MEMBER OF CONGRESS

Darrell Issa

Follow by RSS

Darrell Issa’s recent floor work centers on defense legislation, where he has offered amendments to the defense authorization bill letting cleared investors fund classified startups, arguing that small defense innovators cannot otherwise raise private capital. He builds his case in structured, reasons-first form—laying out the problem, then the safeguard in his amendment, such as the five-year sunset, annual reporting to Congress, and revocable clearances—and typically declines to engage with the opposition’s arguments, saying he will not address points that in his view don’t go to the substance of the bill. Outside legislation, he devotes time to hometown tributes, honoring a former San Diego County supervisor at length. His speaking style stays measured and factual, without personal attacks on opponents.Written by AI from their statements. Updated .

Average grade
B
79 / 100 over 3 statements
Signal 71 / 100
Relevance 92 / 100
Respect Not scored yet
Clarity 86 / 100
No habit stands out from the typical statement here. Averaged over the 3 of 3 statements graded so far.

Statements 3

House of Representatives ·

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027

“I want the House to pass my amendment. It stops the government from secretly giving classified information to big companies. It requires yearly reports to Congress, lasts for five years, and helps small private companies find investors while still following strict security rules.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Chairman, in closing, I will be brief. I am not going to address the items that were said by the opposition because they don’t go to the safeguards in this piece of legislation. Without this amendment, there is nothing to stop the administration from providing, without specific requirements to disclose, classifications to any and all individuals, particularly individuals that are, quite frankly, within companies either doing or wanting to do business with the Federal Government. It doesn’t stop the large companies from having unlimited access to programs that may not be widely understood. As a result, they get an advantage of bidding on something no one knows about. Instead, what it requires is annual reporting, including to this body, to Congress, to ensure that we can monitor this program. It sunsets. It is not for this administration, but for a 5-year period. Most importantly, it is extremely limited to private equity investing, by definition in private companies. No part of public companies are affected here, just the opposite. This is an opportunity for private companies to find investors who can only invest if they have a reasonable knowledge of what the product is asked to be and nothing more, and every one of them must still pass the same rigorous application and retention policy for whatever level of clearance is required. Mr. Chairman, I would hope that these words would help the other side understand that, in fact, Congress gains more control over many of the things being complained about by passing this amendment than by not. Mr. Chair, I urge support for my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

“I support this amendment. It creates a test program that lets some private investors get security clearances so they can fund small tech companies making secret military tools. This will help smaller companies build affordable gear like drones for our military.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. Chair, I rise in support of this amendment. We are in changing times. The ongoing battles, both in Iran and in Ukraine, have taught us an important lesson. That is that large, long- term vendors for production of innovative tools don’t work together. The lead time is too long. The requirement for us to innovate at the Department of War simply isn’t working. We need to have small, innovative companies to be able to come forward and be given small allotments in order to develop. However, those allotments are seldom sufficient to operate a company for 1, 2, or 3 years to develop and get a contract going. For that reason, like other startups of all sorts, particularly in the technology field in America, they would normally go to private funding, go to venture firms. But there is a problem. If what you are producing for the Department of War or any other part of our government is classified, you have to say: I have a new product. I can’t tell you about it. Trust me and invest. That simply doesn’t work. More importantly, the requirements from within the government often are not available to the investor. Therefore, it is difficult to get. My amendment deals with this serious problem in a predictable and controlled way. Our 5-year pilot program simply says that with the permission of the Department of War, individuals within qualified investment firms may receive or update their clearances so that they can be part of the investment decision. It does not preclude their being excluded for any reason, including-- and I particularly want to note this--companies which have a foreign investment profile would have to disclose and may very well be excluded. However, the American investment community with American funds is more than sufficient to find, seek out, and invest in innovative companies that can give us a low-cost antidrone product or a low-cost drone, or any other number of critically needed and affordable products. For that reason, we are asking that the Department of War under this pilot program be empowered to allow for these nonoriginal participants to have, on a limited basis, with controls completely in the hands of the Secretary of War and while he retains full authority to revoke participation for any security violation, foreign ownership, control, influence, or any other concern. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

House of Representatives ·

Honoring Bill Horn

“I am honoring the life of Bill Horn. He served in the Vietnam War, worked as a longtime San Diego County supervisor, and spent his retirement helping people around the world.”
  • Speech in the House

    Signal 33 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
Official Congressional Record

I thank the Speaker for noting that disparaging the President is not appropriate for this House. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and the contribution of Bill Horn, a man who gave first his service to the country in Vietnam and then went on to be one of the longest serving county supervisors in San Diego County. Bill Horn wanted more for his family, and he worked hard to do it. While being a county supervisor full time, he also ran successful agriculture. Mr. Speaker, in his retirement, he did more philanthropic work around the world at his own expense than people will ever know. The unsung hero of Vietnam, our county supervisor, a man of simple means and no ambition, did so much for those who needed him. He will be honored and missed.