Statement AI Analysis

Statement AI Summary:

The speaker, Ms. McCollum, opposes the H.R. 4016 Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2026, criticizing the Trump administration’s failure to provide a full budget request which hampers informed funding decisions. She raises concerns about funding transparency, potential overspending or underspending, and problematic policy riders related to reproductive healthcare and LGBTQ+ military members that could affect recruitment. She also expresses concern over the expiration of Temporary Protected Status for certain Afghan nationals who aided U.S. efforts, urging bipartisan legislative solutions. She calls for a bipartisan and thoughtful approach to ensure national security funding and military personnel welfare without partisan social riders.

Statement AI Bias Category on Abortion and Reproductive Rights:

Left-Leaning

AI characterization of politician statement bias

Bias of All Statements by Betty McCollum on Abortion and Reproductive Rights:

Statement AI Categories:

Foreign Policy, Social Security and Welfare, Abortion and Reproductive Rights, Civil Rights and Liberties, Lgbtq+ Rights, National Security and Counterterrorism

AI characterization of politician statemenet legislation/issue category

Date:

07-16-2025

Pages In PDF Link That Have Statement:

H3333-H3363

Congressional Record PDF:

PDF Link

Actual Statement Made In Congress:

If the member made multiple statements on that day, they were analyzed and accumulated together.

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 4016, the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2026. Before I begin getting into the bill, I recognize the work of my staff: Jennifer Chartrand and Jason Gray on the minority side; and Ben Peterson and my defense fellow, Lisa Lawrence, on the other side. Of course, I also recognize the work that we do with Adam Sullivan and all of the fabulous majority staff. I thank them all for their hard work. Mr. Chair, I thank my ranking member, Chairwoman DeLauro, as well as Chairman Cole for their work on this bill. I especially thank Chairman Calvert for his friendship and leadership on this subcommittee. The chairman had to write this bill without a full budget request. Those are unprecedented circumstances, and I know the process was difficult. Mr. Chair, turning to the bill, the fiscal year 2026 Department of Defense Appropriations Act totals $831.5 billion. That is the same level that DOD is currently operating at under the full-year continuing resolution. This bill was written without having any of the full fiscal year 2026 budget request in front of us. That is a huge problem, and let me explain why. The Defense appropriations bill is this committee's largest discretionary funding bill. It is a complex piece of legislation. It deals with a wide range of national security issues, such as the construction of ships and submarines, the launch of technology and advanced satellites, and the development of hypersonic weapons. Most importantly, it supports our servicemembers and their families who bravely serve our Nation. It is in the best interest of our Nation for our Defense bill to be written the right way, and that is done with thorough analysis. The DOD's programs require a detailed annual review because these programs naturally ebb and flow over time. The only way for our subcommittee to analyze this information and write a thoughtful and informed bill is to review a full budget request. Mr. Chair, I want to take a moment just to illustrate that. These two poster boards represent a single DOD program that we fund. This is the future long-range assault aircraft. This is an advanced helicopter for the Army. This poster shows the 9-page Congressional Budget Justification documents for this program from last year's budget request. These documents represent critical granular details that the subcommittee needs to properly evaluate the DOD programs. It not only shows us what the request is for, for the coming fiscal years, but also what is expected over the next 5 years. That detail for the next 5 years is how we can see if the program is still on target compared to the previous year. Why is this important? We don't have clean audits from the Department of Defense except for the Marine Corps. These documents are the only way we can track money. These documents are part of the normal budget process that every administration and Congress has operated under. This year, because President Trump's administration failed to submit a full budget request, what do we have to write this bill? Mr. Chair, I call your attention to the second poster board. The number we see here is one line. This represents all that we received on the future long-range assault aircraft to write this bill. Mr. Chair, it is nine pages of background on one hand and one number on the other. This administration gave us almost no information to make decisions. That is completely unacceptable. I wonder what the majority's action would have been if the Biden administration had failed to submit a budget request. The fact is that we did not have President Trump's plan for his Defense priorities when this bill was written. This makes this bill, unfortunately, an incomplete product. For example, Golden Dome at this point is merely a concept and not a full plan. None of us have been briefed on how the administration intends to spend $175 billion or deliver it in 3 years. The analysis by DOD is incomplete. We don't know how the money for Golden Dome will impact future Defense bills. Another example is the cost to deploy the National Guard around the country to do Homeland Security's job. In June, we found out the cost to deploy 4,000 California National Guardsmen and 700 marines to Los Angeles was $134 million. Now, Secretary Hegseth is reviewing a request from the Department of Homeland Security to deploy more than 20,000 National Guard troops across the country. To what end is that goal? Is it to turn the National Guard into the national police? Well, I don't agree with that. The National Guard is intended to be used for specific purposes. Yes, they are used in States when natural disasters occur or, yes, even in times of civil unrest when their Governors call them up. Then there are the title 10 missions, when they are deployed overseas or in times of national emergency, like on September 11. Deploying 20,000 troops has a serious budgetary impact. Secretary Hegseth did not give us a complete budget. We don't know what thought went into this, the duration of these deployments, how much they will cost, or where the funding will be pulled from to pay for them. The President proposes, and Congress disposes. That is the way our system works in the Constitution. There are consequences for not following this process. We may end up buying too much of one platform and wasting taxpayer dollars, or we may end up buying too little of another, leaving a gap in our capabilities to defend our country. When we write this bill without seeing the full budget request, we fail to maximize the buying power for the taxpayers. It is deeply unfortunate that the Trump administration and OMB, in particular, have put the committee in this position. This bill also includes many of the same poison pill riders that were in previous House versions of the Defense bill. These partisan social riders should never become law. They lead us down a road that, once again, may result in a full-year CR. Last year's CR was bad enough. A second one would be a catastrophe. Our national security cannot afford to lose another year. Once again, this bill limits the ability of service personnel and their families to receive the reproductive healthcare they deserve. Women make up almost 20 percent of the military services, and many women servicemembers live in States that have limited or banned access to reproductive care. Once again, the provisions that disenfranchise gay, lesbian, and transgender servicemembers are included in this bill. These poison pill riders will not go unnoticed by our troops, and they will impact recruitment and retention. As I told Secretary Hegseth last month, we have witnessed a deliberate effort by the Trump administration to silence and diminish the achievements of minorities and women in the military. Their dedication, heroism, and sacrifices on behalf of our Nation deserve recognition and not erasure. As a former history teacher, I acknowledge the uncomfortable truths about our own history. Acknowledging them is the only way we move forward together. Since World War II, the Department of Defense has made great strides in building a military that is more reflective of the population of the Nation it defends. That should be celebrated. It should not be reversed. That is how we build a more perfect Union together. Mr. Chairman, regrettably, at this time, I will be unable to vote for passage of this bill. I cannot recommend that my colleagues support it. I will work with Chairman Calvert in the future as we go through conference to make sure that we can, together, hopefully, produce a bill we can both support. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. McCOLLUM. As the Chair pointed out, I rise to designate the gentlewoman from Connecticut, and I move to strike the last word. Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time. I was done with full debate. Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I think I have a slightly different script. We are friends, and we will get through this. Mr. Chair, I would like to engage with the gentleman in a colloquy, and I would like to rise on an issue of great importance to me and many Members on both sides of the aisle. Would the gentleman like me to continue? Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, that is the status of Afghan nationals living in the United States under temporary protected status. For 20 years after the terrorist attack on September 11, 2001, the United States maintained a significant military and diplomatic presence in Afghanistan. As part of that effort, we asked the people of Afghanistan to trust the United States and to work with us to support the Afghan National Government and build a new future for their nation. Obviously, we did not succeed. Tens of thousands of Afghans stood shoulder to shoulder with U.S. troops and diplomats serving in Afghanistan over two decades. They did so at great risk to their own lives and the lives of their families. When we withdrew from Afghanistan in 2021, we evacuated over 100,000 Afghans. Why? It is because we knew what would happen when the Taliban would return to power. Those Afghans and their families who had assisted U.S. operations would be subject to the vengeful retribution of the Taliban. Not all of those who were evacuated came to the United States, but many did. The least we could do to repay their assistance was to help the Afghans who risked everything for us to start new lives. The temporary protected status designation that they received was essential to keeping them safe. As of this January, there were 11,685 Afghans legally present in our country under TPS. Many of these families are waiting for their Special Immigrant Visa application process to be completed. This is a process that involves rigorous background checks and requires verification of their work assisting the United States, but it can take up to 7 years for an applicant to receive their visa. That is why it is deeply unfortunate that the administration has allowed the temporary protected status for Afghanistan to expire last night. I have asked the administration for a 90-day extension of TPS protections for Afghans in the U.S. while we work on a legislative solution. That is because for the Afghans who will be sent back under this, this is their worst nightmare, and we know how it will end. Not only will this cost them their freedom, it will cost many of them their lives. Congress must act to prevent this. Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I thank my friend, the chairman, for his comments, and I absolutely agree with him. This is the Defense bill that we are debating, and jurisdiction for this issue resides in the Homeland Security Subcommittee. However, we know there is bipartisan support in the House and Senate to protect Special Immigrant Visa holders and applicants. That was demonstrated through the bipartisan passage of the Additional Afghanistan Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2022. I have spoken with Members both Democratic and Republican who served in Afghanistan, and they have told me that this is an important issue for them, and they want to find a legislative fix. My hope is that we can find a bipartisan political consensus as the appropriations process moves forward. Mr. Chair, America must stand with the allies who supported us in our two-decade war in Afghanistan, and that is the least we can do. Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), who is the distinguished ranking member of the Appropriations full committee. Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, may I ask the chairman if he is prepared to close, and I will give my closing statement. Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I understand if the chairman has someone come, just so he knows that. Mr. Chair, we have no further speakers, and I yield myself the balance of my time to close. Mr. Chair, I thank the Members on the House floor for the patience they have had with my voice this evening. The fiscal year 2025 appropriations process was a complete disaster, in my opinion, and it was the result of the first full-year continuing resolution for the Department of Defense. Our national security cannot afford for that to happen again. We must do everything together in our power to prevent that. That means working in a bipartisan way to make these poison pill riders come out of this bill. I look forward to working with Chairman Calvert and the Senate to improve this bill so that we can avoid another full-year CR. Let us give our servicemembers and their families the bipartisan Defense bill that they deserve. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues at this time to oppose this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time. Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I support this package of en bloc amendments to the Defense bill that are in the interest of Members on both sides of the aisle, and I urge its adoption. I yield back the balance of my time. Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I support this package of en bloc amendments to the Defense bill that are of interest to Members on both sides of the aisle, and I urge its adoption. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time. Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I support this package of en bloc amendments to the Defense bill that are in the interest of Members on both sides of the aisle, and I urge its adoption. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time. Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I support this package of amendments en bloc No. 4 to the Defense bill that are of interest to Members of both sides of the aisle. I urge adoption, and I yield back the balance of my time. Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I also support this package of amendments en bloc to the Defense bill that are of interest to Members of both sides. Mr. Chair, I urge adoption, and I yield back the balance of my time. Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I also support this package of amendments en bloc to the Defense appropriations bill that are of interest to Members of both sides of the aisle. I urge its adoption, and I yield back the balance of my time. Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I also support this package of amendments en bloc to the Defense bill that are of interest to Members on both sides of the aisle. I urge its adoption, and I yield back the balance of my time.

AI summary and categorization done by an OpenAI GPT model. For more information see: Editorial and Method