congressional_record: CREC-2025-02-25-pt1-PgH781-3
This data as json
| granule_id | date | congress | session | volume | issue | title | chamber | granule_class | sub_granule_class | page_start | page_end | speakers | bills | citation | full_text |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CREC-2025-02-25-pt1-PgH781-3 | 2025-02-25 | 119 | 1 | PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.J. RES. 20, PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY RELATING TO "ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM: ENERGY CONSERVATION... | HOUSE | HOUSE | ALLOTHER | H781 | H790 | [{"name": "Erin Houchin", "role": "speaking"}, {"name": "James P. McGovern", "role": "speaking"}, {"name": "Ralph Norman", "role": "speaking"}, {"name": "Debbie Wasserman Schultz", "role": "speaking"}, {"name": "Virginia Foxx", "role": "speaking"}, {"name": "Brian Jack", "role": "speaking"}, {"name": "Seth Magaziner", "role": "speaking"}, {"name": "Jim Costa", "role": "speaking"}, {"name": "Kelly Morrison", "role": "speaking"}, {"name": "Jimmy Gomez", "role": "speaking"}, {"name": "Jill N. Tokuda", "role": "speaking"}, {"name": "Eric Sorensen", "role": "speaking"}, {"name": "Nancy Pelosi", "role": "speaking"}, {"name": "Melanie A. Stansbury", "role": "speaking"}, {"name": "Adam Gray", "role": "speaking"}, {"name": "Steve Cohen", "role": "speaking"}, {"name": "Maxine Dexter", "role": "speaking"}] | [{"congress": "119", "type": "HCONRES", "number": "14"}, {"congress": "119", "type": "HCONRES", "number": "14"}, {"congress": "119", "type": "HJRES", "number": "20"}, {"congress": "119", "type": "HJRES", "number": "20"}, {"congress": "119", "type": "HJRES", "number": "35"}, {"congress": "119", "type": "HJRES", "number": "35"}, {"congress": "119", "type": "HRES", "number": "161"}, {"congress": "119", "type": "HRES", "number": "161"}, {"congress": "119", "type": "HRES", "number": "161"}] | 171 Cong. Rec. H781 | Congressional Record, Volume 171 Issue 37 (Tuesday, February 25, 2025) [Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 37 (Tuesday, February 25, 2025)] [House] [Pages H781-H790] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.J. RES. 20, PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY RELATING TO ``ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM: ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR CONSUMER GAS-FIRED INSTANTANEOUS WATER HEATERS''; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.J. RES. 35, PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY RELATING TO ``WASTE EMISSIONS CHARGE FOR PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS SYSTEMS: PROCEDURES FOR FACILITATING COMPLIANCE, INCLUDING NETTING AND EXEMPTIONS''; AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H. CON. RES. 14, CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025 Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 161 and ask for its immediate consideration. The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: H. Res. 161 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 20) providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Energy relating to ``Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Gas-fired Instantaneous Water Heaters''. All points of order against consideration of the joint resolution are waived. The joint resolution shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the joint resolution are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the joint resolution and on any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit. Sec. 2. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 35) providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to ``Waste Emissions Charge for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems: Procedures for Facilitating Compliance, Including Netting and Exemptions''. All points of order against consideration of the joint resolution are waived. The joint resolution shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the joint resolution are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the joint resolution and on any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit. Sec. 3. At any time after adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 14) establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2025 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2026 through 2034. The first reading of the concurrent resolution shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the concurrent resolution are waived. General debate shall not exceed three hours, with two hours of general debate confined to the congressional budget equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Budget or their respective designees and one hour of general debate on the subject of economic goals and policies equally divided and controlled by Representative Schweikert of Arizona and Representative Beyer of Virginia or their respective designees. The amendment printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be considered as adopted in the House and in the Committee of the Whole. The concurrent resolution, as amended, shall be considered as read. After general debate the Committee shall rise and report the concurrent resolution, as amended, to the House. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the concurrent resolution and amendments thereto to adoption without intervening motion except amendments offered by the chair of the Committee on the Budget pursuant to section 305(a)(5) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to achieve mathematical consistency. The concurrent resolution shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question of its adoption. {time} 1215 The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Indiana is recognized for 1 hour. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from Indiana? There was no objection. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and in support of the underlying legislation. Last night, the Rules Committee met and produced a rule, House Resolution 161, providing for the House's consideration of several pieces of legislation, including a closed rule for H. Con. Res. 14, the budget resolution. The rule provides for 2 hours of debate for the Committee on the Budget or their respective designees to debate the congressional budget and an additional hour equally divided and controlled by Representative Schweikert of Arizona and Representative Beyer of Virginia or their respective designees to debate economic goals and policies. The rule further permits the chair of the Committee on the Budget to offer amendments in the House to achieve mathematical consistency and provides that the concurrent resolution shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question at its adoption. Additionally, the rule provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 20, a CRA relating to the DOE's water heater rule, under a closed rule. The rule provides for 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective designees and provides for one motion to recommit. Finally, the rule provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 35, a CRA relating to EPA's methane tax, under a closed rule. The rule provides for 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective designees and provides for one motion to recommit. Mr. Speaker, notable among the bills this rule provides for is the House budget resolution, H. Con. Res. 14. This budget resolution marks the first step for House Republicans to advance President Trump's America First agenda. We have heard plenty of fear-mongering and flatout dishonesty from Democrats and their liberal media allies about what is included in this resolution. To be clear, this resolution unlocks the path forward to deliver on our promises to the American people. Over the next hour, Members are going to hear all of the identity groups [[Page H782]] the Democrats want my colleagues to believe this bill hurts. Members will hear them say that Republicans are abandoning the middle class and cutting benefits. None of that is true. The truth is, there is not one single cut in this bill to any specific program or benefit. The truth is the Democratic Party abandoned the middle class for the liberal elite class a long time ago. The election last November should have been a wake-up call that the American people don't believe them anymore, nor should they. The Democrats are desperate for attention and for power. Don't give it to them. Let's set the record straight about what this budget resolution actually accomplishes. It will provide funding for border security, provide for our national defense, and restore American energy independence. It will provide tax relief for working families. On border security, Biden's open-border policies resulted in over 8.5 million encounters at the southern border since 2021, a 500 percent increase in illegal crossings, and over $115 billion in costs to State and local governments. Most tragically, Biden's border crisis allowed unprecedented amounts of deadly fentanyl into our communities, killing over 100,000 Americans. Next, this bill enables us to permanently protect tax relief. President Trump's Tax Cuts and Jobs Act provided critical relief to middle-class families and small businesses. Americans are still experiencing high prices because we are still recovering from Bidenomics. Prices are up 21 percent. Real wages have declined by more than 3 percent. Mortgage rates have skyrocketed. Credit card delinquencies have risen by over 50 percent. Bidenomics cost American families more than $11,000 every year for the last 4 years. Next, this budget resolution prioritizes energy independence. Under President Trump's first administration, the United States was energy independent for the first time in 40 years. That stopped the day Joe Biden took office, and American families have been hurting ever since. Under President Biden, the American energy production was severely restricted. Federal lands were blocked from responsible energy development, and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve was drained. Simply put, again, the budget resolution is a framework that will allow us to deliver on the demands of the American people to secure the border, eliminate wasteful spending, revitalize Biden's broken economy, and safeguard our economic prosperity by providing permanent tax relief for working families. I hope our Democratic colleagues will join us in those efforts. This budget resolution kicks off the reconciliation process and allows our work to begin. Once adopted, our committees and the entire House will begin detailed work to achieve these important goals for the American people. Mr. Speaker, this rule also provides for consideration of two Congressional Review Act measures: H.J. Res. 20 and H.J. Res. 35. H.J. Res. 20 provides for congressional disapproval of the rule submitted by the Department of Energy relating to energy conservation standards for consumer gas-fired instantaneous water heaters. The rule we seek to overturn with this legislation effectively bans certain natural gas water heaters from the market, placing unnecessary financial burdens on consumers, especially seniors and low-income households. H.J. Res. 35 provides for congressional disapproval of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to natural gas facilities. The EPA's rule imposes a significant fee on methane emissions from oil and natural gas facilities. The fee is essentially a pass-through cost to consumers that will raise prices, harm domestic energy production, and increase our reliance on other countries to meet our own energy needs. Mr. Speaker, I look forward to the consideration of these important pieces of legislation. I urge the passage of this rule, and I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. Houchin) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. Mr. Speaker, before I get into my statement, let me begin by saying that I keep on hearing from the other side that this is just a budget resolution and that it doesn't have any actual policies in it. Yet, the gentlewoman referred to all the tax cuts. Can she point me to where the resolution says anything about tax cuts? Of course, the answer is that it doesn't. What it does is simply instruct our tax-writing committees to write legislation to spend $4.5 trillion, just as it instructs our SNAP committee to cut $290 billion and our Medicaid committee to cut $880 billion. Republicans cannot have it both ways and pretend that the harms aren't real while the tax cuts are, but we know the harms are real. We know what is planned, and we have seen the leaked document. Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, it looks like facts and truth have absolutely no place in this administration or in this Republican Party. We already knew that this administration lies like a rug. First, we heard that the United States was sending $50 million worth of condoms to Hamas, which was a lie. Then we heard it was Ukraine that started the war, not Russia, which is another lie. Then we heard that the terrible plane crash here in Washington happened because of diversity programs, which was also a lie. Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. Houchin) wants us to believe that not a single thing in the budget she is arguing for is going to hurt anyone at all and that there isn't a single tax giveaway to billionaires in their budget. Guess what, Mr. Speaker. It is simply not accurate. We all saw this coming. We did. Last month, at Trump's inauguration, who was in the front row? It wasn't people on Medicaid. It wasn't factory workers. It wasn't nurses or teachers or firefighters. It wasn't even his own Cabinet. It was the richest people in the world, and that is who this Republican budget helps. It steals from taxpayers and funnels the money to those at the very top. Imagine stealing from school meals for kids so that billionaires could get another tax giveaway. Last night, in the Rules Committee, the gentlewoman claimed: No, no, no. Democrats can't prove there are any cuts in this budget. Except, Mr. Speaker, we can. We can. Let me lay it out as simply as I can for people. The Republican budget cuts, for example, $330 billion from programs related to education, and the same Representative who wrote this budget, the chair of the Budget Committee, Mr. Arrington, also wrote this document right here, Mr. Speaker, which I have in front of me. It says in black and white that those education cuts include $12 billion from school meals. How dare my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. Mr. Speaker, I am sorry that the gentlewoman doesn't like these facts, but they are facts. School meals are just one example. This budget makes deep, deep cuts to Medicaid, including long-term care; deep cuts to food assistance for hungry families; and deep cuts to Pell grants. These cuts are going to hurt people. I ask the gentlewoman a simple question: Whose side is she on? Does she want to stand with the school kids in her district who rely on school meals to get through the day, or does she side with the billionaires who are getting another tax giveaway in this budget? Does she stand with the 178,119 constituents in her district who are on Medicaid? Does she stand with the thousands and thousands of kids in her district who rely on school meals, or does she stand with the greedy corporations who are price gouging struggling families? I know where I stand, Mr. Speaker, and we are going to fight like hell to oppose this awful Republican budget because we know whose side we are on. We are going to fight like our constituents' lives depend on it because they do. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I commend the other side for finally saying that some of these things that they have been harping on for the last several hours and 24- [[Page H783]] hour segments is not true. There is nothing in this budget resolution that presumes cuts to specific programs. Our Democratic colleagues admitted this much themselves last night. Mr. Speaker, this legislation simply provides flexible spending targets for authorizing committees to best determine what is feasible within their jurisdiction. I remind my Democratic colleagues that this resolution is the first step in a process to let reconciliation begin, when the real work will happen in the committees. If my colleagues have concerns about potential cuts being proposed once the authorizing committees begin their work, there will be ample opportunity to debate, provide amendment, and find opportunities in the reconciliation instructions for common ground. Unlike my friends on the other side, we don't view the Rules Committee as the first stop in the legislative process, but, rather, the last. We should let the committees do their work and not prejudge the outcomes or make baseless accusations and presumptions. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Norman), my friend. Mr. NORMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank Congresswoman Houchin for leading this debate, and I rise in full support of the House budget resolution as introduced by Chairman Arrington. {time} 1230 What our viewers, both in the balcony and watching this by TV, are going to see is two different worldviews. My friends on the left think tax money is their money, that you shouldn't know where it is spent in any shape, form, or fashion. Where they want to spend our tax dollars, which is now being uncovered by Elon Musk, is on a variety of things, but it began 4 years ago with the invasion of the border. My friends from the left, the minute the Biden administration took office, opened the gates for over 170 different countries to let everybody and anybody into this country. My friends on the left allowed 400,000 unaccompanied minors to come into this country, and we don't know what happened to them. It is not good, though. They claim to sympathize with people in this country, but what about sympathy for the children? They did nothing to stop the invasion at the border. They had words, but that is all it was. They want the American people to know that it is their money to spend on illegal aliens' free college tuition, putting it on the backs of the everyday working man. This is the first step in a long journey of what we are voting on today. From the very first day I set foot in this Chamber, I have always promised my constituents that I would do everything within my power to reinstate fiscal sanity to our great Nation. What is worse than a bankrupt country? How does that help children? How does that help single moms? It doesn't. That is what this bill attempts to stop or at least begin the process of healing. We now suffer from World War II levels of indebtedness and pay more on interest than we do on our national defense, to the tune of over $880 billion in interest. Unfortunately, many Members of Congress have demonstrated a complete lack of fiscal discipline and will try to spoil a strong bill that President Trump himself has endorsed. This budget resolution enables us to reach over $4.5 trillion in tax cuts for hardworking Americans and more than $2 trillion in spending cuts, a concept that Congress has been foreign to for way too long. With a historic trifecta, since the Republicans were elected by 77 million people to control the House, the Senate, and the executive branch, we have the opportunity to deliver on our promise to America. We must do what is best for them, including raising the debt ceiling by $4 trillion to prevent Democrats from using a fiscal crisis to hold Trump's agenda hostage. The Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Ciscomani). The time of the gentleman has expired. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina. Mr. NORMAN. Mr. Speaker, due to the previous Biden administration's failed security measures, included in our budget is $300 billion in critical and urgent funding for strengthened border security and our Armed Forces. America is paying twice. We pay to ship illegals over here. We pay to feed illegals over here. We pay to house illegals over here. Now, we are having to take them back. We are for immigration, but the right way. All in all, this package, combined with economic growth unleashed by the America First agenda, can ensure it will provide a deficit-neutral outcome, including seven times the amount of cuts that were initially unveiled. For every dollar that Republicans surpass the goal of spending cuts, there will be another dollar in tax cuts. I am proud to support this budget that finally implements fiscal and budgetary constraints on Congress. It is the first step to unlocking the reconciliation process ahead of us. Previously, under Democrats' failed leadership, which we had 4 years of, nonsense welfare programs ate at the budget, allotting billions for mindless spending. The American people have had enough, which is why we are in the new age of the golden age. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for allowing me to speak and for putting this argument up. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, there are just a couple of points I will make. I am still waiting for the gentlewoman from Indiana to tell me where the tax cuts are in this budget. My colleagues can't have it both ways. They can't say there are all these tax cuts in this budget, yet there are no cuts. The reality is, there are cuts in this budget. To the gentleman who just spoke from South Carolina, he may need a reminder. Maybe he could do a townhall in his district. He might get an earful. Mr. Speaker, 74,000 of his constituents received coverage under the Affordable Care Act. By supporting this resolution, he is betraying the 148,948 constituents in his district who depend on Medicaid for their essential care and the 85,000 constituents in the Fifth District who rely on SNAP to put food on the table. Maybe do a townhall and listen to constituents rather than just big donors. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz). Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose the Republican budget resolution that utterly betrays middle-class Americans and threatens to explode the deficit. This deceitful budget would gut Medicaid, schools, and affordable housing, all so Republican billionaire donors can get more tax breaks. Instead of cutting costs for families, it undermines veterans' benefits and forces millions more families to live paycheck to paycheck. Instead of lowering prices at the pharmacy or the supermarket, this budget will bleed Americans dry. Billionaires get a windfall, and taxpayers get stuck with the bill. This budget would swipe food from seniors and children, and in my district, ACA healthcare premiums would leap by almost $500. A 60-year- old Broward County couple with a household income of $85,000 would see their ACA premiums jump $16,000 a year, a 226 percent increase. How does this Republican rip-off help American families? Long story short, it won't. I urge my colleagues to reject this billionaire buyout budget that would crush working families, make Americans less safe and secure, blow out the debt, and devastate lifesaving resources that families need. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx), chairwoman of the Rules Committee. Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule, which provides consideration of the fiscal year 2025 budget resolution. Our Nation stands at a fiscal crossroads, one where we are beckoned to answer a simple yet pertinent question: What path will we choose to go down? The answer to that question is clear: We must embark upon a path that restores the fiscal health and vitality of the Nation. [[Page H784]] Many have lobbed spurious caricatures and distorted criticisms at this budget resolution, but the truth is that it will work to put the Nation back upon a sound footing where it belongs. Last night at the Rules Committee, we caught Democrats dead to rights. A Democrat tried to refer to the alleged ``cuts'' in our debate but instead admitted that ``it is not there.'' That is right. It is not in the budget resolution. You simply cannot find programmatic cuts in any respect, and I stand here to tell the truth about this budget and the rule we need to get it across the line. From shielding Americans from the greatest tax increase in history to supporting the military, allocating resources to the Trump administration to secure the border and to trimming wasteful programs, our budget resolution has solutions that the American people expect and demand. President Trump specifically requested ``one big, beautiful bill,'' and House Republicans have answered that request with a constructive, full-bodied product. Now, let's juxtapose our beautiful bill with the failed reconciliation schemes passed by Democratic Congresses. They used it to pass ObamaCare, robbing Medicare of over $700 billion of funds in the process and kicking Americans off their health insurance plans after promising to keep them. They hijacked the process to pass the so-called American Rescue Plan to waste over $2 trillion in taxpayer funds, fueling the greatest inflation rates in generations. Lastly, they used the reconciliation process just a few years ago to pass one of the worst pieces of legislation in the modern era, the so- called Inflation Reduction Act. That catastrophe of a bill was a one- way ticket to financial ruin. It wasted money on green energy schemes, punished companies that proudly develop American energy, and ironically drove up costs for every American family. I will let our deficit-reducing, border-securing, tax cut-preserving, American energy-strengthening budget stand against the failed record of congressional Democrats any day of the week. The truth is that Americans win under the Trump agenda and this budget. This blueprint is a framework on which Congress can deliver the agenda the American people want and deserve. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the rule and the underlying resolution. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman is talking about what was said in the Rules Committee last night. I will take a couple of minutes to talk about how people voted in the Rules Committee last night. We gave Republicans a chance last night in the Rules Committee. We said if they really don't believe that this budget cuts funding for school meals, if they really believe what they are saying, then they can vote to ensure the American people that they are not going to steal school meals from kids in order to give tax breaks for millionaires. Every Republican voted no, every single one of them. Then, Democrats offered an amendment to protect Medicaid. Medicaid, as you know, Mr. Speaker, covers 41 percent of all births in the United States, nearly half of children with special healthcare needs, and five in eight nursing home residents. We asked them not to cut Medicaid in order to fund tax breaks for billionaires. Every Republican voted no. Then, Democrats offered an amendment to extend tax cuts for people making under $400,000 while ensuring that corporations and billionaires pay their fair share. We asked Republicans to continue tax cuts for only those who need it the most because those are the tax cuts they let expire while their tax cuts for greedy corporations were made permanent. We asked them to prioritize working families over greedy corporations. Every Republican voted no. Then, Democrats offered an amendment preventing tax giveaways for people earning over $1 million a year. Every Republican voted no. We wanted to see if there was anyone so rich that Republicans don't think they deserve a tax giveaway, so we asked them to vote against tax breaks for people earning over $100 million per year. We asked them to side with factory workers and firefighters over hedge fund managers and billionaire bankers. Every Republican voted no. We even offered an amendment preventing tax cuts for people with a net worth of over--get this--$1 billion. Every Republican voted no. They betrayed their constituents. They voted to steal from the American people in order to protect tax breaks for billionaires. Again, this is about whose side you are on. Republicans showed us last night with their votes whose side they are on, and it is not the working people of this country. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Jack). Mr. JACK. Mr. Speaker, in addition to the budget resolution, which I support, I rise today in support of the rule for H.J. Res. 20, a resolution authorized by the Congressional Review Act that will enable our Congress to repeal a job-killing Biden administration regulation that would ban and eliminate noncondensing tankless water heaters, an American product made by blue-collar American workers in the heart of my congressional district in Georgia. This regulation was passed in the midnight hours of the Biden administration on December 26, after Christmas and weeks after Americans soundly rejected the Biden-Harris regulatory regime administration, putting in peril the livelihoods of hundreds of my constituents the day after Christmas. To put this into perspective, noncondensing tankless water heaters account for 40 percent of our country's tankless water heater market. A majority of those noncondensing tankless water heaters are manufactured in my congressional district by an incredible company called Rinnai America Corporation. These water heaters are the most advanced and efficient noncondensing tankless water heaters on the market. Perhaps most importantly, Rinnai America is the only company that builds noncondensing tankless water heaters on American soil. Rinnai America is headquartered in my hometown of Peachtree City, and 3 years ago, it opened a state-of-the-art facility in Griffin, Georgia, two cities I proudly represent in this Congress. {time} 1245 Over 500 of my constituents are working to manufacture and market the very water heaters the Biden administration attempted to outlaw. This job-killing regulation imposed by the Biden administration is yet another painful example of the left's war on hydrocarbons. The purpose of this regulation is to try to single out and eliminate an American manufacturer of noncondensing tankless water heaters. Effectively, the Biden administration and the government were trying to alter the market on their own by picking winners and losers, which is something that consumers should do, not unelected nameless bureaucrats. Mr. Speaker, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have spent an enormous amount of time the past few weeks trying to convince Americans they are the party of blue-collar American workers. Well, in the spirit of bipartisanship, I encourage my Democratic colleagues to join me in support of this resolution to protect and champion hundreds of blue-collar American jobs in the heart of our country. To my Republican colleagues, let's join together as a team and end this war on hydrocarbons now. President Trump's White House has explicitly endorsed this resolution, and I urge all of my Republican colleagues to join us and vote for this critical legislation to empower consumer choice and champion American manufacturing. I will close by saying, we expect this vote later this week. I hope everyone in this House joins me in support of this legislation in defense of blue-collar American workers. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. We are here talking about billions of dollars of cuts to Medicaid, school meals, and food for children, and this guy is talking about tankless water heaters. I mean, read the room. I should just say that by supporting this budget resolution, he is betraying [[Page H785]] 125,952 constituents in his district that depend on Medicaid for their essential care. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Magaziner). Mr. MAGAZINER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to Donald Trump, Elon Musk, and House Republicans stealing trillions of dollars from the middle class to fund massive tax cuts for billionaires. Instead of focusing on the cost of living or making America safer, Republicans are planning a massive giveaway to the rich, with working people picking up the tab. They want $2 trillion in tax cuts for people making more than $500,000 a year by extending Trump's 2017 tax plan. That is $2 trillion for people making more than $500,000 a year. How are they going to pay for it? By cutting Medicaid. That is healthcare for 77 million Americans, 80,000 Rhode Islanders, including seniors, children, and people with disabilities. Nursing homes and community health centers all across this country will shut down. It is not just healthcare. This bill takes money from education, farmers, and small businesses, all for billionaire tax cuts. These Republicans are not fighting for the middle class. They are fighting for Donald and Elon's rich friends at Mar-a-Lago, and the middle class is paying for it. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.'' Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Costa). Mr. COSTA. Mr. Speaker, I strongly oppose this rule that enables a reckless Republican budget resolution to go forward. Let me tell you why. Republicans claim to be lowering costs, but their plan, in my view, does just the opposite. Let me bring it all home. In California's 21st Congressional District which I have the honor and privilege to represent, the wonderful people in the San Joaquin Valley, 456,532 people could lose their Medicaid under this rule and budget resolution. Under this rule and resolution, 131,000 people could lose their SNAP benefits. Over 25,000 people could lose coverage through the Affordable Health Care Act. We have made remarkable progress as a result of the Affordable Health Care Act, reducing the number of people without insurance in our constituency to less than 10 percent. That would be changed. There would be $3 million in energy and conservation funds that would be withheld from farmers in my district. If you want to put the American people first, we must reject this debacle and begin on a real bipartisan basis to pass a budget that fits the American people. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. Morrison). Ms. MORRISON. Mr. Speaker, today I rise on behalf of the nearly 80 million Americans across the country who get their health insurance through Medicaid. I rise as a physician who has cared for patients for more than 20 years, and I implore my colleagues to recognize that health insurance is not just a throwaway line item that you can scratch out in a budget. It is the difference between being able to receive the lifesaving healthcare people need or not. Medicaid is the single largest source of healthcare coverage in the United States. Medicaid covers nearly half of all children, and it is the largest insurer of kids with disabilities. Medicaid is a vital source of prenatal and postpartum care for women, and it covers more than 40 percent of births in our country. The Republicans' dangerous proposal today is selling out the health and wellness of kids, families, seniors in nursing homes, and people with disabilities. Why? To make room for tax breaks for millionaires? This is wrong. We cannot stand for this. We need our colleagues across the aisle to stand up for our children and families. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I notice there are not a lot of people on the other side wanting to defend this budget. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Gomez). Mr. GOMEZ. Mr. Speaker, the Republican budget can be summed up in three simple words: defund, defraud, and deceive. First, the Republicans want to defund social safety net programs working families rely on, like Medicaid, school meals, and food stamps. In my district alone, 425,000 individuals depend on Medicaid for their healthcare. That includes kids and people with disabilities. Second, Republicans want to defraud the American people by taking money from working families to hand out massive tax breaks to billionaires and corporations who pay little to no taxes. Finally, they are trying to deceive the American people by claiming that they are not cutting any programs, but we know at the end of the day that their budget will include cuts to Medicaid and programs that families depend on. Republicans need to step up because this is not just a blue State or a Democratic issue. This will cut benefits, healthcare benefits, for hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Americans across the country, including 171,000 in Arizona's Sixth District. We need Republicans to step up and not be shameful and pass this budget. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I don't know if the gentlewoman wants to give us some of her time because we have a lot of speakers over here. I guess not. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Tokuda). Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the House Republican budget resolution, a blatant attempt to strip healthcare and food aid away from everyday Americans. With up to $2.5 trillion in Medicaid cuts and $230 billion slashed from SNAP, this budget plan would leave millions of families and seniors without essential support. Rural America would suffer the most. Nationwide, more than 12 million rural Americans rely on Medicaid, and SNAP participation is higher in rural areas than urban ones. In my home State of Hawaii, over 350,000 people rely on Medicaid, and nearly one in five depend on SNAP to eat. Rural Americans, who live in 181 of our congressional districts, red and blue, already face some of the harshest health disparities, living 3 to 10 years less than their urban counterparts. These cuts will only deepen such inequities and leave them with no safety net. Let me be clear. These cuts will cost lives. These are not just numbers. They are real people. They are our neighbors, our grandparents, and our children. At a time when too many are struggling, Republicans are delivering tax breaks to billionaires on the backs of our working families. Americans in rural America deserve better. Our country deserves better. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.'' Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me just say, by the way, Mr. Speaker, how is that mandate going for you guys now that voters are realizing that you betrayed them? Let's look at some newspapers from around the country: ``Georgia Congressman confronted by angry crowd over support for Trump's agenda.'' This is from The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: ``U.S. Rep. Rich McCormick was peppered with boos and catcalls throughout a townhall meeting in Roswell late Thursday, as hundreds of critics jeered the Republican for backing President Donald Trump's agenda during his first month in office.'' There is another one. ``U.S. Rep. Glenn Grothman faces hostile crowd in Oshkosh townhall meeting.'' That is in Oshkosh, Wisconsin. ``Protesters urge Rep. Scott Perry to say no to Medicaid cuts.'' That is in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. ``Outside Congressman's office, protesters make noise over potential Medicaid cuts.'' That is from Representative Ryan Mackenzie's district in Salisbury Township in Pennsylvania. I could spend an hour reading these into the Record, Mr. Speaker. Republicans are getting chewed out at all of [[Page H786]] their townhalls. Something is happening in this country right now, and you can feel it. People are waking up to the betrayal, and they are angry. They have a right to be angry. My Republican colleagues need to remember that when they vote for this budget, they are on record. They have made it clear that they serve the billionaires and not their voters. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Sorensen). Mr. SORENSEN. Mr. Speaker, looking around this room, I ask: Shouldn't our government benefit those we represent back home? However, what is being presented by my Republican colleagues today is a plan that would gut healthcare for 152,483 of my neighbors at home who depend on Medicaid, more than 66,000 kids under the age of 19. Ten thousand seniors back home rely on Medicaid in Illinois' 17th District for their nursing home coverage. While you may see this as a numbers game in a budget, I see families. I see neighbors. I see loved ones. Let me let you in on a secret because there aren't any Republicans in this room. There are more Republican constituents of mine that are calling my office saying: We may have voted for Donald Trump, but we didn't vote for him to do this. This is cruel and unusual punishment to single out everyday Americans, making them go without. Also, billionaire donors and big corporations get tax breaks to make them more wealthy. Let's get back to doing the work for the American people who need us to do this work the most. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time both sides have remaining. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts has 12\3/4\ minutes remaining. The gentlewoman from Indiana has 12 minutes remaining. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I note the gentlewoman doesn't seem to have any other speakers. I was wondering whether she might want to lend us some of her time. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the Speaker Emerita, a powerful leader in the Democratic Caucus and for the country. Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his exuberant presentation of opposition to this budget. I thank him for all the amendments he proposed to improve upon it. Sadly, the Republicans didn't accept just one. Here we go again. The last time the Republicans had a majority in the House and Senate and President Trump in the White House, they passed a terrible bill that was a tax cut for the rich that gave 83 percent of the benefits to the wealthiest people, the top 1 percent in our country, and added $2 trillion to the national debt. This year, they are doubling down on that, $4 trillion to the national debt, and they call that fiscal sanity. They are doing it by steering taxpayer dollars from Medicaid to give additional tax breaks to billionaires and big corporations. People think of Medicaid sometimes as a poor children's program, and that would be sufficient justification for it all, but it is a middle- income benefit. Seniors who need long-term healthcare need Medicaid. Members should listen to their constituents and hear what they have to say about what it means to their fiscal well-being. Listen to constituents. The numbers are staggering. By voting for this cruel bill, they are betraying hardworking Americans by raising costs for all those already struggling to make ends meet. The President said he was going to reduce the cost of living. He didn't. He said he would reduce inflation. He didn't. {time} 1300 Mr. Speaker, indeed a vote for this budget is a vote against Medicaid, ripping away healthcare from children, people with disabilities, and seniors. It is a vote against SNAP, as the distinguished chairman indicated, taking food out of the mouths of babies. They do that with glee while President Trump and congressional Republicans are choosing to protect billionaires, by the way, who benefit from Medicaid with people cleaning their homes. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from California. Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, we are led and unified by Hakeem Jeffries. We are united in our commitment to work for working families. That is why I urge a ``no'' vote on this extreme measure, and I thank the distinguished chairman for his leadership. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article from the Economic Policy Institute titled: ``The House Republicans' plan to cut Medicaid to pay for tax cuts for the rich would slash incomes for the bottom 40 percent.'' The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts? There was no objection. [From the Economic Policy Institute, February 19, 2025] The House Republicans' Plan To Cut Medicaid To Pay for Tax Cuts for the Rich Would Slash Incomes for the Bottom 40 Percent (By Josh Bivens) The clearest legislative priority of the Trump administration and the Republican-led Congress is to keep taxes low for the richest households and corporations. Last week, House Republicans submitted a budget resolution that calls for $800 billion in cuts to Medicaid--the program that provides health insurance for low-income Americans--to help pay for extending the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), which primarily benefits the highest earners. President Trump endorsed the House plan earlier this morning, despite vowing yesterday to not cut Medicaid. Besides being unfair, the cost of this overall tax cut would be large enough to put huge stress on other parts of the economy, no matter how it is paid for. But the costliest way to pay for this would be to enact large cuts in spending programs like Medicaid that provide benefits to economically vulnerable families. These cuts would equal almost 11 percent of all Medicaid spending over the proposed time period. In a forthcoming report, we highlight just how damaging these Medicaid cuts would be for typical families. Health coverage is expensive in the U.S., and the value of Medicaid's coverage is equal to a huge share of the total income of poorer families. In fact, a family health insurance plan in private markets can cost more than what the bottom 20 percent of families earns in an entire year. Figure 1 below shows the House budget resolution's average cut to Medicaid benefits for the bottom 40 percent of the income distribution, expressed as a share of average income. It also shows how much extending the TCJA's expiring provisions would boost incomes for these groups and the top 1 percent. The upshot is that the bottom 40 percent would be unequivocally worse off: Proposed cuts to Medicaid would reduce incomes for the bottom 40 percent more than extending the TCJA would boost them--and the lowest-income households would fare the worst. Strikingly, this is true even as the full $880 billion in Medicaid cuts would only pay for about 20 percent of the total cost of the TCJA--other cuts and economic damage falling on non-rich families stemming from tax cuts for the rich would still be forthcoming. Meanwhile, the TCJA boosts the incomes of the top 1 percent significantly, while these households do not rely in any way on Medicaid. A table from our forthcoming report is reproduced below--it shows the cuts to Medicaid expressed as a share of total money income for the bottom 40 percent of the income distribution for each state. States with more generous Medicaid coverage will see larger cuts, while states that have been stingier to date with Medicaid will see smaller cuts. But in every single state, the proposed cuts are a disaster for the incomes of the bottom 40 percent. This policy trade-off of thousands of dollars in cuts for the bottom 40 percent in exchange for tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars in tax cuts for rich families crystallizes the Republican priorities. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, this article details how these cuts would hurt working families more than any tax relief that they might receive. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Stansbury). Ms. STANSBURY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to oppose this so-called budget resolution which is one of the greatest heists in American history as they loot the Treasury to give permanent tax breaks to billionaires at the expense of millions of Americans. We are talking about cuts to healthcare, Medicaid, and Medicare. Literally a quarter of a million New Mexicans will be unable to access care. [[Page H787]] There will be cuts to income and food assistance, billions of dollars that go to families to keep food on the table and a roof over their head and to give tax breaks to billionaires. They are going to cut vital programs that go to our lowest income and most vulnerable families. As a native New Mexican who grew up in a single-parent home in a low- income family, I know exactly what this means. These cuts are cruel. They are unnecessary. They are undemocratic, and they will blow a hole through our deficit spending by $4 trillion. This is not a budget resolution. This is a blueprint for suffering or, as Elon Musk put it over the weekend, the spoils of war. These guys don't care how many people they hurt or how many families are going to suffer. It is about power and greed, and the GOP is enabling them. We will not sit down and do it. We will not support this budget resolution. We will not give them one single vote. I will not be silenced because we will continue to fight. Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record a letter to Speaker Johnson, signed by eight Republicans, titled: ``Protecting American Communities in the Budget Reconciliation Process.'' The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Bice). Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts? There was no objection. Re Protecting American Communities in the Budget Reconciliation Process. Hon. Mike Johnson, Speaker, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Speaker Johnson: As Members of the Congressional Hispanic Conference, and those who represent sizeable Hispanic populations, we are writing to express our concerns regarding possible funding decisions stemming from the House Budget Resolution's committee instructions advanced on February 13, 2025. While we fully support efforts to rein in wasteful spending and deliver on President Trump's agenda, it is imperative that we do not slash programs that support American communities across our nation, nor underfund critical programs necessary to secure the border and keep our communities safe. Founded in 2003, the Congressional Hispanic Conference is the only Member organization of Hispanic Republicans in Congress and is committed to ensuring that the Republican party welcomes all who believe in faith, family, and the American Dream. Hispanic Americans played a decisive role in securing a Republican majority in 2025, having helped flip key districts, delivered historic gains in border communities, and put their faith in our party to fight for them. That trust wasn't given--it was earned. Moreover, the American people--as a whole--put their trust in us. People of all backgrounds cast a vote of confidence for our party. That is why we are eager to deliver on President Trump's historic mandate. We support the highest possible funding for border security to achieve the long-term border security agenda items by President Trump that we fully support. Collectively our members represent over half of the southern border and it is our constituents who have felt the brunt of the border crisis. We must fully fund and support efforts to: Complete the border wall, hire and retain border security personnel, and invest in border security technology. Increase ICE detention capacity, end catch-and-release policies, and enforce immigration law. Integrate and improve communications systems, as well as provide resources for rural sheriffs, police departments, and state and federal law enforcement agencies affected by the border crisis. We also fully stand behind efforts to: Reauthorize the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act to protect the Child Tax Credit, defend small businesses, and prevent reckless taxation. As we consider reconciliation cuts, we must be strategic. We need to uphold fiscal responsibility while ensuring that essential programs--programs that have empowered Americans to succeed--are not caught in the crossfire. The House Budget Resolution proposed $880 billion in cuts to programs under the jurisdiction of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, with Medicaid expected to bear the brunt of these reductions. Nearly 30 percent of Medicaid enrollees are Hispanic Americans, and for many families across the country, Medicaid is their only access to healthcare. Slashing Medicaid would have serious consequences, particularly in rural and predominantly Hispanic communities where hospitals and nursing homes are already struggling to keep their doors open. Moreover, the possibility of cutting Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) funding threatens hospitals that serve low-income and uninsured patients. Additionally, the House Committee on Education and the Workforce has been tasked with cutting $330 billion, where federal aid for higher education--such as Pell Grants--may be a target for reductions. Hispanic students make up a significant share of Pell Grant recipients, many of whom are first-generation college students striving for a better future for themselves, their families, and our nation. In the 2015-16 academic year alone, 82 percent of full-time Latino students relied on grants and loans, including Pell Grants, to afford college. If we are serious about empowering the next generation and strengthening our workforce, we must facilitate, and not undermine, opportunities that help students succeed. Finally, the House Committee on Agriculture has been directed to cut $230 billion. While we fully support efforts to eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse, we must ensure that assistance families rely on this programs--such as SNAP-- remain protected as nearly 22 percent of Hispanic families rely on this critical program as a temporary safety net during difficult times. Not to mention the support that SNAP provides to families of all backgrounds across our nation. Hispanic Americans stood with us because we stood up for them on the issues that matter: border security, economic opportunity, and a government that works for the people, not against them. We look forward to working with you and our colleagues on a responsible approach to these budget discussions where we can both eliminate government waste while ensuring we do not undermine programs that support working-class Americans. Hispanic Americans are the future of the Republican Party, and they are closely watching to see if we will govern in a way that honors their values and delivers results. Sincerely, Tony Gonzales; Monica De La Cruz; Juan Ciscomani; James Moylan; Nicole Malliotakis; David Valadao; Rob Bresnahan, Jr.; Kimberlyn King-Hinds Members of Congress. Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, this letter makes clear that they know that Medicaid, Pell grants, and SNAP will face harmful cuts if this budget passes. Madam Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to provide for consideration of an amendment to the budget resolution which prevents tax cuts for billionaires if Medicaid is cut by a single cent. Madam Speaker, 72 million Americans, including 30 million children, rely on Medicaid for critical healthcare and other lifesaving services. With this budget resolution, House Republicans are betraying the most vulnerable Americans to give tax breaks to billionaires. Representative Gray submitted an amendment that would prevent Republicans from betraying Medicaid recipients in order to give billionaires tax breaks. It shouldn't be controversial. I offered that amendment last night in the Rules Committee and, to my shock, every single one of my Republican colleagues voted against it, standing with billionaires over Medicaid recipients. I am now giving every House Republican a chance to go on the record. Voting ``yes'' on the previous question means my colleagues want to cut taxes for billionaires, even at the expense of vital Medicaid coverage. Voting ``no'' gives my colleagues an opportunity to ensure that Medicaid is protected. It is that simple. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment into the Record, along with any extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts? There was no objection. Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, to discuss our proposal, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Gray), the sponsor of this legislation. Mr. GRAY. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Speaker, I rise today conflicted about what is happening in our government and across the country. Like many Americans, I find myself frustrated with government that doesn't work, lines that are too long, services that are too hard to navigate, and roads that don't get fixed. This shouldn't be a partisan issue. All of us here today should be in favor of making our government work better and strengthening programs that our constituents rely upon. In fact, some of my Republican colleagues, led by Congressman Tony Gonzales, wrote in a letter to Speaker Johnson that the proposed cuts to Medicaid within this budget would have serious consequences, particularly in rural and [[Page H788]] Hispanic communities where hospitals and nursing homes are already struggling to keep their doors open. One of those communities where hospitals are struggling to stay open is mine in California's Central Valley. Over 450,000 people in my congressional district rely on Medicaid for their health coverage. The Central Valley is also experiencing a healthcare shortage, forcing people to drive across the country, across county lines, across the State, waiting for hours to see a provider. These proposed cuts to Medicaid only stand to worsen the crisis. Let's be clear. These cuts wouldn't just impact individuals covered by Medicaid. In my congressional district, 59 percent of individuals are covered by California's Medicaid program. That means that doctors and hospitals in my district rely on Medicaid for nearly two-thirds of their revenue. Without that revenue, these providers would not be able to keep their doors open. In fact, Madam Speaker, there is an entire county I represent with a population of 162,000 people who have no hospital at all to go to because it had to close. I submitted an amendment to this resolution to ask a simple question. Is it such a priority to fund tax cuts for individuals with over $1 billion in net worth that we would enact devastating cuts to healthcare for rural and low-income communities? This proposal would steal from the poor to give to the rich. Even if my colleagues don't think that is a problem, Madam Speaker, this literally makes healthcare coverage worse for every single person living in rural America. I have spent the majority of my career in public service, working to make healthcare better, both more accessible and more affordable. This proposed budget does the opposite. My amendment to the proposed budget would prevent consideration of any legislation that would result in cuts to Medicaid in order to provide such tax cuts. Unfortunately, that amendment was blocked from consideration by members of the Rules Committee last night. To my Republican colleagues who agreed that we must protect Medicaid, I hope they will join me in support of this amendment should I have the opportunity to offer it here. Madam Speaker, this is my commonsense solution to honor the trust our constituents put in us when they sent us to Congress. I urge my colleagues to oppose the previous question and support this amendment. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, the ranking member has discussed a number of votes taken at the Rules Committee markup last night. Once again, the budget is the first step in the process, not the last. Many of these amendments will have the opportunity to be debated thoughtfully and ad nauseam, I have no doubt, in the authorizing committees. The Democrats are speaking fear, not facts. Saying something that is false over and over again does not make it true. These amendments can be given consideration in the committees of jurisdiction. That is the process of regular order. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I say to the gentlewoman that Republican Members are raising concerns about these cuts. Maybe we can share some of those press clippings with her. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen). Mr. COHEN. Madam Speaker, this budget is about the millionaires, the trillionaires, the people earning over $400,000 a year, and giving them a $4 trillion tax cut over the next 10 years. It is not about working people. It is about hurting working people, hurting the poor, hurting people with disabilities, and hurting children. What this Congress is looking at doing, because of Musk and Trump and the Republican colleagues here that I share this floor with, is cutting programs that help the public. In October, Elon Musk incorporated United States of America, Inc., in Texas. What that means is it shows his mentality. He thinks he owns this government. He has bought it. He has been given it. He doesn't care about anybody else. He is the only stockholder. America is not a stockholder. Americans are the people who give him the money to give it to the trillionaires and billionaires who were first in President Trump's inaugural crowd. They were first in the crowd. They are first in his mind. They are first in his heart. They are his people. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Madam Speaker, I will reiterate that saying something false over and over again doesn't make it true. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I say to the gentlewoman the facts do matter. Her Members are complaining about the cuts in the Republican budget. Read them. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute in the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Dexter). Ms. DEXTER. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this rule which allows for consideration of the Republicans' extreme budget that slashes funding for vital programs like Medicaid, SNAP, and Federal housing assistance to bankroll $4.5 trillion in tax breaks for billionaires and big corporations. Last week, I got a devastating call from Susan who lives in Sandy, Oregon. She and her husband worked all their lives and saved diligently for retirement but had a single accident that wiped out their savings. They are now in their seventies and rely on Medicaid, SNAP, and utility assistance to just make ends meet each month. The legislation in front of us today would rip these benefits from Susan and her husband, denying them access to healthcare, forcing them to ration their food, and jeopardizing their ability to remain in their home. For what? To line the pockets of the ultrawealthy, to pad the bottom line of corporations already raking in profits. I offered six commonsense amendments to this bill to safeguard critical programs for people like Susan and so many Oregonians like her. Republicans rejected every single one of my amendments. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired. Ms. DEXTER. Madam Speaker, as has been true all along, they have no interest in protecting America's middle class. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman is no longer recognized. Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, may I inquire of the gentlewoman how many more speakers she has? I can't remember the last time she had one. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close. Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts has 2\1/4\ minutes remaining. Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Speaker, a majority of Americans now say that Donald Trump is doing a bad job at handling the economy. I don't blame them. Prices are going up on everything in large part because of Trump's tariffs. Meanwhile, wages for workers have not kept pace with inflation for decades. Home ownership is slipping out of reach for more and more people. I will end this debate where we began. Whose side are my Republican colleagues on? Talk is cheap, Madam Speaker. This place runs on hot air from corrupt politicians whose only care in the world is where their next campaign check comes from. Last night in the Rules Committee, Democrats gave Republicans a chance to show whose side they are on. Every single one of them voted against protecting Medicaid so they could give tax breaks to billionaires. That is how they voted. Every single one of them voted against protecting the child tax credit so they could give tax cuts to billionaires. Every single one of them voted against protecting food assistance for hungry families so they could give tax breaks to billionaires. The gentlewoman can claim whatever she wants. The truth is this budget betrays the middle class in favor of tax giveaways for billionaires. It gives trillions in handouts to the ultrawealthy, billionaires, and greedy corporations to the tune of $314,266 each every year for the top 0.1 percent. [[Page H789]] That is an average. Some of them will get millions. That is a bigger giveaway to the ultrarich than most people make in a year. To pay for it, they are stealing from the American people. They are stealing from Americans. They are betraying the people who voted for them. This is the betrayal on a scale I don't think we have ever seen before. Madam Speaker, I am going to fight to expose it and to stop it. I have said this over and over again. We need tax relief for workers, not the ultrarich. We need to preserve Social Security and Medicare, not gut them to pay for corporate handouts. We should protect Medicaid and food benefits for working families because we know these are programs that people rely on and need when times get tough. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, you can shut me up but you can't silence the voice of the American people. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is no longer recognized. {time} 1315 Mrs. HOUCHIN. Madam Speaker, despite what Democrats may claim, the American people know the Biden-Harris administration caused enormous damage to our economy, weakened our national security, allowed millions of illegal immigrants and deadly fentanyl to flood across our southern border, and crippled American energy independence. That is exactly why voters rejected their failed leadership in the last election. Once again, this resolution does not cut a single specific program or benefit. The Democrats are speaking fear, not facts, and saying something over and over again that is false does not make it true. Democrats have told these lies before and were proven wrong. The Democrats want to continue 4 more years of Bidenomics. We want to put us on a path to prosperity. These are the same people claiming that there is no waste, fraud, or abuse in Washington. This resolution will begin a process that sets a fiscal framework to meet the agenda the American people demanded in November. Let's talk about some of their claims, that this is a handout to billionaires. It is their party that abandoned the middle class by spending like crazy. Not extending the 2017 Trump tax cuts would be the ultimate betrayal of the middle class. The average taxpayer in my district, in the Ninth District of Indiana, would see a 26 percent tax hike if the tax cuts the Democrats oppose expire. A family of four making $67,000, the median income in my district, would be a $1,289 tax increase. More than 6 million people were lifted out of poverty under Republican tax reform, dropping the poverty rate to 10.5 percent, the lowest in U.S. history. They claim this budget slashes food assistance. This resolution makes no changes to current law, no cuts in benefits, zero. They claim costs will go up. We will reverse Biden's spending spree and bend the curve on mandatory spending that is driving our debt. Inflation skyrocketed 21 percent under the Biden administration. That is why 77 million Americans voted for President Trump, to fix the economy and rein in Washington's waste, fraud, abuse, and reckless spending. Let's go with facts, not fear. This resolution doesn't say the words ``SNAP'' or ``Medicaid'' or ``school lunch'' once. We are cutting waste, fraud, and abuse for people who are here legally. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act helped people get off SNAP, which is a good thing. A GAO report last year showed improper payments could be costing the Federal Government more than $500 billion annually. I am not here to fight with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. I am here to fight on behalf of the American people, and that is exactly what we are going to continue to do. In the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, my friends want to scare the American people into thinking that this is a tax cut for billionaires to detract from the fact that the 2017 tax cuts under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act have been extremely successful. Let's look at what has made it a success. By every conceivable measure, American workers and the economy were better off. Americans earned bigger paychecks, unemployment for every group was at a historic low, and poverty dropped to its lowest level in history. The 2017 Trump tax cuts lowered tax rates for all Americans. In fact, the lowest earning individuals gained the most benefit. The bottom 20 percent of earners, those with incomes up to $26,000, saw their Federal tax rate fall to the lowest point in 40 years. Earnings under $100,000 received an average cut of 16 percent, while the share of taxes paid by the top 1 percent increased. This is not simply a tax cut for the rich. Finally, if these tax cuts expire, it will devastate our Nation's families, workers, and small business owners. The average taxpayer would see a 22 percent tax hike, meaning on average they will pay $1,695 more in taxes; 40 million families will see their child tax credit cut in half; and 26 million small businesses would be hit with a 43.4 percent top tax rate. This is over 20 points higher than what businesses pay in Communist China. Because of House Republicans and President Trump, American workers enjoyed the fastest wage growth in a decade. This spread to Americans across the income distribution with lower-wage workers experiencing 50 percent higher wage growth than high-income workers. Higher wages led to a rapid growth in household income. Just 2 years after enactment of the tax cuts, real median household income rose by over $5,000. In total, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act's pro-growth policies helped contribute to 3 percent growth in 2018 and 2.6 percent growth in 2019, well above CBO's pre-Tax Cuts and Jobs Act projections of 2.2 percent and 1.7 percent respectively. Meanwhile, we have seen what Bidenflation has cost American families. Again, this budget resolution does not cut a single specific program or benefit. The budget resolution sets a framework. It is a first step toward delivering on the America First agenda and getting our country back on track. We will secure our border. We will rebuild the American economy. We will unleash American energy and safeguard our financial future. Madam Speaker, 77 million Americans voted for this agenda, and it is our job to deliver on those promises. I look forward to moving these bills out of the House this week. I ask my colleagues to join me in voting ``yes'' on the previous question and ``yes'' on the rule. The material previously referred to by Mr. McGovern is as follows: An Amendment to H. Res. 161 Offered By Mr. McGovern of Massachusetts Strike all after Sec. 2 and insert the following: Sec. 3. At any time after adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 14) establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2025 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2026 through 2034. The first reading of the concurrent resolution shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the concurrent resolution are waived. General debate shall not exceed three hours, with two hours of general debate confined to the congressional budget equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Budget or their respective designees and one hour of general debate on the subject of economic goals and policies equally divided and controlled by Representative Schweikert of Arizona and Representative Beyer of Virginia or their respective designees. After general debate the concurrent resolution shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. The amendment specified in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be considered as adopted in the House and in the Committee of the Whole. The concurrent resolution, as amended, shall be considered as read. No further amendment shall be in order except the amendment specified in section 4 of this resolution. Such amendment may be offered only by Representative Gray of California or a designee, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order against the amendment in section 4 are waived. After the conclusion of [[Page H790]] consideration of the concurrent resolution for further amendment, the Committee shall rise and report the concurrent resolution, as amended, to the House with such further amendment as may have been adopted. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the concurrent resolution and amendments thereto to adoption without intervening motion except amendments offered by the chairman of the Committee on the Budget pursuant to section 305(a)(5) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to achieve mathematical consistency. The concurrent resolution shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question of its adoption. Sec. 4.The amendment referred to in section 3 is as follows: Add at the end of title V the following: SEC.___.POINT OF ORDER AGAINST MEDICAID CUTS TO FUND TAX BREAKS FOR THE WEALTHY. It shall not be in order in the House of Representatives to consider any bill or joint resolution, or amendment thereto or conference report thereon, that would-- (1) reduce tax liability for any taxable year beginning after 2025, compared to taxable years beginning during 2025, for any individual taxpayer whose net worth exceeds $1,000,000,000; and (2) reduce coverage for individuals enrolled under the Medicaid program under title XIX of the Social Security Act, shift the responsibility for funding such program or for coverage under such program to States, or include a net reduction in Federal funding for such program. Mrs. HOUCHIN. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous question. The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it. Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question are postponed. ____________________ |