Jim McGovern

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, you have got to love these Republicans. They spend more time talking about micromanaging 0.2 percent of the American population in D.C. and more worried about that than they are worried about the fact that over 99 percent of the American people are about to see their premiums go up. Millions of people are going to lose their healthcare. We just have a different set of priorities. We have a different set of priorities. By the way, when we talk about national security, healthcare is part of it. If you don't have healthcare, you don't have security. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned just a few moments ago, Republicans are blocking a vote on Trump's tariffs in this rule. I think it is pretty obvious why. The consequences of his economic policy are being felt in communities across this country, and Republicans know they can't defend it. That is why they are not doing townhalls. Moms and dads are coming home with pink slips because their employers don't know if they can keep the doors open. Small businesses are shuttering. Farmers are struggling under higher input costs and shrinking markets. Food, gas, electricity, basic goods and services--the prices are all up. They are likely to climb even higher as Trump's tariffs ripple through the supply chain. It is clear that the Trump economy is not working for average Americans. President Trump and Republicans promised to reduce inflation. Instead, last month, we saw the largest monthly increase in inflation since January. They promised to reduce grocery prices. Instead, last month, grocery prices spiked at the fastest pace in 3 years, driven in part by tariff- fueled costs. They promised to cut electricity prices in half. Instead, August electricity prices were 6 percent higher than they were a year ago, and Americans are having to navigate a weakening job market and rising costs. Fruits and vegetables are up nearly 2 percent. Dairy products are up 1.3 percent. Cereal and bread are up 1.1 percent. Meat, poultry, fish, and eggs are all up a whopping 5.6 percent. Give me a break. Mr. Speaker, let's be frank. The only winners in Trump's economy are millionaires and billionaires. He packed his Cabinet with the rich and well-connected. Republicans' reconciliation bill hands out nearly $100,000 in tax cuts for those making over a million dollars a year in 2027 alone. Just last week, the Trump administration started rolling back efforts to crack down on offshore tax shelters that billionaires and giant corporations use to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. Who does that? Mr. Speaker, Trump promised an economy for the American people, but time and time again, his tariffs and policies have only delivered for the ultrarich, while families, farmers, and small businesses pay the price. We ought to be voting on this stuff. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, is the gentleman talking about the reconciliation bill that the Republicans brought to the floor that resulted in trillions and trillions of dollars and more debt, all to give multimillionaires and multibillionaires a tax cut? I mean, I am sorry. If there is class warfare going on here, I know which side my Republican friends are on. Mr. Speaker, millions of everyday Americans all across the country are about to get notice that their healthcare premiums are going to skyrocket, including in the gentleman's district. Moms, dads, and grandparents, people working two jobs just to get by, are going to be at their kitchen tables, facing the awful decision of which bills to pay. For nearly 24 million people in this country who have ACA marketplace health insurance, premiums will increase, on average, by 93 percent. A 60-year-old couple making $80,000 per year will see their premiums increase by over $17,000 per year. That is like $1,400 per month. A family of four earning $64,000 will owe an extra $2,600 in healthcare premiums every year. Where on Earth are families supposed to find this kind of extra money, Mr. Speaker? We are talking hundreds and hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars. That is not extra change that you can find in your couch cushion. It will mean 5 million people, including 2 million with chronic conditions, lose their healthcare coverage altogether. It will mean older adults have to choose between paying their high energy bills and affording their healthcare. It will mean families going without food because their healthcare premiums are unaffordable. It will mean people fall behind on their rent just so they can afford basic healthcare in the United States of America, the richest country in the history of the world. This is a crisis, Mr. Speaker. It is a crisis of the Republicans' own making. Instead of spending the summer working with Democrats to address this looming healthcare cliff, Republicans spent it instead slashing Medicaid by a trillion dollars, kicking 15 million people off their coverage altogether, blocking access to cancer screening and prenatal care by defunding Planned Parenthood, cutting NIH's budget, and taking food away from families with teenagers, veterans, and older adults, which will make them less healthy, all to give tax breaks to Elon Musk and Trump's billionaire friends. Honest to God, Mr. Speaker, I have no idea what to say to the working families who visit my office scared to death that their healthcare costs are going to force them to go broke. I don't know how my Republican friends can talk to people back home in their districts, regular people, hardworking people, and somehow justify what they are doing. I guess many of them don't because they don't do townhalls. With all due respect to the Speaker of the House, no, this actually cannot wait. I understand why they are trying to minimize the crisis that they created, I really do, but hardworking people back home are counting on us, Mr. Speaker. Congress must address this looming healthcare crisis now, including one of the most significant healthcare premium hikes in history, and the historic cuts to Medicaid that are closing hospitals and nursing homes on a daily basis, to give families peace of mind that they won't go bankrupt trying to afford their healthcare. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time I have remaining.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I am losing my voice but not my passion. Mr. Speaker, the truth is simple. Families are being crushed by high prices. Rent, groceries, gas, and healthcare are all going up. What are Republicans doing? They are obsessed with micromanaging Washington, D.C., with not one, not two, not three, but four different bills today about Washington, D.C. I hate to break it to Republicans, but none of the people whom I represent, and I think none of the people from the gentleman's district, live in Washington, D.C., which leads me to wonder why the hell Republicans are wasting time on this nonsense. Mr. Speaker, the other bills that we are dealing with hand out favors to Big Coal and Big Oil. Again, there is nothing for regular families from these guys. There is nothing for average Americans. They have no vision and no plan for economic growth. The bottom line is that healthcare premiums are about to go through the roof. People will see their healthcare bills explode because these guys refuse to act. Republicans are putting ideology over everyday people. They are putting headlines over solutions. They are playing games instead of governing. All of this--micromanaging D.C. and the coal commission garbage--is what the Republicans are focused on while the government teeters on the edge of a shutdown, while Trump's tariffs drive up prices, and while millions of people are about to get kicked off their health insurance. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, students at the University of Massachusetts Amherst recently joined together to address the terrible problem of food insecurity on their campus. After witnessing--and some even experiencing--difficulty affording nutritious food, these remarkable students worked with Chancellor Reyes and his team, the Amherst Survival Center, and the Food Bank of Western Massachusetts to establish the UMass Amherst Campus Pantry. Last Friday, I was proud to stand with them to officially open the pantry, which is a welcoming space that will provide anyone in the UMass community with a little extra help when they need it. The shelves are stocked with nutritious food, including food grown locally by the incredible farmers in western Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, times are tough. Food costs are high and people are struggling. No community and no college campus in our country are immune from food insecurity. I am so proud of the students at UMass Amherst and the administration for working toward a food-secure campus. I encourage students across the country to work with their colleges and universities to address campus food insecurity and finally end hunger now.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I spent August talking to and listening to my constituents, as I hope my Republican colleagues did, too. What did I hear the most? They are scared out of their minds about the impact of the Republicans' big, ugly bill, particularly on how it will make hunger worse in this country. From community-based organizations to food pantries to hospitals to farmers, they are all terrified about the nearly $200 billion in cuts to SNAP. This is why, Madam Speaker, I am stunned, absolutely stunned, that the chairman of the House Committee on Agriculture, of which I have been proud to serve on for 14 years, seems to be hell-bent on jamming a farm bill through the committee this month with no plans, none at all, to address the draconian SNAP cuts. Let me say loud and clear that I, for one, am not open to negotiations and discussions about a new 5-year farm bill unless fixing the cuts to SNAP is on the agenda. Democrats will not be a cheap date when it comes to feeding people in this country. We are not just going to roll over and move on. No way. To talk about a new farm bill without addressing the big, ugly bill's nutrition cuts is unconscionable. It is cruel. Let me remind my colleagues that the average SNAP benefit is about $2 per person per meal. A cut of nearly $200 billion is an awful lot of meals that Republicans are taking away from vulnerable Americans. SNAP cuts are imminent. Despite Republican attempts to push some of the biggest cuts off until the 2026 midterms, very real benefit cuts for some of the most vulnerable of all are expected to go into effect within weeks. Any day now, USDA is expected to release regulations on new time limits for veterans, former foster youth, and homeless populations who were previously exempted. According to a recent CBO report, the new onerous paperwork requirements and time limits alone will kick at least 2.4 million Americans off of SNAP. That is parents with school-age kids, veterans, seniors, and the disabled. Furthermore, CBO expects that some States will choose to abandon SNAP altogether. For the first time ever, the big, ugly bill mandates a State cost-share requirement for food benefits. If States can't pony up their share, which for some States could run into the billions of dollars, they will just choose to walk away. It is an enormous burden on States already strapped for cash. Let me also say this. If Republicans think they can just throw a few extra bucks at TEFAP, which is the Federal program that helps food banks, and call it good, they are out of their minds. We can't food bank our way out of this Republican-made crisis. Charity alone can't pick up the slack of millions of people losing their Federal food benefits. Madam Speaker, it would be utterly reckless of us to try to jam a 5- year farm bill through Congress right now. Let me also say, it is not just the ``usual suspects'' sounding the alarm on SNAP cuts. A couple of weeks ago, I went on my 15th annual farm tour across 12 farms in central and western Massachusetts. Over and over again, I heard from farmers about how they are bracing for these drastic SNAP cuts. Why? We can only buy food with SNAP benefits. Who grows that food? Our farmers, like my constituents, grow that food. They are already seeing the abrupt cancellation of USDA programs that support the purchase of fresh, local produce for schools and food banks. Not only did these cancellations reduce the amount of healthy fruits and veggies going to people in need, it took income away from our farmers. The very real and impending SNAP cuts are just another economic hit to our farmers. Madam Speaker, we are not operating in anything resembling business as usual right now. Republicans have ripped apart the longstanding farm bill coalition between nutrition and farming interests. The big, ugly bill decimated modest, yet meaningful SNAP benefits, all to give more tax breaks to the ultra-wealthy and well-connected. Madam Speaker, we either want to end hunger or we don't. Trump and his Republican cronies in Congress have clearly chosen to make hunger worse. We cannot stand idly by while hunger is made worse in this country, the richest country in the world. Again, what is particularly galling is that Republicans champion tax cuts for multimillionaires and billionaires, while decimating an essential program to help put food on the table. What is wrong with these people. Madam Speaker, we do not share the same values. We say no new farm bill without fixing the big, ugly bill's cuts to SNAP. We can and we should do more, a hell of a lot more, to end hunger now.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Griffith) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. Mr. Speaker, here we go again. Mr. Speaker, here we go again. This rule is insane. Notwithstanding the gentleman's monotone delivery, there is a lot going on here in this rule, and much of it is not good. What are Republicans doing the first week back? Are they doing something to lower food costs as Trump's tariffs drive prices up? No. Are they doing something to fully fund the government before it shuts down in less than a month? No. Are they doing something to help with skyrocketing healthcare prices or reversing their devastating cuts to Medicaid? No. They are doing none of that. They are doing nothing to help regular people. They are doing nothing to help workers, families, or people struggling to get by. Instead, Mr. Speaker, these guys are continuing to cover up the Epstein files. Republicans are deeming as passed--which means no debate, no hearing, and no markup--they are deeming as passed a new, fake Epstein resolution and killing their last fake Epstein resolution. All the while we already have a real, bipartisan bill to unseal all these files. It is the Massie-Khanna bill. Last night, every single Republican on the Rules Committee voted against that bipartisan bill, every single one. As if that is not bad enough, every single Republican on the Rules Committee also voted to create, out of thin air, a brand-new committee to rewrite the history of what happened here on January 6, 2021. They are so desperate to paper over what happened that day, to whitewash it and to pretend it was a normal tourist visit. I was here, Mr. Speaker, here in this Chamber where you are sitting right now, and you can be damn sure I am not going to let anyone pretend that January 6 was a normal tourist visit. However, Republicans, the gentleman from Virginia included, refuse to even display a plaque to honor the police officers who were here that day. I am so sick of this BS about how Republicans support law enforcement. Mr. Griffith and every other Republican on the Rules Committee voted against displaying a plaque to honor the law enforcement officers who were here on January 6. That plaque, Mr. Speaker, already exists. Congress already passed a law to create it, and the Speaker just refuses to display it. Why? Why would he refuse to do it? I know why, and we all know why. It is the same reason why every Republican voted against releasing the Epstein files. It is because Rules Republicans are scared as hell. This is not a deliberative body anymore. Under this Republican majority, Congress has become a rubber stamp for Donald Trump. This is all about the ego of the man who lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Republicans think they work for Trump. They are obsessed with him. It is pathetic. Republicans are ruining this institution, Mr. Speaker. They are destroying this institution. Again, let me repeat: Every single Republican on the Rules Committee voted against releasing the Epstein files, every single one. We heard last night that all Republicans want full transparency, but that is just not true. Mr. Speaker, let me read you a quote from the top Republican in this country, President Donald J. Trump. This is what he says about the Epstein files: ``It has all been a big hoax. It is perpetrated by the Democrats and some stupid Republicans.'' At a press availability just minutes ago, the President again said that this is all a hoax. Now, what do Republicans think of that? Donald Trump says this is all a hoax, and if you want to release the files you are stupid. Now, I am not surprised. I am not surprised the guy who once called Epstein a ``terrific guy'' and who Epstein considered his closest friend is not actually interested in getting to the truth. Do you know when this clicked in for me, Mr. Speaker, and for a lot of people? It clicked after Trump won and then the backtracking began. It clicked again yesterday. It clicked after the same Republican leaders who invited influencers to the White House and then passed out binders about the soon-to-be-released client list suddenly changed their tune. It clicked again yesterday when phase two of the binders came out, more information released that has already been released. Mr. Speaker, 97 percent of it has already been released. It clicked when the same MAGA politicians who once pledged to release everything suddenly came up with more excuses, more delays, and more stalling tactics. What is obvious to everyone is that someone is hiding something. While all of this stalling goes on, what happens? Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's partner in crime, winds up in a cushy, country club prison courtesy of Trump's political appointees. There is not a word of outrage from the Republican majority, not a whisper of accountability, just silence. Now let's not pretend that this is complicated. It is pretty obvious what is going on. The Trump administration has the power to release the Epstein files today. They could redact names to protect victims and survivors and deliver the truth, but they refuse. There is a simple through line to all of this, Mr. Speaker. We all know why Republicans are doing this with the Epstein files. We all know why Republicans refuse to display the plaque honoring the brave law enforcement officers who protected our democracy and protected all of us on January 6. We all know why Republicans vote again and again and again for all these giveaways for the rich and powerful. It is Donald Trump. He wants to rewrite history. He wants to hide the truth about Jeffrey Epstein, and he wants to continue his giveaways to the well-off and the well-connected. This is all straight out of the authoritarian playbook, Mr. Speaker, and you can bet your ass we are going to continue fighting like hell to oppose this insanity. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This is laughable. It is also unconscionable. We know what is going on here. This is an attempt to distract and to rewrite the history of January 6. Quite frankly, it is offensive. It is offensive to the brave men and women who protected our lives on that day. There is not a bunch of destroyed evidence like the gentleman claims. That is just not accurate. The select committee complied with the requirements of the resolution establishing it, in consultation with the Clerk of the House and the document retention precedents of other committees of this House. The select committee's final report and its support materials are posted publicly online. Just to be sure, I checked again today. All of them, every single page of every transcript, are posted online publicly. Maybe the gentleman can't find them. I would be happy to give him the website information. The truth is, they just don't like what the evidence shows, so they want to go on a fishing expedition to try to twist the truth instead of accepting the fact of that day. The fact is this: The people who stormed the Capitol and beat police officers, in order to try to stop the peaceful transition of power, were supporters of Donald Trump, period. It was one of the most shameful and darkest episodes in our democracy. No fishing expedition for alternative facts is going to change the reality. What is particularly offensive is that Donald Trump pardoned all these people, pardoned the people who beat the police officers who protect all of us every single day. It is shameful. In speaking about the Epstein files, again, I am looking at the video of a few minutes ago, of Donald Trump speaking to reporters and calling all of this a hoax, the Epstein files a hoax. He is not talking about what we are doing here. Let me just say to the gentleman and anybody else who wants to know: Listen to what the victims were asking for outside this Capitol just a few minutes ago, the survivors, the survivors of Mr. Epstein and Ms. Maxwell. Listen to what the survivors have been saying. They want the Massie-Khanna bill passed. They want something with teeth in it that will force this administration to comply because they don't trust that they will. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, that is an awful lot of words to defend the fossil fuel industry. While the gentleman was defending Big Oil and all these big corporations that rip off the American people by charging exorbitant prices for energy and while he was going on that tirade, I went back and I listened to Donald Trump's press conference at the White House. Not only did he call the move to release the Epstein files a Democratic hoax, he said it was designed to get the American people to focus in on something that was irrelevant. Mr. Speaker, let that sink in. If you listened to the survivors who were in front of the Capitol just a few minutes ago and listened to their horror stories, that is irrelevant? That the President of the United States of America would say something like that is pathetic. He could very easily put all of this controversy to rest by just releasing the files, and that is why we need to pass the Massie-Khanna bill because we could actually pass a bill that would compel him to do that. What you all did in the Rules Committee last night is a resolution that doesn't really mean anything. It is designed as cover. Quite frankly, it is not enough. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Stansbury).

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I am going to thank the gentleman for publicly splitting with the President of the United States. He said that the Epstein matter was a serious matter. The President just a few minutes ago said it was irrelevant. I think it takes a little courage for Republicans these days to stand up to the President. I do want to point out for the Record that the resolution that is deemed passed in this rule grants no new authority, no new power, and no new nothing to the Oversight Committee. It doesn't do anything. If you want to do something, you can go to the well and you can sign the discharge petition to allow us to vote on the Massie-Khanna bill, which would compel and force the Justice Department to release the files. If the President, by the way, wants to veto that bill, I would like to think that Democrats and Republicans unanimously would join together to override such a veto. I can't imagine anybody here wanting to defend the indefensible. We have another way you could be helpful here. If we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to provide for consideration of H.R. 4405, the bipartisan Epstein Files Transparency Act, introduced by Representatives Khanna and Massie. Mr. Speaker, Republican leadership is twisting themselves into knots trying to look like they are doing something on Epstein to give their Members something to vote on, anything for political cover, while also not upsetting the President. That is why they have deemed in this rule a nonbinding resolution to tell the Oversight Committee to keep doing what they are already doing, which, best as I can tell, is to slow roll the release of documents that the DOJ seems to think are acceptable to the President for release. Mr. Speaker, the American people didn't ask for an Oversight Committee investigation. They asked for all the Epstein files to be released, the very thing that the Trump administration promised and then suspiciously backtracked on. This bill is bipartisan, and it is the only legislation on Epstein that has the force of law. It has the votes to pass. The survivors of Epstein's and Maxwell's crimes spoke today at the Capitol demanding this very bill get passed. Republican leaders need to stop standing in the way, and now is their chance. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment into the Record, along with any extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Khanna) to discuss our proposal, the sponsor of this bipartisan legislation.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, it seems lonely over there. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Virginia (Ms. McClellan).

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Jersey (Ms. Pou).

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes. Mr. Speaker, a vote for this rule is also a vote to create a new select subcommittee to investigate the remaining questions regarding the insurrection on January 6, 2021. I have a radical idea. Instead of wasting time creating a select subcommittee to investigate January 6, maybe, just maybe, we should read the report that the January 6th Select Committee already finished in 2022. Here it is: thousands of pages, millions of records, testimony from Trump's own people. You could use it as a doorstop, it is so thorough. But no, Republicans want to rewrite history. If we were all being honest here, that is what this is all about: Pretend January 6 was just a field trip gone wrong; pretend the police weren't bludgeoned, crushed, or tased; pretend the gallows outside this building were just some kind of art installation. It is insulting. It is a slap in the face to every officer who put their body on the line to save ours. Here is the kicker: This majority still hasn't even hung the plaque honoring those officers, a plaque required by law--required by law. Instead of a sham committee, how about you get a screwdriver and hang the damn plaque because every day it sits in a box is another day Republicans dishonor the heroes who defended this place. If they insist on this little circus, at least investigate something real, like why Donald Trump pardoned people who assaulted police officers. One of those men is now serving a life sentence for plotting to murder nearly 40 law enforcement officers and blow up the FBI. His lawyers even tried to argue that Trump's pardon should cover his murder plot. Another pardoned rioter committed a home invasion less than 4 months later. I bet those homeowners wish he had been behind bars serving his 8-year sentence for assaulting cops instead of terrorizing their family. In fact, at least 10 of Trump's pardoned insurrectionists have already been re-arrested, charged, or sentenced for other crimes.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself an additional 15 seconds. Quite a record. Maybe we should call this new panel the subcommittee on criminal recidivism by Trump's friends. But let's be honest. That is not what this is about. This is about distraction, another shiny object, because the majority doesn't want to talk about the things that they are actually blocking, like the bipartisan effort to release the Epstein files. I will make it simple. Stop rewriting history. Stop wasting time. Stop dishonoring the police. Follow the law, for God's sake. Hang the plaque. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, is the gentleman prepared to close?

Mr. McGOVERN. He has no more speakers? Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time is remaining.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. Mr. Speaker, what we have heard today is excuse after excuse after excuse, diversion after diversion, but no answers to the questions that I have asked: Why won't the Trump administration release the Epstein files? Why won't the Speaker hang up the plaque honoring the law enforcement officers who defended our democracy on January 6? Why do Republicans continue voting time and time and time again to help their rich and powerful friends? I know the answer, Mr. Speaker. The answer is because of the man who occupies the Oval Office. Republicans want to let Trump rewrite history to protect the rich and powerful perpetrators of Epstein's crimes, to protect the people who came into this building to desecrate our democracy, and to protect his wealthy donors and Big Oil who want another giveaway. At the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, this is about trust. How can the American people trust Republicans when they promised to release the Epstein files, and then they broke that promise? How can Americans trust Republicans when they claim to support law enforcement, and then they want to rewrite the truth about what happened on January 6? How can we trust Republicans, who want to ignore the fact that Trump pardoned people who brutally assaulted law enforcement officers? How can they be trusted? How can anyone trust Republicans, when they negotiated spending bills, bills which have become law only to let Donald Trump illegally shut down Federal agencies in direct violation of those negotiations? I don't trust these guys to tell me the correct time, let alone trust them to do what is right for the American people. The way to restore trust is simple: Hang the January 6 plaque honoring the officers who defended our democracy on that day, stop the giveaways for those at the top, and release the damn Epstein files. The victims of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell's horrific crimes were outside the Capitol Building this morning to demand that we pass the bipartisan Khanna-Massie bill to release these files. Mr. Speaker, we have a bill to do it. Stop delaying, stop obstructing, stop protecting the powerful perpetrators of these crimes, and just release the damn files. I urge a ``hell, no'' on this rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, Donald Trump and this Republican Congress just enacted the largest transfer of wealth in history. They cut 15 million people off of their healthcare and decimated food assistance for working families to give tax breaks to billionaires. Last week, I joined my dear friend Representative Ayanna Pressley and Project Bread in Boston to hear directly from people experiencing food insecurity about how the big, ugly bill will make their lives more difficult. We heard from hungry moms, grandmothers, food pantry leaders, and local officials. Each and every person who participated in the roundtables spoke about how the big, ugly bill will increase hunger. If Trump and Republicans in Congress would spend 5 minutes listening to anyone living paycheck to paycheck, they would know how devastating these cuts are. In Massachusetts, we are crafting a plan to prevent families from going hungry amid these reckless Federal cuts. Governor Maura Healey, her administration, and local advocates are forming the Anti-Hunger Task Force to adopt long-term solutions to support families in Massachusetts and work to finally end hunger now.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address one of the most serious issues of our time, the risk of conflict with nuclear weapons. It is a threat that challenges our conscience. It is a threat not just for Americans but for all humanity. It is a threat not just to humans, but to all species of life on our planet. We raise this issue in the context of a series of important anniversaries. One week ago, July 16 marked the 80th anniversary of the Trinity test, the first detonation of a nuclear weapon in New Mexico. We still live with the legacy of above-ground nuclear tests. Two years ago, the Defense Department awarded the Atomic Veterans Commemorative Service Medal to the still-surviving veterans of that era and their family members. We must also honor the downwinders, civilians whose health and land suffered from the effects of radiation from these tests. Many were in the State of Nevada. In addition, we cannot forget the Pacific Islanders who have not been able to return to their home islands or the Uyghurs and others whose homeland in Xinjiang was the location of China's nuclear tests. They, too, have suffered long-term health consequences. In 2 weeks, we will commemorate the first use of a nuclear weapon in a conflict--and that was the atomic bombing of Hiroshima on August 6, 1945--and the second, the bombing of Nagasaki, on August 9. Let us pray that Nagasaki will be the last. Let us work to make sure that it is. Sadly, the threat from nuclear weapons is only increasing. There are estimated to be 13,400 nuclear weapons in the world today. Some 90 percent of these are in the arsenals of the United States and Russia. The rest belong to the U.K., France, China, Israel, India, Pakistan, and North Korea. Russia has threatened to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine and even against NATO nations. North Korea uses its nuclear weapons program to intimidate the United States, Japan, and Korea. China continues to build up its nuclear arsenal. It has some 600 warheads today and is expected to pass 1,000 by 2030, according to the Pentagon. The question of Iran's nuclear program has been at the top of our concerns. The military strikes by Israel and the United States were, as stated, designed to degrade or eliminate Iran's nuclear development capabilities. However, as The Washington Post reported last week, U.S. intelligence agencies assess that only one of Iran's three principal nuclear facilities was destroyed by the U.S. attacks. This tells us that military action is not a reliable way to counter nuclear threats. In 80 years of the nuclear era, the only proven, demonstrated way to reduce the risk of nuclear conflict and to lessen the scale of its destruction is through diplomacy and negotiations. If not for past arms control agreements, Mr. Speaker, today's arsenals would be larger and more dangerous. If not for limitation on above-ground and atmospheric testing, many more people would suffer from radiation and contamination. However, our challenge is made harder by the fact that there is only one arms control agreement remaining in force between the United States and Russia. The New START Treaty limits the number of deployed strategic nuclear warheads for each party to 1,550. The treaty expires in February 2026. There are scant signs that either government is interested in extending it. President Donald Trump can and should take forward steps on nuclear arms control. He can follow in the footsteps of other Republican Presidents. President Eisenhower, in his ``Atoms for Peace'' speech, expressed the moral imperative to warn Americans and the world of the destructiveness of atomic weapons. President Reagan in his second term negotiated the INF Treaty with the Soviets. He spoke privately with Gorbachev about the elimination of all nuclear weapons. Earlier this year, President Trump said from the Oval Office: ``There is no reason for us to be building brand-new nuclear weapons, we already have so many. You could destroy the world 50 times over, 100 times over. And here we are building new nuclear weapons, and they're building nuclear weapons.'' He added: ``We're all spending a lot of money that we could be spending on other things that are actually, hopefully much more productive.'' On this point, Mr. Speaker, President Trump is right. President Trump has the opportunity to make nuclear threat reduction a part of his legacy. As a smart first step, he and Putin can strike a deal to respect New START's central limits and set the stage for a more comprehensive nuclear arms control framework agreement. Next, President Trump can put nuclear weapons on the agenda when he meets with Xi Jinping. He expressed a willingness to do this in his Oval Office comments. Even talking about negotiations in itself can help reduce tensions. A deal requires a first step, and I encourage the President to take it and to take it soon. We, in Congress, can use our voice. Along with our colleague, the gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Tokuda), I am the proud sponsor of H. Res. 317, a resolution that calls on the U.S. Government to return to the negotiating table on nuclear disarmament and to lead a global effort to reduce and eliminate nuclear weapons. It reaffirms our country's moral and strategic obligation to prevent nuclear war and pursue a world free of nuclear weapons as a national security imperative. This call is in the spirit of Presidents Eisenhower and Reagan and Presidents Carter and Obama, and we hope President Trump. I am pleased to report that Senators Markey, Merkley, Sanders, Welch, and Van Hollen have all introduced a version of our resolution. I urge the foreign policy committees of both bodies to consider these resolutions promptly. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, activity in House committees is taking us in the wrong direction. Last week, the Appropriations Committee approved an energy and water bill that cuts the National Nuclear Security Administration's Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation account by $412 million. That is 17 percent. These activities help the U.S. stop the spread of nuclear weapons, detect hidden nuclear activities, and support arms control efforts. Why would anybody think it is a good idea to cut that account? Also last week, the Armed Services Committee approved the National Defense Authorization Act. It authorizes $62 billion for the nuclear enterprise, which represents a 26 percent increase over President Biden's request last year. Unfortunately, the Committee rejected an amendment by the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi) to restrict funding to create a new land-based nuclear delivery system, the Sentinel missile, a $180 billion boondoggle he has called an endless money pit. The threat of nuclear war is an existential one. We have a moral imperative to address it and address it urgently. Debates over the utility and morality of nuclear weapons are as old as the nuclear age. Notably, many of the people who helped make atomic weapons turned out to be some of the most powerful voices against their use and for the reduction in their arsenals. Mr. Speaker, 2 years ago this week, the film ``Oppenheimer'' premiered. It told the story of J. Robert Oppenheimer, the theoretical physicist who helped create the atomic bomb but then pushed against the development of more powerful weapons. For that position of moral courage, he paid a political price. Mr. Speaker, 2 months ago, Dr. Richard Garwin passed away at the age of 97. He is best known as the author of the first hydrogen bomb. Less widely known is that he spent decades working tirelessly in arms control and disarmament, as well as scientific panels, conferences, and government boards. In a 2018 interview, Dr. Garwin said: ``There is a myth, and you saw it operate many times in the past, that if there is a perceived security problem, well, no difficulty, we will just buy more nuclear weapons. But that doesn't improve our security. What we want is less nuclear weapons and less cause for using them on the other side.'' When I was a staffer for the late Congressman Joe Moakley in the 1980s, I recall going to hear Dr. Garwin and Dr. Carl Sagan give a talk on nuclear weapons and the Strategic Defense Initiative. Dr. Sagan, of course, is the physicist who helped us understand the idea of a nuclear winter, which is the hemisphere-wide Dark Age caused by the radioactive ash sent into the atmosphere following multiple nuclear detonations. It would wipe out food supplies and cause untold deaths from starvation, even beyond the millions killed by the blasts. For us today, the dynamic Dr. Garwin identifies isn't in the past. It is in the present. Our inboxes are full of policymakers expressing fears about the growth of China's nuclear arsenal or Vladimir Putin's intentions or Iran's plans. Too often, policymakers have a reflexive response. They are building more. Then we should build more. Mr. Speaker, this is so shortsighted. It is a dangerous reaction. It is very, very dangerous. We know firsthand the harm that such devastating weapons can have. On the 80th anniversaries, people of many generations will gather at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Very few survivors of those atomic bombings remain with us, but their stories endure. The disturbing photos of the burns and the radiation sickness endure. In those cities, those gathered will recommit to preserving the memory of the destruction, and to plead with current and future generations to work to ensure that such horrors never ever, ever happen again. Mr. Speaker, I regret I cannot be with them in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That is why I have organized this Special Order on the House floor today so that Members can share their message from the floor of the House. To our colleagues, to the President, and to the American people, this is a crucial moment in world history. We have a moral responsibility to speak out and to do more. When we return to Washington after the anniversaries and after the August break, let us commit to raising more awareness. Let us commit to more congressional hearings and more debate on the floor. Let us commit to more encouragement for scientists, civil society, and regular citizens to raise their voices. Let us commit to legislation to contain the growth of nuclear weapons. Let us commit ourselves to the elimination of nuclear weapons. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Foster).