Fiscal Year 2027 Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Bill
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
House Appropriations Subcommittee on Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies U.S. House of Representatives
Rosa DeLauro
Healthcare costs are going up. Hospitals are shutting down. The President's signature piece of legislation, the One Big Beautiful Bill, cut Medicaid and nutrition assistance by $1.2 trillion. It will push 15 million Americans off their health insurance, and all of this just to pay for tax cuts for billionaires and for the biggest corporations. The President said we do not have the money for daycare, for Medicare and Medicaid because, quote, "we are fighting wars," end quote.
The President wants to increase the defense budget by half trillion dollars. Meanwhile, this bill cuts funding for education, public health, reproductive health, and job training. Horace Mann called education, and I quote, "the great equalizer." Lyndon Johnson called it, and I quote, "the only passport from poverty." FDR called it, quote, "the real safeguard of democracy," end quote.
The belief in education as an inalienable right is woven into the fabric of our country. It is a promise we make to each succeeding generation that they will be better off than the last. Yet this bill cuts $8 billion, 10%, from the Department of Education. That includes a $2 billion cut to Title I grants, which will put tens of thousands of teachers out of their classrooms, leave countless children with a worse education. This is a step down the path toward eliminating public education in this nation, but I believe that that is the ultimate goal of the majority.
As new technology upends the workforce and inflation outpaces wage growth, this bill eviscerates funding for employment and training programs by $3.3 billion, one-third below the 2026 level. It eliminates funding for adult and youth job training entirely, while cutting funding for the Job Corps in half.
This bill cuts funding for Health and Human Service programs by $4.5 billion, including a $1 billion cut to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The majority of these cuts target programs that combat the HIV/AIDS epidemic, jeopardizing the extraordinary progress we have made toward defeating this disease. The recent Ebola outbreak threatens to become the deadliest in history, but this bill leaves funding for the CDC global health activities stagnant, which will not be nearly enough to sustain our global presence after the State Department's decision to restructure the PEPFAR program. This bill continues a decades-long Republican crusade against women's reproductive health. Even now, years after Roe was overturned, they are still pushing to restrict access to reproductive care regardless of what state you are in.
The bill cuts funding for Title X family planning, leaving 2.6 million men and women without access to preventive care services, including cancer screenings, diabetes screenings, mental health services, and contraception. It eliminates the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program entirely, and it includes dozens of partisan provisions that target reproductive healthcare access. And as if the healthcare cuts in the big beautiful bill were not enough, this bill cuts $2 billion in operations funding from the Affordable Care Act marketplace, threatening healthcare coverage for millions of Americans. Even if you qualify for an affordable plan through the program, you will have a harder time accessing it. The Trump administration and House Republicans are squeezing American families from both ends, increasing costs of daily necessities while hollowing out health, education, nutrition, and housing programs that help families make ends meet.
Despite these objections, and I just say very honestly, there are some bright spots in this bill that deserve recognition. First, I'm glad to see the overall funding level for the National Institutes of Health is increased under this bill, especially targeted increases for research on cancer, Alzheimer's, ALS, diabetes, women's health, and rare diseases. Second, during our subcommittee hearing on the science of reading earlier this year, I called for this committee to reestablish a national reading panel to explore ways to improve how we teach our children to read. I am pleased that this committee has answered that call, and I want to commend Congressman Harder for his advocacy on this issue. I support these provisions and applaud their inclusion.
However, I remain overwhelmingly opposed to the legislation as a whole. Taken together, the bill undermines education, it jeopardizes public health, and it limits workers' opportunities. It does nothing to address the rising cost of living while stripping away crucial support that helps families who are navigating an affordability crisis. I encourage a no vote on this legislation, call on my Republican colleagues to work with Democrats to craft a bill that meets the needs that the American people are facing. Thank you, and I yield back.
Robert Aderholt
Thank you, Ranking Member DeLauro. I would now like to recognize the distinguished chairman of the committee, Mr. Cole, for his remarks.
Tom Cole
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Before I get to my formal remarks, I want to associate myself with my good friend the ranking member about Mr. Hoyer and Ms. Watson Coleman. We're going to really miss you guys. Now, not every day, and maybe not in every debate, because you both are so good at what you do. But I remember, obviously, Mr. Hoyer, I had the opportunity to work with you in many capacities over many years.
But Bonnie, when you were coming on the committee, Rosa was telling me you're going to really like her most of the time. And when you don't like her, I'm going to love her. So I just, I appreciate both of you for your service to this committee, in particular your advocacy for worthy causes, and quite frankly, you both have just been terrific members of Congress, and your constituents could be and are extraordinarily proud of the service you've rendered to them and to the rest of the country, and certainly to this committee.
So just thank both of you very, very much. And thank you, you know, Chairman Aderholt, this is a good bill. And I want to thank my friend, Ranking Member DeLauro, all the subcommittee members as well. Again, I'll add parenthetically, this is where we always start. We're never on the same side at the beginning, but my friend the ranking member and I, and I know the chairman of this subcommittee and the ranking member have come to deals before.
They've worked toward one another. And I think both of you have set us up to do that again. We'll have our differences, we'll have our clashes, but I'm hopeful we can do, Madam Ranking Member, what we did in the four years you were chair when I served on this committee, the four years I was chair. We started in different places every time, but we got to the same place every time. And I think you two managed to pull that off as well last year, and hopefully we can do that again.
I'll start by saying that the significance of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education bill is something I know well. Having spent several years leading this subcommittee, I have a deep appreciation for both the scope of this bill and the obligations that come with it. Chairman Aderholt has embraced that responsibility, crafting legislation that invests in critical priorities while ensuring taxpayer dollars are spent wisely. At its core, the FY 27 bill is about investing in the well-being and potential of America. Think about the people whose futures are shaped by the investments in this measure.
The researcher searching for a breakthrough treatment, the student preparing for a career, the parent relying on a rural hospital, the worker learning a new trade. Their success strengthens our communities and ultimately our country. This legislation invests in the biomedical research that keeps America at the forefront of discovery and innovation. It strengthens public health preparedness and biodefense capabilities, and it advances educational opportunities and high-quality care for rural America. At the same time, it recognizes that we owe taxpayers more than good intentions.
We owe them real results. That means focusing resources on programs that deliverable, measurable outcomes, eliminating duplication, and restoring agencies to their core mission. It's why we advance merit-based opportunity, protect parental rights, uphold long-standing protections for unborn babies, and ensure that federal resources serve the American people rather than ideological agendas. This is a bill that balances investment with accountability. It recognizes that fiscal responsibility and national progress are not competing priorities, they are complementary ones.
By supporting medical innovation, educational achievement, workforce readiness, and stronger communities, this measure comprehensively prepares our nation for the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead. Again, I thank Chairman Aderholt and Ranking Member DeLauro and the staff on both sides of the aisle for their hard work. I look forward to consideration and advancement of today's measure, and with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Robert Aderholt
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And let me just add that my to the chorus about Congressman Hoyer and Congresswoman Bonnie Watson Coleman, we do hate to see you leave.
I mean, I have got to know both of these individuals in different capacities. Congressman Hoyer through the OSCE Helsinki Commission, we worked on that and were able to travel to represent the United States on several times. And then I've also served as we both serve on the Semi-Quincentennial Commission, Bonnie Watson Coleman, and have worked together on some legislation as we celebrate the 250th birthday of the United States of America. So both of these individuals will be missed and we wish them the best, but we hope we will see them often and they will be around and we look forward to the next chapter of their lives. Does any other members wish to make opening remarks?
Yes, ma'am. Actually, when I got up this morning and it was a beautiful day, I was going to come in here and be very quiet and smile, right? I told that to Mr. Hoyer. But then I read this budget and I am telling you, I am mad as hell. I cannot believe what I see.
This is a war on women and girls. Title X zeroed out, healthcare taken from almost three million people. This is our family planning money and not only that, preventive care, cancer screening, diabetes, keeping people healthy, mostly people who are very poor or uninsured. But that wasn't enough, zeroing out teen pregnancy prevention. Okay, let's see, I know you're against abortion, that's one thing, but forced pregnancy, that's another thing.
And lastly, not lastly, I go to another page, almost cutting in half the Office on Women's Health within HHS. It's a war, this is a war on women and you know what, we're not going to take it. And I just hope that my friends on the other side of the aisle, and I have many, I think, if you are a woman or you love a woman, you have a daughter, you have a sister, a mother, a cousin, an aunt, let's keep them healthy. And I just really hope, Mr. Chair, that we can really rethink these cuts and we'll work hard to help you do that. I yield back.
Thank you for your comments. Any other comments? Before we go to the amendment process, let me also, I also want to recognize another member that is with us that is leaving. And well, we're not sure she's actually leaving, but Julia Letlow. She may be just moving down the hallway.
But she is, you know, I don't really think of you retiring because of your youth and but I know you're just moving down the hallway. But Julia Letlow will be leaving us after this term as well and we appreciate her service not only to the Congress but also to this committee and as vice chair of this subcommittee. So Julia, we wish you the best and just remember when you get to the, if someone says that you're now in the upper body, just remind them it's the other body, not the upper body. So but we do appreciate your service, Congresswoman Letlow, and like I said, you're a little bit different position because we may be seeing a lot of you.
So we look forward to continuing to work with you in your in your new role.
Please. Please, yes.
Tom Cole
You know, there's only I sit on the steering committee and so you see on our side of the aisle, you see a lot of members that want to come to committees. And a lot of them want to come to this committee in particular and that's always a privilege. But only two people in all the years I've been on steering committee over 20 years ever came to me and said, I want to go on these are Republicans, be a little different on your side of the aisle, Madam Ranking Member, but I want to go to Approps and is there any way I can get on Labor-H? And one of them was Letlow and the other was Moolenaar. And they're sitting right there together.
I said, you're kidding. I said, you're on. You're on. You have my vote. Two of our members.
Yeah, it's it's you know, well look, every every side look, defense doesn't seem to be quite as high a priority on your side. So each every party has different committees. But you've just done such a wonderful job and unlike my friends Mr. Hoyer and Ms. Watson Coleman, I know given where I know you're going, you are going to miss us as much as we miss you. You're going to long for coming back here where we can actually get to a point and and make a decision. But no question our loss is the Senate's gain and we wish you well in that endeavor.
I'm sure you're going to be successful. You've done a stellar job on our side of the aisle to say the least, not to mention you have friends on both sides of the aisle and you have a natural talent for bringing people together and getting things done. And they des you know, as much as we need that here, they need it even more in the Senate right now. So again, I wish you well in that but thank you for all you've done here. Yield back.
Robert Aderholt
Thank you. Um, any more opening comments anyone would like to make? Mr. Hoyer.
Steny Hoyer
First of all, Mr. Chairman, I'm very distressed that you were not surprised with my retirement because of my age.
I was a little surprised.
Steny Hoyer
I know the young Ms. Letlow who is going to the as the ranking member said the dark side, the opposition as opposed to the enemy. Your side is the opposition, we're the opposition to you, but the Senate, that's a whole another story. But Chairman, I want to thank the members of the staff. We are blessed in the Congress of the United States with having some people who are willing to work very long hours at pay which is usually less than their talent and academic achievement and intellect would warrant in the private sector. I know that because almost everybody who ever leaves my staff makes more money immediately as they walk out the door.
And so we're blessed to have them and the American people are blessed to have them. And so I want to thank all of them collectively. I won't mention names as the ranking member went through those names. Also appreciate Mr. Aderholt and I have worked together for a long period of time. He said a couple of trips, I'm sure it's probably more close to a double digit number of trips that we took during our careers on the Organization on Security and Cooperation in Europe's Helsinki Commission.
And Bob Aderholt has been an extraordinarily strong voice for people around the world who were suffering from despotism and human rights deprivation, civil rights deprivations, and argued for the Helsinki principles. And I've always been pleased to be with him on those trips. I've been on this committee since January of 1983.
I obviously had 20 years leave of absence from the committee, but it was a committee I chose when I first got on the committee. I've never regretted that decision. I did it because I have been a very strong supporter of education. My wife was an educator, my first wife, she died in 1997, and she was an early childhood educator, kindergarten, first grade, and then she was the supervisor of early childhood education in our county. Our county, Prince George's County, was a county of about 800,000, now it's about a million people, so a lot of elementary schools from kindergarten to third grade.
And she started full-service schools. I'm going to offer an amendment on that for early childhood. There are now 101 Judy Centers throughout the state of Maryland, and everywhere I go in the state, people come up to me and say, you know, can we get a Judy Center in our community? So this has been a committee which has really been the central part of my consideration as to what we want to do. I served under a gentleman named Bill Natcher.
He was the chairman when I came to the committee. He was an extraordinary individual. He averaged spending about $75 per election cycle. He came from the sixth district of Kentucky. He was an extraordinary man, very taciturn in many ways, but he articulated the central theme of what I think this committee stands for.
And he would every time we got up, he would say, as long as we take care of the education of our children and the health of our people, we will continue to be the strongest and best nation on earth. I repeat that because I think this committee is very much about the security and success of the United States. We look at the defense bill as the bill which maintains our security, but our long-term security is really sustained by the education of our children and the health of our people. In that context, I'm disappointed with what's been happening with this bill over the last number of years, because I served on this committee with a number of Republican chairmen and a lot of Democratic chairmen. I've told people in my service on this committee, there were 13 of us, eight Democrats and five Republicans for the most part.
And I tell people you could have taken the 13 of us, thrown us up in the air and had us come down in random seats and had a markup. And very frankly, you would have had a hard time determining who was the Republican or who was the Democrat. Silvio Conte was the first ranking member. I don't know that any of you served with Silvio Conte. He represented Western Massachusetts, the furthest west district.
I'm not sure Richie Neal represents that district now, but in any event, he was a very strong supporter. And then some of you may have served with John Porter. John Porter was a very strong supporter and in fact had as an objective over five years to double the NIH budget because he believed that the money you spent at NIH would create a great savings in the healthcare system.
I agreed with that, and most of the committee agreed with that, and we did in fact double it in nominal terms. I don't think in real terms we didn't get to double, but the fact of the matter was my point is he believed in investment in health and in education. This bill, I share the ranking member's view, and I share the view of I'm sure Ms. Coleman and certainly Ms. Frankel on the fact that we are disinvesting in too many areas. We're cutting $3.7 billion in the Department of Labor, $4 billion in HHS, and $8.1 billion cut from Department of Education. I think in many areas we are back to less than we were investing in 23, in fiscal year 23.
Ultimately that has a cost. It has a cost because for the most part five-year-olds are in kindergarten once. Six-year-olds are in first grade once, for the most part, and repeatedly our children have single experiences in one grade or another. And to the extent that we disinvest in any one of those years, our children are not doing as well as they need to do for all of us, for our country. And so I will be offering two amendments, both of which deal with investing in children and in full-service schools.
Full-service schools were funded, I don't know and the staff can correct me on that, but I know last year at 150 million, but I don't know how far that went back. Essentially it's been frozen. Does anybody know off the top of your head?
So the last increase was fiscal year 2023.
Yes. So this in 2023 we had we're now doing fiscal year 27. We've frozen. But this year we zero fund it. Zero fund it.
Those children aren't disappearing. The necessity to have full service. What does full service mean? It means not just education, but it also means the other services that children need. They need health services.
We build these schools for a lot of money. I know I've taken too much time, Mr. Chairman, I'm going to stop pretty soon. We spend a lot of money on these children. You're not going to miss me so much. Spend a lot of money on these schools.
And too often the schools are used for one purpose, but they're really community places where healthcare, full services for parents can be provided so that children can be housed in safe places. My point is that this bill, as Natcher said, is about the security of our country, the health of our children, the health of our families, and the education of our children. So I'm going to be offering two amendments. Why do I offer these amendments? Probably because I'm crazy.
Because we're not going to adopt any amendment in this committee because we don't do that in subcommittees. And Mr. Chairman, you know I feel that that's undermining the importance of subcommittees and the importance of those who the chairman and the ranking member have said frequently we rely on the expertise of our subcommittees.
I don't agree with that proposition. And the reason I don't agree with it is because we do not discuss as a collective, not just Republicans and Democrats, but as the committee members, we do not discuss the priorities of this bill because we come here, the bill is written, and we report it to the full committee. But we don't consider the bill. We don't mark it up. A markup means doing something which the full committee does do and we consider amendments.
I think that's frankly, Mr. Chairman, underutilizing the expertise that we ought to have. And lastly, let me say, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the fact that you've had a number of hearings. But I will tell you, and Dr. Harris, I think hopefully you would be concerned about this as well. When I first served on the committee for a long period of time, we heard from every NIH director. It was an extraordinary educational experience for all of us.
And we had the opportunity to question them as to if we don't invest another million dollars, what is the cost of that disinvestment from those directors? We don't do that. As a matter of fact, we had a relatively very short hearing with the director of NIH, who has a budget in the neighborhood of $40 billion plus. I think that is not doing our work in a way that is beneficial to the full committee, to the full Congress, and to the country because we don't have the knowledge that they can impart to us. And therefore, Mr. Chairman, let me say I appreciate the kind words of the chairman, of yourself, and of Ms. DeLauro.
But I would hope that all of you would think carefully in the years ahead as to what this subcommittee really ought to be doing and what, Mr. Chairman, every subcommittee ought to be doing. In my own subcommittee where I'm the ranking member, we've had two hearings. We've had no hearings since the markup of the bill. And we marked up the bill without a 302(a), so we don't really know, a 302(b), excuse me, we don't, didn't know at that point in time. And we don't know when we don't consider all the 302(b)s at one period of time, what committee needs what source and does defense need so much that labor health gets less?
Does labor health get so much that defense doesn't get what it needs? If we don't have that full discussion and we simply sporadically adopt 302(b)s, I think it does not serve us well. I yield back the balance of my time and thank you.
Mr. Simpson is recognized.
Michael Simpson
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just have a couple things to say and I will keep it within my time limit. But Steny knows how much I like him and how much we get along and stuff. And I really appreciate the history lessons. But I'm pretty sure that if we took all of us right now and threw us all up in the air and came down, you wouldn't be able to tell which ones are Republicans and which ones are Democrats.
Maybe it's different than it was in times gone by. I'm sure that's true.
I wish we could get back to a time when we actually the subcommittee actually did all day markups, sometimes two days, when you actually got in and we discussed it and the subcommittee became the advocate for the bill that came out of there. Now, I know that that's challenging, but it would be nice actually to get back to that at some point in time. But Chairman Aderholt, I want to thank you for what you've done in this bill. We've heard the criticisms and, you know, no matter what you did in this bill, there would be some criticisms from some corner. But you did work with me dealing with dental health, being one of the few dentists in Congress, very important issue to me, and I know that you've done some really good things in here and I want to thank you and your staff for that, working with me on the TRIO program, something that I think is supported by almost every member of this subcommittee to make sure that TRIO continues as it was originally intended.
And I know that you've been working with that and meeting with me and your staff's done a great job on that and I appreciate the work that you've done in that in that arena. This is, you know, this is a complicated bill to write. It's never perfect. Even when Chairman Cole wrote it, it was never perfect, but it was a pretty damn good bill. And you have maybe the biggest task of anybody trying to follow up Chairman Cole and Ranking Member DeLauro as chairman of this committee.
The perfect bill when you wrote it, I know. But they worked together marvelously trying to get together a bill and they did it every year that they were that they were chairman and ranking member. And I know that you're working in that same goal and you were able to come up with a bill last year that could be agreed upon and I know we'll end up that way this year too. So I think you and the staff have done a wonderful job on this bill trying to trying to address the issues of member that issues of concern of members of the subcommittee. So thank you for all the work, but particularly thank the staff for all the work on this.
Robert Aderholt
Thank you, Chairman Simpson. Does anyone have an amendment?
I have an amendment.
We do.
Speaker 7
Okay, there's amendment at the desk. The clerk will read the amendment.
On page 139, line 5, after the dollar amount, insert increased by 150 million. In the report on page 267, strike the paragraph following the header Full-Service Community Schools and insert the following: The committee recommends 150 million for full-service community schools, which is equal to the fiscal year 2026 enacted level. This program makes competitive grants to support school-based comprehensive services for students, families, and communities, such as mental health and nutrition services.
Steny Hoyer
Well, I won't take five minutes. Nobody's listening. Now, Mr. Aderholt, I am going to be here for another six months. And I say that respectfully. Just saying.
As you see in in the full committee, we don't pay attention to one another because it's foreordained that this amendment, no matter the merits of this amendment, will lose. We'll vote on long party lines on our side and your side. But this particular provision has been one that I think almost every chairman has been a real supporter of. And I know Rosa DeLauro and I have worked very, very hard on this particular issue and we have been pretty successful consistently. Why?
Because this is about children who are struggling.
Lois Frankel talked about women. These are about the the neediest kids. This is about kids who we're either going to invest in at the early part of their life or going to invest a lot in the later part of their life. Frederick Douglass, who grew up in Dr. Harris's district, a slave and then became one of America's great leaders, said, "It is easier to build strong children than it is to repair broken men." Ted Agnew said it a different way.
He he and I went to the Maryland government at the same time in 1966. He said, "The cost of failure far exceeds the price of progress." We all know what he meant by that. If we do not invest in our children early, particularly our neediest children, our most economically deprived children, our children who grow up in really tough circumstances. If we don't invest in them now, we're going to invest in them later.
We're going to put them in prison, going to have deep mental health problems, they're not going to be taxpayers, they're going to be tax takers. I know I said I'd only take five minutes harder. So I offer this amendment. It's not an increase. It keeps us even of what we're investing around the country in the toughest challenges we have in education.
I'm not even going to ask for a vote. That'll save a little bit of time. But it will not save the children. I yield back.
Robert Aderholt
Thank you, Mr. Hoyer. Does any other member seek recognition on the amendment? If no further debate, the.
I withdraw the amendment.
Robert Aderholt
Okay, the the amendment is withdrawn. And is there any other amendments?
Robert Aderholt
Gentleman's recognized for five minutes. Or is there's an amendment at the desk? Okay, the clerk will report the amendment.
Yeah, I do.
Speaker 7
On page 87, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert increase by 315 million. On page 203, strike the paragraph following the header Preschool Development Grants and insert the following: "The committee recommends 315 million for preschool development grants, which is equal to the fiscal year 2026 enacted level." These grants build state and local capacity to provide early childhood care and education for children birth through five from low and moderate income families.
Steny Hoyer
This makes a total of 465 million dollars that we're cutting out of this budget, which go directly to the children that I just talked about. I think that's a bad disinvestment for our country and for what nature talked about, the security of our country by making sure that our children and our families' health and education is addressed. I'm not going to ask for a vote on this one either because I know the result would be foreordained and we will say, "Well, that exceeds our 402B." Considering our 402B or 302B ought to be a major consideration from the top number. And we have a hard time reaching the top number because we can't pass budgets on either side of the aisle.
We didn't pass budgets sometimes, and you don't pass budgets, because getting to that number is hard. But if you don't deal with that number at the beginning and determine whether or not your priorities are going to be met in subcommittee A or subcommittee B or C or D, you're really flying blind. And I think that's what we're doing. And I would hope that we would, you all work, I won't be here, and you won't have to hear me go on and drone about this, a different kind of droning. But I think for the sake of the committee and the country, all of you who are going to remain here ought to focus on this.
I yield back and withdraw the amendment.
Robert Aderholt
No, thank you, thank you, Mr. Hoyer, and any other one like to speak on the amendment?
Rosa DeLauro
Mr. Chairman, I don't want to speak on the amendment, Mr. Hoyer's covered it. I just want to say thank you to him for his deep commitment to what happens in the lives of children in this country and that this committee is the vehicle through which we can help to make a difference in the lives of children. So I thank you for that, Mr. Hoyer.
Robert Aderholt
Oh, any other amendments? Seeing no further amendments, I now recognize Mr. Simpson for the purpose of making a motion.
Michael Simpson
Mr. Chairman, I move that the bill be favorably reported to the full committee.
Aye.
Those opposed, no.
Robert Aderholt
The ayes have it. The motion is agreed to. A recorded vote has been requested, and those in favor of a recorded vote raise your hands. A sufficient number of support, a recorded vote is ordered. The clerk will call the roll.
Mr. Aderholt.
Aye.
Mr. Ciscomani. Mr. Clyde.
Aye.
Mr. Cole.
Aye.
Aye.
Ms. Frankel.
Mr. Harder.
Mr. Molinaro.
Aye.
Mr. Pocan.
Mr. Simpson.
Aye.
Ms. Watson Coleman.
Mr. Ellzey.
Aye.
Ms. Bice.
Aye.
Mr. Moore.
Aye.
Ms. Dean.
Ms. Letlow.
Aye.
Robert Aderholt
Okay, on this vote, the ayes are 11, the noes are 7. The amendment is not adopted. Oh, the motion. The motion. I'm reading from the wrong page.
It's been a while since I was right. Tougher than I thought. The bill is now favorably reported to the full committee. I ask unanimous consent that the staff be permitted to make technical and conforming changes to the bill and to the report without objection, so ordered. And of course, copies of the bill are at your table.
And thank you very much for everyone for being here this morning, and especially bright and early 8:00 on a Friday morning. And at that, the committee stands adjourned.
John Rutherford
The subcommittee on Homeland Security will come to order. Welcome to the subcommittee markup for fiscal year 2027 Homeland Security appropriations bill. I would like to welcome the full committee chairman Mr. Cole and ranking member DeLauro and all the subcommittee members. You should all know that it's no secret that Labor-HHS was in here before us and as they were clearing out, for those of you that were here for the Labor-HHS thing and Mr. Cole, Ms. DeLauro, I want to thank you for sticking around for the varsity event this morning in terms of subcommittee markups. There's a junior varsity person leaving right now.
I will hold my comments until the end, so we'll begin by recognizing the distinguished gentleman from Texas, Mr. Cuellar, for his opening remarks. The floor is yours.
Henry Cuellar
Mr. Chairman, thank you so much and I'm pleased to join you today as we mark up your final Homeland Security appropriations. We really appreciate your work that you've done and appreciate our friendship. So the process of working with you and your team in drafting this important bill has been a good one, consistent with the traditions of the subcommittee. So I thank you for the dialogue, the conversations we've had and with your team's willingness to work with us on items that are important for the American people. It is an interesting position we are in as we sit here considering FY 27 budget for DHS while our work on FY 2026 still remains incomplete.
I appreciate many of the new provisions included in this bill that reflect some of the common sense reforms we have been advocating for and wonder if resolution of FY 2026 and reclaiming our full power of the purse is possible without the need for more reconciliation funding that bypasses our committee.
With the 25th anniversary of the terrorist attacks of 9/11 approaching later this year, I'm reminded that it is this subcommittee's responsibility to provide DHS the resources necessary to carry out the missions critical to our nation's and economic security and to protect the health and the safety in doing so. But it's also equally our responsibility to hold them accountable, both in their day-to-day operations and interactions with the public, as well as how they execute the federal funding they're entrusted with. It is why our subcommittee exists. This must always be at the forefront of our deliberations when deciding how to best fund DHS. As a border member, I understand and support the investments in border security and technology, employee care, suicide prevention programs for our Border Patrol agents and the other homeland security folks, but I'm concerned that this bill does not provide sufficient oversight of the department or certain operational reforms that we've been talking about.
For example, while the bill doubles the funding for body-worn cameras, there's nothing in this bill requiring its use during immigration enforcement operations or ensure that the video is retained. This bill also cuts the OIG, and I had time to spend time with them, by 12% and stripped oversight we had agreed to last year for detention facility oversight when detention capacity for ICE is growing and deaths in ICE custody are at record levels. When it comes to the border itself, I do want to express my appreciation for a provision that will protect some of the areas we previously agreed to that were exempted from border wall construction. That's SpaceX, and I had a conversation with SpaceX a couple of nights ago, the Butterfly Center, the historical cemeteries, the chapel, and other places, and I thank you for putting the oversight on the reconciliation. But unfortunately, we got to look at some of the areas.
I know that my colleague from El Paso is looking at some exceptions. I'm looking at some border exceptions in my hometown. It's like having your own house yard and then somebody just puts a fence in front of your yard. But we look forward to working together. This is only the starting process, and I appreciate your opportunity to work on this.
This bill also misses the opportunities to make smart investments in parts of the department that have not seen funding from reconciliation sources. I would like to see more increased funding for TSA and protect their workers' collective bargaining, as well as larger investments in CISA to protect cyber and critical infrastructure. And again, you know, we have other things that we need to talk about, but I do want to say that I want to thank, take this moment and thank and give my deep appreciation to all the department's personnel for the work that they do. I live on the border, so I know Border Patrol agents, ICE agents, HSI, all those folks, OFO, all that, and I go to church with them. I see the folks at the grocery stores.
They're good people. They're good people, and again, I want to thank all of them. And Mr. Chairman, I just want to say you have been a class act, part of the A-team, varsity team that you were talking about. I'm just kidding. But I do want to say thank you so much to you and the team and to all the members.
I really appreciate the work that y'all have done. It's only the starting process, so let's get this process started.
John Rutherford
Thank you, sir, and your credibility was running pretty high till that stuff at the end. I'd now like to recognize the chairman of the full committee, the gentleman from Oklahoma, the floor is yours.
Tom Cole
I thank my very good friend the chairman, and I'd like to first again thank you, Chairman Amodei, thank you, Ranking Member Cuellar, certainly my good friend and working partner, the ranking member of the full committee, Ms. DeLauro, and all of you for being here. I'm actually pretty impressed with the turnout for a Friday morning with no votes. I mean, when I was a more junior member, I might well have not been here. So I commend all of you for being here. I really do, and I appreciate it very, very much.
Keeping America safe and secure is a fundamental duty, and the measure we're considering is critical to that mission. And I want to associate myself, actually, sort of going off script here, with a comment that Ranking Member Cuellar made. This is a process, and you know, we're not in agreement today, but the aim is to work toward doing it. And both of you did that last year. And I was extraordinarily proud.
I think this subcommittee had the most difficult challenges of any of them. Those persist to this day, and I'm going to be very candid in my remarks about the Senate on this. But the point is you got to a deal. And that deal got across the floor. And I appreciate that, and I appreciate what it took for both of you, because I think you were each under extraordinary pressure to get it done, and you're to be, both of you, commended.
Keeping Americans safe and secure is a fundamental duty, and the measure we are considering is critical to that mission. Those aren't words, they're facts. Everyone in this room understands the stakes and the consequences of not acting. You have to look no further than the Senate Democrat DHS shutdown, which is exactly what it is, to understand what I mean. Despite bipartisan efforts to fund the Department of Homeland Security through a regular appropriations process, Senate Democrats refused to advance a bill that would provide certainty for the men and women charged with securing our nation.
And by the way, a bill that they had agreed to in negotiations, that they had agreed to. It was a completely avoidable disruption and one where the ramifications are still being felt. I said it then, and I'll say it again, and I certainly associate myself with Mr. Cuellar in this regard. You know, I appreciate people that actually recognize how tough being on a border is and how much we owe those folks. And to see a situation where we were going from thousands of people a day coming across the border illegally, some in pursuit of opportunity, some in pursuit of criminal activity, to see that go to where we have no known illegal entries for months into this country is an extraordinary achievement.
And the men and women who did it ought to be thanked for it and commended for it, not constantly smeared. I see a lot of politicians trying to make a political point at the expense of federal workers, 75% of whom in the Border Patrol are veterans and or professional law enforcement. And if we've got a couple of bad actors, they do something wrong, we ought to be relentless in the pursuit of them. But to take an entire group and see them sometimes compared to the Gestapo, I mean, it's shameless. It is shameless.
And my friend Mr. Cuellar has certainly never, ever done that. But, and frankly, to my knowledge, nobody in this room has done that. But I've seen it done repeatedly, and it's not acceptable. At its core, appropriations is about fulfilling Congress's constitutional responsibility. Article 1 is not optional, and it's certainly not something members should put aside when it becomes politically inconvenient.
The power of the purse carries with it an obligation to govern, and this fiscal year 2027 bill reflects that responsibility. This legislation funds every core mission of DHS. It strengthens border security, it supports immigration enforcement and combats fentanyl and other illicit drugs. It reinforces the Trump administration's efforts that have helped restore operational control of the border for the first time in years, while ensuring the personnel, technology, and resources are in place to sustain that success. This includes funding to sustain 22,000 Border Patrol agents and support for needed ICE detention beds, and it doubles the resources for body-worn cameras for DHS personnel that we provided last year.
Additionally, the bill enhances America's posture in the Indo-Pacific by providing increased resources for Coast Guard operations to counter China and other adversaries. Investments in maritime domain awareness, unmanned systems, technology modernization, and expanded Coast Guard presence in the region help safeguard critical waterways, support allies and partners, and advance US national security. The measure also bolsters our cyber defenses by refocusing resources on protecting federal networks and critical infrastructure from increasingly sophisticated threats posed by nation-state adversaries and criminals. Finally, the bill ensures states and local communities have the resources they need to prepare for, respond to, and recover from disasters. From firefighters and first responders to emergency managers on the ground, these investments help communities remain resilient when disaster strikes.
Importantly, the measure also recognizes that homeland security is not limited to one challenge or one border. It encompasses everything from fiscal security and immigration enforcement to cyber defense, disaster response, and protecting the American people from emerging threats at home and abroad. I'd be remiss not to recognize Chairman Amodei. Mark has always respected this institution and understood that governing requires showing up, doing the work, and making tough decisions. He brings a practical perspective to every challenge, a willingness to say exactly what he thinks, and a commitment to ensuring taxpayer dollars are spent responsibly.
As chairman of this subcommittee, he's navigated some extraordinarily difficult challenges with steady judgment, candor, and clear focus on results. Through it all, he's never lost sight of our mission or our responsibility to provide the resources necessary to keep America safe. As the final appropriations bill in Congress, this measure is a fitting culmination to Mark's service. It reflects the way my friend has always approached public service: respecting the institution, embracing the responsibility, and never shying away from tough decisions. Congress, this committee, and the appropriations process are stronger, Mr. Chairman, because of your leadership.
I want to thank you, your working partner Ranking Member Cuellar, and the subcommittee staff on both sides of the aisle for hard work, and I look forward to advancing this measure. And with that, I yield back.
John Rutherford
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The gentlelady from Connecticut, the ranking member of the full committee, the floor is yours.
Rosa DeLauro
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I too am so appreciative of your work and work of Ranking Member Cuellar in getting this bill to where it is. There obviously are serious differences with the bill, which we will address and look forward to the opportunity to work together to make changes in the bill. And I want to say a thank you to Chairman Cole, and I concur that the bills don't start out the way we would like them and we try to get to the end game.
I would wish sometimes we would not repeat the same things that we did last year and moving forward and we could do it in a more deliberative and faster way since we know some of these things will fall by the wayside. It may be good that they fall by the wayside now so that we can move the work of the committee. I want to say a thank you to the subcommittee staff. I say that particularly of Homeland Security. It's been difficult.
We were able to pass 11 of the 12 bills. Homeland still has its difficulties, but to the staff on both sides of the aisle, we commend you for your dedication and commitment to Homeland Security. Shannon McCully, Jamie Wise, Jim Ellsworth for the minority, Paula Anstine, Anna Lanier Fischer, Fern Gibbons, Ashley Truelock, Alessandra Ramirez, and Enkosi Thomas for the majority. Again, thank you for your great work. I am opposed to the bill under consideration today.
From the beginning, we have maintained that we will not provide another penny in funding for ICE or the Border Patrol without substantial reforms to the way those agencies operate, reforms that protect our constituents and our communities from the kind of reckless and senseless abuses we have seen. I just might add here that Democrats believe in border control and in secure borders. We are there, but we are also committed to making sure that the result of those actions of border control do not result in American citizens dying in our streets. This bill provides more than $10 billion for ICE and nearly $7 billion for Border Patrol. While I welcome incremental measures the majority has included in the bill, which make progress towards the reforms necessary to protect our communities, they still fall far short of what is required to earn our support.
These agencies have broken the law. In January alone, ICE violated nearly 100 court orders, which the chief federal judge in Minnesota, a Republican appointee, estimated was more than some federal agencies have violated during their entire existence. Just this week, Secretary Mullen testified that he is under no obligation to follow court orders he simply doesn't agree with. That the head of the largest federal law enforcement agency in the country would show such flagrant disregard for the American legal system should offend anyone who respects the rule of law. The majority of Americans support strong protections from ICE abuses.
And yes, we will not agree to another penny until those conditions are met, until we can be sure that the people we represent are safe. Agents must get a warrant from a judge before kicking in someone's door. They must remove their masks and display identification. We must prohibit operations at schools, at hospitals, and at houses of worship. We must end racial profiling and allow for independent investigations into misconduct.
That is how we keep our communities safe and how we protect the rights of all Americans. That is how we regain the trust of the American people that this administration has lost.
During the recent funding lapse, many of my Republican colleagues invoked the Transportation Security Administration and Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, claiming that a failure to fully fund these agencies was so egregious that we had to give ICE and Border Patrol billions of dollars with no strings attached to avoid it. And now Republicans have had that chance to write their own bill from scratch, and what they do, what do they do? They cut the budgets of CISA and the TSA. They cut funding from TSA by nearly $350 million and from CISA by more than $250 million. These agencies and the people who keep us safe every day used to be so important to our colleagues.
What happened? And as we speak, the Senate Republican leadership circumvented this committee and gave the Trump administration another $69.5 billion with no strings attached. There is no accountability and there is no oversight in the measure, and if the measure passes the House next week without any of the precautions, we will have provided DHS with more than $260 billion that this committee did not approve. I will always stand up for the appropriations process. I believe firmly, and I know Chairman Cole shares that belief, that partisan reconciliation bills are no substitute for the work that we do here.
And again, if it passes in the House next week, it will circumvent what this committee is all about and, in my view, violates that power of the purse that is granted to the Appropriations Committee in the United States Constitution. But you have to see the absurdity in refusing to include substantive guardrails against ICE and Border Patrol while also give them nearly $17 billion on top of what they are already set to receive in reconciliation while cutting funding for cybersecurity, for the TSA, and the internal watchdogs who prevent abuse within the department. The reforms we seek for these agencies are not unreasonable nor are they impractical. They are popular, they are responsible, and they are necessary to ensure the safety of our constituents. I encourage my colleagues to work with us to adopt all of these guardrails and protect our communities and to protect the power of the purse that is enshrined in the United States Constitution for this committee.
Until then, I urge a strong no vote on this legislation. Thank you and I yield back.
John Rutherford
Thank you, Madam Ranking Member. Other members of the committee wishing to make opening statements? The lady from Texas, the floor is yours.
Speaker 18
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the ranking member and to our leaders of the Appropriations Committee. It really is a privilege to be part of this committee and to be able to work together to do everything we can to ensure we have the tools but also guardrails necessary, as the appropriations ranking member mentioned. Mr. Amodei, you've been such a great chairman to work with.
I'm sorry we're going to lose you and have always appreciated your willingness to hear me out and to work collaboratively. And ranking member, fellow border Texan, we know firsthand what is happening every day on the border. I just want to echo, I would be remiss if I didn't echo what Ms. DeLauro said to us about the guardrails that are necessary for such a large, significant department. And I want to share a couple of stories with you all, my colleagues on Homeland. The largest detention facility in the world is in my district.
It's called Camp East Montana. It was funded through reconciliation. It's a 1.2 billion dollar tent city. My team and I have tried to conduct oversight multiple times. Thankfully, I've gotten in several times, but it's always hit or miss.
And the rules are shifting, the rules will change. Recently, one of my staff members was targeted by some of the folks there on the ground and doxxed. I've raised all of this to the new secretary. We had a great meeting with him yesterday and I am hopeful that there will be a very different relationship between the new secretary and Congress. But we still have a job to do.
And I want to give you a couple of examples of where a lack of oversight and a lack of guardrails should really outrage and alarm us. One case, a group of women who had been detained during the Minneapolis chaos brought to El Paso. And we met with them. They had been in custody at Camp East Montana for 21 days without a change of clothes, without access to a phone to call their lawyers. They were desperate.
Some of these women were nurses. Some had been in the country for decades. And they felt incredibly hopeless. There was one woman who was HIV positive who did not have access to her medication for 21 days. I'll give you another example.
A man that we met with a couple months ago. And as I was visiting with him, he had a brace on his arm and he kept rubbing his arm. And I asked him, are you okay? And he said, no, my arm was broken by an ICE agent when he arrested me. This was weeks ago.
I've been begging for medical care. Do you want to see my arm? I said, yes, I'd like to see your arm. He took off his brace. You could see the break in his forearm.
His arm had not been set. He had not been allowed to see a doctor. He was given aspirin. And he said, at this point, I just want to be deported so I can check myself into an emergency room wherever they deport me. This is why oversight is important.
This is why standards are important. Believe me, Henry and I live on the border. I worked with the community with El Paso when we were seeing up to 10,000 people a day. That was not acceptable. And we need reform.
And we need to ensure that never happens again, which is why I've co-authored the Dignity Act with your colleague Maria Salazar for those of you who want to see real reform. But until we pass immigration reform, we have to hold our government accountable.
And it's this committee that has the power to do that. And these are just two stories. I we have so many. We are better than this and the Appropriations Committee really can create a standard that we can be proud of, where we can be safe and we can be humane. So I seek to do that with all of you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, ranking member. I yield back.
John Rutherford
Other members' opening statements? Seeing none, uh before I go to uh Mr. Rutherford, I am going to go ahead and and make mine at this point in time. And uh first of all, this will this'll see if anybody's listening. I'm actually looking forward to next week. And you say, what the heck's the matter with that guy?
Um and and it's like, it has not been a great year to be serving in this in this role. I'll just say that. Regardless of what your politics are and, you know, everybody's had something to say, but not everybody has said everything they're thinking on both sides. That's the mark of professionals because God knows there's plenty that could have been said. And so, having said that, you're going, what that's kind of weird, what's why is he saying this?
And uh I'm saying it because as as the chairman alluded to, he was proud of the work that this committee did last year. Nobody got everything they wanted. Uh we got shoved around by by folks that, you know, whatever, it's like, no, well we're okay with this, no you can't do this, you can't do that. I was proud of the collaborative process. I mean there it was still political and we still agreed to disagree on plenty, but everybody was a pro.
And and no offense to any of the other members that don't serve on this committee or on Appropriations, but I think that's not your standard fare in the culture these days. And so now as as we approach next week for this committee, it's like, oh well it's got easier, you know, I mean it's easier to be on Homeland. Um it's all beer and horseshoe pitching and that sort of thing. And and I think it's going to be good to have the discussions that we're going to have in the context of Article 1 and being appropriators. And the bill is going to change from what it is now to to what we report out.
Now it still may end up being the same roll call votes, but the bill is going to change. And if I'm wrong, it's like, well you don't know anything about your committee and and whatever the heck. But I just want to say this to the staffs and and all that, it's like my impression of the work that the people in this jurisdictional area have done as members and staff is pretty pretty doggone strong. And and you're not all being called to talk on your favorite morning or evening show or whatever and it's all a but it's like listen, that old Ben Franklin thing, well done is better than well said. Thank you for being well done people.
Um you don't owe me anything for for saying that, but thank you for being well done people. Um and I also have one housekeeping thing that I need to do because uh we have a new member on the committee, Mr. Shreve from Indiana who's sitting down there on the end thinking everybody's going who's that guy and what's the heck and I'm flying under the radar. I I first of all want to welcome you to to the toughest committee in a subcommittee in Appropriations. And second, um we're not big on ceremony around here.
I just want to let you know if there are any second-degree amendments that we in the majority decide to do on next week's markup, you're going to be carrying them all by yourself. Welcome to the committee, big guy. Okay. Yeah, how's that for Jesus? They're really formal folks down there.
And so with that, I would call on—
Speaker 21
Before you—may I—I forgot to say something. Would the chairman recognize me to make a quick remark?
Chairman is recognized.
Tom Cole
Thank you very much. I forgot to mention our friend Ms. Hinson, who this is her last mark here. And I'm going to use a line I used earlier today with Ms. Letlow, who was in the previous committee. Unlike most members, you know, you always tell them, "Well, we're going to miss you more than you miss us." Actually, you really are going to miss us.
Because if you get to where I think you're going to go, you're going to land in the middle of a lot of problems where, honestly, I think the filibuster has been much misused over there to thwart the progress specifically of this committee and, frankly, earlier in the healthcare stuff. And it's just amazing. But I wish you well. You have been a joy to work with on our side of the aisle and, frankly, I think across the aisle. You are a real credit to your state and your district and this institution.
And you have a brilliant future in front of you. I'm sorry it ended as quickly as it did here. I thought when Grassley decided to run for reelection, we'd got her for six more years. But Senator Ernst made her decision, and I'm sure for good reason. But she couldn't have a better successor if you're successful in that race.
And I know it's a real race and you have a lot of work to do. But I have tremendous confidence in you. And I thank you for the way in which you've carried yourself as a member of this committee and a member of this institution. You really will be missed on this side. Yield back.
Thank you very much.
John Rutherford
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess before I make my final administrative—is there any members who want to submit amendments at this time? Okay, seeing none, final administrative announcement is this: we are formally up for purposes of providing lunch, etc., next Wednesday. And that's an important thing. You know, it's just like troops in the field or whatever, it's like, "What's for—what's to eat?"
And so I know that everybody has their own spin on that sort of stuff and healthy and all that other sort of stuff. I can assure those of you that are looking for healthy choices next Wednesday at noon, you should pack a lunch. We are going to break with responsibility and maturity and stuff like that. And that's all I'm going to say.
Henry Cuellar
Since we're starting Homeland on Tuesday after Labor-H on Tuesday, we will have food from my district. We've got a Mexican restaurant that will come in. It's not Palenque Grill, the same one we bring in. I've tried a different one. It is not Taco Bell.
So that's the next day. No, on Tuesday. You're on Wednesday and you're on Tuesday. We're on Tuesday.
So, for Tuesday, since we're starting Homeland, we'll provide, we'll bring in the cooks from South Texas up here, so.
John Rutherford
That'd be great. And after seeing the previous subcommittee meeting, which we'll have to wrap up in order for Mr. Cuellar to put on his culinary extravaganza, we know that those folks are not going to, you know, do anything wild and out on the edge in terms of culinary adventure, so.
I offered, but it's been taken care of otherwise, otherwise it would have been outrageous.
It's been a tough year all around, hasn't it? Mr. Rutherford, you are recognized for the purposes of making a motion.
Mr. Chairman, I move the bill be favorably reported to the full committee.
The question is on the motion from Mr. Rutherford. The motion is agreed to. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.
Seeing no other business to come before the committee today, the subcommittee on Homeland Security will stand adjourned.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.