NO MANDATE TO CUT MEDICAID

On 2025-11-20, Representative Al Green (D-TX-9) delivered a floor speech titled "NO MANDATE TO CUT MEDICAID" in the House.

NO MANDATE TO CUT MEDICAID

Congressional Record, Volume 171 Issue 196 (Thursday, November 20, 2025) [Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 196 (Thursday, November 20, 2025)] [House] [Pages H4854-H4857] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] NO MANDATE TO CUT MEDICAID (Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 3, 2025, Mr. Green of Texas was recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.) Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, and still I rise, and still I rise, a proud, unbought, unbossed, liberated Democrat. [[Page H4855]] And still I rise, censured but not silenced. It is important to have this photo tonight because it will get us into some very important issues. This was the occasion when I stood before the President as he stood behind me giving a statement at a joint session of Congress. I was seated right over in the third row up. The President started to talk about his mandate. I collected my portable items, and I was about to make my way out to the aisle so that I could traverse my way out through the doors. That was my means of peacefully protesting, but as I moved and he talked about his mandate, something came over me. It was spontaneity. It was not contrived. I stood and I said to the President: You don't have a mandate to cut Medicaid. That was what I said. Now, the press has distorted that, a good many of them, these opinion makers, opinion shapers. They want to define people and define what you say notwithstanding your having said something contrary to what they would like to hear. {time} 1810 They said that I said he didn't have a mandate. I never said he didn't have a mandate. I said he didn't have a mandate to cut Medicaid, and I still stand by it. By the way, it became something that people across the country agreed with. So, I said it, and then I left. I left after having been told that I had to leave because the Speaker concluded that I was out of order. I have no hard feelings as it relates to the Speaker. I have no animus to his requiring me to be removed, although I am the only person who has ever been removed from a joint session of Congress. Here is what happened after I left. The President, from this podium, looked over toward my Democratic colleagues, and the President said to them, as he was talking, words tantamount to them being lunatics. He said it. Members of the Congress of the United States of America are at a joint session of Congress, and the President calls the Democrats lunatics. I wasn't here. I don't know what I would have done had I been here and he called me a lunatic, because I never insulted him by saying something negative about his personhood. I didn't do that, but I was censured. The President was not censured for calling Members lunatics at a joint session of Congress. He has not been reprimanded in any way. We have allowed him to normalize his behavior. I was censured. I had to stand in the well. I accepted my punishment. I accepted it. I never criticized the notion that it was improper for me to be removed. I did say that I didn't think the punishment was appropriate in terms of being censured, but I never said anything that would cause the President to believe that I was disrespecting him as a human. He called Democrats lunatics--no penalties, nothing done. We cannot allow the President to normalize demeaning people, calling them names, low IQ. We can't allow him to do this. If we do, at some point, what I have in my hand now will occur. I have in my hand an article from Politico dated November 20, 2025. When we allow the President to say these things with impunity, this is what we face. November 20, 2025, 10:42 a.m. Eastern Standard time--it is styled: ``Trump calls for Democratic lawmakers to face trial for `seditious behavior.' '' I don't agree with that, but that is not the point. There is more to be said. It goes on to say, in bold print: ``SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!'' he wrote on Truth Social. The President is saying now that someone, Democrats, have engaged in seditious behavior punishable by death. Then, he goes on. The article reads: ``President Donald Trump on Thursday called for six Democratic lawmakers to face arrest and trial after they made a video encouraging U.S. servicemembers and members of the intelligence community to refrain from following orders if they broke the law.'' What does that mean if they broke the law? Well, it means this: If the President gives you an unlawful order, you are not to follow that order. That is what it means. By the way, that is what the law says. You don't follow unlawful orders. We don't want people following unlawful orders. I am not going to name the people, but then it goes on to say: ``It's called SEDITIOUS''--this is the President now. ``It's called SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL,'' Trump charged in a post on Truth Social. ``Each of these traitors''--now they have become traitors. ``Each one of these traitors to our Country should be ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL.'' I don't agree with that, but that is not the most egregious thing in this document that I hold in my hand. I will get to that as I read on. ``Their words cannot be allowed to stand,'' he says. Then, he goes on to say: ``We won't have a country anymore!!! An example MUST BE SET.'' Now, we are getting close to the reason I am standing here tonight. If he had only said the other things, I probably would have, as many others are doing, just let it go, but sometimes, you can cross a line of no return. The President crossed that line with these words. The President then posted 16 Truth Social posts, including one that advocated for hanging Democrats. Now, that is the line. Mr. President, what is wrong with you? Don't you know that there are people who will read this and consider doing something dastardly? Don't you know that you are putting people in harm's way? By the way, I don't think it just includes the eight people who are named here. I don't think it just includes them. I think if you are a Democrat, any Democrat, you should be concerned about what this President has done. I don't think that this applies to just the six Democratic lawmakers that are mentioned here--six, not eight. I think it applies to all of us. Just so that you will know, my friends, when you walk into my office now, the first thing you see is a person with a gun. When I first got elected to Congress, we didn't have police officers sitting out in the lobby. You walk in now and the first thing you see is a person with a gun. Why? Because of this kind of ignorant behavior on behalf of the President. By the way, I am being kind by saying ``ignorant.'' There are many other ways, many other ways, many other adjectives. There is something wrong with the President. There is something wrong with the President of the United States of America. For the President of the United States to say that people should be--let me read it to you one more time. The President then responded with 16 Truth Social posts, including one that advocated for hanging Democrats. There is something wrong with the President. There is something wrong. We can't ignore this. We cannot allow him to say this with impunity. We can't. Now, I don't speak for anybody other than myself and everybody who agrees with me. A lot of people agree with me that the President can't be allowed to do this. That is why I say: ``Censured but not silenced.'' I have not been silenced. I will not be silenced. I am not going to be one who is going to allow this to take place and not speak up and speak out and say to the world that this has to change. We are normalizing not just hate, but we are normalizing these signals to persons who may not be as stable as I would like for them to be, who will then proceed to do something to harm someone. {time} 1820 Yes, when you come to my office, the first thing you see is a person with a gun. When I go out to events now, I have to have someone to escort me out to events. When I am in the airport, we have to be escorted through the airports. Do you think this improves the situation? This does not. This only exacerbates a situation that we already are having to deal with. We have had to allocate more funds so that Members can have armed protection. For me it is armed--maybe for some others it is not--but protection. This is not normal. If we just allow it to continue, we may find ourselves at a point where we can't stand here in the well and say what I am saying. We may find ourselves at a point in the history of the United States of America, which was a functioning democracy when the President took office for this term, we may [[Page H4856]] find ourselves with an inability to exercise the constitutional right of free speech. You have to see what is coming. You have seen what he has done, calling all of the generals in, all of these high-ranking officers. In a sense, they spoke down to them. He changed the name of the Department of Defense into the Department of War. He has become a ``might makes right'' President--might makes right. In a might makes right world, the weak are wrong. If you don't have the might to match what the President is doing, then you are weak. I am coming back to this, but I have to step aside for a second and say this to you: This is a President who has decided that he will use the awesome power of the Justice Department to punish people who are perceived to be, in his mind, persons who have harmed him in some way by simply prosecuting him. Now, look, if we can all decide that we are going to indict the prosecutors in our cases, then we are not going to have a rule of law in this country. What happens to the rule of law if everyday people, like you and me--I can't force the Justice Department to do anything, but he knows this. He knows that he and the Justice Department have unlimited time, a coffer in the millions, if not billions, and that you may beat the rap, but you won't beat the ride, you won't beat th