National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2027

The House debated the fiscal year 2027 appropriations bill funding the State Department, foreign aid, and related national security programs. Republicans backing the bill said it cuts wasteful spending, counters China, supports allies like Israel, Taiwan, and Jordan, and blocks funds for things like UN agencies they viewed as hostile; several Republican amendments sought to end Fulbright funding, require foreign countries to reimburse military training costs, cut funding to the United Nations, and condition or end aid to Nigeria. Democrats opposed the bill, arguing its roughly 20 percent cuts to diplomacy and foreign aid, including global health programs, weaken American leadership and security; one Democrat proposed removing Israel military funding so it could be voted on separately, while Democrats also opposed an amendment to cut Israel-related defense funding. Democrats also objected that leadership had attached other legislation to the bill. Much of the debate was taken up by member amendments on specific aid programs and conditions.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text (opens in a new tab)

62 statements

Mario Diaz-Balart, FL

Republican
“I oppose this amendment. This bill supports America's allies and hurts our enemies. Israel is our strongest ally, and we must keep our promises to them.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, as I have said before with this bill, and I have said it many times: If you are an ally and a friend of the United States, this bill supports you. If you are an adversary, you are not going to like this bill. We have no stronger ally than the State of Israel. This is our commitment under the MOU, which is why I respectfully, but very strongly--very strongly--oppose this amendment. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Thomas Massie, KY

Republican
“I want the House to pass my amendment to stop sending money to Israel. Israel has a strong economy and does not need our help. Tens of thousands of people have been hurt or killed in Gaza, and American taxpayers should not pay for Israel's military actions. I oppose all foreign aid, including aid to Egypt and Jordan.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. Madam Chair, Israel has the strongest economy in the Middle East. Their debt per GDP is in much better shape than ours. They don’t need our money. In fact, they have claimed recently they want to get off of the welfare. I am concerned that the other funding mechanisms they are talking about, or comingling, our technology and supply chains, we will have even less transparency than what is going on here today, so I am opposed to that as well. I am opposed to all foreign aid. I didn’t pick on Israel here. I offered an amendment to defund Egypt and also to defunding aid to Jordan, which we will talk about in a little bit. I am particularly concerned this year about the foreign aid to Israel. There have been 70,000 casualties in Gaza, and I don’t think we should be a part of that. American taxpayers should not be conscripted into funding the military adventures of Israel. Madam Chair, I urge adoption of my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Brad Sherman, CA

Democrat
“Vote no on this amendment. It breaks our agreement to give Israel defense funding. That money buys systems to shoot down missiles aimed at Israeli homes and civilians. Republicans are only pushing this amendment to divide Democrats and use it in political ads.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, President Obama signed a 10-year memorandum of understanding. We are now in the ninth year of that memorandum. Mr. Massie would have us repudiate that signature. That is as bad an idea as Donald Trump’s repudiation of the JCPOA, the deal with Iran that limited its nuclear program. We are told that this is about offensive weapons. This $3.3 billion provides the AMRAAM system that defends Israeli apartment buildings and houses from incoming missiles that have as one purpose: to kill as many Israeli civilians as possible. How are we going to influence the people of Israel and the government of Israel? They need our influence. They need to change their policies. How are we going to influence them? As the missiles are coming in for the sole purpose of killing as many civilians as possible, we say we will not help shoot them down. We will not fund the AMRAAM system that is provided for in a memorandum of understanding signed by President Obama. This amendment is a political stunt. Republican leadership has brought it to the floor--not for the purpose of having it become law, but for the purpose of driving a wedge through the middle of the Democratic Party, for the purpose of facilitating Republican advertisements that will put our party on the side of those who are screaming death to America and death to Israel, and to put our party on the side of those who say that Israel has no right to exist. If you care about not only our Middle East policy but you care about the Democratic Party’s position, with the American people, then you must vote ``no’’ on this amendment. Now that does not mean that there will not be future reductions in our aid to Israel. That does not mean that we will not try to change Israeli policy, but this amendment goes as far as it possibly can to put us on the side not of those who would shoot down the missiles that are aimed at civilian neighborhoods in Israel but on those who are cheering those missiles. Then we are told that the amount of money involved is the focus. It says $3.3 billion, but that is about an 80th of the aid that we have provided Ukraine and that we should have provided Ukraine. This is not an attempt to divert a large portion of our money from Israel. This is an attack on the Israeli people.

Lois Frankel, FL

Democrat
“We need to talk carefully about how we spend foreign aid money, not rush it in a short debate. Innocent people in Gaza are suffering, and we must send help. But Israel has faced thousands of attacks from groups backed by Iran, including Hamas. We need to work together toward a solution where both Israelis and Palestinians can live peacefully in their own states.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, there is no question that going forward there needs to be a thoughtful conversation how we spend our foreign aid money. I know we are all committed to that. My heart breaks for the suffering of innocent people in Gaza. We must find a way to infuse humanitarian support, how to find a peaceful coexistence between Israelis and Palestinians, but let me tell you how we got here. Since 1979, Iran has repeatedly called for Israel’s elimination while arming terrorist proxies. In the past 3 years, those proxies have launched more than 30,000 rockets, missiles, drones, and mortars into Israel while Hamas hid in their billion dollars’ worth of building of tunnels, 450 miles of tunnels, beneath civilian areas to wage war, not peace. This is not a way to handle foreign policy. I join all rational people who say let’s have a deliberate conversation how to move forward, but not with a 10-minute debate on the floor of the House. Let’s have our efforts aimed together to a two-state solution where Palestinians and Israelis can live peacefully and prosperously together. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Thomas Massie, KY

Republican
“I want to stop sending U.S. tax dollars to Jordan. The government spends too much money, which makes everyday life more expensive for Americans. We now send Jordan $2.1 billion, and they are a monarchy that should not get our money.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, I offer this amendment sincerely for the American people because the price of housing, the price of fuel, the price of everything is going up because our government, frankly, is spending too much money. We are borrowing money. We are printing money, and why are we doing this? Are we doing this to support our own infrastructure or our own veterans? No. A lot of this money goes overseas, and one of the recipients is the country of Jordan. I think we should end foreign aid to Jordan. As our debt approaches $40 trillion, it is more and more urgent. I have noticed that the money that we sent to Jordan has tripled since 2008. It started out at about $600 million, and now it is $2.1 billion. This is too much. We shouldn’t be doing it. Jordan is a monarchy. They do not deserve the support of our democratic Republic of this country. I think we should end the support to their country from our taxpayers. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mario Diaz-Balart, FL

Republican
“Vote against this amendment. Jordan helps fight terrorists, takes in refugees, and keeps Americans safe. We must give Jordan the resources it needs.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, it is a dangerous world, and the Middle East is a very dangerous neighborhood, but Jordan is one of our most important allies in the Middle East. It is a bulwark against extremism and terrorism. Jordan has been on the front line of the fight against ISIS. It is an essential partner in stopping Iran’s terrorist proxies like Hezbollah and Hamas. For decades, Jordan has generously hosted refugees from numerous conflicts across the Middle East, but this is the key point: The United States, the American people, are safer because of Jordan. For that reason, it is well worthwhile to make sure that Jordan has the resources it needs to keep contributing to our collective security. Madam Chair, I urge defeat of the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Thomas Massie, KY

Republican
“I want the House to pass my amendment to stop sending money to Jordan. The king of Jordan spends millions on luxury homes while his people live in poverty. We are in debt, and we should spend that money on our own veterans instead.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, this is a very simple amendment. I will just say it again. The monarchy of Jordan doesn’t deserve the taxpayers’ money from the United States. In 2021, King Abdullah II secretly purchased over $106 million in luxury properties in Malibu, London, and D.C. through 36 offshore shell companies while 16 percent of the Jordanian population lives in poverty. It has been said that foreign aid can be described as taking money from poor people in the United States and giving it to rich people in other countries, and that is what is happening in this instance. How much of this money is going to go toward more luxury properties for the King of Jordan? I would like to know that. There needs to be more transparency in this money and, frankly, it needs to end completely. We don’t have the money. We are in debt. It is contributing to the high cost of living here in the United States. We would be better off spending this money taking care of our own veterans. Madam Chair, I urge adoption of my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Lois Frankel, FL

Democrat
“I oppose this amendment. Jordan is an important partner for American security and helps fight ISIS. They also take care of millions of refugees from Syria and Palestine. They need our support, so we should vote against this amendment.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment. Jordan has remained a steadfast ally of the United States, despite increased complexities in the world and in the region. Surrounded by Iraq, Syria, and Egypt, Jordan has been an oasis of stability in the region that has commanded U.S. foreign policy attention for decades. Jordan is a vital security partner, including regional leadership in the United States’ mission against ISIS. They have been generously welcoming neighbors, hosting over 600,000. I will repeat that again: 600,000 Syrian refugees and 2 million Palestinians. I know I have, and I am sure many of my colleagues have personally visited classrooms in Jordan where we have seen Syrian children educated instead of just being left on the streets. In recent years, encouraged by the United States, Jordan has taken dramatic steps to increase government efficiency, professionalize human resources, improve access to water, and digitize government services. A strong partnership with Jordan directly contributes to a stronger, safer, and more prosperous United States, but they can’t do it alone. They need our support, and I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.

Mario Diaz-Balart, FL

Republican
“I want the House to vote against this amendment. This bill cuts spending, but it still supports our allies, like Jordan, who help keep America safe and fight terrorism. It does not help our enemies.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, to conclude, as I said just a few minutes ago, and I said it at the opening of the debate on this bill: If you are a friend or an ally of the United States, this bill supports you. If you are an adversary or you are cozying up to our adversaries, you are not going to like this bill. All of that we do, by the way, while significantly cutting spending. The reason we have alliances and partnerships has to be and is to support our own security. Our partnership with Jordan is indispensable in opposing terrorism in the Middle East. Supporting Jordan helps the national security interest of the United States, which is why I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Chip Roy, TX

Republican
“I want to stop all money in this bill from going to the United Nations. We are deep in debt and should not send tax dollars to an organization that works against American interests and attacks Israel.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman from Florida for his strong work on making reforms to this appropriations package. He did it in the previous Congress last year. He is doing it again this year. There have been a number of significant reforms that he deserves credit for, and I wanted that to be clear when I am offering amendments to change the text. I would note there are still things in the appropriations process that I am not fond of using taxpayer money for, and the United Nations is one of those things. The amendment that I am offering here would prohibit any funds in the bill from being made available to the United Nations at all. The bill continues to fund millions of dollars for the United Nations, despite longstanding concerns over anti-Israel bias, corruption, peacekeeper misconduct, institutional failure, and ways in which the United Nations operates on a regular basis in direct contradiction to the interests of the United States. That is undeniably true for observers of the United Nations, particularly over the last couple of decades and in recent years. When you are a nation that is $40 trillion in debt, when you are a nation that is trying to figure out how to fund the basics of government and find the dollars that we need to secure the Nation with a strong defense, to modernize our military, to ensure border security, all the things that we need to do while we are still racking up debt to the tune of--by the way, paying for interest on the debt to the tune of over a trillion dollars a year, spending more on interest than we are on our own national defense, it strikes me as an inappropriate use of taxpayer money to continue to send that money to an entity that has been working in such negative ways with respect to our interests as a nation. Again, I applaud the chairman for all of his great work on things like UNRWA, working in collaboration with me and others on trying to remove that funding--it was very important--the United Nations Human Rights Council abomination, the United Nations Population Fund, other things that I know that the gentleman has been working on. To be very clear, I am not trying to impugn the bill in any way from that perspective. I just wish to go further. I think it is important that we pull the funds from an entity operating against our interests. It has repeatedly failed to earn the confidence of the American people. It has stood up in solidarity with the worst and most evil countries in the world against our interests and dared to wag their finger at the United States, built on the back of our funding and generosity and, by the way, real estate, to give them a platform to target us and to target our interests, in addition to constantly and consistently going after our friends in Israel. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Lois Frankel, FL

Democrat
“I oppose this amendment. It cuts off all funding for the United Nations. The UN helps feed hungry people, protect refugees, vaccinate children, and stop wars. It is not perfect, but we need it to solve global problems.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, the United Nations was created after World War II with a simple mission: to help prevent another global war and promote peace among nations. Today, it brings together nearly every country in the world to resolve disputes through diplomacy instead of conflict. It coordinates humanitarian relief during wars and natural disasters. It feeds millions of hungry people. It helps vaccinate children, support refugees, and deploy peacekeepers to help protect civilians and maintain stability. The United Nations has made important contributions to the world. Its agencies have helped eradicate smallpox, expand childhood immunizations, delivered lifesaving food and humanitarian assistance to millions, supported peace agreements, protected refugees, promoted human rights, and helped countries work together to combat disease, terrorism, and other threats. We are at a time when instability and suffering are almost unimaginable. The United Nations is a primary partner in getting food into Sudan through the World Food Programme, delivering health to children in Haiti through UNICEF, or supporting and monitoring peace in places like South Sudan and the Central African Republic. This amendment will cut that off. It will cut it all off. The U.N. also establishes international rules that make global travel, trade, shipping, aviation, and communications safer and more reliable. Look, the United Nations is not perfect. It should always be held accountable and reform when necessary, but when the world faces challenges that no nation can solve themselves, the United Nations provides a place for countries to work together in pursuit of peace, security, and human dignity. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Chip Roy, TX

Republican
“We should stop funding the United Nations. It works against American interests, sides with terrorists and human rights abusers, and has no accountability for its failures. The United States can do good work around the world on its own without it.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, I note that it is just not enough for us to say that they can do better. This is an organization that has too often allowed terrorist infiltration within its own entities and sided with terrorist organizations directly against us and our allies. I have seen repeated reports of misconduct involving United Nations peacekeeping operations and too little accountability for those failures. We act as if the United States is not capable of working on unilateral, bilateral, and other bases to be able to do all the great things we want to do around the world. My dad is a polio survivor. There are a lot of things that we can do to try to make sure we are eradicating these things around the world. We don’t necessarily need a bureaucratic organization that its entire organizational structure and bias is structured against us, despite the fact that we fund the overwhelming majority of its operations. The United Nations has been operating against our interests. We are asking American taxpayers to continue to take those dollars and give them to an entity that has, in its open statements to the world, been against our interests so many times, time and time again, including siding with some of the worst countries on the Human Rights Council and the biggest abusers of human rights. The United Nations is put and exalted as somehow being those that we should listen to rather than the United States. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Lois Frankel, FL

Democrat
“I oppose this amendment. We need the United Nations so countries can work together on global problems. If the United States leaves, countries like China, Russia, and Iran will take our place.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, I have heard folks cite what we call the good, the bad, and the ugly with the U.N. Let me just say again, at a time when conflict, hunger, disease, and displacement are affecting millions around the world, we need a place where all nations can get together. What would it mean if the United States walks away? If we walk away, who fills the void? Fill in the blank: China, Russia, maybe even Iran. As I have said before, penny-wise, pound-foolish. Madam Chair, I oppose this amendment, and I urge my colleagues to oppose it. I reserve the balance of my time.

Chip Roy, TX

Republican
“I want the House to pass this amendment. It stops tax dollars from going to groups that work against American interests. Other countries fear the United States, not the United Nations.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, I urge adoption of the amendment to ensure taxpayer dollars are spent on advancing American interests, not funding institutions that too often work against them. We are wholly prepared as a nation to be able to address these issues and concerns. You say, what will happen? China, Russia, and the rest of the world fear the United States. They do not fear the United Nations. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

W. Gregory Steube, FL

Republican
“I want the House to pass my amendment. It stops all U.S. aid to Nigeria until its government takes real steps to stop violence against Christians and religious minorities.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, I rise in strong support for my amendment to increase the withholding threshold for assistance to Nigeria from 50 percent to 100 percent, while keeping in place benchmarks that demand Nigeria take effective steps to address the violence and persecution that continue to devastate the country. Nigeria has faced a horrific wave of violence that its corrupt government has failed to address. For years, and especially in recent months, Christians and other religious minorities in Nigeria have been subjected to violence and terrorism at the hands of extremists who are operating with impunity. Christian women and girls continue to be abducted, assaulted, tortured, and killed. Their churches are burned, and entire communities are erased. If the aid conditions included in the bill are important enough to withhold half of all the funding to the Nigerian Government, then they are important enough to withhold all of the funding. The generosity of our taxpayers is a reflection of the American values we hold so firmly. Never should we allow their hard-earned tax dollars to be funneled to corrupt regimes that fail to uphold religious freedom, fail to adequately confront terrorism, and fail to protect the innocent from persecution. So why are we rewarding a government that fails to meet such a basic obligation? This amendment is simple. It does not remove the aid conditions in the bill but only strengthens such conditions. Most importantly, it upholds a principle that all recipients of American taxpayer assistance should follow: that they must prove that they are willing and able to respond to violence before receiving any funding. Simply put, meet the standard before receiving support. That is the accountability that the American taxpayer deserves. Foreign aid should never be a reward for failure, so as our national debt is fast approaching $40 trillion, why on Earth are we still allowing our ourselves to go further into debt by rewarding corrupt foreign governments that tolerate terrorism within their borders? When churches are burned, women and girls are abducted, and terrorists operate with near impunity, that is not merely an internal disturbance. It is a direct assault on the freedoms our Nation claims to defend, which our foreign assistance must reflect and uphold. This is not about punishing the Nigerian people. It is about demanding accountability for their government’s complacency and ensuring that our foreign aid is leveraged to defend, reflect, and uphold American values. Even the underlying bill recognizes the Nigerian Government’s failure to meet the standard, yet it still allows for half of the funding to be released anyway. My amendment withholds all funds until they meet basic standards. Accountability can never be divided, nor should we allow anyone to exploit the generosity of the American taxpayer. I urge my colleagues to uphold accountability in our foreign aid spending and to vote for my amendment. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Lois Frankel, FL

Democrat
“I want the House to vote against this amendment. It would cut off our aid to Nigeria for health, development, and security. Cutting this help would hurt our fight against disease and terrorism. It would also let China and Russia gain influence there instead of us.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, this amendment would eliminate U.S. health development and security assistance to the central government of Nigeria. This would be a serious mistake. Nigeria is Africa’s most populous nation, one of the largest economies, and a critical partner in promoting stability across West Africa. Our health programs prevent deadly diseases from spreading across borders and strengthen the capacity to respond to future pandemics. Our development assistance helps reduce poverty, improve education, expand economic opportunity, and address the conditions that fuel instability, conflict, and migration. Our security and assistance helps Nigeria combat Boko Haram, ISIS, and other violent extremist groups that threaten both regional and global security. If the United States walks away, the challenges will not disappear. Our influence will. China and Russia will be more than happy to fill the vacuum, expanding their economic, political, and military influence at America’s expense. Engagement does not mean writing a blank check. It means using American leadership to promote accountability, to strengthen democratic institutions, to protect human rights, and to advance our national security interests. Walking away would make neither Nigeria nor the United States more secure. Ironically, this amendment would end the very programs that this provision is trying to support, so it really doesn’t make too much sense. Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to reject it, and I reserve the balance of my time.

W. Gregory Steube, FL

Republican
“I want to withhold all aid to Nigeria until its government meets our conditions. Nigeria fails to stop violence against innocent people and Christians. America is trillions of dollars in debt, and we should not borrow money to send to foreign governments that do not protect their people.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, this amendment does not end all assistance. It only strengthens the conditions and encourages the Nigerian Government to meet them. Why should we give 50 percent of the money when the Nigerian Government has not met the criteria established in the underlying bill? We are approaching $40 trillion in debt. Why are we sending funds to corrupt countries overseas that are unwilling to fully address violence and persecution? The generosity of the American taxpayer should reflect American values. We can’t be putting ourselves more into debt to countries that are unwilling to uphold our values. The U.S. should not borrow money to subsidize foreign governments that fail to protect innocent civilians. If the aid conditions included in the bill are important enough to withhold half of the funding to the Nigerian Government, then they are important enough to withhold all of the funding until the underlying conditions are met. The Nigerian Government continues to fail to address violence in their country. Why should they still be eligible for funding given their lackluster response to the violence? Christian women and girls continue to be abducted, assaulted, tortured, and killed. Their churches are burned, and entire communities are erased. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

W. Gregory Steube, FL

Republican

Linked statement

“I do not want us to send money to Nigeria unless they meet our conditions. They need to stop violence and help victims before they get American tax dollars.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, the underlying bill contains several conditions for assistance to be made available to Nigeria, which includes taking effective steps to prevent and respond to violence and hold perpetrators accountable; prioritizing resources to support victims of such violence, including internally displaced persons; actively facilitating the safe return, resettlement, and reconstruction of communities impacted by the violence; and allocating sufficient resources to address the aforementioned conditions. This begs the question: If Nigeria isn’t meeting these conditions fully, why should they receive any funding? If they truly want the support of the American taxpayer, then they should be meeting these goals. Furthermore, while the underlying bill directs prioritization to address the atrocities occurring in Nigeria, they should be showing willingness to utilize the funding provided to address the violence before receiving funds. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Claudia Tenney, NY

Republican
“I want the House to pass my amendment. Jewish people face unfair restrictions and harassment when they try to visit and pray at the Temple Mount, their holiest site. My amendment tells a government religious freedom group to push for equal access for everyone there.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, the Temple Mount, or Har HaBayit, as it is called, is the holiest site in the world to the Jewish people. During the periods of the First and Second Temples, Jews from across the land of Israel would travel to the Temple during the three annual pilgrimages. These pilgrims included figures like King Solomon, King Herod, and Jesus of Nazareth, our Lord and Savior. However, whereas Christians and Muslims enjoy broad access and religious prayer rights at their holiest sites, Jews are severely discriminated against upon the Temple Mount. Muslims can currently enter the Temple Mount at 11 different gates, but Jews can only enter from 1 gate. Muslims can visit the Temple Mount any day of the week, but Jews cannot ascend the Temple Mount on Friday or Saturday, the Jewish Sabbath. Muslims have broad access to the Temple Mount and can pray openly upon the Temple Mount. Jews are severely restricted in their visits and do not enjoy the freedom to worship or the ability to wear their tallit and tefillin upon the Temple Mount. And for the Jews that ascend in spite of all these restrictions, they still face harassment from Muslims upon the Temple Mount. In fact, Muslim leaders have actively desecrated the site, including the planting and cultivating of trees at the inner courts of the Temple, expressly prohibited by Jewish law. Muslim children play soccer, practice boxing, and have picnics upon the Temple Mount, desecrating its holiness, while Jews cannot even freely worship upon the Temple Mount. You don’t have to take my word for it, Madam Chair. There is photo and video evidence of all this freely available. Individuals like Dr. Melissa Jane Kronfeld have spent extensive time documenting all of this. I thank her for her efforts to draw attention to this critical issue. Further, when one of my staffers ascended the Temple Mount last year, he was harassed by Muslim onlookers, restricted from visiting most of the site, and was only allowed to be upon the Temple Mount for a very short duration of time. Madam Chair, it is unconscionable that Jews do not enjoy the same access rights to visit and pray at their holiest site that other religions do. This is a basic tenet and principle of religious freedom, and the U.S. must do more on this issue. That is why my amendment would emphasize the need for the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom to work to ensure religious freedom and equal access for all with respect to the Temple Mount. I urge all my colleagues to vote for this commonsense amendment and to support religious freedom for all and support the rights of the Jewish people to freely worship at their very holiest site, the Temple Mount. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Lois Frankel, FL

Democrat
“I want my colleagues to vote against this amendment. The Temple Mount is holy to both Jews and Muslims, and small changes there can cause violence. Adding this issue to a spending bill risks causing more conflict instead of solving problems through diplomacy.”
Official Congressional Record

Madam Chair, while this amendment may be well-intentioned, it risks inflaming tensions at one of the most sensitive religious sites in the world. The Temple Mount is sacred to both Jews and Muslims. It is at the center of competing historical, political, and religious claims. History has shown that even small changes to access or worship arrangements can spark violence far beyond Jerusalem. For decades, Israel, Jordan, and the international community have worked to preserve the longstanding status quo, not because it is perfect but because it helps prevent broader conflict while difficult issues remain unsolved. The appropriations bill is not the place to insert the United States into one of the world’s most delicate religious disputes. Religious freedom is a fundamental American value, but lasting progress at the Temple Mount will come through careful diplomacy and respectful, longstanding efforts that preserve peace and stability, not through an appropriation amendment with 10 minutes of debate. Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from issue 115

  1. House of Representatives Anthony "Tony" J. Gallopo VA Clinic 4 statements
  2. House of Representatives Colonel Michael H. Boyce Department of Veterans Affairs Multispecialty Clinic 4 statements
  3. House of Representatives Rodney C. Hamilton Sr. VA Clinic 6 statements
  4. House of Representatives Captain Paul W. "Bud" Bucha VA Medical Center 4 statements
  5. House of Representatives Corporal Patrick D. Tillman VA Clinic 5 statements
  6. House of Representatives National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2027 62 statements
  7. House of Representatives Farewell to Doge 3 statements
  8. House of Representatives Prioritizing Reining in Our National Debt 3 statements
  9. House of Representatives Honoring the 158th Anniversary of the 14th Amendment 4 statements
  10. House of Representatives Our Borrowing Is Terrifying 3 statements
  11. House of Representatives Honoring Senator Lindsey Graham 6 statements
  12. Senate Unanimous Consent Request--S. Res. 556 (Executive Calendar) 3 statements