Chip Roy
Representative for Texas · Republican · United States
“We don't necessarily need a bureaucratic organization that its entire organizational structure and bias is structured against us, despite the fact that we fund the overwhelming majority of its operations. The United Nations has been operating against our interests.”
“Madam Chair, I note that it is just not enough for us to say that they can do better. This is an organization that has too often allowed terrorist infiltration within its own entities and sided with terrorist organizations directly against us and our allies.”
“When you are a nation that is $40 trillion in debt, when you are a nation that is trying to figure out how to fund the basics of government and find the dollars that we need to secure the Nation with a strong defense, to modernize our military, to ensure border security, all the things that we need to do while we are still racking up debt…”
“Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman from Florida for his strong work on making reforms to this appropriations package. He did it in the previous Congress last year. He is doing it [[Page H4521]] again this year.”
“Again, I applaud the chairman for all of his great work on things like UNRWA, working in collaboration with me and others on trying to remove that funding--it was very important--the United Nations Human Rights Council abomination, the United Nations Population Fund, other things that I know that the gentleman has been working on.”
“Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk. The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment. The text of the amendment is as follows: At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the following: Sec. __.”
The complete record
Every one of 214 lines we hold for Chip Roy, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 5.
“The fact is, we are driving up the price of goods and services. We are making it more expensive for the American people to live. We are making it almost impossible for people to fix their vehicles and be able to afford their vehicles with every new thing we add to it to make it more complex in the name of safety or the environment. The fact is, we can't be blind to those realities. That is exactly what is happening. That is why the American people are suffering from the inability to afford to live in this country. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, it is true in New Mexico, we have all that beautiful land. We have our ranchers. We have our farms. We have those mountains.”
“According to the latest data from Kelley Blue Book, the average transaction price for electric vehicles is $55,273, 3.7 percent higher than last year. For context, the median household income for the gentlewoman's district is $62,000. The fact of the matter is, EVs are expensive. EVs are driving up the price of vehicles. The mandate is taking the power out of the hands of the American people to decide, including, by the way, hybrid vehicles which allow individuals to have more efficient vehicles while being able to travel long distances, as I know the gentlewoman has constituents who need to do so in New Mexico as we need to do in west Texas and throughout the State of Texas. Additionally, the trucks that are required under California's unrealistic mandates cost two to three times more than a new, safer, and more reliable diesel truck.”
“These waivers are an essential tool to give California and other States the choice to prioritize both the health and well-being of their residents and the environment. Modeling has shown that by 2040, all three rules would provide an estimated $13 billion in health benefits. Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I will note that neither the GAO nor the Senate Parliamentarian get a vote. It is sort of a shocking news revelation I recognize, but they don't get a vote. We do. The Senate does. We can decide what we think ought to apply. Number two, if my colleagues want to talk about the high price of vehicles, how about the extent to which the average EV costs $14,000 more than the average nonluxury vehicle.”
“It doesn't mandate any other States to do that. States can choose to join California under the Clean Air Act. I proudly served on the California Air Resources Board under three Governors, including two Republicans and one Democrat, and I have seen firsthand the benefits of curbing emissions, both for the economy and public health. There is a reason why California is the fourth largest economy in the world and has three times the amount of patents than any other State, that State being Texas. Republican Governor Ronald Reagan signed into law the creation of the California State Air Resources Board and Republican President Richard Nixon signed into law the California Clean Air Act. This was not a partisan issue then and it should not be now. It is about public health and the economy.”
“Clean Air Act, signed by President Richard Nixon, we did that, and we have been leaders since he signed it. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to specifically three Congressional Review Act resolutions that are in this rule that illegally take aim at California's legal ability to implement more stringent emission standards under waiver from the Clean Air Act. In the last 2 months, the Senate Parliamentarian and the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office affirmed that California's Clean Air Act waiver is not subject to the Congressional Review Act. This week's attempt to advance these CRAs anyway is blatantly illegal. On top of that, these CRAs are another unfounded attempt to limit States from having the choice to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality and their public health.”
“On the other hand, actual deals could be scarce if prices are inflated due to newfound demand. There will still be plenty of opportunities to score a great new car for the informed consumer in 2025, but don't expect those opportunities to stick around forever. Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, if they wanted to actually address the rising costs of cars, maybe they would be willing to address the tariffs. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. DeSaulnier). Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this rule and the resolutions it advances. Texas is allowed to do what it would like to do. California does not mandate Texas' decisionmaking. We want to make our own decisions. Under the U.S.”
“Used car buyers have found themselves in the eye of a perfect storm created by a post-pandemic economy and a brewing trade war. Used car prices were declining in recent months because dealers were sitting on older inventory, which often gets less desirable over time for the average consumer. Demand drove down prices, which in turn created thousands of dealer lots filled with nameplates and model years folks just weren't interested in buying. What happens when those models become the only options American car-buyers can afford within reason (due to tariffs)? Prices are expected to increase as demand for new vehicles slows, adding weight to the demand seesaw and bringing used car prices to new heights. This scenario is music to the ears of used car dealers looking to offload inventory at prices that won't obliterate their profit margins.”
“In the span of the last few weeks, tariffs have been teased, announced, and paused. Unfortunately for the economy, whether or not certain tariffs are actually in effect, the mere threat of increased trade costs is enough for companies to make major changes. Sometimes these changes will benefit American consumers, other times they'll practically price them out of the market. The announcement of import tariffs on new vehicles and auto parts was enough for several automakers to entertain the idea of pausing shipments and adapting production strategies. As a result, the supply of affordable new vehicles in America will dwindle because so many automakers rely on foreign labor and supply chains. Less affordable new cars make used cars much more attractive. Should you buy a used car in 2025?”
“This equates to an average price bump of $317 compared to an average price decrease of $238 in February. An increase of $317 may not seem like much, but it's notable at a time when the price of eggs is a topic of economic frustration for consumers. Furthermore, used car prices have been in the red year-over-year for consecutive months since October 2022, this is a huge shock for the used car market. The tables have turned and this has serious implications for millions of car buyers. Increased demand may give used car dealers sweet relief after a rough post-pandemic reality, but will higher sticker prices prevent some drivers from exploring purchasing opportunities? Why tariffs are affecting used car prices We are nearly three months into President Donald Trump's second term in office.”
“A study conducted by automotive research site iSeeCars concluded that used car prices have risen after months of consistent declines. This could be great news for used car dealers and horrible news for folks looking to purchase a used car in 2025. Why have used car prices suddenly increased? This deviation from the norm surely isn't coincidental. Tariffs are the culprit, and they could take the average used car price to the moon (in the worst way possible). [[Page H1698]] After the events of `Liberation Day', a potential trade war involving multiple world powers is a nightmare-turned- reality. Import tariffs don't just impact new cars and car parts, they cause chaos in the used car market as well. Are used car prices going up? Used car prices for one to five-year-old models have increased by 1 percent year-over-year as of March, 2025.”
“Now, let's recognize that used car prices have gone up for the first time in 30 months not because of what California has done but because of Trump's tariffs. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article titled: ``Used car prices just rose for the first time in 30 months. Here's why and what it could mean for consumers in 2025.'' The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from New Mexico? There was no objection. [From the Jackson Sun, Apr. 10, 2025] Used Car Prices Just Rose for the First Time in 30 Months. Here's Why and What it Could Mean for Consumers in 2025 (By Charles Singh) American used car prices haven't increased for over two years, until now.”
“It is the only State allowed to seek waivers for its own vehicle policies due to a provision in the Clean Air Act crafted to allow California to address Los Angeles area smog, and so they have an outside impact on our ability to get affordable vehicles, including, by the way, hybrid vehicles which would be unnecessarily impacted by where California wants to go and which we want to try to solve. Mr. Speaker, I also note that California, as KTLA reported in a January 30 article, continues to lose more people than come into other States because of the tragic and unfortunate policies of the State of California. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman has mentioned the fact about a vehicle's expense.”
“I can keep going down the list of dead Americans at the hands of the foolish, incompetent, and dangerous policies of the Biden administration that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle did not want to answer. That is the simple truth. When we wanted to get data about the border, they didn't want to answer it. It wasn't because of COVID. Mr. Speaker, I note with respect to California that California's mandates effectively take away America's ability to buy new gas cars. As I mentioned earlier, California gets some special treatment.”
“Don't take this step to cripple California's economy. Vote ``no.'' Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, a couple quick points on the resolutions of inquiry. I won't waste a whole lot more time on it. The fact is, one, we have extended this through September 30 only at our request to limit it because we want to be able to get through reconciliation. Two, my colleagues want to blame COVID. Committees were still in full operation. The fact of the matter is my colleagues didn't want to answer questions that we were asking about the border because they were unanswerable. The border was wide open. Americans were getting killed. Americans like Jocelyn Nungaray, Americans like Laken Riley, Americans like Rachel Morin, and Americans like Kayla Hamilton.”
“Just one of California's standards that would be blocked, the Advanced Clean Cars II, is estimated to reduce healthcare costs by $13 billion over the next 25 years. Now, it is important to note that these rules that California has adopted, they are for California. Other States don't have to follow these rules. There is a lot of criticism of California. We are the biggest State. We are the most diverse State. We are a big, sprawling State that has challenges, of course, but we are the most innovative economy. For all of the criticism that the majority sometimes lodges against us, we have just become the fourth biggest economy of the world. The State of California is the fourth biggest economy, and as we meet our challenges, we are also very successful economically. Mr. Speaker, don't take this step to violate the rules.”
“Now, of course, our current President has taken many actions that we believe are illegal. More than 100 cases have been filed to stop these actions, and he has lost most of them, but it is sad to see the majority here in the House following suit. I will just say this: Abusing the Congressional Review Act is not the slope you want to slide down. You will regret having opened that when you are no longer in the majority. I also oppose the underlying resolutions because they directly risk our fellow Americans' health. Air pollution is directly linked with increased rates of asthma, cancer, and other diseases. Parental and childhood exposure to pollution is linked to long-term health risks, adversely impacting babies and young children.”
“Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren), the ranking member and top Democrat on our Science, Space, and Technology Committee. Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I rise as chair of the California Democratic congressional delegation in opposition to this rule. It makes in order three resolutions that claim to be pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, but are completely illegitimate. That is not just my opinion, the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office has not once but twice found that waivers California receives under the Clean Air Act are not rules under the CRA. The Senate Parliamentarian has reached the same conclusion, so if this passes and if the Senate follows its rules, this will not be in order in the Senate.”
“They could not answer. I don't think it is a coincidence that the House Armed Services Committee and the Foreign Affairs Committee were set to take up these inquiries about the Secretary of Defense using unclassified Signal chats to share sensitive information about military strikes with his family, his personal lawyer, and a journalist. They don't want to vote on Signalgate, so they are rigging the rules to block us. They are hoping maybe this issue will pass over. Maybe we will forget about this lapse of judgment, this utter failure, this TV personality who, I guess, still wants everybody to know what he is doing, but when you are Secretary of Defense, you are not supposed to be letting everybody know what we are doing and putting our servicemembers at risk. {time} 1245 Mr.”
“They don't want to have to actually take up an issue that they know is controversial, and they don't have a reason to present to the American people of why to shut this inquiry down. I will acknowledge that we also had resolutions of inquiry, and there was a reason that we explained to the world: There was a pandemic going on. People were dying. The United States Government was in an emergency, and we were trying to save lives. We were trying to make sure that people were safe, not just here but in every single State. In New Mexico, it was devastating. We were trying to deal with this worldwide pandemic. They have not offered any explanation for shutting down resolutions of inquiry at this time. Mr. Speaker, can you tell me why? Last night, we had an amendment to actually remove this, and we said: Why? Just explain to us why.”
“When compared to cities, rural areas have extremely low EV rates, with the vast majority of rural areas having EV registration rates between zero and a half of a percent. This means there are between zero to five EVs registered per 10,000 people in rural areas. It is simple. EVs are for urban elites in warm-weather States who have no concept of rural America. A government EV mandate is unjustifiable. Vehicle decisions should be left up to the American consumers, not woke extreme climate activists. I urge the passage of this rule. Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, a resolution of inquiry--Congress wants to know. Give us some answers. It is not that big of a deal, except that, right now, I think they just don't want to have to vote. They don't want to have to vote on Signalgate.”
“MILLER of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the rule, which includes several Congressional Review Acts against the disastrous Biden-era electric vehicle mandates. These create undue, burdensome rules, which impact our rural communities. Rural communities are the backbone of our country. They are the farmers, ranchers, teachers, and parents, and they are being crushed by the costly and out-of-touch policies from Washington. There is no doubt EV mandates only add further financial strain to hardworking Americans, especially in my district. Have you seen an electric tractor, baler, or plow? I haven't because they [[Page H1697]] don't work on farms or in the real world. In fact, the heavy-duty trucks in cold weather States lose 20 percent of their battery capacity.”
“Because if you go watch the Twitter feed of Kyrsten Sinema, she is pretty explicit about what she is watching and the hypocrisy of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle in the Senate who now suddenly have newfound love and respect for the 60-vote threshold. My point being, if we are going to change the body institutionally, then let's have a real conversation about changing the body institutionally. Closed rules, I get it. In the majority, we are sitting here, and we have more closed rules. Do we want open rules? Then what will happen when the Democrats are in charge? Do you want resolutions of inquiry? What do we do to bind the hands of a future House on those points if not us agreeing to respect each other's ability to do that? Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Miller), my friend. Mrs.”
“My colleagues on the other side of the aisle tried to change the rule for legislation, and but for Kyrsten Sinema and but for Joe Manchin, they would have done so. Then, the Senate would have been operating by a 51-vote threshold for legislation. Maybe that is good or bad, but maybe we should decide the rules we want to operate under and then apply them to both sides. Right now, we are operating under a 60-vote threshold in the Senate. I think that is something maybe we ought to put to a vote right here in this body, in the House, and say: Do we believe that the United States Senate should operate under a 60-vote threshold?”
“That is, of course, the ``you did it, so we will do it'' argument--not particularly satisfying if you want to have an open body. I think the question would be: What do my colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to have? What should the rule be? If we want resolutions of inquiry to just be allowed in perpetuity, then maybe we need to come up with a way to try to guarantee that and do that, but that is not what happens. We have turned them off. Both sides have turned them off. I would also add, for example, for the filibuster rule in the Senate, are we going to abide by the 60-vote threshold in the Senate as a Congress? My colleagues on the other side of the aisle tried to change the filibuster rule for judges and succeeded, and now, we have a 51- vote threshold for judges.”
“I introduced the ARTICLE ONE Act to try to restrict Presidential power under the Trump administration the first time and had trouble getting it moved during the Biden administration. I am not really even pointing fingers. I am acknowledging the politics. I had some Democratic colleagues and friends of mine that would say: I like that idea, but I don't know if right now is the time. Okay, but let's have the conversation. Let's take ROIs, what we call resolutions of inquiry, a tool in which we can specifically go ask for specific information. We have engaged in that effort. I certainly have. For over 600 days in the 116th and 117th Congresses, ROIs, these resolutions of inquiry, were blocked from coming to the floor by the Democratic majority.”
“Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this rule, and I reserve the balance of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Gill of Texas). Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President. Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I miss getting that admonition. It was a pretty regular occurrence in my various floor speeches. With respect to the resolutions of inquiry, let me put out there that it is my strong preference, as I have said multiple times on the floor of the House, that we come up with a system that allows the body to work its will and that we allow individuals to be able to move forward in good faith to get information and ask questions of the executive branch, no matter who is in power.”
“Hidden in the rule we are debating today is a provision that will cover up Secretary Hegseth's texting of classified war plans. Republicans won't even let Democrats ask for information about what is happening at the Department of Defense--no courage, just capitulation. Today, instead of helping lower costs for working families, Republicans are pushing partisan bills to overturn environmental laws that protect our air and water. It is ridiculous. Costs are going up, markets are tanked, court orders are being ignored, and we are talking about a rule that we will hear about later today that we are going to spend all of this time on the floor of this House, but it is not going anywhere in the Senate. We are wasting the precious time that we have on this House floor to do something. Mr.”
“The Republican budget ends their reconciliation bill. Their tax cuts are going to make sure the rich always win. Now, Trump's approval ratings are the lowest of any President in the last 80 years. In the latest poll released today, Americans give him F's. He is getting F's on the economy. He is getting F's all over the place. Americans disapprove of Trump because he is destroying our economy, and he is betraying his promise to lower costs from day one. Americans are demanding we put an end to Trump's tyranny. Republican voters are showing up at the few townhalls that Republicans are brave enough to have, and they are yelling at their Representatives. They are saying: Do something. While Americans want us to have the courage to stand up to Trump, House Republicans are doing the opposite.”
“When they destroy Medicaid, they destroy rural hospitals, and they destroy healthcare centers that everyone in the community uses, not just those on Medicaid. Trump and Republicans want to give tax cuts to the biggest corporations, as well, so they have to cut funding from low-income college students trying to get ahead and steal food from the mouths of hungry children, and that hurts our farmers and ranchers, too. These are the hungry children that Ranking Member McGovern fights for every day. Millions of Americans will suffer so the billionaires and the biggest corporations can get more--more power, more money, more control, and more influence in Washington, D.C. Americans are tired of how the system is rigged against working- and middle-class families. They know the rich are winning and regular Americans don't seem to have a chance.”
“They fired the auditors and inspectors so no one is there to sound the alarm when Musk steers contracts to his own companies. Talk about self-dealing. One hundred days of courtroom drama, with courts--district, appellate, and even the Supreme Court--saying Trump's actions are likely illegal, unconstitutional, and must be paused to avoid irreparable harm to the American people. While Trump defies the law and damages our economy, what are House Republicans doing? This week and into the next couple, Republicans are plotting to rip healthcare away from millions of Americans to fund tax cuts for 759 billionaires. Republicans will sacrifice healthcare for 72 million children, pregnant women, seniors, and people with disabilities who rely on Medicaid to give tax cuts to the 759 richest people in America.”
“After these 100 days, House Republicans are wasting time on cynical Congressional Review Act resolutions instead of addressing the economic and constitutional crisis facing American families. [[Page H1696]] One hundred days of economic pain, as Trump's on-again, off-again temper tantrum of tariffs tank the dollar, drive up prices, destroy the markets, and threaten a recession. One hundred days of chaos in the White House, where Secretary Hegseth texts war plans to journalists, and the administration belittles allies while embracing dictators like Putin. One hundred days of corruption, as billionaires like Musk and DOGE take Americans' personal Social Security data and fired the employees we need to process those Social Security checks.”
“{time} 1230 We cry for the things we love, and love always comes with pain. With a love as profound and deep as what Molly had, we know the McGoverns' pain will be immeasurable. To Lisa, Jim, and their son, Patrick, please know that your colleagues on this House floor on both sides of the aisle are in pain with you. Our tears are flowing with yours, and your congressional family stands with you in prayer and support. Now, standing in Jim's place, I will turn to the business before us. Representative Roy and I agree on how we opened this, but not on much more this morning because we see a different view on this 100th day that is marking Trump's service in office, 100 days of chaos, corruption, and economic sabotage.”
“Lisa McGovern dedicated herself to helping families deal with cancer at Prevent Cancer Foundation. Lisa knows directly what it is like to see that terrible disease impact a young and promising life and how it, therefore, impacts the entire family. Jim has one of the biggest hearts I know. He stands up on this floor every week to ask us to end hunger now because he deeply feels the pains of hunger that too many young children in America suffer from. Given that huge heart, my colleagues can only imagine the love he poured into Molly. We don't even have to imagine it. We all saw the love he poured into Molly. He worried about her as she sought to live a normal life, studying in Australia and traveling, but he always said ``yes'' and never missed being by her side for key appointments and scans.”
“She lit up every room with her beaming smile--full of laughter, endless warmth, and a sharp wit that could disarm you in an instant. She was unbelievably funny, fiercely loyal, and wise beyond her years. Molly had a rare gift: She made everyone feel special because she genuinely believed everyone was special. She treated people with compassion and kindness--always standing up for the underdog, and making fast friends wherever she went.'' Molly was deeply loved by Jim and Lisa, and because of that love, Molly was also loved by many of her colleagues in this House. She grew up here in Capitol Hill with other children of colleagues on both sides of the aisle. We have been exchanging and I have been watching these beautiful pictures of Molly growing up with those kids from when she was young to just last August at the convention.”
“Let's remember that California gets treated specially and uniquely and that that then has a domino effect through the rest of the country. That is unique to California based on past precedent involving Los Angeles smog and other things where that is causing a direct impact on other States across the country. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank Representative Roy for acknowledging the tremendous loss that Jim McGovern and his wife, Lisa, suffered this weekend when their daughter, Molly, was taken by cancer, a disease both of us have battled, as well. With the Speaker's indulgence, I will read a few sentences from the McGoverns' own statement because I think this captured a lot of who Molly was: ``Molly radiated pure joy.”
“Every one of these regulations add up to interference with the enjoyment of life by the American people, drive up the price of the goods and services for the average hardworking American family, make vehicles more expensive, make our lives more costly. Then people wonder why they are suffering from inflation and suffering from the inability to afford to live in the modern world. This Congress is taking steps to undo that damage, working with the White House to restore the ability of the average American family to live and afford the basic necessities of life, including vehicles and the right to be able to choose the vehicle of their choice in an open market. Mr. Speaker, I know my colleagues are going to say that we are infringing on California.”
“These bills would repeal the California advanced clean cars waiver allowing the State to ban the sale of gas-powered vehicles by 2035; put an end to California's implementation of its most recent nitrogen oxide engine emission standards, which create burdensome and unworkable standards for heavy-duty, on-road engines; nullify a rule by the National Park Service that would infringe on the employment of a recreational area, contravening the agency's own mandate when it was created; and, finally, one that would end an Endangered Species Act designation by the Fish and Wildlife Service that would threaten water resources and other conservation efforts. Mr. Speaker, these things matter to the average American. My colleagues are going to say that this is small ball, and it doesn't matter.”
“Under these bills, we would repeal California's advanced clean trucks waiver, which currently would allow the State to mandate the sale of zero-emission trucks. It would allow the State to mandate the sale of zero-emission trucks.”
“I wouldn't think we would have to spend time on the floor of the House of Representatives doing those things or having the President do it by executive order, but here we are. The President has unlocked America's energy potential, or at least taken a giant step to doing so, by reopening 625 million acres for drilling, withdrawing from the disastrous Paris climate agreement, and approving new LNG projects. Mr. Speaker, here before us today, we have what we call CRAs, under the Congressional Review Act. The purpose of these is to undo burdensome Biden regulations. This is our ability and our prerogative to hold the Biden administration accountable, and that doesn't stop just because the Democrats lost an election and we have a Republican in the White House. We have a duty to undo some of that damage.”
“Have we enacted the law that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle said last year was necessary, this bipartisan bill which, by the way, would have codified all the bad policies under the Biden administration? No. The only thing that changed was a White House willing to enforce the law. That is literally it, and now there is a 94 percent reduction in apprehensions at the border. Keep in mind that we are now at apprehension levels of somewhere around 100 to 200 a day, 3,000 to 6,000 a month. We had 6,000, 8,000, 10,000 apprehensions per day under the Biden administration. The President has restored common sense by ending DEI in the military and working to keep men from competing in women's sports, affirming that there are two genders. These are common sense.”
“We passed that before Easter so that a single judge won't be legislating and making national policy by granting temporary restraining orders and injunctions. We made changes on border policy with the Laken Riley Act, which is extremely important; and legislation to combat the flow of fentanyl. Importantly, what we have been trying to do is undo the damage on the border. Mr. Speaker, keep in mind what has happened now under the first 100 days. In just 100 days, southwest border apprehensions have decreased by 94 percent year over year. Mr. Speaker, consider that for a second. They decreased by 94 percent. What changed? Have we passed a massive law?”
“We [[Page H1695]] are using the tools in front of us to try to limit and minimize the damage caused by the previous administration and, frankly, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle today. Notably, we are talking about in this situation what we have done so far. We have passed legislation to secure our elections through H.R. 22, the SAVE Act, to guarantee that only American citizens vote in American elections; to hold rogue judges accountable for issuing nationwide injunctions and trying to change the process. Mr. Speaker, that is not partisan. Justice Elena Kagan talked about the need for injunction relief. The Democratic Solicitor General under the previous administration talked about the need for injunction reform. We offered legislation that would change and reform injunctions.”
“Speaker, on the legislation that is before us, I know that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are, no doubt, about to launch into how we have had an ineffective first 100 days and Congress is not doing anything. Let me put in perspective for the American people what we are focusing on. We are focusing on undoing the damage of the last 4 years of the Biden administration. The President is doing that on a daily basis in the White House today, and then we in Congress are using the powers that we have before us in an obvious narrow majority and in a narrow majority in the Senate, where you have to get things through the Senate with 60 votes.”
“Molly went to Heaven last week while visiting a friend in Italy, and I think I speak for everybody in this body when we offer our deepest condolences to Jim and to his entire family and to our colleagues who were so close with and knew Molly, who, by the way, from memory I believe worked for Jamie Raskin as an intern, and had her own engagements in public service. When I heard of her passing, I did a little googling about her life, her love for sports and Boston sports, her love of her dad, and how proud she was of her dad. While, just on occasion, Jim and I might have disagreed here on the House floor--it has been known to happen--we are all united in offering our condolences and prayers for Jim's family, and God bless Molly and his entire family. Mr.”
“I say from this side of the aisle, I know speaking for the entire Committee on Rules irrespective of party affiliation, how much Jim, his wife, and his son are in our prayers after losing their daughter and sister, Molly, to cancer. As a cancer survivor, I have seen firsthand the horrors of the disease. I told my Committee on Rules colleagues last night in committee, in my time in treatment at MD Anderson, going through chemo seemed trivial to me compared to watching the parents at MD Anderson who were watching their children go through treatment.”
“Additionally, H.J. Res. 87, H.J. Res. 88, and H.J. Res. 89 are all considered under a closed rule, each with 1 hour of debate, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective designees and provides each a motion to recommit. Finally, the rule tolls the date counts regarding resolution of inquiry until September 30, 2025. Mr. Speaker, before I get into the substance of this, I will start by saying on the Committee on Rules we tend to get to know each other pretty well in significant late-night engagement in debate. The ranking member of the Committee on Rules, Mr. McGovern from Massachusetts, has had an unfortunate loss that words cannot possibly convey as a dad what he and his wife are going through with the loss of his daughter, Molly.”
“During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas? There was no objection. Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and in support of the underlying legislation. Last night, the Committee on Rules met and produced a rule providing for consideration of five pieces of legislation. H.J. Res. 60 and H.J. Res. 78 are both considered under a closed rule, each with 1 hour of debate, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Natural Resources or their respective designees and provides each a motion to recommit.”
“89) providing congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to ``California State Motor Vehicle and Engine and Nonroad Engine Pollution Control Standards; The `Omnibus' Low NOX Regulation; Waiver of Preemption; Notice of Decision''. Sec. 5. Each day during the period from April 29, 2025, through September 30, 2025, shall not constitute a legislative day for purposes of clause 7 of rule XIII. {time} 1215 The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Moore of West Virginia). The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 1 hour. Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume.”
“87) providing congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to ``California State Motor Vehicle and Engine Pollution Control Standards; Heavy-Duty Vehicle and Engine Emission Warranty and Maintenance Provisions; Advanced Clean Trucks; Zero Emission Airport Shuttle; Zero-Emission Power Train Certification; Waiver of Preemption; Notice of Decision''. (b) The joint resolution (H.J. Res. 88) providing congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to ``California State Motor Vehicle and Engine Pollution Control Standards; Advanced Clean Cars II; Waiver of Preemption; Notice of Decision''. (c) The joint resolution (H.J. Res.”
“The previous question shall be considered as ordered on each such joint resolution and on any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit. Sec. 4. The joint resolutions referred to in section 3 of this resolution are as follows: (a) The joint resolution (H.J. Res.”