Gregory Meeks

Mr. MEEKS

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from California.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. Mr. Speaker, first, I want to be clear about what this resolution is not. It is not a vote for or against war with Iran. It is not an authorization for use of military force. It does not prevent the United States from defending itself. It does not restrict our U.S. military from protecting our troops or our assets or our interests. Mr. Speaker, you may have heard some of those claims on the other side today. They are wrong. What is the War Powers Resolution? What is it? It is simple. It simply requires hostilities to stop unless and until Congress does what the Constitution says it should do: authorize them. That is what the Constitution says. It affirms a basic principle: No President can take this action or take this Nation to war against whomever whenever that President wishes to do it without congressional authorization. This is a war. The administration has said so themselves. We have heard many Members on the other side of the aisle say this is a war. This is a war, but it is a war of choice, not a war authorized by the United States Congress. In the administration's own war powers notification--and if you haven't read it, we will give it to you--they do not use or mention the word ``imminent'' at all, not once. The administration has presented no imminent threat. Why? It is because it cannot. I want to give my colleagues the definition of the word ``imminent.'' If it was so imminent, Donald Trump didn't do anything when he was the President before. How long will this war last? We don't know. The administration doesn't seem to know. Their stated objectives are expansive and shifting every day. They seem to shift. One day I heard them say it was regime change. The next day I heard them say it is nuclear weapons. Then after that, it was ballistic missiles, and then we heard the Secretary of State say Israel was going to strike first, and so we felt we had to. Otherwise, Iran would strike first. Mr. Speaker, this administration's case for war makes the Bush administration's weapons of mass destruction story look like a well- documented Ph.D. dissertation. Now, to the Members of Congress who disagree with my opposition to this war: I disagree because I have listened and I have heard, and I disagree with this war. But I say to them: If you disagree with this war, it is your prerogative, but you should vote. We should have a vote. This vote is not about whether or not you support military action. It is about whether you believe Congress should have a say. In essence, it kind of meant should we exist. The Constitution said we should exist. We were created as a country because they were running from a king who did not want a Congress, who didn't have a Congress, who could just do whatever he wanted. That is why the first thing that the Founders said is Congress should be the only one that had the power. Leader Jeffries said--and he went back to a Republican Member of the House of Representatives, Abraham Lincoln, who said: ``The provisions of the Constitution giving the war making power to Congress was dictated, as I understand it, by the following reasons. Kings had always been involving and impoverishing their people in wars, pretending generally, if not always, the good of the people was the object. This, our Convention understood to be the most oppressive of all Kingly oppressions; and they resolved to so frame the Constitution that no one man should hold the power of bringing this oppression upon us''--no one man. We took an oath. We swore to uphold Article I of the Constitution. Our constituents expect us to deliberate on matters of war and peace. Did we deliberate on it? No. Have we had hearings in the House Foreign Affairs Committee? No. Have we had Mr. Jared Kushner here to talk about it? He was supposed to have been negotiating. No. Have we had Steve Witkoff here? No. Have we had anyone other than--they came for other reasons; we were able to ask a few questions--than Secretary Rubio come? No. Has there been not dialogue and conversation? We have the so-called Gang of Eight, and they want to say that is notification. Well, let's talk about it. We didn't ever debate anything on the floor of the House. How many times has the Gang of Eight met? Once. Speaker Johnson would say that is sufficient. Even in that, this imminent strike was never mentioned. We heard from Mr. Himes, who is part of the Gang of Eight. The next time the Gang of Eight was heard was only a few hours before the one who wants to be king said he was going to attack. That is the only dialogue and conversation that took place before the strike. There has been no debate on the floor, no trying to talk to the Members of Congress and, most importantly, the American people because just before the State of the Union, when the President had the whole world, we heard a whole 2-hour speech, the longest in the history of these United States of America, Iran was hardly a mention. If it was an imminent threat, I would think he would want to tell the Nation at that time that we had to do something imminently. We have soldiers who have died, and the President starts talking about curtains and reconstruction and putting gold things up because he likes it. He told families, Gold Star families now unfortunately, that it wasn't serious enough. This is a serious situation. Congress is a coequal branch of government. The Framers vested the war powers in this body because they believed no single person should bring this Nation to war alone, and so today we either defend our principles or surrender it. I urge my colleagues to join me in defending it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. MEEKS

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Ethel L. Cuff Black, a trailblazing educator and one of the 22 visionary founders of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc. Born on October 17, 1890, in Wilmington, Delaware, Mrs. Cuff Black was raised with a commitment to excellence and service that guided her life. She pursued her studies at Howard University, where she became one of the 22 young women who boldly established Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc., on January 13, 1913. The sorority was founded on principles of scholarship, sisterhood, and service; values that Mrs. Cuff Black carried into every facet of her life. In one of their first acts of service, Mrs. Cuff Black joined her sorority sisters in the historic 1913 March down Pennsylvania Avenue, standing at the forefront of the struggle for equality and representation. Her courage and vision laid the groundwork for one of the Nation's most influential Black women's organization, which continues to uplift communities more than a century later. After graduating, Mrs. Cuff Black dedicated herself to education, serving as a teacher in Missouri, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey. Later in New York, she became the first Black teacher in Richmond Hills, Queens. Mrs. Cuff Black joined 10 other dedicated women in chartering the Queens Alumnae Chapter of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc. Together, they worked hand in hand with the community to advance educational opportunities, promote civic engagement, and uplift families across Queens. This act of leadership and service ensured that the sorority's mission remained deeply rooted in community partnership for decades to come. Since 1952, the Queens Alumnae chapter has awarded over $400,000 in scholarship to students in the Queens community. Mrs. Cuff Black is most honorably remembered for her unwavering devotion to education, community, advancing opportunities for Black Americans, and her pioneering spirit in the fight for social justice. She is survived by the enduring legacy of her students and the hundreds of thousands of Delta women who follow in her footsteps across four continents.

Mr. MEEKS

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I think I have heard that story before that this is all about drugs. If I recall correctly, the former President of Honduras probably put more drugs in the United States than Canada has combined. The President of the United States didn't say that was an emergency. He pardoned him. I have heard it before. It is all about drugs. That was the case. What is the case and what is a fact is that in the last year, tariffs have cost American families nearly $1,700. That cost is expected to increase in 2026. That is the case. Since these tariffs were imposed, U.S. exports to Canada have fallen by more than 21 percent. When I go home, my constituents aren't telling me they have an extra $1,700 to spare. They are asking me to lower grocery prices, lower the price of healthcare, and make life more affordable. That is what this is about. It is about the American people and making things affordable for them. Today's vote is simple. It is very simple. Will my colleagues on the other side of the aisle vote to lower the cost of living for American families, or will they keep prices high out of loyalty to Donald J. Trump? That is what this vote is. That is why we pressed for this vote today. That is why a day is a day, and we finally get our chance to have the Members of the House vote their conscience. Do they vote for the President and his ways, or do they vote for their people, their constituents? Let's be clear about this so-called emergency Donald Trump declared on Canada and so many other countries where no emergency exists. For over 50 years, emergency authorities have been declared. What have they been? Yes, they have been for civil wars. Pandemics? I think that is an emergency. A massive human rights crisis could be an emergency. Canada is none of those things. Canada isn't a threat. Canada is our friend. Canada is our ally. Canadians have fought alongside Americans, whether it was in World War II or the war in Afghanistan, where 165 Canadians gave their lives after our country was attacked. There is no national emergency. There is no national security threat underpinning these threats. In an interview just last night, Donald J. Trump admitted he placed tariffs on Switzerland. Why? I will tell my colleagues why. It is simply because he didn't like the way their leader spoke to him. He put tariffs on Switzerland. That is not a strategy. That is impulse. That is a person who is just trying to say that he is the king. Mr. Speaker, guess what. That impulse, who is going to pay the price for it? Who is going to pay the price for that impulse? I will tell my colleagues who. It is the American people. Our morning coffee, our kids' chocolate, lifesaving medical devices, those are the Canadian goods that are being hit by 35 percent tariffs. Americans are paying more for healthcare and their daily essentials during an affordability crisis, all because of a manufactured emergency and one person's ego. The damage doesn't stop there. What about American products? They are being boycotted across Canada. Don't believe me? Just look at the President's social media posts from just 2 days ago where he said: ``Ontario won't even put the U.S. spirits, beverages, and other alcoholic products, on their shelves.'' Tourism from Canada is down 30 percent. People in the hospitality industry--Las Vegas, my home State of New York, and the chairman's home State of Florida--are losing their jobs because Canadians do not want to come to the United States of America. What are the people getting in return? I will tell my colleagues what they are getting. They are getting higher electricity costs during one of the coldest winters in modern history. They are getting higher food prices and higher costs for industrial goods and healthcare. Mr. Speaker, this is heads, we lose; tails, we lose. Tariffs are bad for American workers. They are bad for businesses. They are bad for working families. Instead of addressing the affordability crisis, which the President has called a hoax, Republicans have spent a year blocking this vote to protect Donald Trump, rather than doing their job to help the American people and what the American people did send us here to do, which is to lower costs. That ends today. Every Member now has to go on record. Do they stand with the disastrous trade war or with their constituents who are demanding relief? It is time we end this so-called national emergency because the only emergency here is the economic one created by Donald J. Trump's tariffs. I urge the adoption of the resolution and the termination of these unnecessary and harmful tariffs, which are just taxes on the American people. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, we have had some time from the last time that we were on this floor. If he were so serious about drugs, I asked the chairman previously: Why would the President of the United States pardon one of the biggest drug dealers who was killing Americans, Juan Orlando Hernandez. The last time, the gentleman said that he hadn't spoken to the President and didn't know why. Mr. Speaker, if he is so interested in stopping drugs, maybe he could have and should have had a conversation. Let me just tell you something about drugs, how much drugs are coming in from Canada, because that is what this is about. As a former special narcotics prosecutor--that is me--I know a little bit about that. Saying that you are going to focus and stop certain things from coming across the border of Canada, as if it is coming across in a cluster like it is an emergency, is just an out-and-out lie. The fact of the matter is that if you look at the Federal prosecutions--this just came out not too long ago--for narcotics in the United States of America, it just came out that, under the Trump administration, Federal drug prosecutions fell to the lowest level in decades. It talked about that Federal drug prosecutions dropped 10 percent in 2025 as agents changed their focus to immigration, that the number of new cases being filed is the lowest in decades according to a Reuters analysis. High-priority drug investigations have stalled since Donald Trump took office. It doesn't sound like the President of the United States is really concerned about drug prosecutions. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal), an individual who really knows about taxes and tariffs, the ranking member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. MEEKS. Have you found out yet why Mr. Hernandez has been pardoned?

Mr. MEEKS. I want to find out right now because I would prosecute him.

Mr. MEEKS. Have you had a conversation with the President about it?

Mr. MEEKS. Well, you should. If you consider--why aren't you prosecuting cases now?

Mr. MEEKS. It would not be coming from Canada.

Mr. MEEKS. Did the fentanyl come from Canada?

Mr. MEEKS. What source is that?

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, what source is the gentleman talking about?

Mr. MEEKS. No, I think that is Canada is doing law enforcement on its side, and we are not doing now law enforcement on our side.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, Canada plays virtually no role in the United States' fentanyl influx, especially compared to other countries targeted by the Trump administration. Canada contributes less than 1 percent to our southern neighbor's border of street fentanyl, less than 1 percent. That is not according to me, because I don't know where he gets his facts, but that is according to the DEA, as well as the Canadian Government, 1 percent. We do a lot of trade with Canada, and in Florida's 21st District, the chairman's district, exports to Canada support 1,650 jobs. Many of them will begin to lose their jobs. This is about affordability. This is about job creation and the economy. I wonder what he is going to say to those 1,650 people in Florida's 21st District. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Sanchez), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, the talk time is soon over because of what I am hearing from the other side. Basically what this is about is the American people having a chance to see where their Members are, whether they want to--they will judge ultimately--believe that this is an emergency from what they hear and know of the President or whether they are concerned about their cost of living, whether they are concerned about that hot chocolate, whether they are concerned about that coffee, or whether they are concerned about life-saving medical devices. What this will do--which has been blocked for almost a year--is simply to have a vote on the House floor so that the American people can see because then ultimately, we will know which way is the right way for them. We are here to represent the citizens of the United States of America, not a President. We soon will have a vote because that is what is going to happen, which is what I have been asking for for over a year. If you think this is an emergency, if you believe the President, you are going to vote that way. If you think this is going to be accountable to the American people, if you think that the American people will say that the cost of living, the cost of electricity, the cost of food every day they go to the market is of concern to them, they will be watching how you vote on this bill. They will be watching. Vote how you want. This is for the American people to see where you stand, with them or the President of the United States. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Salinas).

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, one thing that I will say, yes, the economy is booming. Mr. Speaker, if you are a billionaire, the economy is booming. However, when I go home and I talk to my constituents, what they tell me is that the price of beef has risen 16.4 percent over the last year. The price of coffee is up a whopping 19.8 percent. The price of lettuce is up 7.3 percent. Frozen fish is up 8.6 percent. So for them, it is not booming. As I said, this is just about a vote. It is just about a vote. I wish we could have had this vote 1 year ago. If, in fact, they believe this is an emergency, I don't know why it was held up for 1 year and tried to be prevented again. It is a vote. Let the American people know where you stand, Mr. Speaker. They see it with your vote. Do you stand with them, Mr. Speaker, trying to fix the affordability crisis, or do you stand with Donald Trump and my Republican colleagues who are just taking care of those for whom the economy is booming, the billionaires of our country? Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Magaziner).

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Castro), who is the ranking member of HFAC's Western Hemisphere Subcommittee.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett), a member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Horsford).

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stanton).

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. The American people are watching. This is very simple. Why did we take a year to get this vote? It is because Trump's tariffs are unpopular--the majority of Americans know it--and a majority of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle don't want to be on the record. Well, they are going to be on the record. They know that more than 60 percent of Americans disapprove of these tariffs. They know that the foreign governments don't pay these tariffs. They know that American families do. The farmers feel it. Small businesses feel it. Moms and dads feel it every time they see the prices at the grocery store. What this is, we can go back and forth, but the American people are watching. They are the ultimate judges. They can see. They can hear. They know our friend. They know how Canada and Canadians are friendly to us in the United States of America, closest partners. Many Canadians have given their lives for us. The American people can watch. What this simply does, this resolution, we will see. If you think that there is a crisis with Canada, then vote. Still, the Constitution says it is the House of Representatives and the United States Congress, it is within our authority. Don't punt. Don't just hide behind somebody else. That is what this will do. If you believe that this is an emergency, vote that way, if that is what you really believe. However, if you go to the grocery stores, if you see the price of beef, if you look at the price of coffee, if you feel that the economy is suffering as a result of these tariffs, if you think the economy for the average, everyday American is as good as those billionaire friends that the President has, then you vote with the President. Give up, but don't give up your authority as a Member of this House to vote. The first fight here was the power to vote on this issue, which was blocked for 1 year. I choose not to give up that power. Whether I agree or disagree, I want to vote on it. That was prevented for over a year. Today, we will vote on it. I thank some of my colleagues on the other side who have had the courage to stand up and say: Let's vote. Let's vote on this, and let the American people know how we stand. Let's vote on this to see if we believe that tariffs cause an affordability issue. Let's vote on this if we believe that Canada is not our friend, if Canada is an adversary, and you feel we should block a bridge like the President is talking about now, a bridge that Canadians paid for right across, block it, make them the 51st State, and insult them. If that is what you want to do, do it. If you want to stand to bring down prices, if you want the average, everyday American to be able to raise their children and live the American Dream, if you want to make sure that families can afford to pay their rent, can afford to buy food, can afford to have healthcare, then you vote ``yes'' for this resolution. The jury is really the American people. They ultimately will vote. They ultimately will tell us what is in their best interests. I have confidence in the American people. That is why I wanted a vote on this bill. I didn't want to play the funny rules that were being played and were attempted last night. Fortunately, some of my colleagues on the other side did not want to play that game anymore either. Those rules and those games that were played to prevent a vote on the floor in the United States Congress are over. That is what this is about, so the American people can see what we stand for. Do we stand for just going blindly with the President of the United States, or do we stand for the American people and making sure that their cost of living is cheaper and affordable so they can simply send their kids to school and be able to put a good meal on the table and a roof over the heads of their families? That is what this vote is about. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS. I will say that the American people are the judges. They don't need to hear anything else. The American people will judge.