“I want the House to pass this budget resolution. It protects our elections by requiring voter ID. It gives our military the tools they need to keep us safe. It also supports American farmers to protect our food supply.”

“Mr. Chair, I thank the chairman for yielding and all of his work on this, what I call, commonsense resolution, a simple resolution, really, addressing three priorities that the American people support, three priorities that are core functions of government and that are very, very important. Number one is election security, ensuring that our elections are conducted fairly, securely, and that only American citizens are voting. Voter ID, the American people support that. Mr. Chair, 80 to 90 percent of the American people support the idea of showing voter ID when you show up to vote. Number two, this is instruction to the committees. It begins the process of providing our servicemembers with the resources they need to meet growing threats around the world and keeping the American people safe. These individuals who are serving us are putting their lives in harm’s way every day. The least we can do is ensure they have the tools and equipment they need to do their jobs and to keep us safe. Finally, the third point in this resolution is ensuring our food supply is secure. Our American farmers work very, very hard every single day to feed America--really, feed the world. They have had some tough times, and this provides the help they need at this time to ensure that they can continue to feed America. Unfortunately, every Democrat on the House Budget Committee voted against these commonsense provisions in this resolution. The American people sent us here to deliver. They sent us here to deliver on these priorities. It is a great resolution. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the SAVE America Act as it moves through the House.”

“I want people to show a photo ID to vote. Most Americans support this. It will make people trust our election results.”

“Mr. Chair, we gave the Democrats, our friends on the other side of the aisle, opportunity after opportunity multiple times to support what 83 percent of the American people support, which is photo identification to vote in elections in this country. You need an ID to check in at a hotel and to fly on an airplane--in Mamdani’s New York, you need it to shovel snow--but it is not important enough for the cornerstone of this democratic Republic. The American people aren’t fooled. We are not fooled. We are going to do this so that we can continue with this great country of ours and with the confidence of the American people in the outcome of the elections. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Speech on a bill

  Relevance 0 of 100

  None of this speech addressed the bill under debate and what it would change.

  See full analysis →

“When Democrats were in charge, they raised taxes, added rules on businesses, and spent billions on green energy and stimulus checks. Our policies cut taxes for families, seniors, and workers, and wages are up.”

“Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Just to be clear, when the Democrats had total control, they heaped taxes and regulations on our job creators. They attacked, with a whole- of-government force, against domestic energy producers. They waived work requirements for able-bodied adults. They allowed illegals onto our social safety net. They did give a tax break to green energy corporations. They gave tax subsidies to the tune of $800 billion, along with hundreds of billions of dollars in wasted stimulus checks. Juxtapose that with 127 million Americans getting a doubled standard deduction, 40 million families getting an enhanced child tax credit, 35 million seniors getting the double deduction for seniors, an average of $7,500. Mr. Chair, 7.5 million filers got the no tax on tips, and 29 million filers got overtime breaks, on average over $3,000. By the way, wages are up. That is what is happening because our policies are delivering for the American people and working families. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Moore), my friend and another member of the Budget Committee from the Tar Heel State.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Speech on a bill

  Relevance 0 of 100

  None of this speech addressed the bill under debate and what it would change.

  See full analysis →

“I support this budget resolution. It keeps tax cuts for working families and funds our military. It also requires people to show an ID and prove they are citizens before they can vote.”

“Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong support of the House budget resolution. This resolution in this reconciliation package builds on the working families tax cuts that were passed into law last year that have lowered taxes for more Americans than probably any tax bill in decades. I will talk about one thing, though, that seems to get glossed over by my friends on the other side, and that is the SAVE America Act that is in here. The overwhelming majority of Americans support voter ID when it comes to voting. My home State in North Carolina, a little over a decade ago, adopted it, and we have actually seen even greater voter participation since doing so. I raise the question to some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle: Have they not seen the news that just showed where 6,600 votes were cast in New Jersey by noncitizens? Voter fraud is happening. That has been discovered. That is documented. The SAVE America Act--which is a part of this, voter ID-- makes it very clear that for someone to vote, they need to be a citizen as required by the Constitution. They also must present a form of ID. This is easy, simple stuff. That is in this resolution, as well. Those who vote against this resolution also vote against this commonsense reform where we want it easy to vote but hard to cheat. I will say, Mr. Chair, that I am very proud of what the Budget Committee has done in building a responsible budget that funds critical needs right now with our military, with threats that we have against us from around the world, and, at the same time, responsibly spends money and maintains these tax cuts that we passed. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.”

“Republicans are working together for the American people because of leaders like Steve Scalise. I am giving him time to speak.”

“Mr. Chair, I mentioned earlier that the Republican Party is united and unrelenting in delivering for the American people. That doesn’t happen without a fearless leader and the legend from Louisiana, my dear friend, Mr. Steve Scalise. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise).”

“I want the House to pass this budget resolution. It supports our military and farmers, cuts taxes for working people, and protects our elections by requiring voters to show a photo ID.”

“Mr. Chairman, I thank my dear colleague from Texas for yielding. I am truly going to miss him, but he has got a lot of great work left to do as the chairman of the Committee on the Budget, not the least of which is this important resolution, which is being brought forward, Mr. Chairman, a resolution that is critical to ensuring the hallmark of democracy, and that is the right to vote: one person, one vote. If we look at all of the things that we have been working with President Trump to do to make life more affordable for working families, over and over again, we see nothing but obstruction from Democrats. It is sad to say. It is sad to see. The American people are watching a party that has become a rudderless ship running off the left edge, socialists taking over. Watching what is going on to that other party, look at some of the things we have been able to do, even with their obstruction: working to produce more energy in America so we can lower costs for American families, while every Democrat voted no, and working to lower tax rates for working families. Yes, no tax on overtime is a benefit that has helped over 30 million Americans. These aren’t the millionaires and the billionaires that Democrats go fight for every day. These are hardworking families making under $100,000 a year, many of them shift workers and law enforcement officers. Maybe they voted against that bill because they want to defund the police, not help police officers and firefighters have a little bit more money in their pockets. With no tax on overtime, no tax on tips, somebody making $32,000 a year on average has thousands more in their pocket now because of the work Republicans did. How did Republicans pay for it, Mr. Chairman? It was paid for by putting antifraud measures in that bill--yes, going after theft of American taxpayer dollars and not just small-time folks. There are foreign countries operating with criminal organizations in States like Minnesota. We saw it. We documented it. It couldn’t be stopped because we needed the measures. We tried to work with Democrats on it, but for whatever reason, every step of the way they blocked it. They blocked it until we put it in the reconciliation bill. Then when the tools were in place, President Trump was able to go out and recoup not millions but billions and tens of billions of dollars that we were able to take out of the hands of people stealing your money, and we put it in the pockets of hardworking families. Overtime workers, waiters, waitresses, senior citizens who now have a tax credit, all of that we paid for with money that was being stolen. Every step of the way, Democrats opposed it. They would rather the theft of your tax dollars go to fraudsters than hardworking families have their money back. Their obstruction is nothing new, Mr. Chairman. Then we get to today, where we say: Shouldn’t we make sure our men and women in uniform have the tools they need to do their job safely? Shouldn’t we make sure that our farmers get the relief they need so we can keep working to lower food costs? Oh, by the way, can’t we ensure the integrity of the American vote? These are basic things that most Americans understand. Democrats in Washington don’t. They go back home and give Fourth of July speeches. Then they get on an airplane, and a transformation happens. They get up here, and they start voting against the wishes of the American people over and over again. Why? Not just to defend fraudsters. If we know that requiring a picture ID, just something so basic that every American understands--which, by the way, those same Democrats have to show that picture ID to get on the airplane to come up here and vote for socialist policies. But they don’t want that to be the case when you vote. They would say: Don’t worry. There is no fraud. There is no fraud. Well, why is it just that today’s New York Post uncovered yet again what we have known all along? In New Jersey, they just admitted 6,600 noncitizens are on their rolls, many of them voting, voting in elections, illegals on their rolls voting. They document in this article many elections that were decided by just a small number of votes. In fact, the margin of the theft, the stolen votes are that margin. This can be stopped just by requiring a picture ID. Then some would say, well, then, why would anybody be against that? They will hide behind all of these other ruses, but they will vote ``no.’’ We have got a bill later today to say: Well, let’s ban Members of Congress from trading stocks, and people are going to watch the board on an issue that every American understands. Almost every Democrat is going to vote ``no.’’ People will say why is that? Because it requires a photo ID. What is so harmful about that? A person can’t go get an unlimited bowl of pasta at Olive Garden without showing a photo ID. Can we at least have the Olive Garden standard when we protect democracy and the franchise that we have to keep this great democracy? That is just requiring that you prove you are who you say you are. This, Mr. Chairman, is such a fundamental principle. It is not hard to explain to the American people, but it is actively opposed by Democrats in Congress. It just begs the question: Why? Who are they protecting? Who are they protecting with the ``no’’ vote, Mr. Chairman? If they know illegals are voting in many of these States where they don’t require photo ID, then why would they vote against the requirement? Why? It is a great question. Every American, Mr. Chairman, is going to be able to watch this vote and know where their Member of Congress is. It is critically important for accountability that we all stand up and be counted. I am strongly for this. I think it is critical we protect the sanctity of every American’s right to vote. If somebody else is stealing your vote because they are voting illegally-- thousands in New Jersey--then it takes away your right to vote, Mr. Chairman. We ought to be protecting everybody’s right to vote, especially those people who are legally allowed to vote, not people who shouldn’t be allowed by law to vote. Let’s pass this important resolution and get it over to the Senate so they can do their job and get this to the President’s desk.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Speech on a bill

  Relevance 3 of 100

  Only 3% of this speech directly addressed the bill under debate.

  See full analysis →
• Little substance
  ?

  Speech on a bill

  Signal 44 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 →

“Republicans are not trying to hurt vulnerable people. We are trying to cut waste and fraud in government programs, and nonpartisan budget numbers prove it.”

“Mr. Chairman, I respect my friend from the Commonwealth of Kentucky, but this false narrative is perpetuated every time Republicans actually go after the waste in this town and the fraud that is being perpetrated on the taxpayers and the vulnerable who need these programs. They start saying that we are kicking the vulnerable off and we are throwing them into the streets. All I ask you to do is look to the nonpartisan CBO, once again, and I include this letter in the Record, Mr. Chairman. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Subchapter A. Reducing Fraud and Improving Enrollment Processes: Sec. 71102--Moratorium on Implementation of Rule Relating 0 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 Sec. 71106--Payment Reduction Related to Certain Erroneous O O O 0 * 0.1 0.2 * * 0.1 Sec. 71107--Eligibility Redeterminations.................. O O O.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 Sec. 71109--Alien Medicaid Eligibility.................... * 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Sec. 71110--Expansion FMAP for Emergency Medicaid......... 0 * * * * * * * * * Subchapter B. Preventing Wasteful Spending: Sec. 71112--Reducing State Medicaid Costs................. 0 0 * 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Subchapter C. Stopping Abusive Finance Practices: Sec. 71114--Sunsetting Increased FMAP Incentive........... 0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Sec. 71115--Provider Taxes................................ 0 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 Sec. 71117--Requirements Regarding Waiver of Uniform Tax * 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Sec. 71118--Requiring Budget Neutrality for Medicaid 0 * * * * * * * * * Subchapter D. Increasing Personal Accountability: Sec. 71119--Requirement for States to Establish Medicaid O O 2.2 3.0 4.7 5.1 5.2 5.2 5.3 5.3 Subchapter A. Strengthening Eligibility Requirements: Sec. 71201--Limiting Medicare Coverage of Certain 0 0 * * * * * * 0.1 0.1 Subchapter A. Improving Eligibility Criteria: Sec. 71301--Permitting Premium Tax Credit Only for Certain O 0 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 Sec. 71302--Disallowing Premium Tax Credit During Periods 0 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Subchapter B. Preventing Waste, Fraud, and Abuse: Sec. 71303--Requiring Verification of Eligibility for O O O 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 Sec. 71304--Disallowing Premium Tax Credit in Case of 0 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 Sec. 71305--Eliminating Limitation on Recapture of Advance O * * 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Interactions, All Policies................................ * * -0.2 -0.4 -0.5 -0.6 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 Memorandum: Source of the Change Share With Access to Federally Subsidized: Health Insurance (Percent)a............................... n.a. 53 38 38 33 33 35 36 36 37 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Source: Congressional Budget Office. These estimates are subject to considerable uncertainty. CHIP = Children’s Health Insurance Program; FMAP = federal medical assistance percentage; n.a.; not applicable; * = fewer than 50,000 people. CBO’s cost estimate for P.L. 119-21 is available online. See Congressional Budget Office, estimated budgetary effects of Public Law 119-21, to provide for reconciliation pursuant to title II of H. Con. Res. 14, relative to CBO’s January 2025 baseline (July 21, 2025), www.cbo.gov/publication/61570. a. Subsidized health insurance consists of the premium tax credit available to some enrollees for insurance purchased through the marketplaces established by the Affordable Care Act, as well as Medicaid and employment-based coverage. This table presents supplemental data for Congressional Budget Office, letter to the Honorable Brendan F. Boyle, the Honorable Hakeem Jeffries, the Honorable Jeffrey A. Merkley, and the Honorable Charles E. Schumer concerning the distributional effects of Public Law 119-21 (August 11, 2025), www.cbo.gov/publication/61367.”

“The only people who lost Medicaid coverage were immigrants here illegally, people who did not qualify, and people who could work but chose not to. We stand by removing them, and the American people agree with us.”

“Mr. Chairman, the only people who aren’t on the Medicaid rolls today who were on them before were illegals in this country that Joe Biden and Democrats allowed to siphon money away from Americans, people who were ineligible, or people who were able to work but who refused to work for the generous support of hardworking taxpayers. We stand on that proudly. We stand by it, and I believe the American people support us at every step of the way. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Stutzman), my friend from the Hoosier State and another proud member of the Budget Committee.”

“I want the House to pass this budget. It helps make our elections more secure by requiring voters to show ID and proof of citizenship. It also gives our military the money it needs to protect us.”

“Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman of the Budget Committee for this strong resolution. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the House budget resolution. This framework is an important step of protecting our elections as well as supporting our troops. As Members of Congress, we have a responsibility to the American people to safeguard the electoral process. Yet, the Senate has been unable to do so. Over 80 percent of Americans agree that you must show proof of citizenship and ID to vote, and this budget framework moves us closer to enacting these reforms. In addition to protecting our elections at home, U.S. servicemembers are working day and night to be sure that Americans are safe from a nuclear bomb in Iran and to advance peace in the Middle East. Our military is the most lethal fighting force known to man, and they are depending on us to help them finish the job. We must be courageous to support these men and women by supplying the resources they need. We owe Americans secure elections along with a strong national defense to preserve our great Nation. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.”

“I support this budget resolution, even though this is not how the process should work. We must use it to bypass Senate Democrats, buy more weapons for our military, and secure our elections.”

“Mr. Chairman, I think we can all agree that this is not what a budget resolution should be used for, but, unfortunately, necessity commands it. Reconciliation gives us a powerful tool to bring mandatory spending in line with revenues. Unfortunately, the exigencies that we face have left us with no choice but to use this process to assure that we can replenish our arsenals and strengthen the integrity of our elections. The minority Democrats have vowed to obstruct these necessities in the Senate at a time when we are at war with Iran and at a time when public confidence in our election process is at an all-time low. Reconciliation, which this solution sets in motion, is the only path that we can take to achieve these vital measures. I regret the circumstances that force us to employ reconciliation for this purpose, and I pray for the day when Congress fulfills its legal duty to enact a real budget resolution that sets our country back on the road to fiscal health.”

“I want Congress to pass this budget bill. It gives needed money to our military, supports the farmers who grow our food, and helps make sure our elections are fair.”

“Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to make this quick because I want to say something about my ranking member. In case I don’t have time, let me say it now: what a gentleman, what a statesman. This place would work a lot better if you had the tone, the commitment to civility and to just being constructive around here. When you can agree--we don’t agree on this. He is impassioned. I am impassioned. What a good man. The people of Pennsylvania must be very proud of Brendan Boyle. I am. We need to support our troops. This is emergency funding. We need to support our producers who give us food security. That is a national security issue. We do it every year. We need to give the American people the confidence that this and every election going forward is fair and accurate. We need that for this great Republic to succeed and to thrive in the future. Mr. Chair, I urge all of my fellow Members of Congress to support this important piece of legislation. I yield back the balance of my time.”

• Little substance
  ?

  Speech on a bill

  Signal 44 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 →