Byron Donalds

Mr. DONALDS

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chairman, I did not hear an argument as to why $250 million needs to be spent for the Foreign Agriculture Service. What I heard, Mr. Chairman, was talk about the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act which, by the way, has yielded more tax revenue to the Federal Government than at any other time in American history. The minority party refuses to acknowledge the fact that actual tax policy changes in a positive way which reduces rates on producers in our country actually yields more tax revenue to the Federal Government. They refuse to acknowledge that to this day. If you are going to ask for a recipe for fiscal sanity in this Nation, it is to actually lower marginal tax rates over a consistent period of time--consistent, controlled spending restraint at the Federal level over a period of time. Those two things will actually lead us to spending less in this government and provide more prosperity to all of the people that we serve, regardless of where they fall on the economic ladder. Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues to support this amendment. This is what we should be doing. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chairman, my amendment in short does something very simple. It actually reduces the funding requirement for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission back to FY 2018 levels. In short, Mr. Chairman, the job of the CFTC has been operating for a very long time. The additional $96 million in money, it is not clear why they need that to be able to regulate the Commodity Futures Trading platform. Nothing miraculously has changed in commodity trading from 2018 to 2024, so in my view, Mr. Chairman, we need to restore those levels back to the FY18 levels in part because the CFTC will still be able to accomplish their mission, number one. Number two, we are running a $2 trillion deficit this fiscal year. We have to actually begin to pull some of these agencies back two levels so the American taxpayer can actually begin to afford, and not the wishful thinking of Federal agencies. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chairman, a couple of things. Number one, the regulatory mission and the enforcement mission for the CFTC has not been encumbered in any way over the last several years, so cutting their spending back at a time when the American taxpayer does not have more money, first, to give to the Federal Government and its leviathan of overspending but, number two, borrowing more money from its future is just not the prudent measure to do. That is one and two. Number three, Congress has not outlined any regulatory framework around the digital assets framework. It does not exist because Congress has not spoken about digital assets. For the CFTC to take appropriations to regulate a space it has no legal authority to regulate, in my view, is outside the purview of the CFTC. There might be a time in the future where Congress would regulate legislative responsibilities around the digital assets marketplace, but that has not occurred at this time. Number four, I would agree with the gentleman from Pennsylvania, the CFTC, with respect to all the other regulators, is one of the most cost-effective. Obviously, I believe the SEC is bloated and, frankly, out of control in a myriad of areas, but that does not mean that we just turn a blind eye to the budgets of every aspect of the Federal Government. We have to bring some semblance of fiscal sanity to this government and starting even with the good ``cops on the beat'' is a responsible thing to do. The CFTC can still accomplish its mission if their budget is restrained to a degree. There has not been any really significant issues in the derivative markets since, frankly, 2008, where the CFTC has not been able to accomplish its mission. This lower funding level will allow them to do the same. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DONALDS

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment, which establishes a voluntary pilot apprenticeship program for students at Part 141 flight schools. Up front, I will stress that this amendment has wide bipartisan support, and providing yet another option to bolster the pilot pipeline shouldn't be a partisan issue. Specifically, for the proposed apprenticeship program, up to eight students enrolled at Part 141 flight schools would be eligible for a new apprenticeship program each academic year. To emphasize, this is a voluntary program, meaning flight schools can choose to participate. Members might ask: Why establish an apprenticeship program at flight schools? There are several reasons: First, apprentices will receive an airline standard of training and will also be provided flexibility in pursuing career aviation opportunities. Second, the bill will incentivize individuals that have an interest in aviation to attend their local flight schools, which in turn will provide a greater opportunity to bolster the pilot pipeline and a certified flight instructor pipeline simultaneously. Third, this isn't a one-size-fits-all approach. The amendment provides flexibility to establish an apprenticeship program that fits the needs/curricula of the individual flight schools themselves. After all, a flight school in southwest Florida may have completely different operations compared to a flight school in Alaska. Moreover, there are approximately 600 Part 141 flight schools in the United States today; however, only approximately 250 of these flight schools are active in a large way. This amendment includes provisions to incentivize retired airline pilots and retired military pilots to give back, specifically by directing the Secretary of Transportation to develop methods to establish an expedited path that will allow retired pilots to become certified flight instructors. After all, the value of their decades' worth of experience speaks for itself. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Nehls).

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chair, I am prepared to close. Mr. Chair, this is a great amendment with strong bipartisan support. I ask Members to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DONALDS

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. It is not often that the NDAA includes various provisions on advanced nuclear, however, these times are changing. The U.S. military is interested in advanced nuclear reactors to provide clean, baseload power for energy operations, hence why I offered an amendment that expresses support for Project Pele, a DOD program to develop and deploy a portable nuclear microreactor, which will ultimately bolster American national security. Additionally, one of my amendments calls for the development of a strategy to deploy microreactors for natural disaster response. Representing Florida's 19th District, which was hit by Hurricane Ian, we do know the devastation that can occur when you need to access power quickly. These microreactors can help areas do that. Moreover, one of my amendments addresses the potential for the U.S. Space Force to utilize nuclear-powered space vehicles, and another evaluates American national security risks associated with Chinese and Russian interest in space. Congress must recognize the importance of the U.S. military's interest in this innovative technology, and I urge my colleagues to support these six amendments.

Mr. DONALDS

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 529. Let's be very clear. The issue that is happening at our southern border--not the name-calling or talking about former President Trump-- what is happening at our southern border today and for the last 2 years under President Biden has been a dereliction of duty with respect to immigration law in the United States. If the other side wants to speak to the actual issues at hand, it is the fact that the asylum provisions under Joe Biden are a bastardization of asylum procedure as set forth in Federal law by Congress. Mr. Speaker, Congress never anticipated that you would have 6 million-plus people come through the asylum process in 2 years. Congress never contemplated that you would have an asylum procedure where you would have people on a 7- to 10-year waitlist to actually go through an asylum procedure. The President knows this is the case, and it is being done on purpose. That is a congressional purview, and it actually is a dereliction of his duty to faithfully execute the laws of the United States. So if the minority party wants to ask about why we are here, it is that. It is my belief and the belief of many Members on our side of the aisle that this resolution should go to the Homeland Security Committee so they can fully debate and go through the depths of which Joe Biden has been derelict in his duty to execute the laws with respect to immigration in the United States which has major impacts on the American people. There are 100,000 Americans who have died from fentanyl overdoses because of his dereliction of duty. We have the drug cartels on our southern border who have operational control of the southern border because of his dereliction of duty. If the President and congressional Democrats actually took the time to investigate this--like going to the southern border--then they would know this, too. Mr. Speaker, I support this resolution, and Members should be in support of it, as well.

Mr. DONALDS

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Speaker, I actually want to welcome the people who are here in the gallery. I am glad they are here to see this. What they are witnessing is actually something functional that Congress should be doing. We have a Federal agency called the ATF that has unilaterally decided that they want to make illegal a piece of equipment that they legalized more than a decade ago. The ATF said that the pistol brace is a functional and legal piece that can be added to--and I stress ``added to''--a firearm, and they allowed it to be sold in the United States for more than a decade. Now, why do I say, ``added to''? The question for the people in the gallery and the people watching on C-SPAN across the country is: Have you ever seen a pistol brace? It is mostly plastic and/or carbon fiber. It wraps around your forearm, and it has a little pole that sticks out to the midpoint of your hand. The purpose of said brace is for people who actually had an arm injury but still wanted to take advantage of their Second Amendment rights, and the ATF more than a decade ago allowed that brace to be sold in the United States. We now have the same ATF who is deciding unilaterally to go back and say that that brace now needs to be registered, and if you don't register it, you are a felon in the United States. If that is not a gross violation of separation of powers, I don't know what is. Congress never gave the ATF that authority to criminalize American citizens after they were allowed to buy a piece of equipment. If an agency says that they think a piece of equipment is a detriment to public safety, then it is the requirement of the agency and the executive branch to come to this body and ask for legal permission to say so. They did not. They don't just get to act on their own accord. They don't just get to define terms for themselves unless Congress gives them that ability. Mr. Speaker, one of the fundamental problems we are having here at the national level is that we have too many agencies who are taking too much latitude with the liberties of the American people. Instead of going to their Representatives for clarification, they decide that they want to make them felons through the back door. That is abhorrent. That is a violation of separation of powers. It is a violation of the very Constitution, and it is a violation of the liberties of the American people that we are all here to represent. Regardless of how you feel about guns, and regardless of how you may feel about a pistol brace, none of us should be supportive of an agency using their authorities or not using any of their authorities to criminalize the American people. This is a good CRA. We should be voting up on this CRA.

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague from Texas yielding me additional time, but I don't think I will need another minute. Mr. Speaker, we should be voting for this measure. This is a measure to stop a Federal agency from stepping over its bounds and turning law- abiding American citizens into felons. A ``no'' vote on this measure is a vote to allow the Federal agencies to run amok, unobstructed over the will of the people. Our Members should be supporting it. Frankly, every Member in this Chamber should be supporting this resolution today.

Mr. DONALDS

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chair, as is often said in this Chamber, I didn't anticipate debating, but as I sit on the floor listening to some of the things coming from the Democrats about this bill, a lot of it is just simply not true. The Democrats are accusing us of providing funds and slush funds to Big Oil, but in the very Inflation Reduction Act that they passed last Congress--on a partisan basis, mind you--there is $20 billion in that bill that goes to the green energy--I don't know--environment slush fund. The EPA is already saying, Mr. Chair, that that $20 billion is being basically earmarked for a handful of special interests that the American people have no idea about. The Democrats want to lecture us about making sure that we stop the polluters, but their own energy plan actually empowers the biggest polluter on the planet, and that is China. It is China that mines all the minerals for electric batteries, and China does not care about emission standards. The Democrats have no problem empowering China when it comes to mineral production. They have no problem empowering China when it comes to oil production. They just want to limit it here in the United States. This is the same backward thinking that the Europeans have realized in the face of Putin's aggression in Ukraine. It was all good to let Russia drill as long as Europe didn't drill. Mr. Chair, that does not work when it comes to energy production. H.R. 1 brings common sense back to America's energy matrix. It is an all-of-the-above strategy. Listen, I am a Member who has some issues, but I am voting for the legislation because it is far more important to put America in first position when it comes to energy exploration on the globe, as opposed to funding these Green New Deal think tanks and these Green New Deal energy consortiums that haven't proven that they can deliver baseload power to address the needs of the American people. We have an energy problem. That is true. Our energy problem starts first with having cheap and readily available energy for poor Americans, middle-income Americans, small business owners, medium-sized business owners, and, yes, even the people who are wealthy among us. Our economy thrives with a robust energy matrix, not one divided up based upon special interests from the left. That does not work. What works is actually using tried and true energy production standards. By the way, when we drill for natural gas and explore for natural gas and oil here in America, we do it cleaner than anywhere else on the globe. We do it better than anywhere else on the globe, so much so that people want to import it from us. That sounds like a quality plan for America, not the dogma from the Democrats. I have been hearing the talking points all week. Polluters over people? That is a joke. The only people who are putting interests over people are the Democrats with their faulty energy policy. It must stop. We have to put Americans first. Support H.R. 1.

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the time and the effort here. In an effort to ultimately streamline the regulatory approval timeline, my amendment requires the implementation of a study that explores the licensing and permitting process of other energy sources under the Department of Energy's jurisdiction. By studying the licensing procedures of various energy sources, we can streamline the regulatory process overall by cutting down unnecessary red tape. My amendment seeks to optimize American power production, create a sense of ease and standardization in the regulatory maze surrounding various energy sources and examine other regulatory procedures to safely expedite the approval timeline. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DONALDS. Madam Chair, it is important for us to understand that there are two key investments that America is going to need to make. One is increasing our domestic uranium mining capabilities, and number two is bolstering our domestic uranium conversion and enrichment capabilities. If the concern of the United States is to find a way to increase baseload power, and also the necessary concern about emissions, then nuclear power is the path forward for that. We have to take stock of our uranium capabilities here in the United States. Madam Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman), the chair of the Natural Resources Committee.

Mr. DONALDS. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. DONALDS. Madam Chair, I rise in support of this amendment. What this amendment really does is it requires a study on America's current uranium supply, specifically looking into the status of and the quality of such domestic uranium deposits, and it seeks policy solutions relating to America's domestic uranium challenges. My amendment also requires analysis of America's supply in comparison to other countries around the globe. In short, Madam Chair, if you are going to embrace nuclear power in the United States, we also have to understand what our uranium needs are. We have to be able to assess them, and that is what the nature of my amendment does. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Self) to talk about this amendment, as well.

Mr. DONALDS. Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman from Arizona for his concerns, and that is something I definitely want to work on as we move forward. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DONALDS

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate and commend Fort Myers' Southwest Florida International Airport, better known as RSW, for being ranked the number one airport in the United States of America, according to Travel Lens U.S.A. Airport Report. As the Member of Congress that proudly represents RSW, I am excited to stand here today to shine light on this distinct accolade within my district. In 2022, RSW set a record for the total number of passengers, despite the severe impact stemming from Hurricane Ian. To be frank, there are many reasons why a record number of Americans are visiting and moving to southwest Florida. The inherent beauty of RSW speaks for itself--now imagine the stunning beauty throughout my entire district. I can confidently say that I have the most beautiful district in the country and the best district overall, especially considering how many Members come and visit my district. Finally, I want to share a few quick statistics. The average wait time at RSW is only 16 minutes. It is second in the Nation for the lowest amount of carbon emissions per passenger. Number three, it has the fourth highest passenger satisfaction rating in the United States of America. Once again, I congratulate RSW for receiving this great honor for being ranked America's best airport.

Mr. DONALDS

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding time. Mr. Speaker, in short, the pandemic is over. It is time for Federal employees to go back to the office. I find it interesting in this debate that one of the things that is occurring right now is that the President's budget is due next week. We are in the middle of this calamity around debt ceiling which the President, by the way, has led us to. His budget is due next week, and he is telling everybody he needs another month. I wonder if this is because some of his own budget staff aren't in the office. This is something that should have been done long ago. If the President was doing his job being the leader of the executive branch, those employees would have been back. Since Congress is the body responsible for appropriating funds to the executive branch and the President does not do his job of making sure it is working effectively, then Congress does have a responsibility to make sure that these employees come back and get back to work. Life has been happening here in the people's House. A couple of things: It has already been said about the IRS delays. It is shocking that right now it takes 2 to 4 months to get assigned an agent. If you call the IRS, you won't get a call back for 4 weeks. It is also important to understand that right now it takes 30 days for USCIS to respond to a Congressional inquiry. There are many backlogs at the VA; some of them almost 2 years, 197,000 backlogs. How is that affecting the men and women who have served our country with honor and with dignity? Mr. Speaker, this is simple stuff. Most of the American people have gone back to work. All we are saying is let's go back to pre-pandemic protocols which does have telework provisions throughout all of the Federal agencies. It is clear, looking at the backlogs that have occurred through COVID-19 and continuing, the extended telework situation in the Federal agencies is not working for the American people. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues should be supporting this legislation. This is good legislation. It will help all of the American people and, frankly, help the President probably pass his budget on time.

Mr. DONALDS

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Speaker, I was delayed on my way to the floor. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 26, H. Res. 11.

Mr. DONALDS

Mr. DONALDS. Madam Speaker, Metal Detectors stopped me. Had I been present, I would have voted ``NAY'' on rollcall No. 455. Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th Congress Bacon (Stauber) Bilirakis (Fleischmann) Bowman (Tlaib) Brown (MD) (Trone) Buchanan (Bucshon) Carter (TX) (Weber (TX)) Cawthorn (Nehls) Chu (Beyer) Conway (LaMalfa) Curtis (Moore (UT)) DeFazio (Pallone) Demings (Dean) Deutch (Wasserman Schultz) Diaz-Balart (Reschenthaler) Dunn (Cammack) Fletcher (Pallone) Gimenez (Malliotakis) Gonzalez, Vicente (Garcia (TX)) Gosar (Weber (TX)) Herrera Beutler (Valadao) Jacobs (CA) (Garamendi) Jacobs (NY) (Sempolinski) Jayapal (Cicilline) Johnson (TX) (Stevens) Khanna (Garcia (TX)) Kirkpatrick (Pallone) LaHood (Wenstrup) Lawson (FL) (Evans) Maloney, Sean (Jeffries) Mast (Waltz) Mfume (Evans) Murphy (FL) (Peters) Newman (Beyer) Ocasio-Cortez (Neguse) Palazzo (Fleischmann) Pfluger (Ellzey) Porter (Neguse) Rice (NY) (Morelle) Rice (SC) (Meijer) Ryan (OH) (Dean) Salazar (Waltz) Sherman (Garamendi) Soto (Wasserman Schultz) Speier (Garcia (TX)) Steel (Obernolte) Steube (Reschenthaler) Swalwell (Gomez) Titus (Pallone) Torres (NY) (Correa) Upton (Meijer) Vargas (Garamendi) Wagner (Barr) Wilson (FL) (Cicilline)

Mr. DONALDS

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this terrible bill because this terrible bill will increase the cost of energy on every hardworking American in the United States. This bill actually calls for a doubling of the excise tax on oil and on gas, doubling of the royalties on oil and on gas. I was in my district yesterday with Americans for Prosperity at the True Cost of Washington event where they actually brought down the price of gasoline to $2.38, the price it was before Joe Biden took office. I had families in my district crying because they could finally put gas in their cars and food on their dinner table in that day. The Democrats come here today, and they want to lecture us about putting people over politics? That is a joke, and it is a lie. These tax increases on oil and gas will only hurt poor families all across America. I don't care if you are in Seattle, Washington; I don't care if you are in Miami, Florida; you could be in Chicago, Illinois; New York City; or San Francisco, California; those tax increases hurt the very poor among us, and the Democrats are cool with it. Mr. Speaker, vote ``no'' on this bill.

Mr. DONALDS

Mr. DONALDS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hill) for yielding. Energy prices are up over 35 percent. Groceries have surged more than 11.9 percent. The consumer price index is up 9.1 percent. The producer price index is up close to 12 percent. None of this was happening before the American Rescue Plan was passed by Congressional Democrats and signed into law by Joe Biden. Before that time period, our inflation rate was holding steady between 2 and 3 percent. What happened? What happened was the Congressional Democrats and the President of the United States, Joe Biden, unleashed a labor shortage on the United States. People did not have to go to work in order to continue to buy goods. So what happens when you take people out of the workforce is that they have money to spend, but there is not enough supply in the economy because enough people are not working to provide the products for enough goods. So if there are not enough goods, but everybody has money, prices go up. It happens every single time. This is very simple. Even Lawrence Summers, who was an economic adviser to Bill Clinton, said that the American Rescue Plan was going to unleash a massive inflation in the United States. House Republicans said if you pass that bill, it is going to unleash a massive inflation the United States. So the American people need to know and understand that it is the policies of Congressional Democrats and Joe Biden that have unleashed the worst inflation most Americans have ever seen in their lives.