Rosa DeLauro

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I once again would reiterate what I have been saying all along and what I have said in the last several days: this House has overwhelmingly, in the last 2 days, the majority has demonstrated that we want to provide support for Ukraine's self-defense. We had several amendments: a Biggs amendment, a Gaetz amendment, a Greene amendment, all of which resulted in overwhelming support for Ukraine. I continue to believe that this is an appeasement strategy of the far right and, in fact, does not have a majority support in this body, but I believe that standing with our allies does have support. I would reiterate that our own Department of Defense--something that I believe my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have great regard for, listen to, support their efforts, increase funding for defense--care deeply about this issue of our national security and our ability to be able to defend our allies overseas. They all have a great affinity for this effort, and I applaud that, but that seems now to be abandoned. In the words of the Under Secretary of the Department of Defense, they cannot do without this funding. I would remind Members that in a very specific and poignant letter it lays out that: ``The bottom line is we cannot sustain adequate levels of Ukraine assistance with transfer authority alone. ``Delays to additional funding would also be perceived by Ukraine as a sign of wavering U.S. support and likely as a betrayal of our previous commitments.'' Mr. Speaker, the United States betraying our commitment to Ukraine is essentially the bottom line on this continuing resolution. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this continuing resolution. If you cannot agree to the funding levels for 2024 in order to keep government open, you must pass a continuing resolution. A 30 percent slashing of the Federal Government only continues the majority's inability and unwillingness to govern responsibly. I would argue that you cannot call it a conservative resolution, either. There is nothing conservative about the indiscriminate destruction of public investments in America's families. Regardless of what it is called, this bill inflicts serious consequences on the American people, whether it is signed into law, which it never will be, or because of the costly shutdown it triggers. We are less than 48 hours from a government shutdown, and what do we have to show for it? The American people are tired of the doublespeak coming from the majority. There are House Republicans who have repeatedly assured the public that nobody wants a shutdown, and there are others who tell us they think a shutdown would be a good thing for the country. Maybe they are not worried about a shutdown because they know that Members of Congress will not miss a paycheck. I can speak for every Democrat in the Congress when I say we oppose this Republican shutdown, a shutdown that will be devastating for our country. What have the Republicans offered as their effort to avoid a government shutdown? What would this bill do? This bill would slash investments in cancer research, leave communities recovering from natural disasters out to dry, and undercut allies with a $1 billion cut to Israel and further cuts to our support of Ukraine. It defunds law enforcement by 30 percent and makes our communities less safe. It takes food out of the mouths of millions. This bill raises costs for American families at a time when the cost of living is already too high. It cuts title I education funding, the bedrock of American public education, to the effect of 150,000 teachers being pulled out of classrooms. Mr. Speaker, 275,000 children would lose access to Head Start, undermining early education and making it harder for parents to work. In an unprecedented move, the House Republican bill cuts the Low- Income Home Energy Assistance Program, LIHEAP, funding by roughly 74 percent. More than 5 million households will lose their home heating or cooling benefits or have their benefits cut by hundreds of dollars, threatening their ability to heat their homes in winter or cool their homes in summer. House Republicans are threatening public health by cutting the Food Safety and Inspection Service by 30 percent. Without adequate inspection staff in our meat and poultry plants, these plants will be required to close or reduce their hours. It hurts workers' paychecks, reduces the meat and poultry supply, raises the cost of food for American families, and risks the consumption of contaminated food. With the cuts in this bill, 400,000 fewer small businesses would be assisted by the Small Business Administration's entrepreneurial development programs. This would have a significant impact on small business owners, especially among veterans, women, and Native American entrepreneurs. This bill has no future. At best, it is dead on arrival in the Senate and would never be signed by the President of the United States. Everyone in this room knows that keeping the government operating and passing bills to fully fund the next fiscal year will require bipartisan cooperation. You need the House and the Senate, Democrats and Republicans, to pass appropriations bills. Yet, House Republicans are refusing to work with and negotiate with Democrats. This is a pointless charade with grave consequences for the American people. House Democrats are ready to work. We were ready in the spring. We were ready last week. We are ready this weekend. We are ready today, tomorrow, and every day to work in good faith with our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to meet the needs of the American people. Let's get to work, serious work. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I will just take a second to tell the gentleman from Arkansas that, with this bill, you will cut 1,460 teachers from your district and almost 46,000 households will have their low-income energy assistance benefits terminated. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz), the distinguished ranking member of the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Subcommittee.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I want to take a few seconds here to let the gentleman from Texas know that the State of Texas will lose almost 14,000 teachers. That is going to be really tough to explain that to families when their children do not have a teacher in the classroom. In addition to that, almost 77,000 Texans will lose their low-income energy assistance benefits or have those benefits cut. It is going to be a tough time for folks, come the cooler months or the warmer months, to take advantage of this. I think people need to be mindful of the consequences of a 30 percent cut, or in the case of LIHEAP, a 74 percent cut, that they are proposing today. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Ramirez).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I remind the gentleman from Texas that the eyes of the people of Texas are upon you when you are thinking about really 77,000 seniors and kids without any benefits from the low-income energy assistance program and also 14,000 teachers will be gone from Texas schools. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Clarke).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Clarke).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I would take a second to tell the gentleman from Ohio that 232,000 people in Ohio will be without low-income energy assistance benefits. Further, there will be 5,500 teachers who will be pulled out of classrooms, and the families in both instances will suffer while the gentleman talks about issues that are not truly affecting what is happening in the everyday lives of the people that he represents. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Texas.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I find it hard to believe that the gentleman from Texas believes that wasteful spending is on teachers who really teach our youngsters, and 14,000 of them will be gone in the State of Texas. I find it hard to believe that it is wasteful spending to deal with 77,000 people who will lose their LIHEAP benefits. Is that wasteful spending, for people to have heat or be cooled or kids being taught in school? Let's talk about wasteful spending and the tax cuts my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are willing to give the richest one-tenth of 1 percent of the people in this country and the richest corporations, and tax cheats, I might add, as well. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Espaillat), the distinguished ranking member of the Legislative Branch Subcommittee.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, to both of the gentlemen from Florida, 8,500 teachers, gone. Think about the kids who are going to school and there is no teacher for them. Think about folks who need to heat or cool their homes. We are looking at 36,000 households that will be without those benefits. Do they really care about those folks? Probably not. As a Democrat, I took the lead on the infant formula crisis--I don't know where my colleague was during that crisis--and called to attention a company that knowingly sold tainted product and wound up killing three or four people. I don't know where he was during that. I know where I was, and I know where the administration was. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson), the distinguished ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I remind the gentleman from Arizona that there will be 63,000 households in Arizona that will be without the low-income energy assistance benefits. These are not just numbers. These are people, and we are making their lives more difficult at a time when there is serious inflation and when there is, in fact, a high cost of living. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle are only adding and increasing to that high cost of living. I might also remind the gentleman from Arizona that we are looking at about 2,800 teachers. Now, again, these are not just numbers. Children go to school. If there is no teacher to teach them, what is the result? What happens to parents when they find out that their child's teacher is gone? If there was a teaching shortage before, this will make it even worse. That is the result of the cuts that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to make. It is there. It is in black and white. You can't make up the numbers. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. It is almost laughable to think about chaos. I think the majority has demonstrated overwhelmingly in the last several days, the last several months, an unwillingness to govern, an inability to govern, and chaos, general chaos, here. It is interesting. The gentleman is from South Dakota, where, last I understood, a little bit like the Northeast, in New England, it gets cold. It gets cold in the wintertime in South Dakota. The gentleman is happy to see 24,000 individuals not get energy assistance, low-income heating assistance. We may be taking up a collection of hats and coats and gloves, et cetera, because they are not going to get their LIHEAP benefits in a cold climate. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I want to let the gentleman from Wisconsin know that 195,000 households are beneficiaries of the LIHEAP program. They will be jettisoned from that program. If you think it is cold in this Chamber, head to Wisconsin and you will know how cold it is in the wintertime. Think twice about whether or not you will vote to cut 195,000 people's benefits. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I find it unbelievable that the gentlewoman from New York would support a bill that cuts $1 billion from our ally in the Middle East--that is, from Israel. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. What we are looking at here is a piece of legislation that makes a 30 percent cut in programs that have a serious effect on the lives of the people in this country. Let me just lay out some of them because these have not been talked about so far. The National Institutes of Health will be cut. There would be a reduction of 7,000 research grants. I think we have people in this Chamber on both sides of the aisle who have had a loved one with a cancer diagnosis or Alzheimer's or heart disease, but there is a willingness to cut the National Institutes of Health and thereby cut 7,000 research grants. Let's take a look at our allies. We speak about Israel and Ukraine. Israel will receive a $1 billion cut in the funds that the U.S. provides. We talk about Israel as being our closest ally in the Middle East. People should understand what is in this bill. We defund--not we--my Republican colleagues defund law enforcement, reduce drug enforcement administration agents, Federal law enforcement officers, eliminate hundreds of State and local law enforcement. They talk about crime, and they talk about law and order, but there is a willingness to cut the funds in order for us to make our communities safe. Social Security offices, the field offices, would be forced to close down, reducing access to in-person services. People applying for disability benefits will wait additional months for the processing of claims. That is what is in store with this bill if you support it. Wildfire suppression efforts will be hindered, 57 percent cuts, and we know what devastation wildfires have had all over our country. Look at what happened in Maui. Unbelievable that they would talk about a bill, extol a bill that has such devastating repercussions on the people of this country. They slashed the resources for the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline. Opioid use disorder. They are worried and talk about an opioid crisis, but let's cut off the avenue where people can get treatment and help and potentially save their lives. Education. It is an abomination, what they will do to education because they are on a march to eliminate public education in the United States of America; that opportunity that all of our families have said: Go to school, get an education so that you can succeed. Rural America? Let's care about rural America, not cutting the loans and grants for farmers and rural communities. They will make it harder for farmers to access loans and grants, making home farm ownership more difficult. They cut rural housing, rural utility, broadband to keep people in touch, and they eliminate health services for rural and underserved families. Mr. Speaker, 2 million vulnerable individuals and families will lose access to healthcare services. They take food out of the mouths of children, families, and seniors. Mr. Speaker, there needs to be a ``no'' vote on this irresponsible continuing resolution. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the 2024 State, foreign operations, and related programs funding bill. I will begin with comments from President Trump's former Secretary of Defense, Mark Esper. He had this to say in response to this very bill's cut of the State and foreign operations allocation: ``When we don't lead, we create a vacuum that will be filled instead by China.'' He continued: ``America's leadership means more than just military capability. Diplomacy and foreign assistance are part of it, too. This proposed budget would upend that relationship by gutting our civilian toolkit and depriving America of the diplomatic leadership whose benefits I have seen last a lifetime.'' Also, the Global Health Council, together with 70 other organizations--Catholic Relief Services, United States Global Leadership Coalition, American Jewish Committee, InterAction, ONE Campaign, Christian Connections for International Health, and CARE USA--expressed serious national security concerns with the House Republicans' funding plan. Mr. Chair, I plan to submit a compilation of these concerns for the record. We are told that this 2024 State and foreign operations funding bill is tough on our adversaries. The opposite is true. This bill cedes America's position as the leader of the global community. It weakens our national security, shortchanges foreign assistance, hinders our ability to address the climate crisis, and harms women around the world. This is a reversal of the United States' historic position on the world stage and promotes isolationism. We are supposed to be leaders of the free world. The majority is diminishing the United States, what we stand for, and what our values are for our own people and for people around the world who look to us for inspiration and hope. Damage has already been done as partners and allies wonder whether the United States will be with them or whether they will be forced to turn to China or Russia to get needed investment or support in international institutions. With China surpassing the United States as the largest trading partner in many countries in Latin America and Africa, China has more embassies, consulates, and diplomats than any other country in the world. They are contesting our model of democracy and capitalism around the world, and they are going virtually unchallenged. This bill is an unfathomable reduction of our Nation's ability to engage in diplomacy and to project soft power by over one-third. Knowing such a cut would be irresponsible and lead to negative repercussions around the world, this bill claws back billions of dollars, $11 billion of which comes from the EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, part of the Inflation Reduction Act. Yesterday, this body debated how to address the challenges related to the thousands of desperate people reaching our southern border. However, with these cuts, the Department of State and USAID will be forced to reduce programs that engage countries like Colombia and Guatemala to address the very conditions causing people to flee to the United States. We cannot wait to address the issue when people are already at our border. We all know what we should be doing right now, and this is not it. This is an exercise in futility because this bill is going nowhere. The urgent issue is to keep our government open. Everyone in this body knows that keeping the U.S. Government running and passing full- year bills will require bipartisanship. We have a bipartisan agreement in the Senate, a compromise to keep our government open and to address the Nation's concerns. Let us move in that direction. Democrats and Republicans already compromised when they passed the debt limit bill, but because House Republicans immediately reneged, they have moved us to the brink of a shutdown, a Republican shutdown that will have consequences on every senior, veteran, and child in America and on our diplomats and our servicemembers around the world. Let us move to keep our government open and support the Senate's bipartisan compromise.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I have witnessed a lot of surprising and at times confounding things in my time in the House of Representatives, especially in this 118th Congress, but I do not recall a time that this body with an overwhelming bipartisan majority voted to appropriate funds that were then stripped from a bill in the darkness of night. Three hundred thirty-nine members of the House of Representatives, including a majority of the majority, voted yesterday to include support for Ukraine in the Defense appropriations bill. Ninety-three voted against it. Then the Republicans stripped the Ukraine funding from the Defense bill to placate an extreme minority over the will of the majority and prioritizes maintaining the gavel over responsible governing. Russian tyranny and aggression threaten more than just Ukraine's borders. We learned in Georgia, we learned in Crimea, if you stand by while Russia takes an inch, they will take a mile. Vladimir Putin must be held to account for upending Europe's security and peacetime for a pointless and bloody war which has disrupted energy markets and triggered food insecurity around the world. We must be clear about what this means, plain and simple. This is appeasement like the world experienced in 1938, which led to a cascading murderous result. Ukraine's fight for democracy and sovereignty requires decisive action and absolute support from the free world. We must act like the leaders of the free world. We must not abandon our position as the world's beacon of democratic values. We must not surrender our global influence to Russia, China, or any group that threatens democracies. Members of this body have come together again and again to reaffirm our commitment to helping Ukraine defend itself against this vicious invasion. We did so again yesterday. Regardless of which votes the majority is afraid of taking, Democrats will not be afraid of supporting our allies. Funds for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative should remain in the base bill. That is where they have been since 2015. Republicans now have an $826 billion Defense bill that does not include any assistance for Ukraine, the most urgent security crisis that we face in the world. Even if House Republicans insist on upending our process, we cannot abandon Ukraine. I urge the Speaker of the House to lead those who actually wish to govern, not those who seek to appease Putin. We need to support Ukraine.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, I rise today in opposition to this Defense Appropriations Bill. This bill is historically an opportunity to come together on a bipartisan basis to make investments that further American leadership around the world. protect our national security. support American workers and servicemembers. and promote global democracy. I come from a defense state. I have always been proud that this bill creates jobs in Connecticut and boosts my district's long- term economy. I have supported this critical legislation in the past. But l cannot support this bill, which harms our military readiness by undermining morale and failing to support our servicemembers with its divisive policy riders. Neither the Army. Navy nor the Air Force have been unable to meet their recruiting goals, and this bill will do nothing to rectify this situation--it will only make it harder to recruit and retain service members. At a time when the Department of Defense is struggling to meet readiness goals, this bill cuts $1.1 billion in salaries for civilian positions. Research, development, acquisition, and oversight efforts will all suffer from these drastic cuts. The work still needs to get done so the Department will have to hire contractors--which are more expensive and less bang for the buck. And nearly three-quarters of a billion dollars cut from climate- related programs and a ban on the effort to reduce carbon pollution will tie our hands in the face of the national security risk that will define this century. House Republicans are using annual funding bills as vehicles to further their goal of making abortion illegal nationally and spreading hate and discrimination. Republicans have once again discarded the majority of the American people's views and injected their own beliefs into the deeply personal health decisions of women and families. This bill bans funding for expenses incurred for the reproductive health care needs of servicemembers and their families. When women consider serving in our nation's military, they should not have to weigh whether or not politicians in Washington, D.C. think they should have access to reproductive care. They should not worry that an unplanned pregnancy could disrupt their ability to serve or derail the plans they are making for their family. We should trust the American people to make these decisions for themselves--and we should especially trust those who have made the decision to selflessly serve in America's armed forces. By using this legislation to attack LGBTQ+ servicemembers, ban funding for diversity efforts, and stand between American service personnel and their doctors, the majority is exchanging America's military readiness for cheap political points in the face of escalating conflicts abroad. The bill gives broad license to discriminate and protects disseminators of misinformation while limiting the free speech of those who express ideas the majority opposes. This bill is dangerous, and this bill leaves women and minority servicemembers behind. Diversity of background and culture is and has long been the preeminent strength of our Nation's military. And it will continue to be. I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, the Homeland Security Appropriations bill before us weakens our national security, defunds border security, harms the Homeland Security workforce, and leaves Americans vulnerable to escalating disasters. That we are debating this bill on September 27, 3 days before the end of the fiscal year, when House Republicans have provided no path forward to keep our government open is irresponsible. The House majority has exhibited their own inability and unwillingness to govern by ensuring this bill cannot become law without other partisan legislation moving first, but it cannot become law. Rather than voting to keep our government open and ensuring border protection officers and immigration officials get paid, Republicans are pursuing a path explicitly designed to shut down the Federal Government. A shutdown will have consequences for every American family and on the border and border communities. Mr. Chair, Democrats do not support an open border, but let me be unequivocal. There is a crisis on our southern border. Our border communities are struggling with the influx of immigration. The status quo cannot be maintained. That much, we agree on. Where the majority and minority differ is how we address this issue. We must continue to invest in our processing facilities and in transportation and medical care. We need to have an effective process of determining who is eligible to enter the country and who is not. We must continue to invest in newer technology and in our immigration and border security officials and invest in immigration judges, but we must also think bigger, broader, bolder. We cannot hope to resolve this issue if we only begin addressing it right at the border. We must invest in our partnerships with Latin-American countries and fund the expansion of safe mobility offices. Our Republican colleagues refuse to negotiate with Democrats on these issues. We were kept on the sidelines, and, thus, this bill does not make the sound investments that would actually reduce the burden on our border facilities and our communities. This bill misses important opportunities to address the dire opioid crisis that we face as a Nation. It provides insufficient funding for our ports of entry where the vast majority of these drugs enter our country. We should be focusing resources where we agree they are needed most, like combating fentanyl crossing the border, helping our border communities, advancing our cybersecurity posture, protecting Americans from violent extremism and foreign adversaries. I am also deeply concerned about the conditions that greet migrants and asylum seekers, people who leave their homes out of desperation and necessity. We have a responsibility to ensure the safety of these migrants, especially children, and to provide resources so that those who are entitled to stay under our immigration laws can do so. Please understand, by law the United States is required to take in unaccompanied children from neighboring countries, screen them, house them, and provide safe placement. This bill leaves Americans vulnerable to the growing number and increasing severity of natural disasters, exposes Americans to foreign threats with inadequate cyber and infrastructure security investments, and does not fully fund the Transportation Security Administration personnel. House Republicans claim to care about oversight, but this bill proposes several cuts to programs throughout the Department of Homeland Security which are critical to the oversight of our immigration facilities. This bill also eliminates discretionary funding for refugee processing. It shifts the burden of those costs to an already backlogged and overwhelmed system.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, we all know the enactment of appropriations will require bipartisan agreement on sound investments, not reckless cuts and partisan policy riders. Let us focus. Let us focus on opening the government and keeping it open. There is a bipartisan bill in the Senate that we are now debating--77-19--that is overwhelmingly bipartisan. It will come here. Let's put that bill up. Get bipartisan support on this floor. Bring these harmful consequences to the American people to a close. Don't close the government down.