The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 168, line 16, strike ``50 percent'' and insert ``100
     percent''.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1423, the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Steube) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. STEUBE. Madam Chair, I rise in strong support for my amendment to
increase the withholding threshold for assistance to Nigeria from 50
percent to 100 percent, while keeping in place benchmarks that demand
Nigeria take effective steps to address the violence and persecution
that continue to devastate the country.
  Nigeria has faced a horrific wave of violence that its corrupt
government has failed to address. For years, and especially in recent
months, Christians and other religious minorities in Nigeria have been
subjected to violence and terrorism at the hands of extremists who are
operating with impunity. Christian women and girls continue to be
abducted, assaulted, tortured, and killed. Their churches are burned,
and entire communities are erased.
  If the aid conditions included in the bill are important enough to
withhold half of all the funding to the Nigerian Government, then they
are important enough to withhold all of the funding.
  The generosity of our taxpayers is a reflection of the American
values we hold so firmly. Never should we allow their hard-earned tax
dollars to be funneled to corrupt regimes that fail to uphold religious
freedom, fail to adequately confront terrorism, and fail to protect the
innocent from persecution. So why are we rewarding a government that
fails to meet such a basic obligation?
  This amendment is simple. It does not remove the aid conditions in
the bill but only strengthens such conditions. Most importantly, it
upholds a principle that all recipients of American taxpayer assistance
should follow: that they must prove that they are willing and able to
respond to violence before receiving any funding.
  Simply put, meet the standard before receiving support. That is the
accountability that the American taxpayer deserves.
  Foreign aid should never be a reward for failure, so as our national
debt is fast approaching $40 trillion, why on Earth are we still
allowing our ourselves to go further into debt by rewarding corrupt
foreign governments that tolerate terrorism within their borders?
  When churches are burned, women and girls are abducted, and
terrorists operate with near impunity, that is not merely an internal
disturbance. It is a direct assault on the freedoms our Nation claims
to defend, which our foreign assistance must reflect and uphold.
  This is not about punishing the Nigerian people. It is about
demanding accountability for their government's complacency and
ensuring that our foreign aid is leveraged to defend, reflect, and
uphold American values.
  Even the underlying bill recognizes the Nigerian Government's failure
to meet the standard, yet it still allows for half of the funding to be
released anyway.
  My amendment withholds all funds until they meet basic standards.
Accountability can never be divided, nor should we allow anyone to
exploit the generosity of the American taxpayer.
  I urge my colleagues to uphold accountability in our foreign aid
spending and to vote for my amendment.
  Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. LOIS FRANKEL of Florida. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. LOIS FRANKEL of Florida. Madam Chair, this amendment would
eliminate U.S. health development and security assistance to the
central government of Nigeria. This would be a serious mistake.
  Nigeria is Africa's most populous nation, one of the largest
economies, and a critical partner in promoting stability across West
Africa.
  Our health programs prevent deadly diseases from spreading across
borders and strengthen the capacity to respond to future pandemics.
  Our development assistance helps reduce poverty, improve education,
expand economic opportunity, and address the conditions that fuel
instability, conflict, and migration. Our security and assistance helps
Nigeria combat Boko Haram, ISIS, and other violent extremist groups
that threaten both regional and global security.
  If the United States walks away, the challenges will not disappear.
Our influence will. China and Russia will be more than happy to fill
the vacuum, expanding their economic, political, and military influence
at America's expense.
  Engagement does not mean writing a blank check. It means using
American leadership to promote accountability, to strengthen democratic
institutions, to protect human rights, and to advance our national
security interests. Walking away would make neither Nigeria nor the
United States more secure.
  Ironically, this amendment would end the very programs that this
provision is trying to support, so it really doesn't make too much
sense.
  Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to reject it, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
  Mr. STEUBE. Madam Chair, this amendment does not end all assistance.
It only strengthens the conditions and encourages the Nigerian
Government to meet them.
  Why should we give 50 percent of the money when the Nigerian
Government has not met the criteria established in the underlying bill?
  We are approaching $40 trillion in debt. Why are we sending funds to
corrupt countries overseas that are unwilling to fully address violence
and persecution? The generosity of the American taxpayer should reflect
American values. We can't be putting ourselves more into debt to
countries that are unwilling to uphold our values.
  The U.S. should not borrow money to subsidize foreign governments
that fail to protect innocent civilians. If the aid conditions included
in the bill are important enough to withhold half of the funding to the
Nigerian Government, then they are important enough to withhold all of
the funding until the underlying conditions are met.

  The Nigerian Government continues to fail to address violence in
their country. Why should they still be eligible for funding given
their lackluster response to the violence?
  Christian women and girls continue to be abducted, assaulted,
tortured, and killed. Their churches are burned, and entire communities
are erased.
  Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. LOIS FRANKEL of Florida. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of
my time.
  Mr. STEUBE. Madam Chair, may I inquire as to how much time is
remaining.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida has 1\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
  Mr. STEUBE. Madam Chair, the underlying bill contains several
conditions for assistance to be made available to Nigeria, which
includes taking effective steps to prevent and respond to violence and
hold perpetrators accountable; prioritizing resources to support
victims of such violence, including internally displaced persons;
actively facilitating the safe return, resettlement, and reconstruction
of communities impacted by the violence; and allocating sufficient
resources to address the aforementioned conditions.
  This begs the question: If Nigeria isn't meeting these conditions
fully, why should they receive any funding? If they truly want the
support of the American taxpayer, then they should be meeting these
goals.
  Furthermore, while the underlying bill directs prioritization to
address the atrocities occurring in Nigeria, they should be showing
willingness to utilize the funding provided to address the violence
before receiving funds.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Steube).
  The amendment was agreed to.

                              {time}  1420

                 Amendment No. 28 Offered by Ms. Tenney

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 28
printed in part A of House Report 119-749.
  Ms. TENNEY. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.