[0:00]or their respective design. And two, one motion to recommit. Section 8, upon transmission to the Senate of a message
[0:09]that the House has passed HR 4405, House Resolution 581 shall be laid on the table. >> The gentleoman from North Carolina is
[0:20]recognized for one hour. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. For the purpose of debate only, I yield a customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from
[0:30]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
[0:40]purpose of debate only. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. >> Without objection.
[0:52]>> Thank you again, Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of the rule and the underlying legislation. Yesterday, the rules committee met and
[1:02]produced a rule HR res 879 providing for the House's consideration of eight separate measures. The rule provides
[1:12]closed rules for consideration of SJRES 80, HJRES 130, HJRES 131 with one hour of debate
[1:23]equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on natural resources or their respective design for each joint
[1:33]resolution. The rule provides each such joint resolution one motion to recommmit. Further, the rule provides closed rules
[1:44]for the consideration of HR1 1949 and HR 3109 with one hour debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee
[1:54]on energy and commerce or their respective design for each bill. The the rule provides each bill with a motion to recommmit. Additionally, the rule
[2:04]provides for consideration of age conres 58 under a closed rule with one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of
[2:15]the committee on financial services or their respective design. The rule also provides for consideration of HR5214 and HR5107
[2:25]under closed rules with one-hour debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on oversight and government reform or their respective design on
[2:36]each bill. The rule provides one motion to recommit for each bill. Finally, the rule tables House Resolution 581
[2:46]upon the transmission of a message to the Senate that the House has passed HR4405. Mr. Speaker, after over 40 days of the
[2:57]Democrat government shutdown, the House has returned to regular order and this majority is continuing to push forward with the America First agenda, the
[3:07]American people's agenda. These uh leg all of these pieces of legislation we're considering today are in alignment with the American people's
[3:18]demand and President Trump's executive orders that we maintain a robust posture of American energy dominance. You know, Mr. Speaker, our Democrat colleagues
[3:29]have developed a strong proclivity to thumb their noses at the development of energy that comes from American soil. One must wonder why they choose to do that. They pay lip service to
[3:41]environmental protections and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but it's just a fact that American oil and American natural gas are cleaner and more
[3:51]environmentally friendly than any of our global competitors. Why would they seed our dominance on the global stage in favor of hostile actors who lack even
[4:01]the most basic environmental protections? We are blessed as a nation to have vast repositories of natural resources that we can draw from and utilize
[4:12]accordingly. When we ignore the opportunities to harness these resources for our benefit, we deny ourselves the opportunity to grow more self-sufficient.
[4:23]HR5214 and HR5107, two measures reported from the oversight committee, focus on restoring law and order in our nation's capital city, a
[4:35]city that ought to be a model for the rest of the nation to follow. >> Does the gentle lady reserve?
[4:45]>> Uh, Miss I'm going on, Mr. Speaker. HR 5214 would revoke cashless bail in the District of Columbia and would require
[4:54]mandatory pre-trial and postconviction detention for crimes of violence and other dangerous crimes. HR5107 would repeal the comprehensive policing
[5:05]and justice reform amendment act of 2022 enacted by the District of Columbia Council. This act targeted police officers in DC for simply doing their
[5:17]duties, and it led to over 1600 officers being removed from the city's force. Thanks to President Trump's efforts, the streets in DC are safer, and we have the
[5:28]opportunity through these two measures to add to that progress. Finally, Mr. Speaker, we have H. Conrad 58, a resolution denouncing the horrors of
[5:39]socialism. Most of us here in this body recognize how dangerous the plague of socialism really is. We understand its history of failure and oppression.
[5:50]Throughout history, this ideology has collapsed into the most brutal of dictatorships, communist regimes, and outright to totalitarian rule.
[6:01]Many are quick to avert their eyes and cover their ears when presented with facts about the horrors of socialism. How many individuals across the world have suffered and died because of it?
[6:12]This resolution will put everyone in this body on record. The American people will see who espouses this costic ideology and those who reject it. I reserve. Mr. Speaker,
[6:23]>> the gentleoman from North Carolina reserves. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized. >> Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the gentle lady from North Carolina for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. And I yield myself such time
[6:35]as I may consume. The gentleman is recognized. >> Mr. Speaker, Americans are working more and more for less and less. Almost every day I speak with young people who can't afford to start a family, can't buy a
[6:47]house, can't get ahead. I hear it from seniors who are struggling to survive on fixed incomes. I I see it uh with my own eyes. Moms and and dads putting items
[6:57]back on the shelves in the grocery store because they can't afford them. parents who can't go back to work because they can't afford uh child care. People whose people whose health insurance premiums
[7:08]are doubling and tripling because this majority has failed to act. During election season, we heard from Trump and Republicans who swore up and down they would bring down prices. They promised
[7:19]the American people they would reverse inflation and focus like a laser on affordability. And they have broken that promise. They have betrayed the American people. And if you want more evidence of that, look
[7:31]at the bills on the floor today. More garbage, more culture war crap, more bills written by this Republican majority of, by, and for the billionaire class. Republicans moved heaven and
[7:43]earth to give tax breaks to the rich and powerful. That got done in a nancond. But if you're a regular person staring down next year's healthcare premium hikes and deciding whether to pay a
[7:54]thousand bucks more or put food on the table, the answer you get back from Republicans is let them eat cake. We are barreling toward another shutdown at the end of January. We could have spent the
[8:05]last two months working on passing the nine appropriations bills Republicans still need to pass to stop another shutdown and instead they went on a
[8:14]taxpayer funded paid vacation for eight weeks. And let me just say because we are debating a rule to consider these eight bills. This rule sucks. Eight
[8:25]closed rules, no amendments, no changes allowed on the floor. Take it or leave it. And if you're keeping count at home, that's 80 completely closed rules this
[8:35]Congress. The most ever in a year. And I want to correct the gentle lady because last night in the rules committee, she said five of these bills didn't receive
[8:45]any amendments. That's because she didn't ask for any. And when you don't send an amendment dead send an amendment deadline, everyone knows you're doing a closed rule. And I just want to say to
[8:57]my Republican colleagues, you have been complicit in these 80 closed rules nearly nine out of 10 times. You, the majority party, have not been allowed to
[9:07]bring amendments to the floor. You're getting blocked by your own leadership time and time again. How does that feel? Again, this is a terrible rule and I urge a no vote and I reserve my time.
[9:19]>> Gentleman from Massachusetts reserves. The gentle lady from North Carolina is recognized. Uh, thank you, Mr. Speaker. While it's true there have been 80
[9:29]closed measures, this number needs context. 12 of the closed rules were in the rules package, which passed two weeks before
[9:39]the 119th rules committee even organized to begin meeting. Additionally, 25 measures were CRAAS.
[9:48]They don't allow for an amendment. 16 were bills that received no amendments, meaning 41 measures were closed by
[10:00]definition. It's also important that four of the closed rules are duplicates from a previous failed rule. So in reality,
[10:11]only 27 measures have been closed by discretion of the committee. Additionally, the rules committee under Republican control has simply been more
[10:22]productive, producing more total rules than our colleagues ever did. For example, during the most recent Democrat control congresses, the rules committee produced
[10:34]127 total rules in the 116th Congress and 163 in the 117th Congress. Contrast
[10:46]this to the 200 total rules in the Republican le 118th Congress. For the 119th, we're on pace to once again
[10:55]produce nearly 200 rules for the Congress. So, um, Mr. Speaker, we're doing our job. We're not closing out
[11:05]debate. We're having plenty of debate. There's plenty of opportunities for our colleagues to offer amendments. Thank you. I yield. I reserve. >> Gentle lady reserves. Gentleman from
[11:16]Massachusetts is recognized. >> Mr. Speaker, a lot of words to justify um the most closed Congress in history, the most authoritarian Congress in history. It would make Putin blush. Mr.
[11:28]Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to provide for consideration of HR6074, which would extend the Affordable Care Act enhanced premium tax credits for
[11:38]three years through 2028. We are in the midst of a healthcare crisis. More than 20 million Americans who get their health care on the ACA exchanges are going to see their premiums skyrocket
[11:50]next year. That includes 250,000 people in my home state of Massachusetts who are paying lower premiums and co-pays due to these tax credits which Democrats
[12:00]created in 2021 and are set to expire at the end of the year. Let me read you some of the stories from folks in my district. quote, "I I just received my letter and my monthly costs have gone
[12:11]from $1,287 to $3,026 for next year. As a working family with a daughter who has an autoimmune disease, we are struggling and I'm
[12:22]working 50 plus hours a week just to pay the insurance." End quote. Another one, and I quote, "With the Health Connector, I was paying $264 per month. Acceptable
[12:32]seeing that I am healthy but not young. Without the advanced premium tax credit, my monthly premium will be just over $800 per month. I can't and I won't pay
[12:43]that. I will go without. This is happening across the country. And for the sake of millions of Americans and their healthcare, I urge my Republican colleagues to support this bill and vote
[12:54]no on the previous question. Mr. 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. And I
[13:05]>> without objection, gentleman reserves, gentle lady from North Carolina is recognized. >> Uh thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman
[13:15]from Utah, Mr. Owens. >> Gentleman is recognized for two minutes. Thank you, chairwoman, for yielding. Uh Mr. Speaker, uh after blatant
[13:26]obstruction and prolonged delay on the part of congressional Democrats for over 40 days, the House has returned to regular order. It's good to be back and it's about time. Today, we're here to advance eight separate measures that
[13:38]measure that meet the demands of the American people and strengthen President Trump's successful America first agenda. My my constituents voted for the
[13:46]dissolution of the Biden bure bure bureaucratic barrage and for the safety of their communities from bolstering American energy dominance to upholding law and order strengthening the criminal
[13:58]justice system in the nation's capital to rejecting the failed ideology of socialism house uh represent Republicans continue to deliver measurable and substantial
[14:09]progress. I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the eight underlining pieces of legislators legislation. Let's continue delivering wins for the American people. Thank you. I yield back. >> Gentleman yields back. Gentle lady from
[14:20]North Carolina reserves. Gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized. >> Mr. Speaker, shortly on the floor, uh, Republicans are about to finally bring up the Massie counter bill to release
[14:31]the Epstein files. We had to drag this leadership by here kicking and screaming. and I appreciate their sudden and stunning and stunning change of heart on this issue, but I want to state
[14:43]for the record that uh the Republican leadership has tried to block this day for months and months and months. And I also want to state for the record that Donald Trump could release these files
[14:54]on his own today, right now, right this very second. He doesn't need to wait for Congress to pass the bill. Uh he could release the files himself, but he won't.
[15:05]That is why we are here because he refuses to act. Meanwhile, the Republican majority has blocked transparency at every turn. They stonewalled in committee. The general
[15:17]lady from North Carolina and every Republican on the rules committee voted nine times to block my amendment to release the Epstein files. Nine times.
[15:28]Republicans were so afraid of my amendment that Speaker Johnson shut down the rules committee and sent us home early in July. And then he refused to swear in a new member of Congress for
[15:39]weeks because she promised to be the 218th signature to force this bill forward. Only four four Republicans signed the discharge petition. Every
[15:50]single Democrat signed on. In a few moments, I'm going to yield time to Representative Massie, who has been the Republican leader of this effort in the House alongside Representative Connor on
[16:02]the Democratic side. And here's why I'm doing that. This bill should be getting a full hour of debate on the floor. But Speaker Johnson, I guess at Donald Trump's direction, is throwing every
[16:14]procedural gim gimmick at the wall to see what sticks. and he's trying to limit debate on the floor because for some reason he is very very afraid of talking about this. So that's why I'm
[16:26]donating a significant chunk of my time to members who have been silenced by the speaker for the terrible crime of demanding truth and transparency. Now,
[16:37]if I had to guess, most Republicans will probably vote in favor of releasing the files. But they're not voting yes because their conscience changed. They're voting yes because Donald Trump
[16:48]says tells most of them how to vote and he realized he's lost on this one. He says the people who support this bill quote betrayed the entire Republican
[16:57]party. Really? Really? How is accountability for a pedophile something he something Donald Trump campaigned on?
[17:07]How is that now a betrayal? This was his issue, his idea. He ran on releasing the files. And by the way, to those who say that Biden should have released these files, let me just
[17:19]address that right now. You're right. He should have, but he didn't make it his number one issue. And he's not the president right now. Donald Trump is. He could have released the files at any
[17:30]point over the last 11 months. But he has not. Republicans have had months to sign the discharge petition. They had months to bring this bill to the floor.
[17:41]But this leadership has chosen obstruction. They don't want to pass this bill. They don't even want to talk about it on the House floor. And so that's why debate matters. And with that, I reserve my time.
[17:52]>> Gentle from Massachusetts reserves. The gentle lady from North Carolina is recognized. >> Uh thank you, Mr. Speaker.
[18:01]Let's be clear. Republicans don't oppose the full transparency of the Epstein files.
[18:11]We embrace the oversight committee's task of doing just that. We embrace Reverend Representative Massiey's
[18:21]legislation here today by putting it up for a vote under suspension. I'll be voting for it. We already have a House
[18:31]investigation that carries the full force of law and there's no opposition to respecting the majority's wishes to get this cottified into law. Let's get
[18:43]to it. Let's get the vote and end these false debates, uh, straw man arguments and nonsequators.
[18:52]We tried to pass this bill last week, but Democrats wouldn't agree to doing so. Let's vote now. Democrats should
[19:03]stop, listen, and take yes for an answer. I reserve. >> Gentle lady reserves. Gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized. >> Mr. Speaker, the gentle lady doesn't
[19:13]oppose this. Um, boy, you have a funny way of showing it. I gave the gentle lady nine opportunities in the rules committee to bring this measure to the floor. Nine opportunities.
[19:25]And every time I brought up an amendment, she voted it down. Nine opportunities. So to say that somehow this is always
[19:34]what you wanted. Uh I don't know. I it that doesn't pass the smell test. Mr. Speaker, I yield three minutes to the gentleman from California, Mr. Connor.
[19:44]>> Gentleman's recognized for three minutes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership over the last five months to make sure that this bill came to the floor. Thank
[19:55]you also to Don Sison for his leadership and understanding of all the rules to make this possible. Now, as we are here today, I saw on CNN that the president
[20:06]is meeting with the Saudi prince. You know what America first means to me? How about meeting with the survivors? How about making sure that America's
[20:17]girls are not being raped? That's what it means to be America first, not going and just meeting with Saudi princes. You know, I am so honored to be here and
[20:28]working together with Congressman Thomas Massie, who's shown so much courage and principle, and I'm so honored to be here next to Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor
[20:39]Green and Congresswoman Nancy Mace. I was telling someone they said, "What did you learn through this process?" I said, "Sometimes we have to see people not
[20:49]just through their caricature." And I had caricatures of Representative Green and Representative Massie and
[20:58]Representative Mace. But what I saw is they cared as Americans and human beings and they stood with courage and they
[21:09]looked at this not from politics. They looked at this as what is right. And I'm proud today to be a member of Congress. I'm proud to work with them. And I'm
[21:19]proud of what we are showing this country is possible. That if we actually care about American values, maybe we can overcome some of the bitter divides in
[21:30]this country. If we don't care about just getting the credit and maybe work together, we could actually care about forgotten and abandoned Americans like
[21:40]the survivors that testified today. I was so moved by their testimony. How can you hear their testimony as all of us have heard, see their tears, see them
[21:52]holding up photos at the age of 14 and think that they're not telling the truth. This is not politics. This is humanity. Sometimes we get into these
[22:02]chambers and we forget what happened of how we grew up. Most of us, we grew up, we went to barbecue, we went to little league games. We went to church or
[22:13]temple. We didn't fly around in private jets and go to a rape island. We didn't buy off politicians and tell them to
[22:22]keep quiet. we didn't think that it was normal to abuse or rape young girls. And then they're saying, "Well, we don't
[22:31]know if they were 18 or 22." Come on. It's rotten. Then they say, "Well, just care about the price of eggs. Just care about the price of healthcare." You know what's more important than that? American
[22:43]values. These rich, greedy men abused American values. They abused what's sacred about this country. They abused what built
[22:54]this country. >> I yield the gentleman additional minute >> and it is time that they're going to have a reckoning. The Epstein class is going to go. And the reason they're
[23:05]going to go is because the progressive left and the MAGA right and everyone in between is finally waking up against this rotten system. And when people are united, when people work across the
[23:17]aisle, amazing things can happen because the American people are kind and good and decent. So I it's an honor, Congressman Massie, to have worked with you, and I salute particularly the
[23:28]courage of Marjorie Taylor Glean, Lauren Boowbert, and Nancy Mace. None of this would have been possible without their courage in standing up uh on the petition and for what they did. I yield back.
[23:40]>> Gentlemen yields back. Gentleman from Massachusetts reserves. Gentle lady from North Carolina is recognized. >> Mr. Speaker,
[23:53]at the top of this page that I have, I've written Democrat hypocrisy on Epstein.
[24:02]That's what we're hearing today. I'm proud to be a member of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee. and I'm proud to have supported the full investigation into
[24:14]the Epstein files on that committee. Furthermore, I'm proud to have supported formalizing that investigation by taking the decisive step in directing that
[24:25]investigation by a special rule provided by the rules committee. This gave the oversight investigation the full weight of the House of Representatives behind
[24:36]the committee's existing subpoena power. Very important in this debate. Let's get things straight here. In just a matter
[24:46]of hours, we're going to get to vote on the Massie bill. But that won't preclude the existing House Oversight and Government Reform Committee's
[24:56]investigation in any way. And that's a great thing because that investigation is yielding results. We now know that one of Jeffrey Epstein's closest confidants
[25:07]was apparently Larry Summers, a cabinet member in the Clinton administration. We now know that a Democrat member in this
[25:15]body, Stacy Plasket, was colluding with Jeffrey Epstein in real time during a
[25:23]hearing. And the subject matter, how to take down President Trump. Mr. Speaker, you can't make this stuff up. We now
[25:34]know that Epstein himself hated President Trump. It's in black and white. We now know that one of the chief Epstein victims stated that President
[25:44]Trump never acted inappropriately. And don't forget that oversight investigation specifically subpoenaed Bill and Hillary Clinton for their ties
[25:55]to Jeffrey Epstein. They haven't been quick to step into the breach and exonerate themselves, have they? But the truth will continue to come out as it
[26:06]has because of Republicans and a current Republicanled House Oversight and Government Reform Committee
[26:16]investigation, one that already carries the full force of law. Let's see where that leads. I reserve. >> Gentle lady reserves. Gentleman from
[26:26]Massachusetts is recognized. >> Mr. Mr. Speaker, um the gentle lady says that um just trust her and the Republican leadership. Um and I got to
[26:36]tell you, I can't after what I saw unfold over these last several months. Um obstruction and using every maneuver possible to avoid this moment where
[26:46]we're what we're having here today. Um and I got to want to say that for the record, I you know, it doesn't matter whether there's Republicans or Democrats or independents that are implicated in these files. Uh we believe in
[26:58]accountability for everybody who abuses young women. Um and um and we believe in justice. Um and that is kind of what's uniting u many of us on this, you know,
[27:08]on this side of the aisle here today. And I just want to again I want to thank Representative Connor for his leadership. I want to thank Representative Massie, Representative Green, and Representative Mace for their
[27:19]courage um and for their willingness to stand up for what is right. we don't agree on very much. Uh but we do agree that there ought to be accountability when young women are abused when they
[27:30]when and and and so that's what this is about. So, Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Kentucky, M. Mr. Massie, control the
[27:41]remainder of my time. >> Without objection, gentleman from Kentucky is recognized. >> Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how much time I have?
[27:52]You have 17 minutes remaining. >> I yield myself two minutes. >> Gentleman is recognized for two minutes. >> Mr. Speaker, today is an extraordinary
[28:01]day in this chamber. If my colleagues will vote for this measure, we'll see justice triumph over politics. Truth will triumph over deception and
[28:10]obfuscation. Transparency will triumph over dark money. Partisanship will fall away to bipartisanship.
[28:20]grassroots. The people will reclaim the people's house with this vote. It's going to be a victory for survivors. Not just survivors of the Epstein sex
[28:32]trafficking scandal, the thousand survivors that exist. Some of them are victims. They're no longer alive. Some have committed suicide. They
[28:42]share one thing in common. Their youth was robbed from them. Much of their lives were robbed from them. But they're claiming it back. We're going to help them claim that back. But it's not just
[28:54]a victory today if this vote prevails for those survivors. It's a victory for every person, man or woman, boy or girl,
[29:04]who's been victimized sexually in this country. Anybody who's been a victim of sexual assault or maybe they've been victimized by a family member. Maybe it's not a billionaire, but they're all
[29:15]waiting and watching to see what we do today. They're wondering, "If I go to mom or dad, will anything happen? If I go to
[29:26]the sheriff, will anything happen?" Well, we have a chance today to make something happen. Something that's not happened. Something that should have happened decades ago. And that is to get
[29:38]justice for these victims and survivors and transparency for America. That's what this vote is about today. And I reserve the balance of my time.
[29:50]>> Gentleman from Kentucky reserves. A gentle lady from North Carolina is recognized. >> I reserve. >> Gentle lady reserves. Gentleman from Kentucky is recognized.
[29:59]I I now yield uh five minutes to the gentleoman from Georgia, Mrs. Green. The >> gentle lady from Georgia is recognized for five minutes.
[30:10]>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I proudly rise today in a bipartisan effort to release the Epstein files finally after five
[30:20]administrations have covered it up. Earlier today, I attended the press conference where the survivors, they're not victims, the survivors of Jeffrey
[30:31]Epstein's sexual abuse and sex trafficking told their stories. And they told stories about how it started back in
[30:43]1991, 1996, and they continued on through the decades. And they told stories about how they told someone and tried to get help.
[30:54]They told the FBI and they weren't listened to and they told law enforcement and no one did anything. And these women don't just number a few.
[31:05]These women number around 1,000 women. And they are victims of something that's unthinkable. And this should have never ever
[31:16]happened. This was the biggest fight I think I've seen in Washington DC. This is my fifth year here. And this was a fight that we should have never had to wage. It should have been the easiest
[31:28]thing for every single member of Congress. It should have been the easiest thing for the speaker of the house. It should have been the easiest thing for the president of the United
[31:39]States to release all the information, every single file on behalf of these American women. These American women
[31:49]aren't rich, powerful elites. They do not have someone paying for their airline tickets or paying for their trips or paying for their expenses every time they try to do something to get
[32:00]this get this information out. These are your average Americans. And you want to know what the Epstein file files
[32:09]represent? The cover up represents to average Americans. It represents the failures of the federal government and
[32:18]Congress to the American people. And that is that is what people rose up about in 2024. They wanted and demanded transparency
[32:28]from their government and for Americans finally to be put first. And today with this vote, we are finally putting these
[32:39]victims and these survivors of Jeffrey Epstein and the cabal of rich powerful elites that expands not just here in the United States of America, but to other
[32:50]countries as well. We're putting them last. And that is exactly what Americans want. You see, for far too long, far too
[33:00]long, Americans have been put last. And they're sick of it. They're sick and tired of it. And this is why they don't trust Congress. This is why they don't
[33:11]trust the government. And here's the problem. All of these women, women who have suffered in shame for years and
[33:20]years and years, women who were terrified, women who were intimidated, women who were threatened,
[33:31]just like Virginia Guay, and now she's dead. And these women should have never faced that for this information to come out. And we,
[33:42]especially the four Republican members of the House ofi House of Representatives, we should have never faced intimidation and threats for us to
[33:53]get this vote to come to the floor. Never forget there were four Thomas Massie, myself, Nancy Mace, and Lauren Boowbert. We had to sign a discharge
[34:04]petition and we had to fight through intimidation and we had to endure it for months to push that discharge petition finally to
[34:14]218 to get this vote to come out. This is what the American people are sick of and rightfully so. Now, where
[34:24]does this go from here? The question will remain, will the Department of Justice release all the information Will a judge in New York release the
[34:34]information? Will the CIA release the information? And will foreign governments release their information? Or will this continue
[34:44]after this vote today be a cover up? a cover up of the rich, powerful elites that bond together in sex and human trafficking abuse
[34:55]and all types of global business that enriches them but never serves Americans. The American people will know and the victims, actually the survivors of
[35:07]Jeffrey Epstein, will know because they know the list of names. And I remain dedicated to my promise to read that names, those names here on the House
[35:16]floor if those women ever find them in a place that it needs to be done. I yield back to Mr. >> Gentle Lady from Georgia yields back. Gentleman from Kentucky reserves. Gentle
[35:26]lady from North Carolina is recognized. >> I reserve, Mr. >> Gentle Lady reserves. Gentleman from Kentucky is recognized. >> I yield myself a minute and 30 seconds. >> Gentleman's recognized for a minute.
[35:38]>> I want to thank the generosity of Jim McGovern, Representative McGovern for granting us this time. I'm embarrassed for my own party today. I'm embarrassed
[35:47]we withhold withheld signing in swearing in a duly representative of uh the people for 49 days just to
[35:58]avoid this vote that's finally going to happen today. I'm embarrassed that my own party isn't going to yield me time to debate this. Even though they say they support it and I authored it, they
[36:09]don't even want to yield me time to debate this during the bill debate. But I'm thankful. Let me tell you who I'm thankful to. These three brave women, Marjorie Taylor Green, Nancy Mason,
[36:20]Lauren Boowart. They have been threatened. They have been intimidated physically, politically. It's
[36:27]disgusting. and not by the far left. They have been intimidated by people in our own party and for what?
[36:38]For seeking justice for these victims. So I my hats off. I congratulate them for standing strong. I've always wondered where were the Republican men
[36:48]during this battle. We've taken five months, these three women and I have had to drag our party to this floor today to even vote on this and Ro Kana is the
[37:00]most to be thanked here in a extraordinary display of bipartisanship. He did not hesitate when I asked if we wanted to bring this bill to the floor together if he would stand in the
[37:11]trenches with me. He said yes. With that, I reserve. >> Gentleman reserves. Gentle lady from North Carolina is recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as
[37:22]I may consume. >> Gentle is recognized. >> Boy, it's We need to get facts straight here.
[37:31]President Trump's DOJ in his first term arrested and prosecuted Jeffrey Epstein.
[37:43]We on our side want justice to prevail in this case and in every case.
[37:52]Speaker Johnson has always been clear that if the discharge petition reached the necessary signatures that the House
[38:02]would consider the legislation. And that's what we're providing for in our rule today. In fact, in fact, as soon as the
[38:13]petition hit 218 votes last Wednesday, House Republicans offered a unanimous
[38:23]consent request to pass the legislation. Then, however,
[38:31]the Democrat leader would not give consent to do that last week.
[38:40]Why? Because they're not really interested in this. They're interested in some other things. And Mr. Speaker, I
[38:49]have to correct the record. Mr. Massie did not request time from me. I'm the person who controls the time on
[39:00]the Republican side and he did not request time from me or I would have given him time. >> I I reserve. >> Gentle lady reserves. Gentleman from Kentucky is recognized.
[39:11]>> I'd like to now recognize the gentle lady from South Carolina for five minutes. Nancy Mace. >> Gentle lady from South Carolina is recognized for five minutes. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I want to
[39:22]thank my colleagues today for the time uh Mr. McGovern and Mr. Kana for the five minutes on the floor to speak about
[39:31]an issue that is not political for me. Helping the survivors of Jeffrey Epstein and his horrific, gruesome,
[39:40]brutal sex trafficking ring is deeply personal. And while we often uh have many disagreements about a lot of issues, maybe most issues, today they
[39:52]are allowing us to speak on the floor. And I want to thank my colleagues, Congressman Massie, Marjorie Taylor Green, and Lauren Boowart, the four of
[40:01]us making history today over the discharge petition and delivering justice for those who have desperately
[40:11]fought for it for in some cases almost 30 years. I wore white today because I wanted to reflect on the innocence
[40:22]of the young women who had their innocence stolen from a demon named Jeffrey Epstein. From demons,
[40:31]friends of his, rich and powerful people who stole their innocent innocence as young as 14 years old. It was taken
[40:43]from them and they've never gotten it back. I'm also wearing white today to recognize the courage that it takes for women to come forward, the sacrifices to
[40:54]them personally, professionally, financially, the embarrassment, the humiliation, the shame that we still deliver on the backs of
[41:05]women who have been brutalized, who've been raped, who've been assaulted. The shame that the media pours over their heads that their colleagues, their
[41:16]friends, their neighbors, their loved ones, because you come forward and because you talk about sexual assault, you are not a It's not because of
[41:26]what you wore. You're not a But that's how women are treated. And you're not lying. And I want every woman to know, every Epstein survivor to know, every woman across the country who is a
[41:38]survivor, who is a victim of assault, that we today, we see you. And this fight and this vote tonight, I see it.
[41:48]It is about the Epstein victims, but it's about much more than the Epstein victims. This is about the powerless.
[41:57]Taking power away from the very powerful. This is about giving women who never had a voice
[42:08]giving a voice to the voiceless. This is about their sacrifice. This is about having and recognizing
[42:19]their courage. This is about justice for the Epstein victims. But it's also about hope. Earlier this year, I gave a speech right
[42:29]here on the floor of the US House of Representatives detailing trauma that I experienced, endured, and am a
[42:39]survivor of that I accidentally uncovered two years ago almost to the day.
[42:47]And today I still don't have justice like millions of women across the country. When I spoke out I got
[42:57]attacked. When I spoke out I was shamed. When I spoke out I was defamed and smeared. And that goes on
[43:08]today right now in the present. God sure has a funny way of working through us. I, like many of the Epstein survivors and many other survivors
[43:18]across the country, I don't think I will ever heal from the destruction my abuser did to me. But I can heal by
[43:27]being a vessel and being a voice for all those who need it. And that's why we are here today. That is why I will never abandon a single survivor ever. And I
[43:39]will never waver. I spent my morning talking to law enforcement and others about another potential Jane
[43:50]Doe, Jane Doe number five, who may be another sexual assault victim in the case that I uncovered two years ago. It's very difficult for us to come
[44:00]forward, but I want to thank the women who have the Epstein victims, the victims in the case that I uncovered. I want to thank all of you for being a
[44:09]voice, for giving me hope. Maybe one day I too can get justice. Thank you and I yield. >> Lady yields back. Gentleman from Kentucky >> reserves.
[44:20]>> Reserves. Gentle lady from South Car or North Carolina is recognized. >> Um thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Um,
[44:32]our colleagues want Americans to believe that this discharge petition and underlying
[44:40]legislation are the be all and end all in this investigation. However, it's House Republicans who've
[44:51]worked tirelessly to achieve true justice for victims. To date, the significant information
[45:01]that has come out has come from the Oversight and Government Reform Committee. As a result of its issuing 13 subpoenas,
[45:11]we've released 65,000 pages of documents from the Department of Justice, the Epstein estate, which was not mentioned
[45:21]in the underlying legislation, former US attorney, um, and others. Let me state it again. The unanimous
[45:32]consent request to pass the legislation immediately last week was blocked by the minority leader.
[45:44]Full stop. If Democrats truly cared about finding justice immediately for victims, this legislation would have been passed last
[45:53]week. Instead, they want political theater to capitalize on. House Republicans, on the other hand,
[46:03]remain focused on truth, accountability, and delivering real justice for Epstein's victims, not political points. I reserve
[46:15]>> reserves. Gentleman from Kentucky is recognized. >> Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time I have remaining? >> Gentleman has 5 and a half minutes remaining. I yield myself three and a half minutes.
[46:25]>> Gentleman is recognized. >> Mr. Speaker, all that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing. And we've had a lot of good men doing a lot of nothing on the other side
[46:36]of the aisle until we did something. Three brave women and myself and the the Democrat caucus. We did something. And then what did they do? They've opposed us every step of the way. They've lied
[46:46]about the legislation. Let me tell you some of the lies they've told. They've said that it doesn't protect victims. Well, if that is so, why were dozens of victims with us today at a press
[46:58]conference urging this body to pass this legislation? It's because this legislation specifically protects victims. They've said this legislation does not prevent
[47:09]the release of child pornography. Of course, it does. We have a specific provision in our legislation to prevent that. They've said so many falsehoods about this legislation, but now they're
[47:20]going to vote for it. hopefully enthusiastically, but really they've been drugged to this. Our judicial system is broken. If it were working, there wouldn't be a
[47:30]thousand victims who haven't seen justice yet. They are victims of the Epstein class. I I begrudge nobody's success that they become a billionaire. But if you think
[47:42]being a billionaire or buying politicians keeps you out of the judicial system, let you rape young women, lets you traffic women, you've
[47:53]got another thing coming when this bill passes. Do not let the Senate muck this up. There have already been efforts to
[48:01]derail this our our discharge petition. The oversight committee has released thousands, tens of thousands of
[48:10]documents. That's fine. Keep working. How many names have you released? Zero. You are still protecting or the
[48:20]DOJ is protecting pedophiles and sex traffickers. The time for that to stop is now. Now, our speaker says, "Oh, this Senate, this bill needs amended in the
[48:31]Senate." And specifically, he's trying to create a loophole. He's trying to categorize the pedophiles as victims. He's saying, "Oh, we don't embarrass the people that went to the rape island. We
[48:42]should protect those names against uh unreliable accusations." Is he calling all of these victims unreliable?
[48:52]They've testified to the FBI. The FBI has these names in their possession. I asked the FBI director in a hearing, "Have you looked at the documents?" No.
[49:02]He trusts everybody that's been there for decades. That is wrong. Do not let the Senate muck this bill up. And if you are, if you're a party to
[49:13]that in the Senate, you are part of this cover up that we are trying to expose. I am sorry if one of your billionaire donors is going to get embarrassed because he went to Rape Island.
[49:25]That is what they have coming. In fact, they need to be on the other side of bars. A lot of them. Some of them will be embarrassed, but some of them need to go to prison and the survivors know
[49:36]that. So, how will we know if this bill has been successful? We will know when there are men, rich men in handcuffs being perwalked to the jail. And until
[49:47]then, this is still a cover up. I urge my Senate colleagues, do not muck up this bill. The president has already said he will sign it. That means he will
[49:57]sign the bill that we have here today. Do not change this bill. He is ready to sign it. Give it to him. Put it on his desk. Let's get just justice for these
[50:08]victims. With that, I reserve. >> The gentleman from Kentucky reserves. The gentle lady from North Carolina is recognized. >> Reserve. >> The gentle lady reserves.
[50:19]>> Is the gentle lady prepared to close? >> Yes, I am. Mr. Speaker, >> the gentleman from Kentucky is recognized. I yield the remainder of my
[50:28]time to ranking member Mr. McGovern. >> The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized. >> Thank you. And first, let me say how um much I admire the courage of my Republican colleagues who are beside me
[50:39]here today, Mr. Speaker. Uh and it at the end of the day, this is not about us. Uh and it's not about politics. This
[50:48]is about the survivors. Young girls who were exploited by powerful men. men who use money and power to take advantage of girl of girls, some as young as 11 years
[50:58]old. The president of the United States calls it all a hoax. Can you imagine that? What an evil and disgusting thing to say. These young girls, now women,
[51:10]the survivors, what happened to them was horrific. They were sexually abused, many of them, for years. And the president of United States calls it all a hoax. What kind of messed up, sick in
[51:21]the head, immoral person says something like that? This bill is about making sure powerful men are held accountable. It's about demanding truth and
[51:31]transparency for the American people. Now, Republican leaders in this House lost control of the story. They lost the ability to hide behind procedure and they lost the luxury of pretending that
[51:42]they were ever on the right side. The American people see it, survivors see it, and history will see it. and listening to the speaker of the house's press conference today. I mean, it it
[51:53]sounds like he basically wants to kill this whole thing. He's trying to obstruct and derail the process. Why the hell is he fighting so hard to do the opposite of what the survivors want?
[52:04]What an awful, awful thing to do. So, let us release the files. Let's give survivors the transparency they've long been denied. Let us take back power from
[52:15]the rich billionaire elites who think they can do whatever they want with no justice or accountability. And let's remember exactly who had to be dragged
[52:25]here under duress and who stood up from day one demanding the truth. And with that, I yield back. >> Members are reminded to refrain from
[52:36]engaging in personalities towards the president. Gentleman yields back. The gentle lady from North Carolina is recognized.
[52:47]>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, those of us who did not sign the
[52:57]discharge petition are just as concerned about the victims or if you as some are
[53:09]calling them survivors as our colleagues who signed the discharge petition.
[53:17]We share contempt for anyone who abused anyone else. I've stood on this floor
[53:26]many times, Mr. Speaker, to speak out for victims and survivors of people who
[53:35]who have been abused and against anyone who breaks the law or takes advantage of an innocent person.
[53:46]We will not be characterized as insensitive to that. But what House Republicans
[53:56]who didn't sign the discharge petition remain focused on truth, accountability,
[54:05]and delivering real justice for Epstein victims. Again, I'll point out that it was under President Trump's Department of Justice
[54:17]that Jeffrey Epstein was arrested and tried. We have not tried to avoid this this
[54:28]situation. We want things done the right way. We want maximum justice for these
[54:37]victims and survivors. Our rule today simply expedites consideration of the Massie Kana
[54:48]legislation. And as I said, we would have liked to have seen it passed last week uh when we gave an opportunity for it, but it it
[54:59]was blocked by the Democrat minority leader. I ask for support for this rule, the
[55:10]underlying legislation. With that, I urge my colleagues to vote yes on the previous question. Yes on the
[55:19]rule. And Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time and move the previous question on the resolution. >> The gentle lady yields back the balance of her time. The question is on ordering
[55:31]the previous question on the resolution. Those in favor say I. Those opposed? No. >> In the opinion of the chair, the nos have it.
[55:41]>> Mr. Speaker, >> the yays and nays. >> The yays and nays are requested. Those favoring a vote by the ys and nays will rise.
[55:53]A sufficient number having risen, the yays and nays are ordered. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the
[57:08]chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yays and nays are ordered or votes objected to under clause six of rule 20. The House
[57:20]will resume proceedings on postponed questions at a later time. For what purpose does the gentleman from Ohio seek recognition? >> Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass HR 4405.
[57:31]>> The clerk will re report the title of the bill. >> HR 4405, a bill to require the attorney general to release all documents and records in possession of the Department
[57:41]of Justice relating to Jeffrey Epstein and for other purposes. >> Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Jordan and the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Raskin, each will control
[57:53]20 minutes. The chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio. >> Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous
[58:04]material on HR 4405. >> Without objection, >> Mr. Speaker, uh I yield myself such time as I may consume. >> The gentleman is recognized. >> We all support holding bad guys
[58:15]accountable, and we're all going to vote for this resolution. But I think a little perspective is important. Democrats have had spent six months
[58:26]talking about Epstein even though they had four years to do something about it. Now, why would they do that? Why would they do that? Maybe it's to go after
[58:36]President Trump. Never forget, they shut down the government for 43 days. They said, "Don't worry about our military. Don't worry about air traffic controllers. Don't worry about our economy. Don't
[58:48]worry about American families. No, no, no. Close the government for a month and a half because it might hurt the president. For the past decade, there's been one
[58:59]constant for Democrats. One constant. Go after Trump. They spied on his campaign. Then it was Mueller. Then it was impeachment one. Then it was impeachment
[59:11]two. Then it was all the lawfare. Alvin Bragg, Fonnie Willis, Leticia James. Then it was Arctic Frost investigation at the Justice Department surveilling
[59:20]United States senators and congressmen and a whole host of other Americans. Then it was Jack Smith and his gag orders and is raiding President Trump's home. Then it was a 43-day shutdown. And
[59:32]now it's Epstein. And by the way, by the way, the same party that did all that, they were also the ones who were texting with Mr. Epstein during a hearing where
[59:42]Michael Cohen was their witness in another effort to go after the president. Americans see through it all. And
[59:51]frankly, it's actually kind of sad this this obsession, this syndrome, this this mindset that says we got to go after President Trump no matter what that they
[1:00:02]have. And I actually when I think about it, I think it's because President Trump's and Republicans have accomplished so much that they told the voters they were going to accomplish in the 2024 election. We're actually doing
[1:00:14]what we said we were going to do. President Trump said he was going to cut taxes, and he did. President Trump said he would secure the border, and he did. President Trump said he'd get men out of women's sports, and he did. President
[1:00:25]Trump said he would make sure Iran doesn't have nuclear capability, and he did. and he said he would get the hostages out of Gaza back back into
[1:00:32]Israel and he did all in nine months. So I don't know what what what causes this this mindset this syndrome that the left has but I know one thing. I know
[1:00:44]one thing it is real which brings me to last week. Think about what the Democrats did last week. The Democrats released an email that the
[1:00:56]oversight committee had obtained from the estate. An email from Mr. Epstein to Miss Maxwell. When the Democrats released it, they redacted the victim's
[1:01:05]name. Something we all support, something everyone supports, except except in this case, no court had ordered that name redacted, no agency
[1:01:16]had redacted it, and the estate didn't redact it, and the victim had already went public. So why black out her name? Why black out her name? Because she had said in her
[1:01:28]book and had testified under oath that she never saw any wrongdoing by President Trump. So think about what they did in an email
[1:01:38]between two criminals, Mr. Epste and Miss Maxwell. In an email between two criminals, they hide the name of an individual who had went public and exonerated the president.
[1:01:50]And we know why. to distort and twist the message because they thought it might harm the president. Their position, their position, cover up
[1:02:01]the names of people who are already public, but don't worry about other innocent people who the court said should remain private. Again, I think the American people see through it. They see through what the
[1:02:13]Democrats are doing. The American people know what this is. They know Democrats have nothing else to run on because of the success of this administration.
[1:02:23]So, I say let's vote yes on this resolution and then let's get focused on making sure we're doing what the American families elected us to do. With that, I reserve. >> The gentleman reserves. The gentleman
[1:02:35]from Maryland is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. >> The gentleman's recognized. >> Today, four months and three days after Mr. Khan and Mr. Massie introduced their
[1:02:46]discharge petition, perhaps the most famous discharge petition in American history. The People's House unites across party lines to draw a moral line.
[1:02:57]We draw a line against the rape and sexual violation of children. We draw a line against the global criminal trafficking of girls and young women to
[1:03:07]service the pleasure of rich and powerful men who believe they are beyond all law and all morality. We draw a line
[1:03:16]to put the voices of the victims and the survivors first. We asked the Senate to join us without changes rather than obstruct this bill with dilatory
[1:03:28]amendments, legislative graffiti, and self-deing millionoll jackpot provisions for lucky senators just passed the bill. We're finally voting today because a
[1:03:39]bipartisan discharge petition led uh by representatives Massie and Connor and signed by 218 of us overthrew the
[1:03:49]determined obstruction of the speaker. This forced vote means the House will no longer acquies in this astonishing
[1:03:59]realtime cover up of a multibillion dollar global sex trafficking and child rape ring that has ravaged the lives of
[1:04:09]more than a thousand girls and young women. We are here today because these victims, these survivors, these citizens, these inspiring women who have
[1:04:19]come to Washington are demanding nothing less than justice and the complete truth about who is responsible for their vicious abuse, including those
[1:04:30]responsible for enabling it, ignoring it, bankrolling it, and covering it up. We join them today in rejecting any more
[1:04:39]dangerous lies about the crimes they suffered. No, child sex abuse is not a hoax. It's a crime. Human trafficking is
[1:04:50]not a hoax. It's a crime. These crimes are a curse on children and young people across America. In universities and elementary schools, in churches and
[1:05:01]mosques and synagogues, in boy scout troops and college sports teams and summer camps, anywhere the powerful and the rich believe they've got the
[1:05:12]opportunity and the impunity to exploit the young, the poor, the powerless, and the vulnerable. We must face the truth and find the co-conspirators still at
[1:05:24]large in one of America's most extensive and sophisticated sex trafficking and child abuse rings in history. Release of the file will expose the role
[1:05:35]of everybody who facilitated and covered up these crimes like JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Deutsche Bank and Bank of New York Melon which executed
[1:05:45]billions of dollars in transactions related to these offenses as well as any bank executives who participated in the sexual abuse of girls and young women.
[1:05:55]We must expose everyone who cover up these crimes. Like Alex Acasta, the former US attorney in Miami, Donald Trump's labor secretary who gave Jeffrey
[1:06:05]Epstein an unbelievable sweetheart plea deal, immunized unnamed conspirators, and killed an investigation into Epstein's financial crimes that could
[1:06:15]have brought down the entire criminal network. And with that, I'm going to uh yield. Oh, I'll reserve the balance of my time. >> The gentleman reserves. The gentleman
[1:06:27]from Ohio is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield four minutes to distinguished chair of the House Oversight Committee, Mr. Comr. The gentleman from Kentucky. >> The gentleman from Kentucky is recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As
[1:06:38]chairman of the House Oversight Committee, I've always believed that sunshine is the best disinfectant. For years, the American people have demanded transparency about Jeffrey Epstein and
[1:06:47]Glain Maxwell's horrific crimes and about the federal government's failure to protect the victims. The House Oversight Committee is conducting a thorough review of the federal
[1:06:58]government's investigation into Epstein. Our work goes far beyond the legislation before us today. We are committed to accountability, transparency, and justice for the American people and for
[1:07:09]the survivors of these appalling crimes. To date, the oversight committee has released more than 65,000 pages of
[1:07:18]documents, issued 13 subpoenas, and conducted interviews with two key witnesses, both of whom were Republicans. The Trump administration has provided us with Department of
[1:07:29]Justice materials and access to suspicious activity reports. Unfortunately, throughout this investigation, Democrats have chosen to manufacture yet another anti-Trump hoax
[1:07:40]instead of pursuing justice. They have mischaracterized witness testimony and selectively released documents complete
[1:07:49]with targeted redactions in an effort to smear President Trump. For example, former US Attorney General Bill Barr, who oversaw the 2019 Epstein
[1:08:00]investigation, stated clearly under oath that the prosecution team found no evidence that President Trump committed wrongdoing.
[1:08:12]Despite this simple and straightforward fact, ranking member Robert Garcia, moments after that deposition, tiptoed
[1:08:23]out and publicly claimed that quote, "Bar could not clear Trump of wrongdoing." That was a lie, and we have the transcript to prove it. I invite the
[1:08:34]media to read the transcript. When the oversight committee interviewed former US attorney for the Southern District of Florida, Alex Aosta, Democrats whipped themselves into a
[1:08:44]frenzy trying to manufacture a gotcha moment, but they failed. Mr. Aosta dismantled the Democrats narrative. His testimony confirmed there was no contact
[1:08:55]between President Trump and Mr. Aosta and no connection between President Trump in the Epstein case. Next, Democrats resorted to selective leaks and doctorred documents to mislead the
[1:09:07]American people. Oversight committee Republicans have posted 65,000 pages of documents we have received to date. Democrats, by contrast, have released
[1:09:16]fewer than one dozen. In their latest selective leak, Democrats released just three three of the 23,000 pages of documents from the
[1:09:28]Epstein estate. And they made redactions to two of those emails that changed both the context and the meaning of the three pages they released. When CNN
[1:09:40]CNN called them out for their deceptive redactions, representatives Stanberry and Crockett tried to blame Republicans for their own edits, for the Democrat
[1:09:51]Oversight Committee edits. After Democrats released only three emails, Republicans released over 23,000 pages. And what did Democrats say in response
[1:10:02]when we released every single document that we got? They claim full transparency was meant to quote disorient or distract from their
[1:10:13]manufactured narrative. These are the same Democrats who chant release the files every day until the files contradict the story they want to tell.
[1:10:23]That that is the definition of hypocrisy. In contrast, full transparency exposed how Epstein appears
[1:10:32]to be TDS patient zero. The emails re reveal a journalist coach Epstein to blackmail then presidential candidate
[1:10:42]Donald Trump. >> Additional minute to >> the gentleman's recognized. >> The files also show that a House Democrat colluded with Epstein during
[1:10:51]the 2019 oversight hearing to discredit witness with a vendetta against President Trump. And unsurprisingly, Democrats have been silent about their colleagues coordination with Epstein.
[1:11:03]Another email shows Democrat fundraisers invited Epstein to an event or to meet privately with Hakee Jeff as part of their 2013 effort to to build
[1:11:13]to win a majority. So Hakee Jeff campaign solicited money from Jeffrey Epstein. That's what we found in the last document batch. The files
[1:11:23]underscore why former President Trump must appear for his deposition. We've subpoenaed him. To date, the Democrats have done nothing to help us uh secure his appearance. I support full
[1:11:34]transparency. The oversight committee will continue to work to get the truth to the American people and to get justice for the victims. That's our goal of this investigation. With that, I
[1:11:45]yield back. >> Mr. Gentleman yields back. >> Yeah, Mr. Speaker, we reserve. >> The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, you know, I should just point out that we've heard now from the two distinguished chairman
[1:11:57]of the Judiciary and the Oversight Committee, and they've spoken almost exclusively to denounce Democrats. We have a bipartisan coalition here demanding the truth about the largest
[1:12:09]child sex abuse and trafficking ring perhaps in American history, certainly in this century. And they want to just throw stones at the Democrats. What a remarkable failure of leadership we're
[1:12:20]seeing from the other side. And I imagine that the chairman of the oversight committee will follow up his spectacular failure in trying to impeach President Biden with his spectacular failure in trying to block the
[1:12:30]resolution we brought the floor today. I'm happy to yield one minute. I excuse me. You're not recognized, whoever is speaking. And I'd like to uh yield one minute to the very distinguished
[1:12:40]minority leader on the House Oversight Committee. >> The gentleman is recognized. >> Uh thank you. And Mr. Speaker, it's it's wonderful to hear uh Republicans and certainly uh the chairman of our committee finally wanting transparency
[1:12:52]on this issue. It is time to end this White House cover up now. Now, we know that Donald Trump has tried everything to kill our Jeffrey Epstein
[1:13:01]investigation and he's failed. And now he's panicking. He's about to lose his Epstein vote to force the Department of Justice to release the files. And let's
[1:13:12]be crystal clear, Trump has the power to release the files today. He does not even need a vote. And he continues to defy the subpoena of the oversight
[1:13:23]committee to release all the files. What is Donald Trump hiding? What is Pam Bondi, the attorney general, hiding? Why
[1:13:33]won't they release the Epstein files right now? And he must explain to the public why he moved sex trafficker and monster Gain
[1:13:43]Maxwell to a cushy lowsecurity prison after her interview with Trump's personal lawyer. He should declare and every Republican should say that she does not deserve a pardon or commutation.
[1:13:54]>> The gentle's time is expired. >> More seconds. >> I grant him 20 more seconds. >> We don't care how much money you have, what party you're in, how powerful you are. We should get justice for the
[1:14:04]survivors of Jeffrey Epstein. And our work on the committee is not over. Next up are the bank and financial records to follow and expose Epstein's network. Today there should be unanimous vote on
[1:14:16]releasing the files and we will get justice. And with that, I yield back and we reserve. >> The gentleman reserves the gentleman from Ohio is recognized. >> Thank you, speaker. I yield a minute and a half to the distinguished gentleman from California and member of the
[1:14:26]judiciary committee, Mr. Kylie. >> The gentleman from California is recognized. I have consistently called for the maximum possible level of transparency when it comes to the
[1:14:36]heinous crimes of Jeffrey Epstein. That's why I have consistently said I am inclined to vote for this bill and it's why I will be doing so today. The
[1:14:46]victims deserve the truth. They deserve justice and they deserve closure. For months, they've had to wake up every day
[1:14:56]and see the name of their tormentor on the front page of every newspaper, on every t TV channel, as has the broader American public. This issue has been so
[1:15:06]politicized by so many people in so many ways, which is deeply unfortunate when we're talking about matters of the highest sensitivity and untold
[1:15:17]suffering. It is my hope that the passage of this resolution today together with the work of the oversight committee committee will lead to the
[1:15:27]expeditious release of all pertinent material so that we can move on. Let's get accountability. Let's get answers
[1:15:37]and let's get this over with. I yield back. >> The gentleman yields back. >> Yeah, we reserve. >> The gentleman from Maryland is recognized. I yield one minute to the very distinguished gentle lady from
[1:15:48]Washington, a member of the Judiciary Committee. >> The gentle lady from Washington is recognized. >> Mr. Speaker, thousands of girls, children were abused by Jeffrey Epstein
[1:15:58]and his massive and powerful ring of pedophiles and protectors of pedophiles. We can't say all their names here. We don't have time. But let's at least
[1:16:10]bring a few of the courageous survivors and their names onto the House floor right here as we debate this. Haley Robson,
[1:16:20]Jenna Lisa Jones, Michelle Lacata, Ashley Rubit, Annie Farmer, Marina
[1:16:29]Lassera, Rachel Benvdz. These women have carried a burden that they never should have had to bear. And
[1:16:38]today they demand, we demand, the American people demand that we answer their clarion call to justice. Today, despite all the giant cover up attempts
[1:16:49]by this administration and this speaker of the house, we will vote to release all the Epstein files. To be clear, there is no protection for pedophiles,
[1:16:59]no protection for the rich and powerful men of either party, who participated, who turned a blind eye, who winked and grinned while witnessing the horrific
[1:17:09]abuses of young children. Release the gentle lady's time the damn files. Now >> we reserve. >> The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield a minute
[1:17:20]and a half to the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina and member of our committee. >> The gentleman is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I have been very supportive of this effort specifically to bring justice to the victims of this
[1:17:30]horrific series of crimes. However, I have worked behind the scenes to raise concerns with this petition as it is currently drafted. Specifically, I believe that there is grave risk at
[1:17:41]harming innocent people. And I repeat, harming innocent people. When innocent people are harmed, that is not furthering justice. With an investigation of this size and a file
[1:17:53]that is as large as the Epstein files and as poorly defined as that is in this petition, there will invariably be people who are released pursuant to this discharge petition who had nothing to do
[1:18:05]with criminal activity. Imagine, if you will, a bellman, a waiter, some type of dorman, a mere social attendee who had no impact whatsoever on the criminal
[1:18:16]activities of Jeffrey Epste. No participation. their lives are forever ruined. And I'm reading specifically from the petition's language that
[1:18:25]prohibited grounds for withholding information in this file are embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity. And I would just submit if you are going to be
[1:18:36]embarrassed, if you are going to suff suffer social harm, and that is all of the encompassed activity that you were a part of, you will be named in this petition. And I resent that. Innocent
[1:18:46]people should not be harmed when we are pursuing justice. I understand the political nature of this petition. I resent the fact that there was not room
[1:18:57]for good faith amendments and I urge the Senate to protect innocent people. I yield back. >> Yields back. The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized. >> Thank you. I'm yielding one minute to
[1:19:08]the distinguished gentle lady from California, Representative Kuger Dove. >> The gentle lady from California is recognized. >> Mr. Speaker, one in three women and girls around the world are physically
[1:19:18]and sexually assaulted each year. Of the 152 women in this body, that means 51 women. It includes your daughters, your sisters, your nieces, your mothers. And
[1:19:30]with the Epstein files, we have a chance to change that. But real talk, the administration doesn't need a discharge petition. It has not complied with the subpoena, and it has the power to
[1:19:40]release the files today. Instead, the man in the most powerful position in the world has used the full weight of the government to block and obfuscate and deflect the full release of the files.
[1:19:51]It is the same person who intimidated female members of Congress to withdraw names from the petition, who responded quiet piggy to a female reporter who asked about the files and who nominated
[1:20:01]an alleged sexual predator to be our AG. It is the same person whose name appears more than any other in the Epstein emails. And in the pantheon of violence, a sexual predator is the worst of the
[1:20:12]worst. So why protect him? It's also curious that the judiciary is managing this debate and has not even had this come before the committee. I wonder why. Release the files now.
[1:20:24]>> We reserve. The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized. >> I thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield two minutes to the uh gentleman from Texas, Mr. Roy. Uh chairman of the Constitution subcommittee.
[1:20:34]>> The gentleman from Texas is recognized. I thank the chairman. Today, a united Republican party and a bipartisan supermajority is going to pass a bill to increase transparency regarding the
[1:20:45]egregious abuses by Jeffrey Epstein. A goal that anyone of conscience desires. That is in totality an important statement to check the rich and the powerful. Remember how we got here?
[1:20:56]After decades, it was President Trump's Department of Justice that indicted Jeffrey Epstein in July of 2019. It was President Trump's DOJ that arrested and indicted Miss Maxwell. It was the
[1:21:07]Republican le oversight committee through 13 subpoenas that has released 65,000 pages of files in just 10 months. Meanwhile, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have largely ignored
[1:21:18]this issue. It was Democrats who redacted an email to mislead the American people about the truth of a witness that exonerated President Trump. It was a Democrat, Representative Placet, who literally texted with
[1:21:29]Jeffrey Epstein as we questioned Michael Cohen. It was Democrats who shut down the government, resulting in the delay of swearing in of members as we vote to pass this legislation, and it will pass.
[1:21:41]It is impossible, however, to avoid problems with its politiciz politicization. One colleague has offensively gone so far as to say that to oppose this bill
[1:21:51]means you support pedophiles. Yet, I know good public servants, former law enforcement, former prosecutors who never knew Epstein, never knew any visitors to his criminal enterprise, who
[1:22:02]have genuine concerns about supporting this bill out of fear of creating new victims or harming existing victims or both. That is what we've reduced Congress to, inserting itself into the
[1:22:13]prosecutorial process for political motivations driven heavily by hatred of President Trump. We should be concerned about victim privacy, concerned about risking disclosure of non-credible
[1:22:24]allegations of child sexual abuse materials, future investigations. But here's the deal. The leaders of this nation must expose abuses by the rich and the powerful. That is why President
[1:22:34]Trump and the House have been working for full transparency, but we should be motivated by truth and justice for all, not politics. I yield back. >> The gentleman yields back. The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized.
[1:22:46]>> Thank you. Thank you. I yield one minute to the distinguished gentle lady from Massachusetts, Representative Clark, the minority whip. >> The gentle lady is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This should be an easy vote. This is about justice for
[1:22:58]the victims and survivors of Jeffrey Epstein. This is about every victim of trafficking and sexual abuse, monstrous
[1:23:07]crimes that thrive in secrecy and fear. Yet, instead of shining a light on that darkness, just moments ago, Donald Trump
[1:23:17]defended the continued obstruction of releasing these files. Even as House Republicans prepare to vote yes today,
[1:23:27]Speaker Johnson is calling this a show vote. He's calling it dangerous. He is signaling the US Senate to block it.
[1:23:37]Republicans continue to use their power to shield rich pedophiles from justice. If you can't stand up for these
[1:23:45]survivors, how can anyone trust you to stand up for them? I yield back. >> The gentle lady yields back. >> We The gentleman reserves.
[1:23:57]>> Does the gentleman reserve? >> Yeah, we reserve. >> The gentleman from Ohio is recognized. We reserve. The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized. >> Yes. Just very quickly, what happened
[1:24:07]under the Biden administration? Well, under the Biden administration, Gain Maxwell was prosecuted for conspiring to sexually abuse and traffic girls in
[1:24:16]2020, right? When in uh in in 2021, she was convicted. In December of 2021, uh, after a month-long trial in Judge
[1:24:26]Nathan's courtroom, in 2022, Maxwell was sentenced to 20 years in prison under the Biden administration for sex trafficking and sexual abuse of
[1:24:36]minors. But when President Trump took office in January of 2025, they killed the investigation. They assembled all the materials. They got all the prosecutors together, and they
[1:24:47]terminated the investigation. I yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Roger Krishna Murthy. >> The gentleman from Illinois is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in strong
[1:24:57]support to release the Epstein files. First, this issue is beyond party. It's a question of justice. Survivors have waited too long. Stop the delay. This is
[1:25:06]not a hoax. Release the files. Second, we must face a hard truth. Silence that shields the powerful is a betrayal of those they hurt. Congress must reject
[1:25:17]any attempt, including a presidential pardon or any form of clemency for Glain Maxwell. This cannot be done. This would be a cover up. We cannot allow clemency
[1:25:28]of any kind from Maxwell. Not now, not ever. Survivors deserve justice. I urge a strong yes vote. Thank you. >> Back. >> I want to thank the gentleman for for
[1:25:40]his eloquent remarks. Pardons are for people who are contrite. Pardons are for people who are repentant. Pardons are not for people who lie. Every member of this body should immediately, verbally,
[1:25:52]vocally denounce the idea of clemency, commutation, or pardon for Gla Maxwell. And we reserve. >> The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized. Yeah, we reserve. Mr. Speaker,
[1:26:02]>> the gentleman reserves. >> Uh, I yield 30 seconds to Miss Leger Fernandez. >> The gentle lady is recognized.
[1:26:12]There were thousands of girls and young women abused, trafficked, and used by Epstein, the elite, and the powerful who believed they could get away with it.
[1:26:22]Epstein told the young victims that he controlled the banks and the government. Those women refused to be silenced, and today they have pierced the dark with
[1:26:34]their light. Anytime any girl is trafficked, molested, or abused, the world must stand up. Today, the House
[1:26:43]proves Jeffrey Epstein wrong. The Senate must do the same tomorrow. >> The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield two minutes to the gentleman from uh from
[1:26:55]California. >> One and a half, excuse me. One and a half minutes to the gentleman from California. >> The gentleman from California is recognized. >> I thank you, chairman. Mr. Speaker, a million minute and a half
[1:27:06]or an hour, the words would still have to be the same. We've all said that this will pass the House perhaps unanimously today. I think all of us who have looked
[1:27:18]at the details of this particular uh bill know that it is flawed and that before it goes to the president's desk, it has to be amended as it can be
[1:27:29]amended in the Senate. And we call on the Senate to amend it so that we protect the innocent, so that we have the provisions that were intended
[1:27:39]perhaps to be in this bill but are not properly written. With that, President Trump has said, "Get it to his desk. He will sign it." President Trump has said
[1:27:50]he will do it. But I'm going to say to all of us, it is also important that we remember that Epstein is dead, but people live on. People who were
[1:28:02]innocent, people who in fact should not be named. We're not talking about the rich and the powerful. We're talking about the very victims. That is what we
[1:28:12]need to make sure is amended before it goes to the president's desk. And with that, I thank the chairman for his time. I think no more needs be said that this
[1:28:23]body will vote for it all, but let's not kid ourselves. It has to be changed so that it properly protects both the tradition of the uh grand jury and
[1:28:35]clearly those innocent people that would otherwise be swept up. And I yield back. >> That gentleman's time is expired. The gentleman yields back. Reserve. Gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized. >> This whole bill is about protecting the
[1:28:47]innocent. Mr. Speaker, the Senate must pass the bill as we are passing it today and as the president has said he would sign it after changing his position on
[1:28:57]the bill over the weekend when he could see the title wave of public opinion moving against him. Let's pass this bill, pass it in the Senate, sign the bill, and let us go ahead and release
[1:29:08]the complete file. I yield 30 seconds to the distinguished gentle lady from Arizona, Representative Ensari. >> The gentle lady is is recognized. >> Mr. Speaker, the walls are closing in on Donald Trump and his rich and powerful
[1:29:19]friends who either abused or raped children or were enabling and complicit in these heinous crimes for decades. This vote today matters, but here is the truth. Donald Trump could direct the
[1:29:30]Department of Justice to release the files today. He is choosing not to. They are already under subpoena led by oversight Democrats and have refused. This is an ongoing cover up by the Trump
[1:29:42]White House and Mike Johnson in the House has been complicit. What is Trump hiding? Why not release the files today? This is a >> time has expired. >> Release the files today. Thank you.
[1:29:53]>> The gentle at least time. The The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized. >> Uh thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Van Drew. >> The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized.
[1:30:05]>> Today, I want to talk about hypocrisy. Let me be clear. I was from Jumpstart, a co-sponsor of this very bill. From the beginning, we should never protect pedophiles.
[1:30:16]But for months, my Democratic colleagues have done what they think is politically convenient. Through all the yelling, through all the tears, through all the sadness, they say releasing the Epstein
[1:30:27]list is of grave concern to him. If that was true, where were they during the four years of the Biden presidency? Why didn't they demand the release of these files from Jumpstart in year one? Mr.
[1:30:38]Speaker, why didn't they ask for them in year two? Or if that wasn't good enough, maybe in year three they had control or
[1:30:47]not even in his final year of office. Other than a single letter the ranking member wrote in 2019, a single letter,
[1:30:57]not one Democrat on the committee spoke out about Epstein or his victims of this very terrible tragedy other than to say that he didn't like the plea deal.
[1:31:07]Let me say this. When they stand here today insisting how badly they want these files released, why didn't they do it? Yet they stayed silent for year
[1:31:17]after year after year after year under Joe Biden. It's impossible, Mr. Speaker. It is impossible to see that as genuine. What I see is a group more focused on
[1:31:28]scoring political points and drama than a protecting abused children. The record is clear. under Republicans. Far more information has been released in the
[1:31:39]last 6 months than was done during all four years of the previous presidency under Joe Biden. We've actually been the party of transparency. We've released
[1:31:49]the information. We've told the truth unfortunately and I'm sad to say it. They have been the party of hypocrisy. Mr. Chair, I yield back. >> The gentleman yields back.
[1:32:01]>> The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized. You know, I've never heard a more defensive presentation in my life uh than what we're hearing from over there. The gentleman should spend a little less time pointing out hypocrisy and a little
[1:32:12]more time trying to figure it out. Cruelty, humiliation, and rape. And that's what we're working on. I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from California, Mr. Mint. >> The gentleman from California is
[1:32:23]recognized. I want to remind you that we are all here voting on this bill because President Trump, who has the power to release the Epstein files at any time, has refused to do so, calling this a hoax. We're here because Speaker Mike
[1:32:34]Johnson and President Trump have gone to extraordinary lengths to try to kill and delay the discharge petition, including refusing to seat Adalita Grahalva for over 40 days and threatening House
[1:32:44]Republicans who signed on. Now, several of my Republican colleagues have accused those of us House Democrats who support justice here of having Trump derangent syndrome. You all suffer from something much worse, which is pedophile
[1:32:56]protection syndrome. Stop protecting pedophiles. Release the Epstein files. The victims deserve justice. I yield back. >> We reserve. >> Members are reminded to direct their
[1:33:06]comments to the chair. >> The gentleman from Maryland reserves. >> The gentleman from Ohio is recognized. >> We reserve. >> The gentleman from Ohio reserves. The gentleman from Maryland.
[1:33:17]>> I'm granting uh yielding 30 seconds to my friend, Representative Walkinshaw from Virginia. >> The gentleman's recognized. >> For years, Mr. Speaker, we have watched dangerous conspiracies like Pizzagate
[1:33:28]and Qanon shape our political landscape. They helped fuel the rise of President Trump and were built on baseless claims about secret pedophile rings. While the
[1:33:38]real documented case of child sex trafficking involving Jeffrey Epstein remains shrouded in secrecy because President Trump refuses to release the
[1:33:48]files. What is President Trump hiding? Why won't he release the files? The House finally has the opportunity to act. Release the files and let the
[1:33:59]American people truth. I yield back. >> The gentleman yields back. We reserve. The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized. We reserve. Gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized.
[1:34:11]>> Granting 30 seconds to the very distinguished gentle lady who is finally with us. Representative Adalita Grahalva from Arizona 7th. >> The gentle lady is recognized.
[1:34:21]>> Thank you. Uh Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the survivors, family members, and advocates who are here today and have never given up. The legislation in front of us at its core
[1:34:32]is about something very simple. The survivors deserve justice. The American people deserve the truth. To every survivor watching, your courage is inspiring. You are the reason why this
[1:34:43]vote is happening today. Protecting women and children from pedophiles should not be a democratic issue. Should not be a Republican issue. It should be a human rights issue and a matter of
[1:34:53]justice. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on the transparency act. I yield back. Thank you. >> Thank you. And we reserve. The chair will remind all persons in the
[1:35:05]gallery that they they are here as guests of the house and that any manifestation of approval or disapproval of proceedings is in violation of the rules of the house.
[1:35:17]>> The gentleman from Maryland. >> Yeah, but I'll just add they're here as honored guests of the House and we're delighted they're here and with that we reserve. >> The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized. >> We reserve.
[1:35:28]>> The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Maryland. Uh, I'm granting 30 seconds to Representative Lois Frankl from Florida. >> The gentle lady from Florida is recognized. >> Mr. Speaker, for far too long, the
[1:35:39]survivors of Jeffrey Epstein's abuse were failed by a justice system that minimized their suffering and prosecutors who treated young girls as if they were criminals. That was wrong.
[1:35:49]And I am here with my colleagues to promise this. We will get to the bottom of why the Epstein survivors were treated so badly, who made those decisions, and who were they protecting.
[1:36:00]No more secrecy, no more excuses. We all deserve the truth. And I thank the survivors for their courage and perseverance. Your voices are being heard.
[1:36:11]>> The gentle lady yields back. The gentleman, we reserve reserves the balance of his time. The gentleman from Ohio. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from the great state of Louisiana, the speaker of the United States House of Representatives. Mr.
[1:36:23]>> Gentleman from Louisiana is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Chairman Jordan, for doing such an extraordinary job on all of this. For 43 long days, the Democrats held this house
[1:36:33]and the entire country hostage. Finally, with the lights back on, this body is returning to our regular legislative session. We have a lot of work to do. My colleagues on this side of the chamber
[1:36:44]are ready and eager to get back to our urgent legislative work that we promised the American people we would do. We've got to continue lowering the cost of healthcare. We've got to bring down prices for American families. And we got
[1:36:54]to finish the regular appropriations process, just to name a few of those priorities. And I wish I could say that our first order of business would be to get to those urgent priorities. But of course, we're here spending time on the
[1:37:06]floor about something else. This is something we could have resolved last week when we brought a unanimous consent to pass this discharge with the full support of the body. But our friends
[1:37:16]over here who are arguing today stalled that. They objected to it and they wanted to have this exercise instead. And that's why we say that this is a a show vote. That's what this is. They're making a show of it. And it
[1:37:27]really is a shame. We have some heroic women in the chamber today. I met with many of them a while back. They're in the gallery here. They have they have come forward. They have shown their
[1:37:37]faces. They've used their names to share the unspeakable tragedies that many of them were subjected to. Some of them when they were very young. And it is a heroic service to the country. They were they were seeking justice and the
[1:37:49]justice has been delayed for too long. The Department of Justice many years ago should have brought these charges. It took too long to do it. And and now we're in this process of making sure all
[1:37:59]the American people get the the information. But we have to do it in the right way. The right way. After four years of Democratic control under President Biden, they were not truthful with us about a lot of things. The
[1:38:11]Democrats insisted the border was secure. We knew it wasn't. They submit they insisted that uh inflation was transitory. We knew it wouldn't be. They misled the American people about the obvious mental and physical decline of
[1:38:23]the previous commander-in-chief. And now those same Democrats are demanding transparency. Suddenly transparency is their new word. out of nowhere. They've taken a curious concern in the Epstein
[1:38:34]investigation all in the name of that in the name of transparency. But the question has been asked here many times during the debate on the floor and everybody questioning why it is the
[1:38:45]Democrats have done this right now have to look at the obvious facts. The Democrats had all the Epstein files in their possession for four long years under the Biden presidency. The Biden
[1:38:57]Department of Justice had these files and no one on this side who is breathless today about the urgency of this release ever said a word about it. And it was the Democrats who could have urged President Biden's Department of
[1:39:08]Justice to go beyond prosecuting just Epstein and Gelain Maxwell, but they didn't do it. And so it's a fair question to ask today, why now? Why the
[1:39:19]sudden urgent interest in Jeffrey Epstein? Look, we know why. It's because the Democrats were never interested in transparency or executing justice or protecting the victims of this
[1:39:29]unspeakable tragedy before. The simple truth is obvious for everybody to see. This is a political exercise for Democrats. And it pains me to say it. I I I wish that was not the truth, but it
[1:39:39]is. And it's undeniable. This is as deceitful and dishonest as their pointless stunt was to shut the government down. Democrats are using the
[1:39:49]Epstein tragedy, the unspeakable evils that this guy committed with his trafficking ring and all of the the abuses that they that they made these young women go through. They're using
[1:40:00]that as a political weapon to try to distract from their failures as a party and and to try their best to try to tie President Trump somehow into this wretched scandal. The president had
[1:40:11]nothing to do with it. He's been very clear and he has nothing to hide and that's why he's endorsed the vote today. I I suspect this vote will be probably unanimous. But here's the important point that everybody needs to
[1:40:21]understand. We have been advocates of maximum transparency, but we have also insisted that the victims be carefully protected. The oversight committee has been doing extraordinary work and we've
[1:40:32]got some of the the most vigorous advocates on the Republican and Democrat side on the oversight committee. They've been working in earnest to deliver transparency for the American people and
[1:40:42]to do it in a responsible manner. What do we mean by that? The bipartisan effort over there is already producing all the results that the discharge petition seeks and much much more.
[1:40:54]Chairman Comr and all of these advocates over there have been releasing thousands of documents, for example, from the Epstein estate. By the way, in my view, that's been the greatest treasure trove of information because it's yielded for
[1:41:05]us Epstein's own personal flight logs, his financial records, his daily calendars, and so much more. But importantly, none of that was addressed or is addressed in the legislation
[1:41:16]that's being voted on today. The the estate files wouldn't even been encompassed in that. And so, it goes to show that the oversight committee is doing it from the right way. From the very beginning, we've been insistent that this matter be handled carefully
[1:41:27]and with the utmost caution and cons and and care for the people who have been harmed. They should not be made to suffer any longer. We're talking about real people's lives at stake here and
[1:41:38]young victims who don't want to be dragged into this political game that could get hurt further. But the Democrats are rushing the release of thousands of unsubstantiated documents that may be included in this that are
[1:41:49]going to be in the public domain with the passage of this bill. And there are serious deficiencies in the legislation that I have noted at length and Republicans have to work to address those deficiencies in the Senate if and
[1:42:00]when this legislation is advanced. I stood before the American public today at our press conference and I explained in detail the the dangers of the discharge petition. We we have posted at at my
[1:42:12]website speaker.gov a summary the the the legal council. A small army of lawyers put this together. I used to be a federal court litigator. Many of my colleagues who spoken today were. We understand the dangers of how this was
[1:42:22]haphazardly drawn up. And among them, by the way, Mr. Speaker, before I forget, I seek unanimous consent to enter into this document into the record. It is that it's on the website. It's entitled,
[1:42:33]"How the flaws of HR4405 Could revictimize Epstein's victims, create new victims, and damage the judicial system." It is dated today.
[1:42:43]Thank you. And it and it summarizes just five or six of the major concerns. Among them, it fails to fully protect victim privacy. It could create new categories of victims. It potentially jeopardizes
[1:42:54]grand jury secrecy. It fails to prohibit release of child sexual abuse materials that are not appropriately defined in the legislation. It jeopardizes future federal investigations and we have
[1:43:05]national security concerns regarding classified information. We'll put this in the record because we need the legislative record to reflect what is the legislative intent behind this vote. I used to litigate cases. We would
[1:43:16]litigate uh federal statutes and whether or not they could survive. And legislative intent is important. And we need to say clearly for the record as a speaker of house I'm saying to you this legislation that will pass today is
[1:43:26]flawed and it must be amended. The question is why didn't we amend it here before we passed it because the authors won't allow it because under the rules of the house under a discharge petition they have to agree to consent for the the legislation to be amended and
[1:43:38]they're not doing that. So now we rely upon our partners in the other chamber to get that done and they need to do that. The victims deserve our utmost respect. In fact, they should be saluted for their courage. And the young women
[1:43:49]who have not come forward, who are now, some of them are middle-aged women who have not come forward, also deserve our respect. And they they deserve to be protected. Republicans support transparency. We want maximum
[1:43:59]transparency, especially when it comes to disclosing the names of anybody who had anything to do with these evils, anybody who conspired with or aided in any way, Jeffrey Epstein, they must be
[1:44:11]brought to justice. We we want the bill to be amended so it doesn't in the at the same time violate victim privacy, create new victims, disclose the names of any whistleblower or informant, cause the release of grand jury materials or
[1:44:22]or child sexual abuse materials, or undermine our national security. And if and when the Senate takes this up, we will work with our colleagues over there to make sure that these things are corrected. I I'll just um I'll just
[1:44:34]close with this um this simple thought. Uh we we've been at this a while. um it's drug on for a while, but uh it's time for this to come to light. We we
[1:44:45]are I I expect that I expect that this will be a unanimous vote and it will reflect what I think every member in this chamber and I'll say this now, at least in recent days, every member of
[1:44:55]the chamber on the Democrat side, they didn't say anything for four years, but they're for maximum transparency now and so is this side. But we want to do it in a respectful and and careful manner so that we don't subject innocent people to
[1:45:07]further harm. And that has been the whole thing. I told all my members today I'll be voting yes on this and I suspect almost everyone will. We'll send it to the Senate and we hope it's corrected. Thank you for the time, Mr. Speaker, and
[1:45:18]I yield back. >> Gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized. >> I'm yielding to Mr. Gomez for the sole purpose of making a parliamentary inquiry. >> Mr. Gomez is recognized.
[1:45:29]>> Mr. Speaker, I rise um to ask a point of parliamentary inquiry. Is this an appropriate time to point out that the Republicans named Children's Savings Account and their so-called One Big Beautiful Bill after Donald Trump,
[1:45:41]someone connected to one of the most notorious pedophiles in this country, or that the speaker of just lied on the floor by stating that there was protection there is protections for the
[1:45:53]victims in the Epstein bill. >> The gentleman is no longer recognized. Gentleman from Maryland, you are recognized. >> Thank you. I I am uh prepared to close. I've got no more speakers on my side.
[1:46:04]>> The gentleman reserves. Gentleman from Ohio is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. >> No, no. >> Gentleman from Ohio has 30 seconds.
[1:46:22]>> You could remain. >> Can I inquire how much time is remaining? 30 seconds. 6 minutes 15 seconds
[1:46:34]>> take 30 his >> we reserve >> gentleman reserve gentleman from Maryland is recognized um I'll take the opportunity of the speaker's presence to respond to some of the things that he
[1:46:45]said in the very presence of the victims and the survivors who come to join us today the speaker said that now would be a time we should be working on urgent
[1:46:53]legislative work Mr. Speaker, justice is urgent legislative work. The truth is urgent legislative work. The speaker says, "Why now? Why now?"
[1:47:07]Well, Mr. Speaker, you were the one who refused to swear in Adelita Graava for 50 days. We would have done it 50 days ago, but she provided the 218th
[1:47:16]signature on the discharge petition. So why now? it was because of your dilatory tactics, your delay, your postponement
[1:47:25]of it. Now, uh the the gentleman says that they're not sufficient protections. There are protections in the bill for the victims to make sure that their
[1:47:35]names will be redacted. And yet, we hear even the speaker of the House of Representatives openly inviting the US Senate to start fingerpainting on this bill, which we have waited more than
[1:47:47]five months to bring to the floor. The Senate should pass the bill exactly as it's written. The president should sign it exactly as he said he would when he finally changed his mind. And the
[1:47:58]Epstein file must be released. Moreover, if the president is serious about what he's saying, he's got the power to release the Epstein file right now.
[1:48:08]Nobody's stopping him. It's within his possession. It's within his control. he can release the whole thing and he can react redact the names of the victims
[1:48:17]and others uh who are innocent um in this process. Mr. Speaker, Speaker Johnson said that these are
[1:48:31]unspeakable evils. Well, because of the bravery and the invincible courage of the women who've joined us today, they're no longer unspeakable.
[1:48:41]They're spoken. They're articulated. The cat is out of the bag. And we know what's been going on for decades. It's been a double standard of justice going
[1:48:51]all the way back to Alex Acasta, who later got rewarded with a cabinet appointment in the Trump administration. Alex Acasta had a 60count federal
[1:49:01]indictment ready to go against all kinds of people for an interstate sex trafficking conspiracy with solicitation with child sex abuse all of it. And he
[1:49:13]traded that 60count federal indictment for one count in state court. And Jeffrey Epstein ended up getting the sweetest of sweetheart deals ever on the
[1:49:24]plea bargain front. He was free from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. to do whatever he wanted in continuing to perpetrate his crimes and run his conspiracy. And then
[1:49:35]he would come and he would watch TV and spend the night in jail. And it was over in about a year after the rape and sexual abuse of hundreds and hundreds of girls. And he
[1:49:46]kept going and he kept at it. We want the whole truth to come out. This is the United States of America. Even the British monarchy wouldn't put up with
[1:49:56]this. How about the American democracy? How about we say, "No way. We're not going to allow this cover up to go on for one day more." And I'm glad the
[1:50:06]president changed his mind after pulling out all the stops to try to get uh one of our Republican colleagues to change their mind to remove their name from the
[1:50:18]discharge petition. He gave up. And I want to salute the gentle lady from Colorado from having the courage to stand her ground in the situation room in the White House and say no, she
[1:50:30]wasn't going to be bullied. No. So, um, I'm glad the president changed his mind, but let's be clear, Mr. President, you've got the power today to release
[1:50:41]the entire file. That's what you called for. That's what Pam Bondi called for. That's what Cash Patel called for. So we don't need anybody calling for the Senate to slow things down for more
[1:50:53]weeks and more months. The American people have had it. We'll reserve. Gentleman reserves. Gentleman is reminded to direct your comments to the chair and not your colleagues. The
[1:51:03]gentleman from Ohio is recognized and you do have 90 seconds remaining. Correction. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Texas. >> Gentleman from Texas is recognized. The Democrat party with help from the
[1:51:14]dishonest media used the Epstein files not to seek justice from the victims for the victims but to smear President Trump. And it's sickening. Quite sickening. The Democrats have used the Epstein files to distract the American
[1:51:25]people from the winds President Trump and his administration have delivered for the American people for the last 11 months. I'm proud to work with my Republican colleagues on the House Oversight Committee in coordination with
[1:51:36]the Justice Department. 65,000 pages of documents related from Epstein released. What have my Democrat colleagues done? They selectively leaked and altered documents to mislead the American
[1:51:47]people. As President Trump has stated, we have nothing to hide. Nothing to hide here. I'm voting to release the files so that we can move on from this Shmere campaign the Democrats have manufactured. God bless.
[1:51:58]>> Gentleman's time is expired. >> Gentleman from Maryland is recognized. >> Reserve the balance of the time. >> Gentleman reserves. >> Reserve. >> Gentleman from Ohio reserves. Gentleman
[1:52:09]from Maryland is recognized. All right. How much time do I have to close? >> You have two minutes. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I I want to thank all of America for tuning in to
[1:52:20]this. I want to thank uh Representatives uh Massie and Kana, Representative Green, all of those who have insisted upon bringing the truth forward and a
[1:52:32]reckoning with the reality of one of the worst international child sex trafficking rings ever to exist in the United States. and the cover up attendant to it. We've got the
[1:52:44]opportunity today to do justice for the victims, for the survivors who have come forward to say that the voice of the victims and the survivors must be put at
[1:52:54]the very center of our deliberations. Not shunted off to the side, not submerged, not subordinated, but put at the very center. We must hear from the
[1:53:03]people who themselves were victimized by this nightmare. Now, our colleagues across the aisle seem to want to make this into some sort of partisan contest.
[1:53:14]I haven't heard so much talk about the Democrats since the Democratic National Convention. And all that we've done here is to say we want to bring the truth
[1:53:23]forward along with a bipartisan group. We don't want the Senate monkeying around with this in order to slow things down. We want it passed in the Senate.
[1:53:33]We want it signed. And before that, if the president is true to his word and he wants to see all of this come to light, he can release it now instead of fighting, kicking, and screaming every
[1:53:44]step along the way. But I'm glad he's changed his mind, and I hope he maintains the momentum he's got to stick with the vast majority of the American people who want to see that the truth is
[1:53:55]done here. And while he's at it, the administration could reconsider their terrible policies, gutting federal offices and programs designed to combat
[1:54:05]violence against women. The DOJ terminated hundreds of grants to police departments, defunding the police when it comes to investigating violent sex
[1:54:14]crimes, and to support victims. His doge destroyed programs to combat international human trafficking rings. Let's get back on the side of the women. I I yield back.
[1:54:25]>> Gentleman yields back. The gentleman from Ohio. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh the speaker Johnson said it right. Why now after four years of doing nothing because going after President Trump is an obsession with these guys.
[1:54:36]Best example, best example is John Brennan testified in front of our committee under oath said he was not involved with the dossier. Only problem is Tulsi Gabber declassified a report, released that report and it said exactly
[1:54:48]the opposite. And she related a story in there where a CIA official went up to Mr. Brennan said, "We shouldn't include this in the report." And John Brennan's response was, "Yeah, but doesn't it ring
[1:54:58]true? Forget the facts. Forget the truth. Go after Trump. Put it in." Same dynamic at work here. We're all for protecting innocent victims. We're all for exposing the bad guys who did bad
[1:55:09]things. But this is obsession with the left. For 10 years, it's going after President Trump. So vote yes. Make sure the bad guys are held accountable. We all want
[1:55:19]to do that. Speaker Johnson's right. I think it's going to be unanimous, but understand what they're doing cuz they had four years and didn't do a darn thing. With that, I yield back.
[1:55:30]>> Gentleman yields back. The question is, will the House suspend the rules and pass the bill HR4405? Those in favor say I.
[1:55:40]>> Those opposed say no. >> In the opinion of the chair chair, twothirds being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended. The bill is passed and can request a recorded vote. Mr. The
[1:55:51]gentleman from Maryland is recognized. >> Yeah, I'm requesting recorded vote. >> Gentleman from Maryland has requested a recorded vote. Those favoring a recorded vote will rise.
[1:56:03]A sufficient number having risen, a recorded vote is ordered. Members will record their votes by electronic device. Pursuant to clause nine of rule 20, this
[1:56:13]15minute vote on the motion to suspend the rules will be followed by fiveminute votes on ordering the previous question on House Resolution 879, adoption of
[1:56:24]House Resolution 879 if ordered and adoption of House Resolution 878. This is a 15minute vote. Heat. Heat.
[2:06:11]Good morning. Heat. Heat.
[2:13:51]Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.
[2:16:13]Heat. Heat. Heat.
[2:16:54]Heat. Hello.
[2:17:24]Heat. Heat.
[2:18:11]Heat. Heat.
[2:19:58]Heat. Heat. Heat.
[2:21:44]Heat. Heat. on this vote. The yays are 427,
[2:22:58]the nays are one. 2/3 being in the affirmative. The rules are suspended. The bill is passed and without objection, the motion to reconsider is
[2:23:09]laid on the table. Pursuant to clause 8, rule 20, the
[2:23:36]unfinished business is the vote on ordering the previous question on House Resolution 879 on which the yays and nays are ordered. The clerk will report the title of the resolution. >> House calendar number 47, House
[2:23:48]Resolution 879. Resolution providing for consideration of the joint resolution Senate Joint Resolution 80 providing for congressional disapproval under chapter
[2:23:58]8 of Title 5, United States Code of the Rule submitted by the Bureau of Land Management relating to National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska integrated activity plan record of decision
[2:24:09]providing for consideration of the joint resolution House Joint Resolution 130 providing for congressional disapproval under Chapter 8 of Title 5 United States Code of the rules submitted by the
[2:24:19]Bureau of Land Management. ment relating to Buffalo Field Office record of decision and approved resource management plan amendment providing for consideration of the joint resolution
[2:24:29]house joint resolution 131 providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5 United States code of the rules submitted by the bureau of land management relating to coastal plane oil
[2:24:40]and gas leasing program record of decision providing for consideration of the concurrent resolution house concurrent resolution 58 denouncing the horrors of socialism providing for
[2:24:51]consideration of the bill HR1 1949 to repeal restrictions on the export of import of natural gas. providing for consideration of the bill HR 3109 to
[2:25:02]require the Secretary of Energy to direct the National Petroleum Council to issue a report with respect to the prochemical refineries in the United States and for other purposes providing
[2:25:12]for consideration of the bill HR5107 to repeal the comprehensive policing and justice reform amendment act of 2022 enacted by the District of Columbia
[2:25:22]Council providing for consideration of the bill HR 5214 to require There are mandatory pre-trial and postconviction detention for crimes of violence and
[2:25:32]dangerous crimes and require mandatory cash bail for certain offenses that pose a threat to the public safety or order in the District of Columbia and for
[2:25:41]other purposes and for other purposes. >> The question is on ordering the previous question. Members will record their vote by electronic device. This is a
[2:25:51]fiveminute vote. Heat.
[2:26:48]Heat. On this vote, the yays are 217, the nays
[2:31:38]are 211. The previous question is ordered. The question is on the adoption of the resolution. Those in favor say I. >> Those opposed say no. >> No.
[2:31:49]>> In the opinion of the chair, the eyes have it. >> Speaker, >> for what purpose does the gentleman from Massachusetts rise? >> I ask for a recorded vote.
[2:31:59]A recorded vote is requested. Those favoring a recorded vote will rise. A sufficient number having risen, a recorded vote is ordered. Pursuant to
[2:32:09]clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. >> The House will be in order.
[2:32:27]The House will come to order. The House will come to order. For what purpose does the gentleman seek
[2:32:40]recognition? >> To speak out of order for one minute, Mr. Speaker. >> Without objection, the gentleman is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I rise to
[2:32:50]recognize a man whose dedication, steadiness, and wisdom have shaped not only my work in this chamber, but the work of this institution itself.
[2:33:01]I'm talking about my chief of staff, Brett Horton. There are few people who know Capitol
[2:33:13]Hill more intimately than Brett. For 15 years, >> gentlemen will suspend. The house will be in order. >> Gentleman's ready.
[2:33:22]>> For 15 years, he's been by my side. He began as my counsel in 2010 and worked his way through some of the most demanding consequential roles in the
[2:33:32]House, policy director at the Republican Study Committee, floor director in the majority whips office, and for the last decade, my chief of staff in both the
[2:33:43]whip's office and the leader office. To me and to countless members of Congress and staff, Brett Horton has been far
[2:33:53]more than a colleague. He's been a trusted adviser, steady in his approach, wise in his counsel, and deliberate in his words and
[2:34:03]actions. When the stakes were the highest, Brett's voice was the one you wanted in the room. His fingerprints are on every major Republican policy victory we've
[2:34:15]achieved in the past decade. But perhaps more importantly, he's been by my side through tough personal and professional challenges that extend far beyond
[2:34:26]legislating. In the aftermath of the congressional baseball shooting, an event that shook my family, my staff, and this entire
[2:34:36]conference in Congress, Brett's leadership and friendship were unwavering. He helped carry us through one of the most difficult and unprecedented challenges we ever faced.
[2:34:47]Mr. Speaker, public service at this level demands trust, character, and unwavering duty for the institution that
[2:34:57]is this United States Congress. Brett Horton embodies all of these qualities. I'm profoundly grateful for his years of
[2:35:05]service to me personally, to this House, and to our country. As Brett begins his next chapter, I have no doubt he'll continue to serve with the same
[2:35:15]excellence that he's defined that has defined his entire career. The United States House of Representatives is the stronger institution because of Brett
[2:35:25]Horton's distinguished service here. I wish Brett all the best in his future endeavors. And I tell you, thank you, Brett, for your personal friendship and
[2:35:37]for your service to this great United States of America and this great Congress. Thank you, Brett Horton. Mr. Speaker, I
[2:36:05]>> gentleman yields back. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the unfinished business is the vote on the adoption of House Resolution 879 on which a recorded vote is ordered. The clerk will report
[2:36:15]the title of the resolution. Calendar number 47, House Resolution 879, resolution providing for consideration of the joint resolution, Senate Joint Resolution 80, providing for
[2:36:26]congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of Title 5, United States Code of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Land Management relating to National Petroleum reserved in Alaska Integrated
[2:36:37]Activity Plan. Record of decision providing for consideration of the joint resolution house joint resolution 130 providing for cons congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5
[2:36:47]United States Code of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Land Management relating to Buffalo Field Office record of decision and approved resource management plan amendment
[2:36:57]providing for consideration of the joint resolution house joint resolution 131 providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5 United States Code of the rules submitted by the
[2:37:07]Bureau of Land Management relating to coastal plane oil and gas leasing program record of decision providing for consideration of the concurrent resolution house concurrent resolution
[2:37:17]58 denouncing the horrors of socialism providing for consideration of the bill HR1949 to repeal restrictions on the export and import of natural gas. providing for
[2:37:28]consideration of the bill HR 3109 to require the Secretary of Energy to direct the National Petroleum Council to issue a report with respect to the prochemical refineries in the United
[2:37:39]States and for other purposes providing for consideration of the bill HR5107 to repeal the comprehensive policing and justice reform amendment act of 2022 enacted by the District of Columbia
[2:37:51]Council providing for consideration of the bill HR5214 to require mandatory pre-trial and postconviction detention for crimes of violence and dangerous crimes and
[2:38:02]require mandatory cash bail for certain offenses that pose a threat to the public safety or order in the District of Columbia and for other purposes and for other purposes. >> The question is on the adoption of the
[2:38:15]resolution. Members will record their votes by electronic device. This is a fiveminute vote. Heat. Heat.
[2:41:05]Heat. Heat.
[2:41:26]Heat. Heat.
[2:42:55]Heat. Heat.
[2:43:29]Game number two. On this vote, the yays are 217 and the
[2:44:03]nays are 210. The resolution is adopted. Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the
[2:44:22]unfinished business is the vote on adoption of House Resolution 878 on which the yay's and nazs are ordered. The clerk will report the title of the resolution. >> House resolution 878. Resolution
[2:44:33]disapproving the behavior of Representative Jesus G. Chewy Garcia of Illinois. The question is on adoption of the resolution. Members will record their
[2:44:43]votes by electronic device. This is a fiveminute vote. Heat. Heat.
[2:47:14]Heat. Heat. There he is.
[2:48:52]One And that's Come
[2:50:17]on everybody. Heat. Heat.
[2:51:08]On this vote, the yays are 236, the nays are 183 with Four answering present. The resolution is adopted. Without objection, the motion to
[2:51:19]reconsider is laid upon the table. The House will come to order.
[2:51:36]The House will come to order. For what purpose does the gentleman from South Carolina seek recognition? Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 2A1 of rule 9, I rise
[2:51:48]to give notice of my intent to raise a question of the privilege of the house. The gentleman is recognized. Just a moment.
[2:51:58]Members of the house will come to order. Chair would ask members to please take conversations off the floor. The gentleman is recognized. Mr. Mr.
[2:52:09]Speaker, my my House resolution 888 censoring and condemning Delegate Stacy Plask and removing her from the House Permanent Select Committee on
[2:52:18]Intelligence for conduct that reflects the discreditability on the House of Representatives for colluding with convicted felon and offender Jeffrey
[2:52:28]Epstein during a congressional hearing. Whereas Stacy Plasket, the delegate representing the United States Virgin Islands in the House of Representatives,
[2:52:39]inappropriately coordinated in real time with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein in a congressional hearing in
[2:52:48]February of 2019, whereas Delegate Plask was actively coached by Epstein during the hearing, receiving in instructions on specific
[2:53:00]lines of questioning. and was congratulated afterward after after the message by Mr. Epstein. Good work. Whereas Jeffrey Epstein,
[2:53:12]Mr. Speaker, the House is not in order. >> The gentleman has the floor. The chair would again ask the body to please observe the quorum and keep conversations to a minimum. The gentleman has the floor.
[2:53:24]Whereas Jeffrey Epstein was a known convicted felony sex offender, having plead guilty and been convicted for procuring a child for prostitution and
[2:53:34]solicitation, a pro prostelite in a plea deal in 2008 and served a 13-month prison sentence. Whereas in the course
[2:53:44]of that investigation, the FBI compiled reports on dozens of confirmed minors who credibly alleged sexual abuse by Mr. Epstein.
[2:53:55]Whereas Epstein was under further federal investigation beginning in November of 2018, two months before delegate Plaset's recently revealed text
[2:54:05]exchange during a congressional hearing following investigative reporting by the Miami Herald detailing Epstein's controversial 2008 plea deal and
[2:54:16]highlighting accounts of his victims. Whereas Epstein was arrested in July of 2019 and charged with one count of sex
[2:54:26]trafficking of minors and one count of conspiracy to commit sex trafficking of minors, he was later found dead in the New York Metropolitan Correctional
[2:54:36]Center. Whereas, according to documents released from Epstein's estate, during a House Committee on Oversight and Reform hearing featuring testimony from Michael
[2:54:47]Cohen, the disgraced former attorney for President Donald J. Trump, Delegate Plask coordinated her line of questioning with Jeffrey Jeffrey Epstein
[2:54:57]in real time over text messages while the hearing was underway. Whereas Delegate Plask, who previously serves served as an assistant attorney general
[2:55:08]in the United States Department of Justice Civil Division, is known to have had extensive political, personal, and professional connections with Epstein
[2:55:19]after his conviction as a sex offender up to the time of his arrest and then his death in 2019. Whereas deleg de delegate plasket's
[2:55:29]relationship with Epstein stands in stark contrast to the public image that she has curated for herself as a defender of justice and accountability
[2:55:39]and while secretly collaborating with an individual whose crimes against vulnerable women and children shocked the entire nation. Whereas delegate
[2:55:50]Plask's willingness to receive instructions on official congressional proceedings from Epstein, a convicted felony sex offender with deep concerning
[2:56:00]international associations, is especially alarming and inappropriate given her own past service in the United States Department of Justice and her current role on the House Permanent
[2:56:10]Select Committee on Intelligence and raises serious questions about Delegate Plask's judgment, her integrity, and our fitness to serve. Whereas such
[2:56:22]associations erode public trust in Congress, particularly when they involve using input input from a sex offender to advance partisan attacks during official
[2:56:33]proceedings. Now, therefore, be it resolved, section one, censor of delegate stacy Plaset, resolve that the House of Representatives censors and
[2:56:44]condemns delegate Stacy Plask for inappropriate coordination with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein during a congressional hearing, which
[2:56:55]reflects discreditibly on the House of Representatives and directs the Committee on Ethics to conduct a full investigation into the extent of Plaskets's ties to Epstein and any
[2:57:06]further improprieties. Section two, remove from House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. The following named member be and is hereby
[2:57:16]removed from the following committee on the House of Representatives. Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Miss Plask. >> Chair will now recognize the gentleman
[2:57:27]from South Carolina to offer the resolution just notice. Does the gentleman from South Carolina offer the resolution? I do. The clerk will report the resolution.
[2:57:36]>> House resolution 888. Whereas Stacy Plask, the delegate representing the United States Virgin Islands in the House of Representatives, inappropriately coordinated with
[2:57:46]convicted six sex offender Jeffrey Epste in a congressional hearing in February 2019. Whereas delegate Plask was actively coached by Epstein during the hearing, received instructions on
[2:57:58]specific lines of questioning, and was congratulated afterwards with the message, "Good work." Whereas Jeffrey Epstein was a known convicted felony sex offender, having plead guilty and being
[2:58:08]convicted for procuring a child for prostitution and for soliciting a prostitute in a plea deal in 20 2008 and served a 13-month sentence. Whereas in the course of that investigation, the
[2:58:19]FBI compiled reports on dozens of confirmed minors who credibly alleged sexual abuse by Epstein. Whereas Epstein was under further federal investigation beginning November 2018, two months
[2:58:30]before Delegate Plasket's recently revealed text exchange during a congressional hearing, following investigative reporting by the Miami Herald detailing Epstein's controversial
[2:58:40]2008 plea deal and highlighting accounts of his victims. Whereas Epstein was arrested in July 2019 and charged with one count of sex trafficking of minors and one count of conspiracy to commit
[2:58:52]sex trafficking of minors. and he was later found dead in the New York Metropolitan Correctional Center. Whereas, according to documents released from Epstein's estate during a House Committee on Oversight and Reform
[2:59:03]hearing featuring testimony from Michael Cohen, disgraced former attorney to President Donald J. Trump, Delegate Plask coordinated her line of questioning with Jeffrey Epstein in real time over text message while the hearing
[2:59:14]was underway. Whereas Delegate Plask, who previously served as an assistant attorney general in the US Department of Justice Civil Division, is known to have had extensive political, personal, and
[2:59:26]professional connections with Epstein after his conviction as a sex offender up to the time of the his arrest and then death in 2019. Whereas delegate Plasket's relationship with Epstein
[2:59:36]stands in stark contrast to the public image she has curated for herself as a defender of justice and accountability while secretly collaborating with an individual whose crimes against vulnerable women and children shocked
[2:59:48]the nation. Whereas Delegate Plasket's willingness to receive instructions on official congressional proceedings from Epstein, a convicted felony sex offender with deeply concerning international
[2:59:58]associations, is especially alarming and inappropriate given her own past service in the US Department of Justice and her current role on the House permanent select committee on intelligence and
[3:00:08]raises serious questions about Delegate Plasket's judgment, integrity, and fitness to serve. And whereas such associations erode public trust in Congress, particularly when this involves trying using input from a sex
[3:00:20]offender to advance partisan attacks during official proceedings. Now therefore be it resolved. Section one censure of delegate Stacy Plask. The House of Representatives one, censures
[3:00:31]and condemns delegate Stacy Plasket for inappropriate coordination with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein during a congressional hearing which reflects discreditibly on the House of Representatives and two directs the
[3:00:42]committee on ethics to conduct a full investigation into the extent of Plasket's ties to Epstein and any potential further improprieties. Section two, removal from House Permanent Select
[3:00:53]Committee on Intelligence. The following name member B and is hereby removed from the following committee of the House of Representatives. Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Miss Plask.
[3:01:04]>> The resolution qualifies. For what purpose does the gentle lady from Massachusetts rise? >> Mr. Speaker, I have a motion at the desk.
[3:01:12]>> The clerk will report the motion. >> Miss Clark of Massachusetts moves to refer the resolution to the Committee on Ethics.
[3:01:23]The gentle lady from Massachusetts is recognized for one hour. >> Mr. Speaker, today we have finally taken
[3:01:31]a vote that recognizes the need for the survivors and victims of Jeffrey Epstein to have justice and transparency. And
[3:01:43]now minutes later, the gentleman from South Carolina is filing yet another partisan resolution.
[3:01:53]I ask all of my colleagues to support this motion to refer this to the ethics committee and I yield back my time. >> Without objection, the previous question
[3:02:07]is ordered. The question is on the motion to refer. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> All those opposed say no. >> No. >> In the opinion of the chair, the nos
[3:02:19]have it. >> Mr. Speaker, >> and the motion is not up. >> Mr. Speaker, I request to call the yays and nays. >> The yays and nays are requested. Those favoring a vote by the yays and nays
[3:02:29]will rise. A sufficient number having risen, the yays and nays are ordered. Members will record their votes by electronic device. Five minutes will be
[3:02:39]allowed for this vote. Heat.
[3:04:48]Heat. Heat. Heat.
[3:06:08]Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.
[3:10:19]All right. On this vote, the eyes are 213 and the
[3:10:41]nose are 214. The motion is not adopted. Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. Pursuant to clause two of rule nine, the
[3:11:03]gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Norman, and the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Raskin, each will control 30 minutes. The chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina.
[3:11:15]>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In just a moment, the chair would ask the House to come to order again. ask members to take conversations off the floor so that the members can be given due accord and
[3:11:26]respect during the period of debate. The gentleman has the floor. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today because the House of Representatives has a responsibility
[3:11:35]and a duty to protect the integrity of this institution. And what we learned from the documents released by Jeffrey Epstein's estate is nothing short of
[3:11:46]alarming. Those documents show that Delegate Stacy Plask, a sitting member of Congress, coordinated her questioning during an oversight, an official oversight hearing
[3:11:58]with a man who is a convicted sex offender. A man whose crimes against minors shocked this entire nation.
[3:12:08]Let me be clear, this was just not casual contact. there. There were deliberate communications and they shaped her official line of questioning
[3:12:19]in a congressional hearing. The American people expect honesty. The American people expect integrity and judgment from their elected officials.
[3:12:30]They expect members of Congress to conduct themselves with one word, decency, not to seek advice from a predator who exploited
[3:12:40]minor children. This resolution does not accuse. It acknowledges what is documented. It censors Delegate Plask for her conduct,
[3:12:51]removes her from the intelligence committee where her judgment is paramount and directs a full investigation into the extent of her relationship with with Mr. Abstein.
[3:13:03]Some will try to to spend this as politics, but protecting the honor of this body is not partisan. It's not Democrat. is not Republican. Standing Standing against a
[3:13:15]convicted predator's influence in our proceedings is not partisan. It's basic decency. We We cannot pretend this
[3:13:25]didn't happen. The American people deserve better. Speaker, I reserve. The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized. >> Thank you kindly, Mr. Speaker. I yield
[3:13:36]myself such time as I may consume. The gentleman's recognized >> and I rise in opposition to this resolution. Uh, you know, we're here today on the floor to support the
[3:13:48]complete disclosure of information related to Jeffrey Epstein and his billiondoll international child sex trafficking ring. and our side of the
[3:13:58]aisle at least supports the release of information relating to anybody who had anything to do with it, whether they're a Republican, a Democrat, an
[3:14:08]independent, or what have you. Period. We insist on complete full disclosure. This resolution has nothing to do with that. This seems to me to be one more
[3:14:19]pathetic effort to distract and divert attention from the fact that the president's name appeared more than a thousand times already in the small fraction of material released on Epstein
[3:14:30]and from the failure of the majority to move to disclose this information. And it is this bipartisan group that
[3:14:40]we've had behind the discharge resolution which has insisted on bringing this to the four. And we've got nothing but obstruction, opposition,
[3:14:49]resistance, evasion, distraction, and diversion from the other side. And now we get one more resolution like this. The resolution actually proposes um a
[3:15:00]disciplinary censure against Representative Stacy Plasid, but amazingly alleges no misconduct. It does not allege the violation of the Constitution. It does not allege the
[3:15:12]violation of a federal law or a state law or local law. It does not violate it does not even allege a violation of the ethics rules of the House of Representatives. And yet they want to
[3:15:22]censure her and throw her off of her committee. this a distinguished former federal prosecutor uh diligent public servant
[3:15:33]representative of the people of the Virgin Islands. Now, criminal justice has two parts to it. One is insisting upon legal
[3:15:44]accountability for people who do wrong. The other part of it is due process, which may be the two most beautiful words in the English language.
[3:15:54]Certainly the two most beautiful words in the Constitution of the United States. It's due process that protects all of our freedoms and our rights against the arbitrary power of
[3:16:05]government and the will just to punish somebody without any process at all. But that's exactly what's going on here. Think about it. Gain Maxwell had due
[3:16:15]process. She had a right to counsel. She had a right to hearing. She had a right to hear the evidence against her. She had a right to put on her case. She had a right to cross-examine. She had a
[3:16:25]right to a neutral, impartial tribunal. She had a right to unanimous verdict uh of a jury and all of that she had. And she was found guilty. And that's why she
[3:16:36]was sentenced to jail for 20 years. Even though Donald Trump has transferred her from a real prison to a prison camp where she's gotten very special pampered treatment like she's in a Trump hotel.
[3:16:48]She gets room service to her cell. She gets gym privileges. other inmates don't get. She gets uh to use the warden as a
[3:16:58]gobetween with people outside of the institution and so on. But any event, she had due process. Donald Trump had due process. He was convicted on 34 felonies, but he had the right to counsel. He had the presumption of
[3:17:09]innocence. He had a unanimous uh jury trial right. They had a right to cross-examine everybody, put their own witnesses on. Now they want to take a former United States prosecutor, the
[3:17:20]representative of the people of the Virgin Islands, and without even going to the ethics committee, much less a court, they want to arraign her on some charges based on a newspaper article
[3:17:30]that she did something lawful, however ill advised it may have been, she took a phone call from one of her constituents. Now, I don't think it is the position of
[3:17:41]the very distinguished gentleman that if we find Jeffrey Epstein on the phone with Donald Trump, he should be impeached for it. Or is that his position?
[3:17:52]>> Is his position that anytime Jeffrey Epstein got somebody on the phone and he got a lot of people on the phone, that person is suddenly guilty? That sounds like guilt by association. That sounds
[3:18:03]like collective guilt. Our minority whip introduced a perfectly reasonable amendment to say, "Let's refer this to an ethics committee. Let's have a real hearing." They didn't want to have a real hearing. They want to rush to
[3:18:14]judgment. Why? So there can be some headline that will please Donald Trump tomorrow instead of a unanimous statement, or forgive me, I think the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana may have dissented, but an otherwise
[3:18:26]unanimous verdict of the House of Representatives that the American people want all the files open. We've had enough of the cover up. We want all of the truth. We want the survivors and the
[3:18:37]victims to have the possibility of accountability. Well, they want to give them another headline, which is that they've arraigned a Democratic member for taking a phone call from her
[3:18:48]constituent, uh, Jeffrey Epstein, in the middle of a hearing. And of course, I I I don't think there's any rule here against taking phone calls, um, in a hearing. Now, if you want to actually
[3:19:00]give her the chance to explain what happened, then we would take it to the ethics committee. I still don't see what the charge is. Where is the ethical transgression? Where is the legal
[3:19:10]transgression? Are you saying anybody on your side of the aisle who had a phone call with Jeffrey Epstein should be censured? Be careful your answer there because there's a lot more that's about to come out, right? So, you should think
[3:19:21]about what is the principle behind this rush to judgment. And I want to close just with this thought because I know there were a lot of people uh in the chamber who were here when this happened and a lot who weren't. There was a move
[3:19:33]to expel George Santos who was a Republican member of the House from New York. And it was the same kind of rush to judgment absolute political frenzy.
[3:19:43]And I looked at it for about 60 seconds. And you know I was a professor of constitutional law so call me a legal nerd. But I said wait this guy's not been convicted of anything. Well, he's a Republican. Yeah, I know he's a
[3:19:55]Republican. He is not convicted in criminal court. To my knowledge, he had not been arraigned yet or convicted of anything in the ethics disciplinary process. They just said, "Well, there's
[3:20:06]bad press. We want to get rid of him. Beware of what you wish for. Is that the rule that you want here in the House of Representatives that you can just draw up a member of Congress in 24 hours or
[3:20:17]48 hours because there's a bad newspaper article without asking any questions, without giving that person any due process at all? Is that what it's come to at this point? I mean, all we're
[3:20:28]asking for in the Epstein files is release the materials so we can check it out. They want to go ahead and censure and remove from a committee a distinguished member of the House of
[3:20:39]Representatives with no due process at all. I uh reject this. I hope the whole body will reject this. Just like I voted and spoke against removing George
[3:20:49]Santos, a Republican on the other side of the aisle, because he had gotten no due process, I hope all of our colleagues will reject this absurd rush to judgement and attempt to change the
[3:21:00]uh change the subject here. I reserve the balance of my time. >> The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from South Carolina is recognized. Mr. Speaker, before I yield time to my good friend, Louisiana. Uh, Representative
[3:21:12]Raskin, I will be careful in my remarks. You need to be careful with your facts. Um, you have 11-year veteran of this
[3:21:21]body who should know better. You have a 11-year member of this body who took money. It wasn't a newspaper article. It was a fact. She took money from Jeffrey
[3:21:31]Epstein. Uh it's it's ironic that you're taken up by defending Miss Plaset uh which it's going to the ethics
[3:21:42]committee, but she she's lost her willingness or lost her ability to serve uh because she's got irrational judgment by taking a taking money from a
[3:21:52]convicted ped ped pedophile of young children. And uh it's it's unfathomable that you're taking a position that you are. These are facts. You mentioned Gla Maxwell. She's not a sitting member of
[3:22:04]Congress. She as a sitting member of Congress. Uh Miss uh Miss She has relinquished any sense of duty to serve on these committees. With that, I want
[3:22:15]to yield as much time as needed for my good friend Louisiana, Mr. Klay Higgins. >> And the chair would remind all members to please avoid engaging in personalities to direct all comments to the chair. The gentleman from Louisiana
[3:22:26]is recognized. >> I thank my colleague Mr. Norman from South Carolina and I thank my colleague Mr. Rasin for the salient points that he
[3:22:36]had brought to this debate. I I also defended George Santos on this floor and opposed the means by which he was
[3:22:46]expelled. I think it was beyond the pale. And this is a this is a this is a responsibility that that we
[3:22:57]bear in this body is to determine the means by which our colleagues
[3:23:07]shall be reprimanded or disciplined. And the constitution is clear on this. My my friend Mr. Asan knows full well
[3:23:17]that this body controls the means by which and the rules by which the members of Congress shall be disciplined. So
[3:23:27]we've had variances of opinions regarding you know the exact um disciplinary actions that should be
[3:23:38]embraced or rejected member by member. But let me say that that in this case,
[3:23:47]Miss Plask's receiving text messages, this was so alarming to me when when I saw this and
[3:23:56]read it. I I didn't believe it. I say to my friend, I thought perhaps it was a it was it was
[3:24:06]media from a a satirical site. It couldn't possibly be true because we all know that a a text message, a text
[3:24:18]exchange is is rather intimate in the realm of communications and to pierce into an actual
[3:24:30]congressional hearing for a member of Congress to receive and respond to a text message
[3:24:39]during a hearing. ing that is quite familiar, is it not? And this was shocking to me that that a a member of Congress would
[3:24:51]be exchanging text messages directly with Jeffrey Epstein in 2019, at which time he was being prosecuted
[3:25:03]federally by the first Trump administration. He had received some nature of a sweetheart deal back in 2007 and avoided
[3:25:15]federal prosecution by plea no contest to some level of state prosecution where he was he was
[3:25:25]sentenced Mr. speaker to 13 months. My understanding he did 11 months and at the easiest time that could be done. He walked every day during the day on a
[3:25:35]work release program. So that sweetheart deal let me say should be looked at. And now to my horror who has come to light
[3:25:46]that should be looked at. What was her involvement? Was there some involvement then? She's a good lady from the Virgin Islands. Where did Jeffrey Epstein live
[3:25:57]in the Virgin Islands? She was a constituent in 2019. Was she a friend in 2007? During her service to the DOJ, which my
[3:26:08]friend has brought up, was there any interactions? These are the questions we have. The good lady from the Virgin Islands has crossed the threshold of
[3:26:20]reasonable suspicion. And therefore she should be investigated during said investigation by ethics and
[3:26:30]I would recommend by DOJ and I would recommend by oversight and judiciary committees. Meanwhile, she should absolutely be removed from the House
[3:26:42]Select Committee on Intel. This, Mr. Speaker, is my position. I presented without note for the betterment of the debate of this
[3:26:52]body and I yield my time back to the gentleman from South Carolina. Mr. >> Speaker, I reserve >> from South Carolina. The gentleman from South Carolina reserves. The gentleman
[3:27:04]from Maryland is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And it's always a pleasure to hear my friend from Louisiana. Both of the Republican speakers have said this demands an ethics investigation. I think Mr. Higgins just said it should be
[3:27:15]investigated by oversight and by judiciary as well as by uh ethics as well as you know by by others. This resolution censures her and punishes her
[3:27:26]before there's been one day of investigation. There's been no investigation at all. That was the whole burden of uh of the minority whips
[3:27:37]amendment. It was to say let's have an investigation, refer it to the ethics committee. That's why you uh the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana and I both voted against and we got a
[3:27:46]majority to vote against censuring or expelling even um George Santos without any ruling by our ethics disciplinary body. Isn't that putting the cart before
[3:27:58]the horse? I don't get it. I wish one of you could explain that to us why we should censure her before there's been one day of actual investigation. if being on the phone with one of our
[3:28:10]constituents, even an evil, sinister force like Jeffrey Epstein, uh, you know, and of course, you know, he has said that he considered Donald
[3:28:21]Trump the the, uh, most evil person he ever met, he said without a redeeming bone in his body. So, I agree people can say different things, but uh, Jeffrey
[3:28:31]Epstein to me disgraced himself. But in any event, um, people, you know, people want to know, well, what were the contents of that conversation? What why
[3:28:42]was Miss Plasket doing that? I'm sure she's got a good explanation. We're talking about a distinguished lawyer and federal prosecutor uh who was uh in the middle of a hearing, which is something
[3:28:52]that members do all the time is to talk to people um in hearings about different things. But let me ask, if it's now the standard that just to be on a phone call with somebody establishes guilt by
[3:29:04]association, what about all the members of this body or of the US Senate who were on the phone with January 6th insurrectionists
[3:29:13]and President Trump and his associates who were trying to block the certification of the election as people were chanting, "Hang Mike Pence." A lot of phone calls, lot of traffic going on.
[3:29:25]In fact, that's why our Republican colleagues dealt themselves a million dollar cash payoff bonanza provision in the most recent uh Republican spending
[3:29:36]bill. They put that in there because their phone records had been subpoenaed lawfully by a grand jury. They were treated like every other American citizen because their names came up as
[3:29:47]potentially being involved in that conspiracy to somehow shut down proceedings in the House and the Senate. Now, are we saying just because they were on a phone call, they're guilty of something? We should strip them of their
[3:29:59]committee assignments? We should censure them? Have we gotten to that point? I mean, come on. This is the House of Representatives of the United States of America. Let's stick by the
[3:30:09]Constitution. Let's stick by due process. Let's go through the rules. I yield uh five minutes to my distinguished colleague from Connecticut, Representative Hines. >> The gentleman from Connecticut is
[3:30:20]recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Mr. Speaker, and I thank the gentleman from Maryland. I'm not going to speak today about Jeffrey Epstein or January 6. I'm going to confine my remarks to two things that
[3:30:32]I know about. And I'm going to take a deep breath right now because to stand here and to have to listen to the gentleman from Louisiana in the guise of just asking questions bismerch one of
[3:30:44]the finest members I have had the honor of serving with I would think would offend the sensibility of anybody in this chamber. But I'm going to limit my remarks to two things I know very well.
[3:30:56]Number one, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and what we need to do to preserve that very special environment. Number two, the character
[3:31:06]of Delegate Stacy Plask on Hipsy. I've served for 10 years and with Chairman Turner and now with Chairman Crawford, we have fought for
[3:31:17]that decade to keep the Select Committee on Intelligence immunized from the sewage that flows through this chamber, the partisan
[3:31:28]attacks, the hideousness. And by and large, we've been pretty successful with one exception when that committee got involved in the political investigation around Ukraine in the first Trump
[3:31:38]administration. Every single day, the leaders of that committee work hard, establish friendships, and do the work we need to do to make sure that the toxicity and the sewage that we're
[3:31:50]hearing right now don't impinge the critical work of making sure that our intelligence communities are keeping Americans safe and not violating civil liberties and not doing things inconsistent with the desires and
[3:32:02]character of the American people. this effort put forward by a bunch of people who haven't served on that committee and who have no idea the comedy and the grace with which that committee serves.
[3:32:12]You sir will hurt this committee badly. And I expect every Republican on the intelligence committee and I'll say it again. And I expect every Republican on
[3:32:22]the intelligence committee who know Miss Plaset and who know the committee to vote no on the idea that without evidence and without due process, Miss Plask should be removed from that very
[3:32:34]special committee. This resolution would strike a devastating blow to Hipsy's ability to work effectively by removing a member in good standing
[3:32:43]based on a newspaper article about text. No due process, no evidence, nothing offered other than a newspaper article which has moved moved the gentleman from South Carolina, a member who is
[3:32:54]consistently engaged in a bipartisan and productive way with the committee's work to make some unrelated political statement will do profound damage to
[3:33:04]this essential committee. Now, let me just talk for a moment about Miss Plask. I've served in this institution for 17 years, longer, I think, than most people
[3:33:15]in this chamber. And I have not had the honor of serving with somebody with the integrity and the commitment and the hardworking bonafides
[3:33:25]as Ms. Plask. We can argue about the wisdom or the judgment associated with those texts. I'm told that apparently Mr. Epstein was
[3:33:35]a constituent. But on any one of us, our worst day, our biggest misjudgment is not to be judged without any due process, especially in
[3:33:46]the context of this superb member, this critical critical member of the intelligence committee. The result of this resolution, if it
[3:33:56]were to pass, will be to undo the efforts of the Republican speaker and the Republican chairman of the intelligence committee, Mr. Crawford to restore the committee to what it was
[3:34:06]intended to be. And while the bill for that decision won't come due immediately, it will come due over time in the form of a less accountable and less effective intelligence community
[3:34:17]with less effective oversight for Congress. So I don't expect the gentlemen who have offered this up to back down now. But I do expect every single member of the intelligence
[3:34:28]committee that elect those few who understand what it is we need to do to close the door on the flow of partisan sewage which we see now threatening the
[3:34:38]critical work that we do. Vote no on this appalling resolution. I yield back. >> We reserve. The gentleman from Connecticut yields back to the gentleman from Maryland. The gentleman from
[3:34:49]Maryland reserves. The gentleman from South Carolina is recognized. Mr. >> Speaker, can I inquire about how much time we have left? >> Two and a half minutes. >> Two and a half minutes. >> 22 and a2 minutes.
[3:35:00]>> 22 and a2 minutes. >> Uh, let me just say for my good friends on the left, you know, we're hearing words. That's all this is, words. You're taking the side of a young lady who
[3:35:12]should have known better. Uh, she served for 11 years. She she disparaged herself. She did it to herself. This is not smoking mirrors. This is actual text
[3:35:22]that pretty well indictes Miss Plascus. Would she probably take it back? Yes. But it's too late now. I want to yield as much time as needs to be consumed by
[3:35:33]my good friend from Texas, Chip Roy. >> The gentleman from Texas is recognized. >> I thank the gentleman from South Carolina. I thank him for bringing forward this important resolution uh before the body. I do want to say I
[3:35:45]appreciate the gentleman from Maryland his commentary about um the vote on removal and his considered judgment with respect to Santos and I agreed with him at the time and made the same points.
[3:35:57]Um, I want to align myself the remarks from the gentleman from Louisiana, but I want to note in doing so and and I and I and and I think the gentleman from Maryland has shown uh respect to I think
[3:36:08]the judgment of the gentleman from Louisiana about his being the so the sole vote on the issue before this body before with respect to what we're making public because of the gentleman's I think very real concerns about what it
[3:36:20]might mean for victims. And we had that debate in a colloquy back and forth in the judiciary committee a few hours ago about what we can do to ensure victims are protected and so forth. As we all go forward in what I believe is a unanimous
[3:36:30]view that we should go seek out uh truth and justice here with respect to Epstein and anybody associate associated with him and them and the uh nefarious
[3:36:41]affairs uh involving Jeffrey Epstein. Uh the the reason that I support this resolution is and I would note that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, they could have tabled this
[3:36:52]resolution, they chose not to table it, they chose to refer it, which which suggests to me that there's a recognition that something here is not particularly good. That we've got a
[3:37:02]sitting member, in this case the delegate, uh from the US Virgin Islands who was sitting in the oversight committee. And I'm actually of particular interest here because I was
[3:37:14]the one doing the questioning. Apparently my questioning was so riveting uh that she was engaging in text messages back and forth at that moment while I was questioning Mr.
[3:37:23]Cohen. Um the gentle lady was engaging in this back and forth on text messages with Jeffrey Epstein. Now again, I've
[3:37:33]listened now for months. my colleagues on the other side of the aisle disparage and try to impugn the character of the president of the United States and other
[3:37:43]members of the administration in connection to an investigation of Jeffrey Epstein which the president his administration in 2019 they indicted
[3:37:54]Epstein they actually moved forward and federally indicted him in 2019 Gelain Maxwell was arrested by the Trump administration And I know the gentleman
[3:38:05]from Maryland will go on to say that the Biden administration then carry forward that that arrest and and indictment into prosecution. True. But it was in fact the Trump administration that did what
[3:38:16]had not been done for a long period of time uh by taking forward that indictment. So, I've been listening to all of the preaching by my friends on the other side of the aisle about how
[3:38:28]any association, anything to do with Jeffrey Epstein is somehow uh the dispositive uh you know uh moment here in terms of determining uh the character
[3:38:38]of this administration or what they're doing or not doing when they're leaning in to try to seek the truth where mil, you know, tens of thousands of pages have been released by Jamie Comr and 13
[3:38:49]subpoenas has all been put out. So now the House just voted to have greater transparency. Time will tell what that means in terms of what the court does and how they deal with grand jury
[3:39:00]secrecy and what they do to continue to redact and protect victim's names under existing laws and how the courts treat that. That's going to be a process as the gentleman likely knows, right? This is going to be determined as to what
[3:39:10]gets released and how. But here we have the gentle lady sitting in the oversight committee texting with a known convicted felon, a convicted pedophile that was
[3:39:21]very public and known, had served jail time, and is engaging not just in texts that were trivial, but texts involving advice about her questioning of Michael
[3:39:31]Cohen. All designed to figure out how to get Michael Cohen to be able to somehow go after Trump or Trump's adviserss or people around the president. That to me
[3:39:42]is what we talk about with censure which is contemplated of course in our rules and in the structure. The gentleman talked about the constitution. We're not removing her. We're simply saying censure and we're saying that it is a
[3:39:54]censurable conduct to say that this individual sitting on a committee taking advice from a known convicted pedophile, convicted felon. that that is conduct
[3:40:04]unbecoming of a member of the United States Congress and engaging in real time taking advice from someone that we've been listening to being lectured to is someone deserving of all of the
[3:40:15]scorn of the entire world and he is. That's why we're here. If my colleagues didn't think this was a concern, they would have simply made a motion to
[3:40:25]table. But my colleagues decided to refer it to committee because they know this is a problem. They know this is not the kind of conduct you want in a member of this body. So I think that the
[3:40:36]gentleman from South Carolina is right to have brought this forward. I think that the uh body should hear this debate and tonight that we should vote tonight to censure and refer to the ethics
[3:40:47]committee for further consideration. And with that I yield back. >> Yields. Gentleman from South Carolina I reserve. Gentleman reserves. Gentle from Maryland is recognized.
[3:40:58]>> Thank you Mr. speaker and um thank you to my friend from Texas for those remarks. Uh I'm afraid all of them dance around the central issue which is uh the
[3:41:09]the good congressman knows how due process works in America. There are facts that are aduced first. There's an opportunity to be heard on both sides. There's due process. There's
[3:41:20]consideration. Then there's judgment. You flipped the whole thing on its head. You've said we're going to judge her guilty before anybody has an opportunity even to hear what the charges are, much
[3:41:31]less answer the charges, much less do any kind of analysis. I'm I'm I'm sorry to hear that the text exchange uh that it seems to be at the heart of people's
[3:41:42]consternation here, took place uh during the distinguished gentleman's questioning, but that is not a federal offense, nor is it an ethical violation in the House of Representatives. you don't get to have the undivided
[3:41:54]attention of all of your colleagues. The the gentleman says that he thinks that our position is that any association
[3:42:03]um with Jeffrey Epstein is a dispositive moment of judgment for people. That's not the position we've advanced. We've taken the position with the survivors
[3:42:13]that we want to end the cover up of what happened and then let the chips fall where they may. If there are people who were actually engaged in crime, as
[3:42:23]Galileain Maxwell was, as Epstein was, then they should be charged with every element of due process. If they happen to be a waiter or a waitress uh who
[3:42:33]works at an event, they're not guilty of anything. That's what due process is. We're able to sift through and figure it out. But your rush to judgment isn't even giving anybody a chance to know
[3:42:43]what the charges are here. It's the most extraordinary thing I've ever seen. And I'm going to yield uh now to delegate Plaset herself. Uh the distinguished representative from
[3:42:54]>> Oh, I'm sorry. First, we've got uh Representative Crockett from Texas for two minutes. >> Thank you so much. This is a distraction to take take away from the fact that the
[3:43:05]Guardians of Pedophiles is literally trying to protect pedophiles. The president is is a convicted felon and an accused sex offender. Stacy Plask hasn't
[3:43:15]been accused of either. So, what are we actually here talking about? Trump and Epstein were besties. We've all seen the pictures of them. We saw the birthday
[3:43:24]book. So, why are y'all more interested in talking about Stacy Plask than Trump's relationship with the man? When did y'all become so moral? Cuz I can
[3:43:35]remember when when y'all wouldn't sign the discharge petition. All of a sudden, everybody wanted to vote for this, but you you wouldn't sign the discharge petition until we decide that we are
[3:43:46]going to go after the actual rapists and pedophiles. Miss me with your moral high ground. Folks who also took money from somebody named Jeffrey Epstein as I had
[3:43:57]my team dig in very quickly. Mitt Romney, the NRCC, Lee Zeldon, George Bush, Win Red, McCain
[3:44:09]Palin, Rick Lazio. I just want to be clear. If this is the standard that we going to make, just know we going to expose it all. And just know that the FEC filings, they are available for
[3:44:20]everybody to review. This is absolutely ridiculous. You decide that you want to punish a sitting member of Congress because you are concerned about her text messages. Well, maybe you should be more
[3:44:31]concerned about those sex tapes that we still haven't gotten access to. Maybe you should be more concerned with the fact that the president, his name is mentioned in the files way more than
[3:44:41]Stacy Plask's name. Listen, I'm not saying that anything is right or wrong, but listen, if you trying to figure out what's going on with somebody that's a criminal, then you maybe need to talk to
[3:44:51]their associates. That's exactly why maybe she was getting text messages. I'm not saying she was or wasn't, but considering the fact that they were talking to another associate of the
[3:45:01]president's and maybe she needed intel, you'd have to go talk to somebody that maybe knows what he's up to. >> Time is expired. We reserve.
[3:45:11]Gentleman from Maryland reserves. Gentleman from South Carolina is recognized. Mr. >> Speaker, I recognize my good friend from Arizona, Mr. Bigs. How much time is the gentleman recognized? >> How much time
[3:45:23]>> time you've allotted the gentleman? >> How much time do we have left? >> 17 minutes. >> The gentleman has 17 minutes remaining. >> U as much time as a gentleman making s
[3:45:33]gentleman is recognized. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you uh Mr. Norman. Thank you for uh raising this issue. This is um this to
[3:45:43]me this is an interesting issue um because I'm I'm hearing the argument is um coming at us and it says well you know there's no due process.
[3:45:55]Well debate is a part of due pro process. That's that's part of what that's part of uh due process is to have this debate. you get to stand up, get to
[3:46:06]defend, and get to raise your issues. And um and you chose to take it back to committee, which as Mr. Roy said, that
[3:46:18]kind of indicates that maybe you know that there's something that's that's uh not great about this. So, I'm looking at this and and here's here's at least one of the exchanges
[3:46:30]that that seems to seems to have taken place. and may maybe we'll hear some some comment about it. That'd be good. You can hear make some comment about it. But
[3:46:40]but in this exchange, Mr. Epstein sent a text message to the gentle lady from the Virgin Islands, and
[3:46:49]this is the quote. Um he brings up Rona, keeper of the secrets, and he's who's he referring to?
[3:47:00]Rona Graph. That's That's a a a Trump assistant. And Plasket responds, "Rona, question mark." Quick, I'm up next.
[3:47:11]Is that an acronym? So, she wants to know what what Mr. Epstein wants her to talk about. Don't you find that interesting? I find that
[3:47:22]really intriguing, especially since we know what Mr. Epstein was. And Epstein responds, "That's his assistant." doesn't really say much more than that.
[3:47:33]And then Plask starts questioning Mr. Cohen and asks about Graph. So, not only was she texting
[3:47:42]having this communication with uh with Mr. Epstein, she's asking Mr. Cohen what Mr. Epstein wants her to ask.
[3:47:54]Another text says from Epstein, "Good work." That's after she wraps it up. The the all of this seems to be very interesting and I'm I'm sorry. I don't I
[3:48:05]I don't breathe a rarified air of the intelligence committee. I don't I I'm just a regular guy uh and a member of member of the House. That's all. So, I
[3:48:16]don't know about that rarified error and I guess I'm part of the sewage that's uh that Mr. said. Yeah. Yeah. Thank thanks for thanks for uh agreeing with me, Miss
[3:48:28]Plasket. So So she's she's she's got us down. If you unless you're in the intelligence committee, you're crap. That's what that's what that's what the
[3:48:38]intel committee says. But here's the deal. When you're sitting there in a sitting committee and you're having
[3:48:48]communications with a convicted sex offender, and you're taking their advice on how to
[3:48:58]ask questions. Maybe you got a problem. Maybe your problem is that you're you've brought disrepute on the House. And this isn't from the articles.
[3:49:08]This is from the 10,000 pages or so released last week from the oversight committee that they received from the Epstein estate.
[3:49:19]This isn't fishing around. This is coming from real evidence. So I sit here and I I listen. Oh, you know, this is she's the finest member that
[3:49:30]ever walked the planet, man. That's what she heard. But the bottom line is this. She's sitting there seeking advice and
[3:49:41]counsel on how to ask questions from Jeffrey Epstein who this entire body save one just condemned
[3:49:52]and we want all the evidence and it's a shame to be here but for one thing you made the choice and so Mr. Chairman,
[3:50:04]I'm encouraging everyone in this body to support Mr. Norman's resolution and I yield back. Gentlemen yields.
[3:50:15]Speaker, I reserve. Gentleman from South Carolina reserves. The members are reminded to direct their commentary to the chair. Before I recognize the gentleman from Maryland, please remind yourself as well as the members to
[3:50:26]refrain from engaging in personalities towards the president. Does the gentleman seek recognition? >> Yes, I do. >> Gentleman's recognized. >> Thank you very much. Um, just I want to
[3:50:38]remark that yet one more member says we should go ahead and censor her and then we should do a complete investigation. I think any fifth grader in America knows
[3:50:48]that's the exact opposite of what due process means in America. We don't punish people before we have investigation and the opportunity to be heard. I yield six minutes now to the
[3:50:58]distinguished gentle lady from Virgin Islands, Representative Klask. >> Thank you so much um to Mr. Rasin, to my former professor in law school, and I
[3:51:10]want to address the body. I first want to give you all a sense of what was happening that day. Everyone knows at that hearing in
[3:51:19]February, the entire country was watching as Michael Cohen decided he was going to finally give up information
[3:51:30]about what was happening in the Trump the Trump world, the Trump enterprise. And at the beginning of that hearing,
[3:51:39]the ranking member Jim Jordan had the disrespect to Elijah Cummings. May he rest in peace and his name be a memory after not
[3:51:51]allowing Mr. Jordan to shut the committee hearing down. And I turned to Mr. Jordan and told him to have respect
[3:51:59]for the chair and to basically shut up. And that moment went viral. And I began
[3:52:07]to get innumerable texts from friends, from foes, from constituents about what was happening in that hearing.
[3:52:18]And I got a text from Jeffrey Epstein, who at the time was my constituent, who was not public knowledge at that
[3:52:28]time that he was under federal investigation. and who was sharing information with me.
[3:52:39]Now, I heard recently from someone that I was seeking advice from him. Let me tell you something. I don't need to get advice on how to question anybody from
[3:52:50]any individual. I have been a lawyer for 30 years. I have been a narcotics prosecutor in New
[3:52:58]York City. I have been had the honor of being a political appointee at the Justice Department after September 11th
[3:53:08]as a Republican appointee in the Bush administration. I know how to question individuals. I know how to seek information. I have
[3:53:18]sought information from confidential informants, from murderers, from other individuals because I want the truth, not because I need them to tell me what
[3:53:29]to say. And if you look at the transcript, you will see that I question Michael Cohen for five minutes. The
[3:53:38]Washington Post only shows you 30 seconds and takes from it one individual's name that I got from Jeffrey Epstein and
[3:53:49]didn't know who the individual was and put that individual with a host of other individuals that I felt the committee should subpoena.
[3:54:00]They've never been subpoenaed. They've never been questioned because at the end of the day, I know that in the Trump administration and with my colleagues
[3:54:10]over there, it's not about sexual assault. It's not about support of victims. It's about money. It is about
[3:54:19]money. I have consistently stood against sexual violence and the exploitation of women and children in previous careers as well as here in this body. We all
[3:54:30]know that Jeffrey Epstein's actions were absolutely reprehensible. As a constituent, as an individual who gave donations to me, when I learned of
[3:54:42]the extent of his actions after his investigation, I gave that money to women's organizations in my community. Not back
[3:54:53]to him, but to women in the community who needed that support. That's what I think should have been done and that's what I did. They've taken a text
[3:55:04]exchange which shows no participation, no assistance, no involvement in any illegal activity and weaponized it for political theater.
[3:55:15]>> Cuz that's what this is. This has been reviewed by federal courts. any charges. Victims who initially had a case against
[3:55:25]me dismissed it on their own without prejudice. You don't want to talk about what is really happening here. Your attacks on
[3:55:35]working families, your protection of powerful predators and corporate criminals. You want to talk about texting texting felons. How often do you
[3:55:45]text President Donald J. Trump? That's the individual we should be concerned about. And let me tell you this, I am not going to support the wealthy and
[3:55:55]connected who continue to exploit workers and evade taxes, powerful figures with credible allegations, who face no consequences, and corporate
[3:56:05]interests profiting from human suffering while family struggle. >> And let me tell the people of the Virgin Islands Gentleman will state his point of order.
[3:56:20]>> Um the point of order is you may not call the president of the United States a felon. >> That is a violation.
[3:56:31]>> Point of order is under consideration and we're not going to lose order here either. So please >> may I continue? >> May I continue? Members are however
[3:56:41]reminded to refrain as mentioned a little while ago from making personality uh commentary towards the president. >> Point of order is not time.
[3:56:53]>> The point of order is not timely. So the gentle lady is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. What is happening here? I feel sorry for
[3:57:03]my colleagues. I feel sorry for this body. I see members coming and speaking against me who I've never even had a conversation with. You don't know me.
[3:57:14]You don't know the work that I've done. You don't know the support that I've given to families, to individuals, to support people. I worked a full-time job
[3:57:24]with children under the age of five, going to school, law school at night. Do you think I would risk my law degree for any individual? Never mind a
[3:57:36]reprehensible individual by EP Jeffrey Epstein. I would not. But what I am about is the truth. And let me tell the people of the Virgin Islands. This
[3:57:46]attempt at intimidation will pass. >> We in the Virgin Islands do not back down from a fight. That is how we won our freedom and that is how we will
[3:57:57]continue to grow our equality. And if you censure me, take away a committee, I will still do the work because I am here
[3:58:07]to support people and to support this great constitution which I have sworn numerous times to uphold.
[3:58:19]>> We reserve and I thank the gentleman reserves. Gentleman from South Carolina is recognized. >> Mr. Speaker, before I recognize Mr.
[3:58:28]Clyde, I let me just say uh Miss Pli, I don't know you. My overall impression of you has been good, but and you you you give these words about protecting
[3:58:39]families and children. Where was that demonstrated when you took money from a convicted pedophile that had been had served time? Where was that? the words
[3:58:50]are are are beyond uh believability and I think you're a nice person but you you missed the boat when you took my I've got this I've got the mic now uh you you
[3:59:01]you lost your your uh I I don't know the word to describe it but what you did you deserve to come off the committees and let me remind you remind you we want
[3:59:11]this to go to the ethics commission and to the those listening the ethics commission is five democrats and five Republicans let them find it. But in the meantime, you do not deserve to serve on a
[3:59:23]committee with national clearance. And I would like now be reminded again to direct their commentary to the chair. >> Mr. uh Speaker, I would like to recognize my good friend from Georgia,
[3:59:34]Mr. Andrew Clyde. >> How much time is the gentleman recogn Shall I recognize him? >> How much time is left? >> 11 and 12 minutes. >> You have 11 and a half minutes remaining. Uh >> five minutes. Gentleman's recognized for
[3:59:46]five minutes. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Uh my good friend uh Mr. Norman from South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in
[3:59:56]support of this resolution censoring and condemning delegate Stacy Plask of the US Virgin Islands for inappropriate coordination with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein during a congressional
[4:00:08]hearing and removing delegate Plaset from the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and referring her to the Ethics Committee for further investigation. After four years of
[4:00:17]silence on this matter, not a peep during the entire Biden administration, let me repeat that. After four years of silence on this matter about Jeffrey Epstein, House Democrats are now
[4:00:29]demanding transparency and accountability surrounding Jeffrey Epstein and his associates. While their fake outrage is clearly just another disgusting attempt to smear President
[4:00:39]Trump, House Republicans are taking this matter seriously and are working toward delivering the muchneeded transparency and accountability that the American people deserve. This resolution is
[4:00:51]accountability page one. During the House Oversight Committee's ongoing investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, emails obtained by a congressional subpoena. That's right. It
[4:01:02]was a the congressional subpoena by the house oversight committee, not the discharge petition that just got voted on. But this was the oversight committee's congressional subpoena has
[4:01:12]brought to light that in 2019, delegate Stacy Plask coordinated her line of questioning questioning with Jeffrey Epstein in real time over text messages
[4:01:22]during an oversight committee hearing featuring testimony from Michael Cohen. Now, who was Michael Cohen? Michael Cohen was the disgraced former attorney
[4:01:32]of President Donald Trump. She was asking input from Jeffrey Epstein on how to best question Cohen. And Cohen was himself at that time a convicted felon
[4:01:43]from 2018. So now that Republicans are exposing Democrat ties to Jeffrey Epstein and his vile crimes, the other side of the aisle has flipped. They
[4:01:53]apparently no longer want transparency or accountability. Why? Because they don't want the truth. They want to weaponize a serious matter into a
[4:02:02]distraction. All in an attempt to take down President Trump and to hurt his administration and what he's doing to make America great again. The actions
[4:02:12]taken by Delegate Plasket reflect poorly on the House and this body needs to hold her accountable. I urge all of my colleagues to vote to adopt this resolution to show the American people
[4:02:22]that those who colluded with Mr. Epstein, including members of the House, will be held accountable. And this resolution is the beginning of that. I thank you and I yield back.
[4:02:32]>> Gentleman yields to the chair. Mr. >> Speaker, I reserve gentleman from South Carolina reserves. G gentleman from Maryland is recognized. Proud to yield one minute to the distinguished minority
[4:02:42]leader Hakeem Jeff. Minority leader is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the distinguished gentleman, my good friend from the great state of Maryland, the
[4:02:53]ranking uh Democrat on the judiciary committee for yielding. I rise today in strong opposition. This resolution, this effort to censure
[4:03:04]Delegate Plask to rip away her membership on the Intel Committee is nothing more than a political stunt by a desperate
[4:03:13]failed candidate for governor, trying to pander to the people back in South Carolina. Nothing more than that.
[4:03:23]You want to make the statement about who's brought disgrace to the House. The actions of this House Republican majority have brought disgrace to the
[4:03:34]House House of Representatives from day one of this presidency. The reality is if you want to talk about feelalty to
[4:03:45]the Constitution and things of that nature, the House is a separate and co-equal branch of government. You don't seem to understand that you functioned from the very beginning
[4:03:56]of your so-called majority, Mr. Speaker, not as a check and balance on an outofc control administration, but as a reckless rubber stamp for Donald Trump's
[4:04:07]extreme agenda. And you are failing the American people. You failed to keep your core promise. Your core promise
[4:04:17]to the American people was that you were going to lower costs on day one. Costs haven't gone down here in the United States of America. Costs have gone up.
[4:04:27]The Trump economy is a complete and total failure. It's a disaster. The American people are hurting. And so every week you come to the House
[4:04:37]floor now that you've returned from your seven-week taxpayerf funed vacation >> and come up with another stunt to try to distract the American people. Or perhaps
[4:04:48]you were ordered by your puppet master Donald Trump who wants to distract the American people today because his effort to suppress the
[4:04:58]Jeffrey Epstein files has failed spectacularly. We believe in transparency. We believe in accountability. We believe in due process. That's the opposite of what is
[4:05:09]happening on the floor today. And let me be very clear about Stacy Plask. She's a woman of great intelligence and a woman of great integrity. And she deserves better than what she's
[4:05:22]receiving from House Republican extremists. She deserves the opportunity to be heard. She deserves due process. She
[4:05:33]deserves the ability to make her case, not to be prosecuted by petty fogers playing lawyer on the floor of the House of
[4:05:43]Representatives. Google that if you don't know what it means, the so-called Freedom Caucus want to lecture us
[4:05:54]about proceeding at this moment. The actions that you continue to engage in will have consequences.
[4:06:04]Consequences today, consequences tomorrow, consequences next week, consequences next year, and certainly consequences when the American people throw this
[4:06:15]House Republican majority out in the aftermath of the election next November. Be very careful about the extreme actions that you continue to engage in.
[4:06:26]Now, that's extraordinary to me. Week after week, censure after censure, and I wonder, is it just coincidence
[4:06:38]that the last three censures we've had on the House floor happened to involve first you tried to censure
[4:06:48]the Monica MacGyver >> and then, Mr. Speaker, Republicans tried to censure Ilhan Omar. And now we're on the floor and you're
[4:06:58]trying to censure Stacy Plask. >> What is it exactly that those three individuals have in common? House Republicans are going to have to
[4:07:08]answer for the things the extreme things that you continue to do. And the American people know this is a phony majority. It's a fake majority. It's not a real majority.
[4:07:20]Republicans aren't doing anything to make life better for the American people. And that's why we're on the floor right now. There's nothing that House
[4:07:30]Republicans can do to disgrace Stacy Plask because House Republicans continue to disgrace themselves. >> And so whatever happens
[4:07:43]later on this evening, the American people will hear from Delegate Plask beyond this making her case. The people of the Virgin Islands, I'm confident, will
[4:07:55]continue to stand behind her. And we will never be lectured on issues
[4:08:06]related to accountability and transparency and principle and ethics from this group of extreme House
[4:08:16]Republicans who continue to visit a national nightmare on the American people, bending the knee to a wannabe king, doing real harm in real time. And
[4:08:26]at the end of the day, your time is coming as well. I yield back. >> Gentlemen yields.
[4:08:36]How much time do we have, Mr. Speaker? >> Gentleman has four and a half minutes. >> Three and a half minutes. All members are again reminded, including a minority
[4:08:45]leader, to direct your comments to the chair. All members are again instructed, including the minority leader, to refrain from engaging in personalities towards the president.
[4:08:57]>> The gentleman from Maryland seeks recognition. >> I know we will reserve. >> Gentleman from Maryland reserves. Gentleman from South Carolina. Speaker, I find it interesting that the
[4:09:08]minority leader mentioned that, you know, we got a not really a majority. I will tell you 77 million people are a majority. uh they they rendered the consequences
[4:09:18]to elect the president that has revived this country from a disaster uh four years under the Biden administration. Let me um let's go back
[4:09:27]under a little bit of history here uh about the hearing. The messages show that uh Plaset texted Epstein before the
[4:09:38]hearing that started that day at 7:55. She texted him the sex offender, the predator on the children she says she protects.
[4:09:49]Uh they had comments like um uh she told him to told uh Miss Plask talk about his grades. She mentioned that she had a
[4:10:00]great looking outfit. It's from Mr. Epstein. Um, in 10:40 she broadcast a feed cut to Miss to Miss Plask showing her mouth her
[4:10:10]moving her mouth is as if she was chewing something. Uh, and the Miss Plask mentioned that she
[4:10:20]had multiple multiple text. Well, according to the records, um, and I don't know how many of her texts came
[4:10:29]from those convicted of a felonies, but on, um, at at 2 225, Epstein sent uh two
[4:10:40]225 minutes be before Plask began questioning Cohen at 228, Epstein messaged back, good work at 234, one
[4:10:48]minute after Plasket finished her question to Cohen. So the whole five minutes was pretty much conducted under
[4:10:57]the direction of a con convicted pedophile. Um and this dialogue Miss Plask was reached
[4:11:08]by phone Thursday. Plask deni declined to answer questions about the text messages and directed all inquiries to congressional staff. Palaska's chief of
[4:11:17]staff said Thursday she was not in a position to confirm or not whether the congresswoman was texting with Mr. Epstein at the hearing. She did not
[4:11:28]respond uh to follow-up questions. Bottom line, these are facts. These are text messages. She can't This wasn't smoking mirrors. So, it's interesting
[4:11:37]that uh they're taking that tact. Um but Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have left? Gentleman has six and a half minutes
[4:11:47]remaining. I reserve. Gentleman from South Carolina reserves. Gentleman from Maryland. Uh I'm yielding one minute to the representative from New York, Miss Clark. >> Gentle lady is recognized.
[4:11:59]>> Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the Congressional Black Caucus, the conscience of the Congress in strong opposition to this resolution. This resolution is a blatantly partisan,
[4:12:10]shameless attack. As we sit here today, Donald Trump is still the single person in this country with the authority and the ability to deliver justice to
[4:12:20]survivors and truth to the American people by just releasing the files. So instead of answering why Donald Trump chooses every single day not to release the Epstein files, they're pointing
[4:12:31]fingers at this side of the aisle. Mr. Speaker, unlike the president, Congresswoman Stacy Plasket has committed no crime, violated no rule, and broken no promises. There has been
[4:12:42]no investigation, no due process, no inquiry into whether the congresswoman had any connection whatsoever to Epstein's despicable and disgusting
[4:12:52]criminal conduct. This resolution would have ha have us remove a capable and hardworking member of one of the most serious working committees in this body
[4:13:02]on the basis of a conversation from more than six years ago which broke no rules broke no rules and has no connection to any criminal activity. I urge my
[4:13:12]colleagues to vote no on this partisan resolution this sham and I yield back time is expired. We reserve gentleman from Maryland reserve. Gentleman from South Carolina. This >> week I reserve.
[4:13:23]>> Gentleman from South Carolina reserves. Um and we're prepared to close. >> It's closed.
[4:13:33]>> Yes, I'm prepared to close. >> All right. >> Gentleman from South Carolina is prepared to close. >> Maryland is recognized.
[4:13:42]>> Mr. Speaker, thank you very much. Um, I want to uh start by addressing uh the young people who appear to be in the audience this evening because I'm afraid some of my arguments are uh lost on some
[4:13:54]of our uh colleagues across the aisle suffering from Trump derangement syndrome. It seems to have completely warped their minds today and they're not thinking clearly about the Constitution or about the rule of law. But the young
[4:14:05]people here will recognize if they read this resolution immediately what's wrong with it because it it's replete with phrases like this that um uh this one
[4:14:17]incident that they're referring to raises serious questions about the judgment and the integrity and the fitness to serve. Well, I I I think that's absurd, but in any event, if you
[4:14:27]think it raises serious questions, presumably you would want the answers to those questions. But you don't get answers by rushing to judgment and turning the whole process upside down.
[4:14:39]This resolution starts by saying we censure her, we remove her from committee and the very next uh component of it says we direct the committee on
[4:14:48]ethics to conduct an investigation. That is the opposite of due process. And I hope at least future generations will understand that's not how we hold people accountable whether it's under criminal
[4:14:59]law, under civil law, or under uh an ethics process um which they, you know, purport to want to be launching here. Again, go back to the s the the George
[4:15:10]Santos standard. The reason we voted against just hanging him out to dry and centuring him and expelling him is because the process hadn't happened yet.
[4:15:21]and Democrats and Republicans together did it, but they're thinking in solely partisan terms. Even Matt Gates, accused of having sex with this 17-year-old, was
[4:15:32]never censured by the House of Representatives. Even with Speaker McCarthy and others condemning him for what he did, we did not censure him.
[4:15:42]Think about what you're doing to the precedence of this body by trying to attack Miss Plask. And let me just close with a personal thought. I wasn't going to
[4:15:52]bring it up because I didn't want to embarrass her, but she was one of the three finest students I ever had in constitutional law. She was a straight A student in the early 1990s. She's a
[4:16:04]straight A student in the 21st century. I'm proud not only that she was my student, but that she's my friend and that she's my colleague, and you don't disgrace us in any way. You go to work
[4:16:15]every day for the people of Virgin Islands, and we're proud of you. With that, I'll yield back. >> Gentleman yields. Gentleman from South Carolina is recognized. >> Uh, Mr. Speaker, and I find it
[4:16:27]interesting that the president is occupying the minds of my good friend on the left, rentree, and um, it's interesting they bring him up every time and keep doing it. Keep doing it. Uh,
[4:16:38]this president's got a record that is second to none. Uh, and I hope our listeners in the audience and can distinguish between just words and
[4:16:48]babbling on when they reject the facts of what's been presented. Texts don't lie. Um, and they can can offer all the
[4:16:58]excuses. And I I do think Miss Plus is a nice lady. She made a mistake here, a bad mistake. She took advice from a convicted pedophile that that is
[4:17:09]indefensible in this in this discussion here today. Mr. Speaker, I've listened to my colleagues defend the indefensible. I've heard everything from this is old news to this is just
[4:17:21]politics. But not a single person has disputed the key fact. Written records in Epstein's own estate documents show
[4:17:30]Delegate Plask sought his input for an official hearing. This is the issue that alone. Everything
[4:17:39]else is just noise. This chamber cannot overlook that a member of a sitting member of Congress coordinated with a convicted sex offender to prepare
[4:17:50]questions for an official proceeding. Imagine telling the American people that that's acceptable. Imagine explaining to parents all across this country that
[4:18:00]Congress sees no problem with relying on the council of a predator of our innocent children. Some of my colleagues want to blur the
[4:18:10]edges, soften the facts, or bury this under procedural fog, noise as I call it. But sunlight is the best
[4:18:20]disinfectant, and accountability is not optional. This resolution is not excessive at all. It is appropriate. It
[4:18:29]is measured. It is necessary at this time. The question before us is very simple. Do we uphold a minimal a minimal
[4:18:38]standard for ethical conduct or or do we just shrug and say well uh maybe next time? Mr. Speaker,
[4:18:50]the public deserves better. The House deserves better. The American people deserve better. I urge adoption of this resolution and I yield the balance of my time.
[4:19:02]>> Gentlemen yields. Without objection, the previous question is ordered on the resolution. The question is on the adoption of the resolution. Those in favor say I.
[4:19:12]Those opposed say no. >> Uh in the opinion of the chair, the eyes have it. >> Yeah.
[4:19:22]>> Welcome to procedural democracy. >> What purpose does a gentleman seek recognition? I I request a recorded vote and I I challenge the speaker's interpretation of the voice vote. This
[4:19:34]gentleman ask for the A's and A's. I ask for the A's and the Naz. The A's and Nas are requested. Those favoring a vote by the A's and Naz will rise. A sufficient number having risen. The A's and Nas are ordered. Pursuant to
[4:19:46]clause 8 of rule 20. Further proceedings on this question will be postponed. All
[4:21:30]right. Do your script here.
[4:22:16]Okay. For what purposes a gentleman from Arkansas, Mr. Westerman, seek recognition. >> Mr. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 879, I call up HJ Res 130 and
[4:22:26]ask for immediate consideration in the House. >> The clerk will report the title of joint resolution. >> House joint resolution 130. Joint resolution providing for congressional
[4:22:36]disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5 United States Code of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Land Management relating to Buffalo Field Office record of decision and approved resource
[4:22:48]management plan amendment. >> Pursuant to House Resolution 879, the joint resolution is considered read. The joint resolution shall be debatable for one hour, equally divided and controlled
[4:22:58]by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on natural resources or their respective design. The gentleman from Arkansas, Mr. Westman, and the gentleman from California, Mr. Huffman,
[4:23:09]each will control 30 minutes. The chair recognized the gentleman from Arkansas, Mr. Westerman. >> Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks
[4:23:20]and to include extraneous material on HJRES 130. Without objection. >> Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. >> The gentleman is recognized.
[4:23:31]>> I rise in strong support of HJ Res 130, which would repeal the Bureau of Land Management's misguided resource management plan or RMP amendment for the Buffalo Field Office in Wyoming, which
[4:23:42]was finalized in the twilight hours of the Biden Harris administration. Wyoming's Powder River Basin currently supplies 40% of the nation's coal. The R&P amendment in question effectively
[4:23:54]halted future federal coal leasing across a region in Wyoming larger than New Jersey and located in the heart of America's coal country. Without repeal,
[4:24:05]the RMP amendment will end coal production in the region entirely by 2041 and close 12 active mines. The R&P amendment is a death blow to America's
[4:24:15]energy security, Wyoming's workers, and the e economic backbone of the state itself. It is projected that US electricity
[4:24:24]demand will grow by as much as 128 gawatt through 2029 and global energy demand is expected to double by 2050.
[4:24:34]Coal is reliable, affordable, and essential to meet the increasing power demands of the AI revolution and advanced manufacturing. The R&P amendment locked up an astonishing 48
[4:24:45]billion short tons of coal. That's enough to meet US coal demand for the next 116 years. 92% of Wyoming's coal is exported to other states, helping keep
[4:24:57]the light zone and utility prices affordable in places in in distant places as far as Texas, Illinois, and my home state of Arkansas. Nationwide, residential electricity prices have
[4:25:09]increased by 13% since 2022. and overturning misguided policies like this R&P amendment will help make the cost of living more affordable for families
[4:25:20]across America. It's time to unleash our domestic resources to put this money back into the pockets of American families by repealing the Biden administration's anti-American energy
[4:25:31]policies. What's more, instead of working with the state, the Biden administration blatantly ignored local opposition at every stage of this process and rammed this RMP amendment
[4:25:42]through to appease environmental extremists. The Biden administration provided a limited opportunity for public comment or engagement on this R&P amendment. Wyoming's governor, unified
[4:25:53]congressional delegation, locally elected officials, tribes, and local communities all expressed strong opposition to this plan amendment. The previous administration ignored them
[4:26:04]all. According to local representatives, it is suspect and disturbing that such a dramatic change to the current land use plan would solicit such little engagement during the public comment
[4:26:15]period. Campbell and Johnson County commissioners who represent the local communities affected by this plan stated that whatever information they provided to the BLM in this process was quote
[4:26:27]ignored by the federal agency. Overturning the R&P amendment takes power from bureaucrats in Washington DC and returns it to the people of Wyoming. The BLM also ignored tribal input in
[4:26:38]developing this RMP amendment. The Navajo Transitional Energy Company, which is wholly owned by the Navajo Nation, provided detailed comments opposing this amendment that were all
[4:26:48]dismissed by the BLM. In a letter they submitted to the agency, they stated, quote, "BLM consistently downplayed the reasonably foreseeable negative impacts
[4:26:58]of the mines's closures on the surrounding social justice communities, and it did not even consider the jobs lost in the downstream communities that rely on the Powder River Basin Coal."
[4:27:09]End quote. Energy security is national security, and Wyoming's energy industry remains indispensable to ensuring America stays energy dominant. Wyoming's
[4:27:20]Powder River basin with its low sulfur coal produces the world's cleanest burning coal. We should be f focused on exporting this abundant natural resource to our allies abroad, not burying this
[4:27:31]base low power under layers of bureaucracy. By passing the CRA today, we're advancing President Trump's executive orders on unleashing American energy and
[4:27:41]reinvigorating America's coal industry. We're also restoring hundreds of millions of dollars in future revenue for Wyoming's K12 public education system and protecting more than 4,000
[4:27:51]high-paying jobs in rural Wyoming. In conjunction with the proen energy policies included in the working families tax cut law, this CRA also has
[4:28:01]the potential to generate more than $260 million for the federal treasury. This CRA helps the US remain energy dominant and will lower prices for families,
[4:28:11]strengthen our economy, and boost real wages for hardworking men and women. Urge my colleagues to stand with Wyoming, stand with American workers, and stand for energy security by
[4:28:21]supporting this resolution. I reserve the balance of my time. >> Gentleman reserves. Gentleman from California is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And uh let me wish Chairman Westerman a happy
[4:28:32]birthday. Uh, I do wish him a happy birthday. But, um, even that goodwill does not change the fact that this is bad legislation. And so, unfortunately,
[4:28:44]Bruce, I'm going to have to rise in opposition to the bill while wishing you a happy birthday. We are, Mr. Speaker, all grateful that the Republican shutdown is finally over. But millions
[4:28:55]of Americans are still on the cusp of losing health care. They are struggling to put food on the table. And after their 7-week paid vacation, I can't imagine anything more disconnected than
[4:29:07]for House Republicans to come back here and make their first priority not helping working families to make ends meet, but jamming through more favors for their billionaire buddies. These
[4:29:18]three Congressional Review Act or CRA resolutions treat America's public lands like they are just lines on a balance sheet. They silence public opinion. and
[4:29:29]ignore the fires and storms that are made worse by climate change. All of it to make fossil fuel extraction the number one priority going forward for
[4:29:39]how we manage our public lands. Wildfire defense, public safety, recreation, conservation, all of these take a backseat now to maximizing corporate
[4:29:49]profits even in our most fragile landscapes like America's Arctic. Americans want clean air, clean water, accessible public lands, not handouts to
[4:30:00]polluters. Overturning balanced, forward-looking BLM plans in Wyoming and Alaska is a colossal mistake. Across the federal
[4:30:11]land management agencies, plans like these are the foundation for responsible, sustainable management of our public lands. RMPPS are the product
[4:30:21]of extensive public input, rigorous scientific reviews, meaningful tribal consultation, and balancing the activities on our public lands from
[4:30:31]energy development to recreation is what these plans do. They reflect the needs of communities, industries, ecosystems, and they outline a clear vision for the
[4:30:41]stewardship of millions of acres of public lands. Let's look at the Buffalo field office RMP targeted by this particular resolution. It was developed
[4:30:52]after a court found that the previous plan failed to address the public health and climate impacts of unfettered coal mining in the region. Importantly, the
[4:31:02]current RMP was also developed after robust tribal consultation and public input. So, we're just going to throw that all away. I strongly oppose HRES
[4:31:13]130, which would repeal the current balanced RMP for BLM's Buffalo field office in order to prop up the coal industry in Wyoming's Powder River
[4:31:23]Valley. The plan targeted by this resolution ended new coal leasing in the region because of its harm to the climate and public health and because of
[4:31:33]decreasing demand for coal. At the same time, the plan allowed existing mines to continue to operate through the end of their current leases. Rescending this
[4:31:44]plan means locking us into unnecessary emissions and energy costs at a time when the planet and the American people
[4:31:52]cannot afford it. And it also puts us on a treadmill of litigation and uncertainty, sending us back theoretically to a plan that was already
[4:32:02]adjudicated to be illegal or maybe waiting for a new plan to come forward from the Trump administration and I guess hoping that a future court will
[4:32:13]decide that it's not substantially similar to the ones that have been uh thrown out with your CRA. This uh is something that my friends across the aisle simply haven't thought through.
[4:32:24]There is so much chaos and uncertainty when the sledgehammer of the CRA is used in this reckless manner. Now, House Republicans already passed and the
[4:32:33]administration implemented unprecedent unprecedented giveaways to the coal industry through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, including slashing the royalty
[4:32:43]rates for coal from 12% to 7.5% and opening more than 13 million acres of public lands for coal leasing. But even with these hands outs, it's not
[4:32:55]enough to reverse decades of market contraction in the coal industry. The coal industry is dying. What Republicans don't mention is that BLM's coal lease
[4:33:05]sales this year have either failed to reach market value, been indefinitely cancelled, or received little to no
[4:33:14]bids. Rather than simply redoing this RMP through the wellestablished public process, which the Trump administration is already doing, House Republicans want
[4:33:25]to overturn it using the CRA. Again, an extremely blunt instrument that will throw us into great uncertainty and litigation for sure. This choice would
[4:33:36]lock out the perspectives from previous tribal and public engagement and ban the agency from ever again issuing a substantially similar RMP, leaving land
[4:33:47]policy frozen in time, really more like frozen in some kind of a limbo. Incredible uncertainty and chaos. House Republicans want to permanently enshrine
[4:33:57]fossil fuel extraction as the top priority for millions of acres of public land across the country, no matter the cost. And they're picking winners and losers here, blocking affordable
[4:34:08]renewable energy projects, sacrificing our public lands in the process. I urge my colleagues to reject these res reckless resolutions that would upend millions of acres of public land
[4:34:19]management and reject this entire familiar playbook from congressional Republicans trying to deepen our dependence on dirty fossil fuels that
[4:34:29]pollute our air, contaminate our water, and harm the public health while doing everything possible to slow, stop, or sabotage the development of affordable
[4:34:39]renewable energy. Our constituents deserve a lot better than this. We deserve clean, affordable, and reliable energy. We deserve good paying jobs and affordable health care. And we shouldn't
[4:34:51]sacrifice America's health, environment, and livelihoods in order to do it. This legislation and my friends across the aisle are on the wrong side of history trying to prop up the dying coal
[4:35:02]industry. They're on the wrong side of public land management and they're on the wrong side of the American people's pocketbooks as they face rising electricity costs. That's why I oppose
[4:35:13]this resolution and reserve the balance of my time. >> Gentlemen reserves. Gentleman from Arkansas is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And Mr. Speaker, I sincerely appreciate the birthday
[4:35:25]wishes from my friend across the aisle. That means a lot to me. If I had a birthday wish of my own, it would be to make energy more affordable for the American people, to help the good folks
[4:35:36]of Wyoming, to have a livelihood, and to uh not only keep prices down, but keep good paying jobs across this country that are in the energy industry. We know
[4:35:46]that we need more energy going forward. We need more electrons on the grid. We need a larger grid. And we need to all work together to do those things. But if
[4:35:56]this resource management plan amendment by the previous administration was balanced, I would hate to see a heavy-handed resource management plan amendment by the previous administration
[4:36:06]because this took a sledgehammer to an established industry in the state of Wyoming. And I'm sure uh my distinguished colleague from the great state of Wyoming uh Representative
[4:36:18]Hagaman, who is the lead sponsor of this legislation, will go into detail what this would mean to Wyoming if this plan amendment stays in place. And I yield
[4:36:28]her six minutes. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my legislation, House Joint Resolution 130, which
[4:36:38]utilizes the Congressional Disapproval Procedure under the Congressional Review Act, or CRA, to restore coal leasing in Wyoming's Powder River Basin. Many on
[4:36:49]the east coast of America might be surprised to learn that the federal government owns massive amounts of the western states. In Wyoming, the federal government owns about half of our
[4:36:59]surface estate and 60% of the subsurface estate or our minerals. In northeast Wyoming, the Bureau of Land Management's Buffalo Field Offices Office owns and
[4:37:10]manages over 788,000 acres of land and 4.7 million acres of our mineral estate. Notably, this land encompasses Wyoming's share of the
[4:37:20]Powder River Basin, North America's largest coal deposit, responsible for the production of 40% of our nation's coal. Wyoming is the largest coal
[4:37:31]producer in the nation. We, in other words, are responsible for ensuring that you can turn on your lights and heat your home. The BLM manages its public lands pursuant to the Federal Land
[4:37:42]Policy Management Act, which is implemented pursuant to what we refer to as resource management plans or RMPPS. These RMPPS are designed to maximize
[4:37:53]resource values for the public. The BLM is required to comply with a multipleuse mandate, ensuring that these combination of uses meet current and future needs of
[4:38:03]the American people. In its waning days, the Biden administration issued an RMP amendment for the Buffalo field office, which pursued the no new leasing
[4:38:12]alternative, pulling 481,000 acres of America's largest coal reserves and resources offline, making 48 billion short tons of coal unavailable and
[4:38:24]ending leasing in the Powder River Basin. Such a decision cannot be considered a legitimate or legal RMP pursuant to FlipMa, and neither does it align with Congress's multipleuse
[4:38:35]mandate. The Biden RMP is instead very clearly a mineral withdrawal enacted by climate activists in direct violation of the law. The Biden administration's
[4:38:45]decision to terminate mining in Wyoming's PRB not is not only irresponsible and harmful, but downright illegal. A mechanism used by the
[4:38:55]governing elite to inflict harm on every single citizen of this great country to further climate change lunacy. If this RMPA is allowed to continue, it would
[4:39:05]risk $4,122 jobs in rural Wyoming, $1.9 billion in labor output through 2048, and millions of dollars in state revenue used to fund
[4:39:17]public K12 education. This seemingly localized decision has national repercussions as well. In 2024, Wyoming
[4:39:26]produced 191 million tons of coal, 171 million tons of which was shipped to 26 different states for producing electricity. At these rates, Wyoming
[4:39:37]produces about 40% of the nation's coal and about 80% of all federal coal production. With coal generating as much as 23% of America's electricity any at
[4:39:48]any given time, Wyoming's coal supplies Wyoming coal supplies as much as 9.2 2% of the electricity produced in this country. Watching the arguments in the
[4:39:59]rules committee last night and on the floor today, it is clear that affordability is the word of the day for my colleagues across the aisle. If utility bills for Americans is something
[4:40:09]they genuinely care about, then I encourage them to vote for HJRES 130 and to not turn off the Powder River Basin Coal, which accounts for so much of
[4:40:20]American energy and could generate even more if Washington DC had not waged a war on coal for the last three decades. In short, it is policies such as no new
[4:40:30]coal leasing contained in this Buffalo RMP that reduces affordability, which my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will be supporting if they
[4:40:39]continue to oppose HJRES 130. This vote today is a vote to shore up the grid, which will have positive impacts on the utility bills of Americans. When
[4:40:50]combined with what this majority did for energy development in the one big beautiful bill, we are shoring up centuries of energy production. We cannot survive in this country without
[4:41:00]Wyoming coal. The more majority of which is produced in the Powder River Basin. Demand for Wyoming coal is only increasing both here and abroad. If you turn out the lights on one of Wyoming's
[4:41:11]most important industries, you will also be turning out the lights on America. The Biden administration knew this and pursued this harmful policy anyway, and
[4:41:20]they did so in violation of the law. On September 18th, 2025, the Governmental Accountability Office determined that the Buffalo RMP was a rule subject to
[4:41:31]the CRA on the grounds that it is an agency statement, is a future effect, and it implements, interprets, or prescribes law and policy. This decision
[4:41:41]is in line with previous GAO decisions on similar land management plans and RMPPS, several of which this body has passed in the 119th Congress. A vote
[4:41:51]today for HJRES 130 has many positive implications. First, it would overturn this harmful plan and revert to the 2015 RMP, thereby protecting access to
[4:42:03]481,000 acres for coal leasing. Second, it would provide certainty to countless Wyomingites who rely on our good, clean coal for jobs and for revenue that funds
[4:42:14]the schools that our ch our children attend. Third, it is a vote for the millions of Americans who continue to rely on Wyoming coal and who always will. Fourth, it's a win for Congress,
[4:42:26]reminding the agencies that we are the primary policymaking branch of government and that we will hold the agencies responsible responsible for bad
[4:42:36]unlawful regulations. I urge all of my colleagues to vote in favor of HJ Res 130 and I yield back. >> The gentleman from Arkansas reserves. The gentleman from California. You are
[4:42:48]recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It occurs to me that uh as we're having this debate uh pretty much the rest of the world is in Brazil right now for the climate conference. Of course, the Trump
[4:42:58]administration has disgracefully pulled the United States out of the Paris agreement once again. So, we have no federal delegation at all. But as the rest of the world convenes to accept the
[4:43:10]reality of the climate crisis and to accept the the related reality of coal being the biggest contributor to carbon pollution and the entire world is
[4:43:21]talking about how to phase down uh our dependence on coal pollution and fossil fuel pollution. We are here in this alternate reality of the Republican
[4:43:31]majority where my colleague from Wyoming calls it climate lunacy. Um it's it's a sad sad testament to frankly uh the disgraceful leadership of this
[4:43:43]Republican majority that propping up the coal industry with discounted royalties and massive subsidies and millions of acres of land giveaways and now this
[4:43:53]misuse of the Congressional Review Act uh is the official policy of the Republican majority. It's just uh almost unthinkable and yet that's where we are
[4:44:02]with that. Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Mexico. Mr. Vasquez >> is recognized. >> Thank you, ranking member. Thank you,
[4:44:12]Mr. Speaker. Uh well, first coming from New Mexico, let me tell you that I have gone through the R&P process firsthand uh in my own Los Cru's district, the Tri
[4:44:21]County R&P, and those are long and painful processes. They take a lot of public input, a lot of painful meetings. Those plans are developed with the input
[4:44:32]from residents from all sides of the aisle that represent different parts of what is our public lands and the mandate to have multiple use lands. They are not meant just for one industry. They are meant for everybody that uses those
[4:44:44]public lands. And when I served on the US federal committee to advise the forest service and we got all these stakeholders together to implement the 2012 planning rule, it was the same
[4:44:55]deal. We did it deliberately. We did it with all stakeholders at the table. And so these RMPs are actually developed with public input from every community, not from one single stakeholder group.
[4:45:06]And that is the painful process that it takes to update these plans, many of them which haven't been updated since the 1980s. Now, it's important that we take into account the time, the effort of not just the agency staff and those
[4:45:18]folks who show up to those hard meetings and hear the public out, but the public who comes out in my district sometimes driving 30, 40, 50 miles just to attend one of those meetings so that they can
[4:45:28]eventually get to an RMP knowing that that will be the law of the land. And so today, I rise in opposition to all the CRAAS. But in particular, I want to talk
[4:45:38]about one very special place. In 2017, when the Arctic National Wildlife Refugees coastal plane was first officially open to drilling, supporters promised that the sale would raise
[4:45:49]significant revenue. Instead, only three biders emerged, and the first mandated lease sale brought in less than 1% of the $2.2 billion that Congress was told
[4:45:59]to expect. less than 1% that burden taxpayers with an additional $2 billion in national debt. Why? Well, because the Arctic is one of the most expensive
[4:46:11]places on Earth to drill and investors and the and the oil industry know this. In fact, BP and Shell already abandoned their Arctic proposals, even paying to
[4:46:21]exit those leases. And financing has dried up completely with ne nearly every major US bank and 20 global insurance companies having publicly pledged not to
[4:46:31]finance Arctic drilling projects. Yet here we are. The coastal plane is too remote, too costly, and too risky to make drilling financially feasible, especially when we already produce
[4:46:43]record oil and gas volumes elsewhere at a far lower cost to taxpayers, including in my district, the Perian Basin. And let's be clear, Arctric drilling will not lower gas prices. With no existing
[4:46:54]roads, pipelines, or infrastructure, any Arctic oil would take years to reach the market, if it ever does. I know this myself because this is a picture from when I was in the Arctic. Now, this is
[4:47:05]also a question of what we value. The Arctic Refuge is the only national wildlife refuge that protects a complete Arctic ecosystem. It's called the crown jewel of our public lands. And that it's
[4:47:16]called that for a reason. And I saw why firsthand when I was there last summer. Now, this special place offers unmatched truly wild fishing and hunting
[4:47:26]opportunities for all Americans. When you catch your first Arctic char in the Canning River on the coastal plane, it is a moment you will never forget as an American. And these lands have provided
[4:47:36]sustenance to the Gwitchin and Nupia peoples for millennia. The bottom line, setting the unique wildlife and recreation values of America's Arctic
[4:47:45]aside, using the CRA to overturn land management plans is bad policy, bad economics, and bad land man management. And truly, it's a disrespect to the constituents who showed up to those
[4:47:56]meetings to create that R&P in the first place year over year over year. So, by treating every resource management plan as a rule that is subject to the CRA, Congress is throwing the legal status of
[4:48:08]every oil and gas lease, every grazing permit and recreational activity across the West into question. And I asked my Republican colleagues, why pursue the
[4:48:18]CRA process when this administration has already revised the plan in question? They've already opened up the coastal plane. So, why do this? We should vote no, not to score a political point, but
[4:48:29]because this proposal simply doesn't make sense and won't work. Thank you. I yield back my time. >> Gentleman from California reserves. The gentleman from Arkansas. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You know, it's
[4:48:40]been mentioned that uh US coal is dying. US coal is being murdered. It's there's been an attack on it for many years and
[4:48:48]and some people will not stop until they see it gone. But it's to our own demise because we depend so much on the energy uh not only from coal but from natural
[4:49:00]gas. We may need more nuclear power. We need more hydro power. We need all kinds of new power. And this isn't the time to
[4:49:09]be attacking our fuel sources. And you know, we'll have a debate on the uh the Arctic slope and the coastal plane, but when we're talking about uh Wyoming, we're talking about coal and we're
[4:49:21]talking about really the backbone of our uh electrical generating and distribution system. I yield three minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota, who's the chair, the subcommittee
[4:49:32]chairman on energy and minerals for the natural resources committee, Mr. Stalber. >> Gentleman from Minnesota is recognized for three minutes. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today in strong support of this CRA resolution
[4:49:43]introduced by my good friend and colleague from Wyoming, Representative Hegman. This resolution overturns the Biden administration's actions to lock up public lands in Wyoming from
[4:49:53]responsible coal development. All part of the Democrat and President Biden's agenda, which was anywhere but America, any worker but American energy agenda.
[4:50:05]Last year, I had the opportunity to join Representative Haggman on a tour across the Powder River Basin where we visited the coal mines and met the proud men and women who have been working there for
[4:50:15]generations. While I visited one of these mines, I met a union electrician, third generation minor,
[4:50:26]who raised his hand and stated, "Please don't take our jobs away. I'm working here and my son just got hired here.
[4:50:37]The passion he had for the industry and these jobs were incredible. He and now his children work in that coal mine. That gentleman told me his
[4:50:48]family story with a lump in his throat. Like generations before him, he and now his children had access to good paying union jobs in the coal mine across the
[4:50:59]Powder River basin. But thanks to the Biden administration's continued war on coal, his job and his livelihood was on the line as the mine he worked out worked in was set to run out of coal
[4:51:10]reserves in just a few short years. Thanks to the Biden administration's resource management plan that blocked new coal leasing, the mine wouldn't be able to access additional reserves and
[4:51:20]would have to close. In doing so, the mine would have to lay off hundreds of workers and devastate the surrounding communities that depend on the coal mining industry to drive their local
[4:51:30]economies. With tears in their eyes, this electrician asked me to save his job and save his livelihood so he could continue to provide for his family and
[4:51:42]energy for America. Mr. Speaker, we have the opportunity today to do just that. By voting in favor of this CRA, we will be able to roll back the disastrous
[4:51:53]Biden administration's anti-American energy policies and keep the Powder River Basin alive. And through the CRA, we will stop future anti-American energy
[4:52:03]administrations from taking similar steps to shut down the Powder River Basin. I want to thank my colleague from Wyoming for introducing this important CRA resolution on behalf of the hardworking men and women that make up
[4:52:15]Wyoming's coal industry. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for this this resolution and I yield back. M >> Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time. I'm prepared to close and
[4:52:26]reserve the balance of my time. >> Gentleman from Arkansas is prepared to close and reserves the balance of his time. The gentleman from California is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, you know, it's a little bit rich to hear all of
[4:52:37]this concern about jobs and the poor electrician who's going to lose a job and to hear all of this concern about the energy that we desperately need to
[4:52:46]meet projected demand increase. What we're really hearing across the aisle is a very selective concern about some jobs and about some types of energy. Because
[4:52:58]as we're having this debate about a desperate scheme to try to pop prop up the dying coal industry, not just with this CRA, but with the discounted
[4:53:09]royalties, with the massive public land giveaways, with all of the other favors uh that have been doled out to this industry. At the same time, the Trump
[4:53:19]administration is trying in every way it can to kill off the clean energy uh industry, which generates far more jobs
[4:53:28]than coal. Far more people stand to lose their jobs. Far more electricians, like the one my friend was just so concerned about a moment ago, stand to lose their
[4:53:38]jobs because of this war on clean energy that my friends across the aisle are just fine with. Now, Chairman Westerman said we need all types of new energy. Well, you know, I guess we'll have a
[4:53:49]chance this week to find out if that too is just more happy talk, more hollow words because there'll be a markup on his legislation on permitting. And
[4:54:01]Democrats have been asking for meaningful changes to this war on clean energy as the first item to have a serious negotiation and discussion about
[4:54:10]that. We'll find out and I hope that Mr. Westerman delivers on his promise to work in good faith with Democrats and to do something about the war on clean energy. But unless and until he does,
[4:54:22]and unless and until my colleagues across the aisle stop pretending that an entire industry with far more jobs than coal and far more energy that can be
[4:54:32]brought to bear to meet rising demand at far less cost until they stop pretending that that war on clean energy is not happening, all of this, frankly, uh is
[4:54:43]just political theater. Now, Mr. speaker to the point about the so-called viability of coal. Let's just zoom in on the coal industry in the Powder River Basin, the very place that would be
[4:54:54]impacted by this CRA. On October 6th, the Bureau of Land Management held a lease sale for 167 million tons of coal on public lands on the Montana side of
[4:55:05]this specific basin. The BLM received one bid that was valued uh that valued each ton of coal at onetenth of one
[4:55:14]penny. The administration rejected that bid and canceled the lease sale because that abysmal price did not meet the requirements of fair market value
[4:55:24]outlined in the mineral leasing act. That's the reason that the BLM came together to finalize the Buffalo field office RMP amendment to address
[4:55:34]decreasing demand for coal, which is both the dirtiest and the most expensive form of energy. House Republicans would give away your public lands and waters
[4:55:45]to big coal for pennies, fractions of pennies. The coin that they are phasing out as practically worthless. Uh, it's about as valuable as the coal that
[4:55:57]they're trying to subsidize. This resolution will do nothing to address skyrocketing energy bills in Wyoming or anywhere else. A conservative former Wyoming state representative recently
[4:56:08]penned an op-ed that really speaks to what's happening on the ground. And I quote, "We need responsible legislators who do not rely on wishful thinking to make long-term policy decisions. It's
[4:56:19]time to take off the aluminum foil hats filled with wishful thinking and make some real decisions based on responsible prediction. End quote. I reserve the balance of my time.
[4:56:30]>> The gentleman from California reserves. The gentleman from Arkansas. >> Mr. Speaker, I'm prepared to close and continue to reserve. >> Gentleman continues to reserve. Gentleman from California.
[4:56:41]>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In closing, uh, I strongly oppose this resolution. Using the CRA to overturn this RMP and the others that we're debating this week
[4:56:51]will throw our public lands into chaos. It completely sidelines the input and perspectives of local communities who spent years working with BLM on this plan. And it's another reckless attempt
[4:57:02]to prop up the fossil fuel industry and line the pockets of polluters, all at the expense of affordable energy and good paying jobs. The Buffalo Field Office RMP allows existing coal leases
[4:57:14]to continue with reasonable safeguards to reduce emissions and protect land and water. Congress should not be overturning this plan with the sledgehammer of the CRA. I strongly urge
[4:57:26]my colleagues to vote no on the resolution. And to my Republican colleagues, I urge you to think twice about the consequences of this action and setting this chaotic precedent. I yield back.
[4:57:36]>> The gentleman from California yields. The gentleman from Arkansas. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And uh since my colleague mentioned the speed act, which we'll be marking up in committee on
[4:57:47]Thursday, even though it u is not on the floor today, I'll put in a shameless plug for our bipartisan legislation that is uh not only techneutral, but it's agnostic to the project, the project
[4:57:58]type. It would definitely help us uh produce more energy in America and it will also help us to build things in America. Again, something we desperately
[4:58:07]need to do. and we'll debate that Thursday and hopefully someday we'll be out here debating it on the floor. But as we look at this particular uh RMPA
[4:58:18]that um is on the floor today because the Biden administration on their way out pushed something through by rule that they could never get passed into
[4:58:29]law. And a CRA, I remind you, is so that Congress can exert its legislative authority over an administrative
[4:58:39]agency or over an administration. And I would remind future administrations not to make dumb rules when you're going out the door or somebody in Congress will be standing here maybe on the other side of
[4:58:50]the aisle doing a CRA to turn back the rule making uh ability that is not lawmaking as we're instructed to do in the constitution as a legislative
[4:59:02]branch. But in response to the actual RMPA that we're talking about, the CRA on it today, now is the time to unleash
[4:59:13]American energy. The Buffalo field office resource management plan would not only devastate Wyoming's energy workforce, it would raise prices nationwide.
[4:59:25]We are in a competition. We're in a competition with China that certainly hasn't backed off on building coal fired plants. Matter of fact, they're building
[4:59:34]at a rate of about one every two or three days coming online because they know they need reliable energy. They need affordable energy and
[4:59:45]they need that to establish their manufacturing dominance and to beat us in the race for AI. Uh we can't allow that to happen. Even though China
[4:59:56]produces twice as much electricity as we do today, um we shouldn't be discriminating against any energy source. We should be trying to produce
[5:00:07]as much energy as we can so that we can win in that competition. By passing this CRA, we're restoring the
[5:00:16]BLM's multiple use and sustained yield mandate and preventing future administrations from locking up America's natural resources. The era of curtailing multiple uses of our federal
[5:00:27]lands hopefully is over and it's time to usher in a golden age of unleashing our energy and mineral resources. Urge adoption of this bill and I yield back the balance of my time.
[5:00:38]>> Gentlemen, uh from Arkansas, yield. All time for debate has expired. Pursuant to House Resolution 879, the previous question is ordered on the joint resolution. The question is on
[5:00:49]engrossment and third reading of the joint resolution. Those in favor say I. Those opposed say no. The eyes have it. Third reading. Joint resolution provided
[5:01:00]for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5 United States Code of the rules submitted by the Bureau of Land Management relating to Buffalo Field Office record of decision and
[5:01:12]approved resource management plan amendment. >> The question is on passage of the joint resolution. Those in favor say I. Those
[5:01:22]opposed say no. The eyes have it. The joint resolution is passed. For what purpose does the gentleman from California seek recognition? >> You'll never guess why. I'm going to
[5:01:32]request the y's and nays. >> The yays and nays are requested. Those in favor of a vote of the nays will rise. A sufficient number having risen. The yays and nays are ordered. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20. Further
[5:01:43]proceedings of this question will be postponed. For what purpose does the gentleman from
[5:01:55]Arkansas, Mr. Westerman seek recognition. >> Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 879, I call up HJRES 131 and ask for it immediate consideration in
[5:02:06]the House. >> Clerk will report the title of the joint resolution. >> House joint resolution 131, joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of Title 5, United States Code, of the rules
[5:02:18]submitted by the Bureau of Land Management relating to coastal plane oil and gas leasing program. Record of decision. >> Pursuant to House Resolution 879, the
[5:02:29]joint resolution is considered read. The joint resolution shall be debatable for one hour, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on natural resources or
[5:02:39]their respective design. The gentleman from Arkansas, Mr. Westerman, and the gentleman from California, Mr. Huffman, will each control 30 minutes. The chair recognizes the gentleman from Arkansas.
[5:02:50]Mr. Westerman, you are recognized. >> Mr. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all members be given five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous
[5:02:59]material on HJRES 131. >> Without objection. >> Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. >> The gentleman is recognized. I rise
[5:03:09]today in support of HJRES 131, which would repeal a Biden era record of decision or a rod restricting oil and gas production on 1.16 million acres
[5:03:19]within 1002 area of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, also known as Ammoir. The 1002 area of Ammoir was specifically set aside by Congress for its oil and
[5:03:30]gas potential and estimated to hold anywhere between 4.25 and 11.8 8 billion barrels of recoverable oil. Prior to the passage of the working families tax cut
[5:03:42]law, which requires four lease sales to be held over a 10-year period, Congress had previously mandated in in the area an action that had the support of local North Slope communities and native
[5:03:53]villages. In fact, last Congress, we held a bipartisan legislative hearing on HR6285, Alaska's right to produce act, where we heard from tribal representatives,
[5:04:04]including a new leadership from the native village of Cactivic, the only indigenous tribal community within Ammoir. In that hearing, Dorene Levitt,
[5:04:15]director of natural resources for the Nupia community of the Arctic Slope, said, and I quote, "The North Slope and Nupia live in one of the most remote areas of the country with none of their
[5:04:26]communities connected by a permanent road system to each other or to municipalities in the state, making private and public investment very costly. So, it is up to their people to
[5:04:36]seek out opportunities and partners to strengthen their regional economy." End quote. Instead of working with Arctic slope communities to create economic
[5:04:46]opportunities, the Biden era rod further limited the economic prospects available to those in the region, reducing investment and cutting off essential new infrastructure that would support
[5:04:57]resource development. During President Trump's first administration, consistent with federal law and local voices, the Department of Interior finalized plans
[5:05:06]to make all 1.56 million acres of the coastal plane available to oil and gas leasing. Lamentably, in 2024, the Biden administration disregarded local tribal
[5:05:17]voices and reversed course, implementing a new record of decision that chose the most restrictive alternative, making available the minimal amount of acreage
[5:05:27]for energy leasing. The Biden administration also included energy prohibitive stipulations in the rod designed to undermine energy lease sales in the 102 area. These provisions were
[5:05:39]horrifically successful as the last lease cell held received no bids. The Biden administration's anti-energy decisions limit economic opportunities
[5:05:49]for local Alaskans and Alaskan natives living within Ammoir. Congress must move to repeal the Biden era rod that runs counter to congressional intent and
[5:05:59]unfairly reduces economic opportunities in the region. I want to thank Representative Begage for his work on HJRES 131 so we can restore common sense to the management of vanwires vast
[5:06:10]resources and again unleash American energy. Urge my colleagues to support this legislation and I reserve the balance of my time. >> The gentleman's mark is all reserves. Gentleman from California, you're recognized.
[5:06:21]>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I strongly oppose HJRES 131. The Congressional Review Act resolution here would overturn BLM's coastal plane oil and gas
[5:06:32]leasing program record of decision. My Republican colleagues are once again pursuing policies that expand our nation's carbon pollution and expose our communities to future disasters. Not
[5:06:44]only would this legislation grant access to one of the most ecologically sensitive and yes, incredibly difficult regions to drill, but it would reverse
[5:06:54]significant strides that Democrats have made to protect lands that tribal nations have occupied since time immemorial. This misguided bill would
[5:07:04]lock in oil and gas development in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, an area known to the Gwitchin people as the sacred place where life begins. The
[5:07:14]coastal plane is the heart of the porcupine caribou herds Calving grounds. It hosts nearly 200 migratory bird species annually, connecting the rest of
[5:07:24]the United States and also the world to this cradle of our natural heritage. Equally vital, the 9,000 strong Gwitchin nation whose subsistence and culture
[5:07:36]depend on the caribou herd reside along the herd's migratory route, making any disruption not only a threat to biodiversity, but also an assault on
[5:07:46]indigenous livelihoods and traditions. Let me read to you a quote from the executive director of the Gwitchen Steering Committee, Kristen Morland. She says, quote, "It is unthinkable that our
[5:07:58]congressional decision makers continue to push to exploit the coastal plane of the Arctic refuge for oil and gas drilling." She continues, "We rely on the caribou, not only spiritually and
[5:08:10]culturally, but for our survival and subs subsistence. This action from DC is an insult to the Gwitchin people and ignores those
[5:08:20]realities." End quote. Sovereign Anupiat for Living Arctic also opposed this proposal. They said, and I quote, "Many Alaskan native communities are already
[5:08:30]facing negative health impacts from oil and gas development on their lands and are struggling to provide for their families due to impacts on the local fish and wildlife populations. Now, Mr.
[5:08:42]Speaker, these words remind us that the climate crisis is here. It is real and it is exacerbated by this administration's relentless push towards
[5:08:53]fossil fuels. In the in the Arctic, temperatures are rising four times faster than the global average. And it is the indigenous communities in northern Alaska and in the refuge that
[5:09:04]are disproportionately feeling the devastating impacts of the climate crisis. melting perafrost and changing species migration patterns are threatening food security, cultural
[5:09:15]traditions, and their ways of life. You'll hear my Republican colleagues argue that increased oil and gas development in the Arctic will be good for America's bottom line. That is
[5:09:25]patently false. Let me take you back to 2017 when Republicans cut a backroom deal to help pay for Trump's billionaire tax cuts the first time around by
[5:09:35]drilling in the Arctic Refuge. two refuge lease sales were included in part to offset the cost of those tax giveaways to the to the wealthy. Republicans in Congress and the Trump
[5:09:47]administration promised that these lease sales would bring in 1.8 billion in revenue for the federal government and the state of Alaska. Well, when the
[5:09:57]first lease sale finally took place in 2021, guess what happened? It generated less than $15 million. That is around 2%
[5:10:07]of what the CBO had estimated in 2022. Two of the lease sales, two of the lees actually asked BLM to cancel and refund
[5:10:17]their leases separately. In 2021, two development companies actually paid $10 million to walk away from their legacy leases in the Arctic refuge. That's
[5:10:27]about the only revenue we've been able to generate in this spectacularly difficult place to drill. Taxpayers for Common Sense, a non a nonpartisan group
[5:10:38]focused on deficit reduction, recently said that drilling in the refuge has never been a credible revenue offset, and it isn't now. They even found that new leasing in the area would only raise
[5:10:50]at most $30 million. A drop in the bucket when you consider my Republican colleagues big ugly bill, which will cost American taxpayers $3.4 trillion.
[5:11:02]This resolution is the latest attack from my Republican colleagues to undercut our public lands, to prop up fossil fuel polluters and the expensive energy sources that they pedal, and to
[5:11:13]leave people out of the decision-making process, all while driving up energy prices for the American people. I urge my colleagues to join me in the long-standing bipartisan support for
[5:11:25]protecting the Arctic Refuge by opposing HJRES 131. and I reserve the balance of my time. >> Gentleman from California reserves. The gentleman from Arkansas is recognized.
[5:11:35]>> Mr. Speaker, I yield four minutes to the gentleman from Alaska, the lead sponsor of this legislation, Mr. Begage. >> The gentleman from Alaska is recognized for four minutes. >> Mr. Mr. Speaker, as the sole
[5:11:46]representative of Alaska in the United States House, I rise today in strong support of House Joint Resolution 131, a resolution to overturn the Biden
[5:11:55]administration's 2024 record of decision and action that severely restricted energy development on the coastal plane of Alaska's North Slope. For Alaskans,
[5:12:05]this issue is foundational economically, strategically, and culturally. The 1002 area of Anoir, the coastal plane, is the most studied piece of land in Alaska and
[5:12:16]one of the most resourcerich energy basins in North America. Congress set this area aside specifically because of its oil and gas potential, and Congress
[5:12:26]has twice mandated that it be leased for energy development. Yet, in December 2024, in the final days of the outgoing administration, the Interior Department
[5:12:36]issued a new record of decision that made only 400,000 acres available, a mere 25% of the legally designated coastal plane, effectively shutting down
[5:12:47]1.16 million acres that Congress expressly told the department to lease. That record of decision ignored Congress. It
[5:12:57]ignored the statutory mandate in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and it ignored the voices of the people who actually live on Alaska's North Slope. Thanks to a request from Alaska's delegation, the
[5:13:09]Government Accountability Office issued a legal opinion on August 25th confirming that this 2024 record of decision is a rule under the Congressional Review Act. That opinion,
[5:13:20]printed in the Congressional Record in September, triggered the CRA window that allows Congress to act today. and Congress must act because Alaskans have spoken clearly and they've spoken
[5:13:32]loudly. The North Slope Anupiat leadership, including the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, the North Slope Burrow, and the Anupiac Community of the Arctic Slope, have consistently
[5:13:43]supported responsible development in the 1002 area of our North Slope. For decades, they have supported balanced development because they know how vital it is to sustain their communities,
[5:13:55]maintain their way of life, and fund essential public services. Oil and gas development on the North Slope provides 95%
[5:14:03]95% of local tax revenue, which pays for schools, clinics, utilities, public safety, and infrastructure in some of the most remote and highcost communities
[5:14:15]in America. Without development, those services disappear. Mr. Speaker, the law is clear, the science is clear, and the economic reality is undeniable. The US
[5:14:25]Geological Survey estimates the coastal plane contains 10.4 billion barrels of recoverable oil, a resource that can strengthen America's energy security at
[5:14:34]a time when geopolitical instability is rising and global energy demand is surging. President Trump recognized this on day one, issuing Executive Order
[5:14:44]14153, unleashing Alaska's extraordinary resource potential, directing the Secretary of the Interior to restore the lawful 2020 framework. And the Bureau of Land Management is already implementing
[5:14:56]that directive, working to reinstate the 2020 record of decision, and moving forward with the four statutoily required lease sales mandated by the
[5:15:05]American Working Families Tax Cut. But unless we disapprove of the 2024 ROD today, regulatory whiplash will continue. Investment will remain frozen
[5:15:16]and local communities will shoulder the burden of federal indecision. House Joint Resolution 131 ends that uncertainty. It restores the legally compliant 2020 record of decision. It
[5:15:27]restores the full acreage Congress authorized for leasing and it restores, importantly the voice of North Slope residents in Alaska. Mr. Mr. Speaker, Alaska has the energy the world needs.
[5:15:39]America has the workforce to develop that energy responsibly. And Alaska's communities from Utkiagic to Kaktovic have been asking for consistency, partnership, and respect from their
[5:15:50]federal government. Today, we can answer that call and I urge my colleagues to vote yes. Support Alaska, support American energy security. I yield back. >> Gentleman Toms is expired. Gentleman from markets all reserves. The gentleman
[5:16:02]from California is recognized. >> I reserve. The gentleman from California reserves. The gentleman from Arkansas. You are recognized. >> Mr. Speaker, I yield four minutes to the
[5:16:13]gentleman from Minnesota, Mr. Stabber. >> The gentleman from Minnesota is recognized for four minutes. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this CRA resolution introduced by my good friend and colleague,
[5:16:24]Representative Beg. This resolution overturns the Biden administration's actions to prevent the great people of Alaska from accessing and responsibly
[5:16:35]developing their abundant oil and gas resources on the North Slope. Yet again, these actions were just another part of the Democrat and
[5:16:44]President Biden's agenda. Anywhere but America, any worker but American. This was put out by the Biden
[5:16:54]administration, Mr. Speaker, on December 8th, mere weeks before the transition to the Trump administration,
[5:17:04]last Congress, I was proud to introduce the Alaska's Right to Produce Act, which reversed many of these same anti-American energy policies of the Biden administration and passed the
[5:17:14]House with bipartisan support. Alaska is blessed with a tremendous wealth of natural resources. In fact, when Alaska was admitted to the union, there was a
[5:17:26]specific condition laid out that the new state would develop these abundant natural resources for the benefit of all Alaskans and all Americans. The Biden
[5:17:38]administration took step after step to block the Alaskan people from developing these resources, levying more sanctions. The Biden administration levied more
[5:17:49]sanctions on the state of Alaska than they did Iran. Congress time and time again has passed laws to encourage and even even require oil and gas leasing and development in
[5:18:01]the 1002 area of Anoir. The Biden's administration recorded decision runs completely counter to the laws that Congress has enacted and they played
[5:18:11]games to discourage development like only offering unfavorable acreage in their lease sale. These policies run counter to the wishes of the Alaska
[5:18:22]natives across the North Slope of Alaska. I had the honor of leading a bipartisan delegation of my colleagues on the natural resources committee to the North Slope last year to visit with
[5:18:33]these Alaska natives and see the responsible oil and gas operations firsthand. These individuals depend on revenues from oil and gas development for their everyday lives. In fact,
[5:18:45]Alaska natives who are enrolled shareholders of the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation collect nearly $30,000 a year thanks to responsible oil
[5:18:55]and gas development on the North Slope. And the Biden administration failed to properly consult with the people of the North Slope when they decided to lock up
[5:19:06]Anoir and the NP NP. Former Secretary of the Interior Deb Ha Howland refused request after request to meet and hear from them. And this was
[5:19:18]told to us in a meeting in the Natural Resources Committee. The CRA resolution will correct this by giving Alaska and the Alaska natives of the North Slope
[5:19:28]the opportunity to responsibly develop 102 area of Anoir, which was set aside by Congress for this direct purpose. Mr. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my
[5:19:40]colleague for introducing this important CRA resolution on behalf of all Alaskans and I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for this resolution and I look
[5:19:50]forward to this passing this house and I yield back. >> The gentleman from Arkansas reserves. The gentleman from California is recognized. >> I reserve. >> The gentleman from California reserves. The gentleman from Arkansas.
[5:20:01]>> Mr. Speaker, I have no further request for time. I'm prepared to close and reserve the balance of my time. Gentleman is prepared to close and reserves the balance of his time the gentleman from California. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So, in closing,
[5:20:12]I strongly oppose this resolution. It would open up ecologically sensitive, culturally important, and incredibly remote regions of the Arctic to oil and
[5:20:22]gas drilling. Drilling proponents have grossly overstated how much oil industry interest there is in drilling in the coastal plane of the Arctic Refuge. The
[5:20:32]Arctic is an extremely remote and harsh environment, requiring specialized equipment and infrastructure, making it one of the costliest places to drill in the entire world. There have been
[5:20:44]multiple lease sales held in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which I want to emphasize is a wildlife refuge, and still no legitimate oil and gas company
[5:20:54]currently holds a lease there. Even during President Trump's first term, no oil and gas company kept their leases. In fact, a recent report from Taxpayers
[5:21:06]for Common Sense outlined the lack of economic viability for any oil and gas development there, citing astronomically high costs in this remote region. So,
[5:21:16]let me be clear. House Republicans actions today will do absolutely nothing to lower your energy bills, but it will allow for the selloff of some of our
[5:21:27]most special and sacred public lands. And that's why I oppose HJRES 131 and all of the CRA resolutions on the floor today. I urge my colleagues to join me
[5:21:38]in voting no and I yield the balance of my time. >> The gentleman from California has yielded. The gentleman from Arkansas is recognized. >> Mr. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues for supporting this critical legislation
[5:21:50]and engaging this meaningful discussion. Before I close, I want to highlight another statement from Director Levitt which he offered during a resource committee hearing last Congress. Uh Mr.
[5:22:00]Stubber in his testimony talked about how the uh locals in the area just wished someone would listen to them. But director Levitt said this and I quote,
[5:22:11]"Had the administration acted according to the Indian Real Organization Act or its own orders, its leadership and staff would have made allowance for the fact
[5:22:21]that the Inupia community of the Arctic Slope or the ICAS alongside many other North Slope tribes and entities like the native village of Kctivic, Voice of the
[5:22:32]Arctic, Anupi, Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, and more have a long history of supporting responsible resource development projects in Ammoir. The voice of the Arctic and up of which
[5:22:44]ICAS is a member has a standing resolution supporting the responsible exploration and development of the 102
[5:22:52]area of Anoir. End quote. HJRZ 131 responds to the wishes of the local people who call Amoir home and unleashes the region's bountiful natural resources
[5:23:03]for the benefit of US energy security and the economic well-being of local communities. I again urge my colleagues to support this legislation and I yield back the balance of my time.
[5:23:14]>> Gentleman from Arkansas yields back. All time for debate has expired pursuant to House Resolution 879. This previous question is ordered on the joint resolution. The question is on
[5:23:25]engrossment and third reading of the joint resolution. All those in favor, please sign by saying I. Oppose say no. The eyes have it. The clerk will proceed
[5:23:35]with third reading. >> Joint resolution provided for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5 United States Code of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Land
[5:23:45]Management relating to coastal plane oil and gas leasing program. Record of decision. The question is on passage of the joint resolution. Those in favor please
[5:23:57]signify by saying I. >> Oppose say no. The eyes have it. The joint resolution is. What purpose does a gentleman from
[5:24:07]California seek recognition? >> Request the ys and nays. >> The yays and have been requested. Those favor by yays and nays will rise. A sufficient number have been risen. The yays and nas are ordered pursuant to
[5:24:19]clause 8 of rule 20. Further proceedings on this question will be postponed. For what purpose does the gentleman from Arkansas, Mr. Westerman, seek
[5:24:30]recognition? >> Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 879, I call up SJRES 80 and ask for its immediate consideration in the House. >> The clerk will report the title of the joint resolution.
[5:24:41]>> Senate Joint Resolution 80. Joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code of the rules submitted by the Bureau of Land
[5:24:51]Management relating to National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska Integrated Activity Plan, record of decision. >> Pursuant to House Resolution 879, the
[5:25:01]joint resolution is considered read. The joint resolution will shall be available for one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on natural resources or their respective
[5:25:13]design. The gentleman from Arkansas, Mr. Westerman, and the gentleman from California, Mr. Huffman, will each control 30 minutes. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Arkansas, Mr. Westerman.
[5:25:24]>> Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on SJRES 80. >> Without objection.
[5:25:36]>> Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. >> The gentleman is recognized. >> I rise today in support of SJRES 80, which repeals the Biden administration's
[5:25:45]2022 integrated activity plan or AP for the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, also known as the NP. Under the Naval Petroleum Reserves
[5:25:57]Production Act of 1976, the approximately 23 million acre NP was designated by Congress due to its vast energy resources. In 1980, Congress
[5:26:08]amended the act and directed the Secretary of the Interior to conduct quote an expeditious program of competitive leasing of oil and gas in the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska
[5:26:19]end quote. In 2020, in President Trump's first administration, the Bureau of Land Management, released its IEP for the NP, the 2020 IEP listened to local voices
[5:26:30]and opened up access to over 18.5 million acres of the NP for oil and gas leasing. Over 13 million acres were made available for new infrastructure
[5:26:39]development. Nugar Harter Ek, president of the voice of the Arctic and Nupat stated in a September 2023 natural resources committee committee hearing
[5:26:50]that quote, "We also felt heard when BLM released an NP integrated activity plan in June 2020 that considered the interest of our communities, including
[5:27:00]future community infrastructure needs." End quote. The IEP outlining management activities for the natural resources throughout the NP was thoughtfully crafted by the first Trump
[5:27:11]administration taking into account the voices of local indigenous tribal communities. Regrettably, in 2022, the Biden administration placed the 2020 IEP
[5:27:22]with a new one, reducing the available acreage for oil and gas leasing by 37% and reducing areas available to infrastructure by over 2.3 million acres.
[5:27:33]In November 2023, during another hearing on the matter, we heard from Commissioner John Bole of the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, who expressed concerns about the Biden
[5:27:43]administration's NP rulemaking process. And again, I quote, "The process to date has been confusingly deficient as the Bureau of Land Management has scheduled and canceled public meetings on short
[5:27:55]notice, avoided consultation obligations, and attempted to avoid procedural safeguards that are meant to keep rulemakings of enormous public cost and consequence from being hastily and
[5:28:06]arbitrarily implemented. Neither comprehensive environmental nor economic reviews have been completed for a proposal that will dramatically change environmental and economic management in
[5:28:16]what may be the largest federal petroleum asset in the country. End quote. In that same hearing, Mr. Hartek shared again I quote, "This decision
[5:28:26]coupled with further protections for NP will undoubtedly shrink the economic opportunities available to the North Slope. It virtually guarantees to set us back on our journey towards
[5:28:36]self-determination by requiring further reliance on the federal and state government to provide for the basic needs of the people on the North Slope. End quote. Ultimately, the Biden
[5:28:48]administration styied energy production within the NP and failed to offer leases in a manner that would boost revenue and provide economic stability to the region and the state.
[5:28:58]The most recent lease sale in the NP took place in 2019 when the BLM leased over a million acres, generating more than 11 million, including roughly 5.6
[5:29:09]million for the state of Alaska. Revenue from developing these resources is essential to livelihoods of all Alaskans. For example, in FY 2022,
[5:29:19]Alaskan oil and natural gas production, largely driven by the consequences of the proen energy policies of the first Trump administration, generated $4.5 billion in state and local revenue and
[5:29:31]supported over 69,250 direct and indirect jobs. Alaska's role as a leader in unleashing American energy dominance will continue. In the working families tax cut law, Congress
[5:29:42]highlighted the importance of the NP and required five lease sales to be held in the area over the next 10 years. To ensure our energy independence, we must unleash American energy and ensure
[5:29:54]access to our own resources here at home. This legislation is an important step in doing just that. I thank repres Representative Beg and Senator Sullivan for their work to bring SJ Res 80 to the
[5:30:05]House floor so we can nullify yet another misguided Biden era action and take another step to put our nation's energy policy back on the right track. I reserve the balance of my time. The
[5:30:16]>> gentleman from Arkansas reserves, gentle from California, you're recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I oppose SJRES 80, which would overturn the BLM's 2022
[5:30:26]integrated activity plan record of decision for the National Petroleum Reserve Alaska, more commonly referred to as NP. Now, the the name National Petroleum
[5:30:37]Reserve uh is more than a little misleading. This is not some industrial sacrifice zone. It's not some untapped oil field just waiting to be developed.
[5:30:48]On the contrary, the NP is the largest contiguous unit of public lands in the United States. It spans 23 million acres and this area of the western Arctic is
[5:30:59]home to a diverse ecosystem where iconic species like wolves, polar bears, and caribou roam and beluga and boowhead
[5:31:08]whales shelter in its coastal waters. Millions of migratory birds rely on this intact landscape and critical waters and
[5:31:17]wetlands that are the NP. The legislation before us today would withdraw a smart and wellthoughtout plan
[5:31:26]to balance conservation and development in the NP. The 2022 NP plan was developed over more than a decade of
[5:31:37]engagement with a variety of stakeholders, scientists, experts, indigenous communities, NOS's, and industry. It aimed to limit the disruption and ecological harm from
[5:31:48]existing oil and gas development while also designating special areas to protect habitat for the many species that call this amazing place home. I
[5:31:58]respect uh that there are a variety of views on how to manage our nation's public lands, but it won't be possible for future administrations to incorporate feedback and comments on
[5:32:09]proposed actions in the NP if Congress approves the resolution before us today. The CRA, as we've said several times in the course of this debate, is a blunt
[5:32:21]instrument. It would prevent BLM from ever issuing a substantially similar replacement. And so this path would strip local land managers of the ability
[5:32:31]to respond to on the ground changes and needs for the future of the NP. My friends across the aisle, you don't need to do this. There are already
[5:32:42]processes in place for administrations to propose new management decisions if you don't like this plan. And the Trump administration is doing just that already, pursuing updates to the land
[5:32:54]management plans that we've been debating here using the standard inclusive mechanisms that allow for public input. Interior Secretary Bergam withdrew conservation protections for
[5:33:06]the NP in July. And just last week, the Interior Department finalized a new rule that overturned the previous plan. The Congressional Review Act is simply the
[5:33:17]wrong tool to address any changes to management of these lands and it's not even necessary. So why do my Republican colleagues need to take up our valuable
[5:33:28]floor time here debating a rule that their friends in the administration have already rescended? They just returned from a 53day
[5:33:38]taxpayer funded vacation, cancelled five weeks of votes, and still have a long to-do list before the end of the year. That list, I hope, includes figuring out
[5:33:49]how to avoid another government shutdown in January. But you may wonder if my colleagues are spending time on polluter giveaways to maybe distract from something. Maybe
[5:34:01]something like the fact that President Trump has been mentioned more than a thousand times in the Epstein emails. President Trump and House Republicans
[5:34:11]continue to push their drill baby drill agenda even though it makes no sense for people, for the planet or for our pocketbooks. I urge my colleagues to
[5:34:21]vote no on this distraction, this HJRES 80. And I reserve the balance of my time. >> The gentleman from California reserves. Gentleman from Arkansas is recognized.
[5:34:31]>> Mr. Speaker, I would just like to point out that while the current administration did recently resend the 2024 rule this month, passage of a CRA is still necessary to prevent a future
[5:34:42]administration from again weaponizing IEPs similar to this one that ignore congressional intent. And by replacing
[5:34:52]the 2022 IEP, BLM wouldn't be left in limbo. they would revert back to the initial IEP finalized under the first Trump administration which did take into
[5:35:04]account Native Tribal Voices and is consistent with the requirements included in the Tax Cut and Jobs Act. With that, I yield five minutes uh to the gentleman from Alaska, the lead
[5:35:15]sponsor of the House companion to this legislation, Mr. Beggage. >> The gentleman from Alaska is recognized for five minutes. >> Mr. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of Senate Joint Resolution 80,
[5:35:26]legislation to disapprove the Bureau of Land Management's 2022 integrated activity plan for the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska. Let me be very clear.
[5:35:36]This is not an abstract policy debate for the people of Alaska. This is about whether the federal government will honor both the law and its commitments to the people who call Alaska home and
[5:35:47]whether America will choose energy independence over energy uncertainty. The National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, an area the size of Indiana, was
[5:35:57]set aside more than a century ago to ensure the United States had a strategic domestic energy supply. Congress reaffirmed that purpose in the Naval
[5:36:08]Petroleum Reserves Production Act, directing the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a quote expeditious program of competitive leasing in the NP. But
[5:36:17]the 2022 integrated activity plan issued in the final stretch of the last administration turned that congressional mandate on its head. It shut the door on
[5:36:26]48% of the reserve, reducing available acreage from 18.6 million acres to just 11.8 8 million acres and restricted infrastructure corridors across millions
[5:36:38]more. In effect, the plan attempted to create a wilderness area in a petroleum reserve and it did so without listening to the people who actually live there.
[5:36:48]Alaska is asking us to act. The Anupiat people who live in the area have spoken and they could not have been clearer. through the North Slope Regional Trilateral, the Anupiat Community of the
[5:36:59]Arctic Slope, the North Slope Burrow, and the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation. We have heard that the Biden administration's 2022 plan imposed quote sweeping restrictions that curtail
[5:37:11]responsible development, undermine congressional intent, and disregard the well-being of the people who depend on these lands for both subsistence and livelihoods." End quote. These
[5:37:22]communities are located in an area nearly the size of Minnesota with no highway connections, extreme transportation costs, and a cost of
[5:37:31]living among the highest in the nation. Oil and gas development funds their schools, their public safety, their utilities, their clinics, basic services that most Americans assume their local
[5:37:43]government can provide. But on the North Slope, that stability exists because responsible development exists. and we have a duty to ensure that it continues. Alaska's business community stands with
[5:37:54]them. The Alaska Support Industry Alliance, representing 547 companies and 35,000 Alaskan workers, warned that the 2022 plan jeopardizes the jobs and
[5:38:05]investment their families depend on. National organizations from the National Federation of Independent Businesses to the American Exploration and Production Council to the American Petroleum
[5:38:15]Institute have also voiced their support for re reversing this restrictive rule. And the administration itself has made clear that restoring access to the NP is
[5:38:25]a priority. President Trump's executive order 14153, unleashing Alaska's extraordinary resource potential, directs the Secretary of the Interior to
[5:38:35]review and rescend the 2022 decision and reestablish a balanced framework consistent with the 2020 plan. This statement of administration policy strongly supports this resolution. Mr.
[5:38:47]Speaker, Alaska is ready to power America. We are ready to help lower energy costs for families and small businesses. We are ready to strengthen national security by reducing our reliance on foreign nations. And the
[5:38:58]people who live in Alaska's far north, the people whose ancestors have called the region home for 10,000 years are asking us to restore the balanced, lawful management framework that they
[5:39:09]helped shape. Senate Joint Resolution 80 does exactly that. It restores congressional intent, restores certainty for Alaska's communities. It restores
[5:39:18]America's strategic energy reserve. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting Senate Joint Resolution 80, to stand with Alaska, to stand with energy workers, with the Anupiat people
[5:39:30]of the North Slope, and with an American future grounded in abundant, affordable, secure energy. And with that, I yield back >> the gentleman from Arkansas.
[5:39:41]>> Thank you very much. >> Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to submit a letter for the record from the Nupat community of the Arctic Slope,
[5:39:51]ICAS, the North Slope Bureau, and the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, ASRC, that specifically states BLM failed to engage in meaningful government-to-government consultation
[5:40:02]with ASRC, the burrow, and this contradicts federal consultation requirements and disregards the voices of the very communities most affected.
[5:40:12]Our leadership has consistently raised concerns about this process and its outcome. Yet those concerns were ignored. >> Without objection, the gentleman from California, the gentleman reserves, gentleman from Marcus Reserve, gentleman
[5:40:23]from California. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So again, the the plan that this resolution targets for disapproval uh is is not in place. It has been rescended by the Trump administration. And if ever there's a
[5:40:35]case for a mislication of the CRA, it would be this right here. Uh but I think uh Mr. Speaker, it's it's an important
[5:40:44]time for us to step back and consider why using a CRA for any frankly public land management plan, but certainly for one that's already been rescended, uh is
[5:40:56]just a recipe for uncertainty and conflict and litigation. Nearly a third of our nation's land mass, 640 million acres, is managed by the federal
[5:41:07]government. The Forest Service manages 193 million acres. BLM manages 244 million and an additional seven in addition to 713 million acres of federal
[5:41:18]minerals. For nearly 50 years, BLM and the Forest Service have managed these lands under management plans required by the Federal Land Policy and Management
[5:41:30]Act and the National Forest Management Act. And these plans known as resource management plans, we've been calling them RMPs, establish safeguards for
[5:41:40]watersheds and recreation areas. They facilitate energy development and other commercial activity. vide a mechaniz a mechanism for harmonizing the needs of local communities with our national
[5:41:51]goals and perspectives. Now just a few months ago we debated some other CRA resolutions targeting management plans
[5:42:02]and we explained at that time how unprecedented that was. We still don't know the extent of chaos that is going to result from these actions that have already been taken. But we do know this
[5:42:13]under the CRA rules, and rules is a technical term of art here, normally cannot go into effect unless they are submitted for
[5:42:23]congressional review. And here's the problem. BLM and the Forest Service have never considered RMPs to be rules that they would submit to Congress. They've
[5:42:34]just never done that. And that's long been the case under both Democratic and Republican presidents. presidents with presidents being set by
[5:42:43]those presidents. Um, now that Congress has decided apparently to disapprove of individual RMPs, what does that mean for
[5:42:52]every other plan that is in place that wasn't submitted to Congress? What does that mean for the small businesses, the local communities, and other public land stakeholders who depend on a stable and
[5:43:04]predictable land use planning process? If the validity of these land use plans is challenged, then leases, permits, and other authorizations that depend on
[5:43:15]those plans could be called into question. This is already creating uncertainty and delays, making it nearly impossible for new projects to proceed
[5:43:26]on time. And here are a couple of examples for consideration. What would happen to the White River oil and gas resource management plan amendment in
[5:43:34]Colorado which authorizes 15,000 oil and gas wells? What about the Rosemont copper plan amendment for forest service lands in Arizona
[5:43:45]approving 5,000 a 5,000 acre open pit mine in the Coronado National Forest or the Gateway West Trans West Express and
[5:43:55]Gateway South R&P amendments for three transmission lines through Wyoming, Idaho, Nevada, and Utah. Does Interior now need to go back and submit all of
[5:44:06]those R&P amendments to Congress for approval under this new Republican interpretation of the CRA? Is Congress prepared to take on day-to-day management of public lands and minerals
[5:44:18]thousands of miles from Washington DC? I don't think so. But I am not the only one who has concerns about this treadmill of litigation and conflict and
[5:44:28]uncertainty that is being created here. Uh, let me read a quote from Kathleen Sagama, President Trump's first nominee for director of BLM. And she said,
[5:44:39]quote, "There are some additional legal risks that can arise from the CRA. It's uncharted ground, and if not used wisely, there could be some legal risks
[5:44:49]introduced and some bad legal precedents." Just a few months ago, the House passed several other CRA resolutions overturning land management plans. uh as
[5:45:00]we said at the time that it was unprecedented. These resolutions before us continue to chart unprecedented ground and I don't think anyone
[5:45:09]including my colleagues across the aisle have thought a heck of a lot about where it leads. I reserve the balance of my time. >> Gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Arkansas is recognized.
[5:45:21]>> Mr. Speaker, I would submit that a recipe for disaster is when an administration goes out on their own, goes around the laws that Congress passed and implement bad rules on their
[5:45:31]way out the door and expect no repercussions from that. I'd say a recipe for good governance is when Congress acts within their power to
[5:45:42]disapprove of these rules. And that's exactly what we're doing with the CRA to make sure that these rules are followed. Uh, Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time. I'm prepared to close
[5:45:52]and I reserve the balance of my time. >> Gentleman reserves. The gentleman from California is recognized. >> I I thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just want to point out that, you know, we've heard
[5:46:01]a number of times now that more drilling is necessary in the name of energy independence. And I want to remind my colleagues that the United States is
[5:46:11]already the number one producer of oil in the world and the number one producer and exporter of gas in the world. Uh but
[5:46:21]you would sure never know it when you look at the energy bills that are facing uh families all over this country. It is abundantly clear that the drill baby
[5:46:32]drill agenda is not working for everyday Americans. As long as we are dependent on the fossil fuel roller coaster, American consumers will be at the whim
[5:46:44]of the global oil and gas market. But if we want energy independence and if we want lower utility bills, we need to get back on track with the transition to
[5:46:55]clean energy. It is cheaper. It is safer. And it is generated entirely here at home instead of being at the mercy of global price shocks like oil and gas
[5:47:06]just inherently are. Instead, this legislation would make us more reliant on fossil fuels and more entangled with uh the price effects of this fossil fuel
[5:47:18]roller coaster. Plus, oil from America's Arctic will not come online for many, many years. The Willow project, for example, won't start until around 2029.
[5:47:30]Meanwhile, the Arctic is warming four times faster than the rest of the world. Even at the Willow project, developer Kico Phillips will use artificial
[5:47:39]chillers to freeze melting perafrost before drilling for oil. That's the kind of uh complexity and additional cost that is inherent in drilling in these
[5:47:50]remote pristine parts of the Arctic. The project itself will release nearly 300 million metric tons of carbon pollution into the atmosphere over its lifetime.
[5:48:00]The equivalent of at least 66 coal fired power plants. Again, Mr. Speaker, if we want true energy independence and security, we need to combat the climate
[5:48:10]crisis and transition to clean renewable energy. And with that, uh, I reserve. >> Gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Arkansas is recognized. >> Mr. Speaker, I'm prepared to close and
[5:48:21]reserve the balance of my time. >> Gentleman reserves. The gentleman from California is recognized. >> Yeah. Um, Mr. Speaker, if you could bear
[5:48:37]with me for one moment. >> Yes. >> Here it is. This is just excellent staff work, Mr. Speaker. Um, in closing, I
[5:48:48]strongly oppose this uh resolution. The three Congressional Review Act resolutions that we've been considering here today are going to strip local land managers of the ability to respond to
[5:48:58]future challenges and changes uh and needs in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the NP, and the Powder River Basin. And if these reckless resolutions
[5:49:08]pass, these places will be locked into outdated plans that fail to account for changes in community needs, industry needs, and yes, climate driven impacts.
[5:49:20]And these CRA resolutions are completely unnecessary because the Trump administration has already acted on their own to replace these plans. Even
[5:49:30]oil and gas industry experts across the political spectrum agree that the use of the CRA on land use plans creates regulatory and legal ambiguity. In fact,
[5:49:42]Kathleen Sagama, as I Kathleen Sagama, as I just told you, former President Trump's former nominee to lead the BLM, recently said, it's a quote worth repeating, there could be some legal
[5:49:54]risks introduced and bad legal precedent," unquote, when using CRAAS in this manner. Yet, apparently, my friends across the aisle are just going to do it
[5:50:04]anyway. Now, Sagama led the Western Energy Alliance, an oil and and gas industry trade association. She testified before the House Natural
[5:50:13]Resource Majority many times. This misuse of the CRA will create regulatory chaos for everyone, including the industry. So, I asked my colleagues
[5:50:23]across the aisle, why pursue it? House Republicans are continuing to lock the American people into higher energy costs by pushing their fossil fuel playbook
[5:50:32]and sabotaging clean renewable energy. Our constituents deserve better. They deserve a future with clean and affordable energy, where utility bills aren't skyrocketing, where we know our
[5:50:44]lands and waters won't suffer as a result. That's why I oppose this resolution and urge all of my colleagues to join me in voting no. And I yield the balance of my time. Gentleman from
[5:50:54]California yields. The gentleman from Arkansas is recognized. >> Mr. Speaker, it's been stated that um gas and energy prices won't be reduced
[5:51:04]by passing this um this CRA. And I I contend that they will because overturning these rules would incentivize much needed investment
[5:51:14]throughout the state or the entire North Slope. The regional impacts of increased energy production in Alaska cannot be overstated. Refineries in the region, including California and Washington, are
[5:51:26]equipped to handle Alaskan oil. And the refinery in Kenai produces most of the state of Alaska's gasoline. The North Pole refinery provides jet fuel for our
[5:51:36]military amongst other aviation fuels. Two other refineries located in Vald and near Fairbanks also produce diesel and heating fuels. And let me point out that
[5:51:48]three out of 10 state households in Alaska rely on fuel oil, kerosene, or propane for home heating. Now, you may ask, why would they rely on these fuels
[5:51:58]that are traditionally more expensive when Alaska has trillions of cubic feet of natural gas? That's because that natural gas is on the north slope. And
[5:52:09]even in the uh city of Anchorage, they're running out of natural gas because they can't move the gas from the North Slope, they can't develop infrastructure, and not only can they
[5:52:21]not meet their own needs with that gas, they certainly can't uh export it to our allies. As many have shared, the MP is essential to unleashing American energy
[5:52:32]dominance and sustaining economies throughout Alaska. Congress must also act to undo the harm that the previous administration imposed, and we must work
[5:52:42]to unlock the estimated 8.7 billion barrels of oil and 25 trillion cubic feet of natural gas the NP holds. By repealing this decision, we can help
[5:52:53]uphold tribal voices and revert to the 2020 IEP that considered their meaningful input. Letting these plans shut down energy production in the NP
[5:53:04]linger would be devastating to Alaskans, especially the native communities on the North Slope. Without jobs, people may leave these communities, jeopardizing the culture and social fabric of the
[5:53:16]region. We cannot afford to let this happen. We must pass SJ res 80. Urge my colleagues to support passage of the important legislation. I yield back the balance of my time.
[5:53:26]>> The gentleman yields the balance of his time. All time for debate has expired. Pursuant to House Resolution 879, the previous question is ordered on the joint resolution. The question is on
[5:53:37]third reading of the joint resolution. Those in favor say I. >> Those opposed, no. >> The eyes have it. Third reading. Joint
[5:53:48]resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5 United States Code of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Land Management relating to National Petroleum Reserve
[5:53:59]in Alaska integrated activity plan record of decision. The question is on passage of the joint resolution. Those in favor say I.
[5:54:10]>> Those opposed say no. It's about 67. The eyes have it. The For what purpose does the general >> request the yays and naysay?
[5:54:21]>> California seek recognition. >> The yays and nays are requested. Those favoring a vote by the yays and nays will rise. A sufficient number having risen. The yays and nays are ordered. Pursuant to
[5:54:32]clause eight of rule 20. Further proceedings on this question will be postponed. Purpose does the gentleoman from New York seek recognition.
[5:54:42]>> Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 2A1 of rule 9, I rise to give notice of my intent to raise a question of the privileges of the house. The form of the
[5:54:54]resolution is as follows. HRES 889 censuring representative Corey Mills in
[5:55:06]the House of Representatives. resolution censoring Representative Corey Mills. Whereas, Representative Corey Mills has on several occasions
[5:55:17]conducted himself in a manner that reflects discredit upon the House of Representatives. Whereas our