Rep. McCollum Statement Opposing the National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Appropriations Bill

I rise today in opposition to H.R. 8595, the Fiscal Year 2027 State and Foreign Operations appropriations bill. I opposed the bill when it was reported out of the House Appropriations Committee, and urge my colleagues to join me in opposing the bill on the House Floor. Before I address underlying issues with the base bill, I’d like to address one amendment offered by Mr. Massie.

I have long been a vocal opponent of the way the United States provides a blank check to Israel. For the last nine years, I have carried a bill, the Defending the Human Rights of Palestinian Children and Families Living Under Israeli Military Occupation, which would put limits on how all US assistance to Israel may be used. My bill would ensure that not one penny of taxpayer dollars is used to violate the human rights of Palestinian children. Further, I am a proud cosponsor of other legislation, like the Block the Bombs Act, that would place additional limits on US assistance to Israel. These are the legislative proposals that the House should be taking up to condition assistance to Israel.

Instead, the House is considering Mr. Massie’s amendment which would strike all $3.3 billion in Foreign Military Financing to Israel. I support the goal of Mr. Massie’s amendment to cut the same funding that has helped Israel commit human rights violations in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon. However, this amendment does nothing to limit the assistance we provide to Israel under the defense appropriations bill, nor does it condition future assistance that the US is due to provide Israel under the existing Memorandum of Understanding between our two countries that is not set to expire until FY2028. I will vote present on Mr. Massie’s amendment as I have serious concerns with the way it is so broadly written. As drafted, other foreign assistance—including vital assistance to Palestinians—could be cut off as well. For Mr. Massie, this amendment is just another way to carry out President Trump’s isolationist agenda to limit and, in some cases completely cease, US foreign assistance.

With that, I’d like to express my concerns with the underlying bill. It’s deeply unfortunate that this legislation continues President Trump’s retreat from strong American diplomacy in the world and supporting development assistance. We know what happens when America withdraws from the developing world: poverty, malnutrition, and disease take hold, transnational terrorism spreads, and our adversaries like Russia and China move in to fill the void. This bill is $2.7 billion dollars below last year. It is a staggering $12 billion below where the bill was two years ago. 20 percent. Gone. In two years. 
 

I am particularly heartbroken by what has happened to funding for global health initiatives, which used to be a source of bipartisan pride. Democrats and Republicans used to stand together and say: America saves lives, and we do it because it reflects our values. But this bill cuts $532 million from global health programs.

Here is what will happen: fewer mothers will survive childbirth in sub-Saharan Africa. Fewer children will be vaccinated against highly contagious, dangerous diseases like tuberculosis—and we know that disease does not stop at any border. It means HIV clinics in Zambia, in Uganda, and in the Philippines shut their doors. Make no mistake—even if America disengages from the world, global problems will still land on our doorstep—they’ll just be harder to manage. 

These programs save lives, and they improve our national security in the process. We can and must do better.

I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing this bill. 

I yield back.