Betty McCollum

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, well, it is no secret that this appropriations cycle was tough, and as ranking member of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, I thank--really thank--Chairman Calvert for working in a bipartisan manner to get the Defense bill done. This compromise Defense bill is focused on two things--national security and our servicemembers and their families. This bill provides our servicemembers with the training and the equipment necessary to complete their missions and come home as soon and safely as possible. It supports military families with a 5.2 percent pay increase. It includes a 5.4 percent increase to the basic housing allowance. This bill restores at least some funding for Ukraine through the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative. But the House must pass the Senate's security supplemental as soon as possible. I am glad to report that all the partisan riders that were originally in the Defense House bill have been removed. Madam Speaker, this minibus shows us that there is only one way to fund the government, and that is on a bipartisan basis--full stop. Let's follow this example in the next appropriations cycle. I urge Members to support the bill.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 7521, the Protecting American from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act. This legislation was passed out of the Energy & Commerce Committee with a remarkable vote of bipartisanship, unanimously supported 50 to 0, because our nation is facing a clear, emerging threat from foreign adversaries who have alarming access to Americans' data. Their control of communications applications gives them the ability to push disinformation and propaganda campaigns literally into the hands of 100 million Americans, including tens of millions of children. When you download an app, you should ask yourself: Who gains access to my information? How are they tracking it? How is it being used? Does a foreign government have access to it? With regard to TikTok, some answers are clear: TikTok is a company based in China that is regulated by its Communist government. TikTok is tracking users' location information, online activity, and interactions. It is not clear the full extent to which users' data is being used. Just last week, users were targeted and tracked, and received difficult-to-dismiss pop-up alerts. They were tracked based on their geo-location information, and pushed to call their Member of Congress, sharing a misleading message calling H.R. 7521 `the TikTok ban'. This incident alone raises concerns about the security and safety of the American public's personal information and how it is being used. The public deserves to know about the risks to their privacy when using TikTok. I support H.R. 7521's provision requiring parent company ByteDance to sell TikTok within six months to continue operating. This bill would also give the President the authority to protect Americans from future threats from foreign adversaries--namely, China, Iran, North Korea, or Russia--by requiring that communications applications are divested from their control if they pose significant threats to our national security. I urge my colleagues to support these protections for our national security and the integrity of our democracy.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H. Res. 1065, Denouncing the Biden administration's immigration policies. House Republicans have again brought to the House Floor a partisan messaging resolution that does nothing to begin to fix our broken immigration system. If House Republicans were serious about solving the problems at our southern border, they would negotiate and work to pass bipartisan legislation that could be approved by both the House and the Senate and be signed into law by President Biden. Instead, they continue to attack the current administration to gain cheap political points. As I've said many times this Congress, House Republicans continue to waste our time and resources on messaging bills like this do-nothing resolution, instead of working together with Democrats to solve problems for the American people.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 6276, the Utilizing Space Efficiently and Improving Technologies Act of 2023. Once again, the Republican House Majority has brought forth a bill that would accomplish the exact opposite of its claims. This bill would create massive inefficiency by forcing the early termination of government facility contracts to meet an arbitrary and inflexible standard of occupancy. These contract cancellations would incur additional costs, result in massive staff relocations that are not paid for by this legislation, and severely disrupt the work of federal employees who are serving the American public. The end result would be a tremendous waste of taxpayer dollars. Additionally, this legislation would override the work that agencies themselves ale already doing to evaluate and update their federal space requirements. Instead, H.R. 6276 sets up a biased method of data collection that inaccurately assesses the needs of our federal workforce. It fails to count field workers--including Border Patrol agents, park rangers, and food safety inspectors--as full-time federal employees. It would ignore the significant challenges, and costs, involved in modernizing and reconfiguring historic buildings to increase occupancy levels. My Democratic colleagues and I want to work with the federal agencies to collect accurate information and to fully understand the individual facility needs of each agency. Where opportunities to reduce space or improve its utilization exist, the General Services Administration already has the authority to act. As agencies adjust to the increased use of alternative and hybrid work schedules, they are examining opportunities for consolidation and other ways to efficiently and effectively achieve their missions. This thoughtful and necessary work would be swept aside by a clunky and misguided mandate in the USE IT Act. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 6276.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2799, the Expanding Access to Capital Act. Mr. Chair, this bill does not in fact expand access to capital. It expands access to fraud. Historically, U.S. capital markets have been successful because of the transparency, accountability, and oversight required by regulations. Investors both here and abroad have confidence in the investments they make because they know companies are required to be transparent and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is obligated to perform oversight. However, large companies are now using exemptions designed for small businesses. This has resulted in an expansion of the private securities market, which is riskier than the public securities market because there are fewer and, in some cases, no disclosures required. H.R. 2799 would exacerbate these problems by allowing large companies to evade disclosure requirements and SEC oversight. The bill also reduces incentives for companies to go public through an initial public offering (IPO) which will deprive investors, including working families and retirees, of transparent investment opportunities. Everyday Americans invest their hard-earned money to save for their education, travel, buying a home, and retirement. H.R. 2799 threatens the existing regulations that protect everyday Americans from risky investments that would put their livelihoods in jeopardy. Under current regulation, financial professionals or companies are required to only sell private securities to investors who have access to reliable information, have a demonstrated ability to understand the risks, and have the financial wherewithal to absorb potentially severe investment losses. H.R. 2799 removes these safeguards, allowing financial middlemen to peddle risky private securities to unsuspecting, hard- working Americans. H.R. 2799 sets everyday American investors up to fail. H.R. 2799 also includes anti-worker provisions that will harm gig- workers like rideshare drivers, food delivery providers, and on-demand caregivers. The State of Minnesota has been working hard to prevent the misclassification of gig-workers workers as independent contractors and provide stronger protections for these workers. H.R. 2799 would preempt these efforts in Minnesota and around the country by prohibiting the classification of gig-workers as employees. This provision would cut off gig-workers' access to essential state-based rights and benefits like a minimum wage, unemployment insurance, overtime pay, health benefits, and workers compensation. Mr. Chair, H.R. 2799 eliminates crucial investor protections which would expose the investments of American families and seniors to financial fraud. I urge my colleagues to oppose the bill.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 7511, the Laken Riley Act. For the third time in three months, House Republicans are bringing their repackaged partisan talking points to the floor and reviling America's immigrant communities. H.R. 7511 is another bill that undermines constitutional due process and politicizes a tragedy. The murder of Laken Riley is tragic, and it should not be exploited by Republicans looking to use it to pass their harmful legislation. This bill would compel the Department of Homeland Security to take into custody all non-citizens who have been arrested for theft. No conviction is required, and no additional resources are provided to the Department to carry out this mandate. As I've said before, in America, you are innocent until proven guilty. This has been the law of the land for hundreds of years. This bill is another poorly written slippery slope that undermines the rights of all people legally present in the United States. Laken Riley's murder is a tragedy. She was a 22-year-old college student who should still be alive today. Republicans are using this horrible event as a political ploy, when they should be coming to the table to find meaningful, bipartisan solutions to fix our broken immigration system. Until then, their dangerous and partisan ploys ring hollow.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, today I joined thousands of people in Minnesota who gathered for the public funeral for Burnsville Police Officers Paul Elmstrand and Matthew Ruge, and Firefighter-Paramedic Adam Finseth who gave the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty. On Sunday, February 18, 2024, these courageous public servants answered a call to protect a family and our community, and were gunned down in a horrific act of violence. This heartbreaking incident occurs amid a crisis of gun violence and domestic abuse, and our first responders are on the front lines every day. Officers Elmstrand and Ruge dedicated their lives to protecting our community. Firefighter-Paramedic Finseth was committed to saving lives, as he was attempting to do that day. He also served our Nation proudly in the U.S. Army, twice deploying on tours of duty in Iraq. Their deaths in the line of duty are a devastating tragedy that touches their families, their fellow first responders, the Burnsville community, the state of Minnesota, and our Nation. I extend my deepest condolences to their families and friends who loved them. Their heroic sacrifice will always be remembered and honored.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 7176, the Unlocking our Domestic LNG Potential Act of 2024. This bill would open the floodgates for gas exports that enrich our adversaries, raise consumer energy costs, and accelerate the climate crisis. Mr. Speaker, why would Republicans want to export our natural resources to foreign adversaries without even considering if those exports will harm everyday Americans? This bill does just that. H.R. 7176 removes the requirement that the Department of Energy (DOE) first determine if liquified natural gas (LNG) exports are in the public interest before approving export applications to countries with whom the U.S. does not have a free trade agreement. By removing essential safeguards, this bill will allow our adversaries, like China, to purchase even more of our natural resources to use against us. This bill is nothing more than a giant handout to Republicans' big oil and gas friends, and hardworking Americans will pay the price with higher home energy costs. H.R. 7176 is detrimental to my constituents who already have to deal with volatile fossil fuel costs and gas prices being manipulated by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). Big oil and gas corporations don't need another handout from Congressional Republicans. They already enjoy billions in taxpayer-funded subsidies and continue to rake in record-breaking profits. The U.S. is the number one exporter of LNG worldwide, and U.S. exports are expected to double by the end of this decade. Last November, I joined my colleagues in the House and Senate in sending a letter to DOE urging the agency to update how it determines if new licenses for LNG exports are in the public interest. I was pleased to see the Biden administration's announcement in January that DOE would pause approvals for pending and future applications to export LNG from new projects until the agency can update the public interest analyses for authorizations. President Biden's decision will ensure that impacts on costs to American families and businesses, climate impacts, and environmental justice are factored in when approving LNG exports. I commend President Biden for his commitment to leading the way in ambitious climate action. This is the third time that I have voted on this bill on the House Floor in the 118th Congress. For the third time, I urge my colleagues to reject H.R. 7176 and the Republicans' radical agenda that puts polluters over people.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H. Res. 863, Republicans' sham effort to impeach Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. House Republicans are choosing to pursue an impeachment that has no basis in wrongdoing by Secretary Mayorkas. Their cynical ploy has everything to do with weaponizing a constitutional process in an attempt to divert attention from their inability to provide viable solutions to the border crisis. Secretary Mayorkas has not violated the law, let alone committed ``high crimes and misdemeanors,'' which is the constitutional standard for impeachment. Rather than working toward bipartisan solutions, House Republicans are doing the bidding of former President Donald Trump in a pointless attempt to reinstate the Trump administration's failed and inhumane border policies. They know these policies will not become law. They are actively blocking real solutions for the complex issues that impact border communities and migrants. House Republicans should stop wasting time and taxpayer resources by pushing lies and to score cheap political points with their MAGA base and instead work together with Democrats to solve problems for the American people.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I thank Ranking Member DeLauro for yielding. Mr. Speaker, our Nation faces two immense national security challenges, and Congress must address them both: Russia's illegal and unjust invasion of Ukraine, which threatens their territorial integrity and the security of Europe; and Israel's response to the Hamas terrorist attacks on October 7, which has spiraled into a regional conflict between the United States and Iranian proxies. Tragically, three U.S. servicemembers have lost their lives in this conflict. Our Nation and the world need decisive action from Congress. The Hamas attacks of October 7 were barbaric, and Israel does have the right to defend itself. I have long supported missile defense priorities like Iron Dome in the Defense Appropriations bill, but this is not the way to get more aid to Israel. The Senate and the White House do not support this action. This bill was introduced to get ahead of the Senate's bipartisan security supplemental which does address all of our national security priorities. The Republican House bill plays politics with our national security, and that is wrong. It is a nonstarter for those of us who seriously want to address these crises in a comprehensive manner. Here is how we do that: We do provide the assistance to Israel, but it is equally as important to get more lifesaving humanitarian aid into Gaza because if we don't, then the situation for civilians will continue to deteriorate; starvation will grow, disease will spread, and Palestinian civilians, most of them children, will continue to suffer, and many will die. Because of this, Israel's security situation will worsen if we don't do the humanitarian aid. We need to support our national priorities around the world. Our servicemembers are working nonstop to defend commercial shipping routes and deter broader regional conflicts with Iran. They deserve our support. We must provide additional security assistance to Ukraine. The situation there is desperate, Mr. Speaker. Ukrainian civilians will continue to be murdered, and their military faces a serious shortage of ammunition. We must remedy that. Congress cannot afford to ignore any of these challenges because America cannot afford to ignore them. We must lead. The Republican majority, in my opinion, is failing to do just that. If we fail here, the national security consequences we will face abroad are that we will leave both Israel and U.S. troops in the Middle East in a more dangerous position when it comes to Iranian activities; we will condemn more Palestinian civilians in Gaza to die; and we will doom the Ukrainian people to face a dark future with their democratic aspirations crushed by Putin's boot. We will leave our European allies, who have just approved a 50- billion-euro package for Ukraine, to face a resurgent Russian military on their borders. The majority has left us no choice but to vote ``no.''

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 7024, the Tax Relief for American Families and Workers Act of 2024. Mr. Speaker, this bill is a wolf in sheep's clothing. Let's be clear about what this tax deal is: just another Republican handout to big corporations and oil companies. Congressional Republicans are claiming victory with this bill, touting the $600 billion in tax cuts for corporations if the corporate tax cuts in this bill are made permanent. The 2017 Trrump-GOP tax scam has added $1.9 trillion to the deficit. Republicans voted to raise taxes on the middle class to pay for their deficit-exploding giveaway to big corporations and billionaires. Thanks to the Trump-GOP tax scam, big corporations and oil companies have enjoyed lower taxes and have taken advantage of tax credits. Big corporations like Amazon, Google, Facebook, and Marathon Petroleum already pay far too little in taxes each year. H.R. 7024 would give them access to even more tax cuts. Congress should be ensuring big corporations and oil companies pay their fair share rather than helping them get a leg up. I support the Child Tax Credit and voted for it in the American Rescue Plan, but H.R. 7024 is eighty-two pages long and only three pages pertain to the credit. In those three pages, the Child Tax Credit provisions fail to replicate the success of the improved Child Tax Credit provided to families by the American Rescue Plan. Under H.R. 7024, fewer families will be eligible, and the credit will be received as an annual refund. We heard from families who said the monthly payments are what made this credit so helpful to them in 2021 to pay their monthly bills, keep healthy and nutritious food on the table, and manage a mortgage or rent. I look forward to working with NETWORK, Save the Children, the Minnesota Council of Nonprofits, and other advocacy groups to put forward a tax bill that accomplishes all our goals with the Child Tax Credit. I strongly opposed the Trump-GOP tax scam when it was rushed through Congress in 2017. Donald Trump and the GOP promised increased tax revenues to offset the massive debt they created, but it never materialized. Instead, the tax scam ballooned the deficit. I've been outspoken in the past about how harmful those tax cuts were, and I believe H.R. 7024 is another Republican scam to give big corporations a break while the rest of America picks up the tab. I urge my colleagues to reject H.R. 7024.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition of H.R. 5585, H.R. 6678, and H.R. 6976, a series of Republican messaging bills. This week, instead of working in a bipartisan manner to fix our broken immigration system, the Republican Majority brought their partisan messaging bills to the House Floor. These three bills are unnecessary. As our laws are written today, conviction of these crimes already makes a person with a green card or visa deportable. For example, H.R. 5585 makes fleeing border patrol a deportable offense-- this is already a deportable offense. H.R. 6678 makes an immigrant who commits Social Security fraud deportable--this is already a deportable offense. H.R. 6976 makes a person deportable if convicted of a serious DUI--this is already a deportable offense. These bills are unnecessary, but what is radical about them is that they change due process under the United States Constitution. In two of the bills, the crimes described do no longer require a conviction to make a lawful resident deportable. In America, you are innocent until proven guilty. This has been the law of the land for hundreds of years. These bills are a slippery slope and move to take away the rights of those legally present in the United States. My concern is, will Republicans stop there, or will U.S. citizens be next? With the bills House Republicans have brought to the Floor this week, along with their unjustified and unprecedented impeachment of Secretary Mayorkas in the Homeland Security Committee, they continue to demonstrate they are not willing to work toward real solutions to bring order to the border and fix our immigration system. You deserve real solutions to these issues. I am committed to working with anyone who is serious about bringing forward meaningful solutions to the problems at our border.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H. Res. 957. We have all seen what is unfolding on our southern border, and the humanitarian and security issues it raises. The complex problems facing our immigration system need comprehensive reform, not more rhetoric and demonization of immigrants. But rather than working toward real solutions, this week House Republicans are bringing to the floor a partisan resolution condemning the Biden Administration over its supposed ``open border policy.'' Mr. Speaker, there is no ``open border.'' The Biden Administration has worked from its first day to ensure that everyone who arrives to the United States is treated fairly and humanely, while navigating within an outdated and broken immigration system. Congress has failed to pass any meaningful efforts to fix it for three decades. The fact remains, the United States needs comprehensive immigration reform. Reform that is compassionate, fair, and at times firm. For years, businesses, law enforcement, and faith groups have reiterated the harms of the current immigration system. We do not need more resolutions that do nothing but parrot partisan talking points. This Congress, Republicans have demonstrated no willingness to engage in finding solutions. In fact, instead of working toward solutions, House Republicans are making the problem worse. The Biden Administration requested additional resources for the border in October of last year, including an additional 1,300 border patrol agents and 375 immigration judges, but Republicans refuse to allow a vote. And just today, Speaker Johnson was quoted saying ``I don't think now is the time for comprehensive immigration reform.'' If now is not the time for action, when is? If, as this resolution claims, we are in ``the midst of the worst border security crisis in the Nation's history,'' why is this not the time to discuss solutions? Republicans must stop using the immigration system as a political talking point and an election ploy. Congress must immediately take meaningful action to reform a broken immigration system.

Ms. MCCOLLUM

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 788. H.R. 788 would prevent the Department of Justice from negotiating settlements in court cases to include payments to third parties, such as nonprofits, community organizations, trusts, or foundations. This redirection of funds is especially important in cases when harm is difficult to monetize, such as assessing damage to the environment or unknown health outcomes to individuals resulting from chemical exposures. In these cases, third parties are able to utilize the small portion of settlements they receive to help rectify the harm done by the plaintiff. For example, after the 2010 BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, $20 million was redirected to groups aiming to restore the health of the Gulf--one way to further remedy the environmental harm caused by BP. It is critical the federal government retains its ability invest in harm remediation while holding bad actors accountable. Congress should not be undermining the Department of Justice's ability to hold corporations accountable when they do harm to the public. The federal government must retain all its tools in its effort to protect the public interest and enforce our nation's laws. Instead of undermining the ability to settle cases with just outcomes for those impacted, we should be focused on passing legislation that serves the needs of the American people.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge the Biden administration to seek an unequivocal statement of commitment by the Israeli government against mass resettlement of civilians from Gaza. I echo the concerns of JStreet: any form of mass permanent transfer of families in Gaza from their homeland constitutes an undeniable violation of international human rights law. For too long, Palestinian families have been forced from their homes and endured violence perpetrated by many settlers and the Israeli military. To date, Israeli military operations have displaced more than 85 percent of Gaza residents from their homes, and the United Nations estimates that more than a quarter of Gaza residents will have no home to return to. The United States has a duty to insist on a public, unequivocal commitment by Prime Minister Netanyahu to stop the displacement of Palestinians living in Gaza and to accept the right of millions of Palestinians to live in peace and safety within Palestinian territory. As a major military assistance ally, the United States must hold the Israeli government accountable to this and increase pressure to facilitate humanitarian aid to the region. An immediate, comprehensive commitment to ensuring there is no mass displacement of civilians from Gaza--half of whom are children--is required for there to be any hope for peace today or for future generations of Palestinians and Israelis.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H. Res. 918, Republicans' baseless attempt to distract from the ongoing criminal proceedings against former President Donald Trump. After a year of frivolous investigations produced no evidence of wrongdoing by President Biden, Republicans brought to the floor a resolution directing committees to pursue a sham impeachment inquiry. This resolution is clearly an attempt to minimize and distract from former President Trump's high crimes and misdemeanors, during the same week that his criminal trial proceedings reach the U.S. Supreme Court. While House Republicans have spent the year wasting time and taxpayer dollars, Democrats have delivered the votes to prevent a government shutdown--not once, but twice. This body has a duty to keep the government functioning and open for the American people, yet Republicans time and time again have shown no interest in meeting that obligation. As we approach the halfway point of the 118th Congress, it is clear the majority would rather spend their time distracting the American people with their extreme MAGA messaging instead of doing the serious work of legislating. It is past time for House Republicans to start addressing the serious and urgent needs of all our constituents.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H. Res. 927. Let me be clear--I condemn antisemitism on our university and college campuses in the strongest possible terms. If I thought this resolution was a good faith effort to combat antisemitism, I'd support it. Regrettably, that is not the case. Like many of my colleagues, I was disappointed by the testimony provided by the presidents of Harvard, MIT, and UPenn. Calling for genocide is dangerous and intolerable, and the presidents should have used their time in front of the Education and Workforce Committee to explicitly condemn attacks against the Jewish community and affirm their commitment to protecting Jewish and Arab students experiencing hate. Those private institutions are now deciding how to proceed with their leadership and make amends for their offensive statements. This resolution does nothing to address the problem of antisemitism on campuses. Instead, House Republicans are once again using Jewish pain to score political points. There are many ways that Congress can address the rise in hate--for example, implementing President Biden's National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism. Or, instead of cutting $35 million from the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights that protects Jewish students on campus, they could join Democrats in fully funding the office. This resolution fails to do either, and instead of funding these important initiatives, the House Republican majority is continuing to hide behind empty words--and actions speak louder than words. I uphold and include in the Record the comments made by my colleague, The Honorable Jamie Raskin (MD-08) made on the House Floor on December 13, 2023. For these reasons, I must oppose the resolution. * Remarks by Rep. Jamie Raskin per the United States House of Representatives Congressional Record, Volume 169. Issue 205, December 13, 2023. Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this resolution which, to my knowledge, would mark the first time in American history that the House of Representatives would vote to tell private college and university presidents to resign. I want all of my colleagues to think very seriously about what this means for us today and in the future. We are all profoundly disturbed by the resurgence of anti- Semitism and racism in campus towns, including death threats, serious death threats against Jewish students at Cornell, and actual shootings and attempted murder of three Palestinian- American students in Burlington, Vermont. We all want to express our outrage in House resolutions, which we have done more than 20 times as a House of Representatives, and numerous times even since October 7. For example, on November 2, we passed H. Res. 798, which condemned all forms of anti-Semitism on college campuses, denounced any support for terrorist groups on campus, reaffirmed the free speech rights of Jewish students and faculty, and urged enforcement of Federal civil rights laws to protect Jewish students against anti-Semitism. Why do we need this resolution? The only thing new about it is it would have the U.S. House of Representatives call specifically for the resignation of two college presidents, a call that has been slipped in at the bottom of page 2 of the resolution. This extraordinary passage comes close to being what the Constitution calls a bill of attainder, which is the unconstitutional imposition by Congress on a specific citizen or citizens of a criminal punishment or stigma by the Congress itself. Although this resolution is not a criminal punishment or stigma against specific citizens, it is undoubtedly a civil punishment and stigma against specific American citizens. How many of you would like the president of the college where you went or where your children go to be walking around with a congressional resolution telling them to resign? Everyone knows that this will be an academic scarlet letter and a professional death sentence for anyone carrying it around. Does anyone think that UPenn President Liz Magill, who has already resigned in the face of Ms. Stefanik's ceaseless campaign to force her out, will ever be able to find another college presidency? Give me a break. Now, I hold no brief for the college presidents' overly legalistic, ethically tone-deaf answers awkwardly advanced in response to Ms. Stefanik's rapidfire, yes-no questions. It should not be difficult for anybody to say in an age of rampant gun violence and lax Republican gun laws, which have put tens of millions of AR-15s in circulation in our society, anyone calling for genocide of the Jews, or anyone else, should be sent immediately a campus security detail to see if they pose the risk of harm to other people or if they need an immediate mental health exam. If there is not an imminent threat, surely the call for genocide of the Jews by definition constitutes a hostile learning environment and should occasion aggressive disciplinary action. Where is the common sense on the part of the college presidents? Where is the common sense in the Congress of the United States of America? Calling for the resignation of private individuals at private universities would be a dramatic and unprecedented departure for the U.S. Congress, which has never before voted to tell a college president to resign. Before we affix this lifelong stigma, reproach, and dishonor on a private citizen, do you think perhaps we should offer them some kind of due process, the kind of due process that even George Santos got and that Donald Trump is getting all over America right now for his 91 Federal and State felony charges? The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Meuser). The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland. Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, should Harvard President Claudine Gay, who is the first Haitian American ever to serve in that position, and Sally Kornbluth, who is Jewish, get the chance to explain what they are actually doing to combat racism and anti-Semitism at their schools and what they have done in their lives and in their careers to oppose anti-Semitism and racism, which are the gateways to destruction of liberal democracy? Do we care about that, or is this just a bunch of drive-by talking points? Is it relevant that the Harvard and MIT boards have made unanimous statements affirming the leadership of their two college presidents? Are we saying that their boards don't matter or they are indifferent to anti-Semitism and the leaders of the Freedom Caucus knowbetter than the Jewish president of MIT what anti-Semitism is? Now I know these two were the presidents testifying before Ms. Stefanik, but are we sure that these two are even the worst in the country when it comes to bias and discrimination? Is this a one-shot deal, or, as Ms. Stefanik promises, is this just the beginning? Are we going to go through all of the college and university presidents in America? What about the CEOs of the businesses? Maybe they are not performing to her satisfaction either. Indeed, maybe there are college presidents who have looked the other way in not hypothetical cases of anti-Semitism and racism but real cases of anti-Semitism and racism. What about them? Are we going to let them go, or are we going to go after them? Maybe we should determine who the worst are before we start using the resources of the House of Representatives to call for people to resign. Are there college presidents, by the way, who looked the other way when there was sexual abuse of college male wrestling team members, rape of students, or female gymnasts or female soccer players? Are we interested in that now that we are superintending higher education in America, now that we are the appellate review board for the colleges? The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks to the Chair. Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, are we prepared to become the national academic appeals panel for college presidents, coaches, and professors, or is that perhaps best left to the universities themselves? Maybe it is that we just don't have a positive legislative agenda of our own to lower drug prices in America, to get aid to our democratic allies in Ukraine against the fascist imperialist thug Vladimir Putin. Maybe we don't have anything real to do, so we decide instead to go around and start lecturing the college presidents and the college boards all over America. In the absence of a real program for America, the majority is filling our hours with censures, expulsions, motions to vacate the speakership, overthrow their own leaders, and, of course, impeachment of President Biden for what? For doing nothing wrong. That is all that they give us. This cannibalistic instinct they have unleashed now turns on private citizens, academic leaders who will wear the scarlet letter ``A'' so they can have some more press conferences. Vote ``no'' on this resolution.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (NDAA). I did not vote for the Republican majority's version of the NDAA that passed the House in July. That bill was loaded with extreme and partisan social policy riders that had no place in legislation that supports our national security and the service members who defend it. That is why I'm encouraged by the bipartisan negotiations that produced a much more balanced compromise bill. While there are still some provisions I do not agree with, nearly all the worst policy ideas from the Republican majority have been removed. Excluded from the agreement are the harmful provisions that would deny reproductive health care access to our service members and their families and attack the rights of LGBTQ+ service members. I do disagree with some remaining provisions that I believe will continue discourage building a diverse military, and ones that would inhibit the Administration's ability to improve military resilience and readiness in the face of ongoing climate change challenges. For example, this legislation maintains a provision banning Critical Race Theory in our military education system. The definition is narrower than originally proposed, but I remain concerned with how Critical Race Theory is defined and that this provision could be used to limit how certain eras of American history are taught. This NDAA also institutes a salary cap and hiring freeze on the Defense Department's Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) Committee, pursuant to completion of a department audit. I think this is unnecessary and should have been removed. As Ranking Member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, I am intimately familiar with the range threats to our nation and to our partners and allies around the world. That is why I will continue to fight against the same outrageous and extreme social policy provisions included by Republicans in this year's Defense Appropriations Act that would result in deterring the American public from raising their hand to serve. This legislation temporarily extends the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) 702 authorization. I am supportive of reforms to Section 702 to ensure that the civil liberties of American citizens are protected, and Congress must consider the merits of bills on FISA reform that are moving through the House and the Senate right now. However, the national security risks associated with allowing this authorization to lapse entirely in a manner of weeks with no replacement are too grave. It is important that we allow more time for Congress to understand the sensitive details surrounding this program, continue constructive debate, and find a compromise solution that finds a prudent balance that respects individual liberty and protects national security. I am strongly supportive of this NDAA's ironclad commitment to our allies and partners at a time when geopolitical events increasingly test America's resolve and unity. This legislation includes robust resourcing toward the European and Pacific Deterrence Initiatives, an extension of the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, and a provision that places limits on the President's ability to withdraw the U,S. from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization pursuant to Congressional approval. These are all important parts of maintaining America's security commitments to our fellow democracies in Europe and in Asia. Of particular significance to our Pacific deterrence efforts, this legislation elevates our commitment to AUKUS, our tri-lateral Pacific partnership with Australia and the U.K. Provisions that empower our Defense and State Departments to streamline resource and information sharing between these critical allies and measures that strengthen our collective defense industrial capacity all embrace the recognition that we are stronger together in these endeavors than alone. Also notable is how this bill takes care of our service members and their families. This NDAA continues our commitment to invest in our most important resource in our nation's defense arsenal--our people. The compromise supports the administration's proposed 5.2% pay raise for service members, strengthens the civilian workforce, and supports military spouses and families with additional authorized investments in housing, childcare, career opportunities, health care, and other quality of life needs. Mr. Speaker, this legislation is not perfect and there are provisions in it that I disagree with. But no compromise is perfect. This legislation is significantly improved from the Republican bill that passed this body in July, which would have been a disaster for our national security and our troops if it had been enacted. I will support the conference agreement.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise to share my deep concern with H. Res. 894 and the way it fails to address the rise in hate speech and threats occurring in our country and around the world. Over the last several weeks, the House has rightly made efforts to condemn antisemitism and show support for the Jewish people. However, this resolution does not seriously address the rise in antisemitism in any tangible way, and the actions of the Majority to treat this issue as an opportunity to confuse and sow division is redundant, devoid of meaning, and ultimately harmful to the cause of rebuking hate in all its forms. Congress must take meaningful steps to fight against antisemitism. We can do this by stepping away from political games and fully implementing the Biden Administration's National Antisemitism Strategy, a whole-of-government approach to fighting antisemitism in the United States. I also want to underscore the importance of prioritizing the safety of Jewish, Palestinian, and Muslim communities. The resolution before us today is silent on the concurrent rise of anti-Arab hate and Islamophobia happening in America, and by failing to include all instances of bigotry stemming from the conflict, we are missing an opportunity to condemn hate in all its forms. In Congress we must be open to discussing and disagreeing about challenging topics, including about Israel and Gaza. I remain committed to condemning hate speech and the violence it inspires and believe that any actions considered in the House must also do so. For these reasons, I must vote present on this resolution.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 5961, the No Funds for Iranian Terrorism Act. If passed, H.R. 5961 would destroy our credibility in negotiation for our nation moving forward on future diplomacy with Iran, putting the U.S.--and the world--in danger of a nuclearized Iran. Let's be clear: the prisoner swap agreement established earlier this year by President Biden helped eliminate a long-standing obstacle for improving U.S.-Iran relations and was an important step in preventing Iran from ever obtaining a nuclear weapon. By passing this legislation, we could be making future negotiations with Iran impossible, and eroding U.S. diplomatic credibility at a time when regional violence is on the rise. This loss of credibility and leverage damages the United States' ability to negotiate for future hostage release, including Israelis being held in Gaza. This would be the second time the United States has gone back on its word with Iran. Lest we forget, it was former President Trump who threw the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) into chaos when he announced the U.S. would withdraw from the deal in May 2018. Since the U.S. withdrew, Iran announced that it will not limit its stockpile of low-enriched uranium, which is a loss for national security here at home and across the globe. As my colleague Rep. Gregory Meeks, the Ranking Member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said during the markup of this bill: this is not about being friends with Iran. This is about using the best proven method--diplomacy--to stop Iran's nuclear ambition. It is through diplomacy that we have the best chance of reopening formal nuclear negotiations in the future, and we must keep this possibility alive. In addition to preserving our negotiating integrity with Iran, I am voting against this bill because the United States has a reputation of providing humanitarian aid to oppressed populations, even when we disagree with their governments. We know that when a population is deprived of food, water, access to medicine, and safe shelter, it makes it easier for oppressive regimes to thrive and control their people. If this bill were to pass, the United States would take the unprecedented step of opening up the possibility of sanctions on humanitarian aid. The civilians of Iran did not choose their government. They will suffer the most under economic sanctions. For these reasons, I must vote against this legislation.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 5283, the Protecting our Communities from Failure to Secure the Border Act of 2023. In bringing H.R. 5283 to the House floor, Republicans again demonstrate they are more interested in political grandstanding and punishing asylum seekers than advancing any serious policy on immigration. Under the guise of protecting our public lands and national parks, H.R. 5283 would prohibit any temporary or permanent housing for asylum seekers on land controlled by National Park Service (NPS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), or the Forest Service (USFS). If Republicans truly cared about our public lands, they would not have passed an Interior Appropriations bill that dramatically cuts funding for our federal land management agencies, including $450 million from the National Park Service and $312 million from the U.S. Forest Service. Mr. Chair, this is another messaging bill from House Republicans that will never become law. It is time we focus on finding real solutions to the issues our constituents are facing.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, I rise to share my concerns regarding the hate speech and threats throughout our country and the world. We must speak loudly and clearly with one voice: Threats, harassment, and hate based on race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, or any other identity have no place in our communities, on our college campuses, and in our society. The increase of these cases is serious and it demands action. Bills we have been voting on do not address all the rise of hate against all the protected groups, including the concurrent rise of Islamophobia and bigotry against Palestinians. Let me be clear: I stand with our ally Israel. I condemn the violence committed against the Israeli civilians by Hamas. I speak out against anti-Semitism, but it is a glaring omission not to include other protected classes. We are missing an opportunity to condemn hate in all its forms. I remain steadfast in condemning hate speech and the violence it inspires.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise to address my vote against Rep. Lawler's Amendment No. 114 to the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education Appropriations bill. This amendment would prohibit funding to any institution of higher education that authorizes, facilitates, funds, or otherwise supports events that are deemed to promote antisemitism. To be clear: I condemn antisemitism in all its forms and stand with the Jewish community as they mourn the losses sustained in the October 7 terrorist attack by Hamas and the subsequent increase in antisemitic incidents in the U.S. and around the world. I concur with J Street that the amendment is ``designed to pave the way for ill-considered crackdowns on free speech under the guise of combating antisemitism.'' This amendment violates students' First Amendment rights to share and debate ideas and express peaceful dissent. It is too broad and could lead to colleges and universities banning student groups that aim to provide safe refuge, community, and space to discuss issues that are important to them based on the opinion or statement of one student. This amendment would foster a chilling effect for universities, who risk losing all federal funding for an apparent violation. This amendment also completely fails to address the concurrent rise in anti-Muslim and anti-Arab hate. It is a glaring omission not to include other protected classes and misses an opportunity to condemn hate in all its forms on our college campuses and in our communities. Every student deserves a safe environment in which to learn and live, and I wish Rep. Lawler's Amendment had been inclusive of all protected classes.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 5894, the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. The bill before us today is unprecedented in many unfortunate ways. This bill makes devastating cuts across some of our most vital government agencies; it decimates education spending, abandons low-income workers and college students, stifles medical innovation, and harms women's health. This bill was pulled from consideration on the House Floor because Republicans do not have the support within their own Conference to pass this legislation. It is another example in a long line of Appropriations failures by House Republican leadership, where there has been no effort to find middle ground and find a bipartisan path forward. Let me begin with House Republicans' unilateral decision to skip the full committee markup for this bill and for the Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations Act. House Democrats were denied the opportunity to debate, amend, and mark up H.R. 5894 in committee. This bill is so deeply unpopular that Republican appropriators did not want to go on the record in committee in support of its deep cuts to our nation's education, workforce development, and public health funding. Not only have House Republicans deviated from the longstanding committee process, but they have taken the unheard-of step of adding partisan riders to the bill and report in advance of consideration on the House Floor. Democratic appropriators had no say in their inclusion--in fact, we only saw these changes once they had been made public. The report is not amendable on the House Floor, so there was no recourse in challenging any of these new alterations beyond demanding they be removed in the conference process with the Senate. Now let's talk about some of the policy decisions within H.R. 5894, starting with the astounding 28 percent cut to the Department of Education. This bill decimates support for children in K-12 elementary schools and early childhood education; including an 80 percent cut to Title I that is meant to help the most vulnerable students and school districts in our country. I have heard from my constituents--teachers, principals, paraprofessionals, parents, and students--that we are facing a crisis in our classrooms. This bill does not address the teacher shortage or the extensive learning loss occurring in our schools post-COVID; and this bill does not help make college more affordable. Instead, this bill makes devastating cuts to the bedrock of American education, leaves our teachers out in the cold without sufficient resources, and eliminates opportunities for students to access need- based financial aid for their postsecondary education. This bill also eliminates all funding to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, including their educational programming for young children, Ready To Learn. In addition to education spending cuts, House Republicans have also taken aim at workforce development. This bill eliminates funding for the Federal Work Study, Youth Job Training, and Adult Job Training programs, effectively denying job and employment training services to 420,000 Americans who face barriers to finding a good-paying job. House Republicans also cut $313 million from worker protection agencies like OSHA, putting hardworking Americans at risk at home in Minnesota and across the country. This bill hurts the National Institutes of Health by cutting $2.8 billion from their topline budget, which will stymy medical innovation. It makes a $139 million cut to the National Institute of Mental Health at a time when our country is facing a mental health crisis. The bill also contains major cuts to the National Cancer Institute, hurting our research and treatment capabilities for those with cancer here in America and around the world. Unsurprisingly, this bill also takes aim at women's health by cutting programs that support maternal and child health, eliminating programs that provide access to health services and contraception, and adding numerous poison pill riders that further strip a women's right to make medical decisions about her own body with her doctor. H.R. 5894 prohibits funding to Planned Parenthood, eliminates funding for Title X Family Planning, and makes a $35 million cut to the Maternal and Child Health Block Grant. Supporting our children and families is the bare minimum of what our government should do for its people. This bill fails at every level to do so. Instead of reevaluating their extreme funding bills and working together with Democrats to create legislation that will improve American lives, House Republicans are distracted by their own chaos and are intent on placating the most extreme in their caucus. For these reasons and more, I must oppose H.R. 5894 and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to H.R 4820, Departments of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024. With this bill, House Republicans are cutting vital investments in our nation's crumbling infrastructure, jeopardizing housing supply, and inserting right-wing policy riders into funding bill debates. Last Congress, I was proud to work with my colleagues to pass the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to fix our roads and bridges, reduce emissions, and address historical inequities caused by our nation's interstate highway system. Now, Republicans are using H.R. 4820 to undo the progress Democrats made. H.R. 4820 includes a drastic cut to transit programs and zeroes out funding for the RAISE and MEGA grants that are essential to rebuilding infrastructure in our communities. Additionally, Republicans have made a drastic 35 percent cut to Amtrak National Network funding. This will devastate Amtrak's resources, resulting in a cut to train service for the Empire Builder and loss of jobs for Amtrak workers. This bill fails to address the lack of affordable housing in Minnesota's Fourth District and across the country. Republicans have made a devastating $1 billion cut to the HOME Investment Partnership Program, the best tool states and localities have to increase the supply of affordable houses for rent and home ownership. As Ranking Member of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, I know all too well that a lack of supply in off-base housing has increased competition among military families and driven up housing costs. We see this all over the country. Last Congress, we had to increase the Basic Allowance for Housing to try to offset some of the challenges military families face, but as long as there is a shortage of affordable housing, this is only a band aid and not a permanent solution. The 67 percent cut to the HOME program included in H.R. 4820 will certainly result in less affordable housing options in our communities and drive up the cost of off-base housing for military families and the Department of Defense. My opposition to the bill is not solely due to the inadequate funding levels. This bill, like all of the Republican appropriations measures, embraces right-wing social policy fights that have no place in the bills that fund our government H.R. 4820 would explicitly allow discrimination based on same-sex marriages, strips away protections enshrined to all Americans in the Fair Housing Act of 1958, and ties the hands of the Department of Transportation to curb carbon emissions and build climate resilient infrastructure. These provisions must be rejected. Mr. Speaker, government funding runs out November 17th. Instead of reevaluating their extreme 2024 funding bills and working to find a bipartisan path forward to fund the government beyond next Friday, House Republicans have once again wasted time considering a bill that is too extreme even for their own party. Republicans don't have the power to pass their own bad bills. H.R. 4820 now joins the Agriculture bill in a purgatory of Republicans own making. I urge my colleagues to work in a bipartisan fashion to cut through this Republican chaos and avoid a government shut down.