Matthew Rosendale

Mr. ROSENDALE

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

Mr. ROSENDALE. Mr. Chairman, my amendment No. 58 would reduce the total appropriations for the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies by $1.55 billion, bringing the total cost of the bill down from nearly $58 billion to $56.4 billion. I submitted this amendment to get the total cost of this year's appropriation bills closer to the fiscal year 2022 levels. I have been traveling around the State of Montana for quite extensive periods of time over the last several months and I have yet to find a single person that feels like we didn't have enough spending or government in fiscal year 2022. As a matter of fact, most of them truly believe that we had far too much government and it was engaged in trying to run their lives and they did not want to see it anymore. I believe that the Federal Government had more than enough funding in FY22 and that it is time to rein in the out-of-control spending. To get their spending under control, the Federal agencies must begin operating at the same levels, or at very least, receive only modest increases. The American people are sick and tired of the D.C. cartel running up the tab on the American people while our constituents are struggling to make ends meet. To be clear, my amendment still allows for modest increases in the fiscal year 2022 spending for energy and water. I am not trying to slash funding or cripple necessary infrastructure. I am trying to ensure that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently and that we get the government off the path to financial ruin. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROSENDALE. I yield to the gentlewoman from Ohio. Parliamentary Inquiry

Mr. ROSENDALE. Mr. Chair, I misspoke. This is for Interior. This is for Interior. Excuse me. Mr. Chair, this is for Energy.

Mr. ROSENDALE. Mr. Chair, under Secretary Granholm, we have seen America's energy prices skyrocket with no clear plan to help Americans other than to further deplete our Strategic Petroleum Reserves. The Department of Energy has done nothing to show they deserve an increase in funding from last year. Secretary Granholm routinely speaks about how her intention is to quickly move away from traditional energy industries. Many Americans rely on these industries for their livelihoods. This administration shows a lack of clear consideration of these people and industries, even as they are necessary during our transition to clean energy. Furthermore, the very people that get hurt the most by this reckless administration's actions are the ones at the lowest end of the income scale. Quite frankly, if you just look at one section of this legislation, we don't want to compromise our national defense. One section, $1.2 billion, the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy is where the Federal Government is picking winners and losers to try and develop different types of fuel, including biofuels and batteries and the Federal Government should not be involved in that. The free market knows how to do it. They know how to do it the best. They have demonstrated they know how to do it the most efficiently. Further, Mr. Chair, I would just like to say that there is no reason that we cannot remove a meager $1.55 billion from this total bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ROSENDALE. Mr. Chairman, FY 2022, Corps of Engineers, $8.34 billion. FY 2023, $8.66 billion. FY24, $5.57 billion. We cannot continue to reward bad behavior. A recent project in Texas, the Ike Dike coastal barrier project, is currently projected to cost $57 billion, representing the largest civil engineering project in United States history, which is 68 percent higher than the recent estimate of $34 billion. There is not a contractor that has built a home that would have a homeowner abide by those types of terms and conditions. How can the Army Corps of Engineers be allowed to receive such a massive amount of funds when their project estimates are so routinely off base? Their time frames with which they are estimating to complete them are just as bad. A project in Michigan for the New Lock at the Soo is currently projected to cost $394 million more than the Biden administration's proposed funding. The list goes on and on and on. We cannot continue to reward this bad behavior. Mr. Chairman, once again, we have seen these projects go over budget and over time. The Corps of Engineers should not be rewarded, and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

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

Mr. ROSENDALE. Mr. Chair, I rise as the designee of the gentleman form Texas (Mr. Roy), and I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. ROSENDALE. Mr. Chairman, this amendment prohibits any of the funding in the Energy and Water Appropriations bill from being used to carry out President Biden's executive orders on climate change. These executive orders served as the catalyst for some of the Department of Energy's most radical actions, including the Justice40 Initiative, a radical environmental justice initiative that directs 40 percent of Federal clean energy and energy efficiency spending based on race, migrant status, and other characteristics. A moment ago, you heard me speaking about relying upon the marketplace and the free market to develop the most effective, efficient, and technologically advanced methods with which we can fuel everything that we have now, whether that is electric turbines or motor vehicles. To base it upon race, migrant status, and other characteristics demonstrates why exactly the Federal Government should not be involved in this type of action. The Department of Energy's transition to carbon pollution-free energy sources, a zero-emissions fleet, and a net-zero building portfolio--the power grid from Canada to Mexico around the country cannot sustain pushing everything to renewable energies when they are only operating at solar about 18 percent and wind energy at the very most efficient, 40 percent of full power when we happen to have wind blowing. This is not the way for us to go, and I would ask that we prohibit those funds from being used for such purposes. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROSENDALE. Mr. Chairman, building on the coast does not cause climate change, but it certainly exposes you to incredible risk of having your house washed away. Now, I am not a genius, nor am I climatologist or a weatherman, but even I know that simple fact. In 2021, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve had a total of 610 million barrels of crude oil in it. Here is what our Department of Energy has done: reduced it down to 347 million barrels of crude, the lowest level since 1983. The emissions in our country have gone down. It is demonstrated very clearly that by placing us more obligated to purchase our energy overseas, all we are doing is creating more pollution problems around the Earth. We do it cleaner. We do it safer. We do it with the strongest environmental standards, and we do it with the best labor practices around the world. Mr. Chairman, I hope my colleagues can support this. There is no reason for the Federal Government to be involved in directing what type of energies we should develop. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. ROSENDALE

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

Mr. ROSENDALE. Mr. Chair, my amendment No. 172 would prohibit funds made available by this act to require a member of the Armed Forces or a civilian employee of the Department of Defense to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. The fiscal year 2023 National Defense Authorization Act rescinded Secretary Austin's memorandum requiring that members of the Armed Forces be vaccinated against COVID-19. Unfortunately, the NDAA did not prohibit future mandates. The last mandate resulted in over 8,400 troops being kicked out of the military for refusing this experimental vaccine, and we lost about 60,000 reservists. Countless individuals also decided not to enlist because of this mandate. While our military is failing dramatically to meet recruiting goals, it is outrageous that the Department of Defense would condition employment on receiving a COVID-19 vaccine. For example, in 2022, the Army sought 60,000 recruits but only enlisted 45,000. For 2023, the Army is aiming to recruit 65,000 new members but is only expected to recruit between 50- and 55,000 Active- Duty members. Additionally, young, healthy males are the least at risk of getting a severe case of COVID-19 while they are the most likely group to have an adverse reaction from the vaccine, making the mandate not just counterproductive but potentially dangerous. The Biden administration is already urging all Americans to get a booster shot, despite no human-outcome data on the new shot. Congress must preemptively stop all COVID-19 vaccine requirements before these unelected bureaucrats try to take more control of our lives. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROSENDALE. Madam Chair, I am glad we are talking about the effectiveness and the readiness of our military. Again, 60,000 reservists left the military because of a mandate. Fortunately, we did learn something from it and it was removed from the NDAA, and Austin went along with it. These are the mandatory vaccinations that all servicemembers are required to receive before initial entry in basic training: adenovirus, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, influenza, measles, mumps, rubella, meningococcal, poliovirus, tetanus-diphtheria, and varicella. However, the main difference is that these other vaccines are much different and more effective than the COVID-19 vaccine. Take measles, for example. One estimate found that the measles vaccine is 85 times more effective than the Pfizer COVID vaccine. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy), my dear friend.

Mr. ROSENDALE. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROSENDALE. Madam Chair, we don't have a single problem with this being an option. If any servicemembers want to go and get an experimental vaccination plugged into their arm, they are welcome to do so. What we are saying is that the dollars that are going to be issued to the Department of Defense should not include any mandate for this experimental vaccination. In August of 2022, The Washington Post reported that 58 percent of the deaths related to COVID-19 were among vaccinated or boosted persons. This raises serious questions about even the effectiveness of this vaccine. I would also like to state that the COVID-19 vaccine requirements also continue to ignore natural immunity. As renowned Dr. Marty Makary testified in the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic this year, ``Over the past 3 years, over 200 studies have shown that natural immunity is at least as effective than vaccinated immunity. A recent Lancet review . . . natural immunity is at least as effective as vaccinated immunity, and probably better.'' Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ROSENDALE

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

Mr. ROSENDALE. Mr. Chair, my amendment No. 180 would prohibit the use of funds being made available by this act from enforcing any COVID-19 mask mandates. Now, I want to make sure that everyone understands there is a huge difference between a COVID-19 mask mandate and having a section of a medical facility that is quarantined off because of highly contagious diseases or folks that are immune deficient. That has nothing to do with the COVID-19 mandate. This is only about COVID-19 mandates. Last month, Morris Brown College in Atlanta reinstated its COVID-19 mask mandate. They eventually rescinded the mandate, in large part due to public outcry, but make no mistake, tyrants will go out of their way to control our lives if we allow them to. The simple fact is that masks don't work. A recent study confirmed this fact, stating: ``Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza-like illness/COVID- 19-like illness compared to not wearing masks.'' This was obvious to anyone with common sense, but our experts lied to us for the past 3 years about everything. There are also negative consequences and potential safety concerns for children being forced to wear a mask. There are almost 70,000 children that attend Department of Defense Education Activity schools. We have seen the negative consequences of children masking, and children of our servicemembers who are risking their lives overseas should not be subject to this cruel treatment. Nobody should be turned away for refusing to wear a mask, but the real purpose of the mask mandate is for unelected bureaucrats to control our behavior, which is unacceptable and something that I will not tolerate. Moreover, a potential mask mandate based on vaccination status would create a division among servicemembers. There has been a lot of discussion on enacting police policies that create cohesion among members of the Armed Forces and stigmatizing some servicemembers by forcing them to wear masks that would create a group of second-class citizens. This would, ultimately, create division among enlisted members. The American people are sick of COVID-19 hysteria by unelected bureaucrats and will not comply with any more unscientific edicts. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROSENDALE. Mr. Chair, I am glad that the gentlewoman from Minnesota brought up the bill, the actual bill. ``None of the funds made available by this act may be used to enforce any COVID-19 mask mandates.'' Again, let me reiterate: Highly contagious diseases or folks that are immune deficient have nothing to do with the COVID-19 mandate. Here is the other thing. If someone is concerned or chooses to virtue signal by wearing a mask, they are free to do so. They are absolutely free to do so. If they have an immune deficiency and want to wear a mask, they are free to do so, but do not impose the mandates on us freedom-loving individuals who don't want to walk around covering our faces up just to let someone else feel a little better about things. We have problems right now with recruitment. The numbers are down as much as 35 percent. We are missing goals dramatically. Approving arbitrary mandates that don't help the military mission to be the most effective fighting force on Earth is not the way that we are going to get those numbers up. Mr. Chair, this is a good amendment. It is going to help us with recruiting efforts. It is going to help us make sure that our team works together better, and I ask everyone in here to support it. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ROSENDALE

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

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

Mr. ROSENDALE. Madam Chair, my amendment No. 73 would prohibit funds from being used to enforce Secretary Mayorkas' memo prohibiting workforce immigration enforcement. With the stroke of a pen, Secretary Mayorkas eliminated a key method of interior enforcement and required our Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, the ICE agents, to fight with one hand tied behind their back. Right now, there are over 16.8 million illegal aliens in our country, and estimates suggest that upward of 65 percent of the illegal aliens are employed. Businessowners and ranchers in Montana work hard to ensure they are in compliance with Federal immigration law, and this memo punishes law- abiding businesses that refuse to hire illegal aliens. Additionally, Americans should not be expected to compete in the labor market with illegal aliens who are depressing wages and keeping good-paying jobs away from American citizens. President Biden and Secretary Mayorkas' refusal to allow ICE to do their job and enforce our Nation's laws is a clear dereliction of duty and presents risk to our country's national security. Simply put, my amendment would allow ICE agents to do their job enforcing immigration law with the most effective methods possible. Under President Trump, workforce enforcement operations were common practice, making it clear to illegal aliens and the employers that there would be consequences for breaking the law, putting all businesses on a level playing field. It is time we protect small business owners and workers and force Secretary Mayorkas to let ICE do its job. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROSENDALE. Madam Chair, Secretary Mayorkas acknowledges the threat of illegal labor in his memo ending workplace enforcement: ``Unscrupulous employers create an unfair labor market. They also unfairly drive down their costs and disadvantage their business competitors who abide by the law.'' These businesses are not abiding by the law. The illegal aliens who are working there are not supposed to be employed. It is not fair to the labor market. It is not fair to the Americans who wanted to have these positions. It absolutely does suppress the wages and hurts everyone. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ROSENDALE. Madam Chair, my amendment No. 74 will reduce the total amount of funds appropriated by this bill to move our country toward fiscal responsibility, bringing spending toward fiscal year 2022 levels. We all know that we are facing a $33 trillion national debt, and at the spending levels that are being proposed by the appropriation bills that we have been going over the last several days, we very easily could be facing a $3 trillion addition to that debt by the time we add the interest in. It is clear that President Biden and Secretary Mayorkas have no interest in securing our border or enforcing immigration law. Instead, this administration is spending money to encourage illegal immigration through illegal migrant parole programs and cooperation with far-left NGOs. Additionally, Secretary Mayorkas has issued countless memos handicapping law enforcement efforts from ICE and CBP. I have gone down there and visited the border myself several times. As long as President Biden refuses to enforce immigration law and stop the invasion at our southern border, DHS should not be rewarded with a budget increase. President Trump secured the border and provided for our national defense with significantly less money. It is abundantly clear that Biden's border crisis is a deliberate policy choice by this administration and not a funding issue. This country, again, is $33 trillion in debt. We cannot afford to continue business as usual, primarily when President Biden and Secretary Mayorkas use taxpayer dollars to prevent our border from being secured. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROSENDALE. Madam Chair, in 2020, the DHS bill appropriated $67.8 billion. In 2022, the DHS bill appropriated $75.538 billion. The 2024 DHS appropriation bill includes $91.5 billion. While I certainly respect the work that has been done in that committee, we all are going to have to take a haircut. If not, we are going to add $3 trillion a year to the national debt. Over the next 5 years, that will rise to $50 trillion. Madam Chair, $50 trillion in just 5 years, not 20 years, not 50 years, and it will cost 50 percent of the annual revenue in interest payments alone to service that. If you think that we are making difficult decisions right now, when 50 percent of the revenue that we collect on an annual basis is going to service that loan, we are going to have to make massive changes to the way that we run the Federal Government, and every single person in the country is going to feel it. It is going to be dramatic pain. All I am asking is that we reduce by $8.7 billion. I can't believe that I am saying only $8.7 billion. Again, I respect the work that has been done, but these are some difficult decisions that need to be taken care of, and I am willing to do my part to help us get there. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.