TranslatePolitics.com

Recent debates

8 latest topics

09-03 Protect Economic and Academic Freedom Act of 2026 13 statements 09-03 Moment of Silence in Honor of the 25th Anniversary of September 11 2 statements 09-03 Honoring Former U.S. Representative Charles Hatcher of Georgia 2 statements 09-03 Recognizing Firefighters from California's Third Congressional District 17 statements 09-02 Saluting White Plains Beautification Foundation 2 statements 09-02 Celebrating Rural Lawyer Julie Bear 4 statements 09-02 Operation Midway Blitz Anniversary 2 statements 09-02 Catherine Watts Celebrates 100th Birthday 4 statements

House of Representatives

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027

2026-07-21 Issue 119 Showing 21–29 of 29

Official Congressional Record ↗

Nancy Mace

Republican 7:50 p.m.

“I don't like the other side. I say they are bad. A famous tennis player said confirming her gender was easy. I think trans girls should not be on teams with other girls. I think trans girls should not be in locker rooms with other girls. I worry about what could happen with them there. I think they are sick men. I think they make fun of women. I don't like it.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. Chair, I would encourage my colleagues on the left side of the aisle to read Martina Navratilova's X account today, talking about how confirming she was a woman was not invasive. It was a simple cheek swab. This is the fear politics of the left, and that says a lot about how far they have gone. To say that trans kids just want to be on a team with our little girls, if there is a tranny on a team with our daughters, they need to be kicked right off. If they are in a locker room with our girls, they need to be kicked right out. We have seen some really crazy stories of grown men with beards shaving at the sink with little girls in towels in the corner of the locker room scared to death and vulnerable to sexual predators. We all know the tranny thing really is about sexual gratification. Sexual attraction to being dressed as a woman has nothing to do with them thinking that they are a woman. In fact, they are mocking being a woman. They are mocking our femininity, and they are mocking the rights that we fought for for hundreds and hundreds of years. It has not been long since women actually got the right to vote. There are still ceilings to be broken in this country. It is not going to be done by some mentally ill man in a skirt. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Sara Jacobs

Democrat 7:50 p.m.

“You say we fear-monger. I say you target girls. A girl was investigated to see if she was trans. She was not trans. Other girls were investigated because they did not look feminine. None were trans. You spread rumors about a basketball player. You harassed her. You bullied her. You threatened her. In Florida, you investigated a trans student. Investigators asked kids to describe the trans student undressing. I think this is disturbing. I think trans girls are more likely to be victims of violent crime, not the perpetrator. I think the person behind this amendment is wrong. She wants to stop colleagues using the restroom. She talks about the right to vote. I think her side wants to take away a woman's right to vote. I think this is absurd.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. Chair, my colleague says that we are just fear- mongering about what these bans would actually mean, but we have actually already seen how trans sports bans have been used to target all girls. A high school athletic association secretly investigated a female athlete without telling her or her parents to see if she was trans. She was not. The same association had investigated other complaints, receiving them because ``an athlete doesn't look feminine enough,'' and none of those allegations that the students were trans were verified to be true. In another incident, a Utah State school board member falsely suggested in 2024 that a high school basketball athlete was trans, subjecting her to relentless harassment and bullying, including threats of violence. In Florida, a school investigated a trans student's participation in girls' sports, and investigators repeatedly asked other individuals, all children, to describe how the student appeared in various stages of undress. If this does not disturb you about how our young girls will be treated in sports, then you are clearly not paying any attention. Let's be clear: Trans girls and trans women are much more likely--four times more likely than Cis people to be the victims of violent crime, not the perpetrator. Let's also be clear about something. The author of this amendment has led her own investigations that have failed, trying to prevent our colleagues from being able to use the restroom. She is talking about the right to vote. Her side of the aisle is literally pushing to take away a woman's right to vote because of the SAVE Act, and Secretary Hegseth doesn't think women should have the right to vote or serve in the military. This is absurd. I yield back the balance of my time.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Addison P. McDowell

Republican 8:00 p.m.

“I want taxpayers to pay for military parents' school choice. Some military families can't use school choice. I want a pilot program so active duty families can use it too. I think parents who serve our country should decide where their kids go to school.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. Chair, today I rise to offer an amendment to H.R. 8800. My amendment would authorize the Secretary of War to establish a school choice pilot program for members of the Armed Forces. Over the past 5 years the number of States that have chosen to prioritize education freedom for parents has skyrocketed. On this issue, Americans have spoken. Parents must have a bigger say in their children's education. Despite overwhelming support, many military families are barred from participating in school choice initiatives because they are either stationed in States without school choice or they are located in one State but domiciled in another. This amendment would authorize the War Secretary to establish a school choice pilot program for full-time Active-Duty military members. Mr. Chair, there is no reason why parents who are dedicating their lives in service to our country should not have the same rights as other parents to decide where their kids go to school. This honors a provision in the Department's budget request. Mr. Chair, I urge all my colleagues to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Joe Courtney

Democrat 8:00 p.m.

“I don't want taxpayers to pay for military parents' school choice. The government already pays some money for schools that military kids use. Starting this program will make the Pentagon spend more. We need that money for other things. I think military families should use the schools they have. I don't want them to have vouchers. I want more money for other education programs. I will fight for more money for those programs. I think this amendment will make it harder to get that money.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. As a member of the House Armed Services Committee and the Education Committee, I represent a military district with about 7,000 sailors and officers. Many of those children use local schools which the Federal Government partially reimburses through the Impact Aid Program. The notion that we are going to start a new program--and really this program is about who pays. It is about funding vouchers. It is not really whether or not military families have a choice in terms of whether they themselves want to go to a parochial school or to a private school. That is not the point. The point that we are talking about here is, again, that this is going to put a stress on the Pentagon's budget, who already, as I said, underfunds Impact Aid and DoDEA schools. If you look at the President's budget that came over, Mr. Chair, there was actually a cut to Impact Aid in terms of what was sent over. We are going to be in a fight over at the Appropriations Committee to restore funding. Again, as someone who represents a district with public schools that are proudly in the business of offering education for K-12 students, this, again, is just going to be another pressure, external pressure, in terms of reducing what, in fact, these communities really deserve, which is to have the military fully compensate an item that families really depend on in terms of making sure whether they are deployed or whether when they are on base they are getting education and that the local community is not taking an unfair hit in terms of paying for those services. Again, this amendment would generate a new cost to the Pentagon's budget in terms of DoDEA funding and Impact Aid funding who, again, today are not actually up to the levels that fully paid for those services. For that purpose, I oppose the amendment. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Addison P. McDowell

Republican 8:00 p.m.

“I want military parents to have vouchers. Parents should decide where their kids go to school. This bill starts a program to let them choose. I want my colleagues to support this bill. Military parents should have the same rights as other parents.”

Joe Courtney

Democrat 8:00 p.m.

“I don't like vouchers. Vouchers cost money. That's an issue. The other side didn't address it.”

Jill N. Tokuda

Democrat 8:00 p.m.

“I oppose this voucher program. I want taxpayers to spend more on public schools near military bases. We could spend on programs for disabled kids. Private schools can reject kids. I don't like that. Military families should get more money for public schools. That would be better.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to this amendment. Mr. Chair, we all want the same thing for our military families. While our servicemembers carry out the mission to protect and defend our Nation, we have a duty to care for the loved ones whom they leave behind. For families with school-aged children, that means investing in safe, stable, high-quality schools where every child can learn, grow, and thrive. This amendment does the opposite. It creates a new, unfunded voucher program that diverts taxpayer dollars to private, including religious, schools instead of strengthening the public schools that educate most of our military-connected children. This year, taxpayers are investing $3.6 billion in DoDEA schools, but the majority of military-connected students attend local public schools, which receive just $70 million in Impact Aid, even though they lose local property tax revenue because of nearby military installations. These schools welcome military children every time new orders arrive, helping them navigate new classrooms, new communities, and the challenges of constant moves and deployments. If Congress is prepared to invest more in military children's education, and I fully support that, we should be investing where most of them are already learning: our public schools. This amendment also falls short for families raising children with disabilities. Public schools are legally required to identify students with disabilities and provide the services and accommodations they need. Private schools are not. They may lack specialized staff or refuse to admit a child altogether. Unlike public schools, private schools are not required to follow the same Federal civil rights protections. Taxpayer dollars could fund schools that discriminate in admissions based on disability, religion, sex, sexual orientation, and other characteristics. A voucher is not a real choice if a school can simply turn a child away. Our military families deserve better. Let's strengthen the schools they rely on, fully support DoDEA and public schools through Impact Aid and ensure every military child has access to a well-funded, accountable education.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Joe Courtney

Democrat 8:00 p.m.

“I don't want this voucher program to pass. I want the government to spend more money on public schools near military bases. DoDEA and Impact Aid already give some money. But I want more. The government should give them more money first. Then maybe we can talk about vouchers. I want you all to vote no.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. Chair, I think Congresswoman Tokuda did a very nice job in terms of laying out the reality of what is actually going on in communities where military installations and military bases exist. Those are tax exempt properties where the communities are, again, more than glad to educate the children of military servicemembers. They have to find a way to finance the cost of that education. Unfortunately, the existing programs in place today, DoDEA and Impact Aid, fall short in terms of making sure that those communities are fairly reimbursed. Mr. Chair, we are not in a place where there should even be a discussion about starting new funding programs for education paid for by the taxpayer until we keep the promise to those communities that we are going to reimburse the cost of educating military schoolchildren. For that reason, Mr. Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote from all our colleagues, and I yield back the balance of my time.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Mike Rogers

Republican 8:10 p.m.

“I want this defense bill to pass. It will spend money on the military.”

What they said. What they meant.

Recent debates