▶ 0:00:00When remake the scholarship and foundation as the president sees fit. In other words, he would do to the Truman Scholarship Fund what the president has done to the Kennedy Center. It would weaponize a historically bipartisan program that could be used to seek retribution for perceived non-conservative bias in education.
▶ 0:00:24And of course there is of course a non- conservative bias in education because conservatives don't believe in science. it would be absent disproportionately absent from higher education. So, I'll be voting no on that and urge my colleagues to do the same. Another bill we consider is the Science of Reading Act, a bipartisan bill focused on strengthening literacy instruction.
▶ 0:00:52This bill clarifies that federally supported literacy instruction should align with the science of reading including core components such as phonics, fluency, and vocabulary. I believe it is a reasonable, research-based approach to ensure that federal literacy funding supports practices that help students learn. I want to thank the gentleman from New York, Mr. Mannion, and the gentlewoman from Indiana, Ms. Houchin, for their leadership on the issue.
▶ 0:01:20I would point out that I have heard had some concerns about the effect of this legislation on those that are English language learners and the disabled. And I thank the gen- the sponsors for making sure that the bill did not adversely affect those The The third bill we consider is the No Aid for Ghost Students Act.
▶ 0:01:45The bill would require the Department of Education to use an identity fraud detection system to review each FAFSA application. Under this bill, if an applicant is found to have have found what the bill de- details as reasonable suspicion of identity fraud, then they would be subject to additional identity verification.
▶ 0:02:09reasonable suspicion is a legal term is often called articulable reasonable suspicion. It's not a hunch. It's not bigotry. It is credible suspicion. And when you have that, of course, you should uh have um uh additional uh action taken.
▶ 0:02:36I understand the bill would codify the department's existing actions to combat fraud and ensure that financial aid resources go to students in need rather than perpetrators of fraud or phishing Um we need to reduce fraud. Uh the broad language uh we need to make sure that the language really means reasonable suspicion in the legal sense and not somebody's hunch or racial bias.
▶ 0:03:04Uh but it that's um the intent of the bill, and I'm sure it is. I hope the committee can make sure that's um uh agreed to and everybody can work together to root out fraud. The other bill, Student Aid Fraud Oversight and Accountability Act of The bill would This bill would reduce a school's flexibility in dispersing aid to students.
▶ 0:03:30Under current law, schools are allowed to disburse financial aid if the institution has not found a credible reason to believe that an applicant's FAFSA application is inaccurate prior to complete verification.
▶ 0:03:45Instead of allowing schools this discretion, the bill would require the Department of Education to prioritize an institution for program review if that institution has dispersed financial aid to a single student whose application was flagged for raising a reasonable suspicion of identity fraud. I understand the bill is attempting to codify the department's current fraud prevention practices.
▶ 0:04:10However, just a single error by a college would trigger this additional review and I'm not sure that's appropriate. We'll offer amendments to put our prioritize program reviews only if the school uh that only the schools that display a pattern of uh aid to fraudulent applicants rather than just one mistake. Again, I expect the committee to work with stakeholders to ensure that colleges are set up for success in addressing fraud.
▶ 0:04:41FAFSA Verification Efficiency Act um uh deals uh under present law Department of Education verifies students' eligibility for for federal aid by matching data with the Internal Revenue uh Social Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security.
▶ 0:05:02While the law already allows verification of and parent information, gaps in the mean that some some contributors, such as spouses [snorts] or step parents, must undergo slower verification processes.
▶ 0:05:18This bill would require the Department of Education working with the Social Security Administration to verify both Social Security numbers and citizenship status for anyone whose information is provided in connection with federal student aid. While supporters argue that this would speed up the FAFSA process, the bill goes much further than necessary, expanding federal collection of citizenship data to individuals who are not even applying for federal aid.
▶ 0:05:46This uh expansion raises serious concerns about unneces- unnecessary data collection and the potential misuse of personal information for immigration enforcement. As currently drafted, the bill goes too far and I would hope that we would not pass it.
▶ 0:06:03Um another bill, Stop Sexualization of Children Act, um this bill prohibits the use of any funds authorized under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to {quote} develop, implement, facilitate, host, or programs, activities, literature, or materials that include {quote} sexually oriented material for students under the age of 18 and specifically calls out gender dysphoria and so-called
▶ 0:06:34I'm not sure that's a word, but let me preface this conversation by saying that of course teachers should consider age appropriateness in their lessons. No one is advocating that schools teach age-inappropriate material.
▶ 0:06:48That being said, the bill bill is drafted so poorly that it would even prohibit the teaching of the Virginia state flag because the um Virginia state flag has the depicts a woman whose breast is exposed. Can't talk about the Virginia state flag or the Obergefell Supreme Court
▶ 0:07:15Winton offered a series of amendments to demonstrate how problematic the legislation is, especially for trans kids, and how this bill attempts to impose federal censorship as to what can be taught on states and classrooms across the country and which authors of uh if one author authors material, it would be okay, and if somebody else authors the same material, maybe not. I oppose the legislation. So, I'm will be opposing that legislation.
▶ 0:07:46The ERISA Litigation Reform Act under the Employee Retirement Security Act, ERISA, workers have the legal right to bring claims in federal court. Thanks to this bedrock right, workers have been able to fight back against being charged excessive fees that steal their retirement savings. Last year, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that plan participants need only allege that a violation of ERISA's rules occurred to pursue their case.
▶ 0:08:16This bill would overturn that unanimous Supreme Court decision and impose additional burdens on workers when seeking to enforce their rights in court. In particular, this bill unfairly delays workers' ability to recover losses by placing a hold on discovery until motions to dismiss have been decided.
▶ 0:08:35Committee Republicans are advancing legislation that weakens retirement savers' rights to seek justice when harmed, while at the same time the Trump administration seems poised to poised to encourage retirement plans retirement plans to include risky assets such as cryptocurrency in 401k plans. And this is not in the best interest of workers who are already facing an economy that isn't working for them.
▶ 0:09:03And for those reasons, I'll be urging colleagues to oppose the bill. Mr. Chairman, as I stated before, today is a missed opportunity to actually improve Americans' lives and reduce the cost of living. Americans [snorts] are in crisis and counting on us to help. We could do that, but we're not doing it today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
▶ 0:09:27I thank the gentleman. Without objection, all other members who wish to insert written opening statements into the record may do so by submitting them to the committee clerk electronically by the end of the day Pursuant to the House rules, a copy of the text to be marked up as was made available to members and the public at least 24 hours in The bills being marked up today shall be open to amendment at any point and the chair will allow members to offer
▶ 0:09:57amendments in a manner not prohibited by House or committee rules. Without objection, members who have more than one amendment to the bills and wish to offer their amendments on block may do so. The committee will now proceed to consideration of the bill HR 7894 for amendment. The bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are The clerk shall designate the bill.
▶ 0:10:27HR 7894, a bill to make improvements to the Harry S. Truman Memorial Scholarship Act and for other purposes.
▶ 0:10:34Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. Without objection, the bill will be considered as read and open for amendment at any point and any amendment offered shall be considered as read. Does anyone seek to be recognized? Representative Fine, for what purpose do you seek recognition?
▶ 0:10:51I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 0:10:53The clerk will designate the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
▶ 0:10:56Amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7894 offered by Mr. Flat of Florida, identifier 7894ANS_01.
▶ 0:11:05Without objection, the amendment shall be considered original text for purposes of further amendment. The amendment in the nature of a substitute has already been distributed. I now recognize Mr. Fine for 5 minutes to explain the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
▶ 0:11:20Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I I'd like to start by thanking you and committee staff and Representative Stefanik for allowing me to pinch-hit on this bill today. Um the ranking member just talked about the bills that we pass should quote unquote improve American lives and I'd like to explain what this bill does and I think I'll close by explaining why it does that. In 1975 Congress established the Truman Scholarship, a scholarship for college juniors pursuing a career in public service.
▶ 0:11:49The award's the only federal memorial honoring our 33rd president, Harry S. Truman, who I hope we would all agree was an extraordinary president and is meant to help students who want to serve the country with integrity, respect, and dedication. That sounds like a good thing, something we should all support. Unfortunately, the Truman program has strayed far from its original purpose.
▶ 0:12:12Instead of being something that focus on improving all American lives, it's increasingly become a pipeline for radical liberal activists, a job training ground for one political party, rather than a bipartisan award where every student, no matter who they are, has an equal chance. A recent College Fix investigation found that in the last 10 years, liberal winners outnumbered conservative winners by a staggering 14 to 1 ratio.
▶ 0:12:39An American Enterprise Institute study could not identify a single winner between 2021 and 2023 who professed interest in stopping illegal immigration, protecting the unborn, or defending the Second Amendment. As of December, the Truman website listed sample essays from Christians, students interested in military service as substandard. There were no highly rated sample essays from Christians or students pursuing military service. After the Truman winners are picked, they remain active in liberal politics.
▶ 0:13:08The College Fix reviewed the current public activities from Truman scholars from the 2017 and 2018 cohorts and found that at least 98 of the 122 winners retain a clear connection to liberal politics, such as working for Democrat members of Congress, advocating for progressive causes, or teaching classes with a liberal focus. By contrast, not a single winner could be identified who is currently active in conservative politics. It's okay if you're active in public service if you win the scholarship.
▶ 0:13:38In fact, that is the entire idea behind it, but it should be open to all political viewpoints. But it's worse. Student winners have also displayed wildly inappropriate conduct. Representative Stefanik, the bill's sponsor, has highlighted that previous winners include, believe it or not, a public unrepentant pro-Muslim terror sympathizer, someone who supports Hamas. The Truman should never become a breeding ground for Muslim terror. The time has come to clean house.
▶ 0:14:07Every student, conservative or liberal, should be given a fair chance to win this award. The current leadership of the Truman Foundation has failed to provide that opportunity, so Congress must act. On March 12th, Representative Stefanik introduced this bill, the Truman Scholarship Clean House Act.
▶ 0:14:22The bill would fire the current Board of Directors, remove the current Executive Secretary, empower President Trump with the advice and consent of the Senate to appoint the majority of a new Board of Directors, ensure that no more than half of any interview panel comes from the same political party, whether it's Republican or Democrat, institute a code of conduct that students must meet, including not being suspended or expelled for violating their university's honor code, codify existing practice that only US citizens, not illegal immigrants, are eligible for the scholarship, and implement additional reforms to restore
▶ 0:14:52fairness and The ANS simply makes a technical change to the original bill. It's time to right the ship and ensure the Truman Scholarship once again rewards excellence in public service, not ideological conformity. The bill accomplishes those goals, and I want to thank Representative Stefanik for her leadership on the issue, Chairman Walberg for marking up this bill, and former Chairwoman Virginia Fox for beginning this investigation.
▶ 0:15:17If the standard that we use to pass bills is that it improve American lives, I would argue this does this in two ways. Number one, it's going to make sure that all Americans have access to this program, not just those who engage in liberal advocacy. But second, as one of the investigations showed, it will make sure that the liberal people who get in are exposed to viewpoint diversity. I went to Harvard 35 years ago.
▶ 0:15:44It was not an easy place for a conservative to be, but it made me stronger because I had to deal with people who did not have the same views that I did. Having your ideas tested is something that benefits not only one group, it benefits all groups. America deserves better from the Truman Foundation than we have gotten, and so I hope that we will all support this amendment and the underlying bill. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield my time.
▶ 0:16:10I thank the gentleman. Are there any members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment in the nature of a substitute? Uh ranking member, Mr. Scott.
▶ 0:16:20Do you wish to be recognized?
▶ 0:16:22Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the last word.
▶ 0:16:24You're recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 0:16:25Thank you, Mr. Chair. After this hear After this committee held one hearing on this topic where there was little established to be a problem with the program that demands our attention, we are now considering a bill that would make drastic changes to the program far beyond any sensible approach to what reform of a program might look This bill fundamentally changes the makeup of the foundation board of trustees, a board that current the a board that current law mandates
▶ 0:16:56be I would point out it's not It's not just bipartisan, but uh the president appoints a majority of the board. That majority has to be bipartisan. Uh four members of the He appoints eight. Four legislators, and the Secretary of Education.
▶ 0:17:21So, between the President and Secretary of Education and uh two Republican legislators, the President has hand-picked almost the entire board. These terms are staggered, so they kind of carry over. Now, I understand that four of the current positions in the board are designated as Republicans are vacant.
▶ 0:17:46But, according to the foundation, these two of those vacancies were present throughout the whole first Trump term, and the President had the opportunity and ability to appoint board members and didn't appoint them. NASCENT complaining that they weren't there.
▶ 0:18:04I don't think the policy solution is to give him the power the power to name eight board members combined with the Secretary of Education would give him an instantaneous, not the staggered term, um but an instantaneous majority, just like he did with the uh Kennedy Foundation.
▶ 0:18:22Laws governing the Truman Foundation currently limit the factors that can be considered by the bipartisan board to determine if students become scholars, their academics, their leadership record, their community service, and their suitability to be a leader and make a difference in public service. Executive Secretary wrote the chair last Congress and made clear that the foundation officials don't ask candidates about their political leanings and only learn of them if they share them.
▶ 0:18:49If the majority had evidence that the scholarships were not being awarded according to the criteria set forth in law and regulation, they would have brought that evidence forward, but they did not. Instead, we're now considering unnecessary changes to the program that has a track record of producing bipartisan roster of stellar public servants. Now, let's be clear. We're just This is just a power grab, Uh unnecessary. We have a bipartisan board.
▶ 0:19:19President Trump gets to appoint just about A clear majority of the members. Firing everybody just makes no sense. I yield back.
▶ 0:19:33I thank the gentleman. Does the gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Anders, seek recognition?
▶ 0:19:39I yes, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
▶ 0:19:41You're recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 0:19:42Briefly, look in theory we might have a bipartisan board here or a process that might choose a bipartisan board, but listen to the statistics that Mr.
▶ 0:19:55Fine Progressives outnumber conservatives 14 to 1 20 21 to 2023 not a single applicant expressed any interest in protecting the unborn Second Amendment securing our borders, Christians and people expressing interest in military service are not represented. The bottom line is this has just become a program to train professional leftists.
▶ 0:20:21And if that's the case, and if we don't have a reform like Representative Stefanik's bill, then we just need to get rid of this all together. Because my constituents tax dollars, and by the way, I represent Missouri, after whom this scholarship is named, do not want to be funding professional left-wing activists. So, I encourage the adoption of this bill and with that I yield back.
▶ 0:20:48I thank the gentleman. Does the gentlewoman from Georgia, Ms. McBath, seek recognition?
▶ 0:20:55Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I like to speak in opposition to the amendment in the nature of the
▶ 0:21:01for 5 minutes.
▶ 0:21:02Thank you, sir. And I Mr. Anders, I actually have to disagree. I think that this legislation just would not rule out root out bias. Actually, it's going to do the It would take a scholarship that is meant to be unbiased and ensure that it prioritizes conservative ideas over others. Time and time again, House Republicans attempt to demonize the programs that they disagree with.
▶ 0:21:29Programs that make people's lives better politically biased because they don't advance their narrow idea of what they think government really should be doing. It isn't about evaluating the students on their merits or the benefit their studies provide or whether they are fully focused on public service. It's about It's about uplifting this majority's opinion over others, whatever that opinion may be.
▶ 0:21:56It's about trying to force their black and white viewpoint of people and certain ideas as nothing more than conservative or liberal. When we know people and ideas are so much more than what those two words really mean and what they really carry. It does nothing but divide the American people even more than we already are. It's exact type of mindset that Americans are sick and tired of.
▶ 0:22:25The villainization of our friends and our neighbors, people who just feel just as strongly about these issues and the direction of this country, but they have a completely different life experience that guides them and we need to honor those The tribalism, the inability for politicians to see beyond their own party line, to not even try to understand the point that the other side is making, to take the easy
▶ 0:22:55way out and label their opponents as biased just because they think differently than you. To sort and label people and their ideas as liberal or conservative and all the baggage that actually comes with that. Regular people don't try to fit all of their thoughts and opinions into those That's how politicians think. Not regular people.
▶ 0:23:22We should all be evaluating people, their work and their ideas individually, not on whether some politicians share their inherently biased opinion on what they consider to be liberal or considered to be conservative. Wanting to make the world and this country a better place to live for all people is not a progressive ideal. It's an American one.
▶ 0:23:48One that God calls upon each of us to make a reality at home and and and Wanting to lead in spaces like human to share the stories of the many types of people who call our country their home, to eradicate disease and poverty so that all those made in God's image can live a decent and fulfilling life.
▶ 0:24:15This is the type of work that my Republican colleagues label as biased. These are the things that millions of Americans take real pride in. It's what is supposed to make this country special and better than others like it. Our commitment to equality and justice for all, not just for those who believe in the same things as you do.
▶ 0:24:43Americans have long defined for themselves by our unity and shared purpose despite our many differences. Our commitment to the idea that out of one stronger whole is made possible. But that stronger whole is weakened with legislation just like this. I don't believe this to be a good piece of legislation or good use of our limited time in Washington this week.
▶ 0:25:14And I hope that we recommit ourselves as we always claim that we do. I really hope that we recommit ourselves to real issues that have an impact on everyday Americans' lives. And I yield.
▶ 0:25:31I thank the gentle lady. Are there any other members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment in the nature of a substitute? There being no further discussion on the amendment in the nature of a substitute, the committee will move to consideration of amendments. Are there any members who would like to offer an amendment? Representative Scott, do you wish to offer an amendment?
▶ 0:25:52Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. Um
▶ 0:26:00The clerk will report the amendment.
▶ 0:26:03Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7894 offered by Mr. Scott of Virginia, identifier
▶ 0:26:15Does the gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order?
▶ 0:26:18Uh Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of
▶ 0:26:19Point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman from Virginia, uh the ranking member, Mr. Scott, for 5 minutes in support of his amendment.
▶ 0:26:28Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the amendment does um essentially two things. It's a change of date of and prevents the um president naming the renaming the foundation in his honor. In his own honor. I wish this did not have to be offered, but based on the track record of this administration, I fear it must. This amendment is silent on the merits of the underlying bill.
▶ 0:26:55Just recognizes we can't trust the current chief executive to implement it. In March of last year, officials from the so-called Department of Government Efficiency took over the US Institute of of Peace, pitting Washington DC Metropolitan Police officers against lawfully present By the end of the year, former officials had succeeded in a federal case declaring these actions illegal, but that [snorts] case is on pause
▶ 0:27:26pending Supreme Court consideration. Meanwhile, the president who just unilaterally started a war has his own name on his US Institute of Peace. Last February, the president dismissed most of the board of the John F. Kennedy Center of Performing Arts and appointed new board members and the president and CEO of the center uh to do his bidding.
▶ 0:27:49In subsequent year In the subsequent year, they've done inestimable damage to the center's including closing it down because nobody wanted to go. In a move that is also being challenged in court, the board so-called voted to rename the the Trump Kennedy Center, a power the board doesn't even have. This amendment would make clear that there are powers that the Truman Foundation board does not have. They cannot rename the scholarship.
▶ 0:28:20They cannot give out scholarships in honor of anyone else besides President Harry S. Truman. It's frankly sad that we have to make this clear, but based on what's going on, I think it's As I said in my remarks on on the amendment in nature of substitute to the underlying bill, gives a blank check to the president to handpick board of trustees and an executive secretary to make the Truman Truman Foundation whatever way he sees fit.
▶ 0:28:49We should make it clear in this bill that if and when the newly constituted Truman Foundation board makes a motion to change it from the Truman scholarship to the Trump scholarship, that they do not have the power to do so and acting would be in violation of the law. And so whatever the merits of the underlying bill may be, we can be certain that this president administration are not the ones to execute them.
▶ 0:29:15So we should start this uh for the next presidential And this uh Congress and this committee should go on record when it comes to the Truman scholarship and other congressionally authorized institutions and let this administration know that we'll not put up with using agencies and naming agencies to serve his vanity.
▶ 0:29:38As such, this amendment would postpone the effective date of the bill until after this president leaves office and make sure that whatever board that is constituted in the future is one that will recognize President Truman and not the vanity of whatever president they may represent. Urge the adoption of this amendment and I yield back.
▶ 0:29:59The gentleman yields. Does the gentleman from Utah insist on the point of order?
▶ 0:30:02I withdraw my point of order.
▶ 0:30:04The reservation is withdrawn. Does anyone else seek recognition on the For what purpose does the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Fine, speak seek recognition?
▶ 0:30:14All right. To oppose the amendment, Mr.
▶ 0:30:16You're recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 0:30:18Um this amendment's not necessary. No one's talking about removing President Truman's name uh from the scholarship. In fact, it's named that in statute today. But I would note that the behavior that we've seen in this scholarship dishonors the name of President Truman. President Truman was the United States president that recognized the state of Israel at great difficulty to himself.
▶ 0:30:47Yet this scholarship openly honors those who oppose that and seek its destruction. Um this award was meant to honor President Truman's life by promoting bipartisan civic spirit and helping students from a variety of backgrounds pursue an honorable career in public service.
▶ 0:31:04As I talked about, by only having one group of people get into a self-supporting loop of agreement, the values are never tested, the views are never challenged, and it ends up hurting not only the conservatives who are refused access to the scholarship, but the liberals that get involved in some sort of groupthink where their views are never tested.
▶ 0:31:27But the second thing this amendment does is it pushes back the date of implementation to 2029, and that should not happen because we can see how the Truman Scholarship folks have handled this scrutiny. If they were right, if the things we've heard from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle were correct, they would have provided data that says, "No, no, no, this is not happening. What you allege is false.
▶ 0:31:50It just so happens that this is how things work out, but we really are open to everyone." But we know how they have changed. In 2024, after the AEI report, instead of helping us understand what was going on, the Truman Foundation stopped publishing biographies of its winners. So people couldn't figure out the ideological background of them. Instead, they only shared names and universities. They even hid the biographies of past winners.
▶ 0:32:18The only way you can get to those are with password-protected information. It is not accessible to the public who pays for this. Just think about that. You pay for this, but you can't know who's getting your money. So obviously they believe that they have something to hide. And College Fix used things like LinkedIn and the names to research the people and found 43 of 54 winners were obviously liberal. Only three were obviously conservative.
▶ 0:32:48Because we have seen how the Truman scholarship has reacted to this, we should not give them more time to hide and more time to obfuscate. We should do this now. It is the right thing to do, and I hope everyone will vote down on that amendment. And Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
▶ 0:33:04I thank the gentleman. Gentleman yields. Are there any others who seek recognition on the amendment? The question is on the amendment by the gentleman from Virginia, Representative All in favor, say I.
▶ 0:33:24All opposed, no. No. In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it, and the amendment is not agreed A roll call vote is ordered pursuant to the chair's previous announcement. This vote will be postponed. Are there any further amendments to the amendment in the nature of substitute to HR 7894?
▶ 0:33:51Does the For what purpose does the gentleman from Virginia seek to be
▶ 0:33:55Chairman, I have an amendment to this 7894 {underscore} AMD02.
▶ 0:34:00The clerk will report the amendment.
▶ 0:34:02Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7894 offered by Mr. Scott of Virginia, identifier Scott {underscore} 7894 {underscore} AMD02.
▶ 0:34:14Does the gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order? A point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mr. Scott, for 5 minutes in support of his amendment.
▶ 0:34:25Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is simple. It just says any member who decides to vote to destroy the Truman Foundation in its current form shall not be rewarded by being appointed to whatever the new board is. As I said when speaking on the member nature substitute, I feel that the underlying bill would put too much power in the hands of the administration to remake the Truman Foundation.
▶ 0:34:51The administration already has the opportunity to appoint a vast majority of the board. This would be this could be used to allow members of this body to benefit whether it's being appointed to the new board of help or perhaps joining the foundation as an officer once they leave This should not be options for members to create for themselves.
▶ 0:35:16As such the amendment would simply prevent members who support the bill from being able to accept any largess from the president as a result of that If you think the Truman Foundation needs reform, you can vote for this amendment. That in case such as now that you support the reform in its face, not [snorts] for any actual or perceived opportunity. Mr. Chairman, urge adoption and yield back.
▶ 0:35:43The gentleman yields. Does gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order? The point of order is withdrawn. Does anyone else seek recognition to speak on the amendment? Representative from Florida, Mr. Fine, do you wish to be recognized?
▶ 0:36:00I do, Mr. Chairman, to speak in
▶ 0:36:02Recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 0:36:03Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This amendment is not only petty, but mean-spirited, and doesn't even do what it purports to do. The amendment's basically meant to target Representative Stefanik for her current leadership on the Truman Foundation where she's uncovered these issues. We should be thanking her for what she's done, not attempting to punish her. She's served admirably on the board. She's held board members accountable for the horrific bias that's infiltrated the program.
▶ 0:36:30She also uncovered and shared the Muslim terror advocate who received a scholarship as part of this and she's called for them to have their awards revoked. For this, Democrats don't think she should be allowed to serve on the board. You find wrongdoing, you find bias, you must be punished, apparently. This is an awful amendment that targets Representative Stefanik for doing the right thing, but it doesn't just target her.
▶ 0:36:54The sponsor says, "Well, if you vote for this, you shouldn't benefit." I think it's a ridiculous argument. Um, but nonetheless, let's take him at his But this amendment also targets people who don't have the ability to vote on it. Any person who's serving in a role appointed by the President of the United States.
▶ 0:37:16So, any one of the thousands of people who are serving in any role in um appointed by the President who may have nothing to do with this, may not even agree with what we're doing. But because they have served for President Donald J. Trump, Democrats believe they should be canceled and ineligible to serve. This is not only um it's not only mean-spirited, but it's frankly undemocratic, and I would encourage all of my colleagues to vote against it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
▶ 0:37:46The gentleman yields. Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment by the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mr. Scott. All in favor, say I.
▶ 0:38:01All opposed, no. No. In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it, and the amendment is not agreed A roll call vote is ordered pursuant to the chair's previous announcement. This vote will be postponed. Are there any further amendments to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 7894? Does the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Scott, seek to be recognized?
▶ 0:38:26Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk, 7894_AMD04.
▶ 0:38:31The clerk will report the amendment.
▶ 0:38:33Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7894, offered by Mr. Scott of Virginia. Identifier
▶ 0:38:45Does the gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order?
▶ 0:38:47Reserve a point of order.
▶ 0:38:48A point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mr. Scott, for 5 minutes in support of his amendment.
▶ 0:38:56Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before I make remarks on this on the previ- on amendment, uh, where we talked about the reason we need to prohibit them changing the name, um, the gentleman from Florida mentioned that the dictates that the Kennedy Center, um, the name Kennedy Center is in the US Um, and they changed it at that that the Truman is in the code,
▶ 0:39:26and I would point out that Kennedy is also in the code, but they changed that. So, we're just making sure that they know that they can't change it because it's in the code, and they can't change it. But, Mr. Chair, this amendment is designed to, uh, to reflect a problem that's been articulated. The purpose of the scholarship program is designed to award scholars who intend to pursue a career in public service.
▶ 0:39:53Current law and regulations of the Truman, uh, scholarship are clear. The law states that the basis for the award is to award scholarships to persons who demonstrate outstanding potential and plan to pursue a career in public Regulations that govern the program require that that scholars must include in their submission to the foundation a statement of interest in a career in public service that specifies in detail how their graduate program and their overall education and
▶ 0:40:24work experiences uh uh will realistically prepare them for their chosen career goal in government or elsewhere in public And the foundation has found that most MBA graduate programs are not designed to realistically prepare candidate for public service.
▶ 0:40:41And they have recognized that there are But it is not a hard and fast rule that scholars pursuing an MBA may be Truman So, whatever however that's considered, I think it would be helpful just to strike out that um presumption that they're not qualified. Just strike that out and let people uh be considered uh the way they want uh the way they should be considered.
▶ 0:41:09The underlying provision in the bill is not in line with the purpose of these Truman scholarship program uh outstanding candidates who intend to enter public service, some of whom may have MBA degrees or suit pursuing MBA degrees. So, I ask support for my amendment and yield back.
▶ 0:41:29The gentleman yields. Does the gentleman from Utah insist on a point of order?
▶ 0:41:32I withdraw my point of order.
▶ 0:41:34Uh the reservation is withdrawn. Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment? Uh For what purpose is the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Fine, seek recognition?
▶ 0:41:44Um Mr. Chairman, I'd like to speak in
▶ 0:41:47You're recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 0:41:49Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Of all the amendments, the three amendments we've heard, this one is is unquestionably the Because it engages in the sort of rank that is part of what has made our government broken. Now, I understand that attorneys, like the ranking member, believe that only attorneys ought to be in government, nobody else, because they've studied the law. And apparently, if you become a lawyer and you go work in M&A or something else, you're somehow advancing a career in public service.
▶ 0:42:20Um we have a doctor's shortage in this We have people who go to medical school. They may join the military, as we have some who have done to practice their Um they may go into rural America, provide it where medical care is needed, serving low-income rural people. And by the way, it turns out you might get a an MD and join Congress. We have 20 members of Congress from both parties who are doctors.
▶ 0:42:49As it relates to MBAs, well, I know a little bit about that because I am one. And I can tell you I'm new here, but part of the reason I was incredibly effective, passed more bills than anyone in the history of the Florida legislature in my 8 years there, is because I applied the same skills and training that I learned as an MBA. I was gen- once jokingly called the best lawyer in the Florida House, wasn't very nice to the actual lawyers.
▶ 0:43:20So, I understand we may live in a world where only becoming an attorney is seen as some sort of honorable trade in order to get into government. That's exactly what is wrong with government in this place. There's certainly a room, a place for attorneys, but to say that MBAs and cannot be committed to advancing a career in public service, and to literally state if you want to get an or an MD, you're excluded from participating
▶ 0:43:51this, it is absolutely wrong, and frankly, it's just simply disgusting. And I for that reason, I hope you'll oppose the amendment, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
▶ 0:44:01The gentleman yields. Does the gentlelady from Georgia, Ms. McBath, seek recognition?
▶ 0:44:07Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I um would like to go ahead and just stand in support of Mr. Scott's amendment, and I do yield the balance of my time to the good man of Virginia. Ranking member Scott.
▶ 0:44:22I Thank you, Mr. Mr. Chairman. Just in defense of lawyers, I think um it's clear that our job here is to draft Of course, there'd be a disproportionate number of lawyers if our job here was to bake cakes. There'd probably be a disproportionate number of bakers. Um not You don't have to be a baker. You don't have to be a lawyer. Um but we shouldn't be a surprise.
▶ 0:44:48But I am surprised at the opposition cuz I don't quite understand the logic. The bill eliminates any presumption of disqualification for someone seeking an MBA degree. They would be considered like everybody else. I thought that was the gentleman's position. Um but I'm not sure what the um what what his opposition is.
▶ 0:45:17This This amendment will eliminate the presumed disqualification of people with MBA degrees so that anybody seeking an MBA degree can be considered just like everybody
▶ 0:45:41Does the gentleman Does the gentlelady yield?
▶ 0:45:47Yes, uh Chairman, I yield.
▶ 0:45:48The gentlelady yields. Are there any others who seek recognition on the Seeing none, the question on the amendment by the gentleman from Mr. Scott. All in favor say I. All opposed, no.
▶ 0:46:10In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it and the amendment is not agreed Further action on H.R. 7894 is postponed. We'll now move to consider the next bill. The committee will now proceed to consideration of a bill H.R. 7890 for The bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are available. The clerk shall designate the bill.
▶ 0:46:40H.R. 7890, a bill to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to exclude certain instructional approaches from comprehensive literacy instruction, to prioritize certain funds to promote the use of evidence-based literacy instruction, and supports aligned to the science of reading and for other purposes.
▶ 0:46:59Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. Without objection, the bill will be considered as read and open for amendment at any And any amendment offered shall be considered as read. Does anyone seek to be recognized? Representative McKenzie, for what purpose do you seek
▶ 0:47:19I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 0:47:21The clerk shall designate the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
▶ 0:47:24Amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 7890 offered by Mr. McKenzie of Pennsylvania identified as 7890 ANS_01.
▶ 0:47:33Without objection, the amendment shall be considered original text for purposes of further amendment. The amendment in the nature of a substitute has already been distributed. I now recognize Mr. for 5 minutes to explain the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
▶ 0:47:49Mr. Chairman, I would like to speak in support of the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 7890, the Science of Reading Act of 2026. For generations, children have learned to read in a clear and rational way. The letters in the alphabet are associated with sounds. They can be joined together with other letters to create new sounds. By combining those sounds in order, we're able to read and understand language.
▶ 0:48:17This approach, commonly known as phonics, was the bedrock of reading instruction in our nation's schools. Starting in the 1960s, a radical new approach to reading instruction emerged. Instead of relying on the science of reading and teaching children the construction of the English language, students were taught to, quote, guess words based on elements like pictures or context.
▶ 0:48:43This three-cueing approach was then pushed into countless schools across the country, robbing children of a foundational understanding of how the English language actually works. Decades later, the result is clear. Long-term trends of the Nation's Report Card, or NAEP, show little to no improvement since 1971.
▶ 0:49:09Fortunately, many states have taken steps to reverse the damage and return to common sense by embracing a traditional phonics-based curriculum. Some states, like Alabama and Louisiana, have seen significant improvement after banning three-cueing. Even at a time when most states are still struggling to recover from COVID-era learning loss. It's time now for Congress to double down on what works, encouraging schools to embrace proven performance of phonics.
▶ 0:49:38That's why we need to pass the Science of Reading Act of 2026. This common-sense legislation ensures that comprehensive literacy state development grants aren't used to support three-cueing and prioritizes funding for states with comprehensive literacy plans aligned to the science of reading. The ANS simply makes a technical change and America's children deserve proven high-quality literacy curricula.
▶ 0:50:07It's time to pass the science of reading act of 2026 and ensure that schools everywhere are using curricula that give our students the knowledge and skills they need to succeed. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
▶ 0:50:23The gentleman yields. Are there any members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment in nature of substitute? Um gentleman from New York, uh Representative Mannion, do you wish to be recognized?
▶ 0:50:35Mr. Chair, I move to strike the last
▶ 0:50:37You're recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 0:50:39Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to speak in support of the amendment in the nature of a substitute, and I want to start by thanking my colleagues, Congresswoman Houchin and Congressman Kiley, for working with me in introducing this bipartisan bill. Strong reading skills are foundational to our students' success and to our nation's future.
▶ 0:50:59We should always be doing more to ensure that our students are meeting or exceeding proficiency standards and that our teachers are equipped with the best instructional Unfortunately, we know from our recent assessments that many of our students are falling behind. Average reading scores are declining or stagnating, and most fourth and eighth graders are not doing as well as they did just a few years ago. I was a teacher for almost 30 years.
▶ 0:51:29So, I also want to say this, standardized test scores don't always tell the full story and should not be the only benchmark of success. Our teachers are always assessing their We have other complementary ways to measure economic process, and those deserve our attention as well.
▶ 0:51:50But still, the reading scores at the national level are indeed concerning and we need to take action to address those That's why I'm proud to have co-led the science of reading act of 2026. This bill would improve the Department of Education's comprehensive literacy state development grants by better aligning the program with the science of reading.
▶ 0:52:13It would ensure that federal funds for reading instruction and appropriately are appropriately spent on evidence-based methods. This bill is also written in a way that carefully retains local control over curriculum and ensures that individualized instructional supports for students with disabilities are protected.
▶ 0:52:35In the school that I used to teach and where I represented my colleagues as a teacher association president, there was a district-wide adoption of the science of reading. My experience was that many veteran teachers and new teachers alike were resistant to this change.
▶ 0:52:54But after it was piloted and they saw the results, they came around, embraced the science of reading after understanding that it it is um an evidence-based form of instruction and they saw many positive preliminary results.
▶ 0:53:15My wife is also an expert in literacy instruction and curriculum and she experienced this as well along with her colleagues. Professional development for teachers is also a critical part of effective science of reading implementation and New York is one of the many states making those necessary investments. Again, I appreciate the committee's consideration of this bill today and I kindly ask my colleagues to support it. Thank you, Mr.
▶ 0:53:45Chair, and I yield back.
▶ 0:53:47Thank you, gentlemen. Gentleman yields. Are there any other members who wish to be recognized? Gentle lady from Georgia, Ms. McBath, you wish to be recognized?
▶ 0:53:55Thank you, um, Chairman, and I actually would like to speak in support of the amendment in the nature of substitute.
▶ 0:54:03You're recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 0:54:04Thank you very much. Uh, I'm very excited to support this legislation sponsored by, uh, Congresswoman Houchin and Congressman Man- Mannion and both Kaiali'i. Um, actually, this is how I learned how to read in the 1960s. So, when implemented correctly, the science of reading has been proven to help children learn to read and to write more effectively. Something that sounds basic, but is incredibly challenging if you don't have the proper instruction.
▶ 0:54:34With a focus on comprehension, it emphasizes that reading does not come naturally to children. It is a skill that must be cultivated and must be taught. With a focus on not just reading the words, but really understanding what they mean. A troubling number of children and adults across our country are not able to read and they're not able to write effectively. Not only is that bad for our economy, but it's limiting people's ability to truly enjoy their lives to the fullest.
▶ 0:55:05Learning to read and critically think about what you're reading and what it means is essential to a fulfilling life. But what has been done to teach these skills in the past has unfortunately not set up our students to achieve their full potential. According to the Nation's Report Card, which I would like to submit digitally for the record, um, over 40% of Georgia's fourth graders were not reading
▶ 0:55:32Without objection, they'll be entered.
▶ 0:55:34Thank you. We're not reading at their grade level in 2024. And that should be so unacceptable to us. The numbers are even worse for children who look like me. Black and Hispanic students had average scores that were significantly significantly lower than their white counterparts than white students.
▶ 0:55:55In Georgia, less than 10% of white children grow up in poverty, which is still too many, but it is less than the national rate of 15 or 16%. Unfortunately, the same can't be said for all children in the state of One in three black and Hispanic students live in households that make below the poverty line. For family of four, that is just $32,150 a year.
▶ 0:56:24The same report card found students who identified as poor or economically disadvantaged had an average score that was 32 points lower than students who don't have to worry about their families' finances. It's clear that if we want to get at the root of this problem, we must also commit ourselves to creating a country where no child is forced to grow up in poverty.
▶ 0:56:48This country has come so far in its literacy, but there are still far too many children who never really have learned how to read. And without that foundational skill, it makes it so much more frustrating and more difficult to understand the world around them, the world in which they live. These kids are passed along until they age out of the system, where they don't just wake up every day and learn to read. They often never have the opportunity or the resources to learn these foundational skills as adults.
▶ 0:57:19As a lead sponsor of the Adult Education Works Act, which would reauthorize the adult education portion of WIOA, I work very closely with adult educators from around the country. Most of whom are severely overworked and definitely underpaid. A lot of them aren't even paid at all. These are people teaching the very basic reading, writing, and numeracy skills that everyone needs in order to be truly successful.
▶ 0:57:47But, there's practically no funding or support for these programs, which Congress can and must change. There's so many adults that we can help by not leaving them as we're leaving them as our children. By preventing more kids from being passed along and left behind, we can ensure that there are more adults with the skills they need to get a good job and to keep it.
▶ 0:58:14I truly believe that the best way to fight poverty is with opportunity. And you give our children opportunity by making sure they have the ability to read. You fight poverty by ensuring have and can afford the skills they need to get good jobs and build a future that they can look forward to. And you can't get a good job without a high quality education.
▶ 0:58:36So, bipartisan bills like set our children up for success, and I'm so grateful and so thankful that there's something that we're working on together, something that's going to come out of this committee that is going to be beneficial to our children, not partisan. And I look forward to supporting it and other legislation that uplifts the science of reading and uplifts our children's success. And I
▶ 0:59:00The gentle lady yields. I now ask forgiveness from my colleague from California for missing your hand signal. I recognize you now to speak on this this uh amendment in nature of a substitute.
▶ 0:59:13Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh the reading wars are over. That was the conclusion uh we reached on our K-12 education subcommittee uh at a hearing on literacy uh a few months ago. Uh and so, this bill today follows directly from that conclusion.
▶ 0:59:30And the idea here is pretty simple that we should not be using federal literacy to promote discredited approaches to literacy like three cueing or whole language approaches that in fact have only proven to increase rates of illiteracy. So this bill is the science of reading act of 2026.
▶ 0:59:54And what that refers to is the recent studies that have shown time and that the way that the brain is is wired when it comes to learning is actually you know validates the more traditional approaches to reading instruction. Namely phonological awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension.
▶ 1:00:20So while there might be a language instinct which is to say that that young children can learn language by osmosis that they're sort of wired to to pick it up, there is no reading instinct. This doesn't just kind of happen naturally which is the premise of some of these alternative approaches that came into vogue in recent decades. Rather it requires explicit instruction of those elements that I just listed.
▶ 1:00:47And so this approach or the return to this more traditional approach which has been adapted in certain ways but is ultimately rooted in in getting back to basics of phonics, it has shown amazing results across the country. So perhaps most strikingly in Mississippi, a state that had really struggled with literacy, was 49th in the country.
▶ 1:01:10They had dropped it a full approach of returning to the science of reading and they in a matter of years went from 49th in the country for fourth graders to ninth in the country. This is referred to as the Mississippi miracle, but there was nothing really miraculous about it. It was all grounded in proper pedagogy and science-based instruction.
▶ 1:01:31And we've seen similar examples in other states, and at this point just about every state has to varying degrees recognized the importance of returning and recognizing the science of reading. Even most recently, my own state of California has come around, and it's about time because California has suffered from not having proper literacy instruction. We actually have the highest rate of illiteracy in the country.
▶ 1:01:57So, I'm very grateful that we have strong bipartisan support for this legislation. When it comes to our kids' ability to succeed academically and their success in life, not to mention the future of our country, for there's perhaps nothing more important than making sure that they learn to read, our kids learn to read and to read well from a young age. So, thank you very much to the cosponsors of this legislation on all sides, and I yield
▶ 1:02:25The gentleman yields. Now, I recognize gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, to speak on this amendment nature of the substitute.
▶ 1:02:33Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I'm supportive of HR 7890, the Science of Reading Act. The bill aligns federal literacy funding with evidence-based reading instruction to ensure that competitive literacy grant programs supported under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act reflect actual research about how children actually learn to read through strong foundations and phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension.
▶ 1:03:04Far too many children are not reading at grade level. National assessments show stagnant or even declining reading rates with only about a third of third graders in the nation reading at proficient And criminologists will tell you that if you can't read by the third grade, you're on track to dropping out of school and a lot of things which include disproportionate levels of crime. Literacy is not a partisan issue.
▶ 1:03:34It is a national priority and is one of the clearest areas where evidence can guide us towards better outcomes by strengthening literacy instruction, we strengthen access to academic success and opportunity for all students. And Mr.
▶ 1:03:47Chairman, it's important to note that concerns have been expressed about the effect of this bill on English language learners and students with And we want to thank the sponsors of the for considering those concerns because as the bill is it is clear that the students, English language learners and students with disabilities are not adversely affected by the provisions of this bill.
▶ 1:04:18And so with that in mind, Mr. Chairman, I ask people to support the bill and I yield back.
▶ 1:04:24The gentleman yields. Are there any other members who wish to be recognized to speak on this amendment in the nature of a substitute? Seeing none, there being no further discussion on the amendment in the nature of a substitute, the committee will move to consideration of amendments. Are there any members who to offer amendments?
▶ 1:04:47Seeing none, there being no amendments, the question now occurs on the amendment in the nature of the substitute to HR All in favor say I. I. All opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the eyes have it and the amendment in the nature of a substitute is agreed to. We'll now move to consider the next
▶ 1:05:14Got it.
▶ 1:05:32The committee will now proceed to consideration of the bill HR 7891 for amendment. The bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are available. The clerk shall designate the bill.
▶ 1:05:47HR 7891, a bill to amend section 498A of the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require the Secretary of Education to prioritize program reviews of institutions of higher education that disperse federal financial aid under title IV of such act without verifying the identity of a student whose FAFSA presents a reasonable suspicion of identity fraud.
▶ 1:06:11Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. Without objection, the bill will be considered as read and open for amendment at any point and any amendment shall be considered as read. Does anyone seek to be recognized? Mr. Chairman Thompson, for what purpose do you seek recognition?
▶ 1:06:29Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment in the nature of a substitute at the desk, amendment 789 ANS.
▶ 1:06:35The clerk shall designate the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
▶ 1:06:39Amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7891 offered by Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania, identifier 7891 ANS.
▶ 1:06:47Without objection, the amendment shall be considered original text for purposes of further amendment. The amendment in the nature of substitute has already been distributed. I now recognize Mr. Thompson for 5 minutes to explain the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
▶ 1:07:01Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for convening today's important markup on my student aid fraud oversight and accountability Act. I'm honored to lead this legislation amending the Higher Education Act to strengthen federal oversight of institutions that disburse federal student aid to students uh to applicants suspected of potential identity fraud.
▶ 1:07:23This issue, commonly referred to as ghost student fraud, has plagued community colleges and universities across the country for many and crowded real deserving students out of classrooms. Ghost students fraud refers to schemes that in which bad actors use stolen or counterfeit identities to submit college admission and federal student aid applications, enroll in courses, extract federal student aid, and then vanish with extra These fraudulent actors posing
▶ 1:07:53as students have cost taxpayers millions of dollars proving that our current system is being exploited at the public's In 2025, the Department of Education discovered that almost 90 million dollars in federal student aid was distributed to fraudulent actors.
▶ 1:08:11Millions of dollars have been dispersed to deceased individuals and more than 40 million dollars were collected by entities using bots disguised as This crisis has hit states like California and Minnesota particularly In fact, over the past year, scammers stole more than 10 million dollars from California's community colleges where roughly 34% of applicants were identified as fake.
▶ 1:08:37In Minnesota, more than 1,800 ghost students collected 12.5 million dollars in taxpayer-funded grants and loans. The Student Aid Fraud Oversight and Accountability Act will create an oversight mechanism requiring the Education Department to identify institutions that disburse federal aid to applicants flagged for potential fraud, placing those institutions in a priority category that can allow for program reviews, audits, and other oversight activities.
▶ 1:09:08By implementing common sense identity checks like in person or live video verification, institutions can ensure federal funds are given to legitimate This legislation is a key step in rooting out fraud and abuse in our education system and ensuring our taxpayers money is not wasted. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the student aid fraud oversight and accountability act to help ensure aid reaches the students it is intended to serve, not criminals. And I yield back.
▶ 1:09:39The gentleman yields. Are there any members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment in the nature of a substitute? Does the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Scott, seek to be recognized?
▶ 1:09:58I move to strike the last word.
▶ 1:09:59The gentleman is recognized for 5
▶ 1:10:10Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um HR 7891 amends the Higher Education Act to require the Department of Education to prioritize program reviews for institutions that have dispersed fund that have dispersed financial aid to any student whose application was flagged as raising a reasonable suspicion of identity fraud. Uh we have to note, Mr.
▶ 1:10:35Chairman, that a lot of times people are trying to get registered by deadline and um you can't wait if you can't if they have to wait a couple of weeks to get uh everything in order, they may not be able to register. And so sometimes um these things are rushed. Um and we have to keep that keep real life into consideration.
▶ 1:11:01This bill would codify the department's current practice of prioritizing reviews of institutions based on fraud fraudulent uh student financial aid However, I'm concerned that as drafted this bill does not adequately support colleges in their efforts to address identity fraud. Colleges are working hard to prevent individuals from fraudulently enrolling in their institutions or receiving uh federal student aid for classes that they did not take.
▶ 1:11:29This bill would could penalize institutions for simply making a single mistake with one individual student. Instead, I strongly urge Republicans to better target the program review prioritization to colleges that have displayed a pattern of dispersing aid to fraudulent applications.
▶ 1:11:49Uh additionally, I have several concerns on this bill as I do with them the ne- maybe the next bill 7892 regarding the expansive interpretation of what constitutes reasonable suspicion of fraud. This process must be evidence-based practices to root out actual fraud rather than burdening students with increased verification requirements that delay their access to student aid. Despite these concerns, I'll support the underlying bill.
▶ 1:12:19However, I expect this committee to work with colleges, financial aid officers, and other stakeholders before floor consideration to ensure that the program review uh prioritizes institutions that have a pattern rather than penalizing institutions for a single mistake. Uh I have amendments to address these issues and I yield back.
▶ 1:12:43Gentleman yields. Are there any other members who wish to be recognized? Gentleman from California. Are there any other members who wish to be recognized? There being no further discussion on the amendment in the nature of substitute, the committee will move to consideration of amendments. Are there any members who wish to offer an amendment? I recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mr.
▶ 1:13:13Scott, for purpose of amendment.
▶ 1:13:15I have an amendment at the desk, Scott VA 05 _ 056.
▶ 1:13:21The clerk will report the amendment.
▶ 1:13:23Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7891 offered by Mr. Scott of Virginia, identifier Scott VA _ 056.
▶ 1:13:34Does the gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order?
▶ 1:13:36I reserve a point of order.
▶ 1:13:37A point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mr. Scott, for 5 minutes in support of his
▶ 1:13:46Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this bill would allow the department to prioritize program reviews for a school if they've seen even one instance where they've dispersed financial student financial aid in one individual with a reasonable suspicion of identity fraud. My amendment would update this requirement to prioritize program reviews for institutions that have displayed a pattern of dispersing student aid to potentially fraudulent individuals.
▶ 1:14:13This prevents a single institution reporting a single institutional reporting error from triggering a program review. It also requires the department to allow institutions to provide information on any errors or mistakes made regarding a given disbursement to a reasonably suspicious individual.
▶ 1:14:32This amendment would ensure the department is targeting abuse institutions that are not making meaningful steps to address fraud issues, rather than institutions trying to do their best to address fraud, like community colleges. This is This would also enable the Department to utilize its resources in a more efficient manner given the severely reduced staffing levels at the office of Federal Student Aid.
▶ 1:14:58Without narrowing down what constitutes a reason what is what constitutes reasonable, many [snorts] under-resourced institutions may be subject to additional unnecessary verification burdens that take them away from helping students. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment. Yield back.
▶ 1:15:16The gentleman yields. Does the gentleman, uh, Mr. Owens
▶ 1:15:19I I withdraw my point of order. The reservation is withdrawn. Thank you. Does anyone else seek recognition on the
▶ 1:15:29Uh, for what purpose does the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Thompson, seek
▶ 1:15:33Uh, just speak on the amendment.
▶ 1:15:35You're recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 1:15:38Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I I thank my good friend from Virginia for, uh, bringing up the uh, the issue they've had. We've We've heard feedback on this as well, and and we're interested in these changes. However, we want to examine these changes closely to ensure that we get the language right. And for that reason, I I have to oppose this amendment. However, I am willing to commit to uh, with the ranking member, um, uh, to consider some of your proposals or similar changes to the bill.
▶ 1:16:07And with that, I yield back.
▶ 1:16:12The gentleman yields.
▶ 1:16:13Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment with those Unanimous consent to remove the amendment with the remarks that were given by Representative Thompson. Without objection, so ordered. Are there any other amendments to the amendment in the nature of I recognize the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Scott.
▶ 1:16:40I have an amendment at the desk, Scott VA {underscore} 057.
▶ 1:16:46The clerk will report the amendment.
▶ 1:16:48Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7891 offered by Mr. Scott of Virginia, identifier Scott VA {underscore} 057.
▶ 1:16:58Representative Owens, do you
▶ 1:16:59I reserve a point of order.
▶ 1:17:01A point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman from Virginia, Representative Scott, for 5 minutes in support of his amendment.
▶ 1:17:09Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this amendment the bill allows the department to conduct additional program reviews for institutions that have dispersed that have dispersed federal student aid to an individual who has reasonable suspicion of identity fraud. As I previously mentioned, I have concerns about how this administration may interpret what constitutes reasonable suspicion of identity fraud as drafted. There are no parameters on what this could be.
▶ 1:17:39Therefore, my amendment would clarify that the department utilizes its existing verification group framework to better identify serious patterns of identity fraud rather than place these requirements on lower [snorts] levels of identity verification, such as verifying students' tax information. Without narrowing down what constitutes reasonable, a fair many students may be subject to additional unnecessary verification burdens.
▶ 1:18:06Colleges and students must be able to trust the department is solely addressing legitimate suspicions of suspicious behavior, such [snorts] as submission of several FAFSA applications under different names from the same IP address or physical address or the use of a social security number from a deceased individual.
▶ 1:18:26This bill should not allow the this administration to consider other factors unrelated to potential identity fraud, such as a student's demographic Um Mr. Chairman, in light of the comments with from the um sponsor of the bill, I withdraw the amendment and work with them on this as well as the other.
▶ 1:18:49I thank the gentleman. Are there any other amendments to be offered? There being no further amendments, the question now occurs on the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7891. All in favor, say I. I. All opposed, no.
▶ 1:19:17In the opinion of the chairs, the eyes have it and amendment in the nature of a substitute is agreed to. There being no further amendments and further action on HR 7891 being postponed, we'll now move to consider the next bill.
▶ 1:19:44The committee will now proceed to consideration of bill HR 7892 for The bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are available. The clerk shall designate the bill.
▶ 1:19:57HR 7892, a bill to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require to the Secretary of Education to use an identity fraud detection system to review each FAFSA to determine whether the FAFSA represents a reasonable suspicion of identity fraud.
▶ 1:20:12Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. Without objection, the bill will be considered as read and open for amendment at any point and any amendment offered shall be considered as read. Does anyone seek to be recognized? Representative Owen, for what purpose do you seek recognition?
▶ 1:20:30Uh, I'd have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 1:20:32The clerk shall designate the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
▶ 1:20:35Amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7892 offered by Mr. Owens of Utah identifier 7892 ANS.
▶ 1:20:43Without objection, the amendment shall be considered original text for purposes of further amendment. The amendment in the nature of a substitute has already been distributed. I now recognize Mr. Owens for 5 minutes to explain the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
▶ 1:20:57Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The No Aid for Ghost Students Act seeks to remedy a serious problem that institutions of higher education face. Bad actors submit faster applications using stolen or fabricated identities to obtain federal aid student aid dollars. These fraudsters are often called ghost students and leave taxpayers to foot the bill while crowding out real students.
▶ 1:21:18It's time we strengthen protections for federal funding to stop them from The No Aid for Ghost Students Act remedies this problem by requiring the Department of Education to use identity fraud detection systems to review each faster application to determine whether the application presents a reasonable suspicion of identity fraud.
▶ 1:21:37When the application is flagged, the applicant and the institution designated by the applicant are For institutions to disperse federal student aid to these applicants, the institution must verify the identity of the applicant either in person or on a live video call. The bill also requires Department Department to establish guidelines for the verification process. Report on the system's use and effectiveness to My ANS uh makes a simple technical change.
▶ 1:22:07This common sense legislation ensures federal dollars aren't flowing to professional Federal aid it needs to go to students who need it most and every cent that's defrauded represents a lost opportunity for students in need and a serious offense to the American taxpayer. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this ANS and on this much needed underlying bill. With that, I yield back.
▶ 1:22:30I thank the gentleman. Are any members any other members who wish to be recognized for the discussion on amendment in the nature of substitute? Mr. Scott, do you wish to be recognized?
▶ 1:22:40Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the last word.
▶ 1:22:43You're recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 1:22:44Mr. Chairman, HR 80 Excuse me, 87892 amends the Higher Education Act to require the Department of Education to implement an identity fraud detection system within the FAFSA process. Specifically, the bill would require the Secretary to inform aid applicants that they are subject to these identity verification processes. It also requires colleges to certify that there is no reasonable suspicion of identity fraud through identity verification.
▶ 1:23:13This bill would codify the framework of the Trump admin- what the Trump administration is already implementing for the 2026-27 school year. Over the last [snorts] decade, there has been an increase in college enrollment by individuals uh attempting to There's been an increase in college enrollment by individuals attempting to commit fraud.
▶ 1:23:32In many cases, these are fraudulent applicants using fake or stolen identities to enroll in courses and obtain access to federal student aid money and other college resources with no intention of actually attending the courses or working towards the degree. While this fraud happens across all higher education sectors, there's been an increase in fraudulent enrollments at low-cost, open-enrollment colleges like community colleges and online programs.
▶ 1:24:02It is important for the department to proactively screen for identity fraud verification process is the very time and resource Since verification process is a very time- and resource-intensive process for under-resourced colleges, this is why the The Simplification [snorts] Act of 2020 uh required the department to streamline and simplify the verification process.
▶ 1:24:27Now, while I support the uh goals of the legislation, I do have a few concerns about the way the bill is might make it more confusing for colleges and potentially actually slow down aid disbursement. For example, the bill lacks details on what steps an individual should take for an individual who gets flagged for verification that are in fact that are in fact students but may not have immediate access to necessary documentation.
▶ 1:24:55Those would include those who are unhoused or foster youth. Additionally, we've seen significant uh from the Department of Education to many student populations and student including students of color and students with legal permanent residence.
▶ 1:25:13Concerned that this administration may attempt to twist what constitutes reasonable suspicion of identity fraud to attack [snorts] colleges or students and therefore it is critical that the bill require clear guidance on how colleges should comply with the law and how to determine which students to subject to additional verification. Despite these concerns, we need to support the bill because we need to address identity theft.
▶ 1:25:39However, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, I expect the committee to work with colleges financial aid offices, college access organizations, and others to ensure that this new process decreases the verification burdens on colleges and will not prevent students from receiving their student aid in a timely manner so they can actually register for classes before the uh deadlines. I'll offer amendments to address these these issues and yield back the balance of my time.
▶ 1:26:09The gentleman yields. Does the gentleman from California, Mr. Kelly, wish to be You're recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 1:26:16Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, the taxpayers in my state of California have been attacked by a staggering amount of fraud. And one of the very clear examples of that is with uh community colleges in particular. Uh, we saw a staggering 1.2 million fake community college applications.
▶ 1:26:36That's about a third of the applications uh that were simply used to commit financial aid fraud where uh fraudsters would pose as applicants and then uh you know, whatever portion of uh the financial aid uh you know, was above and beyond uh tuition and fees and went to the uh supposed student, they would simply uh pocket as part of their uh criminal enterprise. And so our taxpayers lost millions and millions of dollars uh because of this.
▶ 1:26:59One of my local community colleges, uh they saw this uh massive increase in applicants, like a tripling in the number of applicants, and they said, "Huh, that's odd. We know we're doing a good job, but that's a pretty unusual spike in applications." So they actually were on top of things and implemented measures uh to combat this at their community call at their at their particular college, uh but not every college is able to do that, has the resources to do so. And frankly, the state has kind of been missing in action.
▶ 1:27:25Uh, so a group of us from California asked the Department of Education uh to look into this issue, and they responded by creating new ID uh verification validation requirements, which have been pretty successful in actually rooting out this fraud. So today's bill is simply uh codifying these practices to make sure that they remain in place and that fraudsters can't simply wait for a future administration uh to pull back these uh requirements.
▶ 1:27:52So the bill is called the No Aid for Ghost Students Act, and I think it's properly named because we want aid to go to real students, not ghost students. We're very proud of the financial aid uh that we're able to provide students to attend college, to attend community college, to climb the ladder of economic opportunity, to become uh valuable contributing members uh of our workforce Uh, and this bill will assure that they're the ones who benefit from financial aid, not fraudsters who are simply advancing criminal aims.
▶ 1:28:22I thank my colleague from Utah for proposing this bill. Very happy to support it and I yield back.
▶ 1:28:28The gentleman yields. Are there any others who wish to speak on amendment in the nature of a substitute? Seeing none, there being no further discussion on the amendment in the nature of substitute, the committee will move to consideration of amendments. Are there any members who would like to offer amendments? Representative Scott, do you wish to offer an amendment?
▶ 1:28:45Mr. Chairman, I have two amendments that I'd like to offer on block. Um, Scott VA and Scott VA
▶ 1:29:00The clerk will report the amendments.
▶ 1:29:03Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7892 offered by Mr. Scott, Virginia, identifier Scott VA and Scott VA _059.
▶ 1:29:14Does the gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order?
▶ 1:29:17I reserve a point of order.
▶ 1:29:18Point of order is reserved and I recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mr. Scott, for 5 minutes in support of his amendments.
▶ 1:29:26Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The first amendment _08 just says after fraud detection system insert the following based on identity verification process for verification tracking groups V4 and V5. It's similar to the amendment I introduced in the previous bill.
▶ 1:29:50This would require colleges to determine a reasonable suspicion of identity fraud is not present by conducting in-person or lab audio-visual verification of Um, we have concerns about how the administration may interpret what constitutes reasonable suspicion and my amendment uh will just make sure that it's talking about a verification process that's already in in in in um existence.
▶ 1:30:18Goes after the four and five or more serious cases. Those are the ones that you are going after, not flagging people because of demographics or family size or anything else. Colleges should be able to trust the department is solely addressing legitimate suspicious suspicions rather than fearing the administration may be looking at um uh this information for other reasons.
▶ 1:30:45The other amendment on Onan simply says that um um the bills the bill aims to streamline the identity verification process by uh requiring the Department of Education implement an identity fraud detection system within the FAFSA process, but there are open questions regarding the requirement of institutions when faced with identity fraud and how colleges support students who've been
▶ 1:31:15flagged for additional verification. My amendment would require the Secretary of Education to provide resources, including technical and financial assistance, to colleges to carry out the new requirements outlined in HR 7891. The amendment [snorts] would also require the Secretary to establish guidance for institutions that outline the specific roles and responsibilities of institutions and the department.
▶ 1:31:40Right now, it's unclear what procedures they would have in place to support students who get flagged for increased in identity verification, but it's critical for these students that they have timely access to their student aid if they get flagged. You don't want a situation where the verification process puts them past the deadline for um for for for registering for their courses.
▶ 1:32:05Additionally, it's important to make clear how institutions remain compliant with the new new regulations as they navigate all of the complex changes in federal student aid from the big ugly that was passed earlier uh in this session. We know colleges want to mitigate identity fraud within us federal student aid.
▶ 1:32:27It hurts students and increases burdens on college administrators, but we must provide them with the tools they need to successfully implement a streamlined verification process and support their students who get flagged for verification. Therefore, I support these amendments and yield back.
▶ 1:32:46The gentleman yields. Does the gentleman from Utah reserve?
▶ 1:32:50I withdraw my point of order.
▶ 1:32:52The reservation is withdrawn. Does anyone seek recognition on the I recognize the gentleman from Utah for 5 minutes.
▶ 1:33:10I want to thank first of all the ranking member for offering the the amendment. Um the financial assistant and guide and guidelines. Unfortunately, this amendment is unnecessary and I must oppose it. The department already assists institutions with technical assistance when needed. Institutions also already uh receive taxpayer funds through federal student aid and should take their commitment to combating fraud seriously. They should not require an initial uh taxpayer funds to follow through on that commitment.
▶ 1:33:37The bill also provides Congress with information about the fraud detection system in a 30-day notice before any change of that system is implemented. The bill also continues a also already has a uh an annual evaluations and reports on that fraud system as well as guidelines for that institution. There's no need to request an additional set of guidelines when this bill already clearly describes the process of combating fraud.
▶ 1:34:03And for the second amendment adding assistance existing regulations on verification into the bill. This amendment is unnecessary. The bill is already clear that it's addressing this identity fraud. Adding regulations language to fast for verification until this bill would only tie the hands of the department in adapting a system to changing fraud I wish you to oppose these amendments and support the underlying bill and I yield back.
▶ 1:34:31The gentleman yields. Does anyone else wish to speak on the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment by the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mr. Scott. All in favor say I.
▶ 1:34:47All opposed, no. No. In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it to end the amendments and the amendments are not agreed to. Further action on HR 7892 is postponed.
▶ 1:35:18There being no further amendments, the question now occurs on the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7892. All in favor say I. I. All opposed, no.
▶ 1:35:31In the opinion of the chair, the eyes have it and the amendment in the nature of a substitute is agreed to. There being no further amendments and further action on HR 7892 being postponed, we'll now move to consider the next bill.
▶ 1:36:07The committee will now proceed to consideration of the bill HR 7893 for amendment. The bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are available. The clerk shall designate the bill.
▶ 1:36:22HR 7893, a bill to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to improve the process for the verification of social security numbers required to be provided to the Secretary of Education for federal student aid and for other
▶ 1:36:36Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. Without objection, the bill will be considered as read and open for amendment at any point. And any amendment offered shall be considered as read. I now recognize myself to offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute. I have an amendment at the desk. The clerk shall designate the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
▶ 1:37:00Amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7893 offered by Mr. Walberg of Michigan, identifier 7893 ANS_01.
▶ 1:37:09Without objection, the amendment shall be considered original text for purposes of further amendment. The amendment in the nature of a substitute has already been distributed. I now recognize myself for 5 minutes to explain the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
▶ 1:37:24The Department of Education is statutorily required to verify students' identities when they fill out the FAFSA To do that, the process uses an individual's social security number and checks government records to indicate citizenship status. This is not controversial since and since 1995 the citizenship indicator has been used for purposes of identity verification.
▶ 1:37:55In 2019 Congress passed the FUTURE Act which requires that all students and their contributors consent to having their tax information requested directly from the IRS and populated into FAFSA. To do this the Department needs to verify each student and his or her contributors identities with the Social Security Administration. But there is a problem.
▶ 1:38:21The law only allows the Department to verify the Social Security numbers of students and their parents, not other contributors like step parents and The FAFSA Verification Efficiency Act fixes this gap by requiring the Department in coordination with the Social Security Administration to verify the Social Security number and citizenship status of anyone applying for federal student aid and other contributors for the purposes purpose of identity
▶ 1:38:51verification. As Congress works to reduce improper federal student aid payments, we should make sure the Department has the tools it needs to to detect fraudulent identities and inaccurate financial information. I urge my colleagues to support HR 7893, the FAFSA Verification Efficiency Act, and I yield back.
▶ 1:39:18Are there any members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment in the nature of a substitute? I recognize the gentleman, the ranking member from Virginia, Mr. Scott for 5
▶ 1:39:29Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, HR 7893 amends the Higher Education Act to require the Department of Education in cooperation with the Social Security Administration to verify Social Security numbers of anyone that is required to be provided to the secretary for federal student aid When students complete a FAFSA, they can consent to having their and their contributors tax uh information pulled directly from the Internal Revenue Service,
▶ 1:39:59which speeds up the process in determining federal student aid. To do this IR- IRS match, the department must verify the student or contributor's social security number. However, it is currently it currently only has the authority to verify the social security numbers of students and parents of dependent students, but fails to address spouses and step-parents.
▶ 1:40:24HR 87893 would ensure the department can verify social security number of any family member contributing to FAFSA, and therefore more easily access their tax data through the IRS. Now, this bill goes a step further and requires the secretary to collect and verify citizenship status of any individual who provides a social security number for the purpose of federal student aid.
▶ 1:40:49This opens the door to a very concerning federal data collection on citizenship beyond what is required by law. Only students and parents who are applying for a parent Only students and parents who are applying for a parent PLUS loan should be required to uh verify their citizenship status status because only citizens uh are eligible for those for those loans. And that's what's happens under current law.
▶ 1:41:18Given the Trump administration's ongoing, rampant, and violent attacks on immigrants and people of color across the country, I'm concerned that this data collection can and will be used to further expand immigration enforcement and intimidate students from mixed-status families from applying to Congress should authorize Congress should never authorize the citizenship verification of anybody who did not receive federal who is not receiving federal student aid.
▶ 1:41:48And we certainly should not give the Trump administration more authority to to surveil or intimidate students and their families for simply applying to college. we will offer amendments to address these issues including limiting citizenship verification to individuals accessing federal student aid and prohibiting FAFSA data from being shared or used in immigration enforcement. So, I propose my colleagues to oppose the underlying bill unless these
▶ 1:42:18Are there any other members who wish Are there any other members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on amendment and nature of a substitute? There'll be no further discussion on the amendment in the nature of a substitute. The committee will move to consideration of amendments. Are there any members who would like to offer amendments?
▶ 1:42:41Does the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, wish to offer an Yes, Mr. Chairman. I have um amendment at the desk. Uh Scott
▶ 1:43:01The clerk will report the amendment.
▶ 1:43:07Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7893 offered by Mr. Scott of Virginia, identifier
▶ 1:43:23We'll suspend for a moment.
▶ 1:43:50Will the clerk redesignate the
▶ 1:43:56Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7893 offered by Mr. Scott of Virginia identifier Scott _ FAFSA _ AMD _ 04.
▶ 1:44:07Does the gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order?
▶ 1:44:10I reserve a point of order.
▶ 1:44:11Point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman Virginia, Mr. Scott, the ranking member for 5 minutes in support of his amendment.
▶ 1:44:21Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, HR 7893 opens the door to very concerning federal data collection on citizenship status that outweighs any improvement made to the application As I said earlier in my earlier remarks, parental and spousal citizenship status does not affect student eligibility for for financial aid.
▶ 1:44:46Thus, there's no reason for Congress to expand citizenship verification of anybody beyond those where it is relevant to eligibility. My amendment would prohibit the Department of Education from collecting citizenship or immigration status of anyone who's not required to have their citizenship verified for the purpose of receiving federal student aid. It would also prohibit the Department of Education from sharing FAFSA data with other agencies.
▶ 1:45:19prevalent prevalent immigration enforcement across the country concerns about how the Trump administration may choose to weaponize citizenship data on students uh students' parents and their spouses. Without these restrictions, this bill creates another tool for the Trump administration to encroach on people's data and advance harmful immigration actions.
▶ 1:45:46Just last month, immigration agents detained a student at Columbia University after [snorts] misrepresenting themselves to access a restricted area of campus without legal And outside of uh higher education, we have already seen the Trump administration break the trust of everyday Americans to advance their immigration enforcement.
▶ 1:46:08For example, the IRS illegally shared private taxpayer data with the Department of Homeland Security. So, how can we trust that they're not going to weaponize FAFSA data? Regardless of immigration status, increased immigration enforcement across the country, especially in education spaces, is negatively impacting students, families, and college staff. Many of whom most of whom are uh are there properly without any problems.
▶ 1:46:39Uh seeing um seeing their having young people see their classmates dragged away uh inflicts trauma on them that uh they'll never forget. So, this amendment will ensure that students can access federal student aid without fear of of their loved ones being reprimanded while still making improvements to FAFSA. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment. Yield back.
▶ 1:47:05The gentleman yields back. Does the gentleman from Utah insist on a point of
▶ 1:47:09I withdraw my point of order.
▶ 1:47:10Point of order is withdrawn. I recognize myself for 5 minutes in opposition to the I personally believe, looking at reading the amendment, it's unnecessary.
▶ 1:47:26The identity verification process between the Department of Education and Social Security Administration constitutes a matching program under the Privacy Act of 1974 and is allowed under the statutory authority provided by the Higher Education Act. This has been the Department of Education's process for students who have applied for federal financial aid since 1995.
▶ 1:47:53The process that this bill would statutory require of all FAFSA contributors is already the status quo for many. The Department knows how to safeguard this data as they use it for the intended purpose of identity verification and have been doing so for I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment and support the underlying bill and I yield back.
▶ 1:48:18Are there any others who Are there any others who wish to speak on the The gentle lady from Oregon, do you wish to speak on the amendment?
▶ 1:48:27Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I
▶ 1:48:29You're recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 1:48:30Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I I want to align myself with the comments of ranking member Scott and support his We have seen in my home state of Oregon and across the country a vicious attack on immigrants and this amendment will help to address that. And Mr. Chairman, you said that the the Department would safeguard the data. Um I say without hesitation that I don't trust that in this administration that they will safeguard any data.
▶ 1:48:59Um as we speak, there is a conference right a press conference right now in support of DACA students uh who of course are people who in our communities have contributed so much to our communities, to our society, to our economy. Um [snorts] we should be protecting DACA students as well. Um Mr. Chairman, um I I I wish we were working on the Dream and Promise Act of this. So, I want to align myself with Mr.
▶ 1:49:26Scott and extremely concerned about anything that is going to discourage people from getting a higher education and particularly give information to the Department of Homeland Security to increase their already vicious and violent attacks against immigrants and people of color across the country and I yield back.
▶ 1:49:48The gentle lady yields. Are there any others who wish to speak on the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment by the gentleman from All in favor say I.
▶ 1:50:06All opposed, no.
▶ 1:50:09In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it and the amendment is not agreed A roll call vote is ordered pursuant to the chair's previous announcement. This vote will be postponed. Are there any further amendments to the amendment in the nature of substitute to HR 7893? I recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member Mr. Spat as Mr. Scott for an amendment.
▶ 1:50:37Mr. Chairman, I have a substitute to the amendment in the nature of a substitute at the desk. It's a sub under score 01.
▶ 1:50:46The clerk will report the amendment.
▶ 1:50:50Substitute to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7893 offered by Mr. Scott of Virginia identifier Scott {underscore} FAST Act {underscore} sub {underscore} 01.
▶ 1:51:00Does the gentleman from Utah reserve point of order? A point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member Mr. Scott for 5 minutes in support of his amendment.
▶ 1:51:13Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, HR 7893 would improve the faster process for dependent or marriage students and their but this bill goes too far. It opens the door to increase federal data collection on citizenship status as this country experiences an unprecedented amount of violent immigration enforcement efforts.
▶ 1:51:37Parent and spouse citizenship status status does not affect the student eligibility for financial aid. Therefore, citizenship status should not be collected for anybody except students applying for federal aid or parents applying for parent plus loan. That's already required under federal law. The Democratic in amendment in nature of a substitute would replace the text of the bill with a more narrow verification process.
▶ 1:52:05Specifically, this required this amendment would require the Department of Education to work with the Social Security Admin- Administration to verify the Social Security numbers of any person applying for federal student aid or any parent applying for parent plus loan.
▶ 1:52:21This would help improve the department's data matching process to determine of student aid without expanding the Trump administration's ability to unnecessarily collect or verify citizenship status on family members for which that citizenship status is not relevant to the eligibility for student aid in this in that case. So, let's be clear.
▶ 1:52:46The current law does not require either a student's parents or spouse to be citizens in order for that student to reach to receive federal student aid. Congress should not allow the Trump administration to get away with expanding citizenship collection or encouraging [snorts] the surveillance of students with family members who may not be citizens or are caught up in President Trump's violent immigration enforcement tactics.
▶ 1:53:11This amendment will ensure that our students and their contributors data are protected while making improvements to I urge my colleagues to support this amendment in nature of a substitute or oppose the underlying bill.
▶ 1:53:28The gentleman yields. I recognize myself in opposition to the amendment. Uh the the department has used citizenship, as I mentioned before, as a component of the identity verification process for students applying for federal student aid since 1995.
▶ 1:53:49It should not not be controversial to allow the department to use citizenship to verify the identities of anyone who contributes to the FAFSA. The department has been safeguarding this data for 30 years. The underlying bill allows the department to use citizenship for identity verification without restricting student aid based on the citizenship status of a student's parents, step-parents, or spouse.
▶ 1:54:20It's also not necessary to include that the department must engage in a computer matching agreement since this is what is required by the Privacy Act. I oppose this amendment and support my underlying bill and I yield back. Does anyone else seek recognition on the I recognize the gentlewoman from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici, for 5 minutes on the
▶ 1:54:50Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I I want to speak in favor of Mr. Scott's amendment for the reasons he explained. But I also want to note, Mr. Chairman, that you said this should not be controversial. But it is. And in other years, in other times it might not be, but it is because this administration is targeting immigrants and people of color and in a vicious way.
▶ 1:55:11And so this is going to discourage people from applying to college, people who have the right to apply and the right to get financial aid and the right to attend depending on who their family is or what they look like. So I strongly support this amendment for the reasons Mr. Scott explained and I yield back. And I yield the rest of my time to Mr.
▶ 1:55:32I just had to ask you a question. What effect would this have on a student who's eligible for student aid but has an undocumented relative that may be contributing? Their citizenship status having nothing to do with their Might the student not even apply if they've got to expose their relative? That's my understanding. Mr.
▶ 1:55:57Ranking member, based on conversations and what I've seen in the community where I live and the community I represent for example yes, very very well could be that eligible students will not apply because they are afraid of their families being targeted. And and that it it is so frustrating and so concerning. We have right now in Oregon kids afraid to go to school because they're afraid ICE is going to come into their classroom.
▶ 1:56:22We have a lot of fear in the community from ICE raids and ICE showing up in places and targeting people. Our small businesses are suffering because ICE trucks are in their parking lots. People aren't going to the restaurants. They aren't shopping at the stores. And and Mr. Ranking member and and committee members this is going to have some generational trauma on some of these kids. There's a lot of kids who are in fear right now about their own government targeting themselves or their families.
▶ 1:56:52And and so I I strongly support the amendment. I wish we were having more serious conversation about the what what's happening to students across the country with the fear of ICE being violent in their community or the fear we have we have kids afraid that when they go home their parents won't be there. That that is so wrong. Kids are US citizens. I have I have a a mother I'm trying to get out of detention right now who's been in detention for almost 2 never committed any crime.
▶ 1:57:20Her her church submitted letters on her behalf. Um she's loved by her church and her community and her friends and her and she's in detention and her kids are suffering in school. They were doing really well. US citizen kids. They were doing really well in school, but now their dad is recovering from surgery. He can't help them. Their mom is sitting with your taxpayer dollars in a prison-like detention center. Even though she has never committed a crime, paid her taxes, and this is wrong, Mr.
▶ 1:57:49Chairman, for many reasons, but I support your amendment. I hope we can have a more thorough conversation about what's happening in schools and to young people across this country because of this the violent actions of ICE and AUBEC.
▶ 1:58:05Does the gentleman yield? Gentleman yields. I recognize the gentleman from Utah.
▶ 1:58:11I'd like to yield my time to the
▶ 1:58:14I thank the gentleman. Let me reiterate. I appreciate the sensitivity, the compassion, the emotion. But again, the underlying bill allows the department to use citizenship for identity verification without restricting without restricting student aid based on the citizenship status of a student's parents, step parents, or spouse. Full stop.
▶ 1:58:45Full stop. On the other issues I would encourage us to ratchet down the venomous statements about ICE, customs and borders, and about the law There are people that are being scared to receive legal opportunities because Let me control myself and say inaccurate spin information being put out.
▶ 1:59:15It's time to stop that. I yield back to the gentleman from Utah. Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment? The gentleman from California, do you wish wish to be recommended recognized?
▶ 1:59:32Mr. Chairman, I I would
▶ 1:59:35You're recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 1:59:36Oh, yes. Thank you. I I would just strike that word. Um
▶ 1:59:42You know, Mr. Chairman, I have American in my own district, some who hold public who feel compelled to carry a passport they are being racially profiled and They're targeted by virtue of the fact that uh people who are Latino or of Hispanic descent or who may appear to be are being targeted.
▶ 2:00:09The Supreme Court has green green-lighted Kavanaugh stops. And so, if you would to if the gentleman would walk in the shoes of someone who by virtue of just being who they are is afraid immigration enforcement, whether it is uh Border Patrol, whether it is ICE, can put them into detention for up to 72
▶ 2:00:41This has occurred with the guest of that I brought to the State of the Union, George Reidis, who was a Army military veteran on his way to I don't think that we are being inflammatory when we tell the stories of these individuals or when we express the fear and anxiety
▶ 2:01:09uh of our constituents. This is the distrust that's engendered by this administration. And this legislation, which you report to say is so simple, is not so I wish that we could trust government agencies, but we've seen government agencies and their policies be responsible for the deaths of American citizens.
▶ 2:01:38And I would remind this committee and all Americans that's not just American citizens who have rights in this Non-citizens are also recognized by the The 14th Amendment does not say no citizen shall be denied life, liberty, or property except under due process of law. It says no person. No person.
▶ 2:02:01And the Constitution was written very intentionally in this case, this Every human being who walks within our is to be respected in terms of their legal rights. And their legal rights mean that they have a right to due process.
▶ 2:02:21I take exception to what Justice Kavanaugh did in green-lighting Kavanaugh stops and racial profiling. And so, our underlying concern with this is very real. It is not hyperbole. Um and it is not inflammatory. Our concerns are very real. And with that, I yield back.
▶ 2:02:50Gentleman yields. Are there any others who seek recognition on the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment by the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mr. Scott. All in favor say I. All opposed, no. No. In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it and the amendment is not agreed A roll call vote is ordered pursuant to the chair's previous announcement.
▶ 2:03:20This vote will be postponed. Are there any further amendments to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7893? Further action on HR 7893 is postponed. We will now move to consideration of the next bill.
▶ 2:03:50Is this the one?
▶ 2:03:51Yes, it is.
▶ 2:03:54The committee will now proceed to consideration of the bill HR 7661 for amendment. The bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are available. The clerk shall designate the bill.
▶ 2:04:08HR 7661, a bill to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to prohibit the use of funds provided under such act to develop, implement, facilitate, host, or promote any program or activity for or to provide or promote literature or other materials to children under the age of 18 that includes sexually oriented material and for other purposes.
▶ 2:04:29Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. Without objection, the bill will be considered as read and open for amendment at any And any amendment offered shall be considered as read. Does anyone seek to be recognized? Representative Miller, for what purpose do you seek recognition?
▶ 2:04:49Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment in the nature of a substitute at the desk, amendment 7661
▶ 2:04:58The clerk shall designate the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
▶ 2:05:02Amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7661 offered by Ms. Miller of Illinois, identifier 7661 ANS_01.
▶ 2:05:11Without objection, the amendment shall be considered original text for purposes of further amendment. The amendment in the nature of a substitute has already been distributed. I now recognize Ms. Miller for 5 minutes to explain the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
▶ 2:05:25Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for including my bill in this week's markup. The COVID-19 pandemic response wrecked havoc on our education system by isolating children and cutting them off from in-person learning and school Yet, it was during the pandemic when parents began paying closer attention to what their children were being taught.
▶ 2:05:51When these parents showed up to school board meetings to voice their concerns or read excerpts from books, the National School Boards Association sent a letter to the Biden-Harris administration that in that accused engaged parents of domestic Meanwhile, reading and math scores have stagnated or declined nationwide.
▶ 2:06:14Schools should be laser-focused on improving educational outcomes, not pushing sexually explicit material in the classrooms. Yet, in many schools, inappropriate content is available to children in And I've seen and read some of this curriculum. I've been married 46 years. I am embarrassed to talk about what we are putting in front of our children.
▶ 2:06:43What we're talking about is is obscene and it's being funded by taxpayer dollars. In fact, books like Gender Queer, Lawn Boy, and It's Perfectly Normal are so explicit that even their authors admit they were never intended for children.
▶ 2:07:02According to Max Eden from the American Enterprise Institute, if a stranger were to read these books to a fourth grader on the street, he might be arrested and Additionally, parents are frequently prohibited from reading these books at school board meetings. In Clay County, Florida, a father attempted to read from the book Lucky at a school board meeting, but his microphone was cut off.
▶ 2:07:29A district spokesperson later explained, "When addressing the board, since our meetings are televised, we must abide by FCC laws and regulations." So, think about this. What we are using taxpayer-funded dollars to put in front of our children is prohibited under FCC laws and regulations.
▶ 2:07:53In Asheville, North Carolina, a local pastor was interrupted by school board officials while he read from It's Perfectly Normal, to which he replied, "If you don't want to hear it in a school board meeting, why should children be able to check it out of the school system?" In my home state of Illinois, Chicago Public Schools featured sexual education curriculum beginning in kindergarten.
▶ 2:08:20In the first grade, there were lessons on how to identify gender identity. In second grade, students were taught the concept of gender stereotypes and how to quote advocate for change. By fifth grade, there was an introduction to puberty blockers. I have seen this curriculum. It is It is obscene. I don't know what else to say.
▶ 2:08:45They are introducing our our first graders to how to masturbate with pictures. We go on into lower elementary schools introducing them to gross oral and anal sex. People I talk to do not believe me. I have to show them the curriculum. It is They are using taxpayer dollars for it.
▶ 2:09:09That is why I've introduced HR 7661 Stop the Sexualization of our Children Act to counteract students' exposure to inappropriate content by prohibiting the use of federal taxpayer dollars to promote sexually explicit materials. The ANS simply makes a technical change.
▶ 2:09:31Surely, we can all agree this should not be a partisan issue, that pornographic content has no place in schools. And I can tell you as someone that spent time in a public school classroom and ended up homeschooling my children, there is not time in the day to be able to introduce our children to all the wonderful educational materials and wonderful literature there is.
▶ 2:09:58This is The other terrible thing about this is they are wasting classroom time. Therefore, I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill and I yield back. Thank you.
▶ 2:10:12Gentlewoman yields. Are there any other members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment in nature of substitute? The gentlewoman from Georgia, Ms. McBath. Do you wish to be recognized?
▶ 2:10:22Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wish to speak in opposition to the amendment in the nature of substitute.
▶ 2:10:27You're recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 2:10:28Thank you, Mr. Chair. This bill is not about protecting children. One of the first bipartisan bills that I got signed into law, the End Child Exploitation Act, extended the retention period of reported child sexual abuse material from 90 days up to 1 year. Ensuring law enforcement has sufficient time to investigate, hold predators accountable, and get them off the street away from our families. That bill was about protecting children.
▶ 2:10:58This bill is about pressuring schools and teachers into conforming to this Republican majority's specific world It's about erasing history and replacing difficult conversations about complicated issues like the Holocaust and slavery. Two of the greatest evils ever to be inflicted upon the world. Two evils whose victims' stories deserve to be told in this country.
▶ 2:11:25Yes, hearing about these things is very uncomfortable for all of us. The heinous acts of violence and degradation described and depicted should disturb every single one of us. That's part of how we know the things done to the victims were so wrong. Just reading or hearing what really happened to these people makes one simply recoil. But that doesn't mean that we should hide from them.
▶ 2:11:52People deserve to know the truth at the appropriate age. And this bill treats 16- and 17-year-olds the same as kindergarteners or first graders. Two ages that are completely different levels of maturity. That are prepared for vastly different levels of information and sensitivity. Just like public schools don't start off teaching math to kindergarteners with trigonometry or calculus.
▶ 2:12:21They don't start off teaching history to our youngest children with nude photos of Holocaust victims or any other extremely sensitive part of history. This bill would ban programming for all students under the age of 18. That includes sexually oriented material including any program, activity, literature, or material that exposes students to It then lists a variety of exceptions including standard science coursework.
▶ 2:12:50But there's no mention of history. No mention of history whatsoever. Would this ban include learning about the forced stripping that was done to so many victims of the Holocaust before they were executed? Would there be a ban on 17-year-olds learning about the daily reality of female slaves in our country? About women who were unable to give consent, who lived under the constant threat of rape and assault? Should that history not be taught?
▶ 2:13:20These examples can't be dismissed as just sexual and cast aside. That's the history of what happened here. What a disservice to the victims that suffered to sum up what happened to them with one simple word and hide away their story is unconscionable. These stories are testaments to the lives that these people truly lived and the horrors that they were forced to endure.
▶ 2:13:46Horrors that must be confronted if we ever truly want to see them stop. It's easy for us to just turn away from these things because they're uncomfortable and they're hard for us to understand or hard for us to fathom. But that is not what Congress should be encouraging. I'm opposed to this bill and I yield back.
▶ 2:14:09Generally yields. Gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Harris, to which be recognized.
▶ 2:14:15Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise today to support the Stop the Sexualization of Children Act because tax dollars should not be used to promote explicit material to minors. At its core, this legislation is about protecting children from content you would find in X-rated movie. It's about curating good content for kids, not banning books.
▶ 2:14:41This bill guards against using federal taxpayer dollars to promote or develop sexually oriented materials for children. And let me be clear, what's often overlooked, this legislation defines this by referencing existing federal definitions of graphic sexual conduct. Just as importantly, it also makes clear what this bill does not do. It does not prohibit the teaching of legitimate science such as biology.
▶ 2:15:11It does not restrict the study of classical works of literature or art. There's a profound difference between studying timeless works that have helped shape Western civilization and exposing children to modern materials that contain graphic and explicit sexual content. This bill draws that line. Students can still learn about great works that have shaped civilization, from Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet to masterpieces like Michelangelo's David.
▶ 2:15:40It also protects the study of major religious text and other historically significant writings. The purpose of our schools should be clear. To equip young people with the tools they need to succeed by focusing on reading, writing, math, and science, not to expose them to content that would make adults blush.
▶ 2:16:04I thank my colleague, Representative Miller of Illinois, for leading on this issue, and I urge my colleagues to vote yes on the Stop the Sexualization of Children's Act. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
▶ 2:16:17Gentleman yields, and I recognize gentle lady from Oregon for 5 minutes.
▶ 2:16:21Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the last word and speak in opposition to the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
▶ 2:16:27Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Instead of focusing on federal issues that actually matter in K-12 education, like saving the Department of Education from extinction or fully funding IDEA or ESSA, this bill blatantly interferes with the local control and would force a radical book banning agenda on public schools across the country. Republicans have repeatedly denied any interest in banning books. We just heard that, but this bill does exactly that.
▶ 2:16:52This bill tramples on the rights of parents and educators and school board members and state legislators by setting a federal mandate on local curriculum. In 1969, the United States Supreme Court said students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate. And yes, there are some limits on First Amendment rights. The Supreme Court ruled in the 1970s that obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment, but members of this committee don't get to decide what obscenity is.
▶ 2:17:19It uses a This bill, in fact, um doesn't even begin to meet uh Supreme Court test. It uses a broadly uh defined sexually oriented material with its own overly broad definition that appears to apply equally to kindergarteners and high school seniors. Additionally, I strongly object to defining classic works of art and literature as any works identified by Compass Classroom.
▶ 2:17:43This is a Christian homeschool curriculum developed by individuals who promote religious creationism over scientific evolution. This type of ideology has absolutely no place in public schools, which, as we should all know, serve students from many different backgrounds and And additionally, if you spent time talking with teachers and visiting classrooms, then you know that educators, whether they be classroom teachers or school librarians, they're not interested in exposing their students to books that are not age-appropriate.
▶ 2:18:14Is there real quantitative data that shows this is an issue? We've heard anecdotes, discussions better raised with educators and school boards, but not to promote federal legislation that would apply to and interfere with virtually every public school in the country. We took an oath to defend the The First Amendment states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.
▶ 2:18:37Legislation that would limit public school curriculum to materials approved by a religious group, that's not at all consistent with the First Amendment. Also, and concerningly, this bill defines sexually oriented material to include gender dysphoria and transgenderism, which I'm not sure is a word, but there's no clarification of what these terms mean. Once again, my colleagues are stoking the flames of culture war issues, but in doing so, they are dehumanizing a group of individuals who happen to be different from them.
▶ 2:19:08The goal here is not an elimination of ideology, but of people. People who are just as deserving of dignity, respect, and love as anyone else, and I truly look forward to the day when my colleagues quit picking on trans students. This bill represents a sweeping overreach of congressional authority fueled by narrow-mindedness and religious extremism. And as I've said many times, this is the United States Congress, not a school board.
▶ 2:19:33Let's leave local issues to local districts and end federal interference in school curriculum. And Mr. Chairman, I want to read briefly from a statement from the American Library Association. And I want to introduce this into the record as well, Mr. Chairman.
▶ 2:19:50Without objection.
▶ 2:19:52Uh the American Library Association said HR 7661 isn't fundamentally about protecting kids, it's about giving politicians broad authority to restrict whose stories are allowed on our shelves. That should concern anyone who believes in the freedom to read and the right of families to make decisions for themselves. Rather than targeting librarians and teachers, Congress should invest in them.
▶ 2:20:15The Right to Read Act, which I note is a bill introduced by our colleague on the committee representative Grijalva, offers a better path supporting well-staffed and well- resourced school libraries, strengthening evidence-based literacy instruction, and protecting the dedicated professionals who help young people discover books that open doors and expand horizons. When we trust families, support educators, and protect the freedom to read, our young people thrive.
▶ 2:20:42HR 67661 would modify the Elementary and Secondary Education Act by prohibiting the use of funds under the act to develop, implement, facilitate, host, or promote any program or activity for or provide or promote literature or other materials to children under the age of 18 that includes sexually oriented material and other purposes. I want to introduce that entire statement into the record because it agrees that parents, not politicians, should guide their children's reading. Uh Mr.
▶ 2:21:10Chairman, I I I wish we were um instead debating the Right to Read Act. I think that would be a much more positive thing for our communities. I urge all of my colleagues to uh vote against this uh amendment into the nature of the substitute and the underlying bill. Uh would it's harmful. I want to uphold the Constitution and free speech rights and and reject HR 7661 and I yield back.
▶ 2:21:35The gentlewoman's time has expired. Yields back. Are there any other members who wish to be recognized? I recognize the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Fine, for 5 minutes.
▶ 2:21:45Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um I'm actually here and not across the hall in another committee hearing because I was waiting my bill to come up next. Um, but sometimes there are times when you actually have to speak up. And to hear the Holocaust as an excuse for why we shouldn't read books to kids that sexualize them and how to teach them how to engage in acts of sexual depravity is
▶ 2:22:16simply repulsive and disgusting. There is nothing about teaching the Holocaust that has anything to do with sexualization unless you're some kind of sicko who gets off on the death of people. I read these books when I was a little kid and believe you me, there was nothing about them that would find that.
▶ 2:22:37And to use the Holocaust, the death of 6 million people under the most horrific circumstances possible as an excuse to allow books that when I was in the legislature, I could not read out loud in committee. And when one member did it, the news media had to turn it off.
▶ 2:23:00There's no book that you will read about the Holocaust that the media's going to say, "No, no, we must shut this down." You know, Democrats lie and they say these bills are about banning books. I ended this debate in Florida cuz every time I would hear this ridiculous argument, I would ask why my book was banned. I wrote a book when I was in college.
▶ 2:23:25I wrote the only academic work ever on the office of the lieutenant And I have news for you. It's not a book that should be in a school library or read in class in part because it's pretty boring. Turns out there are tens of millions of books that have been published and the average school library only has room for 15,000 of them. The average class can only read less than a dozen in a year.
▶ 2:23:54Someone gets to make the decision on who the what books should be in the library and what books should be read in class. And I will tell you this, the people who should be making that decision are ones who don't think reading the Holocaust about the Holocaust is going to be of sexual interest. We can't let these people have anything to do with what books our children read. That much has been made clear today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
▶ 2:24:22Gentleman yields. Are there any other members who wish to speak? Uh the gentleman from California, Mr.
▶ 2:24:27Mr. Chairman, I'm going to strike the last word on the ANS.
▶ 2:24:30You are recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 2:24:32Yeah, well, the very people who should not be determining what can and can't be read in our schools should not be uh members of Congress at the federal level. This is, you know, strictly something that uh curriculum decisions should be made by local uh school boards and uh the states. And this is uh you know, traditionally and and you know, through precedent, something that we at the federal government uh just do not uh you know, uh take jurisdiction over.
▶ 2:25:01What I want to talk about is HR 7661. The so-called Stop the Sexualization of Children Act, which should be more aptly called the Don't Say Trans Act. Uh it prohibits schools from receiving elementary and secondary education Act funds from using those funds to develop, implement, facilitate, host, or promote any program or activity that that includes or to promote promote provide or promote literature or other materials that include, {quote} {unquote}, sexually oriented material to children
▶ 2:25:31under the age of 18. Now, sexually oriented material is defined to include, among other things, any materials that involve gender dysphoria or transgenderism, {quote} Now, this bill would have far-reaching consequences, including barring any discussion of transgender people or topics in the classroom. Banning books with transgender characters or to discuss the existence of transgender people, and banning gay, queer, straight alliances.
▶ 2:26:02This pro- the prohibition on programs or activities that include {quote} {unquote} sexual orient- oriented materials could also be used to target other LGBTQI+ materials as well. Well, what I want to say is there is nothing taboo about being trans. This bill cannot erase the fact that trans people are a part of our communities. They are our family, our friends, our coworkers, and neighbors. Acknowledging the existence of transgender people is not sexual.
▶ 2:26:32Parents across the country want their children to learn in safe, affirming This bill is meant to isolate and target trans kids and teachers. Bills like this one that censor the existence of trans people in our trans people in our society reinforce the negativity and hostility that many trans people, especially youth, already Just to give an example, in 2021, 68.68% all LGBTQI+ students surveyed by
▶ 2:27:02GLSEN reported feeling unsafe in their school environment due to the their perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, or In addition, more than three-quarters of LGBTQI+ students who attended school in person during the surveyed period reported experiencing in-person verbal harassment based on their sex orientation, gender expression, or gender at some point this past year.
▶ 2:27:27In 2024, a peer-reviewed study found that state-level anti-transgender laws increased incidents of suicide attempts amongst transgender and non-binary youth by as much as 72%. A 72% increase. Attempts to erase trans people and content from schools and ban queer straight alliances will only exacerbate the challenges trans students already face and further isolate them.
▶ 2:27:52Instead of addressing actual problems in our education systems, uh this what I call don't say trans bills, um which is what this bill really is, uh like this one, uh what they do what this bill does is stigmatize trans youth, trans teachers, and the children of trans parents. You know, America is a country of freedom of speech and freedom of ideas. Yet, this bill seeks to censor curriculums and ban books in order to erase American history and erase the existence of transgender people.
▶ 2:28:22Censoring transgender-related materials and topics also sets a dangerous precedent that politicians can censor a range of school content based on polit- on that politician's political ideology. Now, the last person we need dictating school curricula is a politician who quoted Hitler. Politicians who try to censor information and control education with bills like this don't care about what's best for American students. They care only about advancing their political agenda.
▶ 2:28:53States, school districts, and teachers know how to draft age-appropriate standards and curriculum for students. Let me say that again. States, school districts, and teachers know how to draft age-appropriate standards and curriculum curriculum for teachers. This bill's author seeks to you know, use uh I think hyperbole and inflammatory language, which is really irrelevant uh to really what happens in most school districts around the country.
▶ 2:29:21I would say 99.9% of the school districts are very much focused on age-appropriate standards. There is no need for this overreach of a bill uh to uh to create an issue or create a solution to a problem that does not exist. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
▶ 2:29:40Gentleman yields. I now recognize gentleman from California, Mr. Kiley, for 5 minutes.
▶ 2:29:46Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. There is some truly horrifying examples of vile content being taught to children, very young children, in some schools across the country. And we discussed some of this at a recent hearing of the K-12 Education Subcommittee. And I know that the purpose of this bill is to protect our kids from that kind of content and to protect the rights of parents from having their kids exposed to it.
▶ 2:30:14Uh that being said, I there I do want to sound a few notes of caution about how this bill is is currently written. And in the first relates to this idea of age appropriateness, because that's really at the core of these concerns is that kids are being uh taught content that is simply not age-appropriate.
▶ 2:30:34But this bill isn't really guided by that principle of age appropriateness insofar as its restrictions are categorical across all of K through 12. And some of these issues cut a lot depending upon the age of the child. You know, for example, we don't generally teach sexual education in kindergarten, but basic sex ed is taught in later grades.
▶ 2:30:59Or even if you take the language from the bill, which says that, you know, one form of this sexually explicit contact involves gender dysphoria or certainly I would agree that under no circumstances is it appropriate to be bringing these issues into a kindergarten classroom. But if we're talking about seniors in high school reading a book that happens to have a minor character that identifies as transgender, whether that book should or should not be allowed strikes me as a much different issue.
▶ 2:31:28Uh that might better be uh debated at the level of the local school board. And uh you know, that brings me to the second point is that the language here cuts quite broadly and it's sort of hard to avoid that uh when you're talking about trying to create language that encompasses the entirety of uh what could appear in in literature or art or or or any other subject.
▶ 2:31:53Uh and uh you know, the the result of that uh is that you know, you could have situations where you have uh you know, forms of uh truly valuable or meritorious uh content uh that end up getting restricted or they create a kind of chilling effect and this does in some sense come dangerously close to violating the principle of not dictating curriculum at the federal level and and the bill seems to acknowledge this, which uh is my final point, which is that it does have this list of great books
▶ 2:32:23uh and so forth uh that are essentially exempted from the bill. Uh and so acknowledging that these are works of such great merit that even if they do have some inappropriate content or some content uh that otherwise runs a foul of the uh prescriptions of this bill, the merit is so great of these particular works that it outweighs that harm.
▶ 2:32:46Uh but if this is the case, if we can have uh you know, uh recognize that there's a balance to be struck here, uh why should that only be possible with a specific circumscribed uh lists of texts. Uh and that essentially freezes what are considered the great works uh in time. Uh why shouldn't that be an issue uh or a matter that is debated uh at at the local level with respect to individual uh works.
▶ 2:33:10So, uh I might suggest uh approaching this from the perspective of the uh Mahmud case, which we discussed in a recent uh hearing, which provides a fundamental right of parents to opt their children out of curriculum that runs a foul of deeply held religious convictions.
▶ 2:33:30We could even you know align the funding decisions with that that you know districts that fail to adhere to them that don't provide parents with robust opt-out rights potentially could see their funding put at risk. I think that might be a better approach that would address concerns that I have that I think are likely to develop as this among others as this legislation progresses. So thank you. I very much do appreciate the intent of the author and I yield back.
▶ 2:34:00Gentlemen yields. Are there any others who wish to speak on I I I I recognize Mr. Scott for 5 minutes.
▶ 2:34:14Thank you, Mr. [clears throat] Chairman. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I think it has to be said and it's been alluded to that the federal government does not control what is taught in schools. It's well established in statute that states and localities determine the curriculum without interference from the federal government. Now, we can revisit that. Um and let's decide on a federal level what is taught in public schools.
▶ 2:34:41And we can have a debate on what history, what civics gets taught. Um if we're going to do that, let's do it. Let's not Let's do it when you want to do it or when somebody else wants to do it. Let's just get rid of the idea that the federal government does not control what is taught in schools. But so long as we have that, uh we ought to we ought to honor it.
▶ 2:35:05Now, apparently some legislator in Florida said something reprehensible at a at a hearing, but that does not justify wholesale book And this bill doesn't even prevent sexualized material. It just says who gets to present it. we've heard the Supreme Court test.
▶ 2:35:31I mean, how do you How do you have a test when you can have certain things said if it comes from a major world religion? What about a minor world religion? Same thing, do they get to say the same thing or is is that material uh stricken? and where do we get this list from? If you're on this list of exemptions, you get to say anything you want about um about sex.
▶ 2:35:59If somebody says exactly the same thing, all of a sudden, they're prohibited. This doesn't make any sense. These decisions have to be made under the present structure Now, if we're going to get into making those decisions, let's get into making all the decisions. How many years of math? How many years of science? How we teach the Civil War and civics all over the country, same curriculum.
▶ 2:36:29Let's impose it. Or we can keep things as they are, localities get to decide. Um but this um I you can't you cannot possibly pass the Supreme Court test where some people get to say things and others can't say exactly the same thing cuz they're not on on on on on on on the list. I hope we defeat the bill.
▶ 2:36:52Gentleman yields, and I recognize gentleman from Utah for 5 minutes.
▶ 2:36:56Thank you. Uh this is not one that I was actually planning on commenting on until I started listening to what's being said We're not talking about Civil War, we're not talking about Nazi Germany, we're talking about kids.
▶ 2:37:086 7 8 years old
▶ 2:37:11that adults are talking putting pornography in front of them and thinking that's okay.
▶ 2:37:16What in the world where have we come to that we're having this debate? This would be of all things We're seeing our children turn into crazy sexual focused people because we're starting off teaching them things they should not be might even thinking about at age. Uh by the way, this is the only way the only way we're going to get past this is We're not going to convince some of these adults who think it's okay to talk this kind of crap.
▶ 2:37:47Sorry. Sorry. This kind of stuff to young people. We're not going to convince them that it's okay. It's something there's something spiritually disconnect disconnected where we can say this is okay to do this to our children. So, here's the deal. Let's focus on choice. Let parents take a look at the If they think it's okay for their children to go in this direction, but I don't think they will. They will pull them out.
▶ 2:38:14The more choice we have, the more this will fall fall in place. I don't think that we should have anything no matter federal state that that separates the parents from understanding what their children are being taught. If the parents are being taught if the parents understand this, they'll have a choice of moving them out. All right. I I think we're looking at really the culture of our nation at this point. If we can't figure out something as easy as this, then we need to protect our children's character.
▶ 2:38:41Protect them from things that that will impact them in in a very very different way. We can't do that then we're going to have some problems. So, uh again let's let's let's
▶ 2:38:52let's bring choice to the process. Let parents decide and I think this will be uh taken care of in that process. So, I yield back.
▶ 2:38:59The gentleman yields. Are there any other members who wish to be recognized for further discussion? Seeing none, there being no further discussion on the amendment in the nature of substitutes. The committee will move to consideration of amendments. Are there any members who would like to offer amendments? I recognize the gentleman from California, Mr. Takano. Do you wish to offer an amendment?
▶ 2:39:19Yeah, Mr. Chairman, I do have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 2:39:21The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 2:39:24Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7661 offered by Mr. Takano of California, identifier
▶ 2:39:36Does the gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order?
▶ 2:39:38I reserve a point of order.
▶ 2:39:39Point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman from California, Mr. Takano, for 5 minutes in support of his amendment.
▶ 2:39:46Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My amendment would remove discussions of transgender identity from the bill's definition of, quote, sexually oriented material, end This bill is not about protecting children. It is yet another backdoor way to manipulate federal funds to force ideological compliance. This bill says that an entire population cannot be mentioned in books that students read in schools.
▶ 2:40:14This bill says that the existence of an entire population cannot be taught by teachers because some DC politicians dictated dictated so. This bill writes off an entire group of Americans, their history, and their contributions to American society as nothing more than, quote, sexually oriented material, end quote.
▶ 2:40:34It uses the same tired excuse to politicize and erase transgender and other LGBTQI Americans from the curriculums and from the classrooms. In the style of Joseph McCarthy, this bill gives politicians the unilateral power to censor those who they don't understand or don't agree Acknowledging the existence of transgender people is not sexual.
▶ 2:41:02I will say that again, acknowledging the existence of transgender people is not Transgender people exist in communities large and small across the United They are your friends, your neighbors, your teachers, your colleagues, and everyday Americans. Transgender people have always been a part of American society and always will That is not I not That is not ideology, that is reality.
▶ 2:41:28Transgender students are a small proportion of kids that already face significant hostility in their day-to-day lives. As already mentioned, in a 2021 survey, nearly 70% of LGBTQ+ students surveyed said they felt unsafe in their learning environment because of their identity. Another study found that anti-trans state laws have increased suicide attempts among transgender youth by as much as 72%.
▶ 2:41:56Those are huge percentages that paint a dire picture. But studies show correspondingly huge positive statistics when LGBTQI+ students are in environments that support, embrace, and affirm them. Rates of suicidal ideation were reduced by 62% when young people were surrounded by supportive loved ones.
▶ 2:42:17Across the board, young transgender people who had supportive school environments had significantly better mental health outcomes than their peers in unaccepting communities. Acceptance makes a a massive difference in the lives of these children, and even if a little bit of support uh through a history book, a gay-straight alliance, or an affirming these can help these these children imagine a future for themselves when they have no right to stand uh
▶ 2:42:47when when we have no right to stand in their way. Now, there isn't some conspiracy to turn kids trans. Ch- Children are born themselves, and it's our job to help educators uh it's our job as educators to accept, include, and support them as they grow This is basic decency.
▶ 2:43:08For all the lip service my colleagues pay to {quote} giving education back to the states {unquote} and letting school boards make their curricular decisions, they have an incredible zeal for handing down federal mandates on school Now, as a former teacher myself, I don't want a federal legislator telling me what the approved book lists or topics are for my classroom.
▶ 2:43:32As an American, I certainly don't want the mandate approving uh those uh book lists to be written by a member of Congress who has favorably quoted Americans deserve better than this. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment and now yield back.
▶ 2:43:51Does general from gentleman from Utah reserve his point of order?
▶ 2:43:53I withdraw my point of order. the point of order is withdrawn. Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment for uh I recognize myself for 5 minutes to speak in opposition to the amendment. This bill does absolutely nothing to and mistreatment of transgender students.
▶ 2:44:22Students who are confused about their gender should be treated with love and respect. Bullying and mistreatment are wrong. However, students who are confused about their gender should not be encouraged to undergo life-altering surgeries or hormone therapy by their school counselors.
▶ 2:44:53For years, that's exactly what many schools have been doing and are now being found out. Some schools have been remarkably in how they've handled transgender Many schools have exposed extremely young children to controversial teachings at the very least. In Chicago public schools, first graders are given lessons on how to define gender identity.
▶ 2:45:24By fifth grade, there was an introduction to puberty blockers. In Denver public schools, students are taught to support so-called gender-affirming care and encouraged to consider gender If this isn't grooming, I'm not sure what it is. What's worse is that many school districts refuse to tell parents what they're doing.
▶ 2:45:54Just a few weeks ago in Mahmod versus Taylor hearing, we heard that Montgomery Count- County, Maryland introduced radical transgender teachings into its curriculum and refused refused to allow parents to opt out. But it's not just Montgomery County.
▶ 2:46:16According to Defending Education, about 1,200 districts covering 12 million students have policies allowing the school to socially transition a child without parental consent or even parental knowledge.
▶ 2:46:34Under this bill, no federal funds, let me draw attention to that What we're talking about here, no federal funds under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act may be used for transgender topics. I think that says if a school district wants to do it on their own and forego federal funds, I guess they have that option.
▶ 2:47:00This bill will also help ensure that federal funds are not used to groom vulnerable children into life-altering I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment and support the underlying bill and I yield back. Are there others who wish to speak on this amendment? I recognize the gentle lady from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici, for 5
▶ 2:47:26Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. I I want to rise in support of uh Mr. Takano's amendment and I yield to Mr. Takano.
▶ 2:47:35Mr. Chairman, uh your your opposition to my amendment uh went down a whole litany of of things that I never address in my amendment. My amendment is simply about uh trying to make sure that a whole category of are not prohibited from being ever discussed. And that category of people are is is transgender people, transgender kids.
▶ 2:48:02Uh nothing about uh and simply about making sure that curricular decisions are kept uh at the local level and not being dictated by uh the federal government as is statutorily kind of uh the case. but you chose to get into a whole range of topics that are simply falsehoods and not true, exaggerations, and highly inflammatory.
▶ 2:48:30Uh and uh so anyway, um I yield back um and uh wish to get on with it.
▶ 2:48:38I yield back.
▶ 2:48:39The gentleman Does the gentle lady yield?
▶ 2:48:42I yield back.
▶ 2:48:43Gentle lady yields. Are there any others who wish to speak on this amendment? Hearing none, the question is on the amendment by the gentleman from California, Mr. Takano. All in favor say I.
▶ 2:49:05All opposed, no. No.
▶ 2:49:08Mr. Chairman, I request a recorded vote.
▶ 2:49:10In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it. A A roll call vote vote is ordered pursuant to the chair's previous announcement. This vote will be Are there further amendments to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7661? Does the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Scott, wish to offer an amendment?
▶ 2:49:33Uh yes, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment that's designated 7661
▶ 2:49:42The clerk will report the amendment.
▶ 2:49:44Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7661 offered by Mr. Scott of Virginia, identifier
▶ 2:49:55Does the gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order?
▶ 2:49:57Reserve a point of order.
▶ 2:49:58A point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mr. Scott, for 5 minutes in support of his amendment.
▶ 2:50:06Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this amendment adds, quote, or historical accounts of discrimination against world religions uh to the exemptions. It says that uh uh if it's an account from the texts of major world religion, which is problematic on itself.
▶ 2:50:24But, if you're going to use that, you want to include, but not limited to anti-Semitism, but not limited to anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, or Um this amendment would would add exemption for teaching historical accounts of discrimination against world religions including but not limited to antisemitism, Islamophobia, and This ensures that educators can continue to teach accurate, age-appropriate history
▶ 2:50:54about discrimination against religious communities without fear of penalty. History of religion and what people belonging to that religion is not always clear-cut. The history of religion and what people belonging to that religion uh uh have done or uh is not always clean-cut and at times includes references related to sex. For example, some religions in the past have allowed men to have multiple spouses.
▶ 2:51:22Does that mean that shouldn't be discussed in schools? The GAO report in 2021 found that one in four students experienced bullying related to their race, national origin, religion, disability, gender, or sexual And today we're seeing disturbing disturbing rise in openly hostile, bigoted rhetoric towards religious communities including from members of the Republican Party.
▶ 2:51:47Comments such as Muslims don't belong in American Pluralism is a lie. And we need more Islamophobia. When leaders normalize such language, it filters down to classrooms, campuses, and communities. Antisemitism has been rising in recent years and Jewish communities across the country have experienced increased threats, harassment, and violence.
▶ 2:52:12Teaching about antisemitism, its history, its consequences, and its modern forms is is it is modern forms is essential to combating it. Additionally, Muslim and Arab students, faculty, and staff have been subject to violence, discrimination, harassment, bullying, and online targeting in both K-12 schools and higher education.
▶ 2:52:33Under the Biden administration, the first-ever US national strategy to counter Islamophobia and anti-Arab hate, and national strategy to counter antisemitism were all released to help combat anti-Muslim and anti-Jewish hate across the country. Now we [snorts] have a leader saying we need more hate, not less. This amendment protects teaching of religious discrimination to help prevent marginalizing vulnerable communities in our K-12 schools. For these reasons, I hope we adopt the amendment.
▶ 2:53:03Now yield back.
▶ 2:53:05Gentleman yields. Does anyone seek to address the amendment? I I recognize the gentle lady from Illinois, Ms. Miller.
▶ 2:53:14Thank you. We can all agree that religious discrimination is wrong. People of faith should be protected in the right to practice their faith. That's enshrined in the Bill of Rights. However, this amendment is unnecessary. This bill already clearly states that the texts of major world religions may be used may be taught using federal The history of religious discrimination may also be taught under this bill.
▶ 2:53:42What may not be taught is sexually explicit content. Why do you want it to be taught? Whether it's historical or modern, if this content should be taught at all, it should be at the decision of parents and families, not schools. Especially when, as we heard in the Mahmoud hearing a few weeks ago, some school districts are actively hiding from parents what they teach.
▶ 2:54:09I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment and in favor of the bill.
▶ 2:54:17Gentle lady yields back. Does anyone else seek recognition on the The gentle lady from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici, you're recognized for 5
▶ 2:54:28Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I I want to speak in favor of Mr. Scott's amendment, although I I don't I don't think amendments are going to fix this bill. But I want to support this amendment in particular, you know, just a short while ago a colleague said that this bill won't affect teaching about the Holocaust, but I disagree.
▶ 2:54:48In fact, in Tennessee, a school board actually voted to remove Maus, which is a Pulitzer Prize-winning graphic novel in part because of images of nudity despite its clear educational purposes Holocaust literature. Holocaust education more broadly can also include documentary photographs of nude survivors or victims, not because the material is sexually provocative, but because it's historical evidence. What about Dr. Josef Mengele, for example, who did brutal medical experiments, especially on women?
▶ 2:55:18Is that banned or not? It is just not clear. I also want to point out the in the definition in the bill the under rules of construction, it says the text of major world religions, maybe there's a disagreement about what a major world religion is in classic work works of art. Does that mean you can or can't include modern art? It's just very confusing and limiting to say that you can only use classic words of works of art as defined in this legislation.
▶ 2:55:48This this bill is a going to be a disaster for schools to implement. It's going to be confusing. It's going to violate First Amendment rights. And again, if you don't like the curriculum, go to your school board or your state officials. This is not something that is up to Congress. It is a local issue to set curriculum, and then that's exactly what this bill does. I support the amendment even though it doesn't fix the underlying bill, and I yield back. The gentle lady yields.
▶ 2:56:14Are there any others who wish to Representative Fine, you're recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 2:56:21Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to address a couple things that have been said in in debate on this amendment. The first is we've heard that this bill is a bad because it will limit local control to put forward the bills that the books, the content that they want to hear.
▶ 2:56:42So, it's a bad idea for us to be involved in And then the last speaker just talked about an example where said local control, which is supposedly such a great thing, they made what is objectively a bad decision in banning a book that never should have been banned. So, I think they have to decide who someone gets to decide who makes these decisions.
▶ 2:57:08Um and clearly is it a problem when the locals make a bad decision, the feds make a bad decision? I think the logical inconsistency is clear. But, given that one of my comments was referenced, I wanted to address that. I think in this country we're not only in a in a violent war at times, but we're also in a war of rhetoric. And I find it interesting that in one of the previous speakers, they sometimes used the word anti-Arab hate, which by the way we shouldn't want. We shouldn't want anti-anyone hate.
▶ 2:57:37Anti-Arab hate, I think I heard anti-Muslim hate. But then we heard criticism of my description of the term Islamophobia. And I think it's a fascinating word as we are in a war over rhetoric in this You know, racism is when you don't like a race, it is bad. Sexism is when you want to discriminate against a sex, it is bad. So, why is the word that is used most commonly to describe anti-Muslim Islamophobia? Well, if you dig into the word, it's fear. That's what it is.
▶ 2:58:07It's not hate, it's Islamophobia. Islam fear. It's not hate. And what's gone on in this world is we have conflated the idea of stopping discrimination, which is a good thing, with stopping discrimination. I mean, with with stopping criticism, which is And I think this is important because I think what we've seen is the fight against discrimination weaponized to stop discussion.
▶ 2:58:34Cuz by the way, it's not only it's not only a fight about whether you can fear it, it's to say that all fear is irrational. And when we live in a world where in the last 2 weeks five American Muslims in four states have used three guns, two bombs, and one to try to kill people all while screaming the same prayer?
▶ 2:59:02I think some level of fear for an ideology that has inspired those people is justified. Which is why I've made the comments that I have made. So, if we want to have open discussions about discriminating against people, we should because discrimination is bad.
▶ 2:59:17But what we need to in this country is not be afraid to lean into the fight, to lean into the discussion, to lean into the concern, and to make sure that the language that we use accurately describes a real problem, not trying to conflate it to solve a problem that does not actually exist. I oppose the amendment because frankly, I oppose the word.
▶ 2:59:38I I would hope that at some point the Muslim community would come up with a word, would normalize a word, would put forth a word that says whatever they want to call it, anti-Islam, anti-Muslim, because that would describe the same as anti-Semitism or anti-Mormonism. But to say criticism is unreasonable, I think is something that's frankly un-American. And so, I oppose this amendment, and I hope everyone will vote it down.
▶ 3:00:05Are there any others who seek recognition on the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment by the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Scott, all in favor say I.
▶ 3:00:18All opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it and the amendment is not agreed Record A roll call vote is ordered pursuant to the chair's previous announcement. This vote will be Are there any further amendments to the amendment in the nature of a substitute? For what purpose does the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, seek to be
▶ 3:00:44Mr. Chairman, I have a Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk 7661 AMD 04.
▶ 3:00:51The clerk will report the amendment.
▶ 3:00:53Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7661 offered by Mr. Scott of Virginia, identifier
▶ 3:01:04Does the gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order?
▶ 3:01:07point of order.
▶ 3:01:07A point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the the ranking member, Mr. Scott, for 5 minutes in support of his amendment.
▶ 3:01:16Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this uh amendment adds quote teaching students how to protect themselves from sexual abuse and sex trafficking using real-world cases to the exceptions under the rule of This amendment would ensure that the bill would not prohibit uh schools from teaching students how to protect themselves from sexual abuse and sex Uh real-world examples, such as cases such as the case involving Jeffrey
▶ 3:01:46matter because trafficking rarely looks like the sensationalized version people see on television or they imagine. I've also seen recent, deeply disturbing examples of individuals with public visibility committing horrific abuse. News outlets have reported that a January 6th defendant, who received a pardon from President Trump, was recently convicted and sentenced to life in prison for sexually abusing two girls after he got out.
▶ 3:02:14Sex trafficking, sexual abuse are real, widespread dangers and students uh widespread dangers. Uh students deserve honest, practical education that can save lives. Furthermore, it's noting that evidence does not support claims that members of the LGBTQ community pose a heightened risk of sexual offenses against children.
▶ 3:02:36A 2022 UCLA School of Law survey of nearly 1,000 registered sex offenders found that [snorts] less than 1% identified as transgender. Overwhelming majority identified as cisgender, straight, white men. teaching accurate information helps prevent fear-based and misinformation from distracting from real threats. This amendment ensures that educators can teach prevention using facts, not just theory.
▶ 3:03:05These reasons thus support the amendment. Yield back the balance of my
▶ 3:03:08The gentleman yields. I recognize myself in response to the amendment. We agree that students should be kept safe. Regrettably, this includes the need for age-appropriate instruction on crimes. Students should have the information they need to stay safe and identify dangers. This bill is not intended to prohibit that kind of instruction, and I have no issue with reiterating that.
▶ 3:03:35I'm prepared to support the gentleman's amendment, and I urge the gentleman, like all my colleagues, um to to vote in favor of the underlying bill. Are there any others who wish to speak on the amendment? Seeing none, the question on the amendment by the gentleman from
▶ 3:04:04No, we're fine. the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Scott. All in favor say I. I. All opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the eyes have it. And the amendment is agreed to. A roll call vote is ordered.
▶ 3:04:31Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote will be Are there any further amendments to the amendment in the nature of a substitute? I recognize the gentleman from Mr. Scott. This for the purposes of an amendment.
▶ 3:04:56Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk 7661_amd05.
▶ 3:05:02The clerk will report the amendment.
▶ 3:05:03Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7661 offered by Mr. Scott of Virginia, identifier
▶ 3:05:15Does the gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order?
▶ 3:05:17I reserve a point of order.
▶ 3:05:18Point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman from Virginia for 5 minutes in support of his
▶ 3:05:25Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this is amendment adds teaching of world cultures and history and historical figures from historically marginalized communities as exceptions under the rule of construction. This amendment um Mr.
▶ 3:05:40Chairman, history has not always been pleasant to learn about, but it's important to do it in an age-appropriate way, and the localities can figure out what age-appropriate uh material to present, but learning about certain atrocities, which sometimes include items that the bill would call sexually oriented material, though no reasonable person would want that excluded. Take for example figures like Sarah Baartman, whose body was on display to justify enslaving and objectifying African-American women.
▶ 3:06:12Essentially to understand the realities of the exploitation and dehumanization during the colonial area, topics like this help us understand the history of race and gender stereotypes, some of which we still see today.
▶ 3:06:26This bill would allow for students to learn the history of different This bill um would um question whether or not different dances from cultures would be The bill specifically prohibits, quote, "lewd and lascivious dancing" in what exactly is prohibited? Salsa So, there's some cheerleading routines that um might be questionable. I don't know.
▶ 3:06:57This amendment ensures that rich histories in our classrooms remain in places that are not prevented just because a school is genuinely confused about whether or not it is sexually oriented material according to the bill. We need this amendment, Mr. Chairman, and so I'd yield back the balance of my
▶ 3:07:16The gentleman yields. Uh does the gentleman from Utah
▶ 3:07:20Mr. Chairman, my point of order.
▶ 3:07:22Uh point of order is withdrawn. Does anyone else seek recognition on the For what purpose does the gentlewoman from Illinois seek recognition?
▶ 3:07:32Yes, so I'd like to um comment on this amendment.
▶ 3:07:37for 5 minutes.
▶ 3:07:38Thank you. Under this bill, history can still be taught using federal funds. So can the impact of historical figures and events on marginalized communities. Salsa dancing and jazz can be taught. What is not allowed is sexually explicit content. That's totally different than teaching students about the value of jazz. The jazz music I hear is not inappropriate and there's value in students learning it.
▶ 3:08:06What's not valuable, what's not valuable is schools indoctrinating students with sexually explicit dancing and music. And I think that if there's a question in their mind about whether an act is sexually inappropriate, that is a good sign that it is and the school should be exercising caution. This This bill forbids federal funding for sexually explicit dancing and music.
▶ 3:08:34This amendment also opens up a tremendous loophole that schools could exploit. Schools who want to indoctrinate children could deem all kinds of inappropriate content as {quote} history. The existing exceptions in the bill are narrowly tailored to ensure that legitimate curriculum can be taught while excluding inappropriate content. We have overwhelming evidence that some schools are teaching inappropriate content.
▶ 3:09:03We shouldn't give them an easy way to avoid the requirements of this bill and continue using federal funds for inappropriate content. I urge my colleagues to vote no on the amendment and in favor of the underlying bill and I yield back.
▶ 3:09:18General lady yields. Are there any others who wish to speak?
▶ 3:09:22Mr. Chairman.
▶ 3:09:23I recognize the general lady from from North Carolina for 5 minutes.
▶ 3:09:28Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to strike the last word in in support of the amendment. Um and I want to support it. And let me say, Mr. Chairman, let me make it clear to the American people and to all of my colleagues here today that this is a dangerous bill.
▶ 3:09:44It would prevent teachers from teaching some of the most difficult parts of our But this amendment would ensure that this bill does not restrict instruction in the humanities, arts, cultural history, or the lived experiences of marginalized groups. It clarifies that the teaching about culture and history and artistic traditions is not sexually oriented material and remains fully permissible.
▶ 3:10:11And let me take a moment to highlight an issue particularly relevant to my home North Carolina had one of the most horrific, long-lasting sterilization campaigns of any state in our country. Almost 8,000 North Carolinians, primarily black women, were sterilized against their will by the state government.
▶ 3:10:33This bill would hide the evils of sterilization from from our students because any discussion of sterilization in most primary sources on the subject could be construed as sexually oriented material. I spent years working with my colleagues in the General Assembly to create the eugenic sterilization compensation fund. And I didn't spend that time fighting for justice only for Republicans in this committee to hide these horrors from the next generation.
▶ 3:11:04Is the story of forced sterili- sterilization disturbing? Yes, it is. Is the story of forced sterilization a difficult subject for younger students? But the fundamental question before us is this. Do students have the right to learn about the most disturbing moments in our history? You you you doggone right they do.
▶ 3:11:26By removing so-called sexually oriented material from historical discussions, this bill would whitewash centuries of sexual exploitation of black women from from curricula throughout our country. These things happened. They are awful and disgusting, but they are nonetheless real. We are the United States Congress, not the Federal Censorship Bureau.
▶ 3:11:54I encourage all of my colleagues to support this amendment. I encourage everyone who supports this bill to take a moment to think about the ramifications of their actions today. I yield back, um, Mr. Chairman. Thank
▶ 3:12:09The gentlelady yields. Are there any others who wish to speak on this Hearing now, the question is on the amendment by the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Scott. All in favor say I. All opposed, no. No. In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it, and the amendment is not agreed to. A roll call vote is ordered.
▶ 3:12:39Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote will be We will suspend for a moment here.
▶ 3:14:18Are there any further amendments to the amendments in the nature of a substitute? For what purpose is the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, seek to be recognized?
▶ 3:14:25Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk designated
▶ 3:14:34The clerk will report the amendment.
▶ 3:14:36Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7661 offered by Mr. Scott of Virginia, identifier
▶ 3:14:46Does the gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order?
▶ 3:14:48Reserve a point of order.
▶ 3:14:49A point of order is reserved. Uh I now recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mr. Scott for 5 minutes in support of his
▶ 3:14:58Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would ensure that the bill cannot be misinterpreted to restrict to restrict the display of official government symbols, flags, monuments, or historically [snorts] recognized landmarks that are routinely used in civic, historical, and cultural Sometimes flags, monuments, and other historical landmarks include material that most do not consider lewd, but is admittedly something that we would not necessarily create today.
▶ 3:15:28However, this does not mean that we should ban it for fear that and I fear this bill would actually do it. For example, the Virginia flag's construction and history make it an essential tool a teaching tool because it is a central image because it's central image which signifies Virtus standing over tyranny and happens to contain an exposed It was deliberately designed to symbolize the Commonwealth's founding founding commitment to self-government,
▶ 3:15:59civic virtue, and resistance to oppression. Now, allowing teachers across the country to include Virginia's flag in classrooms in some way ensures students can learn how the state's symbol reflects political ideas, artistic traditions, and historical identity that shaped Virginia. But under the bill, it may be banned as it was in a school district in Texas because the drawn figure on the flag shows an exposed breast.
▶ 3:16:29And this flag was adopted over 150 years ago. Similarly, the Arts of War sculptures on Memorial Bridge in Arlington, Virginia also [snorts] display nude men and women. However, these sculptures are federally commissioned monuments created in the 1930s to honor American service and symbolize national ideas national ideals of courage and sacrifice. Learning about them helps students understand how public art reflects the country's historical memory,
▶ 3:17:00civic values, and cultural identity. Teaching students about flags, monuments, and landmarks is a non-partisan education piece. And I encourage my colleagues to vote in support of this common sense amendment.
▶ 3:17:15Gentleman yields.
▶ 3:17:17Does the gentleman from
▶ 3:17:19a question.
▶ 3:17:19Does the gentleman from Utah
▶ 3:17:21Sorry, I yielded.
▶ 3:17:27I withdraw. Point of order is withdrawn. Does anyone
▶ 3:17:33else seek recognition on the amendment? For what purpose is the gentle lady from Illinois, Ms. Miller, seek recognition?
▶ 3:17:43I'd like to comment on the amendment. I appreciate the Democrat amendment, but it's unnecessary. Despite all the rhetoric we've heard from the other side, let's talk about what the amendment actually says. The actual text of the amendment says that nothing in this act shall prevent a state local educational agency or school from displaying emblems like flags and There's nothing in the bill that would prohibit state and local governments from making
▶ 3:18:13these choices. It's federal law that Congress cannot dictate curriculum. State and local governments can make whatever choices they like when it comes to classroom management and instruction. That includes, for example, hanging the Virginia flag. What this bill says is that federal funds under ESEA cannot be used for sexually explicit content.
▶ 3:18:40That term is defined by existing criminal code on child on child sexual exploitation. We define prohibited sexually oriented materials the same as existing criminal At any rate, we're certainly open to ideas to sharpen and enhance the bill.
▶ 3:19:05Unfortunately, my colleagues on the left don't seem to think inappropriate content is a real problem in our They've shown little interest in voting for the underlying bill. Mostly, they've only criticized us for trying to protect our children. I wish they would be more concerned about these issues. The majority has made a good faith effort to protect children from sexualization. That's what this bill does.
▶ 3:19:35Given the minority has shown little interest in actually protecting children and given that this amendment is unnecessary, I urge my colleagues to vote against the amendment and for the bill and I yield back.
▶ 3:19:49The gentlewoman yields. Does the gentlewoman from North Carolina, Ms. Adams, wish to be recognized?
▶ 3:20:00I had a question. Yes, yes, Mr. Chairman. I I would like to speak
▶ 3:20:04The gentlewoman is recognized for 5
▶ 3:20:07It sort of got my attention. I I'm an artist. I'm a professional artist. I'm an arts educator. I taught art for 40 years. I have my own gallery and I do my own practice my own work. And I was very concerned about the uh the the the classic works of art and the definitions in in the subsection here that the term classic works of art means that the works of art depicted, referenced, or otherwise represented in the Smart History Guide to I'm not
▶ 3:20:37sure what they what they're showing. Uh but you know, I taught drawing and painting for many years and uh many of the of the classic works of Leonardo da Vinci, Rembrandt, all those and uh there there are many figures there, men and women and even children, uh that are that are nude.
▶ 3:20:58Now, I guess I'm I'm I'm I'm trying to understand if these things are going to be um uh are going to be classified as uh in this bill. And if so, I mean I'm not not only am I offended, but and I that was the question I had for Mr.
▶ 3:21:17Well, no, no, they they are specific those are specifically allowed because they are in the list of permitted sexual content because they are authored by an approved list of people.
▶ 3:21:39They they they describe what classical works of art means and they go through if you're on that list then you can promote sexual activity. If you're on you're not on the list.
▶ 3:21:51Yeah, so some of my
▶ 3:21:53so you can't you can't prove if you said exactly what the other said your works would be prohibited. I guess we'll have to come up with another list or that's the list that's going to be
▶ 3:22:09that's the they they have they they have prescribed from Congress the list of permitted sexually explicit material if it comes from these sources.
▶ 3:22:23These authors. If it comes from somewhere else they don't want it.
▶ 3:22:27Yeah, well, you know, Scott, I really think that we don't know what we don't know. And that's really unfortunate and you know, I'd invite people to take my class. you know, I don't think we should we should have a list and and that list that list basically is discriminatory. So folks like me and other folks
▶ 3:22:46you mean by discriminatory?
▶ 3:22:47Well, I mean that that if if you're only going to have that list and my work can't be a part of that list you're discriminating against me. my understanding that there was not at all.
▶ 3:23:02Well, that that's part of the problem. You know, I support diversity, equity and inclusion. We need when we talk about the arts, when we talk about culture, Uh, it it is inclusive. It should be inclusive and we should not have an I don't know what this what this organization is that would create a list and say, "You can be a part but I cannot be a part." I mean I I just resent that and I I oppose this bill overall, uh, but I do support your amendment.
▶ 3:23:28Thank you. The gentle lady yields. Are there any others who wish to speak on this amendment? The gentle lady from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici, you're recognized.
▶ 3:23:39Uh, I thank thank you, Mr. Chairman. I I want to speak in in support of of the amendment, uh, but again, I I don't think an amendment is going to save this bill, uh, which is again going to be a catastrophe for schools to try to administer, risking constitutional violations and mass confusion. But but I also want to respond to my colleague who said the Democrats are not interested in protecting children, uh, because nothing could be farther from the truth. Um, the number one cause of death for children is gun violence.
▶ 3:24:06We haven't had a single hearing in this committee about gun violence. The number two cause of death for children is accidents like motor vehicle accidents, childhood cancer. There are a lot of things that are threatening children more than a book in a school. So, we should focus on what is truly important in protecting children, making sure they have access to quality early childhood education, for example. That's protecting children. Making sure they have access to health care, that's protecting children.
▶ 3:24:33Making sure that they have housing, that's protecting children. Addressing gun violence, concerns about ICE raids, that is protecting children. I I tell you I I was just at a a gala for um, childhood cancer over the weekend and I talked to parents who had lost her child to cancer. I I talked to cancer researchers who do everything they can, uh, for childhood cancer. Not one of them complained to me about any sort of book that was in any kind of school and what risk that was to kids.
▶ 3:25:03Let's focus on what really matters to protecting children and address those real issues and I yelled back.
▶ 3:25:14Are there any others who wish to be recognized to speak on this amendment? Hearing none, then the question on the amendment by the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Scott. All in favor, say I.
▶ 3:25:31All opposed, no. No. In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it and the amendment is not agreed A roll call vote is ordered. Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote will be Are there any further amendments to the amendment in the nature of a substitute? Further action on HR 7661 is postponed.
▶ 3:25:57We'll now move to consider the next The committee will now proceed to consideration of HR 6084 for amendment. The bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are available. The clerk will designate the bill.
▶ 3:26:16HR 6084, a bill to amend Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to strengthen the pleading standards for certain claims and for other purposes.
▶ 3:26:25Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. Without objection, the bill will be considered as read and open for amendment at any point. And any amendment offered shall be considered as read. Does anyone seek to be recognized? Representative Fine, for what purpose do you seek recognition?
▶ 3:26:42Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
▶ 3:26:44The clerk shall designate the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
▶ 3:26:48Amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 6084 offered by Mr. Fine of Florida, identifier HR 6084_ANS.
▶ 3:26:57Without objection, the amendment shall be considered original text for for of further amendment. The amendment in the nature of a substitute has already been distributed. I now recognize Mr. Fine for 5 minutes to explain the amendment in nature of a substitute.
▶ 3:27:11Thank Mr. Chairman. For more than a decade, employers across the country have faced a growing wave of frivolous class action lawsuits targeting ERISA benefit plans. These lawsuits drain time, money, and attention from where that money is supposed to go, to protect the retirement security of American workers, retirees, and their families. Now look, if people do engage in fraud in ERISA benefit plans, they need to be held accountable.
▶ 3:27:40But every dollar that's spent defending against meritless claims is a dollar not invested in strengthening the retirement plans or expanding employee benefits. Employers and plan fiduciaries face serious financial and reputational costs. Resources that should be used to serve workers and retirees are instead diverted to create a cottage industry of trial lawyers.
▶ 3:28:04Now over time, this trend's creating a booming class action industry because the challenge is this, under current law, it's often cheaper for the fiduciary to settle than to fight. Even if they win, they lose because of all the money that they have to spend on lawyers to fight back, even when the claims have no merit. This creates a powerful incentive to file speculative lawsuits and to extract settlements.
▶ 3:28:33Now again, ERISA was designed to protect seniors, to protect their retirement savings, not to create a college industry that uses litigation to exploit ERISA plan fiduciaries. When legal costs soar and settlements mount, workers ultimately pay the price. My bill, HR 6084, the ERISA Litigation Reform Act, takes a balanced and targeted approach to address the problem. It does not shield bad actors. Let me say that again. If you engage in bad behavior, you should be held accountable.
▶ 3:29:02And this bill does not stop that. But it strengthens fairness at the earliest stages of litigation to ensure that only well-supported claims move forward. The bill has three common-sense reforms focused on the early stage, the pleading stage, not the whole thing, just the beginning. First, it accesses addresses excessive fee claims, the most common type of ERISA lawsuit.
▶ 3:29:24Under current law, plaintiffs can often survive a motion to dismiss simply by alleging that a plan paid fees to a service provider and labeling the payment as a prohibited transaction. The burden then shifts to the fiduciary to prove the fees were reasonable and necessary. They have to prove they're innocent, they are assumed to be guilty. And again, it is the employees who pay the price. HR 6084 restores balance.
▶ 3:29:48If a lawsuit claims that fees are excessive, then the plaintiff must bear the burden of proving that those fees were unreasonable and unnecessary. That's a straightforward and fair standard. You think you're getting paid too much they're getting paid too much, then prove it. Second, the bill addresses lawsuits involving employee stock ownership plans or ESOPs. Today, a lawsuit can often proceed by simply alleging that an ESOP purchased employer stock, again shifting the burden to the fiduciaries to prove the price was fair.
▶ 3:30:18My bill simply restores balance. A lawsuit must plausibly allege and ultimately prove that the plan paid more than fair value for the stock. This ensures legitimate complaint legitimate cases can proceed while the frivolous ones are dismissed early. And it ensures plaintiffs can back up their claims. Again, there's no desire to stop when that bad actor occurs. Third, my bill temporarily stays litigation discovery until the court rules on motions to dismiss.
▶ 3:30:47You still get to do the discovery, you just have to wait until the motions to dismiss are over because discovery is often the most expensive phase of of a lawsuit. In many cases, the fiduciaries just settle because they don't want to deal with the cost of of discovery, even when the claims lack merit. This reform, modeled after after the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, helps prevent that type of coercive pressure.
▶ 3:31:10Taken together, these three reforms reduce frivolous lawsuits while preserving strong protections for workers and retirees, because again, when a frivolous case is settled, it is the seniors that we are trying to protect that are hurt. The amendment in the nature of a substitute makes a small technical change to the original bill. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on the ANS and to support the ERISA Litigation Reform Act of 2026, and I yield back.
▶ 3:31:39The gentleman yields. Are there any members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment in the nature of substitute? I recognize the gentleman, Mr. Courtney, for 5
▶ 3:31:50Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Move to strike the last word. So, uh so, we had a hearing on this measure, and as we heard from the witnesses, this bill is really this bill is directly at a decision by the US Supreme Court that actually was handed down less than a year ago, Cunningham versus Cornell, which slightly opened the door to plaintiffs in terms of having their day in court in terms of dealing with for many people is probably the pillar of either their retirement security
▶ 3:32:20or their health coverage. Again, what the court did, and again, I want to emphasize, it was a unanimous decision of the court. Samuel Alito to Justice Sotomayor agreed, and everyone else in between, that allowing plaintiffs to actually move forward with a case and not get shut out with a motion to dismiss before they can even get the bare bones of an allegation flushed out in the litigation was unfair.
▶ 3:32:51And they and they again laid out a for both parties to to make sure that the the fairness which the gentleman from Florida just described is actually protected. And what they laid out was under the federal civil procedure a rule 7 motion can be filed by a defendant corporation which does not trigger massive discovery, but rather forces the plaintiff to flush out more
▶ 3:33:21of an allegation in terms of a claim going forward. That's what the court did. And again, they did it unanimously. I mean, think about it right now in terms of just where we are with the US Supreme Court to have a case where again the the the all sides of the court came together with this holding is rare and and that doesn't mean we automatically rubber stamp it, but it does suggest that we should sort of handle it with care.
▶ 3:33:47And again, this was what we heard from the witnesses at the hearing on this bill. So, you know, we've heard that now there's going to be this, you know, avalanche of new litigation that again is going to be filled with frivolous lawsuits against What we've actually heard from the corporate bar, the people who again are defending corporations from frivolous lawsuits is that there hasn't been an avalanche since
▶ 3:34:18Cunningham versus Cornell has has handed down the the law firm Mayer Brown stated quote the the the court's decision has not yet resulted in a material increase in record keeping fee challenges or excessive ERISA fee lawsuits.
▶ 3:34:36We've had actually cases right now where district courts are enforcing that rule 7 procedure which was suggested by the Eastern District of California in an ESOP case basically ordered the plaintiffs to comply with a rule seven motion that the corporate corporations filed again to protect against frivolous lawsuits which was precisely what the court laid out in its decision.
▶ 3:35:05So again we're at a moment right now where the ink is barely dry where the court clearly identified an unfairness in terms of the way the motion dismissed process was being used in this type of litigation again involving people's retirement security and their health insurance and said that we need to let we need to let the parties go a little further and we need to have the parties particularly the corporate bar do a little bit more in terms of flushing out their cases and I would just note Mr.
▶ 3:35:34Chairman as I did at the hearing that we had here is that the corporate bar pointed to the fact that the rule seven pathway which the court explicitly laid out in its decision is is a potential boon for corporate defendants in terms of protecting their rights against frivolous litigation again I would ask this article from June 20 2025 to be admitted into the record.
▶ 3:36:02Without objection hearing none.
▶ 3:36:03So again I I think this is is this legislation is unbelievably premature again given the recent age of this new decision which the court came together to issue again I'll have an amendment in a in a minute again further hone down the what's at stake here for for plaintiffs who again really are at risk to being shut out of court in an unfair way which again the Supreme Court agreed with in Cornell
▶ 3:36:34in the Cornell case and with that I yield back.
▶ 3:36:38The gentleman yields. Are there any others who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment? I recognize the gentle lady from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici.
▶ 3:36:46Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. I I move to strike the last word and speak uh in opposition to the amendment and the nature of the substitute. Thank you Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh first I want to align myself with the remarks of of my colleague, Mr. Courtney. And as uh Representative Courtney explained, this bill seeks to overturn a unanimous Supreme Court recent Supreme Court decision allowing a class action in a ERISA case. Um and I just want to note that if we're talking about overturning Supreme Court decisions, this is not the one I would pick.
▶ 3:37:17Um and and in the opening remarks, Mr. Chairman, you said that these cases are are brought regardless of merit, and the bill sponsor seems to agree with that, and I just don't see that that's so. Because attorneys who bring cases without merit, um they face sanctions, they face a whole lot of work with no income. And also, in this type of situation, Mr. Chairman, and I think this bill is intended to to discourage class actions, but it makes sense and it's most appropriate to allow a class action when employees who participate in a plan are wronged.
▶ 3:37:47And it's very unrealistic to expect individuals to each find counsel and to seek justice. It's It's also It's It's expensive, it's inefficient, and unrealistic. Also, there is a very rigorous process that takes place under Federal Civil Procedure 23 to allow a class certification. And if the if if it's class is not appropriate, then the class is not certified.
▶ 3:38:09So, there are protections in the system, um and to to address the concern that I think uh my colleagues are are raising in in properly. So, I want to stand with workers today and employees who have been wronged and deserve retirement security, and also stand with the United States Supreme Court and their unanimous decision, and oppose this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
▶ 3:38:32The gentle lady yields. Are there any other members who wish to speak? There being no further discussion on the amendment in the nature of a substitute, the committee will move to consideration of amendments. Are there any members who would like to offer amendments? I recognize the gentleman from Connecticut, Mr. Courtney, for an
▶ 3:38:51Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The clerk has an amendment at the desk, HR 6084_AMD_01.
▶ 3:39:00The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 3:39:02Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 6084 offered by Mr. Courtney of Connecticut, identifier
▶ 3:39:14Does the gentleman from Florida reserve a point of order?
▶ 3:39:18Yes, Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of
▶ 3:39:20Point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman from Connecticut, Mr. Courtney, for 5 minutes in support of his amendment.
▶ 3:39:27Great. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My amendment would narrow HR 6084 to ensure that workers and businesses are able to hold their health plan service providers accountable. As we all know on this committee, ERISA has scope that includes also private and employer-based health And I'm opposed to this bill because it fundamentally weakens enforcement of ERISA and needlessly imposes burdens on workers, retirees, and their families seeking to enforce their rights.
▶ 3:39:56Again, I think a lot of the discussion that we heard at the public hearing earlier this Congress and and today has been focused on retirement plans because that was what the Supreme Court case involved. But as drafted, this bill applies not just to retirement plans, but also to health care plans covered by ERISA. That is not a small detail. There are about 2.8 million health plans that are subject to ERISA.
▶ 3:40:22The plans cover more than 135 million Americans, more than half of the working age population. Undermining enforcement of ERISA could not could not come at a worse time. Healthcare costs continue to rise and now account for 18% of GDP. This squeezes both workers and employers who often do not even have the tools they need to know if they're getting a fair deal from their health plans. That's why we have worked in a bipartisan way in recent years to enact legislation that would improve transparency throughout the healthcare system.
▶ 3:40:51This includes bills addressing pharmacy benefit managers, PBMs, which again, we've done a lot of good work in this committee. Third-party administrators, brokers, consultants, and many others who provide services to ERISA covered plans, but often charge opaque and unreasonable fees. As drafted, this bill would weaken enforcement of much of the legislation that we've supported on a bipartisan basis. It would impose novel burdens on both workers and employers when they seek to hold their service providers accountable.
▶ 3:41:21This would undermine, as I said, important bipartisan work that we have done at this committee. Moreover, I would note for my Republican colleagues, this is not just about private lawsuits. Their legislation also undercuts the provision of ERISA that the Department of Labor is relying on to issue its proposed rule regarding PBM fees. Again, the Trump administration in in this area where I think there's support on both sides is actually moving forward in terms of oversight of PBM fees.
▶ 3:41:50In doing so, this bill would make it harder for the Trump administration to enforce its own policy priorities. While my amendment does not fix all of the harm done by this bill, it would address this issue that I believe my Republican colleagues have not fully considered when drafting this legislation. I encourage my colleagues to support my amendment and I yield back.
▶ 3:42:09The gentleman yields. Does the gentleman from from Florida insist on his point of
▶ 3:42:15Mr. Chairman, I will withdraw my point of order.
▶ 3:42:17The reservation is withdrawn. Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendments? I recognize the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Fine, to speak on the amendment, 5 minutes.
▶ 3:42:26Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I I oppose the amendment. Look, ERISA is a uniform national statute. I don't think pleading standards should vary by the type of plan. Fragmented standards could create Fair pleading rules protect all employee benefit plan participants equally, regardless of the type of plan. Um, so I I just don't think we should split it up.
▶ 3:42:50I I want a uniform federal law with uniform pleading standards ensuring all plans and all participants are granted the same protections. This bill does not undermine workers' rights. Uh, I believe it restores balance at the pleading stage. At that early stage where defendants will go, "Well, it's going to cost me a bunch of money to defend it. I should just pay it and and minimize the damage." This is just restoring balance at the early stage.
▶ 3:43:18It prevents discovery abuse, which is used to drive settlements. It ensures that ERISA does what it's supposed to do, protect retirement savings, not enrich lawyers. Again, under the bill, meritorious claims proceed. There's no change to what happens in the end, but speculative claims do not. Um, as it relates to the point that that uh Mr. Courtney made about the Supreme Court, well well I respect his argument.
▶ 3:43:45He said the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that under the current law, these things can go forward. Well, that's the Supreme Court doing what it's supposed to do. You know, interpret the current law the right way. Well, if we don't like the current law, which is what my bill is about, then we have the right to change that law. The Supreme Court's not opining that that's what the law should be. They're opining that that's what the law is, and under it, they can go forward this way.
▶ 3:44:15Our view is that that therefore we should change the law but I would not conflate the Supreme Court interpreting what the law currently is as them saying what the law actually could be and so that's why as as respectful as I am of that unanimous Supreme Court decision under current law that's why I think that we should change the law so I oppose the amendment and I hope my colleagues will will join me in that Mr. Chairman I yield back.
▶ 3:44:41The gentleman yields are there any others who wish to speak on the Hearing none the question is on the amendment by the gentleman from Connecticut. All in favor say I. All opposed no. No. In the opinion of the chair the no's have it and the amendment is not agreed A a roll call vote is ordered pursuant to the chair's previous announcement this vote will be postponed.
▶ 3:45:13Are there any further amendments to the amendment in the nature of a substitute? Does the gentleman from Virginia the ranking member seek to offer an amendment?
▶ 3:45:40I think so. I have an amendment at the desk Mr. Chairman designated Scott VA
▶ 3:46:00The clerk will report the amendment.
▶ 3:46:02Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 6084 offered by Mr. Scott of Virginia identified Scott VA 055.
▶ 3:46:11Does the gentleman from Florida reserve a point of order? Does the gentleman Mr. Fine
▶ 3:46:19Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of
▶ 3:46:23A point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mr. Scott for 5 minutes in support of his amendment.
▶ 3:46:30Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, bill undermines ERISA's private right of action and places needless burdens on individuals who seek to hold fiduciaries accountable for mismanagement of employee benefit plans. Instead of making it harder for workers, retirees, and their families to enforce their rights, we should be taking steps to make the system fairer.
▶ 3:46:54My amendment do just that by ensuring that participants and beneficiaries are able to bring an action for fiduciary breach before it's too late to protect their earned benefits. Unfortunately, the 2020 Supreme Court decision in Thole v. U.S.
▶ 3:47:10Bank made it difficult for individuals who have been harmed by mismanagement by their fiduciaries to show that they have standing under Article III of the Uh in that case, the court held that so long as participants and beneficiaries are currently receiving their pension and have not suffered a concrete injury that would allow them to show they have standing to sue for fiduciary breach under ERISA, uh they don't they cannot bring a case.
▶ 3:47:38In other words, even if a plan fiduciary
▶ 3:47:42is recklessly mismanaging plan assets in a way that guarantees future loss of vested benefits, a worker may not be able to show that they have actually been injured until the manager has frittered away all the money and there's nothing left. This is fundamentally unplan unfair because it forces plaintiffs to wait until it's too late to prevent the problem from occurring.
▶ 3:48:07The plan could be completely out of assets to pay promised benefits when simple intervention years earlier could have prevented that from happening. My amendment would address this issue just by allowing participants and beneficiaries to bring an action for a fiduciary breach under ERISA as assignees on behalf of their plan. If they ultimately prevail, they'll be granted a small award of up to 1% of the recovery amount, which will be distributed equally amongst the plaintiffs.
▶ 3:48:36This is analogous to awards provided to whistleblowers who bring actions on behalf of the federal government under the False Claims Act. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this amendment, which will allow plaintiffs to take action to protect their benefits before it's too I yield back.
▶ 3:48:58The gentleman yields.
▶ 3:49:01Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my point of
▶ 3:49:03Point of order is withdrawn. Does anyone else seek recognition? Gentleman from Florida, Mr. Fine, do you wish to speak on this amendment?
▶ 3:49:11Yes. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I wish
▶ 3:49:13for 5 minutes.
▶ 3:49:14Thank you. Um I understand the amendment sponsor's concern about people in these plans getting getting hurt. And it's a reasonable concern, which is why this bill doesn't affect the ultimate outcome of legislation.
▶ 3:49:30It's focused on what happens in the early pleadings and to eliminate the incentives for unscrupulous attorneys to file lawsuits knowing that it's so expensive to defend them that that the fiduciary will just settle, basically pay a tax, which comes at the expense, not necessarily of the fiduciary. It comes at the expense of the people in the plan in order to avoid it. That's what we're trying to fix, not the ultimate outcome.
▶ 3:50:00ERISA's remedies are robust. The standard of review has been settled by five decades of judicial precedent designed for uniformity. This amendment creates undue complexity, raises administrative costs of ERISA plans. Without the original text of this bill, as we've talked about before, the result of the Supreme Court decision in Cunningham versus Cornell is that an employee benefit fiduciary is guilty until proven innocent.
▶ 3:50:28And that creates this incentive to settle frivolous claims, which again ultimately harms the people that we all say we care about. This amendment, if it were to pass, would create a litigation bonanza for opportunistic class action attorneys preying on employers who voluntarily provide benefits to their employees by replacing the original text of HR 6084.
▶ 3:50:52We need to make sure ERISA benefit plans are for the benefit of employees, not lawyers, and that's why I oppose this amendment, and I yield back.
▶ 3:51:02The gentleman yields. Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment? The gentleman from Connecticut.
▶ 3:51:08Thank you.
▶ 3:51:09Do you seek recognition?
▶ 3:51:10I do. Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield to Mr. Scott.
▶ 3:51:14Thank you, Mr. Mr. Chairman. I think the gentleman from Florida is just making stuff up. Um there's no evidence that there's any widespread uh litigation problem. Um there's no experience I mean there's there's just no no experience I think there's about 500 and some cases, and you got millions of um of of plans.
▶ 3:51:36There there is a problem, however, when somebody's running a plan has invested in maybe conflicts of interest and uh speculative things that obviously constitute a breach of fiduciary duty, and they can't even get into court until the money actually evaporates. Well, by then the people doing it don't have the You ought to be able to protect the assets when you can clearly make a case.
▶ 3:52:08so I would hope we would adopt this amendment so that people can protect their their assets before it's too late. And you're back to the gentleman from
▶ 3:52:19The gentleman yields. Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment? Hearing none, then the question is on the amendment by the gentleman from Mr. Scott. All in favor say I.
▶ 3:52:36All opposed, no. No. In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it and the amendment is not agreed A roll call vote is ordered pursuant to the chair's previous announcement. This vote will be postponed.
▶ 3:52:51Are there any further amendments to the amendment in the nature of substitute HR Seeing none, further action on HR 6084 is postponed pursuant to the previous The chair declares the committee in recess subject to the call of the chair. We expect to reconvene uh promptly after the last vote in the 3:00 p.m. vote series has been called.
▶ 3:53:32So, the committee stands in recess.
▶ 5:28:06The committee will reconvene and come to order following our recess and thanks for uh coming back as quickly as you all did. Before we proceed to postpone requests for recorded votes, I'd like to make a statement I don't really want to make, but I have to.
▶ 5:28:26I'm going to take a moment to to thank James Whitaker, our general counsel, for his service in that capacity uh to the Committee on Education and Workforce over the past year. James has been an incredible member of our team and his work on behalf of American families, students, taxpayers, and workers cannot be Uh as both a military and Hill veteran, James brought not only sharp legal expertise,
▶ 5:28:56but also integrity and a tireless work ethic. I can tell you that for certain trying keep beside him, let alone in front of From his service as a judge advocate in the US Army to his work on Capitol Hill, he's built a career defined by public Uh those qualities have been instrumental in helping this committee deliver real results for the American people.
▶ 5:29:20James has also been instrumental in in elevating the work of this very special committee. And perhaps most importantly, at least on Capitol Hill, James has been a fierce and effective defender of this committee's Sometimes we have to just do that. He made sure our issues were respected, our voice was heard, and that no one blurred the lines of that others stayed in their lane.
▶ 5:29:48While we certainly miss his presence, we are fortunate James won't be far. I'm confident that he will bring the same level of excellence to his next role and try to elevate their services well on Financial Services Committee. Mr. Whiskers as we lovingly call you. We wish you continued success and I think I speak for all of us when I say thank you.
▶ 5:30:22Mr. Chairman. Yeah, well we'll leave that in in in Chile, won't we Lucy? Um Mr. Scott, I recognize you.
▶ 5:30:36Thank you um Mr. Chairman. I'd just wanted to echo your sentiments. I'd like to thank James for his uh service to the committee. He He would It's tough and we had a tough committee. A lot of um contentious issues but he was able to work cooperatively with our team, maintained the dignity of this committee.
▶ 5:30:59Uh I have it on good authority that he was a wonderful travel partner to faraway places on codels, even the as I've been told the deep dark Peru. Uh wish you best of luck in Financial Services. I know you'll do the good job that you did here. Thank you so much.
▶ 5:31:25James, remember we have those dancing pictures of you on the train to Machu
▶ 5:31:37We'll now be voting on two amendments to the to the amendment in the nature of substitute HR 7894. The The amendment offered by ranking member Scott, identified as AMD 01. A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using electronic voting system. Please open the vote.
▶ 5:32:25Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Okay, Ms. Miller. Ms. Miller. Do any members wish to change their Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally.
▶ 5:32:52Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are 13 yeas and 18 nays.
▶ 5:32:56The amendment is not adopted. Now we move to the amendment offered by Mr. Scott, titled 7894 AMD 02. A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using electronic voting system. Please open the vote.
▶ 5:33:40Have all members um recorded the vote? Do any members wish to change their Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally.
▶ 5:33:52Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are 13 yeas and 18 nays.
▶ 5:33:55The amendment is not adopted. The question now occurs on the amendment in nature of a substitute to HR 7894. All in favor say I. I. All opposed, no.
▶ 5:34:11In the opinion of the chair, the eyes have it and the amendment in the nature of a substitute is agreed to. I hereby move that the committee report the bill HR 7894 to the House of Representatives with amendment and with recommendation that the amendment be agreed to and the bill do pass. The question now occurs on the chair's motion. All in favor say I. I.
▶ 5:34:35All opposed, no.
▶ 5:34:37In the opinion of the chair, the eyes have it and the motion is agreed to. A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using electronic voting system. Open the vote, Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded?
▶ 5:35:03One more.
▶ 5:35:09Do any members wish to change their Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally.
▶ 5:35:21Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are 19 yeas and 13 nays.
▶ 5:35:25The eyes have it and the motion is agreed to to HR 7894 as amended and the accompanying material shall be transmitted to the House of Representatives. The chair notes for the record that a quorum is present. I hereby move that the committee now report the bill HR 7890 to the House of Representatives with amendment and with the recommendation that the amendment be agreed to and the bill do pass.
▶ 5:35:54The question now occurs on the chair's motion. All in favor say I. I. All opposed no. In the opinion of the chair the eyes have it and the motion is agreed to. Recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. Please open the vote.
▶ 5:36:26Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Do any members wish to change their Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally.
▶ 5:36:36Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are 33 ayes and zero nays.
▶ 5:36:40The eyes have it and the motion is agreed to HR 7890 as amended and the accompanying material shall be to the House of Representatives. The chair notes for the record that a quorum is present. I hereby move that the committee report the bill HR 7891 to the House of Representatives with amendment and with the recommendation that the amendment be agreed to and the bill do pass. The question now occurs on the chair's motion. All in favor say I. I. All opposed no.
▶ 5:37:12In the opinion of the chair the eyes have it and the motion is agreed to. A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using electronic voting system, please open the vote. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded?
▶ 5:37:36Do any any members wish to change their Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally.
▶ 5:37:43Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are 33 ayes and zero nays.
▶ 5:37:47The ayes have it and the motion is agreed to HR 7891 as amended and the accompanying material shall be transmitted to the House of Representatives. The chair notes for the record that a quorum is present. I hereby move that the committee report the bill HR 7892 to the House of Representatives with amendment and with recommendation that the amendment be agreed to and the bill do pass. The question now occurs on the chair's motion. All in favor say aye. Aye.
▶ 5:38:16All opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the motion is agreed to. Recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using electronic voting system. Open the vote. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded?
▶ 5:38:47Do any members wish to change their Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally.
▶ 5:38:54Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are 30 ayes and three nays.
▶ 5:38:58The ayes have it and the motion is agreed to HR 7892 as amended and the accompanying material shall be transmitted to the House of Representatives. Uh the chair notes for the record that a quorum is present. We will now be voting on two amendments to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7893. The amendment offered by Ranking Member Scott, identified as Scott FAFSA AMD 04. A recorded vote is requested.
▶ 5:39:28Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. Please open the vote. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded?
▶ 5:39:51Do any members wish to change their Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally.
▶ 5:40:00Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are 13 yeas and 19 nays.
▶ 5:40:04The amendment is not adopted. The next amendment offered by Ranking Member Scott, titled Scott FAFSA sub A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. Please open the vote.
▶ 5:40:32Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Do any members wish to change their Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally.
▶ 5:40:45Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are 13 yeas and 19 nays.
▶ 5:40:48The amendment is not adopted. The question now occurs on the amendment in the nature of the substitute to HR All in favor say I. I. All opposed no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the amendment in the nature of the substitute is agreed to.
▶ 5:41:10I hereby move the committee report bill HR 7893 to the House of Representatives with amendment and with the recommendation that the amendment be agreed to and the bill do pass. The question now occurs on the chair's motion. All in favor say I. I. All opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the eyes have it and the motion is agreed to. A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. Please open the vote.
▶ 5:41:46Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Do any members wish to change their Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally.
▶ 5:41:57Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are 19 yeas and 13 nays.
▶ 5:42:00The eyes have it and the motion is agreed to. HR 7893 as amended and the accompanying material shall be transmitted to the House of Representatives. The chair notes for the record that a quorum is present. We'll now be voting on five amendments to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 7661. The amendment offered by Mr.
▶ 5:42:29Takano titled Takano 7661 AMD 02. A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. Please open the vote. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded?
▶ 5:42:59Do any members wish to change their Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally.
▶ 5:43:07Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are 13 yeas and 18 nays.
▶ 5:43:11The amendment is not adopted. The next amendment is offered by ranking member Scott identified as Scott 7661 AMD 03. a record vote is requested. Members will record their vote using the electronic voting system. Please open the vote. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded?
▶ 5:43:43Do any members wish to change their Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally?
▶ 5:43:51Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are 13 yeas and 18 nays.
▶ 5:43:54The amendment is not adopted. We now move to ranking member Scott Scott 7661 AMD 04. A recorded vote is requested. The chairman intends to vote yes. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. Please open the vote.
▶ 5:44:33Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded?
▶ 5:44:41Do any members wish to change their Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally?
▶ 5:44:51Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are 31 yeas and zero nays.
▶ 5:44:54The amendment is adopted. The next amendment is offered by ranking member Scott identified as Scott 76 61 AMD 05. A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their vote will record their votes using the electronic voting system. Please open the vote.
▶ 5:45:24Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Do any members wish to change their Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally?
▶ 5:45:39Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are 13 yes and 18 nays.
▶ 5:45:42The amendment is not adopted. The next amendment is from ranking member Scott entitled Scott 77 7661 AMD 07. Um a recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. Please open the vote. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded?
▶ 5:46:22Do any members wish to change their Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally?
▶ 5:46:29Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are 13 yes and 18
▶ 5:46:32The amendment is not adopted. The next amendment We finished the amendments. Uh the question now occurs on the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 77 7661. All in favor say I. I. All opposed, no.
▶ 5:46:50In the opinion of the chair, the eyes have it and the amendment is in the nature of a substitute is agreed to. I hereby move that committee report the bill HR 7661 to the House of Representatives with amendment and with the recommendation that the amendment be agreed to and the bill do pass. The question now occurs on the chair's motion. All in favor say I. I. All opposed no. In the opinion of the chair, the eyes have it and the motion is agreed to.
▶ 5:47:20A recorded vote is requested. All members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. Please open the vote. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Do any members wish to change their Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally?
▶ 5:47:44Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are 18 yeas and 13 nays.
▶ 5:47:47The eyes have it and motion is agreed to. HR 7661 as amended and the accompanying material shall be transmitted to the House of Representatives. The chair notes for the record that a quorum is present. We'll now be voting on two amendments to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 6084. The amendment offered by Representative Courtney entitled Courtney HR 6084 AMD 01.
▶ 5:48:17A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. Please open the vote. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded?
▶ 5:48:43Do any members wish to change their Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally?
▶ 5:48:50Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are yeas and 19 nays.
▶ 5:48:54The amendment is not adopted. We now move to the amendment by ranking member Scott, entitled S C O T V A 0 5 5. A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. Please open the vote. Have all members been recorded or wish to be recorded?
▶ 5:49:23Do any members wish to change their Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally.
▶ 5:49:30Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there're 13 yeas and 19 nays.
▶ 5:49:33The amendment is not adopted. The question now occurs on the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. All in favor say I. I. All opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the amendment in the nature of a substitute is agreed to. I hereby move that the committee report the bill H.R. 6084 to the House of Representatives with amendment and with recommendation that the amendment be agreed to and the bill do pass.
▶ 5:50:02The question now occurs on the chair's motion. All in favor say I. I. All opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the motion is agreed to. A recorded vote is requested.
▶ 5:50:18Mr. Chairman. Recognize Mr. Scott.
▶ 5:50:22As as we're
▶ 5:50:23just before we vote, I ask unanimous consent to enter into the two letters in opposition to H.R. 6084, one from a group of former Department of Labor officials who worked in Democratic and Republican administrations, and another from the Alliance of Retired Americans, Americans for Financial Reform, Committee for Fiduciary Standard, Economic Policy Institute, National Committee to Protect and Preserve Social Security and Medicare, National Retiree Legislative Network, and the Pension Rights Center.
▶ 5:50:52Without objection, and hearing none, they'll be entered. A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. Please open the vote. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Do any members wish to change their vote? Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the
▶ 5:51:19Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are 19 yeas and 13 nays.
▶ 5:51:22The yeas have it, and the motion is agreed to. H.R. 6084 as amended, and the accompanying material shall be transmitted to the House of Representatives. The chair notes for the record that a quorum is present. I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make necessary technical and conforming changes to today's bills. Without objection, so ordered. Pursuant to House Rule 11, clause 2L, I give notice that all members have the requisite number of days to file supplemental, minority, additional, or dissenting views.
▶ 5:51:52Without objection, so ordered. Without objection, any member who wish to insert materials into the record may do so by submitting them to the committee clerk electronically by the end of the day today. If there's no further business before the committee, without objection, the committee stands adjourned. in 1 hour.