Joe Neguse

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I have great respect for my colleague from Wisconsin. We served together on the Subcommittee on Federal Lands, and I certainly agree with him about the preservation of liberty and the importance of liberty in our founding documents as the core fabric, core threat in our country, but I must also just say that I don't think the American people share House Republicans' priorities. Let me explain why. On Monday, the Rules Committee will be meeting to consider a number of bills. House Republicans put out a notice yesterday what those bills would include. Let me just give you a sampling, Mr. Speaker: the Refrigerator Freedom Act, the Hands Off Our Home Appliances Act, the Clothes Dryers Reliability Act, and--this may be my favorite--the Liberty in Laundry Act. While I appreciate the gentleman from Wisconsin's very passionate defense of liberty, I am not so sure the American people had that in mind. I don't think they are thinking of the Liberty in Laundry Act. I think they expect this House Republican majority to actually address the consequential challenges that face our country, not waste time on petty games and nonsense bills. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, again, I appreciate the passion of the speakers on the other side of the aisle, including the gentlewoman from Wyoming, but facts matter, Mr. Speaker. And this body must dispense with the notion that any of this, the ills that they have spent all this time describing, are attributable to the Biden administration. Mr. Speaker, I will read you a quote. This is from January 2018: ``I would have preferred a permanent reauthorization''--let me repeat that--``permanent reauthorization of title VII to protect the safety and security of the Nation. By signing this act today, however, I am ensuring that this lawful and essential intelligence program will continue to protect Americans for at least the next 6 years. We cannot let our guard down in the face of foreign threats to our safety, our freedom, and our way of life,'' President Donald J. Trump. I understand we are going to have robust debates about the mechanics and the nuances with respect to this particular bill but spare us lectures about the need for a shorter runway and a shorter reauthorization, when the former President, whom apparently the House Republican caucus continues to take orders from, made clear and abundant his desire for a permanent reauthorization of this program with none of these reforms, by the way. None of them. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I just want to read from an article from a few days ago. This is from FOX 5 in Atlanta. The headline: ``Marjorie Taylor Greene standing by eclipse, NE Earthquake comments.'' ``Georgia Congressman Marjorie Taylor Greene is standing by comments she made about last week's earthquake in the Northeast and Monday's eclipse.''

Mr. NEGUSE. Yes, sir.

Mr. NEGUSE. No, I am addressing the Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I am reading an article, a newspaper article. Has that become objectionable now in this body?

Mr. NEGUSE. I thank the Speaker. I will dispense with it quickly. I will just simply say, again, this is quoting from the article here that: ``The Republican Representative then posted on X, the social media site formerly known as Twitter, that `God is sending America strong signs to tell us to repent.' Greene also pointed to Monday's eclipse, saying there are `many more things to come.''' To the extent that my friend from Kentucky was looking for me to make a connection here to the debate that we are having, I suspect it is self-evident, but I am not so sure that the American people should necessarily be taking much stock into the arguments that are being made by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, including from the speaker that we just heard from. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Again, I am going to go through this list of bills that they have noticed for Monday: the Liberty in Laundry Act, the Clothes Dryer Reliability Act, and the Refrigerator Freedom Act. I can assure the gentleman from Ohio, I don't think any of the American people believe that he works in a think tank, given these bills that they have apparently noticed for this House to consider next week. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. Today's rule, put simply, is a testament to the Republican playbook since assuming the majority 15 months ago: chaos, gridlock, and infighting. Over the past year, honestly, it has been difficult to understand what my colleagues across the aisle truly want. At the beginning of this Congress, the other side of the aisle voted for a House rules package that they promised would entail an open rules process for amendments, yet this Congress is on pace to have more closed rules than any Congress in the last 100 years, over a century. A minority of House Republicans now dictate what proposals will even have a chance to be considered in this Chamber, to stand in the marketplace of ideas that our colleagues claim to love so dearly. Mr. Speaker, our colleagues across the aisle reject compromises at every turn. My Republican colleagues rejected a bipartisan immigration deal that came out of the Senate before even reading the bill text. The bill passed with 70 votes, Mr. Speaker, in the United States Senate. Our allies around the world have literally been left stranded, and House Republicans won't even bring the bill up for an up-or-down vote. Instead, their top priority is the Refrigerator Freedom Act, Mr. Speaker. The American people deserve better. They expect better. Enough of the political stunts. Enough of the infighting. Let's get back to work, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose the previous question and the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, first let me thank the distinguished gentleman, my good friend, from the Commonwealth of Kentucky, whose leadership with respect to addressing the scourge of gun violence that has, unfortunately, taken hold in so many parts of our country, has been unparalleled since he first stepped into this august Chamber last year. We are grateful for his service, we are grateful for his leadership, and we are grateful for him initiating this important conversation tonight. Mr. Speaker, I must say that there are many constituents of mine who are frustrated, who are outraged, who are anguished at the inaction of this body to address an issue as fundamental as this one. What could be more important, Mr. Speaker, than the safety of our families, of our friends, of our neighbors, of our colleagues, of our children, of our fellow citizens. This Congress has a job to do, and that job must include addressing gun violence and enacting commonsense reforms that we know will save lives. I have the distinct privilege, Mr. Speaker, of representing the great State of Colorado, and we have been no stranger to the anguish of gun violence. Next week will mark the 25th anniversary of the tragic and devastating massacre at Columbine High School. Mr. Speaker, 13 Coloradans murdered in cold blood, 12 students, and 1 teacher, 25 years ago next week. Mr. Speaker, 3 years ago, my community was devastated by yet another mass shooting at our local grocery store. Mr. Speaker, 10 community members gunned down, including 1 police officer, who bravely died in the line of duty, saving lives, making the ultimate sacrifice. Mr. Speaker, we have lost far too many. There are far too many mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters, children, Americans, dying from gun violence. We have the power to stop it if we follow the articulate admonition of my friend and colleague, Mr. McGarvey, by passing commonsense solutions here in this Chamber. For those who doubt our ability to do so, Mr. Speaker, I will point you to fairly recent history. There were many, many who doubted the ability of the United States Congress and the President to enact laws, commonsense laws that ultimately would and could save lives. They were wrong. Because of President Biden's leadership, we passed a bill in the last Congress, the 117th Congress, the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. That law is saving lives today. Earlier today, the White House, next to the leadership of President Biden, Vice President Harris, the leadership of our attorney general, Attorney General Garland, announced yet another reform, a new rule pursuant to the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act that will finally close the gun show loophole, an important step forward, Mr. Speaker, and one that I applaud. I hope, I sincerely hope that it can be a building block for us to take on. Now, I have to confess, I looked at the notice in the Committee on Rules, the committee on which I serve, with great dismay, just a few hours ago. What did that notice portend for next week? What have House Republicans decided we will spend our time on next week--not gun violence prevention, the Refrigerator Freedom Act. I kid you not, that is literally on the agenda next week: The Refrigerator Freedom Act. How about a bill to address gun violence? Is that too much to ask? My constituents don't think so, and I don't think the people of Kentucky think so either. I thank the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. McGarvey) again for his leadership, for initiating this important conversation. It is the beginning and not the end.

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my distinguished colleague and friend from Michigan for yielding. I also thank Chairman Westerman for his leadership and Ranking Member Grijalva for his support of this bill--my bill, the Drought Preparedness Act--and for being willing to consider it through the Natural Resources Committee and help us to bring it to the floor today. Finally, I thank my colleague, Representative Ciscomani, who co- chairs the Colorado River Caucus here with me in the United States and is a co-lead of this particular bill. As has been mentioned, throughout the West and certainly in my home State of Colorado, we have seen continuing drought conditions threaten the lives and the livelihoods of so many of our communities. These ongoing drought conditions are shrinking the region's many, many water lifelines. I will just say as someone who represents the Second Congressional District of Colorado and has the privilege of representing the Headwaters of the Colorado River, we know in my district and our communities know firsthand just how important that critical water supply is for our State. That is why we created and formed the bipartisan Colorado River Caucus, a forum for Members located in Colorado River Basin States to discuss the various issues facing the Colorado River, upper basin and lower basin States. As the Bureau of Reclamation, States, Tribes, and stakeholders are working toward long-term solutions, it is necessary that we continue to provide States and agency partners with every tool possible to mitigate its impacts, and that is exactly what this bill does. As Representative Dingell and Chairman Westerman just articulated, the authorities that the Bureau has used in the past include drought contingency planning, resiliency projects, and emergency response actions. It is critical that we empower the Bureau to be able to utilize these tools into the future. The Bureau of Reclamation testified during the legislative hearing during this particular bill as to just how important these tools are and how critical it is for Congress to ensure that they continue. I am excited that this bill passed unanimously out of the House Natural Resources Committee and has strong bipartisan support. I urge my colleagues to support this bill here on the floor so we can get this across the finish line and to support Colorado and States across the Rocky Mountain West and the 17 Bureau of Reclamation States as we continue to deal with this crisis.

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the Ranking Member for yielding time. Republicans have had the majority in this House for 11 months, and what do they have to show for it? Nothing--no efforts to grow the middle class, no efforts to lower costs, no efforts to build safer communities; instead, an effort to default on our Nation's debt, two attempts to shut down the government, vacating their own Speaker, and now a baseless impeachment that they are pursuing for one reason and one reason alone--because former President Trump ordered them to do so. Ask them to articulate what crime they are investigating, and they can't give you an answer. Ask them to identify any evidence of wrongdoing by President Biden--crickets. Mr. Speaker, the American people, I can assure you, are deeply disappointed in the actions that House Republicans have taken for the better part of the last year, and this action is no different. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject this farce of a process. Let's get back to doing the important work that the American people expect us to do.

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, let me first thank my colleague from Puerto Rico, as well as the chairman and the ranking member for their support, their partnership, and their leadership in helping facilitate this bill in its journey to the House floor today. I thank them all for eloquently articulating the reasons why I am such a strong supporter of this legislation and why I decided to introduce it with a broad coalition of lawmakers. I would be remiss if I didn't also say a word of gratitude to Representative Debbie Lesko, who has been my partner on this bill, as well as Senators Baldwin, Blackburn, and Bennet who are leading the bicameral legislation in the Senate, the companion bill. This bill, as you have heard, Mr. Speaker, is a simple bill but a profoundly important bill. It is bipartisan, and it is bicameral. Now, by way of background, and as the chairman articulated, I was proud to work on legislation in the 116th Congress that authorized the construction of the Women's Suffrage National Monument on Federal lands here in Washington, D.C. We secured the first outdoor statue in honor of the brave women behind the women's suffrage movement, a monument that will honor the contributions made by a diverse group of women in the fight for women's suffrage. This bipartisan legislation passed both chambers and was signed into law. This effort, Mr. Speaker, has been locally led from the start, driven by constituents in my Congressional District back home in Colorado, and in my view, a prime example of what we can accomplish when we display and demonstrate Colorado's ingenuity and passion and put it to good work. In the years since, the sponsors of the monument have been hard at work to determine the best location for it to be placed within Washington, D.C. As the chairman stated, the decision was that women's history deserves to have a place on our National Mall. Right now, as the chairman articulated, of the 40 monuments on The National Mall, there are none dedicated and committed to women's history. This proposed placement has broad support, including from all of our Nation's living First Ladies who serve as honorary chairs of the Women's Suffrage National Monument Foundation. Placing a monument, as you know, Mr. Speaker, specifically on our National Mall, does require an additional act of Congress, which is the legislation before us today. This legislation simply allows the monument to be placed on the Reserve area of The National Mall. As the chairman articulated, it will be privately funded. It will not cost the Federal Government a dime. I might just add on a more personal note, I, like many of my colleagues, am a father. I have a 5-year-old daughter and a 5-month-old son. My daughter, Natalie, had her first trip to Washington, D.C., when she was just a few months old. She joined me here on the floor in January of 2019 when I was sworn into office here for the first time. I simply cannot wait for her to one day be able to come to Washington, D.C., and to see women's history reflected in the monuments and the memorials that are at the core of our Nation's Capital--not just her, but of course, all children, all Americans to be able to come and see that firsthand. This bill is an important step to doing just that. I am hopeful that we will earn the support of our colleagues across both sides of the aisle. I think this bill is an important step in making our National Mall representative of American history, honoring the legacy of the women who fought for their rights all these years ago. I would urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer my amendment which would allocate additional funding to the Bureau of Reclamation for the Colorado River Compliance Account and to support the Upper Colorado and San Juan River Basin Endangered Fish Recovery Programs. Mr. Chair, first, I would express my gratitude to the ranking member, who has served with such distinction in this body representing northwestern Ohio, Toledo and Sandusky, and doing her part to build a better future for the people of Ohio and the people of our country. In particular, her service as ranking member of this august subcommittee and always trying to find a way to bridge the divide and to build a bipartisan path forward. It is unfortunate that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have regrettably chosen not to do that with this particular bill. However, with respect to this amendment, the Upper Colorado and San Juan River Basin Recovery Programs provide us with an opportunity to chart a bipartisan path forward. They are a model of successful partnership and collaboration across agencies, States, with both Federal and non-Federal partners in my State of Colorado, in addition to Utah, Wyoming, and New Mexico. I have been leading legislation over the past several years to reauthorize these programs, including bipartisan legislation in the previous Congress, which was signed into law and legislation this year that would extend the programs for an additional 7 years. The programs work to recover and protect four species of endangered and threatened fish, while providing Endangered Species Act compliance for over 2,500 water projects. The Colorado River Compliance Account provides critical Federal support for these programs, and my amendment would simply increase the Bureau of Reclamation's funding to direct additional Federal resources to these programs. I hope it is an amendment that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle can support. It is common sense. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman of the subcommittee for his support and his words with respect to this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), the distinguished ranking member of the Energy and Water Development Subcommittee.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Chairman, I would assure the chairman of the subcommittee that I won't be asking for a recorded vote on this amendment, but it is a similar amendment to the amendment just offered. Essentially, this amendment directs the allocation of funding from a different account, again, to support this incredibly important program for all the reasons that had been stated by, of course, the ranking member of the subcommittee as well as the chairman previously. The headwaters of the Colorado River are in my district. As the ranking member so eloquently stated, we face a complex set of challenges in the West as it relates to the Colorado River, which I continue to work to address in my State of Colorado and, of course, working with our colleagues in the Upper Basin and Lower Basin States. This program, the Upper Colorado and San Juan River Basin Endangered Species Recovery Implementation Program, I think is a great and salient example of a way in which we can chart unique solutions to really pressing challenges; in this case, of course, the potential for endangered species in our community and in our water basins. All that being said, Mr. Chairman, without belaboring the point, I would simply say it is a program worth investing in and it is why I am pursuing this particular amendment, and I hope my colleagues can support it. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the subcommittee chairman, again, for his indulgence and support on this particular amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding. I would simply say to my colleague from New York, if you don't want a shutdown, if you are trying to prevent a shutdown, prove it. There is a simple way to prove it, Madam Speaker. Defeat the previous question so we can consider a simple amendment, an amendment that does one thing, that let's this body take an up or down vote on the bipartisan Republican and Democratic Senate continuing resolution that is being negotiated as we speak. That is it. It gives that resolution privilege so that this House can consider it, can take that up or down vote and ensure that the government stays funded, Madam Speaker. If you are not prepared to do that, if my colleagues aren't prepared to do that, then please spare us these supposed concerns for a government shutdown that you have engineered from the start. You want to talk about blame, Madam Speaker, here is a quote, and this is not my quote. This is not conservatism. This is stupidity. The idea that we are going to shut the government down when we don't control the Senate, when we don't control the White House. These people can't define a win. They don't know how to take yes for an answer. It is a clown show. You keep running lunatics, this is what you are going to have. These are not my words, Madam Speaker. These are the words of the gentleman from New York. If he doesn't want to be a part of this clown show--I don't disagree with him, by the way. I don't think the American people disagree with him either. Clearly, the House Republican Caucus is in dysfunction and chaos, but there is an easy way for him to leave this clown show and govern with Republican Senators, Democratic Senators, with your colleagues on this side of the aisle, defeat the previous question and support the amendment and let's have the debate on a bipartisan CR that keeps our government funded. I don't know how a Member can vote for the previous question and deprive this body of an opportunity to vote on that bipartisan CR. I don't know how you go back and tell the tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of troops and law enforcement officers and Border Patrol agents who will be forced to work without pay that you decided that this body shouldn't vote on a stopgap measure to keep the government running. I don't know how you do that. I can tell you this: The American people well understand the Republican plan that they have brought to the floor. You do not get to have it both ways. You don't get to say that you support law enforcement and fentanyl interdiction and then put a bill on the floor that cuts the DEA, that cuts the FBI, that will harm State and local law enforcement officers. You do not get to say you care about public safety and then put a bill on the floor that cuts, by more than 50 percent, wildland fire suppression in States like Colorado, the State that I happen to be honored to represent in the United States Congress. You do not get to have it both ways. The time for political games is over. We have 24 hours to go, Madam Speaker. Let's defeat the previous question and let's pass this amendment to keep the government up and running.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for his indulgence, and I would be remiss to come back to the floor to simply say only in Washington can you have Members who claim they want to avoid a shutdown while they take every step to shut down the government. Only in Washington can you have Members who claim to support law enforcement while they promote a bill that cuts funding for law enforcement. Only in Washington can you claim that you want to secure the border while engineering a shutdown that will force Border Patrol agents to work without pay. Only in Washington can you claim that this so-called debt commission that they have designed will not harm programs like Social Security months after rolling out a plan--the Republican Study Committee in June--rolling out a plan that guts Social Security. My colleague from Pennsylvania is a member of that group. The gentleman from Michigan who spoke earlier, who apparently has proposed this amendment, is a member of that group. Why don't they be honest with the American people about their plans? Because they know the plan to cut Social Security is deeply unpopular, and, yet, they soldier on. Mr. Speaker, 24 hours, that is how much time we have. Defeat the previous question. Let's support the amendment to give an up-or-down vote on the bipartisan deal that Republicans and Senate Democrats have been working on. Let's keep the government up and running. Let's avert this extreme Republican government shutdown.

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, they know that if Republicans are in control of the House, there is one thing they can count on, and that is that Republicans will shut the government down as they did in the 1990s under Speaker Newt Gingrich, as they did in 2013 under Speaker Boehner, as they did in 2018 under Speaker Ryan. I implore my colleagues to get back to the basics of governing. Work with us in good faith. Honor the agreement that you all voted for 4 months ago. Let's fund the government, Mr. Speaker.