sides of the aisle, and I look forward to voting for it. To me, the bad is H.R. 3755. I make no bones about it, Mr. Speaker. I am strongly pro-life. I have a 100 percent pro-life voting record. I respect those with a different point of view, but this is not a codification of Roe v. Wade. This is a radical abortion bill that would allow abortion-on-demand in every State under almost any circumstances that the provider of the abortion deems appropriate. Quite frankly, it is an enormous overreach, and it will overturn dozens of State laws in many States all around the country, laws that have been constitutionally approved in the past. That is unfortunate, and I think many on our side that certainly work on women's health are not going to vote in support of abortion-on-demand. Mr. Speaker, finally, to me, the continuing resolution unquestionably is the ugly. It is not all ugly. There are actually some good things in there. I actually commend my friends for voting to keep the government open. I would normally do that as well. No partisan debate there, at least not from me. I also very much support the relief for those Americans who have been the victims of natural disasters, which is contained in the bill. That, too, was negotiated by the Committee on Appropriations. It is an appropriate measure. So, too, is the money set aside to help those fleeing from the Taliban, those who worked with our forces in Afghanistan and who now come to our country and to other countries seeking refuge and support. We should honor the commitment and the sacrifice they made on our behalf. We could have passed a bill like that in a united, bipartisan fashion. Indeed, the Committee on Appropriations had essentially negotiated the deal. Then a decision was made by Democratic leadership to interject a debt ceiling resolution without any discussion, any negotiation, any way to lower that debt or offset it or slow it down or reform the process. That is what many of my friends object to. I voted for debt ceiling increases in the past under both Republican and Democratic Presidents. I certainly would be prepared to do so again, but not without addressing some of the drivers of the debt, and certainly not as a sign off on a $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill that is on top of our normal appropriations, on top of the bipartisan release given and the coronavirus crisis thus far. That is a stretch too far. My friends know that it won't work, yet we are going to kick it over to the Senate, where we know the support is not there. Mr. Speaker, I suspect we will be back on this floor dealing with this matter again, hopefully in a fashion where the two parties can work together and keep the government open and operational. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question and ``no'' on the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), my good friend, and a fellow member of the Rules Committee, the Energy and Commerce Committee, and a member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, it should be easy to agree that securing our southern border is vital for national security. Our next speaker will talk more about H.R. 4828 and the need for vital security improvements as part of an overall strategy to secure and protect the southern border. I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Katko), the author of the bill, and the ranking Republican member on the Homeland Security Committee.

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Comer), my good friend and the distinguished ranking member of the Oversight Committee.

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Pfluger), my good friend and a distinguished Member, to further explain the amendment.

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the Biden administration's reckless and dangerous policies have led to a crisis on the southern border, as the illegal flow of drugs, weapons, and people continues to threaten American communities. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. Spartz), my good friend and a distinguished Member, to speak more about this crisis and solutions contained in H.R. 4828.

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. If we defeat the previous question, Mr. Speaker, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 4828, the Border Security for America Act, for immediate consideration. The last couple of days have made it plainly obvious that the Federal Government has lost control of our southern border. More than 15,000 migrants have set up camp under the Del Rio International Bridge. Customs and Border Patrol have been completely overwhelmed, to the point that Texas Governor Abbott had to take things into his own hands and deploy both the National Guard and Texas Rangers to stop the flow. Rather than allowing the President to simply fiddle, we must do something in Congress to address this unprecedented crisis. H.R. 4828 will address the ongoing crisis in three ways. It would require the immediate resumption of construction of the wall at the southern border; it would provide for new investments in technology; and it would ensure an appropriate level of Customs and Border Protection officers to fulfill CBP's mandate at all ports of entry and along the border. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include the text of my amendment in the Record, along with extraneous materials, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the crisis at the southern border is affecting communities across the United States, but nowhere is that more apparent than in those communities that are near the southern border. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Tony Gonzales), my good friend and a distinguished fellow member of the Appropriations Committee, to speak more about the need for the Border Security for America Act.

Mr. COLE

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, for vote on final passage of H.R. 4346, had I been present, I would have voted NAY on Roll Call No. 239.

Mr. COLE

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Mr. COLE

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my very good friend from Pennsylvania for yielding. I rise today in opposition to the rule, Mr. Speaker. I have two matters I wish to discuss today. First, I want to speak to the Republican motion to recommit on H.R. 4502, on which the House will be voting in the coming days. While I have many concerns with the bills reported out of the Appropriations Committee, none is more alarming than the systematic removal of longstanding provisions to protect the lives of unborn children and preserve the conscience rights of American taxpayers. This has been done in bill after bill after bill. If my motion to recommit passes, Republicans will restore essential pro-life protections that have been stripped from these bills. We will restore the Hyde amendment, which prohibits Federal tax dollars from funding abortions on demand and has been included in appropriations bills for every year for the past 45 years. We will restore the Weldon amendment, which protects American doctors, nurses, and other healthcare professionals from participating in or providing an abortion if they have a moral objection to that procedure. We will restore the Dornan amendment, which prevents District of Columbia resident taxpayer moneys from being used for abortions on demand. We will restore the Smith amendment, which prevents the Federal Employee Health Benefit Plan from subsidizing abortions on demand for Federal workers. We will restore the Helms amendment, which prevents American taxpayers from financing abortions to foreign organizations or countries. Regardless of one's personal views, lawmakers and Presidents of both parties have always agreed that Americans should not be forced to pay for abortions on demand with their hard-earned tax dollars. It is not too late for Democrats to change course, abandon their radical, far-left policies, and restore these important protections before a final vote on this measure. Every Democrat who is not a freshman has voted to support this language and these amendments on this floor, and we know they must again if any of these appropriations bills are ever to become law. All Republicans in the House stand united with the American people on this issue, and none will support appropriations bills that do not include these important pro-life protections. We urge Democrats to accept the motion to recommit, restore these bipartisan compromises, and allow appropriations bills to move forward toward a final negotiation in good faith. Ultimately, failure to do so will result in either a continuing resolution or, even worse, a government shutdown later this year. Neither outcome should ever be acceptable to any Member on this floor. Let me now turn, Mr. Speaker, if I may, to an issue that is more parochial but where the outlook is more promising. That is the Federal response to the so-called McGirt decision by the United States Supreme Court. Many Members will not be aware of this, but last year, the Supreme Court decided that much of Oklahoma, for the purposes of criminal prosecution, remains Indian Country. In Indian Country, only the Federal Government and Tribal law enforcement officials can prosecute Indians who commit crimes, again, on Indian reservations. That, obviously, in the State of Oklahoma, will now call for enormously robust Federal law enforcement and Tribal law enforcement capabilities. I am happy to report that in one of the measures that we face today, that reality has been taken into account. Frankly, our friends, the Biden administration, asked for an additional $70 million for the Department of Justice to finance additional U.S. attorneys, additional Federal marshals, and additional FBI for Oklahoma to respond to the McGirt decision. Sadly, our friends did not request similar funds for Tribal law enforcement officials, and none of the bills in front of us actually deal with that issue. Last night, we placed an amendment dealing with this before this House. It was part of an en bloc amendment. I actually believe if it had come on its own, it would have passed. But it failed. However, the appropriations process is a long process, and I think negotiations in good faith with the full committee will eventually result in additional Federal dollars for law enforcement. Regardless, that Supreme Court decision, the McGirt decision, means the Federal Government and Tribal law enforcement officials must do more in this area. Again, one of the bills in front of us helps with regard to the Federal Government. I am hopeful, in the final negotiations, we can do more on McGirt. My last point, Mr. Speaker, is simply to say we need to look at all of these bills collectively. Just as a piece of friendly advice to my friends, if we are going to get to a deal, three things absolutely have to happen. The first is, the amount of money we spend on defense simply must go up. There is not enough money in the bills passed out of the Appropriations Committee to adequately fund our defense in a dangerous world. Second, the outrageous domestic explosion of spending must come down. We simply, as my friend from Pennsylvania pointed out, can't afford a spending spree. Finally, and most importantly, and my friends need to realize this politically, for any of these bills to pass the United States Senate and ultimately become law, all the pro-life provisions that they have systematically stripped out of these bills have to be restored. Otherwise, my friends will get Donald Trump's last negotiated budget for the second year of the Biden administration. I don't think that is what they want, but that is exactly where we are headed unless they change course and work with us to preserve these longstanding, pro-life protections that have been in these bills for, in many cases, decades.

Mr. COLE

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Bishop), a passionate advocate on this issue, who will speak more about the previous question.

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

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, it should be easy to agree that schools, especially primary schools, should focus solely on facts-based education, without political overtones. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from South Carolina (Ms. Mace), who will speak more about the importance of defeating the previous question because of the potential indoctrination of school children posed by schools teaching critical race theory.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Owens), the author of this amendment to further explain the amendment.

Mr. COLE

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include the text of the amendment in the Record immediately prior to the vote on the motion to recommit.