Debbie Wasserman Schultz

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, it is not the place for Congress to be pushing for increased use of experimental treatments. This procedure is highly invasive, requiring an injection of medication into a collection of nerves at the bottom of the front side of the neck. The VA and NIH are in the midst of a multiyear clinical trial to collect data on this treatment for potential use in treating post- traumatic stress disorder but do not yet have sufficient data one way or the other regarding this treatment. In fact, preliminary data show that SGB effects are not clear, and it is uncertain whether there is a direct link between the treatment and PTSD. If this treatment is safe, effective, and appropriate for expanded use, then the healthcare experts at the VA should be the ones to expand the treatment for wider use. There is a deliberative process for expanding the use of emerging healthcare treatments, and we should let that process play out. It is really not Congress' role to micromanage medical decisions. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise in tentative support of H.R. 8469, the fiscal year 2027 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies bill. The past few years, the MILCON-VA bill strayed from our tradition of being one of the few appropriations bills that traditionally had bipartisan support. Our committee has a shared goal of supporting our servicemembers, veterans, and their families no matter who holds the majority. We are proud to report that as the bill stands, this is a bipartisan bill--one that we reported out of full committee 58-0. However, it saddens me to see that the majority has made in order amendments that stray from the bipartisan commitment that both Chair Carter and I have maintained. To be clear, if any of the controversial amendments made in order are adopted, we will not be able to support this bill, and all the bipartisan work that we did to get this bill to this stage will all have been for naught. What a message we could send about our ability to work together if the House rejects these controversial amendments and votes to support the MILCON-VA bill--controversial amendments that really have nothing to do with protecting and preserving the quality of life of our servicemembers on Active Duty or our veterans--for a critical bill that supports our servicemembers and those who served our country honorably. To be clear, we have already made compromises on this bill. This is not the bill that I would have written. The bill includes a policy rider that prohibits the VA from reporting a beneficiary--for example, that has been deemed mentally incompetent based on medical evidence and, therefore, is assigned a fiduciary to handle their finances--to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. Not only is this a violation of current law, but it will only put more veterans in harm's way. Additionally, I opposed the funding level for the NATO Security Investment Program, which is $122 million below the request level. Now, more than ever, we should be reinforcing deterrence with the help of our European allies who disproportionately fund this program, especially as the war in Ukraine continues. I was able to put these concerns aside, as were my Democratic colleagues on the subcommittee and the full committee, and support this bill because that is what bipartisanship requires. As I told the Committee on Rules, Mr. Chairman, sometimes we have to compromise on what our preferences might be. You never compromise on principle; but to achieve a greater good, which this bill absolutely represents, sometimes you swallow hard and you look past some things not being exactly the way you would have preferred. So today we will consider an amendment that bans funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion at the VA as well because there are problematic amendments that have been made in order beyond just the language in the current underlying bill. We are worried that we will tip the scales from bipartisanship into partisanship. The Supreme Court's decision to overturn the Voting Rights Act and swift action taken in southern States to disenfranchise Black voters proves that we have always needed to lean in on ensuring there is diversity, equity, and inclusion. We will not allow this attack on communities of color to continue, and we will strongly oppose this amendment if it is offered. The amendment does nothing to help veterans and is divisive, partisan, and unnecessary. Along these same lines, there is an amendment that attacks Filipino World War II veterans, veterans that fought for us and with us, resulting in one of the greatest victories in our history. I want to be clear here. The Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund exists to correct what was a racist decision made in 1946 that banned Filipino veterans from receiving compensation for their service in World War II. That is why the word ``equity'' exists in the title of this account. There is also a messaging amendment on gender-affirming care for veterans. I hope that is not offered, but regardless of how you feel about the LGBT community, it is ridiculous to block a veteran from receiving the healthcare that they have earned. It is disappointing that we are at this point, and I hope that throughout the rest of this process we can come together to defeat these amendments. I do want to underscore that Judge Carter and I could not possibly have a better working relationship, and we have worked hand in glove to reach this point, and I think I can safely speak for both of us that we hope we can achieve the same outcome we were able to achieve in the full Appropriations Committee. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Levin), a distinguished member of the Appropriations Committee and the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Subcommittee.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Escobar), who represents Fort Bliss and is a member of the Appropriations Committee and the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Subcommittee.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chair, I am prepared to close, as well, and I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chair, I am very proud that we were able to pass this bill out of the full Appropriations Committee 58-0. I know Judge Carter and I are equally proud of that. This is legislation that, as you have heard, does fully fund healthcare for our Nation's veterans. It ensures--and we worked together on this--that veterans who get healthcare services through the PACT Act are able to have advanced funding to ensure continuity, regardless of the actions here in this body, for continued funding for their healthcare as a result of toxic exposure during their service, and now we have advanced funding for the Toxic Exposures Fund as well. We added $15 million in prevention to make sure that we could have resiliency for our servicemembers because they are consistently now subject to the impacts of natural disasters, and it provides additional investments in child development centers and barracks, which are both areas of bipartisan concern. We are looking forward to the amendment process in which we can hopefully continue the bipartisan cooperation. I want to thank Ranking Member DeLauro and Chairman Cole for their leadership. They are true leaders that we are fortunate to be able to work under. I also thank the team of professionals that I rely on: Farouk Ophaso, Tyler Coe, and Steven Goodall. I support this bill in its current form, but I have serious concerns, again, about the controversial amendments that we will be considering later today and tomorrow. I want to repeat, if any of those controversial amendments are added to this bill, it risks losing support from our side of the aisle. I hope we can come together. We already are together. I hope we can remain together in the name of bipartisanship and in service to our veterans and servicemembers to pass this bill with overwhelming support. We can only do that by keeping divisive, unnecessary, unrelated provisions out of the bill. I, again, thank Judge Carter for his partnership and his friendship, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of these amendments en bloc. This en bloc contains noncontroversial amendments that raise awareness on the programs that we all care about. It includes the need to address a variety of medical care issues at the VA, addresses the VA construction backlog, constructs more State extended-care facilities, expedites claims processing, and draws attention to our defense infrastructure, specifically at public shipyards. I encourage my colleagues to support these amendments en bloc, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Randall).

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Washington.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. Elfreth).

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New Hampshire (Ms. Goodlander).

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Walkinshaw).

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I really want to note what a decent human being and individual, with the wryest of senses of humor, that Bill Posey was. I had the privilege of knowing Congressman Posey for my entire career. We were elected together in the class of 1992 in the Florida House of Representatives, and just like my friend, Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart, I, too, served with Bill in the Florida House of Representatives and Florida Senate, along with here in the United States House of Representatives. Bill Posey and I entered the Florida House together, and the passion he had to serve his constituents on the Treasure Coast and the Space Coast was the same all the way through to his final day serving in this body. During his time in Tallahassee and Washington, D.C., Congressman Posey was dedicated to fighting for funding for NASA. He was NASA's champion and securing Florida's role as the leader in space launches and operations. He fought for robust funding to protect our irreplaceable environment in the State of Florida, including his yearslong work to reauthorize and prioritize funding to clean up our Nation's estuaries. There was no issue too big or small, and Bill was never afraid to stand up for what he believed in, even if his own party wasn't going in the same direction. We worked together to pass drowning prevention legislation, to prevent children in Florida from drowning in residential swimming pools when his party went the other way on that, passing the first swimming pool safety legislation in the State of Florida together. He worked with me to try and make condo buildings safer following the horrific collapse and tragedy of Champlain Towers South in Surfside, Florida, which I represented at the time. My heart goes out to Katie, his life partner. There were no spouses that I remember more than Bill and Katie, who were inseparable. To their family, may the memory of Bill Posey be for a blessing. I appreciate the opportunity to mourn his passing.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I will start by thanking the gentleman from Maryland for yielding and for his support of this resolution, along with his decades of leadership in support of the Jewish-American community and as a member of it. I also thank Chairman Jordan for facilitating consideration of this measure on the floor. I appreciate our work together on issues where we agree. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of my resolution, H. Res. 1251, to recognize Jewish American Heritage Month and honor the role of Jewish Americans throughout our country's 250-year history. I thank Representatives Troy Carter, Miller-Meeks, and Fitzpatrick for joining me to co-lead this resolution. Jewish American Heritage Month, or JAHM, is an annual opportunity each May to come together and honor the generations of Jewish Americans who help make up an integral part of the rich mosaic of the United States. While JAHM is a celebratory and educational month, this commemoration takes place amid rising anti-Semitism. As the resolution notes, anti- Jewish bias was identified in two-thirds of 2024 FBI hate crime reports, and American Jews, who are just 2 percent of the population, were targeted in 15 percent of all hate crimes. Mr. Speaker, 91 percent of Jews feel less safe in America after violent attacks in Colorado, Pennsylvania, New York, and here in Washington, D.C., some of which were deadly. As these threats surge, more than half of Jewish institutions, like synagogues, preschools, and community centers, lack the resources to protect themselves. The status quo is unacceptable. That is why this resolution expresses moral clarity. The House must unite to denounce anti-Semitism and protect Jewish Americans from attacks on their religious freedom, dignity, and safety. The best tool in the toolbox to counter baseless conspiracy theories, ignorance, and bigotry is education. When 38 percent of Americans don't know someone Jewish and 30 percent aren't familiar with the term ``anti-Semitism,'' it is essential to take this opportunity in the month of May to build awareness of the role Jewish Americans have played in our country's success. This year, as we mark 250 years since the Declaration of Independence, I am proud that our resolution highlights the more than 1 million Jewish-American men and women who have defended our freedom in the U.S. military. Jewish Americans have served in every branch of the United States Armed Forces, in every major war and conflict. At least 18 Jewish servicemembers have earned the Medal of Honor, our Nation's highest military decoration, for risking their lives above and beyond the call of duty. Their stories, embedded in this resolution, are the best illustration of how Jewish Americans have contributed to protecting our liberty and our way of life. They are the clearest refutation of false, bigoted accusations that Jewish Americans lack loyalty for this country. Honoring the sacrifice of these heroes means ensuring their identity isn't erased when they are gone. I am proud to have worked across the aisle to protect their legacy. My bipartisan Fallen Servicemembers Religious Heritage Restoration Act, which passed the House last year, would ensure that hundreds of Jewish servicemembers who were wrongfully buried under Latin crosses have their graves marked with the Star of David. This is just one of countless areas of American life where Jewish Americans made bountiful contributions, and we in Congress have a critical role to play in educating Americans about the Jewish community and preserving our history. This resolution makes clear that the United States Government stands firmly against anti-Semitism in any form and commits to protecting every American's right to express their religion without interference or persecution.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, as we mark Jewish American Heritage Month, I urge my colleagues not only to support this measure, but to take this opportunity to engage with their Jewish and non-Jewish constituents during the month of May to educate them about Jewish contributions to the success of the United States of America. Mr. Speaker, I urge support of this resolution.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, due to the House Committee on Appropriations markup not recessing on time and holding a vote, I missed the first vote on Wednesday, April 22, 2026. Had I been present, I would have voted NAY on Roll Call No. 130.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this measure to restore protections for our Haitian-American neighbors, and I am grateful for Congresswoman Pressley and Congresswoman Gillen's leadership on this issue. Haiti is in collapse. That is not in doubt. Gangs control 90 percent of the capital. Millions are internally displaced, and most of the population needs emergency food and medicine. The U.S. supports a peacekeeping force in Haiti, so it is hard to argue that it is dangerous enough to send in the military, yet safe enough to send civilians back to. Haitian TPS recipients are vetted for any criminal history and came here to flee the same violence at home. TPS holders are on work permits, pay taxes, pay into Medicare and Social Security, and get nothing in return. It helps no one to take 200,000 people out of the workforce, while taxpayers foot the bill for detaining and deporting people who haven't committed a crime. This is an economic disaster with the enormous taxpayer and moral cost of deporting hardworking people into chaos when they pose no threat. Every dollar we spend to rip apart law-abiding families with legal status--and I know that is a fact that my friends on the other side of the aisle refuse to acknowledge because TPS is a legal status--every dollar taken is a dollar not spent to go after real criminals. I visited the Everglades detention camp last week, and the horrors I saw strengthened my resolve. We can't stuff law-abiding people into cages for months with no trial and then send them to unsafe conditions. This week, I was proud to lead an amicus brief with Ms. Pressley and 185 congressional Democrats to urge the Supreme Court to reject Trump's illegal termination of TPS for Haitians. My Haitian neighbors in Florida are an indispensable part of our community, economy, and culture. It infuriates me that President Trump shamelessly peddles lies about Haitians to promote racist, collective punishment. Haitian Americans deserve better. We all deserve better than an administration more concerned about hitting Stephen Miller's ICE quotas than bringing down costs. If we care about our seniors, our parents, our aunties, and our grandmothers; if we care about the patients in hospitals and nursing homes; and if we care about making sure that our economy is strengthened by incredible Haitian workers who are part of the backbone of it, then we will vote ``yes'' to save jobs in your community, ensure that hospitals have nurses, ensure that elderly parents can access care, and to stand up for our Nation's values.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, last week, I conducted an unannounced oversight visit to the Everglades detention camp the Trump administration and Florida's government despicably named Alligator Alcatraz. While the employees in charge honored the legal requirement to allow me in, for the 3 hours I was there they wouldn't allow me to speak with the people they had put in cages. Because I arrived without notifying ICE, as Federal law allows, they had no time to whitewash the inhumane conditions. I want to tell Americans the truth about what is being done in the middle of our Everglades, in our name, and on our dime. Mr. Speaker, when you walk into this facility's dormitory area, which is a series of massive tents built on top of a tarmac, all you see are cages. Inside were 32 adult men, from ages 18 to 75, all packed into each cage, eight cages per tent, with 1,500 packed in that way in total. The cages are clearly unsanitary. It is dirty and smells like urine. Men used the toilet inside the cages with only an open-sided, pelvis- level wall a few feet from the beds with toilets that have feces remnants in them. So whom have they put in these cages? Are they convicted criminals? Some possibly are. Let's be clear: Convicted criminals should be deported. However, the vast majority are not that. Do they pose an immediate public threat? Under ICE's own risk assessments, the vast majority do not. Yet everyone there suffers, and that suffering is very intentional because cruelty is the point. Some have been held in cages for 6 months or more. Detainees report being beaten, taunted, and pepper-sprayed. Many have disappeared, without a day in court, to distant third countries where they don't speak the language. Haitians have been dumped into Mexico. Cubans have been sent to African countries and jailed on arrival. When I walked through, men cried out for help. An older man was sprawled on his cot, clearly ill. I am certain more are sick. I have seen reports that staff deny access to prescriptions, and several detainees have been hospitalized. They are served tiny meals marked fresh that were clearly dated 2 weeks old. For months, ICE denied detainees' access to lawyers or family, including U.S. citizen kids. A court order finally forced them to install unmonitored phone lines for people inside to call their attorneys. Human rights advocates alleged more violations since then. One harrowing example came just before my visit. On April 2, staff at the facility shut off phones for a full day, cutting contact to the outside world. When detainees protested, officers entered their cages and severely beat them. According to the court filing, one man was ``thrown to the ground and beaten by multiple guards. He suffered injuries to his shoulder . . . and was kicked in the head. A guard placed their knee on his neck. . . . `' Reports say when officers pepper-sprayed everyone in cages, an ``older gentleman passed out, as he could not breathe.'' It begs the basic question: Who is in charge here? ICE argues in court that this is a State facility, immune from Federal law, which is absurd. Immigration is a Federal responsibility. The site is in the middle of a federally protected area on Miccosukee Tribal land under a Federal treaty. Why is ICE hiding behind Florida? Is it so they can try to evade accountability for depriving detained people of basic human rights? As soon as I arrived, I was met by Florida State employees and contractors. During the tour, I asked if ICE had a permanent presence, and they said yes. Any questions I asked about the detainee population were referred to ICE. Yet ICE personnel not only refused to speak with me, they blocked me from talking to the men caged there for months, despite my having signed privacy releases for specific detainees. Three things about this facility are crystal clear: First, while Florida taxpayers bear the costs, ICE is clearly in charge. That means this camp should fall under the same rules as any other ICE facility. Second, it is an ecological disaster. Taxpayers spent billions to restore the Everglades, which is a critical water resource and a homeland for the Miccosukee people. Now we are spending countless tax dollars to produce heaven only knows how much pollution, because ICE never conducted an environmental assessment. Third, this facility makes a mockery of our values. It is an insult to the Bill of Rights, which requires due process and prohibits cruel and usual punishment for all people, not just citizens. It is a gut punch to family members who can only watch loved ones waste away inside dirty cages with no legal recourse. We know this is wrong. We know it is un-American. That is why we must stand up. I watch with pride as my south Florida neighbors mobilize to hold vigils outside the Everglades internment camp and unite in solidarity. For my part, I led Florida Democrats to sponsor legislation to shut this place down and guarantee every Member of Congress can conduct oversight at ICE jails, like I did, to see the truth. Mr. Speaker, this detention camp must be shut down. Our conscience demands it, and I will not rest until the families torn apart by this stain on the State of Florida seek and obtain justice.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise to recognize Fathers M.I.A. on its 10th Anniversary. Founded in 2016 by Gernald Hawkins, Sr. and Robert L. Jackson, III, Fathers M.I.A.'s mission is to mentor, support, challenge, assist, and advise fathers as they actively engage in rebuilding relationships with their children. Mr. Hawkins and Mr. Jackson attended a teen sporting event where they realized it was mothers, and not fathers, who would bring their children to sporting practice and major games. It was there that they identified a need to bridge the gap between father and child. By working to bridge this gap, they are changing the narrative for fathers who are M.I.A.--Missing In Action--to Motivated, Involved, and Active. Their objective is to give fathers and their children a fighting chance and opportunities to positively change their lives, thinking, and values. This year, Fathers M.I.A. is holding its 10th Annual `As We Honor You' Scholarship Gala, a celebration of students who have demonstrated remarkable perseverance in their education despite the absence of paternal love and comfort. During this elegant evening, young ladies are paired with local law enforcement and young men dance with their mothers, creating a unique and supportive atmosphere. Scholarships are awarded to selected participants upon successful completion of the eight-week program, which significantly contributes to their personal growth and mindset. The program encompasses a variety of activities, including essay writing, etiquette classes, online and social media safety sessions, group therapy, and instruction in positive affirmations. On behalf of Florida's 25th District, I commend and thank Fathers M.I.A. for their work to strengthen our families and community. I wish them much success as they continue to mentor future generations.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, as a result of travel disruptions stemming from the recent major storm system, I was unable to attend the Chamber in person for votes on March 17, 2026. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 88; YEA on Roll Call No. 89; NAY on Roll Call No. 90; and NAY on Roll Call No. 91.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the legendary Jaxson's Ice Cream Parlor in Dania Beach, Florida on its 70th Anniversary. Founded in 1956 by Monroe Udell, Jaxson's began with a simple but powerful vision: to create the best homemade ice cream using Monroe's proprietary recipes, serve high-quality American classics, and build a place where families could gather to make lasting memories. Seventy years later, that vision continues forward under the leadership of Monroe's daughter, Linda Udell Zakheim. One of South Florida's most iconic, long-standing family restaurants and multigenerational businesses, Jaxson's is known for oversized sundaes--especially its ``Kitchen Sink''--classic American fare, and nostalgic charm, including one of the largest collections of license plates, which adorn its walls. The restaurant has been featured nationally on CNN, Good Morning America, the Food Network, and various local media. Monroe and Linda always considered their staff to be family and have improved the standard of living for their employees. On February 24, 2014--the day of Monroe's 86th birthday--Jaxson's voluntarily raised their hourly wage from $7.93 to $10.10, which was later recognized by President Barack Obama. Additionally, their iconic ``Kitchen Sink'' holds a permanent place at History Fort Lauderdale Museum as part of their ``Roots of Resilience: The Journey of Black Broward'' exhibit, honoring Monroe Udell's commitment to hiring Black employees during the Jim Crow era. Among them was George Hadley who worked at Jaxson's for 38 years. As a long-time customer and fan, I can attest to Jaxson's dedication not only to their customers, but to our community. Linda Udell Zakheim and the Jaxson's family set a remarkable example for all Floridians. I congratulate them on 70 incredible years of serving up scoops, smiles, and sweet memories.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I rise in support of this resolution because I simply do not trust this President to truly prioritize democracy and the will of the Venezuelan people. I represent one of the largest Venezuelan communities in the country. Many of my constituents fled brutal repression under Chavez and Maduro. Most of them were glad to see Maduro captured and face justice, and so was I. Maduro is a murderous criminal who tortured, imprisoned, impoverished, and oppressed his people. He stole elections, jailed his opponents, drained his nation's wealth, and unleashed the largest peacetime refugee crisis in history. Mr. Speaker, 8 million Venezuelans were driven into exile. I was glad to see Maduro held accountable, and this resolution, as my colleague who just spoke, Mr. Diaz-Balart, would clearly know, would not preclude operations like the one that arrested him, especially if the administration finally does what they should have already done: come up with a day-after plan for democracy, present a coherent strategy to Congress, and make a case to the American people. Arresting Maduro does not fix Venezuela because Maduro did not destroy Venezuela by himself. He relied on criminal affiliates who helped him cling to power. Delcy Rodriguez, Jorge Rodriguez, Diosdado Cabello, Vladimir Padrino Lopez, all of them share Maduro's guilt, but instead of being thrown in jail, they were left in charge. The machinery of repression was left in place, and the democratic hopes of Venezuelans are being left behind. My constituents who celebrated Maduro's capture are horrified to see President Trump normalize relations with the same regime that forced them to flee. This President must not make the U.S. complicit in the brutal repression of Venezuelans which continues today. Yet, Trump continues to jeopardize the lives of lawful Venezuelan immigrants by forcing them back into the chaos after he terminated their TPS. Trump has lavished praise on Maduro's hand-picked replacement, Delcy Rodriguez, who ran the regime's torture dungeons. Meanwhile, he has dismissed and demeaned Venezuela's democratic leaders like Maria Corina Machado and president-elect Edmundo Gonzalez. In fact, President Trump hasn't said one word about seeking democracy or human rights in Venezuela. If Congress backs military action, then democracy, stability, and safety for Venezuelans should be the objective. But those aren't President Trump's goals. He only speaks about getting a cut of the regime's oil sales and ignores their ongoing repression. I have no illusions about the dangers this regime poses. I am open to the idea that military action may be needed to achieve democracy. If Trump truly cared about Venezuelan democracy, he has tools at his disposal. He has broad authority to defend our national security interests. He could employ covert action, enforce vigorous sanctions, support civil society groups on democracy's front lines, and take action, as he does, against cartels and narcoterrorists. He could use his ``tremendous leverage'' to push for elections in human rights because this resolution doesn't block any of that. Instead, Trump is just seeking profits for the same Big Oil companies who propped up Maduro for years. He moved on his own with no plan for democracy, and he swapped out one dictator for another and declared mission accomplished. My vote today isn't about the means that this President used to capture Maduro. Presidents should use the power they have to be tough on dictators who abuse their own people. But given his utter disdain for democracy and his callous disregard for the chaos and violence to which law-abiding Venezuelans are being deported, I simply cannot give this President a blank check to put troops on the ground. For all we know, Trump plans to deploy troops to protect the regime's oil facilities, not to liberate Venezuelans. I have known Maria Corina Machado for years, but this week I was able to finally meet her in person for the first time. She is remarkable, inspiring, and I have total faith in her selfless dedication to bring Venezuela out of darkness. More importantly, Venezuelans have faith in her. When she spoke, she discussed the essential momentum the democracy movement needs and the danger of allowing this lingering dictatorship to reinforce its grip on power. She told us conditions on the ground are dire, that we cannot allow the regime and the military militias to strengthen their hold on power. Maria Corina has a vision to resurrect Venezuela, and there is a U.S. role to see it through. That is why it is so disturbing that her White House meeting ended with no firm commitments, no timeline for elections, and no guarantees from President Trump. Instead of opening a pathway to democracy, this President is focused on opening offshore accounts to hoard Venezuelan oil money. So I support this resolution because of my faith in Maria Corina Machado, not in spite of it. It is rooted in an ongoing commitment to standing resolutely with Venezuelans to demand an end to this illegal regime. It is aligned with my belief that a transition to democracy led by Maria Corina Machado and Edmundo Gonzalez must take place. I hope I am wrong about the President's motivation.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I hope I am wrong about the President's motivations, and he brings Congress a real strategy to transition Venezuela to democracy. I hope he was moved by Maria Corina Machado's vision and not just her Nobel Prize. I am a show-me person, not a tell-me person, and so far President Trump has shown that he is more concerned with seizing Venezuela's oil than freeing Venezuela from dictatorship. ``Hasta el final''; ``Until the end.''