LEGISLATIVE DAY OF MARCH 27, 2026
No chapters available yet
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
Floor U.S. House of Representatives
Follow its sittings
Speaker 6
I have been directed by the senate to inform the house that the senate has passed with an amendment h r seventy one forty seven, an act making further consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year ending 09/30/2026 and further purposes, in which the concurrence of the house is requested.
Mike Ezell
The chair will entertain up to five further requests for one minute speeches on each side of the aisle. For what purpose does the gentleman from Virginia seek recognition?
Mister speaker, I seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to extend the
Mike Ezell
Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
Mister speaker, I stand before you today to recognize and celebrate the historic one hundred twenty fifth anniversary of Sweet Briar College in Amherst County Of Virginia's Fifth Congressional District. Founded in nineteen o one by Indiana Fletcher Williams, Sweet Briar has spent more than a century preparing women to lead with integrity, resilience and purpose in critical roles throughout America's workforce. Sweet Briar's many notable alumni, including Mary Pope Hudson, the current president of the college, hold true to the mission of guiding and inspiring the next generation of female leaders. For one hundred and twenty five years, Sweet Briar has stood as a testament to academic excellence and preparing women for lifelong leadership. I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating this extraordinary institution.
And with that, I yield back.
Marlin Stutzman
The gentleman yields back. For what purpose does the gentleman from Missouri seek recognition? Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
Wesley Bell
I rise, mister speaker, I rise today to talk about a woman who changed Saint Louis, and in doing so, changed America. Her name is Frankie Muse Freeman. In 1954, when segregation was still the law of the land, despite that, Frankie Frank Muse Freeman walked into a Saint Louis courtroom with her law degree. The result, the end of legal race racial discrimination in public housing in Missouri. She was the lead attorney, she was a black woman, she won.
She didn't wait for permission anywhere in her life. When law firms wouldn't write her back, she opened her own practice. So during women's history month, when I think about what this administration is doing, gutting programs that black women built careers and communities around, eliminating the pathways to economic stability. I think about what Frankie Muse Freeman would say. I think she'd say get back to work and most importantly win.
Thank you, mister speaker. I yield back.
Marlin Stutzman
The gentleman yields back. For what purpose does the gentleman from California seek recognition?
Ro Khanna
Mister speaker, this body needs to vote on Thomas Massey and my resolution to end the war in Iran. The president has sent 2,000 more soldiers from the army eighty second division to Iran. This is on top of 4,500 marines we already have there. We cannot afford to put ground troops in Iran. This body needs to say no to the 200,000,000,000 request and vote to end a war that is causing gas to skyrocket.
Gas is up to nearly $4 a gallon, up 34%, and we've already lost 13 American service members. Let's end the war. Let's bring the troops home. Let's make sure we're putting Americans first.
Marlin Stutzman
The gentleman yields back. For what purpose does the gentleman from Kentucky seek recognition? The gentleman is recognized for one minute.
Speaker 5
Mister speaker, it's hard to believe, but it's been three years now since my hometown of Louisville, Kentucky was forever changed by the mass shooting at Old National Bank, the Monday morning after Easter. Three years since we lost Josh Barrick, Dina Eckert, Julianna Farmer, Jim Tutt, and my good friend, Tommy Elliott. Three years have passed, and it's still shocking. It still hurts. We're still grieving.
I still haven't found the words to heal those wounds, but I want to read what Tommy's wife, Mary Anne, courageously shared after this tragedy. May I continue to receive the gifts of grief to help heal my heart? May it offer me clarity, help me realize what matters and what doesn't, and then let the rest go. May I honor the unsolved questions and mysteries of life, the cracks, and look for the light that shines through them. May we all.
Thank you, mister speaker. I yield back.
Marlin Stutzman
The gentleman yields back. For what purpose does the gentleman from California seek recognition?
J. Correa
Mister speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of my very good friend, Minor Duncan, a devoted educator, public servant whose impact in our community will be felt for generation. Before dedicating his life to education, mister Duncan probably served our country in the US army in the Korean War from 1952 to 1954. Later, served at the unified Fullerton Unified School District for more than forty years as an educator principal, during which time he helped develop programs that strengthened student literacy and success. After retirement, he wasn't over. He went on to work at Cal State Fullerton in the area of education.
Then he was elected to the Fullerton District Board of Trustees for eight years. Beyond his profession, he was a man who cherished his family, friendship, and he has survived today by his children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren who will carry on his legacy. Please join me in celebrating the life of Maynard Duncan, a man who served his country, his community, his family, all with distinction. May he rest in peace. Mister speaker, I yield.
Marlin Stutzman
The gentleman yields back. For what purpose does the gentleman from Illinois seek recognition?
Jonathan Jackson
Mister speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the body for one minute without objection.
Jonathan Jackson
Mister speaker, I rise today during women's history month with both reverence and sorrow to honor the life and legacy of Betty Jean Mason Odom, a trailblazer whose recent passing marks the loss of a visionary leader and beloved pillar of the Chicago community. In 1978, after studying in Paris, France, Mrs. Odom returned home with an idea, the concept of total skin care for the African American community. She founded Betty Olm Incorporated, which has since become Chicago's premier and most imitated day spa. For more than four decades, her High Park institution provided world class wellness services, skin care, and affirmed the beauty and dignity of people of color through her groundbreaking skins of color products.
Miss Odom's life is a remarkable tapestry of service and achievement. A graduate of Fisk University and Meharry Medical College, she served our nation as a first lieutenant in the United States Army Nurse Corps. She is also an accomplished actress, model, television host, author, entrepreneur, educator, and inspired generations of young people through her lectures on confidence, purpose, and professional ambition. Even in her latter years, miss Odin's light never dimmed. She celebrated her extraordinary life.
We mourn her passing and give thanks for the profound and lasting impact of miss Betty Odom. She is survived by her daughter, Lori Odom. May her memory continue to inspire all of us. Mister speaker, I yield back.
Marlin Stutzman
The gentleman yields back. For what purpose what purpose does the gentleman from Mississippi, mister Ezel, seek recognition?
Mike Ezell
Mister speaker, pursuant to house resolution eleven thirty one, I call up h r seven zero eight four as amended, the defending American property abroad act of 2026 and asked for its immediate consideration in the house.
Speaker 13
Union calendar number 484, h r 7084, a bill to amend title 46 United States code with respect to the types of vessels that may enter or operate in navigable waters of The United States or transfer cargo in any port or place under the jurisdiction of The United States and for other purposes.
Marlin Stutzman
Pursuant to house resolution eleven thirty one, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on transportation and infrastructure printed in the bill is adopted and the bill as amended is considered red. The bill as amended shall be debated debatable for one hour, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on transportation and infrastructure or their representative designees. The gentleman from Mississippi, mister Azel, and the gentleman from Washington, mister Larson, each will control thirty minutes. The chair recognizes the gentleman from Mississippi, mister Azel.
Mike Ezell
Mister speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on h r seven zero eight four. Without objection. Mister speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. The gentleman is recognized. I rise in support of h r seven zero eight four, the defending American property act of 2026.
This bill provides the president with the authority to effectively address an unlawful taking of United States citizen on port, harbor, or marine terminal by another government in the Western Hemisphere. United States companies operate maritime facilities throughout North And South America. Their investments must be protected. It is essential that The United States president be able to act quickly and decisively in response to another government exporiating or nationalizing a United States citizen owned port, harbor, or marine terminal. This bill establishes a new narrowly constructed authority for a president to impose a consequence on a foreign government that illegally takes a maritime facility.
Sanctions are an accepted tool used in diplomacy and economic statecraft. The authorities that h r seven zero eight four establishes are completely com complementary to similar authorities that congress has already granted the president. Nothing in this bill precludes or preempts any other option for dispute resolution. It simply gives the president another meaningful targeted tool that it can encourage negotiations and resolution. The defending American property abroad act builds on sanctions legislation previously passed over the past six decades and provides the president with one or more option in a continuing to protection protecting overseas American investments.
Mister speaker, I urge support of this legislation and reserve the balance of my time.
Rick Larsen
Thank you, mister speaker. Today, I rise in opposition to h r seven zero eight four, the defending American property abroad act of 2026. As we've seen with recent vessel boardings and border operations, the coast guard has brought authority to enforce American laws in the water. The Coast Guard routinely interdicts drugs and migrants, enforces fisheries, vessels, and ensures the safety of property and life at sea. In fiscal year twenty twenty five, the Coast Guard set record breaking numbers.
The service see the service sees over 510,000 pounds of cocaine in the maritime domain over triple its yearly average. Even more impressively, the Coast Guard saved over 2,200 lives and over $40,000,000 of property by running, over 6,700 search and rescue cases. They do all this while protecting global fish stocks and by enforcing domestic, and international fisheries laws. HR seven zero eight four does not help the Coast Guard address violations of the law at sea. Instead, the bill inserts the Coast Guard into what is a property dispute between The US company and the Mexican government that, if anything, will only add to the coast guard's burden.
The coast guard is already strained in its ability to effectively conduct its missions. Just last week, the vice commandant testified before the transportation and infrastructure committee that the coast guard is a $20,000,000,000 organization operating on a $13,000,000,000 budget. HR seven zero eight four prohibits vessels, commercial shipping or cruise vessels from entering or operating in US waters if that vessel made a port of call at a port that was nationalized or expropriated by another country from a US citizen or company. Now requiring the service to identify and prohibit vessels from entering US waters due to an international property dispute further strains the services resources. This legislation is meant to only, is meant to only apply to one port in Mexico, but it's written so broadly it could encompass disputes in other countries with and with other companies both today and in the future.
Now Congress has many pressing issues that we should be considering today. The president himself has promised less war and lower prices, instead the American public is getting more war and higher prices. And I wish we were taking time today to discuss those lower costs for my constituents. Instead, we are interjecting congress into an international land dispute. Now I I wanna be really clear, I am sympathetic to the plight of this particular US company involved in this dispute.
This legislation doesn't solve their problem. That solution can be found and, and opportunities are available through diplomacy and even trade agreements, but not really legislation. For those reasons, I'll be voting no on this legislation and reserve the balance of my time.
Marlin Stutzman
The gentleman the gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Mississippi is recognized.
Mike Ezell
Mister speaker, I now yield five minutes to the bill sponsor, mister Pflugger from Texas.
August Pfluger
Thank you, mister speaker. I rise today in strong support of h r seven zero eight four, the defending American property abroad act, and I'd like to thank chairman Graves for his support. Let's be clear, American companies operating abroad should not have to fear arbitrary government actions that undermine their property rights. But right now, that is exactly what is happening. And when countries violate trade agreements and illegally seize assets from US companies, it puts American job security, economic security, and quite frankly, our national security at risk.
HR seven zero eight four ensures there are enforceable consequences for those actions. And, specifically, it strengthens US maritime security law to address these unlawful seizures. Through existing coast guard authorities, it also authorizes the president to deny entry into US ports for vessels that operate through expropriated American owned port infrastructure in Western Hemisphere countries with US free trade agreements. And we know this is not just a hypothetical example. For years, the Mexican government has targeted The US based Vulcan Materials Company.
In 1986, Vulcan Materials Company built the only deepwater port in Mexico's Yucatan Peninsula. And for decades, this operation crushed limestone to critical infrastructure projects across the Gulf and Atlantic Coast, roads, bridges, housing, and energy facilities in states represented by members on both sides of the aisle. But starting in May 2022, the Mexican government launched an endless pressure campaign against Vulcan Materials and sent the military to forcibly shut down its operations. In 2023, they invaded and occupied the property again just to hand it to private Mexican competitor. In 2024, they declared the port and a quarry, and the quarry, adjacent to it a naturally protected area to complete the expropriation.
And now Mexico is weaponizing its tax authority, pursuing billions in retroactive dollars and claims to seize what remains. Meanwhile, Mexico has allowed a dozen unpermitted quarries in the same exact region for Mexican companies to operate freely. Let me say that again. Mexico used its military to forcibly shut down an American company and created false environmental claims to do so, and it's a direct violation of USMCA. We did not resort to legislation as a first option.
In fact, for four years, The United States has pursued every available diplomatic tool, congressional letters, administration engagement, and bilateral pressure, and none of that worked. This represents a coordinated multi front campaign by Mexico against an American company that undermines our diplomatic progress and threatens all US investment in Mexico. Now my colleagues may ask, why is this bill the right response? First, it's surgical. It targets expropriated port infrastructure only.
It will not disrupt current legitimate shipping operations. And second, includes clear off ramps. If the foreign government returns the property, provides fair compensation, and resolves the dispute, then the restrictions are lifted. And lastly, it includes exceptions for for emergencies and maritime safety. I'm proud to have worked in a bipartisan way with representatives Carbahal and Sewell and chairman Graves' committee staff on this legislation.
And this isn't just about one company. We cannot allow a foreign government to steal American property and face zero consequences. This is an opportunity for us to protect American investment abroad, to protect American companies, to protect our own communities. And if you're an American company operating abroad, we have vowed to protect you, and this legislation does just that. I urge colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote yes on H r seven zero eight four, and I yield back.
Rick Larsen
Thank you, mister speaker. I will I would like to, yield, three minutes to the representative from California, representative Carbaugh. The gentleman is recognized.
Salud Carbajal
Thank you, ranking member Larson and chairman Graves. I wanna thank representative Flueger for his leadership today. I rise in support of the defending American property abroad act. This is a common sense and targeted bill that gives The United States a real tool to respond when foreign governments unfairly seize property owned by Americans without due process. The bill would look to identify foreign ports, harbors, and marine terminal terminals where American owned property has been expropriated or taken without due process.
Once identified, goods loaded at those facilities and passenger vessels serving them may be restricted from entering or operating in The United States. Let me be clear about what this means. It means that if you take American property, you don't get to do business as usual with The United States. We can identify those ports and terminals and restrict the ships that use them from entering our ports. That's real consequences, not just words.
It is a targeted solution to support American innovation. This legislation focuses on one bad actor. In recent years, an American company, Vulcan Materials, invested in port and terminal infrastructure in Mexico in good faith under the expectation that its property rights and contracts would be respected. And instead, the Mexican government took action that resulted in the seizure of that port facility despite long standing agreements. What makes this even more frustrating is the justification that was offered.
Mexican officials pointed to environmental and permitting concerns, but the same government that is accusing this company of environmental harm awarded six industry awards from PROFEPA, which is their environmental enforcement agency for the company's environmental stewardship. You can't speak out of both sides of your mouth. And at the same time, the government of Mexico has allowed for the use of Vulcan Deepwater Port by another company. That is not what good faith partnerships look like, especially from our largest trading partner. Trade should not be a race to the bottom.
It should support good paying jobs, protecting the environment, labor standards, and strengthening local communities. And it should be grounded in mutual respect where countries that benefit from access to US markets also respect the rights of workers, investors, and communities tied to that trade. The bill reinforces that principle. Just like I have been willing to call out unfair practices by foreign governments, I've also spoken out when our own government does something similar, including under president Trump who has imposed blanket tariffs without rhyme or reason, an equally reckless action. This bill is a targeted solution.
I urge my colleagues to also support this bill. I yield back the balance of my time.
Marlin Stutzman
The gentleman yields back. Reserve. Gentleman from Washington reserves. The gentleman from Mississippi is recognized.
Barry Moore
I thank the gentleman from Mississippi. Mister speaker, what we have seen happen to Alabama's own Vulcan Materials Company should concern every member of this body. A foreign government shut down an American company's operations, moved to seize its property and ignored the rule of law. If it can happen to one American company, it can happen to any of them. We must protect American jobs and American investments and stand on the principles that The United States will stand for its people and its companies wherever they operate.
The government of Mexico's actions shutting down operations, explorating a deep water port and quarry and hiding behind environmental designations set a dangerous precedent that weakens trade relationships and threatens our national security. The defendant American property abroad act of 2026 makes it clear, if you target American businesses there will be consequences. It strengthens our trade enforcement rules, expands section three zero one authority and allows The United States to take real action against those who seize or interfere with American property. We will not allow foreign governments to benefit from the access of our markets while violating the rights of American companies. I urge my colleagues to stand with the American workers, stand with the rule of law and support this bill and with that I'll yield back.
Marlin Stutzman
The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Washington is recognized. Thank you.
Rick Larsen
I'd like to yield three minutes to representative from Illinois, representative Garcia.
Jesús García
Thank you, mister chair. I rise today to voice my strong opposition to this bill. First of all, this bill, this bill and the substance of the bill, this dispute is undergoing consideration by the international bodies established by The US Mexico Canada trade agreement. We really should wait until a decision is arrived at with respect to that mechanism. But there are other considerations.
First, let's consider other far reaching implications. The bill gives the president the authority to prohibit vessels that travel through certain Western Hemisphere ports that he designates from entering US waters. While supporters say that the bill is narrowly written to target a specific project in a specific country, the reality is that the president will be given broad authority that could be applied to other countries in the future. And let's not forget who we're talking about here. This is the same president who used military force in Venezuela to force regime change.
The same president who's now engaging in an illegal war with Iran without even consulting congress. Do we really want to entrust the president with this new authority granted under this bill? Equally damaging, the bill ignores the objections of local people fighting for their right to safe drinking water in a surrounding environment free of contamination. That's what's in the dispute resolution matter being addressed now. I've spoken to local community leaders who have suffered from the environmental damage caused by these mining operations.
This bill limits the ability of foreign governments to adopt measures that protect its communities and its environment, essentially coercing those foreign governments to prioritize the interest of US corporations over its people. We should not be legislating to hinder a foreign government's ability to protect its citizens from environmental harm. We should not be granting the president a new authority that could have broad foreign policy implications. I urge my colleagues to join with me and to vote no on this proposal. Thank you, mister chair.
I yield back.
Marlin Stutzman
Chair yields back. Does the gentleman reserve? Reserve. The gentleman from Mississippi is recognized.
Mike Ezell
Mister speaker, I rise in support of h r seven zero eight four, the Defendant American Prosperity Abroad Act of 2026. I'm a proud cosponsor of this vital piece of legislation and I thank my colleague, Chairman Pflugger from Texas, for his leadership on this matter. In 2022, the Mexican government unlawfully took over and shut down a limestone quarry in Mexico operated by a US based company. This seizure violated The US Mexico Canada agreement, undermined American property values, and threatened US economic growth, and national security. It is of the utmost importance that we protect American businesses and vessels from being unfairly targeted or having their assets unlawfully seized while operating around the world.
I'm a proud I am proud to support h r seven zero eight four, which ensures that there are real consequences when American property is seized abroad. I urge all my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill and show the world that Americans stand firmly behind its workers, businesses, and investments at home and abroad. And I yield back the balance of my time.
Marlin Stutzman
Gentleman yields back. The gentleman reserves. I reserve. Alright. The gentleman from Washington is recognized.
Rick Larsen
Thank you. I'd like to, yield two minutes to representative from Alabama reps and figures. The gentleman is recognized.
Shomari Figures
Thank you, mister speaker. I rise today in support of the Defendant American Property Abroad Act because it is the right thing to do. We've we've talked about here today about this being a US based company. Well, it's a little bit more personal than that to me and my colleague Congresswoman Sewell and a few of my other colleagues from the state of Alabama. This is an Alabama based company.
And it is the right thing to do because when you have a company that is operating on lawfully acquired land nearly four decades ago, performing lawful operations, paying taxes lawfully, exporting the goods lawfully, many of which that come through my hometown, the Port Of Mobile which is now the deepest port in The Gulf. They're doing this lawfully, they should be treated lawfully. And what we have here is not really complicated, it's not complex in terms of what the Mexican government did here. They came in and just took it and said we're not abiding by a process, we're not abiding by any contractual terms or any other terms, we're just taking it and by the way we're not going to pay you for it. And when a foreign entity uses the full force of its military and its government to take away property rights from a Alabama based company, I'm going to stand up for that.
But we also have an obligation to make sure we're using the full force of our government in response to it. And that is what this legislation does and I urge my colleagues to support it for that reason. But not only that because we're we're here because it's an Alabama today, but tomorrow it could be a Mississippi company or a Washington company or Oregon, Indiana, Illinois, any other state. We cannot sit by quietly and not respond and not respond proportionally to what the Mexican government has done. I don't have anything personally against the Mexican government, don't have anything certainly against the Mexican people.
But what I do have a problem with is when we see a government mistreating, even our own government, mistreating businesses and mistreating people. We have an obligation to speak out and to stand up for that and for that reason I stand in support of this legislation and urge all of my colleagues to do the same. Thank you, mister speaker. Yield back.
Marlin Stutzman
The gentleman yields back. Reserve. The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Mississippi is recognized.
Mike Ezell
I now yield two minutes to representative Strong of Alabama. The gentleman is recognized.
Dale Strong
Thank you, mister speaker. The question is, do we support president Trump with this authority? Absolutely, we do. Well, I rise today in support of H. R.
7,084, the Defending America Property Abroad Act of 2026. This legislation makes it clear The United States will not stand for unlawful harassment campaigns against American companies and American workers. For over thirty five years Vulcan Material Company based in Alabama has lawfully owned and operated a limestone quarry in Mexico. Yet since 2018 the Mexican government has unlawfully restricted Vulcan's operation and wrongly targeted them through coercion and intimidation. In 2022 the Mexican president attempted to seize the property when Vulcan refused to surrender Mexican retaliation by issuing stand down orders.
No American company should be pressured into accepting a fire sale takeover or punished for standing up for its lawful rights. Vulcan followed the law, held up its end of the deal and operated transparently. What they received in return was their property stolen and seized by the Mexican government. These actions have essentially left only deepwater port, the only deepwater port on the Yucatan Peninsula owned, constructed and operated for years by Vulcan and the surrounding land open for sale to our adversaries. Unbelievable.
The Defending America Property Abroad Act gives The United States the tools to push back against foreign countries and trading partners when our companies are unlawfully targeted and harassed. America owes Mexico nothing. This is about fairness and accountability. The United States will no longer sit by and allow foreign nations to profit from stolen American property. I urge my colleagues to support HR 7,084 and I thank my friends.
I want to thank also congressman Pflueger for his leadership in advancing this important legislation.
Marlin Stutzman
The gentleman yields back. The gentleman reserves. I reserve. The gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Washington is recognized.
Rick Larsen
Thank you. I'd like to yield two minutes to the representative from Alabama, representative Sewell.
Terri Sewell
Mister speaker, I rise today in support of the Defending American Property Abroad Act. This narrowly tailored bill will target vessels that attempt to enter into The US after moving through a seized American owned port. Vulcan material is proudly located in my Alabama district. So I've been following this dispute closely since 2018. The facts of the case are clear.
The government of Mexico used its military force to illegally occupy Vulcan's property. And in 2022, president Obador illegally shut down Vulcan's operations. Mexico's justification for the seizure are fabricated, and it is clear that the government wants to take Vulcan's port because it is the only deepwater port in the region. Now, mister speaker, Vulcan has attempted to use all existing legal and diplomatic options to resolve this situation. Since 2018, they have used the USMCA arbitrary arbitration policies and processes, and multiple US ambassadors to Mexico under the Biden and Trump administration have attempted to find an amicable solution.
I have met directly with president Obrador about this issue. While previous ambassadors have been sympathetic to our concerns, president Obrador and now president Xi'an have overruled their own diplomatic and staff orders. It is time for congress to act. I was told by the president that we had to have an act of congress in order for the port to be returned. And so today, sir, I say proudly, we are doing something.
Congress is doing something. And this is just not about an Alabama company. It is about American property abroad.
Terri Sewell
I urge congress to vote in favor of this bill and I support this legislation wholeheartedly. I yield back the balance of my time.
Marlin Stutzman
The gentlelady's time has expired. Does the gentleman reserve? Reserve. Alright. The gentleman from Mississippi is recognized.
Mike Ezell
I now, yield three minutes to representative Palmer of Alabama. The gentleman is recognized.
Gary Palmer
Thank you, mister speaker. I rise today in strong support of h r seventy eighty four, the defending American property abroad act of 2026. This legislation codifies the common sense principle that foreign nations should not profit from property stolen from Americans. This bill is needed for years because for years, the Mexican government has engaged in a deliberate campaign against an American company, Vulcan Materials, headquartered in my district. In 2022, Mexican authorities used military force to shut down Vulcan's lawful operations.
Then in 2024, they took the dramatic step of declaring Vulcan's private property a protected natural area. The move was not designed to conserve land, but to justify taking it. But this is about more than one company. Mexico's actions sent a dangerous signal to every American business operating abroad that their investments, their assets, their rights could be stripped away at any moment by the corrupt Mexican government. When I and other members of the Alabama delegation in a bipartisan manner met with the ambassador from Mexico, he described his government's actions as a civil dispute.
I pointed out to the ambassador that in America, we don't send in our military to resolve civil disputes. The port at the center of the dispute is not just any asset. As it's been pointed out by other speakers, it's the only deepwater port on the Yucatan Peninsula built by American investments, critical to supply and construction materials for infrastructure across The United States. Mexico's actions undermine not only property rights but also our supply chain. The illegal action is more like an action by a cartel than it is a trustworthy government, and it raises serious questions about entering into any agreements with Mexico.
The Defending American Property Abroad Act ensures that government, foreign governments, cannot seize American owned infrastructure and then benefit from the infrastructure. It authorizes The United States to deny entry to vessels operating out of or that have visited ports unlawfully expropriated from American companies. Mister speaker, this is about protecting American businesses and fundamentally the rule of law. If we fail to act here, then we invite more of this behavior, not just from Mexico, but from any nation watching to see how The United States responds. I thank representative Pflueger for his work on this important issue, and I urge my colleagues to vote yes on h r seventy eighty four.
Thank you, mister speaker. I yield.
Mike Ezell
Mister speaker, I have no more speakers and I have prepared to close, but I continue to reserve.
Rick Larsen
Thank you, mister speaker. We also have no more speakers and are prepared to close. And given, what the representatives noted, I'll I'll close right now. Again, I'll just reiterate, the bill before us today does not resolve this dispute between the Mexican government and an American company. There are tools available and continue to be available to resolve that.
It provide it gives, the Coast Guard more work on top of all the work our US Coast Guard is already doing. I had an amendment to the rules committee. They rejected an amendment that would have required the president to consider the potential cost before exercising the authorities granted in this bill, and that, rules committee, amendment was rejected. Arbitration, treaties, trade agreements, these mechanisms exist to solve international disputes. These are appropriate venues for this dispute and not legislation.
For those reasons, I will be voting no. Now in conclusion, I do wanna note something that this these bills and the 13 to 14 bills that came before this this body earlier this week from the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, those were on suspension. This one was not. But it needs to be said that the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee works extremely well. We see ourselves as a island of partnership in a sea of partisanship in the US Congress.
And even though this bill may not fit that fit that bill, the committee works that way because of one person. And that one person is representative Sam Graves. And, this morning, it was announced that Sam, will not be running for reelection. And I think I want to take this brief moment as part of my time in closing to just note that we are gonna be losing a fierce advocate for infrastructure investment and for transportation safety with his announcement that he will not run again. Sam and I served together nearly twenty six years.
We came in together. In recent years, we've developed a partnership that overrode the part part partisanship in Congress. This body has dealt with the Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization, a Coast Guard reauthorization, a Water Resources Development Act, reauthorization. We've passed a FEMA Act that reforms FEMA. We have yet to get that to the floor, and we certainly wanna see, see that get to the floor.
A lot of other things. Importantly, we are working right now on a a bill to reauthorize surface transportation authorizations. Things roads, bridges, highways, transit, rail, and some other things. We're working on that right now, and that work continues to progress. All because of the work of representative Sam Graves.
So although the house is losing Sam, a home is regaining him back in Turkiye, Missouri at some point at the end of this year. His family is getting them back. I've always said that Sam likes three things in life, his grandkids, vintage aircraft, and Congress, and in that order. And so I wanna thank Sam Graves for his friendship and his partnership and helping us to continue to do the work of this committee to bring bills to the floor that we can debate, you know, in a manner that's respectful of the body that we all get to serve in. And with that, I yield the balance of my time.
Mike Ezell
In closing, passage of h r seven zero eight four gives the president authority to effectively address the illegal taking of a United States citizen owned port, harbor, or marine terminal throughout the Western Hemisphere. American companies are the source of more investments in the Western Hemisphere nations than investors from around the country. Infrastructure projects in America's especially port infrastructure project represents significant potential business opportunities for American companies. Protecting overseas US investments is an important policy objective. This bill creates an appropriate cost and consequence for stealing property from an American owned business.
The defending American property abroad act of 2026 is consistent with other authorities Congress has given the president to act against the illegal taking of American business and investments. Mister speaker, I'm a former sheriff from Mississippi. And where I come from, when you take something that doesn't belong to you, that's stealing and you've broken the law. If you break the law, there are consequences. This bill ensures there are consequences for foreign countries that steal from our companies.
Simply put, this legislation is common sense. Mister speaker, I urge support of this bill and I yield back the balance of my time.
Randy Weber
Gentleman yields back. All time for debate has expired. Person to house resolution eleven thirty one. The previous question is ordered on the bill as amended. The question is on Engroseman and third reading of the bill.
Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. The ayes have it. Third reading.
Speaker 13
Union calendar number 484, h r 7084, a bill to amend title 46 United States code with respect to the types of vessels that may enter or operate in navigable waters of The United States or transfer cargo in any port or place under the jurisdiction of The United States and for other purposes.
Randy Weber
The question is on passage of the bill. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed say no. The ayes have it. The bill is passed.
Speaker,
Randy Weber
This gentleman wants the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays are requested. Those favoring a vote by the ayes and nays will rise. A sufficient number having risen, the ayes and ayes order members will record their votes by electronic device. This is a fifteen minute vote.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.