the argument being made on the other side is not accurate. I will give them the benefit of the doubt because, perhaps, they don't know it is not accurate. We have over 110 people who are prepared to vote for all of the funding in DHS other than both of the components who recently have snatched people off the streets of America, wearing hoods and no badges and putting them into unmarked cars. Yes, we are not for that. The gentleman said he was--that I asked to yield--a law enforcement officer. I was going to ask him whether he ever wore a mask during the course of his duties, not a gas mask, a mask to keep him secret. I was going to ask him whether he ever went into a home without a warrant, inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States. Yes, we want to defend the Constitution of the United States. By the way, unless you missed it, when we passed the appropriation bills that have funded most of the government, we did so, and we took DHS out and told you we are not for that. What you continue to do is to bring to this floor something we have told you we are not for. Mr. Speaker, if the Speaker of the House brought that bill to the floor to fund all of DHS' components, except those two agencies, it would pass overwhelmingly today, within this hour. I guarantee it as a former majority leader.
On the recordMarch 26, 2026
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Addressing concerns about funding for the Department of Homeland Security and law enforcement practices.
Share
More from Steny Hoyer
Aug 14, 2026
Americans deserve to have Congress focus on the issues that matter, not litigating conspiracy theories from the pandemic.
Jul 19, 2026
The proposed Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance represents a threat to every one of those efforts to better American lives, strengthen our economy, and keep our country competitive.
Aug 13, 2026
The threat posed by Putin, sowing global instability, kidnapping children, and targeting civilians, demands comprehensive and resolute action.
Jul 23, 2026
The Trump Administration should be ashamed of itself for proposing this pay disparity, and I urge the Senate to address it and insist on parity.





