Chip Roy

Mr. ROY

Mr. ROY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would note that the reason that the former President's name comes up is because the lingering impacts of the previous administration continue. I mean, I already mentioned you have got the mother in Florida, but I can mention dozens and hundreds of examples of American citizens that have died as a result of people who were let in under the previous administration's policies, people who have died here today in America, policies we are trying to reverse and that we are trying to enforce against. The lingering effects are fairly profound. I can assure you that the American citizens getting killed at the hands of criminals allowed into our country by the previous administration do not take solace in the fact that we now have a new administration, yet that administration is being hamstrung by virtue of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle's unwillingness to fund the very entities that try to stop the danger and the attacks on the American people. That is what this is all about. That is what this all boils down to. Again, I can assure you that the people I represent, the people I talk to across the State of Texas, are thrilled with tax cuts. They are thrilled with regulatory relief. They are thrilled with our actions in Venezuela. They are thrilled that we are reestablishing our strength in the Western Hemisphere and around the globe. They are thrilled that we are standing up to the cartels. They are thrilled that we designated the cartels as terrorists. They are thrilled that we stopped the flow at the border. They are thrilled that we have been enforcing the law and removing dangerous aliens. They are thrilled that our military has the highest recruitment and the highest enlistment in a generation because people actually believe in our country again. They are thrilled in the direction that this administration and this Congress wants to go, and they recognize that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are throwing up barrier after barrier after barrier to be able to carry out the fundamental function of government, which is to defend the United States, defend our border, and do our job. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would note that we are talking about rural America. Last summer, when we passed the largest tax savings for the American people in history, it included significant savings with respect to the death tax that cripples American farmers, and not a single one of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle supported that. We advanced that legislation. We advanced that tax reduction so that American farmers can pass down their farms to the next generation without having to give it up because of the burden of Federal Government. My colleague invoked the Founders, that they couldn't imagine we would be here having this discussion. I, in fact, think that the Founders would be quite pleased to see us on the floor reversing the regulatory state and reversing the burdens being placed on the American people that are limiting their ability to do what God gave them the ability to do. That is what we are doing with respect to getting these barriers in the Endangered Species Act: the energy mandates on the Federal buildings, putting us into unreliable power rather than reliable power, and allowing ourselves to have geothermal production without barriers that stand in the way of the American people doing what they do best. That is absolutely what the Founders would have envisioned us doing on the floor of the House of Representatives. I am proud to be doing that. I am proud of what we have been doing the last 16 months. As I said before, the people whom I talk to when I go home to Texas are thrilled that our border is secure. They are thrilled our enlistments are up with our military. They are thrilled we are standing up to cartels. They are thrilled we are removing bad actors in this country. They are thrilled we are removing the bureaucratic state. They are thrilled we are firing Federal bureaucrats. They are thrilled we held flat spending for discretionary spending for the last 3 years. They are thrilled that we have tried to make sure that we have money aside to be able to do what our Democratic colleagues refuse to do. Today, I urge adoption of this rule, a rule to put forth legislation that will help the American people in the face of opposition from my colleagues here. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. ROY

Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I come here this evening as someone proud to be a part of an organization called the House Freedom Caucus. I have people that I represent in Texas, constituents, but I also have people throughout the entire State, people across the country who stop me in airports, and they talk about what we do as the Freedom Caucus. I say: Pretty simply, we stand up for freedom. When people say: Well, why would I want to be in the House Freedom Caucus? My answer is: Well, why wouldn't you want to be in the House Freedom Caucus? It is a caucus of individuals dedicated to the Constitution, dedicated to freedom, dedicated to limiting government, all of the principles on which most of us, at least on this side of the aisle, run on. We happen to believe that when you come to Washington, you should do what you say when you are campaigning, that you should do what you say. It shouldn't be that complicated. Unfortunately, it often is. I am proud to be in the trenches often with so many colleagues in the Freedom Caucus who recognize the importance of standing up and fighting for the principles and for the changes the American people sent us here to carry out and execute. We have had a number of really extraordinarily important issues before this body in my time in Congress and in recent years. Right now, we have extraordinary issues facing us. Earlier today, when we had bills on the floor of the House, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle were complaining and criticizing and alleging that we are not accomplishing anything, we are not getting anything done. Alternatively, when I talk to the people that I represent, when I talk to Texans, and I talk to the people that I said that stop me in airports and that thank us for doing what we do in the House Freedom Caucus for conservatives here on the House floor, I would say that I am very proud of the things that we have done over the last 15 months. I am proud that we cut taxes. I am proud that we made sure that we put reforms in place to stop fraud and abuse. I am proud that we were able to put reforms in Medicaid and in food stamps to eliminate welfare for people who aren't working and for people who are illegal aliens. I am proud of the fact that this President has stopped the flow of illegal aliens at the border, that he has designated cartels as terrorist organizations, that he has taken the fight to the cartels and is going after Venezuela and trying to restore our dominance in the Western Hemisphere. I am proud that we have people now registering and enlisting in the United States military in record numbers because he has restored people's belief and confidence in the United States military. I am proud that he is standing up in defense of common sense, of saying that we shouldn't have boys in girls' locker rooms, and that we should be doing the things that would restore order and common sense throughout our country. I am proud of what we have been doing. I have to say that the House Freedom Caucus stands at the epicenter, I think, of the great things that we have been accomplishing. But for the Freedom Caucus 3 years ago, in a notorious event here with respect to the Speaker and selecting a Speaker, we demanded certain changes to this institution. We demanded that we have better representation in the Rules Committee and on Appropriations, and we demanded that we move solid and strong legislation, like H.R. 2 and our border security bill that we passed 3 years ago. We demanded that we have reforms on spending and that we try to move regular order and get bills through so we can actually get appropriations done. Over the course of these years, we managed to pass the strongest border security bill in the history of this body. We managed to pass spending bills that held spending flat for the last three cycles. For 3 fiscal years, we have been able to hold discretionary spending flat. We managed to have serious influence in shaping what happened in the big, beautiful bill, as it came to be known, in particular stopping the absurdity of the green new scam subsidies. We singlehandedly stood up and took the arrows to say: We are not going to pass this, and we are going to demand change, and we are going to demand reform. I can go through a list of countless things, whether it was the FISA reforms from 2 years ago, which I am proud that we implemented because we demanded that we actually protect Americans from warrantless surveillance and warrantless searches. We should demand to protect citizens when we had abuse under FISA and abuse by our intelligence community and the FBI against the American people. By the way, sidenote, we should do that again. We should have more reforms. We shouldn't allow the intelligence community to roll over us. We should stand up again here on the House floor and make sure that the American people are protected. I think there is bipartisan support for that. The Freedom Caucus has stood at the center of these fights and tried to demand that we protect the American people, that we protect them against the long arm of the government, that we try to hold taxes in check, hold spending in check, do even an ounce of what we said we would do when we campaigned. I am proud to affiliate with such a great group of people. I am proud of what we do. I have no problem taking the arrows from people in this town that I am a part of the Freedom Caucus because I can promise you, the American people thank me and the American people thank us. They thank us for standing up against the inevitability in this town of Big Government, big spending and debt, and the expansion of the tyrannical bureaucratic state against the freedom of the American people. I am proud to be affiliated with the Freedom Caucus. We are here today not only to talk about that and to talk about the things we need to do, but we are here to celebrate one of our own, one of our dear friends, Tim Reitz, who serves currently as the House Freedom Caucus executive director. Tim will be leaving this week to go continue to stay in the fight and go to an organization down the street. We will miss, Tim. His work has been tireless in the advance of freedom. His work has been at the center of all that we have been able to accomplish over these last 4 years in his role as executive director, which I think now has been just over 4 years. He has served under at least three different chairmen of the House Freedom Caucus, one of whom is here, and I am sure I will hand over the mike in just a second, to my good friend, Scott Perry from Pennsylvania. Before that, he served as chief of staff, legislative director, and legislative assistant to my good friend and former Member of this body, Jody Hice, who is sitting behind me now. We are all here to thank Tim for his service. He is a great American, a Georgian who worked for Paul Broun, a former Member of this body as well, before he worked for Jody Hice of Georgia. He is a graduate, I believe, of Georgia State University, but a big fan of the Georgia Bulldogs as well. In fact, he is so much a fan of the Georgia Bulldogs that he owns two bulldogs, Rocco and Rockette. He is married to his beautiful bride, Dawn-Marie, who works for the President in administration in the Office of Management and Budget and who herself was a staffer on Capitol Hill. Now, as someone who served as a staffer himself, someone who worked over in the Senate as a staffer, I can tell you how much work goes into being an accomplished and a productive staffer. Look, I have got a lot of staffer friends who are here in the leadership office, the whip office, my team, but I don't know anybody who has worked harder than Tim Reitz as a staffer, whether it was for Jody or in an individual office, whether it was for us, the Freedom Caucus in advance of his duties, but importantly in advance of the cause of freedom. For those of us who come here--and I have got to be blunt here. I always offend people, but I might as well just stick with what works for me--we have got a tendency in this body to come up here to be part of a club. It is like people come here to be a part of something. It is like, look at me, I am a Member of Congress. There are a fewer number of people--and this includes staff, too--there are a fewer number of people who come up here to do, to do things, to fight for things, to take the arrows in defense of something bigger than ourselves. It is not enough to come here and just check the box. It is not enough to just come here and pass a bill because somebody tells you we have to. You come here, and you stand up, and you say: When the American people elected us--and when you have staffers who are sitting there working for us, knowing what they fought for and why they work for us, and they stand up and say: Yeah, but we didn't come here to do that. Like let's take FISA. We didn't come here to rubberstamp what the intelligence community tells us to do. One of our House Freedom Caucus colleagues, Michael Cloud--I want to give him credit. Michael said he is in Appropriations right now or he would be here to celebrate Tim. As Michael said about 3 weeks ago in a Republican meeting: When does the intelligence community ever come forward and say: Hey, we have all this power to collect data and to do all this stuff, hey, we are going to give it back today. Here, we are going to give you some of that power back. Has that ever happened in the history of mankind? Has that ever happened here? Of course not. We came here to say we are going to do something about it. Tim came here to do something about it. Tim joined forces with the House Freedom Caucus to say we are going do something about it. Two years ago, we did something about it. We worked legislation through the Judiciary Committee. We worked legislation in coordination with the Intelligence Committee and actually got some good reforms and a minimal 2-year reauthorization so we could come back and do it again. Here we are and it is going to expire in another 10 days because we extended it 2 weeks last week. We actually have an obligation now to do the right thing, and I know Tim. He would say, look, I am going to stick around another 10 days if we can get it right because we ought to protect the American people. The people who come here to effectuate change, those are the people that you, the American people who are watching this on C-SPAN, all 12 of you, should be thanking your lucky stars that you have someone like Tim Reitz here fighting for you as a staffer and being willing to work as the executive director of the Freedom Caucus, which I think is one of the most respected organizations among the American people and one of the most reviled organizations among the swamp creatures because they don't like having their BS called. Tim Reitz has been a faithful member of that. Mr. Speaker, now that I have a quorum of my colleagues here, I will stop filibustering and turn it over to my good friend Scott Perry, who is the chairman of the Freedom Caucus when Tim was an executive director. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my good friend from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry).

Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Pennsylvania, who ably, as I said, served as the chairman of the House Freedom Caucus. He knows all too well the service that Tim provided to not just the House Freedom Caucus, not just the House of Representatives, but to this great country, in service, obviously, alongside our colleague, Jody Hice. As my friend from Pennsylvania said, we are growing the movement. That is what is happening here, and Tim is going to be part of the movement in a different position, just as our friend Mr. Hice is from another position. God has a place for us at a certain time, and that place has been here with the House Freedom Caucus these last 4 years. Now, it is going to be somewhere else, and we are going to miss him. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Burlison), so that he can share a few of his thoughts.

Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Missouri, and his quote of William F. Buckley about standing athwart history yelling ``stop'' is one of the, I think, seminal moments of the modern conservative movement that Buckley launched and that Ronald Reagan then carried forward. People don't realize that that was literally the first edition, the first version, of the National Review. It was a seminal moment of the conservative movement, and I think it encapsulates very well what we try to do in the House Freedom Caucus in standing athwart the institutional largesse of this town, this body, Congress, and the swamp in general, and yell ``stop'' and say ``enough.'' We came here to do something different. We came up here not to rack up debt. We came here to change things, to stand up for the people, to stand up for freedom, and to stand up for limited government. Tim has been at the center of that, and so has my good friend Josh Brecheen from the great State of Oklahoma. I know we have to move through, and we have several other colleagues. He has what he is going to say, a little extemporaneous point. My good friend worked for Senator Tom Coburn, another great advocate and someone who served in this Chamber, served in the United States Senate, and understood that point of yelling ``stop'' and standing athwart history. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Brecheen).

Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend from Oklahoma for his remarks. I am now going to turn to the gentleman from Louisiana. I know he shares our sentiment about our friend from Georgia, Tim Reitz. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend from Louisiana (Mr. Higgins).

Mr. ROY

Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from California for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I would note the starting place here. In 2010, Haitians were granted temporary status--temporary--after a severe earthquake struck their country. Since then, thousands of foreign nationals from Haiti have remained in the United States due to the renewal of this flawed program. Over and over again, that which was supposed to be temporary has become, effectively, permanent. I have heard a lot of numbers flying around here talking about the number of Haitians, 350,000, on TPS who will be taken out of healthcare. It is a fraction of that number that is actually in healthcare. Let's be honest. My friend from Texas (Mr. Gill) noted earlier that 65 percent of the population is on welfare. Mr. Speaker, 65 percent of the population that came in here under a temporary status is now living off of the taxpayer dollars of American taxpayers because we continue this flawed program. Let's also talk about the reality that we have 91 percent of all Haiti TPS holders enter the country illegally, deliberately violating our immigration laws, and are now using TPS status to stay in the United States. This is not what this program was designed to do. Now, I heard one of my colleagues a minute ago talk about Haitians fleeing danger. You know who else was fleeing danger? A mom, an innocent mom in Florida, just last week, who was brutally bludgeoned to death with a hammer outside a convenience store when her car was being beat up by a Haitian here because of Biden and on TPS. That woman, that mother, she was fleeing danger, the danger of a Haitian migrant here using this flawed TPS program that we are now going to allow to be made effectively permanent, undermining what the President is doing to try to stop the abuse of this program to continue to flood the United States with people that are living on the back of American taxpayers and endanger the American people. How many more Americans do we need to see get murdered? How many more young girls on a subway in Charlotte? How many moms, like this mom in Florida, need to get bludgeoned to death because we refuse to do our job to ensure that the people that are coming to this country are coming here to become a part of our society, to follow our laws, to be a part of the melting pot that we so revere, rather than come here, trying to turn America into something that it is not, and exploit our goodwill to endanger the American people? This is a flawed bill. It should not be supported by anyone in either party.

Mr. ROY

Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, let's be clear about why we are here. Our Democrat colleagues created a national crisis by purposely allowing millions of people into the United States in violation of our laws, resulting in the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans. People like Jocelyn Nungaray whose mom I talked to today, who is watching what is happening here in realtime. It is people like Laken Riley, Rachel Morin, and tens of thousands of our children who died from fentanyl poisoning, all created by purposeful, political decisions by the previous administration and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. Now, we sit here today and my colleagues falsely claim that CBP and ICE are funded. The fact is, first, line staff are being mostly funded by virtue of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, but it leaves out civilian and support staff. That is the truth, factual truth. Today, we had a quote from one of them. It says: The Senate bill paid TSA, but thousands of CBP and ICE professional staff will not be paid. The last paid workday for me was February 13. Now Senate on paid vacation until April 13. That is a guarantee for 2 months no pay. Very likely we won't be paid until May if Speaker Johnson lets this bill pass. That is existing staff, watching what we are doing in realtime. Second, not one, not one of my Democratic colleagues voted for the One Big Beautiful Bill Act they are hiding behind right now saying that the staff is paid. Not one. Last night, yes, there was a voice vote in the middle of the night. This comment that somehow there was massive votes in support of this bill is simply not true. There was a voice vote. The only, and I mean the only, barrier to getting funding for our law enforcement personnel and Border Patrol and ICE who are standing on the line to defend our country are five to seven Democrats in the Senate who refused to let the bill move through while allowing it to be filibustered at a 60-vote threshold. Sheridan Gorman is dead, a student at Loyola, who was killed by Jose Medina, who was illegally present in the United States, who came in in 2023, and this just happened. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle do not want ICE doing their job, do not want Border Patrol doing their job, and are right here today refusing to do the job of funding this fully. Mr. Speaker, I stand with Speaker Johnson. I stand with my colleagues. We should stand with Border Patrol. We should stand with ICE, and we should defend the United States of America.

Mr. ROY

Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my friend from Texas, and I don't want to take up too much time. It has been a great hour. We have had a lot of good conversation. I appreciate the remarks from the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Fine.) He and my friend from Arizona outlined very well a lot of the concerns in addition to what my friend from Texas has done. The fact is you cannot win a war that you do not acknowledge exists. Let's be very clear: There is a war being waged against Western civilization, against the United States of America, and against the State of Texas where I live. It is happening in real time, and it has been going on now for decades. In fact, go all the way back to the 1991 memorandum that was put forward by the Muslim Brotherhood with a number of provisions in it. The one I want to highlight is this: ``In order for Islam and its movement to become `a part of the homeland' in which it lives, `stable' in its land, `rooted' in the spirits and minds of its people, `enabled' in the lives of its society and has firmly- established `organizations' . . . its movement must plan and struggle to obtain `the keys' and the tools of this process to carry out the grand mission as a `Civilization Jihadist' responsibility which lies on the shoulders of Muslims and--on top of them--the Muslim Brotherhood in this country. ``The process of settlement is a `Civilization-Jihadist Process' with all the word means.'' I can keep going. This is organized. There are 600 organizations operating in this country and in Texas trying to drive the Islamification of the United States of America in direct conflict with our laws, our Constitution, and the Declaration of Independence. This has been brought onto this country by our own actions as a government. Since 9/11, some 5-million people have been granted the ability to come into our country from majority Muslim countries, in a post 9/11 world after we were attacked. In real time in Texas, we have more mosques being built in Texas than any other State in the Union. The problem here is that people are going to hide behind the First Amendment to say this is something that is protected by carrying out your exercise of free expression of your religion and carrying out your rights under the First Amendment. What I am here to tell you is that this, by what I just read and by every action that I have seen in concert with this memorandum, is a political ideology that is designed to attack and take over our civilization and to carry out the civilization Jihad that I just described. Mr. Speaker, it is for this reason that we have this Sharia-Free America Caucus. It is for this reason that we are gathering to highlight for the American people what is happening right now in real time such that if you look at Paris and London and you think that is somehow acceptable, then you are misguided because they are losing their way. So much so that I have said repeatedly that we should be as concerned about a nuclearized United Kingdom and as concerned about nuclearized France as we are a nuclearized Iran. It is coming to the shores of the United States, and it is here.

Mr. ROY

Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, this past weekend in Austin, Texas, near where I live, we had a tragedy where an individual shot a bunch of Austonians, including several University of Texas students, at a bar on what we call West Sixth Street, in an area that I frequented often when I was in law school, a little less often these days. But it is an area that is a fairly normal place for people to go, not generally perceived as dangerous. This past Saturday night, early Sunday morning, even as I believe I was returning home from the San Antonio Rodeo, or I had been there, I wake up in the morning to find out that there were three people who had been killed, one of whom was the shooter, and then later a fourth person would die, a third victim. It was an unnecessary, senseless act. It is compounded by not just normal violence, but why this individual was here in the first place. I think we have got to wrestle with some serious questions about who we allow into this country and why. The individual who killed these students--by the way, there were multiple others who were shot having surgeries. One young woman, a young student, was shot multiple times in her abdomen, and another young man who was shot in his head. It was not just the three dead victims. Other people were hurt. Other people were traumatized by it. The individual who did it was wearing a ``Property of Allah'' sweatshirt, had a Koran in the back seat of the car that he had traveled in, was wearing an Iranian flag T-shirt under the ``Property of Allah'' sweatshirt. What we know about him is that he came here from Senegal in 2000, overstayed his visa. In 2006, he obtains LPR, or legal permanent residency status, under the Bush administration--I am going to be an equal opportunity basher of administrations who have failed to secure our border properly--and did so on the back of supposedly a marriage to an American citizen. Fast forward to 2012, under Obama, he gets full citizenship, which Obama was handing out like candy, and then tries to get LPR status for two additional women, allegedly women he was marrying. I don't know whether in succession or at the same time. All I know is he was trying to do that. Fast forward, he was arrested for a hit-and-run alleged in 2022. My fundamental question is: Why are we importing people who are deeply at odds with the values of our country and Western civilization? Why are we doing that? Why have we done that exponentially in the wake of the attacks of 9/11/2001? It doesn't make any sense. This is avoidable. This man didn't need to be in the United States who does not share our values and clearly was interested in serving his convictions for Iran and radical Islamism more than his commitment to this country, peace, and our rule of law. I am going to have more to say about that, but related to this topic, I am proud to be the cofounder, alongside my friend and fellow Texan, Keith Self, a veteran, a great public servant, longtime public servant, a great friend, who shares my conviction--I won't speak for him, but shares my conviction for ensuring we defend our values, our Western civilization, the rule of law in our country; that we stand up against the Islamist movement, putting sharia law forward in direct conflict with our laws. I know my friend has a limited time, so I would like to yield some time to him to speak on this subject that concerns us both so greatly. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my good friend from Texas (Mr. Self).

Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend who has very well laid out the extraordinary problem we have as a country if we allow sharia law to take root. People say, well, yeah, just dismiss it. It is not a big deal. This is just a problem in Europe. You hear that all the time. Is that right?

Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, the fact is that it is a real problem here. It is not just Dearborn, Michigan, where some people get some headlines. It is not just New York City, where you now have Mayor Mamdani and prayer calls in the middle of Manhattan. We have--and I will let the gentleman expand upon it--300-plus mosques, and more mosques being built every year in the State of Texas than any other State in the Union. We have EPIC City, which you can comment about, in your own backyard. We have a massive Islamic center in Houston, a massive Islamic center north of Austin, and an Islamic center in West Campus. You say: Chip, why is that a problem? People can believe what they want to believe. They can build these things. These entities are expressly putting out and advancing Islamism consistent with the plan laid out by the Muslim Brotherhood in accordance with some 600 organizations designed to do it, to put a footprint here that is ideological and political and designed to take over our country. Would the gentleman agree? Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. ROY. Is the gentleman familiar with areas in and around the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex, even nearby his own district in places like Richardson, in places like Arlington, and a little farther away in other areas, that some of our Texas women in particular, and generally, believe to be no-go zones? There are areas where they are increasingly feeling uncomfortable as if they are somehow immersed in the Middle East, in areas that do not share our values of equality, of treating people respectfully the same as peers, and where some of our women feel uncomfortable? Is the gentleman familiar that that is the case, in fact, in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex, from what we understand? Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. ROY. One last point, because I get it thrown in my face quite frequently that our Founders would be appalled that we are raising these issues and questioning people's ability to carry out and practice their faith. I know that the gentleman is a student of our history and the Constitution, and he is a student of military history. I am confident that he is well apprised of the engagement that Thomas Jefferson had with respect to the Barbary pirates and the Barbary wars. When posed with the question that Jefferson posed: Well, why do you make war with us? The response was, as the gentleman knows: Well, we are commanded to in the Koran. To which Jefferson was fairly appalled, as you would expect him to be, Mr. Speaker. We had to carry out wars to make sure our shipping lanes were open and so forth. I know the gentleman, who is a student of history, understands that that conflict was very clear and present even among our leaders as they were founding this Nation and the enlightenment that led to the First Amendment which we cherish, but the recognition of the direct conflict that the Islamic faith had, especially with respect to sharia law being carried out against our values and Western civilization? Does the gentleman agree? Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I know the gentleman has to go to another engagement. I thank him for his leadership in working with me and cofounding the Sharia-Free America Caucus. Do we now have 46? Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. ROY. We have 46 strong and growing. I would invite colleagues on either side of the aisle to join. We should all be united in having a sharia-free America. It is inconsistent with our values. I appreciate his leadership, I appreciate his public service, I appreciate his friendship, and I wish him well this evening. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I would just note that in addition to what we just talked about, there is this view that Europe is unique. Right now there are some 50 million Muslims who have now moved into Europe. We now have got France approaching 10 percent of its population. We have the United Kingdom at 7 percent-plus of its population. In the United Kingdom we have 85 courts carrying out sharia law alongside the civilian courts. In Germany they have 7 to 8 percent of the population. Spain and Italy, and a good chunk of Western Europe, is now approaching 10 percent-plus Muslim. The question now is: As we are having a battle with Iran to take out their nuclear capability, at what point are we going to be concerned about a nuclear France or a nuclear United Kingdom? People say: Well, Chip, that is awfully controversial. Is it? Is it really that controversial? We have majority Muslim countries that are refusing to send their kids to schools in the United Kingdom because they believe that the schools there are teaching a radicalized Islam that is more radical than they have at home. This is purposeful. This is being driven by the Muslim Brotherhood. This is not just happening in Europe. It is happening here, and but for an ocean, we would be Europe now. However, after the massively open borders under the Biden-Mayorkas regime, with the increasing shrinking of the globe, and with totally irresponsible wide-open borders and totally irresponsible ``legal'' immigration policies by this country, we are importing people who hate us and hate our values. Why would we do that? Someone explain to me why we would do that. In the 25 years since 9/11 we have imported millions of people from countries that are diametrically opposed to our values. Why? Why would we do that, and why would we continue? I don't care what it is. I don't care if it is H-1B, and I don't care if it is tourist visas that people tend to overstay and we never enforce. We have massive and rampant abuse of our so-called legal immigration system, and I am sick and tired of hearing colleagues and, frankly, the administration, Republicans, generally Governors, who say: Oh, we love legal immigration. You just have to stop the illegal immigration. Of course, we should stop the illegal immigration. It is the basic duty of government. However, why would you continue massive, widespread legal immigration from countries that very heavily and largely oppose our way of life and want to transform it? They do not wish to melt into the pot. They wish to take over the country and change it. Stop doing that. This is common sense. But common sense was thrown out the window years ago. Everybody lives in this touchy-feely nonsense bull that they were taught in school to say: Well, you know, you just have to open your doors to everybody. Have your porch open and have everybody come in. Hold on. Why would you let people in who want to undo what you have? We have to have people who wish to come here to achieve the American Dream, who want to learn our language, conform with our laws and our society, conform with our customs, conform with our heritage, celebrate and venerate our heritage, support In God We Trust, and accept our values. We have Moses sitting right here overlooking the House Chamber. I am guessing that ``Mr. Property of Allah'' here, who shot up people in my town and killed students from the University of Texas and the Texas Tech student, would not be too excited about Moses overseeing our Chamber. Look, we have to make choices. We have 53 million-ish people foreign born in the United States, almost 16 percent. It is the highest percentage of our population in history. In the 1920s--in 1924 specifically--Congress restricted immigration after a massive explosion of immigration in the late 1800s, early 1900s. Now, let's also consider at the time that while there were differences in cultures--German, Czech, Italian, whatever-- predominantly, these were people who shared Western civilization values. They believed in our country, were going to schools that taught that our country was great, were going to schools that taught the Constitution, were going to schools that taught kids English. At the time, we were trying to build a melting pot. Yet, even with that, we all recognized, whoa, whoa, whoa, maybe we need to pause immigration because we have had so many people come here, we need a little resettling to ensure that everybody here knows what being an American means. For the better part of 40 years, we pretty much flatlined immigration, constrained it to negligible numbers. By the way, during that period, we ultimately were able to win a world war, ultimately have the baby boom post-World War II, and grew the economy. Then sometime in the mid-1960s, we opened up the spigot, and we set forward now a 60-year march that has been a massive curve that has now exploded into the 21st century in which we have brought masses of population into our country, but now increasingly people who flatout do not share our values, and, worse, wish to eradicate our values and kill us. Again, to my colleagues who like to yap on the House floor or on news media about how great legal immigration is, is this great? Is it? Now, I want to say that I am not just making these numbers up. Since 2002, which astute observers of history will recognize was the year after 9/11, where 3,000 Americans were murdered by people who overstayed their visas, I would remind, all the friendly, oh, come join us melting pot folks who came over here on tourist visas that overstayed their visas and then flew airplanes into buildings. Since then, the United States has issued 4.6 million green cards or lawful permanent status to nationals from Muslim-majority nations, allowing them to remain here indefinitely. Now, I am sure there are some of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle that will come down and say: Well, Chip, that is a good thing. Isn't that great, having people come here, diversity? Well, is it? There has been a 48 percent increase in green cards to these countries from 2002 to 2023 since 9/11: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Cameroon, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Mauritania, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Yemen. I am doing that for the benefit of the stenographer. Meanwhile, sharia is exploding. They say no, it is not. Yes, it is. We have story after story of how that is being meted out in communities around our country, not always formally, but certainly in the communities in direct contradiction to our Western values and our law. We have actually had courts being propped up. For example, Governor Abbott in Texas had to go quash two courts that were being set up in the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex, which is why I am saying we should pause immigration. I introduced legislation in November to do that. Let's just pause all immigration. We can allow tourist visas so long as we enforce visa overstays, but we shouldn't reopen the spigots on immigration until we have revamped our badly broken H-1B system, until we have revamped the entire visa system, until we vet people for sharia law or adherence to values inconsistent with ours, until we fix Plyler v. Doe, a wrongheaded Supreme Court opinion saying that we have to allow illegal aliens to be able to get educated here, until we fix our broken immigration system, which the next Democratic regime will exploit, as Secretary Noem testified to yesterday in the House committee, that that would assuredly occur if we do not codify changes to asylum, codify changes to parole, codify changes to catch and release, that it will happen, and we haven't done it. By the way, the House hasn't even passed it this Congress. Why? Why haven't we passed it and sent it over to the Senate? Well, the Senate won't pass it. Well, we are hearing that about the SAVE America Act, too, right now, but why don't we just put more pressure on the Senate to do its job? Show up to work. Debate in the supposedly greatest deliberative body in the world in which they never actually deliberate. When was the last time somebody saw a great speech on the floor of the Senate between two Senators, engaging in debate? The greatest deliberative body in the world? There is more deliberation in an average high school debate than the United States Senate. I have offended a few Senators apparently by virtue of what a couple people said when I called it the nursing home and the Jell-O dispensary. Well, forgive me. Not. Because you don't do anything. The Senate is nothing more in today's operation than the personnel office for the White House. That is it. By the way, it is not even doing that fully effectively. Why haven't we passed the SAVE America Act in the Senate? Well, Chip, we don't have 60 votes. Does anybody know how the filibuster and the rules of the Senate actually work? Sixty votes is one mechanism for shutting off debate, but you actually have to have debate to turn off. Have the debate. Put it on the floor. Oh, but they might offer amendments, and those amendments might be really tough votes for our Members. Well, hell's bells, you might have to vote on something in the United States Senate? Who could imagine the horror of running for office to become a vaunted United States Senator, and yet, oh, no, I might be forced to vote on something? Heaven forbid that the United States Senate Republicans lock together, lock arms, have a strategy, and say, hey, why don't we just table all the amendments. I serve on the Rules Committee here in the House. We get amendments every week, gamesmanship by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. They offer amendments to put us in a bad position, to run ads against us that we are somehow the Devil because we voted against puppies and children and whatever it is. Boo-hoo. Vote no, move on, put a message out, but the Senate won't do it because they are hiding. The United States Senate is hiding behind a fake filibuster, a fake 60-vote threshold that is not real. Put a bill on the floor of the Senate, allow it to be amended. Table the amendments, allow the speeches to go, make them sit there and speak, make them burn the clock, make them sit there for weeks on end, telling the American people how they oppose that only American citizens should vote in American elections, and that we should have voter ID to demonstrate you are who you are when you vote. Go sell that at home. However, the Senate continues to hide, say we can't do that. We don't have 51 Senators. We don't want to upset the filibuster. Chip, you are going to risk the filibuster. False. Fake news. We are saying use the real filibuster. Speak. Invite Mr. Smith to come back to Washington. Allow Mr. Smith to come into the Chamber and show you what a real filibuster is because it isn't keeping the Senate in a quorum call while you go to fundraisers and State dinners or go parade in front of the screens on the committees, come down to the Senate floor, have a few votes, and then fly back out after 2\1/2\ days of work in a week. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was on the floor of the Senate for 3 months, 3 months. They were 25 votes shy of the then-cloture vote to shut off debate. Right now, we are--I don't know--10 votes shy. Put it on the floor and see what happens. Let's see how many phone calls come into Senators' offices. After a week, after 2 weeks, after 3 weeks, you could pull it off the floor if you have got to move something important like DHS funding if Democrats stop blocking the funding of Coast Guard, FEMA, TSA. This is not rocket science stuff, y'all, but the Senate refuses to fight. The American people demand that we actually preserve the integrity of our elections. The American people believe that only American citizens should vote in American elections. They believe you should have voter ID. The Senate should act. The House should codify President Trump's executive orders, send them to the Senate, and then the Senate can do another talking filibuster. Mr. Speaker, they might have to show up on the Senate floor and force work. All of these things are related: wide-open borders, crime rates, organizations that are funding it, the advance of sharia law and the Islamist movement in the United States. All of it is tied to large networks of Marxists and Islamists that are trying to remake the United States of America and undermine everything about our history, heritage, our rule of law, the Constitution, the Declaration. The question is: Are we going to continue to remain asleep, kowtowing to corporate America, telling everybody what to do for labor, earnings per share, and the bottom line so they can get better reports from Wall Street? Because that is what is happening. You turn the management of affairs over to corporations, corporations that continue to buy up land, buy up ranches, buy up farms, often international corporations, almost often foreigners buying up American assets. Are we that slave to corporate America that we are willing to leave our doors wide open to the most dangerous individuals around that do not share our values? A lot of people think that the sharia crisis is only in Europe and in foreign countries, and that it has not yet arrived here. That is false. It is alive, well, and growing. People are going to use the First Amendments incorrectly to hang us with it. They are going to pile weight upon the bow that is our system and it will crumble under its own weight while we fiddle while America burns because we don't want to say uncomfortable things that we can all see with our own eyes. Why do you have to wait in line at the airport? Why can't you take a pocketknife in your pocket on the plane like we did for years? Why do you have to take your freaking shoes off? Was it because of some nice, Christian choir boys and girls from the local church in your community, or was it because of the rise of the Islamist movement around the world? Was it from the Pan Am bombings and all the various terrorist attacks of the 1980s and 1990s culminating in 2001 on 9/11? Open your eyes and see what the world is. Recognize the enemy before you and stop inviting the enemy into your home, and then allowing your own rules to be used to promulgate your own destruction. It is a radical, political ideology that is at odds with the Constitution, the Declaration, and the rule of law. We should act like it. We should tighten down our immigration laws. We should pause immigration. We should vet people for adherence to sharia law. We should ensure that our communities stay safe and recognize the war that is being waged against us and take action. Mr. Speaker, I recognize that my good friend from Arizona is in the Chamber and is no doubt going to regale us with a tutorial on our debt crisis, the extent to which interest payments on the debt, the skyrocketing mountain of debt that is piling up as a result of mandatory spending, in particular, demographic changes, our lack of use of great medical technology, and other things that will allow us to save money and have a much better healthcare system and save our children from the scourge of debt and interest payments that I talked about. Mr. Speaker, I suspect he will say something to those effects, and I think I have filibustered long enough.

Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Schweikert) for the purpose of a colloquy.

Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, can I say something and then I will turn it over to him because I have to go, but the gentleman and I poke each other and have a little fun. I am certainly prone to giving some speeches on immigration, board of security, and other things to come down to the floor. I think the floor should be used. I wish we had actual, real debate. I wish we had something other than Special Orders where you come down here and talk to an empty Chamber. I think we should have 10, 20, or 30 of us down here for hours at a time debating serious issues. I think the American people would expect that. That is why I think the Senate ought to actually advance to debate. Don't be afraid of a real filibuster, but I will say as a compliment that the gentleman has done this for now over a decade. I can't remember how long he has been in Congress where he has been down to the floor and he gives those speeches. I don't mean that as a criticism because that message has been consistent. By the way, the big, beautiful bill last year was nothing like I know what he wanted or I wanted. I wanted to go much further, but what we did get in terms of Medicaid reforms, what we did get in terms of spending reductions, $1.6 trillion in reductions and so forth, again, not what we wanted, would never have happened but for the groundwork being laid by people like my friend from Arizona, the speeches he gives on the floor regularly making the case for how debt, interest, and so forth is killing our country.

Mr. ROY. I am on Judiciary, Budget, and Rules.

Mr. ROY. I see it all.

Mr. ROY. Well, you do a great job of it. Keep pounding on the math. We have made slight progress with flat discretionary spending for 2 or 3 years and a little bit of work last year in the big, beautiful bill, but we barely dented the problem. Mr. Speaker, the iceberg sits in front of us. We are on the Titanic. A few of us are pulling the wheel, but, hell, people on both sides of the aisle are pulling the wheel the other direction. Our kids and grandkids depend on us actually avoiding the frigging iceberg. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.