Donald Trump and Stephen Miller attempted to rewrite the Constitution
through an executive order banning birthright citizenship for the
children of undocumented immigrants. It is the same legal arguments
that were first used when a white supremacist wanted to deny U.S.
citizenship to Chinese Americans.
  Four Supreme Court Justices dissented in the ruling to protect the
14th Amendment. That tells us that we are not safe from these
continuous attacks from Donald Trump and his administration on our
Constitution, on our freedom, and on our neighbors.
  We know that the White House is currently scheming to have Trump's
activist Supreme Court rehear the case that upheld the 14th Amendment,
that upheld birthright citizenship.
  This is all part of a larger agenda to dehumanize Black and Brown
people in this country, to strip away their rights, and to normalize
questioning who belongs here. Who is American enough?
  It is why Republicans have funded Donald Trump's immigration agenda
by $200 billion and why on the 158th anniversary of the 14th Amendment,
my colleagues and I launched the Defend the 14th Amendment Task Force.
  Our goal is simple: to defend the Constitution, to coordinate
oversight and public education efforts, and to respond strongly to the
Trump administration's attacks on our rights, on our freedom, on our
Constitution, our country, and our communities.
  We will stand up to these attacks on civil liberties. We must
continue this fight to ensure that the citizens of the United States
are protected and that nothing erodes these constitutional protections.
It is our duty. It is our responsibility, and it is the oath we swore
when we took this public office.
  Mr. Speaker, I am so proud to be a co-chair of this task force and so
proud to stand here in defense of our Constitution.
  Ms. MEJIA. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chair Aguilar and my fellow co-
chairs, Representatives Cleaver, Randall, Simon, and Subramanyam, for
their leadership in launching the Defend the 14th Amendment Task Force.
  This work is about protecting the Constitution's promise that every
person deserves equal protection, due process, and the full rights of
citizenship.
  Those principles have shaped generations of progress in our country,
and they are worth defending today just as they were 158 years ago. We
owe it to those who came before us and those who will follow us to
ensure that that promise endures.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1840
                      OUR BORROWING IS TERRIFYING

  (Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 3, 2025, Mr.
Schweikert of Arizona was recognized for 30 minutes.)
  Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Mr. Speaker, and to the room, I apologize. I was
doing a tour for a former firefighter, who actually was paralyzed in
the scope of his duties, but we were close.
  Mr. Speaker, I am going to take 1 or 2 seconds here to try to
straighten this out just a little bit.
  The presentation tonight is going to be a little bit technical. Sorry
about that. If you don't like math, if you don't like demographics, if
you don't actually want to deal with the math I am going to give you,
now would be a good time to go find something on Netflix.
  I have been trying to make a point over and over around here that our
borrowing is terrifying, and it is much worse than almost anyone is
willing to talk about.
  We actually had some of the Joint Economic economists meet with some
of the Penn Wharton modelers over the last couple of days. When they
used their population statistics, some of the coming years are even
uglier than we get from CBO, what we get from OMB, and actually what we
get from some of the other scorers.
  Let's actually just sort of start this and put this in perspective
and then understand there are solutions. You don't pay off the debt,
but you can stabilize it.
  What is the number one driver of U.S. sovereign debt? It is shocking
how many of even our brothers and sisters here in this building get the
math wrong. It is demographics, and it is the one thing we are really
not supposed to tell the truth about.
  Next year, there is a model that says we will have fewer under 18
than we had 20 years ago, but we will have almost double 65 and up than
we had 20-plus years ago. It is baby boomers, and we have gone decade
and decade without enough children. It is just math. Is that Republican
or Democrat? It is just math.
  Once again, all right, let's do this. For those of you who have
actually paid attention over the years, you have noticed that over the
time we talked about discretionary outlays. Today, it is down to about
25 percent. What is blue here is what you remember that Congress
actually gets to vote on. What is red here is almost all formulaic, and
that is part of the problem.
  As Members of Congress today, we could all hold hands, sing kumbaya,
love each other, get rid of every dime that is discretionary--now, that
is nondefense and defense, but it is what we vote on--and you still
couldn't balance the budget.
  Remember, last year, for every dollar we took in, we spent $1.43. So
far this year--and, look, I am hoping it bends back down, but this
year, the number is even worse.
  Interest this year, our model--just interest, total interest, so the
interest we have to pay back the trust funds, the interest we have to
pay the people who are willing to buy U.S. bonds, it is the second
biggest expense in the Federal Government, so Social Security,
interest, Medicare, Medicaid and ObamaCare subsidies, defense--once
again, remember, defense, the thing that is in the Constitution, is
actually number five.
  That interest may come in close to $1.3 trillion this year. That is
about 20 percent. One of my charts is going to say 19, but my math is
closer to 20 percent of all tax receipts go just to pay interest.
  I am going to say this two or three times in different ways. In 9
budget years, we have a model that says 30 to 33 percent of all the tax
receipts will go just to interest. So you pay a dollar. In 9 years,
what happens if a third of that money's function is just covering the
interest on the debt pileup?
  It is important to understand this chart and why I show it. I start
with it all the time.
  All right. Let's keep doing this.
  Net interest as a percentage of total revenues would approach 30
percent, and understand, we have a model that actually is over 30. It
is actually as high as 33 percent.
  Here we are. Right now, we are in this slot here, so 19 to 20 percent
of all of our tax receipts is going to interest in 9 budget years.
  This should terrify you. How many bridges, how much helping people
get healthy, how many benefits is the interest paying? No. I mean, it
does benefit those who buy the bonds, and there is the Ray Dalio theory
that it is still money circulating back into the economy, but it is
money that does not go to meet the mission of the Federal Government.
It is basically paying for past spending.
  The ethical question here is: Is borrowing a tax hike? Now, for some
of the antitax groups--I love them. I would cut spending dramatically.
I voted that way, and I am in a tough district.
  Let's be honest, what is the running joke here, Mr. Speaker? No one
ever got unelected by spending too much money.
  It is sort of perverse, but the bond market will basically be running
the Federal Government in the next few years because of the influence
it will have and the damage it can do to us.
  That is a percentage to understand.
  Let's actually dig in a little bit more. The boards, because I
started late, are all upside down. So forgive me, I am going to be
bouncing these around.
  The rising national debt will lower wages. This is something we have
been looking at over and over. We keep talking about affordability. Two
weeks ago, I brought an academic paper and showed some charts that
basically said if mortgage rates--a 30-year home loan rate today is
what? Today, it is running 6.5, 6.7. If we weren't borrowing as much
money as we are today, it would