Warren Davidson

Mr. DAVIDSON

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Hamilton West Side Little League for an outstanding run at the Little League World Series Championship. West Side arrived in Williamsport representing the Great Lakes region and lost a close opening game to Nevada, putting them in the elimination bracket. They responded by winning five straight games and earning a place in the U.S. championship game, ultimately finishing among the final four teams in the tournament. Their performance adds to the proud Little League tradition in Hamilton and gives the community something else to rally around at a time when the city is continuing to build serious momentum. Neighborhoods are being revitalized. Downtowns are filling back up with new businesses, and local employers are investing in creating opportunities for families. Hamilton West Side gave people across Ohio and even the United States another reason to take notice that great things are happening in Hamilton, Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the players, coaches, and families on a remarkable run.

Mr. DAVIDSON

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the great State of Ohio, my home State, for being named the number one State for business. As someone who owned and operated manufacturing businesses in Ohio before coming to Congress, I know firsthand that our State's greatest asset is the hardworking, resilient, and dedicated people who power Ohio's economy and build up our communities that make Ohio thrive. Ohio's number one ranking is a testament to the commitment that has propelled Ohio into national leadership in economic growth and opportunity that directly benefits our workers and our families. Ohio's success didn't happen by accident. It reflects policies that encourage investment, reward innovation, and reduce unnecessary barriers to growth. When government gets out of the way, Americans do what they do best. They build their families, grow businesses, create jobs, and strengthen our communities. Looking ahead, I know Ohio's business leaders, our Chamber of Commerce, and, most importantly, Ohioans themselves will continue to thrive. With God all things are possible, and that is especially true in the great State of Ohio.

Mr. DAVIDSON

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of Chairman Hill's amendment to extend the Defense Production Act for an additional 5 years. For decades, the Defense Production Act has served as an important national security tool. It has continually provided the flexibility to strengthen our industrial base, respond to emergencies, and ensure the United States has resources it needs to meet national security threats at home and abroad. The Defense Production Act helps keep our supply chains secure, strengthens manufacturing in the United States, and ensures that our servicemembers have the support they need to defend our Nation. At a time when our adversaries are investing heavily in new technologies and strengthening their own industrial and defense capabilities, we cannot afford to fall behind. Earlier this Congress, the House Financial Services Committee unanimously advanced bipartisan legislation to reauthorize and modernize the Defense Production Act. I was proud to sponsor that legislation. This reflects a shared understanding that a strong defense industrial base is essential to America's national security and to our economic resilience. Congress has a responsibility to provide our servicemembers with the resources and support they need to accomplish their mission safely and effectively, and we must ensure there is no gap in essential provisions. While I am disappointed that this House is not considering the full bipartisan reauthorization of our standalone bill, I do believe it is essential that we provide certainty to our own economy, to our defense industrial base, and to the manufacturers and processors to help keep America secure. This is what a clean, 5-year extension achieves. Mr. Chair, I urge all of our colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. DAVIDSON

Mr. DAVIDSON. Madam Speaker, last month, a small plane crashed into one of the tallest buildings in Beijing, China, during Friday rush hour. The pilot was killed, and 13 people were injured. This happened in the center of a city of more than 20 million people. Thousands of people nearby saw the plane strike the building. People on the street heard the impact and recorded the aftermath. In the United States, an event like this would receive wall-to-wall coverage, and videos would be spread across social media within minutes. However, in Beijing, the government made it nearly impossible for anyone who was not there to even know that it happened. Posts about the crash vanished from Chinese social media, and searches for the building returned only older results. Police prevented people from taking pictures and ordered witnesses to delete footage. Even though China's national broadcaster sits across the street from the crash site, state media failed to inform the Chinese public about what happened. Because China's censorship apparatus links police surveillance with telecommunications networks, search engines, social media platforms, and state-controlled media, it allows the authorities to identify and suppress information that could embarrass the Chinese Communist Party or undermine their preferred narratives with frightening efficiency. China has used these methods before. During the 2022 lockdown protests, videos disappeared from Huawei phones without warning, deleting picture and videos from their phones and even preventing citizens from preserving or sharing what was happening. George Orwell warned about this sort of coercive power. Now this dystopian system is even more efficient and powerful with modern technologies, smartphones, search engines, surveillance cameras, and government controlled platforms. China has shown how effectively this machinery can erase the truth, and other governments are now creating such systems that can be used in the same way. The European Union is building the legal and regulatory framework to control online speech not just in the European Union but across the West, trying to pressure platforms even in the United States. Through the Digital Services Act, regulators can pressure these platforms to remove or suppress content that conflicts with their official narratives on elections, public policy, or other political issues. Companies that resist can face penalties tied to their global revenue, giving governments enormous leverage over what people are allowed to see online. The United Kingdom has incorporated digital ID and is already jailing thousands of its citizens each year for disfavored speech. In the United States, how could such a thing happen? We have the Bill of Rights and the First Amendment protecting speech, but it was already well underway. When Elon Musk bought Twitter, the Biden administration was working to build a Disinformation Governance Board to coordinate their rapidly expanding censorship operations. Orwell referred to this kind of apparatus as the ministry of truth. Unfortunately, Musk's ownership of Twitter only exposed the truth that even a change of administration has not halted the surveillance state here in America. Under the same guise of protecting kids used by the U.K., the USA just passed a digital ID bill under the guise of banning Central Bank Digital Currency. The United States effectively set a go-live date for CBDC in 2030. Under the old ruse of security and public safety, Palantir and Flock have an all-seeing-eye network expanding around the country. These are just some of the tools used in China, and, unfortunately, some of the same companies are using these same tools here in the United States and across Europe. As James Madison astutely noted in Federalist No. 51: ``If men were angels, no government would be necessary.'' Well, if men were angels, then the PATRIOT Act and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act would have never been abused. The abuse was not only foreseeable, because even good men are prone to abuse power, but it happened. If it were still happening, then how would you know, Madam Speaker? These tools are very effective. The old maxim: Power corrupts, but absolute power corrupts absolutely rings true. Around the world, technology is being turned against the citizens of each country by those in power. A comprehensive system of surveillance, coercion, and control is being built. If we cannot see it, then it may already be too late. Freedom surrendered is rarely reclaimed, and with every vote and every dollar, it is now time for this Congress to insist that good governments defend freedom.

Mr. DAVIDSON

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor Dr. R. Duane Satzger, a Cincinnati native, who is retiring after 47 years of distinguished service to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Dr. Satzger earned his bachelor's, master's, and Ph.D. in chemistry from the University of Cincinnati and joined the FDA in 1979. His forensic work in the 1980s Tylenol tampering crisis helped establish the FDA Forensic Chemistry Center in Cincinnati, a laboratory that has protected countless American lives. Over his career, he led the center's elevation to the National Forensic Chemistry Center, oversaw a state-of-the-art 64,000 square- foot renovation completed in 2024, and launched the INTREPID program with Customs and Border Patrol and DEA--a forensic initiative that links illicit drugs to disrupt deadly trafficking networks. With over 40 publications, two U.S. patents, and dozens of FDA honors, Dr. Satzger's record of scientific excellence and public service is extraordinary. America is safer and healthier because of his lifetime of service to our Nation. I wish him and his family a well-earned and happy retirement.

Mr. DAVIDSON

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Speaker, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is a fine tool for foreign intelligence. Unfortunately, it has been abused and corrupted. I am encouraged to hear Mr. Raskin reclaim his opposition to warrantless surveillance, and I am encouraged that there is a bipartisan effort to reform it. In fact, I think the will of this body is that we defend the Constitution and we defend this Nation. We can do both. We are presented this false dilemma that somehow if you just abandon your freedom, you can be more secure. That is a false tradeoff. Freedom surrendered is barely reclaimed, but, by God, we are here to reclaim it today. We want both. We want a warrant to protect the civil liberties of American citizens, and we want the foreign intelligence to be focused on foreign intelligence. We trust the leaders in the Central Intelligence Agency, the NSA, and others to do what they are supposed to do to target foreigners, but clearly, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has abused their access to this data. They have targeted Americans under all sorts of authorities and not just under 702. We have come together in a bipartisan way. Frankly, the bill that we sent to the Senate just this week was bipartisan. Not only did it deal with 702, but it dealt with the money. People need to pay attention. The future of the money is going to determine the future. Central bank digital currency is communist money for the digital age. Unfortunately, some of my Democrat colleagues, who are united in opposition to warrantless surveillance of all forms, somehow don't see the central bank digital currency for what it is. It is the most dystopian surveillance tool ever developed. It corrupts money into a tool for coercion, surveillance, and control. We rejected that, and the Senate didn't even give us a debate. John Thune asked to be the leader of the Senate, but he is not leading. He didn't even bring this to the floor for a debate. He keeps throwing up excuse after excuse. Well, I will tell you: Anyone can find an excuse. Leaders find a way. It is time for John Thune to do that or step aside and let somebody lead the Senate who will give us at least a debate but deliver the results the American people have demanded in this election. Mr. Speaker, I encourage all of our colleagues to come together and defend our Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Mr. DAVIDSON

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Speaker, my name is Warren Davidson, and I love this country with a soldier's passion. More than 30 years ago, I enlisted in the infantry. My chain of command later helped me earn an appointment to the United States Military Academy at West Point. I was commissioned as an infantry officer, serving in the 75th Ranger Regiment, the 101st Airborne, Rakkasans, and The Old Guard. Then and now, I swore an oath to support and defend our Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Make no mistake, Iran is an enemy of the United States. As our military engages them, they do so justly. Unfortunately, they are not yet doing so constitutionally, and that is why we are here today. For some, this debate will be about whether we should even be fighting in Iran. For me, the debate is more fundamental: Is the President of the United States, regardless of the person holding the office, empowered to do whatever he wants? That is not what our Constitution says. Is he empowered to do whatever he wants for 60 or 90 days? That is not what the War Powers Act says. Is there any limit to executive authority whatsoever? I rise in support of this War Powers Resolution today because the moral hazard posed by a government no longer constrained by our Constitution is a grave threat. The threat to a government no longer constrained by the plain meaning of words is not new for Democrats. Recall that Democrats needed help answering: ``What is a woman?'' Unfortunately, Republicans now want to claim they can't answer: ``What is a war?'' This debate isn't even new. Democratic President Harry Truman obstructed a vote on the Korean war, pretending it was, instead, a U.N. police action. Republican Senator Taft from Ohio insisted in vain that Congress should not shirk its duty to vote on declaring war or at least to authorize the conflict. Instead, Congress then, as it has in the past, passively cut checks to fund the war that they refused to authorize. This dereliction of duty is commonly mocked as an example of constitutional avoidance, and it contributed to the passage of the War Powers Act. President Trump's America First message was supposed to be a rejection of the globalist war machine whose endless wars have left America less free, less safe, and more burdened by debt. On the other hand, President Trump has been reluctant to embrace war and has been incredibly successful in diplomacy. In this case, war may well be necessary, but it is far more pressing that we restore a government small enough to fit within the Constitution. We can afford a government that small and no other. America is a Republic, not an empire. Mr. Speaker, I encourage everyone to honor their oath and support our Constitution. Vote ``yes'' on this resolution.

Mr. DAVIDSON

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Speaker, I would ask Mr. McGovern: Is the contention that this is a present condition, that there are U.S. forces in violation of the War Powers Resolution, or is it about a hypothetical future? I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

Mr. DAVIDSON. The contention is it is a pressing condition?

Mr. DAVIDSON. I disagree with that. I will be voting ``no.''

Mr. DAVIDSON

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 225) to require the Inspector General of the Department of Housing and Urban Development to testify before the Congress annually, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this bill.

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 225, the HUD Transparency Act. I thank the gentlewoman from Texas, Congresswoman De La Cruz, for sponsoring this legislation. The HUD Transparency Act of 2025 is a piece of commonsense legislation that strengthens accountability, enhances oversight, and ensures the American people have a clear view into how Federal housing dollars are spent. For years, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, HUD, has administered programs that touch millions of families, seniors, and veterans in communities across our Nation. These programs are critical. They support affordable housing development, combat homelessness, and help communities recover after disasters. Unfortunately, over the years, in my view, the agency has shown time and time again they are unable to perform some basic functions. The agency continually fails to hold local public housing authorities responsible for providing safe housing. Reports from the inspector general, the Government Accountability Office, and our own committee have repeatedly identified some of the same issues: outdated and incomplete reporting, inconsistent and unverifiable data, missed deadlines, and major programs operating without clear evidence of effectiveness. As the branch with the power of the purse, it is Congress' responsibility to ensure tax dollars that go toward HUD's programs are managed effectively, efficiently, and transparently. H.R. 225 delivers on that responsibility. This bill requires the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Housing and Urban Development to annually testify before Congress so we can ensure the Department is meeting its performance reporting and management standards. By requiring the HUD Inspector General to appear in front of Congress, Ms. De La Cruz's bill makes HUD take the necessary steps to publish key performance information, report program outcomes in a timely manner, and makes the data available so Congress and the public can better ensure Federal housing programs are meeting their goals. The HUD Transparency Act is a straightforward, bipartisan solution to a longstanding problem. HUD needs to use consistent reporting formats so Congress can compare outcomes across programs and track progress over time. It ensures that the American people can see how their tax dollars are being used. These are basic principles of good governance. Transparency strengthens public trust and improves program performance. It allows Congress to address problems early instead of after tax dollars have been wasted or ones in need have been left behind. Importantly, this bill does so without imposing new burdens on State or local governments and without slowing down the delivery of critical housing assistance. H.R. 225 simply ensures that HUD operates with the openness and accountability the American people expect and deserve. Mr. Speaker, I thank Ms. De La Cruz for this important measure, and I urge our colleagues to support it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the Congressional Budget Office estimate for this bill.

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. De La Cruz).

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

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. For the reasons I explained earlier, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DAVIDSON

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4423) to continue the pause on disbursements and new financing commitments to the Government of Burma, as amended.

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill.

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4423, the No New Burma Funds Act. I thank the gentlewoman from Georgia (Ms. Williams) for sponsoring this bipartisan legislation. I am pleased to note that this bill passed the Financial Services Committee unanimously by a vote of 54-0 in July of this year. That kind of agreement underscores the seriousness of the threat posed by Burma's military regime and the broad consensus that the United States must respond firmly. The No New Burma Funds Act ensures that the United States will oppose any new World Bank financing that could benefit Burma's illegitimate military junta and supports international efforts to restore democratic governance. Since the military overthrew the elected Burma Government in 2021, Congress has fought to hold Burma's military coup accountable and support the Burmese people in their struggle for freedom to restore their rightful voice in their own government. Yet despite widespread global condemnation, the acting Government of Burma continues to entrench its power, exploit state resources, and suppress democratic aspirations of its citizens, all while seeking access to new streams of international financing. The No New Burma Funds Act responds directly to this challenge by ensuring that the United States continues to use its full voice and vote at the World Bank to maintain a strict pause on disbursements in new financing commitments to the current government in control of Burma. Supporting democratic movements, defending human rights, and advancing stability in Southeast Asia are in our American interest. When international institutions inadvertently enable authoritarian regimes through new financing, our credibility suffers, and in this case the Burmese people would pay the price. By reaffirming and strengthening this pause, H.R. 4423 provides a responsible and targeted approach that prevents international funds from benefiting the current government and maintains the pressure applied following the 2021 coup. This is a bipartisan, commonsense measure that upholds human rights, reinforces international accountability, and supports the long-term prospects of peace and democracy in Burma. I thank the bill's sponsor for her work on this legislation and commitment to standing with the people of Burma. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this bill and help send a clear message that the United States will not allow international financing that empowers brutal dictatorship or tyranny in Burma. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the CBO estimate for this bill. H.R. 4423, NO NEW BURMA FUNDS ACT, AS REPORTED BY THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Kim).

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Speaker, for the reasons I explained earlier, I urge all of our colleagues to support this bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. DAVIDSON

Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3716) to amend the Federal Deposit Insurance Act to require reports on the use of the systemic risk authority applicable to winding up a failed insured depository institution, and for other purposes, as amended.