▶ 0:03:58E administration will come to order. I note that a quorum is present. Without objection. The chair is authorized to declare a recess at any time. Today, the committee on house administration will consider critical legislation to require voter id in federal elections, prevent members of congress from using insider information to profit from prediction markets, and addresses 21st century challenges facing the legislative branch. The first bill for consideration is h.r. 9368, the voter id act. American elections must be free, fair and secure.
▶ 0:04:27Voter id provides a common sense solution to restoring confidence in our elections. It's pretty simple concept. You must show a photo id to vote. The bill ensures that the cost of an id is not a barrier to vote. States can have hava dollars to provide free ids to those who need them, and the bill allows provisional voting as someone forgets their id when they go to the polls. These policies are common sense, and in fact, 23 states already require a valid photo id to vote.
▶ 0:04:56The voter id act establishes a clear standard for federal elections to strengthen voter confidence and restore trust. I urge my colleagues to support this important piece of legislation. The second bill for consideration is h.r. 9367. The stop lawmakers from predicting act. No member of congress should use public office for personal financial gain.
▶ 0:05:20Earlier this year, the committee passed the nonpartisan stop insider trading act to prevent lawmakers from profiting off of insider information, stop lawmakers from predicting act as a next step in restoring the public's trust. The bill prohibits members of congress from utilizing prediction markets to wager on public policy, government action, and political outcomes. It also applies to members, spouses and dependent children.
▶ 0:05:45Violations will be fined $2,000 and 10% of the transaction, whichever is greater, and any gains realized. Members who leave office before paying the fine can be referred to the united states department of justice for enforcement, if that is deemed necessary. Lawmakers would like to serve the american people, not to enrich themselves by wagering on outcomes, on the decisions they make. We have a real opportunity to restore trust in congress by taking necessary steps to eliminate even the appearance of impropriety.
▶ 0:06:14I strongly encourage my colleagues to support the stop lawmakers from predicting act. We'll also be considering three bills to address challenges facing the legislative branch. First, we'll consider h.r. 9342, the gpo modernization act, sponsored by our colleague representative stephanie bice. The bill will update current law so the government publishing office can better serve congress and the public in the digital age. We'll then move on and consider h.r.
▶ 0:06:419360, the advisory committee on records of congress sunset act, offered by our colleague, representative mary miller of illinois. The bill eliminates an outdated advisory committee and replaces it with a simpler process for reviewing congressional records. Last, we'll consider h.r. 3334, the u. Scp empowerment act of 2025 offered by representative eli crane of of arizona.
▶ 0:07:06This bill gives the united states capitol police the authority they need to respond to unauthorized drones that threaten capital security. I thank my colleagues for being here, and I look forward to our discussion today. I yield back. I'll now recognize the ranking member, Mr. morelli, for five minutes, who drove through the night down from rochester to join us today for five minutes for the purpose of offering an opening statement. >> thank you very much, Mr. chairman.
▶ 0:07:34I have finally figured out how to avoid the traffic to washington, so I, however, don't advise it. But thank you, uh, to you and to all my colleagues here to mark up the five bills which you've referenced, some of which I think we support and some which we do not. Several bills will consider have clear roots in legislation this committee previously considered doomed legislation that has been blocked either by the speaker or by the senate. The voter id act, for example, is exceedingly familiar.
▶ 0:08:03This language is pulled straight from the save america act, a bill that was dead on arrival in the senate. The last three times house republicans unwisely tried to restrict the voting rights of american citizens, the. Stop lawmakers from predicting. Act like the stop insider trading act, upon which it is based, is so filled with loopholes it looks more like a sieve than a bill. The senate was able to unanimously block senators and staff from trading on prediction markets in one day. Why can't why won't the house do the same thing?
▶ 0:08:35We'll also consider a handful of bills related to the legislative branch, and I want to take this opportunity to reiterate how important it is that we build legislative branch capacity. That means allocating congress and its support agencies more than the 4/10 of 1% of all federal discretionary spending. It also means improving the operations and modernizing the authorities of our legislative branch partners.
▶ 0:08:57For the most part, these bills streamline agency operations, eliminate obsolete programs, and provide our partners with the updated authorities they need to protect the capitol and strengthen the legislative process. So I look forward to discussing each bill in greater detail as they come up for consideration. And again, want to thank you and want to yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. Uh, we now call up h.r. 9368, the voter id act. The clerk will please report the bill. H.r.
▶ 0:09:27Without objection, the first reading the bill is dispensed with also, without objection, the bill should be considered as read and open to amendment at any point. I have an amendment in the nature of a substitute at the desk. So please. The clerk will report the amendment. Amendment. Without objection. The amendment in the nature of a substitute is considered as read and will serve as base text for the purpose of further amendment. I now recognize myself to speak on the bill. The voter id act will strengthen election integrity. Election integrity shouldn't be partizan.
▶ 0:09:55Uh, I think it's actually really common sense reform across the country. We all know you got to show a photo id to get on an airplane, to open a bank account, to buy a six pack of beer. Um, these are absolutely common sense reforms. When I go home, people in wisconsin have a tough time understanding how anybody opposes photo identification being required to vote.
▶ 0:10:20I remember it was noted by the ranking member that we've we've had these discussions broadly on election integrity in this before. Uh, we've had debates on the house floor. And I've always reflect back at a, at a time where we there was a robust debate on the house floor, in particular about photo identification, me arguing the need for photo identification, democratic colleague on the house floor arguing against it.
▶ 0:10:45Uh, and it was the day we flew back home, landed, uh, drove home on my way, uh, to janesville. I stopped a six pack of beer, uh, pulled over with brian. How are you doing? Great. This, I suspect counter. Uh, he said, brian, you see your id standard? Open up my wallet, pulled out my id, handed it to the clerk. Clerk looked at my id, confirmed I was 21, which I obviously am.
▶ 0:11:13Bought the beer and walked out, and I was thinking to myself, it is absolutely nuts that we protect our beer more than our ballots in jurisdictions across this country. The photo id act before us, the voter id act, will really remedy this. It's simple if you want to vote in a federal election, you need to show photo id. The voter id act lists five eligible types of ids one probably the most common the driver's license.
▶ 0:11:42Two a state issued id provided by the voter by the state motor vehicle authority with a photo and an expiration date. Three obviously, you could use a united states passport if you'd like, for a valid photo id or five, a tribal id with a photo of the individual and an expiration date. The bill allows provisional voting if someone forgets their id when they go to vote. Common sense. It also allows states that provide photo ids.
▶ 0:12:09It also allows states that provide photo ids at no cost to those who cannot afford one, to access java dollars to pay for that expense. Asking a voter to show their id is a simple way to verify voter identity and eligibility. It's common sense, and I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote in favor of this bill I yield back. Does any other member seek recognition for amendment or debate? Uh, the ranking member Mr. morales recognized.
▶ 0:12:39>> yeah, just as it relates to general comments. And then I will have an amendment that I want to offer, but just generally speaking. And thank you, Mr. chairman, for yielding. I want to correct the record on something, because my colleagues across the aisle continue to consistently misrepresent a very important point. Democrats support voter identification. Let me say that, again. Democrats support voter identification. And there are many forms of effective voter id. New york, for example. And I just did this just a few days ago.
▶ 0:13:09We require voters to prove their identity. First time voters must prove identification, either with their voter registration form or when they cast their first ballot. After that, new yorkers prove their identity through signature matching, and it is pretty extensive. And if you have a signature that doesn't match, you are called to count. And you have to explain why it could be a medical condition. You could have parkinson's disease, you have other things that would affect your signature, but the system is secure and the system works.
▶ 0:13:37I've never seen anyone in new york, neighbors or otherwise complain about the voter id system that we have, and I've never heard anyone complain that someone voted erroneously because of it. Uh, the bill we're considering today would end this secure voter identification system in new york and in arizona and many other states. The bill not only bars, signature verification, even if you were to assume you're going to have photo id, it bars many, many other forms of secure, reliable voter id used across the country by millions of americans. H.r.
▶ 0:14:099368, for example, would ban young people from using student ids, even though people under the age of 30 lack driver's licenses at twice the rate of other adults. That's right, student id would fit within none of the limited number of ids this bill would allow. Neither would a hunting license or a fishing license or a firearm license, for that matter. Americans across the political spectrum agree on this simple point.
▶ 0:14:34After meeting certain minimum accessibility standards, states know best how to ensure a free, fair and secure election. But this bill isn't meant to secure american elections. It's meant to ensure certain americans cannot access the ballot easily. Because why, for instance, would h.r. 9368 specifically ban otherwise valid ids simply for not having an expiration date?
▶ 0:14:58It makes no sense if you have a photo with your name on it and your address and it matches your voter file, what difference whether that piece of paper expires, I understand it for driver's license, to make sure that you're continuing to take tests, that you continue to be up to the standards necessary to operate a motor vehicle safely. I don't understand what it relates to why it would relate to voting, unless you know, for instance, that tribal ids lack, in many cases, expiration dates.
▶ 0:15:25And so native americans will have a difficult time because the id they typically have doesn't have a expiration date at all. Why would you exclude student ids even though they're issued by state universities, if they did not want young people to be precluded from exercising their rights?
▶ 0:15:45Certainly only currently, only eight states that require photo id to vote do not accept student ids, and in six of those, students may cast a provisional ballot that will be counted even if the student never presents one of the specified photo ids in their state law. The bill would therefore disenfranchize the students of 48 states that right now can cast valid ballots using their student ids. The bill is a targeted attack on young people's rights to vote. But that's not all.
▶ 0:16:13Why would republicans include the onerous provision of forced voters to include copies of their photo id with their mail in ballots, a provision so dubious the republican lieutenant governor of utah noted this bill could quote, and this is a, quote, violate our constitutional rights to a secret ballot if they didn't want to burden the millions of americans who vote by mail, it's obvious that's been a pattern.
▶ 0:16:38They don't want people mailing in ballots, even though in the western part of this country oregon, washington, colorado, california, arizona, the vast majority of people cast their votes by mail. Now, in contrast to this extremely restrictive bill, house democrats have long championed legislation that includes a strong voter id provision, the freedom to vote act. The freedom to vote act sets uniform national standards for voter id laws.
▶ 0:17:03It gives flexibility to states to choose which voter ids to require, and it ensures that voters can utilize, but are not limited to, a broad range of acceptable identifying documents, such as a driver's license or other state issued id and employee identification card, a student id, a military id, a gun license, a hunting or fishing license, and other forms of identification to vote. The broad range is actually modeled off west virginia standards for identification.
▶ 0:17:30No one accuses west virginia, to my knowledge, of being a bastion of modern progressive politics. The freedom to vote act also provides alternatives for voters who do not have an id to prove their identity, because studies show that as many as 11% of eligible voters do not have a government issued photo id, the percentage is higher for seniors, students, people of color, people with disabilities, and low income voters. All of these people would be burdened by the bill. So without serious amendment, I will oppose this bill.
▶ 0:17:58I plan to offer such an amendment shortly. And with that, Mr. chair, I yield back. Thank you. >> the gentleman yields back. Representative lee is recognized to strike the last word. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I appreciate the opportunity to speak in support of the voter id act. Before coming to congress, I served as florida's secretary of state, where I worked closely with election officials around our state who are responsible for administering secure, accessible and transparent elections.
▶ 0:18:28From that experience, I know that confidence and consistency in our elections is essential. Americans deserve to know that our elections are secure, that rules are applied fairly, and that eligible voters can have confidence in the outcome of an election.
▶ 0:18:43The voter id act establishes a common sense national standard requiring photo identification in voting for federal elections, while also providing practical accommodations for voters. Eligible voters who forget their id may still cast a provisional ballot, and the legislation supports states that provide identification at no cost to those who need it.
▶ 0:19:11So there is no barrier to americans in obtaining a reliable, verifiable form of identification for use at the polls. This is not a novel concept. Florida and many other states have successfully implemented voter identification requirements for years.
▶ 0:19:30In fact, federal election reform commissions have recommended voter identification requirements as a way to strengthen confidence in the electoral process, election integrity and voter access are not competing goals. We can and should pursue both. In florida, we've demonstrated that it's possible to protect access to the ballot while also strengthening confidence in our elections.
▶ 0:19:56The voter id act reflects that same balanced approach. I thank chairman steel for his leadership and urge my colleagues to support the bill. I yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. Representative sewell's recognized to strike the last word. >> I strike the last word. Mr. chairman, I want to begin by just saying that this is, I think, maybe the fifth time that we've met to talk about voter id law or voting bill. This congress.
▶ 0:20:24Um, it seems to me that we have repeatedly, uh, had legislative efforts that have come before congress that suppress the voting rights of american citizens. First we saw the safe act, then we saw the save america act. And after that, I think it was the mega act. And today we're considering a bill, uh, described as a voter id legislation, but it would make it harder for americans to make their voices heard at the polls. We all agree.
▶ 0:20:49And I just want to reiterate something that the ranking member said democrats support voter id requirements. We understand that you have to prove who you are in order to get out who you are in order to register to vote. I think that's critically important. What we don't disagree about is the limit, number or types of ids that are required to be shown.
▶ 0:21:13You know, alabama prior to 2010 used to have nine forms of id, and now we only have 4 or 5 forms of id, but it used to be that we could be able to show that we prove that we actually live at a residence by showing our lease agreement or our um power bill. Um, we used to be able to show a student id as well as a hunting license. Now it's a hunting license only, not a student id.
▶ 0:21:38I guess what I'm saying is it's important for us as members of congress to make it easier for americans to vote, not harder. And in so many ways, this is very personal to me. When alabama changed its law, my dad, who was a nine time stroke victim, had a very difficult time actually obtaining a photo id. Why?
▶ 0:22:00Well, it took effort from my mom and his home health provider to get him dressed in the morning to go down to the courthouse and to actually sit for a photo id. In fact, it took hours. The fact of the matter is, is that my mom and my dad got my dad up dressed and ready to go, which took about an hour.
▶ 0:22:21Um, we then had to wait for a van that folded out so that my dad could be rolled into the van to go and vote. And when we got, when they got to the courthouse, uh, there was huge steps. And this courthouse had been, uh, grandfathered in before the, um, the american disabilities act. So it didn't have to have a ramp. So just getting my dad up into the courthouse was a chore.
▶ 0:22:52Then when we press the button for the elevator, um, and the elevator opened, the elevator was so small, my dad's wheelchair did not fit in it. Now we're now we're at our two to get my dad a photo id. Um, and then when they finally got up to stairs to go and get the photo id and the registrar's office, there was a big sign that says gone to lunch. What I'm saying is it should not be this hard. And what ended up happening is that the secretary of state knew who I was.
▶ 0:23:21My mom called him and said, can someone tell me where there's a mobile unit that one can go to to get a photo id? They actually drove that mobile unit to my parents house and he got a photo id. It should not. You should not have to be a member of congress or know a member of congress in order to get a photo id. We should make this very easy and we're making it harder. That is why I fully support the ranking members amendment.
▶ 0:23:48He's about to he's about to articulate because it would actually expand the number of, um, types of ids that one can show in order to prove who they are. You know, prior to alabama changing its law, my dad used to show a validly issued id called a social security card. Everybody has one, everybody has one. And it was easy for him to go to vote.
▶ 0:24:13But when we changed the law to require a limited type of voter id and a photo id, uh, in particular, that's when the problem started for my dad and so many who are disabled. And so today, I just really want to speak on behalf of the millions of americans, millions of americans who don't have a driver's license, who don't have a passport, um, who may find it very difficult transportation wise to get to a state supported id.
▶ 0:24:41We should be making it easier for, for americans to vote, not harder. And in so many ways, I feel as if that we're trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. Voter fraud does not exist in the numbers that require us to be so restrictive. With that, I yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. Does any other member seek recognition for debate? Representative bice is recognized to strike the last word. >> yes, sir. Asked to strike the last word.
▶ 0:25:07First of all, I think we can all agree that election security and integrity are vital to our democracy. Americans deserve to know that their election process is secure, and those who vote in them are eligible. Um, I was recently in chile meeting with government officials, and we had a discussion about their voting process. And I asked the question, do you require a voter photo id to vote? And it was almost as though they were shocked at the question.
▶ 0:25:35They said, of course, uh, even countries in south america are requiring a photo id, valid photo id to vote. My colleague from new york, the ranking member, mentioned, uh, signature verification. I don't know about you, but I don't sign my name the same way every single time. Sometimes I use a middle initial. Sometimes I only use the first initial of my name. Uh, my signature has changed over time.
▶ 0:26:03So how in the world can you verify someone's identity with a signature that is not always the same? I want to thank chairman style for working with me to add a provision similar to oklahoma's election laws to allow for notarization of ballots in oklahoma. We passed laws decades ago actually to ensure that our elections are safe and secure.
▶ 0:26:26Not only are you required to have a notarization of your absentee ballot, but you are required to have a valid photo id when you go to the polls and the state of oklahoma put that in a ballot initiative back in the 90s, and it passed overwhelmingly. We all know that this issue is an 8020 issue.
▶ 0:26:5080% of americans want there to be some sort of voter id, and I don't think it's too much to ask to ensure that it is a valid id and that it is issued by a government entity. Having a college id, I think, is not as secure as it should be. Um, so we've said this a number of times in the committee. Oklahoma, I think, is the gold standard for verifying identity for absentee voters.
▶ 0:27:15And I think, uh, the legislation that's being put forward is thoughtful, reasonable, and americans want this to pass. So with that, Mr. chairman, I thank you for your work on this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman yields back. The gentlewoman from texas, representative johnson, is recognized to strike the last word. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I strike the last word. You know, uh, I just kind of want to weigh in on this conversation. I think, um, texas is a state that requires showing a photo id.
▶ 0:27:43Um, and again, I want to echo the, the comments of my colleagues. This is not about whether or not you have to show a photo id. This is about the scope of what constitutes a valid id. And I want to focus on, um, because there are so many state agencies, not just dps, uh, but other schools, universities, the university of texas, the texas a and m and miss bice, my son went to oklahoma state.
▶ 0:28:11You know, I had to prove for him his birth certificate, all of his things to get that oklahoma state id. The fact that we are not allowing photo ids issued by any state agency or state entity is ridiculous. Why are you limiting it to just driver's license. >> with the with the gentlelady yield? >> not yet. I want to finish my soliloquy on this because, you know, the thing is, is that it's ridiculous.
▶ 0:28:39We are trying to suppress the student vote, and we are trying to keep young people in particular from voting. There are 130,000 students in dallas, texas that go to dallas college. There's 85,000 students that go to texas a&m. There are 65,000 students that go to the university of texas.
▶ 0:28:56Each one of those entities goes through a detailed, um, analysis to verify that those students are who, in fact, they are when they admit them, when they go through the student loan process, when they go through the whole process of being a student at that academic university, the fact that they cannot use that id to vote is absolutely insane makes no sense. And it only is an attempt to minimize the student vote full stop.
▶ 0:29:25And so this is not about integrity. This is not about security. Uh, because if it were, we would have a very broad, expansive list of things that constitute a valid id, in particular, any id issued by any state agency. Why? I don't understand why we can't have that be the thing. In texas, we have hunting licenses, just as my colleague mentioned.
▶ 0:29:54You have to go through all of these, um, efforts to prove who you are to obtain that photo identification. And it is a valid form of id in texas. But republicans have determined that, you know what, in texas, that's good enough. And so there's, there should be, um, we need to have an expansive list. And I would hope that this committee could really strongly consider expanding the list of valid ids to any id issued by any state agency.
▶ 0:30:23Um, because obviously the state is charged with verifying who those people are and making sure that those ids match that identity and they should be allowed to do that. And now I yield. >> thank you for yielding. Um, first of all, uh, it's exciting to, to hear that your son is a student at oklahoma state university. Uh. >> he's a proud graduate now, and I'm very happy about that.
▶ 0:30:54>> thank you. Uh, I have two of those. I appreciate that, um, but my question to you is this. You talk about these state entities, but not every university is a state entity. Uh, the university of tulsa is not a state entity. There are quite a few, uh, higher ed institutions in texas, southern methodist, tcu, and others that are not state entities. So it seems to me that you're excluding, uh, provisions that, you know, would allow for some, but not all. >> no. >> I would, I.
▶ 0:31:24>> would welcome that any student id is valid that any of these universities, because they have to go through the same process. The university of tulsa goes through the same thing. You still have to be a student there, have to show your birth certificate, have to show all of those things to qualify for admittance there. So I would argue that any college university would be acceptable, but at a minimum, you should allow it from any state university, because I wouldn't you think that the the state of oklahoma, that oklahoma state university is quite competent to verify the identity of its students?
▶ 0:31:51>> what if I told you that the staff are sitting behind me, shared with me that when he went to his university to get a student id, he was given the wrong id? >> well, I'm sure that mistakes happen. >> I think that that doesn't. >> minimize the fact that the hundreds of thousands of students in texas and in oklahoma and in states all across the country have gone through these processes to verify who they are, to be able to be admitted, admitted to these universities.
▶ 0:32:14And we should allow those student ids to serve as a valid form of identification for who that person is at the ballot box, because otherwise we're just we are keeping hundreds of thousands of students from the opportunity to exercise their constitutional right to vote. And I think that's a huge problem with this bill. And I'm out of time. >> and with that, thank you to my colleague for yielding. >> the gentleman's time has expired. She is back. Is there further amendment or debate?
▶ 0:32:42Is there? The gentleman from new york has an amendment at the desk, has an amendment. We'll pause while the amendment is distributed. Thank you.
▶ 0:33:24>> far too often miss the debate in these committees. I think it's important to be able to do that. Like that. So. This is important. Yes. >> that's what it's supposed to be. And go pokes.
▶ 0:34:02>> the clerk will report the amendment. >> amendment. >> without objection. The amendment is considered. Read the gentleman from new york. The the gentlewoman from florida reserves a point of order. The gentleman from new york is recognized on his amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chair.
▶ 0:34:16Um, I sort of just as a general observation of what's going on, the gop now apparently stands for good on paperwork because it requires americans to do so much more paperwork than they used to. If you're a snap beneficiary, someone who needs nutrition assistance, you now have to fill out certifications and paperwork.
▶ 0:34:39And, you know, just to continue to have the benefit of, uh, of nutrition support, or if you're a medicaid recipient, so-called able bodied, you're not going to have to go through all kinds of things just to continue to get health care in this country, even though it used to be exclusively a question of whether or not you were impoverished and didn't have income and resources to get health care. Um, and now around voting.
▶ 0:35:03And honestly, when it comes to voting, it's built on this preposterous premise, the premise being that elections are no longer secure and it's preposterous because they are, uh, it's preposterous because there's this theory often promoted at the highest levels of the party by the president and his allies that people who aren't eligible, eligible to vote are actually voting, which is absurd.
▶ 0:35:31There's no evidence of it at all. That voter fraud is rampant. I will just say, from my personal experience, which I'm sure everyone here has shared, where you are doing everything you can to get voters out to the polls, right? We now do digital ads, we do television ads, we do, um, text messages, we do phone calls, we knock on doors. We do everything we can to get the eligible voters to come to vote. And it's a struggle. Turnout in some cases is so low.
▶ 0:35:58So but there's this theory which has gained traction, that somehow we're going to ignore all those people who are actually eligible, but we're now going to spend all of our time and do spend all of our time trying to get people who are not eligible, who face severe penalties for even attempting it, are going to vote. It is preposterous. There's no evidence. And yet we're going to add more paperwork requirements.
▶ 0:36:22We're going to do everything we can to just continue this falsehood, continue this theory and this argument that there is something amiss with american elections, all because someone cannot accept someone who should be a big boy, someone who should be able to take wins and losses, can't accept losing a single election in 2020, and their whole party has been turned upside down because of it.
▶ 0:36:49But anyway, that's just my editorializing, uh, on the amendment. Um, I do want to say again, democrats support voter identification. We don't want people who aren't eligible to vote, to vote, and we don't do anything to try to encourage it, despite everything that the president or his allies may say. As I mentioned in my previous comments, house democrats freedom to vote act contains a strong, accessible voter id provision.
▶ 0:37:13So in the spirit of finding bipartisan consensus, my dear friend from oklahoma talked about bipartisan consensus. I'm going to offer, um, an amendment, uh, because bipartisan bipartisanship was once common in the realm of election administration before the leader of one party wagered that denying the results of an election liberated him from its consequences, from its results. All you have to do is attack it, attack its credibility, and you can absolve yourself of losing an election anyway.
▶ 0:37:42I offer an amendment to ensure that american elections remain free, fair, secure and accessible to every eligible voter. I'm proud to offer this amendment alongside my friend congresswoman sewell, the ranking member of the committee subcommittee on elections. It would expand h.r. 9368 forms of acceptable voter id. It borrows from the common sense list of eligible voter identification in the freedom to vote act, including student ids, gun licenses, and concealed carry permits. But we want to find common ground here.
▶ 0:38:12So in good faith, an offer of bipartisan. This amendment would also adopt portions of the bill under consideration today. Committee. Democrats feel that the grant program in section three, for example, makes good sense. Our amendment would retain this republican provision and to ensure that the bill is as effective as possible, our amendment would provide funding to ensure these grants sufficiently serve the eligible american voters most in need. So I encourage my colleagues, both democrat and republican, to support this reasonable approach to voter id. Americans want us to compromise.
▶ 0:38:42They want us to protect voting rights. They want us to secure american elections, including from those in power who would weaponize government power against their political opponents. With this amendment, we'll do all of the above, and I urge its adoption. And with that, I yield back. >> thank you. The gentleman yields back. Is there further debate on the amendment? Representative miller from illinois is recognized. >> okay. Thank you.
▶ 0:39:05I just like to respond to the accusations from the democrats today that, um, uh, any that we want to suppress, uh, voter vote access to, to vote. Okay. It's so ridiculous. I'm triggered. Um, we can look at the votes 100%. The democrats do not support, uh, save america. They don't support mega.
▶ 0:39:34And the reason we want to use, uh, a voter id with a photo is because of the fraud that's going on in our country. And it's in blue states in particularly. It's, uh, snap, it's child care, um, facilities, it's medicare. And even just the government accountability office has estimated the fraud to be up to a half of $1 trillion.
▶ 0:40:03Now, are you telling me these same people are going to have so much integrity when it comes to voting? They are not. That's why we want voter id. That's why the american people want voter id, and you cannot use a student id to go sign up for snap. There's a reason for that. There is excessive fraud. >> in the gentlelady. >> yield include no, including election fraud.
▶ 0:40:28And it's interesting that two of my friends in illinois with the doj have sued illinois over just cleaning up their voter rolls. There's an estimated up to 800,000 ineligible voters on the voter rolls in illinois because they support election fraud. That's what that is doing. When you do not clean up voter rolls, you're supporting election fraud. And guess what? The state of illinois decided to settle because they know they don't have a case.
▶ 0:40:56We want election integrity. Voter id quit gaslighting us. It's the democrats that do not support voter id. And with that I yield. >> the gentleman yields. Is there further debate? Representative sewell is recognized to strike the last word. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I want to wholeheartedly support the amendment of the ranking member. Um, democrats support voter id.
▶ 0:41:25I'm going to say it again. Democrats support voter id. We all agree that it's important for voters to verify who they are in the registration process, as well as the voting process. However, imposing a strict national photo id requirement that only accepts five forms of id risks disenfranchizing millions of voters.
▶ 0:41:48Some may be surprised to know just how many voters do not have driver's license, state issued id, passports, military id, or tribal id. A report of the university of maryland center for democracy and civic engagement estimates that a restrictive voter id law like this one would suppress voting rights of over 30 million americans. I said how personal this was with my dad.
▶ 0:42:16You know, my dad was highly motivated to go to the polls and get his voter id because he had to vote for his daughter on the ballot. It should not have taken, uh, an act of the secretary of state to get him a photo id. We have to think about the fact that we are adding, uh, more restrictive voting laws by limiting the types of id that we have a federal law that only permits five forms of id for voting is simply too restrictive.
▶ 0:42:44Even the state of texas, as our colleague said, has a very restrictive voter id, but it allows seven forms of id. So I think it's really important that we acknowledge that, um, studies have shown and demonstrated that the extensive voter id restrictions do disproportionately affect black and brown american citizens with disabilities.
▶ 0:43:10The elderly and working class voters are disproportionately impacted by these restrictive photo id laws. Um, state governments throughout the country, including my own state of alabama, have already redrawn district maps and moved primaries due to the calais case. Uh, decision by the supreme court pairing that extreme effort with this voter suppression bill further erodes the election integrity that we all cherish as lawmakers.
▶ 0:43:36Or should the ranking members amendment, uh, consider will provide and create an extensive list of documents that a person can use to verify their id, like a valid lease, a mortgage document, a bank statement, a utility bill, a health id, a health insurance card, an id card issued by the supplemental nutrition program. And the list goes on. When it comes to legislating, reality should be our start point.
▶ 0:44:05And that starting point has to start with the fact, the simple truth that rampant voter fraud is a myth. It does not exist. This legislation is an egregious attempt to solve a problem that is not based on a real problem. It is already illegal to commit voter fraud in federal elections.
▶ 0:44:26It is already illegal to commit voter fraud in federal elections, and american citizens, people who are not american citizens are not allowed to vote. And that also is a crime. The solution to resolve this non-existent problem is not to suppress the vote of millions of americans. Rather, the solution is to make it easier for folks to access the ballot box.
▶ 0:44:51Um, with that, I want to yield back my balance of my time, but I just want to reiterate something that was said here today. It is not as if democrats are against voter id or even photo id. What we're against is having a restrictive list that includes things like a passport. A passport costs $140. The folks in my district, the median income for a family of four is $36,000.
▶ 0:45:20There are lots of people who cannot afford a passport. There are lots of people who don't have a driver's license. There are lots of people who don't have a military id, a tribal id, or any other state issued id. We have to think about that. We should be making it easier to vote, not harder to vote. And with that, I want to yield back the balance of my time and ask that all of my, um, colleagues consider voting in favor of this amendment. >> the gentleman yields back.
▶ 0:45:50Representative lee is recognized to strike the last word. >> so I think it's important for us to note here today, every member on this committee who has spoken has said the words that they support voter id, but yet only some of the members on the committee actually support the underlying bill that would define that and require it in federal elections. So the key issue is really this. It's how do we define what a voter id is?
▶ 0:46:19And for clarity, I think that it's important we spend a little time there. The amendment that we're discussing right now would include not just a driver's license, not just a state issued id, not just a passport, but it would also include things like a valid debit card or a valid utility bill or a health insurance card.
▶ 0:46:41And so where the disagreement lies in this committee between the republicans that are here and the democrats, is whether those types of documents are sufficient to verify identity when going to the polls. And so, you know, I think as the chairman started today, we ask ourselves these questions will tsa accept my utility bill? Can I buy beer with my health insurance card?
▶ 0:47:11Unequivocally, no. And no one in america would suggest to us that it should be so. As for the point, as for the allegation that in any way, the underlying bill we consider here today would be harmful to those who can't afford id? No, it's right there in the bill.
▶ 0:47:33One of the things that we anticipated to ensure that there was not a financial barrier to any american to voting was the establishment of a grant program so that any american who needs a valid state issued id but cannot cover the cost of obtaining that id, has a pathway, a pathway to do so. Here is the reality.
▶ 0:48:00Republicans want to ensure that every american has access to the polls, that every american can exercise their right to vote. All we are doing here today is ensuring that there is a baseline, verifiable way to confirm identity for people who come to the polls.
▶ 0:48:24It is something that americans across the country do every day in other aspects of life, and bringing that baseline common sense, level of integrity and reliability to the ids that we use at the polls is not making it difficult to vote. It is creating a system that we can rely on that ensures the reliability, integrity, and consistency of elections across this country. And with that, Mr. chairman, I yield back. >> the gentleman yields back.
▶ 0:48:55Representative torres is recognized to strike the last word. >> thank you, chairman. I fully support the amendment offered by ranking member morelli, and I just want to once again, um, be very clear about what is happening in this committee with the republican effort to cancel your vote as american citizens.
▶ 0:49:23They only want the people who agree with their ill conceived policies of hate, of, of continuing foreign wars, of continuing to spread violence in our community, one american against the other. That doesn't not make us safe. That makes us incredibly selfish.
▶ 0:49:49They know that american citizens are eyes wide open. The cost of living has gone up. Our health care has gone up. The cost of fuel has gone up. Everything that they run on has failed, failed, failed, failed miserably. So here they are. They want to block your vote because they are scared of losing their job.
▶ 0:50:18And you know what my opinion is, is that they should lose their job. Chairman, you came to los angeles because you were also spreading rumors that in california, uh, we were changing people's ballots and changing votes.
▶ 0:50:34And instead what you found and, and what you said to fox news during that interview that I actually posted on my social media page was that you found an incredibly slow process of ballot verification because when people, senator. >> kirsch and california tax every signature. >> and if it doesn't. >> match. We make every attempt to.
▶ 0:51:02>> cure to reach out to that voter to ensure that they are a person who actually voted. Check the facts. Voters check the facts. Americans see who's on your side, check their voting record and every single vote that they have taken since trump was elected has been to benefit the president and to benefit their billionaire funders, not to benefit the
▶ 0:51:34Welfare of american citizens. With that, I'm going to yield the rest of my time to the ranking member. >> thank you to miss torres. I just want to note, and I appreciate my colleague from florida, but when she was secretary of state in florida, you could use to vote student id id from a retirement center or neighborhood association, public assistance, identification, a firearm license, or even an employee id card from any government agency in order to cast a ballot,
▶ 0:52:05Including. You could also use a debit or credit card when you were secretary of state. That's what you allowed. But somehow it's no longer good enough for the people of this country. In georgia, you can use a driver's license even if it's expired. Expiration didn't matter. In georgia, a student id or even an employee id from any government federal to municipal. Wisconsin allows a student id. Um. It even allows newly issued driver's license within 45 days. And it doesn't matter about expiration.
▶ 0:52:34North carolina, you can use your driver's license even if it is expired. A public assistance program id card. Miss miller, a public assistance program id card, or a student or staff id from a list of over 7000 institutions. You know why?
▶ 0:52:49Because in all these states, at the very least, they recognize what we're trying to just simply prove is that you are who you are, not that you have a card that's not expired, not that limiting this to the narrowest range of is clear. What you're intending to do is stop people from voting. There could be no other rationale. These are not states. Again, I wasn't talking about what happens in new york. I wasn't talking about california or all the places where you assume progressives are trying to take elections away.
▶ 0:53:17These are from conservative southern states. And what they do to allow an expansive view that you ought to have the minimal requirement. You ought to be able to prove who you are. And that's it. Because voting, unlike getting on an airplane, unlike buying alcohol or liquor, those are privileges. And those. You have to demonstrate certain degrees of competence or certain degrees of safety, not to vote, not to vote. It's an unalienable right. In my view.
▶ 0:53:47That's what the founders wanted everyone. And by the way, they had an expansive view, even in 1787 when they built this constitution, pretty expansive view of who was allowed to vote didn't require property rights. It didn't require anything to be able to vote. It did, unfortunately, restrict black americans and women. We rectified that, but they had a more expansive view than even the republicans do in 2026. With that, I yield back. >> the gentleman's time has expired.
▶ 0:54:16The representative loudermilk is recognized to strike the last word. Mr. chairman. Um, I had not intended to speak, but I have to respond to the inflammatory and divisive words by the gentlewoman from california that republicans are spreading hate. The republicans are are causing violence. I was on the baseball field on june the 14th of 2017 when a democrat took opened fire on me. This is my time.
▶ 0:54:45>> I guess, and I thought it is my friend from the capital and slaughter your president and I. >> will suspend. Jared huffman will suspend. >> gentleman suspend. Your. Now that you span across america, but that you will not. >> recognize the gentlewoman is not recognized. The time is. The gentleman from georgia. The gentleman from georgia is now recognized. I is not recognized.
▶ 0:55:17The gentleman from georgia will taking cover behind tom cole for 22. >> hours, not a toy. >> not that I am the gentlewoman will suspend. All members are reminded to address their remarks to the chair. The gentleman has the time. The gentleman will be given the time to deliver his remarks as the gentlewoman. Gentlewoman was given her time to deliver her remarks. The gentleman from georgia is recognized again. Mr.
▶ 0:55:45Chairman, I'm just bringing up the point that causing more divisiveness is not the solution here. It was a democrat that walked on the field and started shooting at me and several of my colleagues who was radicalized by inflammatory and divisive remarks by other democrats. I think this is unfair to lay this on the backs of republicans. And that was my point. I yield back.
▶ 0:56:13The gentleman yields back. Is there further debate on the amendment? Representative miller is recognized to strike the last word. >> yes. And I want to remind, uh, the democrats that when non-citizens vote, it is canceling the votes of american citizens. We want voter ids for one reason. We want only eligible american citizens to be able to vote.
▶ 0:56:41I want to remind everybody that the democrats deliberately open the border. They advertise and facilitated the invasion of our country for one reason and one reason only. And it is to replace american citizens at the polls, because you want to hang on to your power and you have terrible ideas.
▶ 0:57:07The american citizens do not support your terrible ideas, and you have brought these people in to replace american citizens. We want voter id because we want only eligible american citizens to vote. Otherwise, you are canceling the votes of american citizens. And with that, I yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. Is there further debate on the amendment? I recognize myself to strike the last word.
▶ 0:57:35Um, a lot has been said. I apologize to one of our colleagues, uh, who was just commenting about, uh, I didn't I the apologies to our colleague from georgia who has spoken over while he was discussing a member of congress being shot and almost passing away on a baseball field.
▶ 0:57:54I think when a member speaks, the member's time should be recognized, and that will be enforced in this committee as it relates to the underlying bill, I think it's really important that we have photo identification. I think, uh, the the gentleman's comments, uh, the ranking member, that there's a series of different standards across this nation actually is reason to support the underlying measure that we, we standardize the approach as we did in other areas of federal law. It was noted.
▶ 0:58:23Do you want to board an airplane? There's a pretty tight list of of forms of id that qualify. I think there's lots of reasons why this amendment, um, doesn't reach to the standard of the, the, to make sure that an individual is who they say they are. Uh, for example, I think if you come in with a utility bill, I think it'd be pretty easy, uh, to bring that bill and claim that you are somebody who you are not. I think the photo identification piece is really important.
▶ 0:58:51So obviously, unless the utility bill in a state that I'm unaware of has a photo associated with it, it doesn't, of course, in the state of wisconsin, uh, that would be unacceptable because I think you need to show a form of photo id. Handful of things were discussed. I just want to try to, to see if I can hit all of these in my, my time remaining. One is the, the funding aspect. It is correct. A passport costs cost money. Uh, all the more reason to make sure that we have the free option available. State of wisconsin. My home state has a free option available.
▶ 0:59:20We in fact, uh, put in place grant programs, uh, to allow for that. Um, I think states need to do a better job about making sure individuals in their state have a valid state id. I think it's really important for a host of things beyond just voting was discussed. Uh, I learned this in real time how alabama has a mobile unit that will go to different locations. Clever idea.
▶ 0:59:44I think states should be encouraged to make sure that we're getting individuals, uh, access to photo ids, um, when they need it. The underlying core goal here is to root out, uh, fraud writ large. We're discussing why you need identification to get snap benefits or other things. The whole idea here is to make sure that we're helping the people who need assistance and our welfare programs. Uh, but we don't allow people to come in, uh, and abuse the system.
▶ 1:00:09Uh, it was also discussed, uh, now two and a half years ago, uh, two days after the 2024 election, I did, uh, go to la to central count. Um, I think my, my interview, uh, as noted, was accurate. I think you posted it, uh, a member here posted it on their own social media because the interview I gave was accurate. And I think most americans are shocked as to how california runs their elections. There's a lot of problems with california runs their elections.
▶ 1:00:38If you care about building up americans confidence in our elections. To me, in that visit was really about one key principle. It's not the discussion today, but that is a simple principle that the ballots should arrive by the time the polls close. If you're a fan of watching sports, it's really nice. There's a whistle that indicates the game I. It instills confidence. >> to me. >> said the. The. The football game ended. >> by the way.
▶ 1:01:07Might be more touchdowns. >> coming in over the next couple of weeks. Even if that was legal, the rules and everybody bought into it. Boy, that doesn't really instill confidence as to how the game was played. Just say just blow the whistle. That's when the game's over. We all know we'll tally it up. I think that's where our elections. That was actually the point of my visit during that visit. It's actually pretty shocking, uh, how california does signature verification. Uh, that is a whole separate matter. I think there's massive opportunities with with california's election. We held a hearing on it.
▶ 1:01:34At its core, I think there's a basic premise. We want to make sure the individuals who go to vote are who they say they are. The easiest and best way to do that is through a government issued photo identification. We laid out five ways an individual could have that very straightforward, very simplistic. Uh, and I think there is a huge opportunity here to benefit from that if we pull in additional language. This is not in this bill today, but additional language from the mega act.
▶ 1:01:59Um, I think the real the real solution here is to further update the real id language such that your identification issued by the state, that real id standard says citizen or non-citizen. The state of north dakota, uh, already requires that on their state issued id. So if you're in the state of north dakota, you go and you get your real id, uh, it actually indicates citizen or non-citizen.
▶ 1:02:24They then have a photo identification requirement when an individual goes to the polls, uh, and you get a two fer in the state of north dakota, you get, uh, confirmation that the individual who is voting is a united states citizen, followed by the fact that the person who goes to the polls is who they say they are. I think that's actually a really straightforward way to accomplish our goal of making sure that it's only us citizens voting, and the person is who they say they are because of the underlying principles here, I am unable to support the ranking member's amendment.
▶ 1:02:52I think it actually guts out key provisions of the underlying bill. I encourage my colleagues to vote against the underlying amendment. I yield back. Is there further amendment or debate? Seeing none, does the gentlewoman from florida insist on her point of order? The point of order is withdrawn. The question now occurs on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york, Mr. morelli. All those in favor of the amendment signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? No. In the opinion of the chairs, the nos. Have it.
▶ 1:03:23>> I would like to ask for. >> a recorded vote. Uh, is is requested. The clerk will call the roll. >> chairman style. No chair votes. No miss lee, no. Miss lee votes. No Mr. loudermilk. No. Mr. loudermilk votes no. Mr. griffin. Mr. griffin votes no. Doctor murphy. Doctor murphy votes no. Miss spice, Mrs. spice votes no. Mr. kerry. Mr. kerry votes no. Mrs. miller. No. Mrs. miller votes no. Mr. morelli. Hi. Mr. morley votes I, miss sewell.
▶ 1:03:52Sewell votes I Mrs. torres. Mrs. torres votes. I miss johnson, miss johnson votes. >> I. The clerk will report the tally. >> Mr. chairman, the vote is four nos. And a yes or four no's, eight noes and four yeses. >> eight noes and four yeses. The amendment fails. Is there further amendment or debate on the underlying bill?
▶ 1:04:20Seeing none. All those in favor of. Let me pull up the bill number for us just so we get this on the record. The question now occurs on h.r. 9368. Um, all those that were in the a nsi apologize. We, we, we got going earlier today. And so I'm, I'm flipping my pages here. There being no further amendment, uh, nature of substitute all those in favor signify by saying I, I all those opposed. No.
▶ 1:04:49The chair the ayes have it and the amendment is adopted. The question now occurs on ordering h.r. 9368, as amended, reported favorably to the house. All those in favor signify by saying I, I all those opposed? No, no. And the opinion of the chair. The ayes have it, and the motion to report is agreed to. >> Mr. chairman, I request. >> a roll call. Vote has been requested in stereo. The clerk will please call the roll. >> chair style. >> I. >> chair. I miss lee, miss lee, Mr. loudermilk, Mr. Mr.
▶ 1:05:22Griffith, Mr. griffith. Doctor. Murphy. Doctor. Murphy. Mrs. bice. Mrs. vice. Versa. Mr. kerry. Yes. Mr. kerry. I. Mrs. miller. Mrs. miller. Votes. Aye. Mr. morelli. Yes. Mr. miller votes no. Miss sewell no votes, no. Mrs. torres. >> I I'm sorry. >> sorry. No. Um, miss johnson, miss johnson votes. No. >> all members voted.
▶ 1:05:50The clerk will report the tally. >> Mr. chairman, for this vote, there are eight eyes and four noes. >> a majority having voted in favor of h.r. 9368, as amended. The bill is reported favorably to the house. Without objection, a motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. I now call up h.r. 9367, the stop lawmakers from predicting act. The clerk will report the bill. >> h.r. 93. >> that objection, the first reading. The bill is dispensed with also. Without objection, the bill shall be considered as read and open to amendment at any point I have a.
▶ 1:06:20I have an amendment in the nature of a substitute of. The desk clerk will report the amendment. >> amendment. >> without objection. The amendment of the nature of substitute is considered as read, and will serve as base text for the purpose of further amendment. I recognize myself for five minutes to speak on the bill. Members of congress should be writing public policy, not wagering on its outcome. I think we all agree on that principle. Under current law, lawmakers are not explicitly prohibited from using prediction markets.
▶ 1:06:47There's growing concerns that lawmakers could wager on the outcomes of decisions they make under the stop lawmakers from predicting act members or spouses and their dependent children are prohibited from using prediction markets to wager on government policies, government action and political outcomes, or any other event that comes to the attention of a covered individual.
▶ 1:07:09As a result, directly or indirectly, of the service of a member of congress, the bill ensures accountability and makes it crystal clear that members cannot participate in these two activities. One wagering on the results of elections as elected officials, and two wagering on government policy. Uh, the penalties associated with this bill are strict in mirror the stop insider trading act.
▶ 1:07:32It includes a fine of $2,000 or 10% of the covered transaction, whichever is greater, and the forfeiture of any net gain realized from the transaction. Uh. Additionally, a member resigns or retires before paying the fine. Uh, the supervising ethics office can refer them to the department of justice for enforcement. This legislation will clarify that no member of congress can wager on insider information they may gain through their service. Uh.
▶ 1:07:58In january, this committee advanced the nonpartisan stop insider trading act, which prevents members of congress from purchasing individual stocks. So now we have an opportunity to build on that important legislation and take this next step. I urge my colleagues to support the common sense legislation. Uh, and it's our opportunity to continue to earn back the trust of american families. I yield back. Do other does any other member seek recognition the ranking members recognize to strike the last word. >> uh. Thank you. Chair. Strike the last word.
▶ 1:08:28I appreciate your gathering us together and considering a solution to what I consider to be a very, very important problem. Today, I support the policy goal of h.r. 9367. Just as I do not buy or sell stock, don't hold individual stock. I do not participate in prediction markets. And that should be the norm for the entirety of the federal government. That includes our official and campaign staffs, our institutional partners.
▶ 1:08:55As a matter of principle, it should include the president, the vice president, the cabinet, the justices of the supreme court. The behavior is too pernicious for a half measure, but. And even the mere appearance of self-dealing further erodes the already declining trust between the american people and this government. I take the trust that's put in me very, very seriously, as we all should.
▶ 1:09:20Before I get into the details of the legislation, it's important that we talk about how urgent this problem is, particularly for those of us in the federal government. For those watching at home, blissfully unaware of what prediction markets are, I want to read some examples of currently available contracts to give you an idea of what we're talking about and what we're confronting, here are some of the contracts that you can buy on the prediction markets. When will trump's ballroom be completed? Which cities will the national guard deploy to this year?
▶ 1:09:48Which bills will become law in 2026? Will mike johnson be ousted as speaker before november 3rd? When will congress regulate cryptocurrencies? Who will donald trump publicly insult by june 30th? I'm not making those up. Those are actually on the prediction markets right now. They may sound silly, they may sound benign on their face.
▶ 1:10:12But if you take a second to think about how easy it would be for someone, particularly a government official, to prohibit to profit using information they've acquired through their work. More grotesquely, war has been uniquely profitable for some users. The market for wagers on the on again, off again war in iran has already topped $2 billion.
▶ 1:10:36And for a president who changes his mind every 15 minutes or so on, what the rationale for the war is, you can imagine how profitable this could be. $2 billion being wagered on the suffering and despair of real people, as if this were betting on the world cup since the start of the iran war, billions of dollars of somehow perfectly timed bets have been placed on the price of oil, which is even more awe inspiring given what a prolonged, chaotic mess this war has been.
▶ 1:11:04The examples are manifold, and this administration has exacerbated the problem. Look no further than the trump family's personal involvement in the spread of prediction markets. Donald trump junior is deeply involved in the industry's two biggest trading platforms as a paid advisor and a direct investor.
▶ 1:11:23Coincidentally, just days after they hired the president's son, polymarket was allowed to resume operation in the united states following a two year ban by the commodities futures trading commission. And in october of last year, the trump media and technology group shamelessly announced the launch of its own trading platform, truth, predict, truth, predict. The president's son also sits on that company's board.
▶ 1:11:52Surely nothing to see here. Divert your attention. Which brings me to the bill we're considering today. H.r. 9367 is not a single chamber resolution for the purposes of self policing this house. I would support that effort. In fact, there are two resolutions currently filed with the house that would prohibit us, our staffs and house officers from participating in prediction markets. These resolutions have been awaiting floor consideration for months now. What's the hold up?
▶ 1:12:22We can clean up our own house and we can do it today by unanimous consent. It shouldn't be hard. The senate unanimously agreed to amend its rules to immediately and explicitly prohibit senators and their staffs from participating in prediction markets. It was effective immediately. A total ban on participation, no loopholes, no allowable types of any contracts. Instead of the simple approach, the bill we consider today is attempting to change federal law, but only for the house and senate.
▶ 1:12:51The senate is certainly not going to pass a bill that is a weaker version of what they already have done by rule. Further, h.r. 9367 takes effect after 180 days. I would prefer to see an immediate ban today. The senate did it in a matter of minutes. No six month grace period, no procedurally laborious process. They just went to the floor with a two page resolution and banned it all unanimously. We should do the same.
▶ 1:13:18I believe this bill, like the stop insider trading act, is meant to blunt the momentum on real reform. We could solve this problem today. The bill won't do it as such. I will oppose it and offer a more comprehensive policy as an amendment. And with that, I yield back. >> gentleman yields back. Is there further debate on the amendment? Is there a further amendment or debate on the amendment? An amendment. The gentleman has an amendment at the desk.
▶ 1:13:47The clerk will distribute the amendment.
▶ 1:14:17>> thank you. >> the clerk will report the amendment. >> amendment? >> without objection, the amendment is considered as read. >> chairman. >> gentleman from florida reserves a point of order. The gentleman from new york is recognized on his amendment. >> thank you, Mr. chairman, I am.
▶ 1:14:42This amendment is a comprehensive and immediate ban on congressional participation in prediction markets. The problem with h.r. 9367 is the bill falls too short, and this problem is far too serious to ignore. Uh. My objection shouldn't come as a surprise. When this committee considered the stop insider trading act, I raised related concerns with the shortcomings of that bill as well. The universe of prohibited investment vehicles is far too narrow, and the universe of covered individuals is far too small.
▶ 1:15:11The stop insider trading act still allows members to freely buy and sell privately traded company stocks. In fact, just days before we consider the bill, the chair of the republican conference purchased hundreds of thousands of dollars in a stock at a time a privately traded company. Days before the pentagon announced the integration of xai into its military systems.
▶ 1:15:36Then, just two weeks ago, ai's parent company, spacex, went public with the largest ipo in history. Notably, this transaction would have been wholly permitted by the stop insider trading act. Another provision of that bill even allows family members to make straw purchases of stock on behalf of members with zero restrictions. I raised these concerns because congressional participation in prediction markets like member stock trading is too urgent.
▶ 1:16:04An issue for half measures is too damaging to the fundamental idea of our republic and our democratic institutions. So I'm proposing a solution. While h.r. Nine three, six, seven bans only certain contracts for certain people, my amendment is a total congressional ban on participation in prediction markets. It covers members, senators, their immediate families, our staffs, candidates for federal office and their staffs, and the officers of the house and senate. Well, h.r.
▶ 1:16:329367 takes six months to take effect. My amendment is effective immediately. It contains no loopholes, no nebulous definitions or half year grace periods. It is effective, simple and immediate. Instantaneous. If anything, my amendment doesn't go far enough, extending into the executive and judicial branches of the federal government. But that's only because we are at the jurisdictional mercy of the rules of the house.
▶ 1:16:57The longer we wait to confront this problem, this head on is more foundation of our government crumbles. It's already on shaky ground. Billions of dollars of dark money are poisoning our elections. The right to vote is under unyielding assault from congress, state legislatures, and the supreme court, and no bid government contracts are being handed out like their pocket constitutions. The american people are sick of it, and it's hard to blame them.
▶ 1:17:26This amendment sends a message that not only are we going to clean up our own house, but we take the trust that's put in us by our constituents seriously, that we use the immense power of our offices to advocate for their best interests, not to self enrich. We can prove that today, right now, by adopting this amendment for the good of congress, for the good of the country. I urge the urge the committee to support this amendment, and I yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. Is there further debate on the amendment?
▶ 1:17:54I recognize myself to strike the last word. Uh, appreciate, uh, my my colleagues intention with his amendment. Uh, a couple of things to cover maybe on this one is I think it's important for the american people to know that there's there are a lot of rules and restrictions on anyone engaged in insider trading on these prediction markets.
▶ 1:18:16And so it would be illegal, uh, of course, under the cftc or the sec, who would have enforcement jurisdiction, uh, for an individual to engage in types of insider trading on these platforms. Um, it's a question then that becomes of how do you enforce that? How do we make sure that this is explicit in what areas should we prevent? Um, my, my colleagues amendment broadens the types of transactions that are covered.
▶ 1:18:40But if we step back and think about the fact that this underlying bill applies to members, spouses and dependent children, uh, one could envision a really simplistic scenario, I think, where no ill intent would be intended, uh, but would be a violation then a federal law. So let me run through this scenario. Say, uh, an individual has a son or daughter who's 18 goes to college. Uh, they're at oklahoma state university of wisconsin, uh, or somewhere else. And they get excited during the ncaa tournament.
▶ 1:19:06Uh, they turn on their phone and they make an otherwise legal bet, uh, or a prediction, uh, because you could this, this wouldn't impact, uh, gambling through, say, like a draftkings, but it would impact prediction markets, say, through cal poly market. And they go on to make an otherwise legal prediction on the outcome of the ncaa tournament. Maybe they put $10 down, they triple their money. However that plays out, uh, under my colleague's amendment.
▶ 1:19:32Uh, with a broad brush, their dependent child away at college would trigger a federal violation of the underlying member. Um, I don't think that's really the intent we're after. Now, whether or not individuals be engaged in prediction markets or online gambling, uh, that is a contentious debate across the country. And I'm not looking to, to enter into that, uh, at least not today. Um, but I don't think that's actually the intention of what is offered.
▶ 1:19:58But I think that's what the legislative text of this amendment is offered actually does what I'm trying to do in my underlying amendment is actually narrow this down to two key areas that I think we should just even remove the appearance of impropriety from. One is public policy. And it was noted by my, my, my colleague, a couple areas where individuals could make, uh, where an individual could go online and make a prediction on public policy. I think it's pretty clear we don't want members in that space.
▶ 1:20:25I think it would already be illegal under insider trading rules. Maybe. Maybe not. Let's just make it explicit and clear under the jurisdiction that this committee has, our legislation does that. The second, uh, is elections, in large part because we're all engaged in those. There was an election last night in new york. Uh, and for obvious reasons, uh, we wouldn't want members engaging in predictions in that space.
▶ 1:20:50Um, and many of these platforms, when you go on, actually, if you read the rules and regulations of those platforms, they're actually outlawing that or banning it. Maybe it would be a better word, uh, in the terms and conditions of these platforms, but I think it's actually a really good policy for us to make that explicit, uh, into the law. It actually couples with the stop insider trading act, bipartisan legislation that we've moved through this committee, uh, earlier this year, uh, which we're hopeful, uh, will ultimately see floor action.
▶ 1:21:18I think it's a really important piece of legislation. And so the underlying bill, uh, is intended to couple with the insider stop insider trading act, uh, not to be too broad that it picks up what I think most members would think is otherwise, um, constitutionally acceptable or permissible, uh, behavior of family members, maybe making a prediction on a sports, uh, event, uh, that they want to, uh, legally participate in, uh, just by, by
▶ 1:21:49The fact that they are a dependent adult child or a spouse of a member. I don't think that they should inherently be restricted on that. As we look to other, uh, government employees, I'm very, actually very open to working with the ranking member in that regard. Uh, this committee, uh, will lose jurisdiction as we look to all federal employees. Uh, but I'm very open to expanding the scope of covered individuals, um, that, that play in. So I, I appreciate the, the intention, uh, of my colleague's amendment.
▶ 1:22:19I don't think it strikes, uh, exactly what we're after. I encourage my colleagues to vote no on the amendment and yes, on the underlying amendment offered by myself. Uh, with that, I yield back. Is there further debate on the amendment? Representative bice is recognized to strike the last word. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. And I just want to reiterate the point that you made. I actually agree that no member of congress should be, uh, partaking in prediction markets.
▶ 1:22:47There's actually in my office, part of our employee handbook prohibits staff from actually participating in these, particularly as it relates to, uh, political activity. So I agree, and I wouldn't be opposed to necessarily, uh, doing this sooner, but I do oppose the fact that, as the chairman said, a college student who may want to partake is prohibited.
▶ 1:23:13And or there could be some sort of civil or criminal penalties that would go along with that or, you know, a affecting the member themselves, I think is problematic. And that's why I'll be opposing the amendment. But I appreciate the ranking members consideration. And with that, I yield back. >> representative bice yields back. Is there further debate on the amendment? There being no further debate.
▶ 1:23:44>> I withdraw. >> my point of order. The gentlewoman removes her point of order. The question is now on the amendment from Mr. morelli of new york. All those in favor of the amendment signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? No. No. The opinion of the chairs. The nos. Have it, yes. A recorded vote is requested. The clerk will call the roll. >> chairman style. >> no. >> so, miss lee? No. Miss lee votes no. Mr. loudermilk. No. Mr. loudermilk votes no. Mr.
▶ 1:24:14Griffith. Doctor. Murphy. Mr. spice. Mrs. spice. No. Mr. kerry. Mrs. miller. Mrs. miller. Votes. No. Mr. morelli. Yes. Mr. rowley votes. Hi. Miss sewell. Yes. Miss sewell votes. Hi. Mrs. torres. >> yes. >> Mrs. torres votes. Hi, miss johnson votes. >> I. The clerk will report the tally. >> Mr. chairman, there are five noes and four yeses. >> the amendment is not adopted.
▶ 1:24:45Is there a further amendment or debate? There being no further amendment or debate, the question now occurs in the amendment in the nature of a substitute. All those in favor signify by saying aye. All those opposed? No opinion. The chair the ayes have it. The amendment is adopted. The question now occurs on ordering h.r. 9367, as amended, reported favorably to the house. Those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed? No, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. The motion to report is agreed to a roll call.
▶ 1:25:15A roll call vote is requested. The clerk will please call the roll. >> chairman styles. I chair votes. I miss lee, I miss lee, Mr. loudermilk, Mr. loudermilk. Hi, Mr. griffith, doctor. Murphy. Mrs. Mrs. burgess owens I, Mr. kerry, Mrs. miller, Mrs. miller. Votes. Hi. Mr. morelli. >> no. >> Mr. rowley votes. No. Miss. Sewell. Sewell votes. No. Mrs. torres, Mrs. torres votes. Miss. Johnson, miss johnson votes no.
▶ 1:25:48>>? The clerk will report the tally. >> Mr. chairman, for this vote, there are five I's and four no's. >> majority having voted favorably of h.r. 9367, as amended. The bill is ordered reported favorably to the house. Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. I now call up h.r. 9342. The gpo modernization act of 2026, introduced by our colleague representative bice from oklahoma. The clerk will report the bill.
▶ 1:26:19>> h.r. 9342. >> without objection, the first reading the bill is dispensed with. Also, without objection, the bill should be considered as read and open to amendment at any point. I have an amendment in the nature of a substitute at the desk. The. Please. The clerk will report the amendment. >> amendment in the nature of a substitute to. >> without objection, the amendment in the nature of substitute is considered as read and will serve as base text for the purpose of further amendment. I now recognize representative bice for five minutes to speak on her bill. >> thank you, Mr.
▶ 1:26:44Chairman, and I'm going to try to make this very brief because I know we're pressed for time. Thank you for having this markup today. Considering the bill, the gpo modernization act of 2026. And I also want to thank gpo director halpern and the staff for their hard work. Um, this bill is simple. It gives gpo the desperate statutory updates that the office has asked congress for for years, and it will finally bring the gpo into the 21st century. As an example, it aligns statutory gpo authorities with the current digital first environment in which they operate.
▶ 1:27:14It removes antiquated references to gpos role in producing inks and glues for federal agencies, and reframes the agency's role in providing publishing and other services. Uh. It also helps the federal deposit library program better serve communities with their digital first needs. Many of the provisions follow findings from the gpo task force on a digital federal depository library program. There's a lot of other great updates in the bill.
▶ 1:27:42I encourage my colleagues to vote yes, and I yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman yields back. Is there further amendment or debate? The gentleman from new york is recognized to strike the last word. >> thank you. Uh, Mr. chair, and I want to begin by thanking my friend and colleague, miss bice, for the bill and just make a couple of quick observations, if I might. The government publishing office is a pillar of the legislative branch without a. Congress simply could not write laws, issue reports, or conduct virtually any of its constitutional responsibilities.
▶ 1:28:12Uh, and it provides the public with one of the essentials of democracy access to authoritative, accurate information. The statutes governing the gpo have seen modest updates over the years, including name change from the original government printing office to the government publishing office. But much of the law still predates the digital era, so the bill further modernizes those statutes, streamlines their operation and provides public access to government information.
▶ 1:28:37I support these efforts, which will help strengthen gpo's capacity, and in turn, congress has to do its work. Among other things, the bill updates the federal depository library program, um, uh, to more effectively provide free, equitable and convenient public access to government information. It will allow depository libraries because I'm going to get a plug in for my local library, including the rochester public library and the rush rhees library at the university of rochester in my home district, to substitute digital copies of government documents for hard copies.
▶ 1:29:07Um, it will free up physical space, therefore, and let libraries without room on their shelves take part in the program and serve the public. It established a national collection of U.S. government public information. It gives the superintendent of documents the tools to catalog, preserve and provide that information to the public. I would go through more because this is a good bill, and I really think this is important. So, uh, and I want to be able to give credit to my friend.
▶ 1:29:34Um, but I will say this, thomas jefferson once wrote that if a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. So guarding against that begins with access to reliable public information, and I'm grateful to support this legislation. Grateful for my friend and urge my colleagues to do the same, I yield back. >> gentleman yields back. Is there a further amendment or debate? Seeing none.
▶ 1:29:59Uh, there being no further amendment in debate, the question now occurs on the amendment in the nature of a substitute. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? No. Depending on the chair, the ayes have it. And the amendment is adopted. Without objection, we'll hold the vote to report until the end of two more bills. Uh, we have a couple of colleagues who have, uh, who are wrapping up a little bit of other work. I now call up h.r.
▶ 1:30:269360, the advisory committee on the records of congress sunset act, introduced by our colleague, representative mary miller of illinois. The clerk will report the bill. >> thank you, chairman steele. My bill, h.r. 9000. >> 361, with a one one moment the. The clerk will report. The bill will be to you in one second. But I love the energy. Uh, clerical, please report the bill. >> h.r. Nine 360. >> without objection.
▶ 1:30:49The first reading the bill is dispensed with also, without objection, the bill shall be considered as at any point an amendment in the nature of substitute the amendment. Without objection, the. Substitute is considered as. >> as. Further amendment. >> the gentlewoman from illinois, representative miller, for five minutes to speak. >> thank you, chairman, we have energy to wrap this hearing up. My bill, h.r.
▶ 1:31:159360, will sunset the advisory committee on the records of congress. This committee was created in the. In the 90s to advise congress in the national archives on the management and retention of congressional records.
▶ 1:31:28Due to the change in technology and the operations of congress over the last several decades, my bill would eliminate this now antiquated committee and instead permit the archivist, house clerk, secretary of the senate, and director of the senate for legislative archives to meet once a year to review records.
▶ 1:31:47The bill requires the center for legislative archives to publish an annual report on the management and preservation of records keeping congress and the national archives updated on the center's management practices. Sunsetting. The advisory committee on the records of congress will save approximately $38,000 annually in operating costs without sacrificing the transparency of congressional records.
▶ 1:32:13As this advisory committee approaches, its 36 year stakeholders agree the committee accomplished its original mandate and has outlived its usefulness. I urge all my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back. >> the gentleman yields back to further debate or amendment? Gentleman from new york is recognized to strike the last word. >> thank you, Mr. chair. Just a brief word, and I thank the gentlelady for offering it.
▶ 1:32:37The advisory committee on the records of congress was created in 1990 to review and advise congress and the national archives on the management and preservation of congressional records. And the house clerk, who's one of the leaders of the advisory committee approached us, I believe, with this proposal because the committee accomplished its key goals and is no longer useful in addressing current challenges. And it's important to continue to update this and not have rules that are outdated. So which makes sense.
▶ 1:33:03The ways we manage and preserve records have changed significantly over the last three and a half decades, and sunsetting this committee will allow the resources dedicated to it to be used to improve, um, contemporary archiving practices. So I want to urge my colleagues to support the bill. And with that, I will yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. Is there further amendment or debate? There being no further amendment or debate? The question now occurs on the amendment in the nature of a substitute. All those in favor signify by saying aye. I.
▶ 1:33:32Those opposed? No. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the amendment is adopted. Without objection. We'll hold the vote to report until the end. I now call up h.r. 33. 34 the u. Scp empowerment act of 2025 uh, introduced by representative crane from arizona. The clerk will report the bill without objection. The first reading the bill is dispensed with also, without objection, the bill shall be considered as read and open to amendment at any point.
▶ 1:33:59I have an amendment in the nature of a substitute at the desk. The clerk will report the amendment. >> amendment. >> without objection. The amendment in the nature of a substitute is considered as read and will serve as base text for the purpose of further amendment. I now recognize myself for five minutes to speak on the bill. The united states capitol police are charged with protecting the safety of the capitol complex for visitors, staff and members alike.
▶ 1:34:21Uh, we're all aware drone usage over the years has grown rapidly, which is a new safety and security challenge around sensitive areas like the us capitol. Uh, as a result, U.S. capitol police has invested in technology and new capabilities to detect and disable unauthorized drones. Uh, however, uh, there are gaps in regulatory authority that need updating to ensure the united states capitol police has explicit authority to respond to any emerging drone activity.
▶ 1:34:52I think we can all agree that the capitol police stands ready and able to address potential threats, but we must ensure that they have the tools they need, uh, without confusion. And so the bill authorizes the united states capitol police to research and evaluate capitol police's capabilities to respond to unauthorized drone activity to ensure preparations are made for the next generation of drone technology.
▶ 1:35:15Uh, I just want to thank representative crane for his leadership and work on this issue to ensure that law enforcement officials, like us, have the tools they need to keep our public and capital safe. I think this is an important clarifying, uh, piece of legislation. I urge my colleagues to support the legislation. Do any other members seek recognition or debate? Representative morales recognized to strike the last word. >> thank you, Mr. chair. Striking the last word. It is no secret that threats against the congress remain extraordinarily high, as the chairman has just indicated.
▶ 1:35:45In 2025 alone, capitol police threat assessment section investigated nearly 15,000 threats and directions of interest against members, their families, staff and the capitol complex an extraordinary number. Unfortunately, the trend has not abated, and while post january 6th reforms have significantly strengthened the security here on the campus campus, the threat environment continues to evolve and our response must evolve with it. And h.r.
▶ 1:36:11Three, three, three, four would help address one such emerging threat unmanned aircraft systems, commonly known as drones. While the capitol police can and do identify and disable drones flown near the capitol, the department lacks the clear statutory authority that other federal agencies possess.
▶ 1:36:26This bill expressly authorizes capitol police to detect, track and, when necessary, disable a drone that poses a threat to the capitol campus and the people who are on it, and allows capitol police to move easily and to coordinate with partner agencies like the federal aviation administration. Advances in technology have made drones smaller, cheaper and more capable than ever before. I work very closely with the sheriff in monroe county, where rochester is located, on drones and the.
▶ 1:36:54The public policies that relate to drone technology for other law enforcement agencies and what was once niche technology is now widely available and malign actors around the world have demonstrated how these systems can be used for surveillance, disruption, and even for attacks. And just in fact, just a few weeks ago, the individual accused of plotting an attack on the white house event reportedly intended to employ drones as part of that attack. These threats are not hypothetical.
▶ 1:37:24The bill is measured, but meaningful step towards empowering the capitol police and make sure that they have the tools and authorities necessary to protect the congress. At the same time, as capitol police take on more and more threat threats against the congress, the department must stay focused on its core mission screening at our doors, inspecting vehicles, assessing threats in time to act on them, and new authorities like this one should reinforce that mission, not pull focus from it.
▶ 1:37:53Um, I expect congress will need to continue to adapt as technology continues to change. Uh, and I hope the department will continue to work closely with subject matter experts at the department of homeland security, the department of defense, the department of transportation. As a. Further develops the counter uas capability. So I support this legislation, encourage my colleagues to do the same and appreciate the legislation. With that, I'll yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. Uh, representative miller's recognized to strike the last word. >> thank you, chairman style. I strongly support the u.
▶ 1:38:21Scp empowerment act, which will help strengthen the security of our capital complex. I have a letter of support addressed to this committee from representative crane, the bill's sponsor, and I request unanimous consent to submit representative crane's letter into the record, as well as a us capitol police document from 2016 detailing U.S. drone policy. >> without objection. >> thank you, Mr. chairman, and I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
▶ 1:38:51And with that, I yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. Is there further debate or amendment? There being no further debate or amendment, the question now occurs on the amendment and the nature of a substitute. All those in favor signify by saying aye. All those opposed? No. That. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? No. In the opinion of the chairs, the ayes have it. And the amendment is adopted. Without objection we'll hold the vote to report until the end. It's now the end.
▶ 1:39:18Uh, the question now occurs on ordering h.r. 9342, as amended. Nine h.r. 9360, as amended, and h.r. 3334, as amended in block uh. All those in favor signify by saying I, I those opposed? No. The chair the ayes have it, and the motion is agreed to a roll call vote is requested.
▶ 1:39:45Uh, the clerk will please call the roll chair. >> I chair also I miss lee I I Mr. loudermilk, Mr. griffith, doctor murphy. Doctor murphy. Votes. Hi. Mrs. bice. Mrs. vice. Mr. kerry, Mrs. >> miller I. >> Mrs. miller, Mr. morelli. I Mr. miller, I miss. Sewell, uh, Mrs. torres, Mrs. torres, I miss. Johnson, miss johnson. Votes. >> I.
▶ 1:40:14The clerk will report the tally. >> so, chairman, for this vote there are eight eyes and zero noes. >> a majority having voted in favor of h.r. 93, 42, 93, 60 and 3334 as a as amended. Uh, the bills are ordered reported favorably to the house. Without objection, a motion to reconsider is laid on the table. This concludes the order of business for today's markup.
▶ 1:40:43Without objection, pursuant pursuant to house rule nine, clause two, l committee members can file with the clerk of the committee supplemental, additional minority and dissenting views on each of the items marked up today. Also, without objection, the staff is authorized to make necessary technical and conforming changes if there's no further business. I want to thank the members for their participation. Without objection, the committee on house administration stands adjourned.