George Santos

Mr. SANTOS

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

Mr. SANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, hypocrisy, as I mentioned. My colleague wants to come up here and call me a crook, the same colleague who is accused of being a woman beater. Are we really going to ignore the fact that we all have pasts, and we all have the media coming out against us on a daily basis? Every last one of us has struggled with every little ounce of what happens in public service. I can go and read about all my colleagues. I am not going to stand here to smear them. I am not going to stand here and use the time I have to say ill things about my colleagues. I refuse to stoop to that level. The only thing I want to make clear is if tomorrow when this vote is on the floor, it is in the conscience of all my colleagues that they believe that this is the correct thing to do, so be it. Take the vote. I am at peace. Whether I get expelled or I don't, I have accepted that I cannot control that fate, Mr. Speaker. I have done the best I can to serve in this body and to deliver the best I can in my campaign promises to vote as a conservative voice in this body. I stand by that. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Higgins).

Mr. SANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I move to have the gentleman from Ohio's words stricken from the record, please.

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

Mr. SANTOS. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.

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

Mr. SANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I call that hypocrisy, more lying, more swamp behavior from this body, the same reason that Americans have no trust in this body because unfortunately, far too often too many of our colleagues here will speak from both sides of their mouths without regard to who it might hurt. As it is said, people in this town will hurt people a whole lot so they can benefit just a little bit. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SANTOS. Mr. Speaker, you know, I hear a lot the lines, ``I encourage Representative Santos to resign,'' and, ``Do the right thing,'' which is resign. What I hear is people don't want to take this vote. I am just here. I am willing to take the vote. Take the vote, guys. I am okay with it. This is your time. This is what they have all built up to all year. The most damning feature of this farce is the total perversion of the priorities of this body and this Conference, which ran on the Commitment to America. Yes, witch hunting George Santos is great. Right there, I remember that on the top line of the Commitment to America. This Conference has failed to pass four different appropriations bills, Mr. Speaker. It had rules fail on the floor. We had Members weaponizing the Rules Committee because it didn't do what they wanted. Our borders are wide open. It is a no man's land being run by NGOs. Yet, this Congress has now taken three measures and the insurmountable amount of time that goes behind them to expel a Member duly elected by the people of the Third District of New York. I didn't think that my tenure in Congress would be this way, Mr. Speaker. I came here to do work. I came here to pass and work on conservative legislation. I have a stellar conservative record that I am proud of. The work I have done in this body I am proud of. The votes I have taken in this body I am proud of. Every vote that I have taken that might have been against leadership, I stand by those votes not because I disrespect leadership but because I want a more conservative agenda for our country. Now, I can't say the same thing about some of my colleagues, especially the ones most adamant to remove me, almost as if we remove him, there is no comparison. It is that much simpler. They can go home and say they are conservative. They won't know what a real conservative will look like on Long Island. That is just the reality. The votes are there. Now, let's talk about the fact of due process that everybody seems to say that I have taken and have received. You know, it is no secret in this body that, obviously, I have an ongoing process with the DOJ. I was given a deadline, an unrealistic deadline, to testify before the committee the same day that I had to go to court. They gave us a hard- line, yes or no answer. They wouldn't settle for anything else. That was the deadline. I could not surpass that date, which means it was either I go to New York City to adhere to my DOJ case or go to the Ethics Committee. No disrespect to the committee--I have incurred over $200,000 of legal fees that have been predominantly paid for, so to suggest that I have not complied with them is yet another lie. They have received every document they have asked for. Documents we did not have, we have told them that we don't have them. We don't have access to what you are asking for. They persisted and insisted in inventing documents, communication between myself and people that did not exist--thus, communication. We informed them. This was all on the record. However, I rise and question again to the chairman: Will he set the record straight that his expulsion resolution contradicts the findings of his report? Which one is it? Am I guilty of a sexual harassment claim, or am I not? The report says I am not. His filing on this expulsion resolution says I am. That is a very serious allegation, one that I sought to see the end of where the Office of Congressional Ethics sent a referral to the investigative subcommittee saying that they did not suggest further investigation into the matter because it lacked credibility, yet it sits on their expulsion resolution.

Mr. SANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Gaetz).

Mr. SANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Higgins).

Mr. SANTOS. Mr. Speaker, we hear a lot about process. We hear a lot about findings. Before I yield some time to my colleague from Texas, I just want to point out in the resolution that the distinguished chairman from Mississippi (Mr. Guest) filed, he states that I engaged in sexual misconduct when his own report states otherwise. That is just a clear evidence of how this process has been skewed, how this process is sloppy, and how it is contradictory to the core. The fact that in the report it states that that was not the case, but they still bring it to the floor of the House of Representatives shows you the lack of respect for one's reputation. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Nehls).

Ms. SANTOS

Ms. SANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, every Member expelled in the history of this institution has been convicted of crimes or were Confederate turncoats guilty of treason. Neither of those apply to me, but here we are. On what basis does this body feel that precedent must be changed for me? Mr. Speaker, I am an American citizen, duly elected, and elected to represent the Third District of New York. I have been convicted of no crimes. My loyalty to this country that gave me life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is true and unquestionable. I stand here today debating for the second time in less than a month for the same exact reasons that were brought up last time. The difference is that one can say I have been indicted once more by the findings of the Ethics Committee--a process that, by the admission of the chair himself, was not complete and conclusive because they didn't want to put more time into it, as if this committee runs on a schedule that, quite frankly, is in a rush. Mr. Speaker, some Members have been under investigation for over 5 years. Some leave while still under investigation. I am not trying to be arrogant or spiteful or disrespectful of the committee, but I am curious to know: What is the schedule of the Ethics Committee? Why rush this? To deliver a predetermined outcome sought out by some Members of our Conference or some Members of this body? This is what it looks like to me. It is a predetermined necessity for some Members in this body to engage in this smear campaign to destroy me. I will not stand by quietly. If they want me out of this body--the people of the Third District of New York sent me here--if they want me out, they are going to have to go silence those people and take the hard vote. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SANTOS

Mr. SANTOS. Madam Speaker, pursuant to clause 2(a)(1) of rule IX, I rise to give notice of my intention to raise a question of the privileges of the House. The form of the resolution is as follows: In the matter of Representative Jamaal Bowman from New York; Whereas, Representative Jamaal Bowman is a Member of the United States House of Representatives; Whereas, on September 30, 2023, Representative Jamaal Bowman knowingly and willingly gave a false fire alarm in the Cannon House Office Building; Whereas, on October 26, 2023, Representative Jamaal Bowman pleaded guilty to one count of falsely pulling the alarm; and Whereas, Representative Jamaal Bowman's actions caused the closing of the Cannon House Office Building and resulted in the disruption of an official proceeding in the Congress. Now, therefore, be it resolved that pursuant to Article I, Section 5, Clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States, Representative Jamaal Bowman, be and he hereby is, expelled from the House of Representatives.

Mr. SANTOS

Mr. SANTOS. Madam Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. SANTOS

Mr. SANTOS. Madam Speaker, on the matter of expulsion, we are now going down a third attempt for a privileged resolution to expel me from the House of Representatives this week. One was introduced earlier today, and just earlier this evening, we had a second. Here is the case in point. In history, five Members of Congress have been expelled. All five had suffered convictions in a court. All five had due process. This expulsion vote simply undermines and underscores the precedent that we have had in this Chamber. It starts and puts us in a new direction, a dangerous one, that sets a very dangerous precedent for the future. Are we to now assume that one is no longer innocent until proven guilty, and they are, in fact, guilty until proven innocent? Are we now to simply assume that because somebody doesn't like you, they get to throw you out of your job? Or better more, does the Constitution bear no consequence where a duly elected Member of the House of Representatives is elected by the general public but then a couple of politicians decide that they don't like that person? These are all matters and questions that can be brought up. I will leave it at this. The process in which the Ethics Committee engaged was incomplete, irresponsible, and littered with hyperbole and littered with biased opinions. The chairman of the committee himself admitted that it wasn't the full extent of process. Therefore, he couldn't recommend from the committee a punishment or action, therefore cheapening the process of the Ethics Committee, cheapening the process that this country has expected from this Chamber. It is not a right to be a Member of Congress. The media will always remind me of that every time I talk to them. It is a privilege, a privilege you work hard for. You get elected to Congress as a privilege to represent those who have chosen you. Madam Speaker, I think we can all agree that due process matters and that we should all be very concerned about the way that we are conducting this process. I ask that all of my colleagues in the House consider and understand what this means for the future. To set the record straight and put this in the Record, I will not be resigning. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SANTOS. Madam Speaker, let me take a moment to discuss my office. Regarding my team, they consistently dedicate substantial effort to handle casework for our constituents. We operate from three locations, two within the Third District of New York and one in Washington, D.C., ensuring accessibility and a commitment to serving the residents of New York's Third District. To this day, we have received a total of 1,286 cases. We have successfully resolved 1,149 cases, leaving us with 137 cases currently under the diligent attention of my team. The completed casework encompasses a variety of matters, including passports, immigration issues, and distinctive cases like securing a Purple Heart medal for the surviving family members of a World War I hero. The work of my office does not go unnoticed, and I and the constituents of the Third District of New York are extremely grateful. I thank my entire team for all the hard work they have put forward throughout these last couple of months. On the Matter of Expulsion

Mr. SANTOS. Madam Speaker, we just hosted the Congressional App Challenge recently, and this week, we revealed the winner for New York's Third District. Richard Xu emerged victorious with his innovative creation VolunHour, an app designed to streamline the tracking of volunteer hours. Among the 17 impressive applicants from my district, each contributing fantastic app ideas, Richard Xu's VolunHour stood out as the winning entry. Richard cited his passion for volunteering and community service as the driving force behind the creation of this app. He started a volunteer organization with a small group of friends, witnessing its expansion from 5 members to 30. Throughout this experience, he recognized the cumbersome and time-consuming nature of tracking volunteer hours, prompting him to develop a solution. I congratulate Richard and send a big shout-out to all the participants from the Third District of New York who submitted applications to the Congressional App Challenge. Well done. Recognizing Dedicated Staff for Casework

Mr. SANTOS. Madam Speaker, it is a source of immense pride that numerous prospective high school graduates in my district aspire to join a service academy. Following a rigorous selection process, I have put forth nominations for 29 applicants. Thus far, four of them have received appointments to academies. Alex Gao from Levittown has been appointed to West Point. David Yoon from Great Neck has been appointed to West Point. Joseph Kim from Little Neck has been appointed to West Point. Tanner Schultz from Northport has been appointed to the Merchant Marine Academy. Embarking on the journey of attending a service academy is no easy feat. It requires diligent effort to master your chosen major and acquire the necessary knowledge to serve your country upon graduation 4 years later. I feel privileged to have had the opportunity to nominate all 29 applicants. I anticipate the appointment of many more nominees from New York's Third District to serve in the coming weeks. Congratulating Richard Xu

Mr. SANTOS

Mr. SANTOS. Mr. Chair, there might not be any vaccination mandates today, but what is stopping my colleagues on the other side of the aisle or the President of the United States from wanting to institute those same draconian mandates tomorrow? If we believe and take the word of my colleague that they don't exist today, they didn't exist prior to 2020 but miraculously appeared and destroyed lives and destroyed careers. The reality is we need this to guarantee protection for the American people so that they are not lambasted yet again with more draconian rules coming out of the Federal Government. Mr. Chair, I strongly ask my colleagues to support my amendment and support the working class by never again forcing them to choose between a vaccine they do not feel convicted to get and feeding their families. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SANTOS. Mr. Chair, one of the biggest infringements on the American people's rights happened shortly after the Chinese Communist Party unleashed a genetically modified coronavirus across the globe, infecting and killing millions. To combat the virus and save the most vulnerable, President Trump initiated Operation Warp Speed, which put on display American exceptionalism when it successfully created a COVID-19 vaccine in under a year. However, what ensued thereafter was far more un-American than anything. It actually resembled more authoritarianism. States and Federal agencies made continued employment contingent on vaccine status. Businesses that did not comply were fined. Churches that did not comply were shut down. People who did not comply were fired. Some States were freer than others, but the Federal Government was the most draconian of them all. Federal workers, including over 8,400 United States servicemembers, lost their jobs because they refused to take a novel vaccine with minimal testing. I am not standing here before you today questioning the legitimacy of the vaccine or calling the creation of the vaccine a net negative. Actually, I am doing the complete opposite. In fact, it was a net positive for society to give vulnerable individuals with autoimmune diseases an extra layer of protection against COVID-19. However, I am standing before you today raging against the government overreach that is vaccine mandates. The American people were given freedoms not guaranteed to other populations across the globe. We have the freedom to choose what vaccines we get. Millions of other Americans and I think it is immoral and un-American to force a person to get a vaccine in order to pay their rent or mortgage or feed their families, Mr. Chair. What my amendment will do is ensure that the funds in the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act be barred from getting allocated to establishing, implementing, or enforcing any vaccine mandate within those agencies. Mr. Chair, to be clear, I am not standing here spewing and spreading anti-vax talking points. In fact, I am standing up for the working men and women of this great country, giving power back to the people, and taking it out of the clutches of government and government mandates. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. SANTOS

Mr. SANTOS. Mr. Chair, my colleague from across the aisle, he speaks with honesty, and I believe so, but I will say this: To call a public servant a bureaucrat, I think that is disingenuous, and the American people are sick and tired of us considering people who fail at their jobs continuously to continue to keep their jobs. I think it is cutting back bad government, I think it is holding government accountable, and I think it is holding people who are inept accountable. Ms. Trottenberg's time as FAA administrator was abysmal with very little accountability, with very little done. I stand strong that we should adopt my amendment. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SANTOS. Mr. Chair, flight patterns have become a silent threat to the health and well-being of Americans. One might ask: What does that have to do with this amendment? Well, citizens of New York's metropolitan area and the continental United States are ceaselessly burdened by aircraft noise and pollution. Residents in NY-3 have been begging elected officials like me to support mitigation efforts to give citizens plagued by ceaseless, noisy, and polluted skies a reprieve. Taking aim at Deputy Secretary of Transportation Polly Trottenberg is not a punishment but rather a wake-up call holding her accountable for her inaction. By reducing her salary to $1, we send a strong message that the well- being of Americans should be the top priority, not the convenience of a select few. Mr. Chair, the fight against harmful flight patterns doesn't end with Polly Trottenberg. We must also demand transparency, accountability, and a comprehensive review of flight patterns across the country. It is time to put the health of our communities first and ensure that every decision made in the aviation industry reflects our values. Let's work together in this body of Republicans and Democrats alike to make a real difference in our communities. For years, NY-3's constituents and communities just like it have asked for help, and now I will put it in the Record and let it be known that a ``no'' vote is a vote against accountability for the people who allow millions of Americans to suffer under the arbitrary rules of the Department of Transportation, FAA, and air traffic control, to name a few agencies. I urge adoption of my amendment to set a new tone and to have accountability for the people suffering from a lack of leadership on this segmented issue of our decaying transportation infrastructure under this administration. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

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