Providing for Consideration of H.R. Law-Enforcement Innovate to De-Escalate Act; Providing for Consideration of H.R. Undersea Cable Protection Act of Providing for Consideration of H.R. Securing America's Critical Minerals Supply Act; and for Other Purposes

Floor Speech

Mr. Speaker, I listened to every word of my colleague from New York's very long speech regarding the bills that the House is considering today. I might perhaps offer a different picture that I think the American people ought to consider.

I think, as you know, Mr. Speaker, last month the U.S. economy shed over 100,000 jobs--100,000. It was the worst month with respect to job losses since the Great Recession in 2009.

Prices are going up across the board. Everything is getting more expensive. Orange juice is more expensive. Ground beef is more expensive. Countless Americans across our country are struggling.

Last year, we experienced a 46 percent jump in farm-related bankruptcies. Rural America is struggling under this President's reckless policies. Americans across the country are struggling economically because of House Republicans' reckless policies.

For all those who wonder whether politicians in Washington might offer a solution to what ails our country economically, have no fear. House Republicans have come up with an answer. This week, they are focused on what really matters to the American people: Cutting taxes for tasers and making it easier for multinational tech companies, monopolies, to build undersea cables through marine sanctuaries.

Those are the bills that we are considering today on the floor. That is their answer to the economic crisis that has befallen the people of our great country.

It is absurd. It is absurd. It begs the question: Why? Why would House Republicans choose this course, again, given all of the challenges that I know that their constituents face, as mine do?

Unfortunately, it is a reflection of the core values of just too many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, who invariably, incessantly, and inherently have a predisposition to favor the ultrarich and the biggest corporations on planet Earth. Anyone who doubts it should consider the bills that we are debating today.

I have to tell you that I do a lot of townhalls in my district. I represent the great State of Colorado. I know the Speaker, being from Nevada, knows my State quite well. I represent a large district in western Colorado and northern Colorado. It is bigger than eight States, with no offense to my colleagues from New Jersey, Maryland, or Rhode Island. It is a huge district, which means that I am on the road a lot. I do a lot of townhalls.

A lot of issues come up at these townhalls. There are a lot of obstacles that Coloradans and Americans are facing that they would like to see their elected leaders help to solve.

I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, the one topic that has never come up at a single townhall that I have held in my career: undersea cables. It just hasn't come up.

Maybe my colleague in New York has a different experience. I don't know. I don't know if he hosts townhalls. I would encourage him to do it. Maybe undersea fiber optic cables are a big deal in his district. I can tell you that they are not in mine.

My constituents aren't really concerned with slashing permitting fees so that the largest technology companies on planet Earth can build fiber optic cables through marine animal sanctuaries. That just isn't something that they are spending a lot of time thinking about.

Who could blame them given all of the concerns that they have in light of the economic conditions that they are experiencing by virtue of this administration's cruel policies that the House Republican Conference has abetted at every turn.

Mr. Speaker, one could ask, as I suspect you would: What is the gentleman from Colorado's suggestion? Lucky for you, Mr. Speaker, I have one, because we know that one of the reasons that prices are going up across the board in the United States are tariffs. It is this President's reckless policies with respect to tariffs. We have some solutions in that regard. They are ways that Congress can finally stop abdicating its authority and exercise its powers with respect to tariffs.

I think the Speaker knows that because Speaker Johnson decided to tuck into the rule that we are considering today a measure that would prevent the House from considering any changes to the President's tariff policies for yet another 6 months.

I am going to read you a quote: ``It will be the fourth time this rule vote putting a gag on tariff debates has been done. I don't think tariffs are good for the economy, manufacturing jobs, and ag industry. American consumers pay the tariffs and thus it is a big tax. I support giving these authorities back to Congress.''

These aren't my words. These are Republican Congressman Don Bacon's words, your colleague, who agrees that what Speaker Johnson is trying to do is to, yet again, gag the United States Congress.

To Mr. Bacon, I say: Thank you for your honesty.

To the rest of my colleagues, I say: Where is your backbone? Where is your spine? Stand up for the Constitution, as your colleague is doing. Stand up for the House of Representatives. Stand up for your constituents.

Shameful, Mr. Speaker.

I am hopeful that perhaps that political courage that Mr. Bacon is showing will be contagious. Maybe a few more of my colleagues will join him.

In any event, I know that we have a lot of speakers who are eager to talk on this subject.

Mr. Speaker, whenever I have an opportunity to listen to one of my colleagues' speeches in this august body, I can always count on them to do three things: to say a noun, a verb, and ``Joe Biden.'' My colleague from New York does not disappoint with this myopic obsession that they have with Joe Biden.

Facts are facts. The price of beef has risen 16.4 percent since last year. The price of coffee is up 19.8 percent. The price of lettuce is up 7.3 percent. Frozen fish is up 8.6 percent. In total, families paid $310 more for groceries during President Trump's first year in office compared to 2024, so spare us these ruminations about Joe Biden.

If they want to get serious about doing something about the cost crisis in our country, making life more affordable for Americans, there is an easy way to do it: Don't sneak in procedural roadblocks to considering tariff policies by the House.

DelBene), who has been a principled leader on this issue with respect to tariffs.

Mr. Speaker, again, I am not going to dispute my colleague from Wisconsin's sentiment here. If people are looking to not pay taxes on tasers, he has them covered. The Republican Conference has them covered.

If people are struggling to pay for their groceries or their rent, they are out of luck as far as the House Republican Conference is concerned. Taxes on tasers, don't worry. They have a plan for that. They are working really hard to solve that existential challenge facing the country as we speak.

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to strike section 4, which would stop an attempt by Republican leadership to block the House from taking up-or-down votes on President Trump's disastrous tariff policies through the end of July.

As the country knows, since March of last year, Speaker Johnson and the Republican majority have blocked up-or-down votes on these policies. Our view is that these policies have been a disaster for the American people, and everyone knows it.

We all remember, with great fanfare, President Trump announcing liberation day. The only liberation that any of our constituents have felt is the money departing from their wallets as this President increases prices on everyday consumers.

It is wrong, and the Congress has a constitutional duty and responsibility to act. We know that these tariffs have cost the American people trillions of dollars. We know that according to the Joint Economic Committee, the average American family now pays an extra $1,625 in basic expenses thanks to the economic policies of this administration.

The question is why are Republicans hiding from an up-or-down vote on these tariff policies?

In the Senate, multiple votes have been held on these policies. Joint resolutions to terminate the tariffs have been sent to the House, to the Clerk here on a bipartisan basis from the United States Senate four different times. But Republicans, four different times, have done the opposite. Republicans have delayed votes on these tariffs, essentially surrendering one of Congress' main functions to one man, one man in the White House.

During the September vote, several Republicans were apparently so frustrated by the process that they actually held out for about 45 minutes before they, of course, did what we all expect them to do: fold and strike a deal.

One of them--and I will quote from one of my Republican colleagues. One of the temporary holdouts said that under the Constitution, the power to impose tariffs is a congressional power and needs to be restored to Congress. Apparently, he switched his vote after issuing that statement because he got a commitment from the Speaker that this House would only block votes on tariffs until the end of January.

Well, here we are back again with the Republican Conference springing into action to do Donald Trump's bidding. He says: ``Jump.'' Our colleagues say: ``How high?'' Well, not all of our colleagues say that. Maybe one of one or two of them, as I said, may show the courage tonight to vote their conscience.

Republicans are trying to ram through yet another rule to hide from taking up-or-down votes this time until the end of July. It is outrageous, outrageous, and it is why we are offering this amendment. Before yielding to the distinguished ranking member who has been a leader in this regard, I want to quote my colleague Tom Massie from Kentucky, a Republican, who I think said it best. ``Why haven't we voted on tariffs in the House of Representatives?'' This is a Republican who said this. ``Because Speaker Johnson is using Rules Committee Resolutions, consummated by majority votes of the whole House, to declare that `a day is not a day' in order to AVOID THE U.S. LAW that requires Congress to vote.'' These are Republican Members of Congress, Tom Massie, Don Bacon, all saying what we know to be true, which is that the House is abdicating its duty.

I would encourage my colleagues, those of whom may find some semblance of backbone, to defeat the previous question, and we can finally have an up-or-down vote in this body on whether to terminate President Trump's disastrous tariffs starting this week with Canada, my colleague from New York's neighbor to the north.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask for unanimous consent to include the text of my amendment in the Record along with any extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I hesitate to respond to my colleague from New York because, again, I think this rule is largely a smokescreen to just avoid a discussion on the President's reckless tariff policies.

However, insofar as my colleague is obsessed with cutting taxes on tasers, I suppose I am compelled to respond to simply say that what was just stated with respect to violent felons not being able to access tasers by virtue of this legislation, that is untrue. It is just untrue.

Clearly, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are seeking to remove these particular weapons from the definition of firearm under Federal law, and as a result, the various protections and safeguards that exist under Federal law. They can make the argument that in certain States there may be protections. That is not true of every State.

In any event, the larger question that every American who is watching C-SPAN now ought to ask themselves is: Why is the U.S. House of Representatives spending so much time on debating cutting taxes for tasers?

How did that manage to become the top priority of the House Republicans in Washington, D.C.?

Inquiring minds would like to know.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NEGUSE. Sanchez).

``U.S. Manufacturing Is in Retreat and Trump's Tariffs Aren't Helping,'' February 2, 2026, headline, The Wall Street Journal.

Apparently, The Wall Street Journal has Trump derangement syndrome, too, according to my colleague from New York. American consumers must also. Everyone apparently has it except for House Republicans.

By the way, my Republican colleagues talk enough about Joe Biden, one would be forgiven for thinking they miss him. As I said, noun, verb, ``Joe Biden,'' effectively the answer and retort on my colleague's part to every question.

The reality is that my Republican colleagues, as has been displayed and demonstrated time and time again, work tragically for one person, and that person is Donald Trump. Lest anyone doubt that, let's see if a few of them will have the audacity, the courage, to vote against the rule today.

I will say, it bears repeating. I have quoted a lot of Don Bacon on the floor today. If he is watching, I hope he will forgive me in advance. I will read again this tweet, this post on X, from John Bresnahan of Punchbowl News, who quoted Mr. Bacon: ``It will be the fourth time this rule vote putting a gag on tariff debates has been done. I don't think tariffs are good for the economy, manufacturing jobs, and the ag industry. American consumers pay the tariffs and thus it is a big tax. I support giving these authorities back to Congress.''

That is from Republican U.S. Congressman Don Bacon, so spare us the stale and tired attacks about Trump derangement syndrome. These are your colleagues saying it, not me.

My colleagues ought to do the right thing: vote against this rule so that we can have an up-or-down vote on the disastrous Trump tariffs that are inflicting pain on the people who I represent in the great State of Colorado and across the country.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

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

The yeas and nays were ordered.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source