Andrew Ogles

Mr. OGLES

Mr. OGLES. Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of my amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. OGLES. Mr. Chairman, it would appear that many in the Democratic Party have taken it upon themselves to offer their talents and considerable abilities to help determine which information is reliable and which isn't. Thanks, but no thanks. Mr. Chairman, in September 2021, the Department of Defense offered NewsGuard, a self-proclaimed fact-checker, a $750,000 grant to effectively censor conservative viewpoints and opinions. Want proof of NewsGuard's censorship efforts? I am more than happy to provide undisputed facts. NewsGuard has given extremely subjective and clearly biased ratings to several conservative news outlets, including The Federalist, a 12\1/ 2\ percent accuracy and credibility score; Newsmax, 15 percent; The Epoch Times, a 17\1/2\ percent score; and OAN, 17\1/2\ percent. I am sure these conservative news outlets have lost out on crucial ad revenue from these ratings. It is censorship. It is fundamentally pathetic that this administration thinks they can sideline conservative viewpoints and demonize conservative platforms without the American people finding out about this. All this is happening while Politico, NPR, and The New York Times have previously received a perfect 100 percent; CBS, 95 percent. Mr. Chairman, we are supposed to have an open and free press. There should be no censorship. This is the United States of America. The fact that we are funding an organization that is censoring viewpoints and news is untenable. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OGLES. Mr. Chairman, it should be noted that Newsmax TV is more than just online. CBS isn't just online. The New York Times isn't just online. These are news outlets with multiple platforms, so it is not about censoring online. It is about censorship. The irony here is abundant, especially when considering that these leftist news outlets parroted the lie promoted by 51 intelligence officials and our disaster of a Secretary of State that the Hunter Biden laptop story was a production of Russian disinformation. Only in America could a guy who helped steal an election and undermine our democracy be promoted to oversee our Nation's policy on Ukraine, but that is the story of Antony Blinken in a nutshell. The Hunter Biden laptop debacle was literally the biggest story of the 2021 election, and a story, if taken seriously, that might have resulted in a different outcome. Instead, our government is subsidizing a self-identified fact-checker who completely whiffed on the biggest story of a Presidential cycle. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OGLES. Mr. Chairman, while I appreciate my colleague's perspective, it should be noted that when conservative versus other news sources are compared with similar metrics that the more liberal- leaning news outlets are ranked 27 points higher. This has a direct impact on revenue streams. To say that they are somehow unbiased literally defies the facts that I have laid out before you and that you have conservative news sites on the bottom end of the spectrum, whereas the more mainstream, liberal-leaning news sites are at the top. Mr. Chairman, it should also be noted that NewsGuard is known to be reliant on and working with the WHO, the World Health Organization, which is known for disinformation and lying and is unduly influenced by the CCP. This is a grant that should not be authorized, it should not be continued, and they should not be relied upon. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. OGLES

Mr. OGLES. Madam Chair, I rise in support of my amendment to prohibit taxpayer money from being used on President Biden's nakedly political executive order allegedly promoting access to voting. This dangerous executive order instructed a wide range of agencies, including the Department of Health and Human Services and the Small Business Administration to engage in voter turnout operations. Think about that for a moment, the government is engaging in voter turnout. Worse, it instructs agencies to partner with approved third-party organizations to assist them in their voter registration and other election-focused efforts. Who will approve these organizations? What criteria will be used? The executive order doesn't say. Congress has never granted the administration any authority to approve such groups or specify criteria therein. This executive order is blatantly illegal. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OGLES. Madam Chair, I agree with my colleague that I, too, would like all to participate in the voting process, all demographics across all spectrums. It should also be noted that there are already provisions in the law to allow for soldiers deployed to vote. Madam Chair, I urge adoption of my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. OGLES. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. OGLES. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to prohibit funding for the so-called Homeland Intelligence Experts Group. The conduct of certain members of the intelligence community, who behaved as political hacks, quite frankly, rather than sources of unbiased information, has undermined Americans' faith in government. That concerns me. Some of these officials peddled obvious falsehoods in an effort to undermine the American people's confidence in the election of 2016, and some meddled in the 2020 election, as well. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OGLES. Madam Chair, at a time when we see dysfunction in government and, quite frankly, in Congress, it is important that we restore faith in institutions. At a time when there are ongoing investigations into, say, the Hunter Biden laptop, it is important that we let due process work its way and not interject so-called experts. With that being said, I encourage, at a time when we desperately need to restore faith in institutions, let's do that thing. Let's trust the process as we move forward. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. OGLES

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

Mr. OGLES. Mr. Chairman, our Nation's international food assistance programs are broken. They drive our deficits higher while providing little to no value to taxpayers and even harming the recipient countries. I am grateful for Mr. Harris' manager's amendment that reduced funding for the destructive so-called Food for Peace program, and I urge extending the cost cuts to its sister program, McGovern-Dole, sometimes known as Food for Education. When we dump free food on developing markets, their domestic farmers can't compete. I mean, who can compete with free? Their domestic farmers are forced out of business, and investment in their domestic agricultural sector dwindles. In fact, we hurt those we seek to assist. We have known that this problem has existed for years. In 2010, watching international food aid destroy his country's agricultural sector, the President of Haiti begged us to stop, to stop sending it. Further, reflecting on his administration's role in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, President Bill Clinton said: ``I had to live every day with the consequences of the loss of capacity to produce a rice crop in Haiti to feed those people.'' Bill Clinton even recognized the mistake. However, we keep making it. We need to stop impoverishing farmers in countries with developing agricultural sectors and stop discouraging private investment in those sectors. While supporters of the McGovern-Dole program have touted its alleged role supporting democracy and good governance, a look at the recipient countries proves that that isn't true. USDA determines a list of priority countries for McGovern-Dole each year. Let's take a look at this year's recipients, seven countries. Nicaragua, which is ruled by Daniel Ortega's thugocracy, throws its opposition in prison, and that is on a good day. It stands accused of politically motivated extrajudicial executions and torture and other human rights abuses. Then there is Togo, whose President first took power in a military coup in 2005. Cameroon's President, coincidentally, won reelection uninterrupted since coming into power in 1982. At the time the USDA put Nepal on the priority list, it had a Communist Party leader. These are not beacons of democracy or good governance. Haiti still remains on the priority list; and look at Haiti today. Decades of aid have failed to produce a reliable government there. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OGLES. Mr. Chairman, success? Haiti is a wreck. Nicaragua has sided with the CCP. They led the charge to expel Taiwan as a permanent observer, replacing with the butchers of Beijing. Of the seven priority countries, six of them--including Cameroon, Mozambique, Nepal, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, and Togo--voted to support China's imposition of the oppressive national security law on Hong Kong. The recipient countries have proven to be anti-American. Their countries have failed to produce agricultural sectors because local farmers can't compete with free. This isn't saving people from hunger. It is destroying the very people we are trying to assist. I urge Congress to continue to reform its food aid program. Mr. Chairman, if you want to sow the seeds of freedom, harvest the yield of democracy, pursuing failed policies is not the answer. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OGLES. Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of my amendment. These policies are failed. They are not successful. We are hurting the very countries that we are aiming to support. Let's help these nations, but this is not the answer. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. OGLES

Mr. OGLES. Mr. Speaker, Elon Musk, someone generally known for promoting free speech and autonomy, falsely stated that Taiwan is an ``integral part of China.'' On a practical level, think about what that means for our efforts. We in Congress can promote Taiwan's participation in international organizations. We can argue that Taiwan must have a seat at the table, but if we refuse or fail to confront the CCP on their falsification of the historical record, if we, as a Congress, can't confront the CCP with the truth, we are letting Xi Jinping dictate the terms of the debate. That is irresponsible and wrong. Unfortunately, this wasn't the first time that Mr. Musk has spread misinformation about the relationship between the CCP, China, and Taiwan. For Elon to spread the talking points of the CCP from a position of influence in the United States is unacceptable, which is why I am sending a letter to Elon Musk providing him with an accurate account of Taiwan's history and a clear message: Taiwan is not part of the People's Republic of China and their free will is not for sale.

Mr. OGLES

Mr. OGLES. Mr. Speaker, Chinese Communists have been poisoning Americans. President Biden and Secretary Mayorkas have refused to secure our southern border and refuse to hold China accountable. In the State of Tennessee alone, overdose deaths have increased 200 percent--200 percent in 5 years. The situation at the southern border has gotten so bad, even the United Nations is saying that our border crossing is one of the deadliest in the world. Think about that for a moment. Therefore, I am introducing the Countering CCP Fentanyl Act. This bill would require the President to submit a list of all CCP government officials trafficking fentanyl and imposes property-blocking sanctions on all of them. We can't stop there. This legislation will make any CCP official caught pushing this poison inadmissible to the United States. Congress cannot stand idly by while Chinese Communists and cartel thugs line their pockets by drugging and killing American citizens. The CCP is using our porous border to continue their march to dominate the Nation. It is time to send China a message that their scheme to scourge the American population will not be tolerated.

Mr. OGLES

Mr. OGLES. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. OGLES. Mr. Chair, as we attempt to cut spending back to top-line FY 2022 levels, we must address the glaring $32.6 trillion debt. We must commit in this Congress to significant spending cuts. If we don't, we will be mortgaging the futures of our children. We will perpetually hobble long-term economic growth by not only destroying our future borrowing power but by forcing our Treasury to dedicate much of its future spending to debt repayment rather than meeting the needs of the American people. If we fail to tackle runaway spending now, we are compromising the well-being of future generations. Is that the legacy we want to leave behind? We have an obligation, a moral one, to ensure that we leave this country better off than we found it. In an appropriations bill that is supposed to be focused on supporting our veterans and their families, we are sending $293 million--taxpayer dollars--abroad to support NATO. That is an increase of 33 percent from FY 2023. There will be some who argue that the $293 million figure is a commitment that the United States made at the June 2022 NATO summit. While Congress has largely abdicated its role in foreign affairs to the executive branch, it was the intent of our Founding Fathers that this institution provide a robust check on the executive. It is why we have the power of the purse. Ultimately, given Congress' massive spending habits, there needs to come a time when we say enough is enough, and that is the purpose for offering this amendment today. I am asking all of my colleagues if they could spare just a 1 percent cut to NATO's Security Investment Program. That is just 1 percent. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OGLES. Mr. Chairman, I have a great deal of respect for my colleagues, but let's talk about America's contribution. We have already spent roughly $42 billion on equipment and support for Ukraine in addition to these moneys. When you think about NATO, our allies are supposed to hold up their fair share of the bargain, 2 percent. We are meeting our obligations, but only seven other countries meet their obligations. Keep in mind, it is supposed to be 2 percent. Luxembourg is at 0.62; Canada, 1.29; Turkey, 1.37; Norway, 1.57; Germany, 1.49; and France, 1.89. Before we start talking about the United States of America doing its job and having to defend the rest of the world, how about our allies do their job and uphold their obligations? I am asking for only a 1 percent cut. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OGLES. Mr. Chair, it is hard to justify sending hard-earned taxpayer dollars to NATO when most of our allies don't uphold their end of the bargain and when they look to us to be their defender and to fund their security. Meanwhile, we have a porous border. Every community in this country is a border town because of fentanyl overdoses in the streets and trafficking run amuck. Yet, we are going to spend more money overseas. How about we secure our country and take care of our country, our people, our needs, and secure our border? Mr. Chair, it is just a 1 percent cut. I encourage all of my colleagues to send a message to NATO and our allies to do their fair share. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. OGLES

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

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

Mr. OGLES. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the opportunity to speak on my amendment, which strikes ``social'' from the scope of factors examined under the FAA's BEYOND program expansion. Mr. Chair, this is a commonsense amendment that simply seeks to allow the FAA to focus on its core mission. The FAA's BEYOND program was crafted to yield the best outcomes for unmanned aircraft systems, not to promote garbage and irrelevant woke ideology. The FAA BEYOND program is innovative, because it was designed to understand the potential benefits of drone use and the processes for drone integration. There is no room for any sort of liberal agenda in this program nor in this legislation. My amendment removes the reference to social impacts examined under the BEYOND program expansion, which goes undefined in the bill, and could, therefore, be used to advance woke considerations. Expanding the scope of the BEYOND program to include social factors distracts from BEYOND's mission of making beyond visual line of sight operations repeatable, scaleable, and viable. Mr. Chair, I urge adoption, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OGLES. Mr. Chair, I would agree with my colleague that this program is vital. It is vital for the future of aviation and for medicine and for all sorts of applications. What it shouldn't be used for is a woke agenda. The BEYOND program expansion is supposed to enable testing of new emerging aviation concepts and technologies to inform policies, rulemaking, and guidance needed to enable these new concepts and technologies, again, not to be leveraged for wokeness. The government should not stick their nose into Americans' lifestyle, well-being, and societal preferences by use or leveraging the BEYOND program, and that is exactly what my colleague is encouraging. Mr. Chair, let us not allow the Biden administration to shift attention away from the real problems that Americans face every day to his administration's radical leftist agenda, which they try to creep into every aspect of our lives. I urge adoption of this very commonsense amendment, which focuses on the underlying bill, the true mission of the FAA, which is aviation and safety in our skies, not wokeness. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OGLES. Mr. Chair, I do appreciate the intent of my colleague, but I think it should be noted that this serves as a back door for a woke agency if it chooses to be so. When we leave these back doors open, what we have seen is a weaponized FBI against American citizens. We have seen a weaponized IRS against American citizens. We have seen a weaponized Justice Department against American citizens. This does nothing more than open the door for the FAA to become weaponized on the social, woke agenda. Enough is enough. Yes, it is just a word, and that word should be stricken. Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of my amendment. It is commonsense, it is conservative, it is the right thing to do, and it says no more wokeness in our country when it comes to the government and how it rules. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.