Scott Perry

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, instead of pandering to special interest groups, we have got to pare back these wasteful programs that oftentimes serve as a boondoggle for a limited number of folks in a limited location. This amendment does not zero out the commission's funding. It doesn't say we have got to get rid of the commission. Other administrations have done that. This doesn't say that. It simply reduces the funding to pre-COVID, pre-Biden spending levels where, quite honestly, most of our bosses, our constituents are living. That is where their paychecks are. They are back there, and we are up here, taking their money and spending it on things that are already being spent on that should be spent by somebody else. They should be attached to accountability at State and local elected officials, but they are not. They are attached to regional commissions that most people don't know who exist, have no idea who runs them or what they do. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chair, I am going to sound like a broken record here, so I will keep it short. I am not picking winners and losers or favorites here. First, the Great Lakes Authority has only been authorized since 2022. It is 2024 now. It still does not have a Federal co-chair. It has no website. It has no programs funded. There is nobody there. Yet, strangely, it is still receiving Federal dollars, to the tune of $5 million, for projects supposedly in the watershed regions of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, New York, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. I don't know because there is no one to ask. Mr. Chair, we have seen how other commissions have gone. President Trump urged the elimination of three of them, and President Obama recommended cuts and elimination for the Denali Commission, making it bipartisan. With that level of bipartisan criticism of existing commissions, I don't see why we need to dig ourselves even deeper with yet another commission. My goodness, Pennsylvania is covered by two of them. That is my home State. You have to call the balls and strikes. I know people in this building will scoff at the difference between $2.5 million and $5 million. We are saying $2.5 million, which is pretty bad for me. I am saying to spend $2.5 million on a commission that doesn't have a co-chair, has no website, and has no programs funded, not $5 million. It is still $2.5 million being sent to who knows where for who knows what, but it is $2.5 million less going toward a commission that cannot even begin operations without any Senate-confirmed Federal co-chair. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chair, with all due respect, Pennsylvania can handle itself. We don't need some commission to do our work. We understand where the water from Lake Erie goes, to the Great Lakes. We understand it is complex. I looked at the list, and I have been to all of these States. I would be happy to meet with the Federal co-chair, but there isn't one. There isn't any. I would be happy to see what they are doing, but that person doesn't exist. Do you know what exists? Millions of dollars going to this organization where there isn't anybody there. That is what exists. That is what we are trying to rectify. We are not even saying take all of it. Just take some of it so we don't spend as much on an organization with no website, no co-chair, no plan. All of us know it is not going to stop at $5 million for this commission, just like the rest. It will all balloon up to tens of millions of dollars if Congress, using the power of the purse, doesn't put its foot down. I love Pennsylvania. I love my home State. We want to handle our business. We don't need unelected bureaucrats not from Pennsylvania telling us how to do things in Pennsylvania. That is what they are going to do with this. Mr. Chair, I urge adoption, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

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

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chair, I know you can't believe it, but there is one left. Like I said, we are equal opportunity here. We are going to take a look at all of them. This amendment would halve the funding of the Southwest Border Regional Commission. This commission, which only had its first chairman confirmed in 2022 and was funded only starting in fiscal year 2021, funds projects in the southern border regions of Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas. Incidentally, the first chairman was previously the director of economic development and special initiatives for Senator Heinrich, which continues this theme of political connection to the chairmen of these regional commissions. I don't know if everyone is getting that, but I bet those not appointed to the regional commission who live in those States get it. Look, I know folks on the other side of the aisle care about the border. Well, I hope they do. I know our side sure does. However, the answer to solving border problems is to actually enforce our Nation's immigration laws, not to give $5 million to a commission that has not published a strategic plan and does not even appear to have a website. We are going to give $5 million to them to fix the border. We can't even fix it at the Federal level. Well, we can, but we refuse to. The commission received $250,000 in FY21 but is now being funded at $5 million in this bill for FY24. For what results? If they are there to fix the border, I would argue they have done a pretty poor job, but we are going from $250,000 to $5 million. This amendment doesn't get rid of the commission. That argument can be made, but this amendment just says we are going to take it from $5 million to a still exorbitant $2.5 million. I suspect we are going to hear from some of my colleagues from Texas about how they want to use this opportunity to fix the border, but this regional commission isn't the answer. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chair, for all the reasons so stated amendment after amendment with all of these commissions duplicating Federal programs, which are specious to begin with, again, it is irrelevant to regions of the country or commissions. I am not picking on one as opposed to another, not trying to pick the winners and losers. Our citizens can't afford their bills. This Federal Government can't afford its bills. Every dollar that we are talking about in this appropriations bill, every single dollar, is borrowed money. Let's not borrow as much. Let's not borrow $2.5 million as much. That is all this is saying. Still borrow a whole bunch, all of it as a matter of fact, but just not $2.5 million more. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend, Mike Kelly, for yielding. It is sad that we have to be here. Corey Comperatore is now a hero, but we would sure rather have Corey back in our lives. I didn't know Corey, but I have come, like many, to learn something about him. Each of us wonder, if we had to, what we would do in that moment; what we would do. Corey's resolve, Corey's mettle was already known to many. As it has been said, he was a volunteer firefighter and the chief, a devoted member of his local church, a member of the armed services of America. Probably other than loving his Savior, what he found most important in the world was being a husband to Helen and a father to Allyson and Kaylee. We need to know why Corey is no longer with us on behalf of the American people, and we are going to find out, but that is not what this is about. This is about honoring the life and the legacy of a man who loved his family, his God, and his country, and laid down his life. He went to the rally, expecting safety, like everybody else, but in the face of unimaginable danger, when a moment means the difference between life and death, Corey shielded his wife and his daughter, the things he loved most in this world. For that, we honor him, we pray for him, we pray for his family and his community. We also know that he exemplifies the best not only in Butler, Pennsylvania, not only in Pennsylvania and our great Commonwealth, but in the United States of America and for all of humanity. I thank the gentleman for this time this evening. God bless Corey Comperatore and God bless his family.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me the time. My friends on the other side of the aisle say: Well, it is against the law for people here illegally to register to vote. It is against the law, Mr. Speaker, for them to vote. It is against the law. Do you know what else is against the law? Coming into our country illegally, but, oh my goodness, who knew? It happens. As the past speaker just said, we have the honor system. Do you know how to register to vote? Just sign it and say, ``I can vote.'' That is how to do the honor system. Mr. Speaker, let me tell you who we are providing the honor system to: people who human traffic, drug dealers, cartel members, people on the terrorist watch list. Mr. Speaker, do we want to count on the honor system to have those folks, people coming from the Communist Party of China, from Russia, our adversaries, our enemies, selecting the leaders of our country? That is what they are telling you right now. That is exactly what they are saying. By the way, this whole thing about military members can't vote, someone can come here illegally and serve in the fire department, in the soup kitchen, in any number of places, including the military, without being an American citizen. I have been overseas, and I have voted as an American military citizen.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for bringing the resolution. To address the other side's claims about subpoenas to Members, they are invalid when you get your buddies together, predetermine the outcome, and then have an illegitimate committee, so-called, that doesn't follow and comport with the rules of the House. By the way, some of the Members accused here were never even served those subpoenas, so let's be careful about disparaging our colleagues. On the issue at hand, Mr. Speaker, this was a criminal investigation conducted by Robert Hur, a criminal investigation on the President of the United States for classified documents for which he was not authorized to have because, at the time he had them, he was not the President. He was the Vice President or a Senator and, in either case, not authorized to have those documents outside the chain of custody and outside a SCIF. He had no courier orders. They were just stored in his garage or at the Penn Biden Center. That is the crime. The crime was committed. That is actually not in question. Robert Hur essentially said that there was a crime committed. The question is of the evidence of the crime committed. What the administration, the Department of Justice, and Merrick Garland have said is: You can't have the evidence. We are going to tell you our version of the evidence. That is not how it goes in criminal trials. We don't say to the defendant: Give us your version of the evidence, and we will see if that is good enough. Prosecutors go get the evidence and then determine where it leads. This House of Representatives demands the best evidence, not somebody else's version of the evidence, but the actual evidence, and the best evidence available, not because the House of Representatives inherently needs it, but because the American people need to judge for themselves about the crime that was committed and then why Robert Hur decided not to prosecute that crime.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 338.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Madam Chair, I want to start out by thanking my good friend from Florida for his hard work and effort on this and also for his hard work and his outstanding effort to speak on behalf of the Cuban people who wish to be free and to speak against communism worldwide. I thank him for that. Everyday Americans across our Nation, like the folks that I have the honor to represent in Pennsylvania in the Tenth Congressional District, just a few hours from this place, are still suffering the impacts of this administration's reckless spending. Unlike the Federal Government, they have to make tough choices. They have got to make their budgets balance. They can't just print money. They have got to stretch their dollars. They have to forgo auto repairs or maybe something around their home that needs attention, take items off their grocery list, choose different items that they can afford, all because of too much spending. They pare back their spending in ways that may be uncomfortable because we won't in this town. To me, it is unacceptable and it is unconscionable. Madam Chair, the United States Congress has been unwilling to do the same for decades now. While, like last year, I appreciate that the underlying bill has eliminated or reduced many wasteful accounts--and it has due to the good work of the chairman here--with all due respect, there is still a lot of work to be done and can be done. The State Department and international organizations funded by the final State-Foreign Operations funding bills have time and time again advanced and sent American tax dollars to causes that run counter to American values and our foreign policy objectives. This amendment reduces the amount for international disaster assistance from just over $3.4 billion to zero. While I admire the desire of many, including myself, to be charitable and help others around the world, we have got to remember, we are being charitable with other people's money. We are being charitable with taxpayers' money, taxpayers that can barely afford their own bills, their own electricity bills, food bills, and daycare bills. God forbid you have got to buy a new car or a new home or pay the interest rates, all due to what is happening here. We want to be charitable, but the fact of the matter, Madam Chair, is that America is broke. It is hard to help other folks when you can't help yourself. This is nearly $3.5 billion, which like many of the other dollars spent in this bill, does not go directly to helping Americans in America. Our constituents simply can't afford yet another line item on their tab while they are already bearing the brunt of reckless spending by President Biden. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. PERRY. Madam Chair, we don't have to question each other's morality here. We all want to help. Everybody wants to be happy. We are Representatives of the United States, and we are heading into disaster season in the United States of America. Whether it is hurricanes across the South or wildfires in the West, it is coming here. This is about foreign disaster aid, Madam Chair, sending money abroad. We can always do that when there is something that happens. We can come to Congress here, and we can come in and vote for things at that time when they happen. I want to say this, Madam Chair. We want to put our chairman in the best position possible to negotiate. This isn't about questioning our moral objectives party by party, side by side, but we know that there is going to be a negotiation with the Senate. We know that. We want to put this chairman in the best position possible. Nobody here believes that we are going to end up with less than we go in with. You are going to end up with more. That is what happens every single time in this body. Let's put this chairman in the best position possible when he goes in and they say: Oh, my goodness, this isn't going to work. Then he can negotiate from there. Maybe it is not $3.5 billion. Maybe it is $3.4 billion, which isn't a big reduction in Pennsylvania where people can't pay their electricity bills, but it is something. It is a start down the road. I want to put this chairman in the best possible position to negotiate. Madam Chair, I urge adoption, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Madam Chair, had I been present, I would have voted AYE on Roll Call No. 285, AYE on Roll Call No. 286, AYE on Roll Call No. 287 and AYE on Roll Call No. 288. Amendment No. 43 Offered by Mr. Ogles

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman from Georgia, for yielding, and I thank my colleagues for their support of the bill. It is amazing, and it is very frightening that in 2024 we are having this discussion on the floor of the House of Representatives. Since the early 1990s, the Falun Gong has been targeted by the Chinese Communist Party. The Falun Gong is a spiritual practice of mind and body in which adherents follow the core principles of truth, compassion, and tolerance. In 1999, the Chinese Communist Party estimated that 70 to 100 million people were practicing Falun Gong, the equivalent of 5 to 7 percent of the Chinese population today. Mr. Speaker, Falun Gong's popularity quickly initiated violent persecution, including illegal detentions, forced labor, torture, and, yes, forced organ harvesting, which is a form of mass murder. This is something out of the thirties and Josef Mengele, but it is happening today. On July 20, 1999, the Chinese Communist Party detained hundreds of thousands of Falun Gong practitioners and banned any further practice of this religion. Since this date, the Chinese Communist Party has continued to escalate its systematic oppression against Falun Gong practitioners. On March 1, 2020, the Independent Tribunal into Forced Organ Harvesting from Prisoners of Conscience in China found there to be an incomprehensible gap between the number of transplant operations carried out in the People's Republic of China in comparison to the number of eligible registered donors. What does that mean? That means in China, Mr. Speaker, if you have got the money, then there is no waiting list for you to get an organ. Go anywhere else in the civilized world and find that. What would that mean? That means there is a ready supply of these organs, because there is. Now their report concluded that forced organ harvesting has been committed for years throughout China on a significant scale and that Falun Gong practitioners have been and probably are the main source of organs for forced organ harvesting. In the U.S., many of those working in organ transplantation and those who benefit from transplantation systems are likely unaware. They just don't know of China's illegal practices. Through its repressive control of information, the CCP has created the infrastructure and resources needed to persecute millions of its own citizens, not only Falun Gong practitioners, but also Uyghurs, Tibetans, Christians, and any other the Chinese Communist Party chooses to target. This bill is the first binding commitment by Congress to take strong legal action against the persecution and the forced organ harvesting of Falun Gong, making Falun Gong the centerpiece of legislation, an action long overdue after 25 years. The Falun Gong Protection Act imposes sanctions on those who participate in or facilitate the forced harvesting of organs in China. This bill directs the Secretary of State to determine whether the CCP's persecution of Falun Gong constitutes crimes against humanity or genocide alongside a required report on the CCP's organ transplant policies and practices. The Communist Party of China doesn't want us to see this. When you take a trip to China, Mr. Speaker, and see all the wonderful things and the wonderful people there, they are not going to invite you to see this. It is going to take us looking. It is going to take us focusing on it. Additionally, H.R. 4132 makes it U.S. policy to avoid any cooperation with the People's Republic of China in the illicit organ transplant industry. Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of this bill, and I thank my friends on both sides of the aisle for their support.

Mr. PERRY

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

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, let me start out by saying happy birthday to the United States Army. I spent a fair amount of time in my life in uniform in the Army. It is a defining thing in anybody's life who has spent time in uniform, and it has been a wonderful institution for many, many Americans over a long period of time. I also thank the chairman for the work on this bill. I know that while we are debating it here today and we are going to vote later today, that the work for next year's bill will start tomorrow. I thank him for his hard work. This amendment is pretty straightforward. It just requires the Secretary of Defense to report on the use of taxpayer-funded union time by DOD employees. We are not saying it is bad. We are not saying it is good. We are not saying it is too much. It is too little. We just want to know what it is. We just want to know. For those who may be unfamiliar, Congress granted certain employees the ability to perform certain tasks for labor unions while on duty. To be clear, that means that these employees are being paid by our constituents to work for union activities instead of doing the job that they were hired to perform. I think maybe it would be fine if we said in the job description that your job is to do organized labor activities, but that is not what is in the job description. The job description is what is needed for the country for the Department of Defense; but instead of doing that work, you are doing other work. Unacceptably, the statistics on the use of official time are very few and far between. Take a GAO report from January of 2017, so we are a few years beyond that now, which is telling in itself. According to the data from the Department of Veterans Affairs, 346 employees spent 100 percent of their time on official union activities instead of taking care of our Nation's veterans. Now, the Trump administration took some steps to improve transparency, including actually reporting the use and the cost of official time by agencies. A VA press release dated November 8, 2018, cites a particularly egregious example. A VA registered nurse, who was elected as a local union official, spent 100 percent of her time doing organized labor activities. That might be fine if the job description was organized labor activities, but the job description is registered nurse. How much time taking care of veterans as a nurse was this person spending? Well, zero, that is how much time. To use examples from the Department of Defense, the most recent available data or estimates of the data from the Trump administration's final report was that 3,235 DOD employees used official time in FY19 for a total of 526,990 hours at a cost of millions upon tens of millions of dollars, not to mention the equipment. We are here debating the National Defense Authorization Act. There are very serious threats around the world. While we stand here, while we sit here, while we watch, the Russians are moving a fleet into Cuba about 100 miles off the coast of the United States of America. Now, I don't know about you, but for me, I want every DOD employee focused on keeping America safe. All we are asking for, all this amendment asks for is a report so that we don't go blindly searching around to try and figure out how best to do that. If we have the information, we can make decisions. We don't have the information. This amendment says give us the information, track the information so we can make decisions. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, there are many things that I agree with the gentleman, my friend on the other side of the aisle. These are important tasks that need to be done. Disputes need to be resolved. We all care about the people who are working for the Federal Government, but to think that after 40 years we have gotten it perfect, and we can't take a look and we can't ask for a report I think is a little bit shortsighted. This isn't an attack on anyone because those things do need to be done. However, I would say this: Yesterday I received an email from the AFL-CIO from someone working on official time. This is yesterday. Today is Friday. Yesterday was Thursday. The time stamp on it is 1:38, so 1338 if you are in the Army, is what time it came. That is in the middle of the business day. That is in the middle of working hours. That is not handling disputes. That is lobbying Members of Congress to vote one way or the other. We want them to be able to handle disputes and do the work to make sure employees are protected and the good work of DOD is done, but I, for one, would like a report on how this is the work that taxpayers should be paying for and how that is happening and how much it is happening. That is all we are asking for, Mr. Chairman, is a report. Mr. Chairman, I include in the Record the email from the AFL-CIO.

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, I urge support and yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted AYE on Roll Call No. 251.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. It is all borrowed money. So who is going to be unhappy if we do that?

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Madam Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 235.