Virginia Foxx

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Tennessee for yielding and for his great work on this impeachment resolution. Mr. Speaker, Secretary Mayorkas' political career is on the chopping block, where it rightfully belongs. He has failed to apply the laws that would stop this invasion at the southern border. To those who claim that this impeachment is for purely political purposes, you are dead wrong. This is about upholding the rule of law that governs our Republic, the same rule of law that Secretary Mayorkas has ignored and forsaken every day. Secretary Mayorkas has had innumerable opportunities to enforce the laws that are already on the books but has chosen not to. He has earned his own impeachment. Let's be clear: Our entire constitutional system is predicated on the idea that Congress creates laws, and the executive branch enforces those laws. Allowing this abuse of our constitutional system to go unchecked could spell the beginning of the end for our Republic. I am proud to serve as a cosponsor of these impeachment articles. The rule of law must be restored at the border immediately.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 443, the bipartisan Enhancing Detection of Human Trafficking Act, sponsored by Representatives Walberg and Sablan.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at noon tomorrow.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, February is Career and Technical Education Month. I join the Nation in commending all the educators who play a vital role in preparing America's students for prosperity in the 21st century economy. However, there is often a disconnect between the curriculum taught at schools and the skills required for in-demand jobs. There are currently 9 million unfilled jobs in the United States, and job creators are struggling to find qualified workers. Career and technical education programs offer a practical solution to bridge this skills gap. These programs offer students hands-on experience and skills that will allow them to excel in the workforce. By equipping students with the competencies they need to be successful on the job, career and technical education programs give participants an invaluable head start. Building a strong, skilled workforce is a national priority. Now is the time to strengthen career and technical education. Mr. Speaker, last week, the Committee on Education and the Workforce advanced the College Cost Reduction Act, CCRA, a landmark bill that would lower the cost of postsecondary education and provide much-needed relief for countless students and families. For too long, colleges have been given free rein to charge exorbitant tuition for degrees without a worthwhile economic benefit. This legislation would ensure that that is no longer the case. Don't take my word for it. Preston Cooper from the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity, FREOPP, states: ``The College Cost Reduction Act would hold colleges and universities financially responsible for unpaid Federal student loans while delivering direct aid to institutions with low prices and strong student outcomes.'' Cooper notes the key provisions of the bill would save billions while lowering tuition costs. Those include loan repayment assistance. The bill pares down the confusing array of Federal student loan repayment plans to two: a standard mortgage-style plan and an income- driven repayment plan. Student loan risk sharing: Colleges, rather than students, are responsible for the cost of repayment assistance. Schools would be required to compensate the government for a portion of the forgiven unpaid interest associated with their former students. Performance bonus: Schools may be eligible for new direct payments from the Federal Government known as Promise grants. These payments are determined by a formula that rewards colleges for low-income student enrollment, high graduation rates, low tuition prices, and strong graduate earnings outcomes. Loan limits: The bill caps aggregate student loan limits at $50,000 for undergraduate students, $100,000 for graduate students, and $150,000 for students in graduate professional programs. Maximum price guarantee: Colleagues must guarantee that the net tuition that students pay in their first year will not increase in subsequent years, for as long as the student is enrolled at the institution. College is an investment for families, and they should know that graduates are receiving a financial return. As such, the centerpiece of this legislation builds off of the Bipartisan Workforce Pell Act and measures the return on investment of college programs by comparing the ratio of the total price students were charged relative to the value-added earnings graduates receive from their degree. Not only does this metric provide a sector-neutral way to assess whether students are better or worse off for enrolling in a given program but provides a measure to which institutions can be held financially responsible or financially rewarded for the outcomes of their students. This means that, among other actions, institutions can reduce or eliminate the risk-sharing penalties by lowering their price, and in doing so, can become eligible for additional performance-based funding, like PROMISE grants that require that, at a minimum, the total price paid by students is at least equal to the value-added earnings of graduates. For example, Preston Cooper's analysis of the CCRA highlights several institutions who are promoting economic mobility and would benefit substantially under this legislation--the State Technical College of Missouri, which could receive millions in flexible performance-based PROMISE funding. In fact, Cooper's analysis finds that almost 90 percent of community colleges would financially benefit under the bill after accounting for risk sharing and PROMISE grants. Most importantly, the bill benefits students by ensuring that as a condition of receiving PROMISE grants, institutions would provide students an up-front, guaranteed price for their entire degree program. This means that for up to a maximum of 6 years, colleges would lock in students' tuition, making it far easier to budget needed resources, and also to weigh the cost of postsecondary education against perceived future benefits, such as their value-added earnings. Policy experts across postsecondary education agree that the CCRA will help lower college costs. Here is what others are saying about it: Andrew Gillen of the Texas Public Policy Foundation: ``Much is in the College Cost Reduction Act, but the most important changes revolve around transparency, financial aid reforms, deregulation, and accountability. . . . ``Overall, the College Cost Reduction Act would be a dramatic improvement for higher education.'' Michael Brickman of the American Enterprise Institute: ``The College Cost Reduction Act provides the first substantive and comprehensive proposal in years to reform the way colleges and universities are funded and held accountable. There's a lot to like.'' Finally, Beth Akers of the American Enterprise Institute: ``The College Cost Reduction Act represents the largest serious and comprehensive higher education reform package in decades and, in theory, has plenty of bipartisan appeal.'' Everyone can agree that college is too expensive and a temporary Band-Aid like one-time loan bailouts simply won't cut it. The College Cost Reduction Act is a promise from this Congress to the next generation of students that we are pursuing lasting solutions to the value problem in postsecondary education. It is also a promise to taxpayers that they will no longer be forced to pay for someone else's debt. You don't have to take our word for it, though. Go listen to and read the mounds of evidence in support of the CCRA. I am proud of the work of the committee to advance this bill, and I look forward to a robust debate upon it reaching the House floor. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, this week, the House Committee on Homeland Security is marking up Articles of Impeachment against Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas for his stark dereliction of duty at our Nation's southern border. I believe that Secretary Mayorkas deserves to be impeached for his failures, and my intention is to vote in favor of his impeachment. That said, it is because of House Republicans' commitment to restoring regular order that we have now reached this critical juncture. Regular order has allowed the Homeland Security Committee to conclude its investigation into Secretary Mayorkas and move at an expedited pace in its consideration of these Articles of Impeachment. It is well known that I voted to refer the impeachment process to this committee. Regular order can and should be followed, especially on such an important issue as this. What has come to light now is that the vote to refer these articles to the Homeland Security Committee expedited the process by giving that committee sole jurisdiction over the articles. That vote gave us the quickest possible timeline to move these Articles of Impeachment to the Senate where a conviction can and should be affirmed. We must also acknowledge that regular order has also preserved precious taxpayer dollars that would have otherwise been wasted if the Committee's investigation had been immediately cut short. Mr. Speaker, while we are on the topic of the southern border, let me address the Senate's secret border deal. The President has claimed that he needs Congress to pass legislation to empower him to secure the southern border. That is patently false. Congress has no such obligation to do so. President Biden has always had the authority to enact measures at the southern border to deter illegal aliens from entering our country: ending catch and release; ceasing exploitation of parole authority; reinstating the remain in Mexico program; expanding the use of expedited removal authority; renewing construction of the border wall. Let's not forget about what authority is granted to the President under the Immigration and Nationality Act as well: ``Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.'' Again, the President already has the authority to secure the southern border. Even in precedent set by the Supreme Court in Trump v. Hawaii, the President can make ``decisions whether and when to suspend entry, whose entry to suspend, for how long, and on what conditions.'' Mr. Speaker, President Biden is acting as if Congress has tied his hands and the only way he can secure the border is with more congressional approval. The truth is that President Biden has been sitting on his own hands for months on end. Perhaps he should take a long, hard look in the mirror.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, President Biden's decision to completely stall LNG exports is a gut punch to the American economy, and it serves as a serious detriment to both energy security and national security. Has he forgotten that just last year our country led the entire world in LNG exports? Think about the American jobs that have been sacrificed because of this decision as well. While President Biden decides to trudge down this irresponsible path, our Nation's adversaries are salivating. This administration is so determined to attack and undercut American energy that it is willing to sacrifice our geopolitical footing to do so. Instead of caving to the demands of the far left, President Biden would do well to put American energy first.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today, I rise as a mother, a grandmother, and a former college instructor, administrator, and student to support the Pregnant Students' Rights Act. Mr. Speaker, in debating the tenets of this bill, I keep coming back to the dual mandate that it represents: more educated young women and more healthy babies carried to term. It reminds me of the two great sources of hope and joy in my personal life, the first of which is education. I have dedicated my life to helping others get a good education, as I was able to do. A good education is a major element of a good life. The second great source of hope and joy in my life has been to rear a child. Having children and then grandchildren is the highest calling and truly the ultimate blessing. Pursuing knowledge and having children: These are two virtues that carry immense social value and should be celebrated. I say should, because as is more often the case, modern society holds them in conflict with one another. Pregnant students should not be faced with the dilemma that their academic and future success must be sacrificed to an unplanned pregnancy. Data show carrying a child to term does not have to hinder one's educational journey. As a woman who understands the strength and resilience of other women, I found it unsurprising that student mothers outperformed their childless peers in the classroom. It is a long-held belief that pregnancy should never be a barrier to a student completing her education. It is a belief enshrined in Title IX, which establishes that universities receiving Federal funds must provide equal opportunities for all students, regardless of pregnancy or parental status. In order to receive Federal funding, campus classroom and education- related activities, from athletics to scholarships to lab work and more, must allow protections and accommodations for pregnant women. That means coaches cannot remove players, universities cannot revoke scholarships, and teachers cannot penalize absences due to medical reasons related to a pregnancy. Yet, despite the legal equality for pregnant students established under Title IX, a significant challenge persists to informing women of the rights and the resources at their disposal. No expectant mother should be left in the dark. The Pregnant Students' Rights Act seeks to bridge the gap between legal protections and practical awareness. It ensures that universities make information regarding pregnant students' rights and protections accessible through handouts, e-mails, and university websites. This bill comes at a time when the nontraditional college student is becoming the norm. Over 20 percent of college students are parents, many of whom are single mothers. With more people entering college at every station of life, it is critical that we pass the Pregnant Students' Rights Act. All students should know the rights and protections available to them, including young, pregnant women. Mr. Speaker, I support the Pregnant Students' Rights Act, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 969, I call up the bill (H.R. 6914) to require institutions of higher education to disseminate information on the rights of, and accommodations and resources for, pregnant students, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 6914.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Iowa (Mrs. Hinson), the sponsor of H.R. 6914.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Aderholt), the chair of the Values Action Team.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. LaMalfa).

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am truly puzzled by the other side and some of the comments that are being made about this bill. It is a simple bill. It is not misleading. It is simply aimed at helping pregnant students get the support and information that they need if they are pursuing their education. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle used to be pro-women. I don't know what has happened to them, but, as one of my colleagues here said, pro-life is pro-woman. This bill is pro-women and pro-helping women getting an education. At the same time, they can carry their baby to term. Now, nothing in this bill prevents a college or university from disseminating information about how to deal with pregnancy-related conditions, including miscarriages. We are not telling the colleges and universities everything that they have to say. We are simply saying you have to inform the students of the services available and the accommodations that need to be made. All of us should have our hearts go out to women who face difficult pregnancies. We have all known them. My own daughter had four very difficult pregnancies. I am deeply saddened that a woman and her baby face challenges and acknowledge that, for a pregnant student, these instances must be extremely stressful and sorrowful, but the purpose of this legislation is to tackle an issue unique to pregnant students on college campuses. Some students are not aware of how they can advocate for themselves to balance student life and motherhood. Colleges and universities must provide reasonable accommodations for these students, such as excused absences and opportunities to make up classwork when a student does have to make frequent medical appointments to take care of herself and her baby. This bill supports pregnant students, and I believe it deserves our support. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, again, I am aghast. I am just aghast at how this bill is being characterized. It is being called an extreme piece of legislation. We want pregnant students to be supported on their campuses and to know that they can be supported. It has nothing to do with criminalizing abortions. It has nothing to do with a nationwide abortion ban. Our colleagues on the other side of the aisle said something about healthy babies. We need pregnant women to have good resources and good healthcare so they can have healthy babies, but they want what they call comprehensive information to women. What they mean is they want to encourage women to have abortions. And what is an abortion, Mr. Speaker? It is killing babies. I have said it on the floor before. The word ``abortion'' sounds so clinical, so clean, but we need to say what it is. It is killing babies up to the point of their birth. This is not an extreme piece of legislation. It is a sensible piece of legislation, and every person in this body should vote for it if you care about life. If you don't care about life, if all you want to do is destroy life, then vote ``no.'' That is the radical side. We are not the radical people. We know we have a culture of life. We have had a culture of life in this country. I fear it is eroding. Mr. Speaker, this bill deserves the support of every person, particularly every woman, because we all can appreciate what it would be like to be in this situation and not have support. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Good), who is a subcommittee chairman for the Education and the Workforce Committee.

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, it is hard for me to believe that some of our colleagues have read this bill with the comments that they are making. It is a 5-page bill, basically. Maybe it takes up 7 pages, but that is mostly blank space. There is nothing about overreach and control in this bill. Our colleagues are saying: Well, you don't provide healthcare. You don't provide food stamps. You don't provide other things. Let me remind my colleagues that we are the Education and the Workforce Committee. We are in our lane. We are looking after pregnant students. Our job is to deal with education issues. As I said in the Rules Committee, our colleagues can go to other committees to do these things. We are doing what we should be doing, which is, again, staying in our lane and helping pregnant students. They should know that if they are here as Members of Congress. I wholeheartedly reject, also, the claim that this bill rolls back any rights of women. Nor does it put undue pressure on anyone other than college administrators to ensure that students are fully informed of their rights. The Pregnant Students' Rights Act ensures that colleges and universities provide information about the rights and accommodations a college must directly offer a mother as she navigates pregnancy and being a parent to her child. Pregnant students deserve equal access to continue their postsecondary education. I do not understand how connecting a student with information is an attack on any rights. Instead, this bill would decrease the likelihood that a student is unaware of her opportunities, unlike today, where students may not receive consistent and timely information. Nowhere in this bill does it prohibit colleges from disseminating any type of information. Nowhere in this bill does it dictate that the information be one-sided. Since when did it become popular to attack providing information and resources to a mother for taking care of her baby? Now, let's talk about one-sidedness, which our colleagues are saying. Colleges have been extremely public in support of abortion. Within minutes of the Supreme Court's decision on Roe v. Wade, ``one-sided'' press releases were published as if the issue had to do with higher education. Here is the statement of the University of Michigan president: ``I strongly support . . . abortion services, and I will do everything in my power as president to ensure we continue to provide this critically important care.'' That is one shining example of the overt bias coming straight from the top of the university. I don't think anyone can make the claim that universities are not already pushing a one-sided agenda. However, this bill does not tie the hands of colleges from continuing to relay information, but it sure does ensure the student mothers are supported. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. Madam Speaker, so now I am truly confused. Our colleagues have come up one after the other and said that this bill is going to bring the end of the world for the ability for women to gain an abortion, which means killing their babies, and now we are told that this bill does nothing and is a do-nothing bill. If it is a do-nothing bill, then I certainly hope our colleagues will vote for it because I know they have voted for other do-nothing bills on the floor. Maybe they should think of it as a do-nothing bill and all vote for it. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining.

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes. Madam Speaker, this bill is about supporting pregnant students. There are many resources for pregnant students, both on and off campus. This bill would connect students to these important resources. Many are nonprofit organizations, not just government programs. In particular, I have heard of inspiring and innovative partnerships between colleges and nonprofit organizations to support student mothers. For example, Belmont Abbey College in Belmont, North Carolina, has an incredible partnership with a noncampus maternity home, MiraVia. At MiraVia's college residence, expectant mothers are welcomed and provided with a place to live free of charge. Pregnant students receive a private suite, meals, childcare, diapers, baby clothing and supplies, nursery furniture, life skill classes, personalized guidance to identify additional community resources, and coordination of education and career opportunities. Belmont Abbey College gives pregnant mothers at MiraVia a full scholarship. This is just one example. I am sure many of my colleagues have more examples of support provided by colleges and universities for students and their babies. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Speaker, again, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have characterized this bill as radical, extreme, overreaching, and controlling students. There are so many negative things and then a couple have said, well, it does nothing. It is sort of confusing. Again, if they have read the five-page bill, they would know that their characterizations of the bill are not at all what it is. It doesn't do things they say they would like it to do, but that is not our role, Madam Speaker. Our role is to work with students on campuses. I do think they are really confused about the nature of this bill, and I would encourage anybody watching this to read the bill. The bill, let's be crystal clear, is not about political advocacy. Nothing in this bill prevents a college counselor from discussing the full panoply of options available to pregnant students. Nothing in this bill prevents a pregnant college student from making her own decision. Rather than political stunts, thanks to a Republican majority, this body is focused on real bills that will have a real effect on the real lives of Americans, particularly pregnant women in college. That is a good thing that we are doing, Madam Speaker. The Pregnant Students' Rights Act is yet another one of the bills we have focused on in this Republican majority in the House of Representatives. Madam Speaker, I look forward to its passage. I urge everyone to vote for this bill. Again, I think if our colleagues on the other side of the aisle care about pregnant women, and particularly pregnant women who are enrolled in college, they would vote for this. If they don't, then I fear it is an indication that they don't care about women who want to carry their babies to term. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, Monday marks the beginning of National School Choice Week, a time to celebrate and explore the various education options available to students and parents. Education is the cornerstone of opportunity in America, and we must spare no effort in laying the foundation for our students to prosper. Educational freedom is essential in these efforts and begets success for America's children while offering parents the resources to support their child's future. No two students are the same, but that is the strength of school choice: empowering students and their families to select the environment that best supports their individual goals and specific needs. Rather than assigning students to schools based solely on their ZIP Code, school choice places students and parents back where they belong, at the helm of decisionmaking concerning education. Options like innovative charter schools, magnet schools, homeschooling, and scholarship programs personalize education and have revived new hope and opportunities for countless American families. I would like to take a moment to commend and reflect on the progress achieved by the school choice movement in the last year. 2023 was a monumental year for expanding school choice across the country. A record 20 States implemented programs or legislation to make education alternatives available for millions of students. Through these initiatives, these States have reasserted the rights of American parents to play a central role in selecting and pursuing the education model they believe suits their child. I am proud to highlight that my home State of North Carolina was among these pioneer States and became the ninth State to pass universal school choice legislation. North Carolina and the 19 other States that passed legislation are amazing examples of putting students first. However, too many of our Nation's students are kept from realizing their full potential because they do not have access to a high-quality education. The uncomfortable truth is that the one-size-fits-all approach to education is harming our students. America invests over $800 billion into education, yet the most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress found that reading scores declined to their lowest level since 1992, and math scores saw their largest decline since the initial 1990 assessment. On the other hand, education choice has been proven to improve student achievement, attainment, and even character development. We must fund students, not systems. School choice puts education funding directly into the hands of parents. By allowing parents the discretion to use the funds already allocated for their child's education as they see fit, school choice ensures that students and schools are well matched and taxpayer dollars are used responsibly for programs and institutions that produce the best outcomes for students. We were sent to Congress to represent the will of the American people, and 71 percent of Americans support school choice, according to recent polling. I am proud of the advancements made for the parents who now have the rightful say in their child's education and for the students who can now unlock their full capabilities regardless of their financial situation, home address, or learning needs. The next challenge we face is extending the promise of school choice to all 50 States. As Chairwoman of the Education and the Workforce Committee, I am committed to promoting high-quality education for all Americans. Madam Speaker, I wish everyone a happy National School Choice Week, and I look forward to celebrating more progress and milestones in 2024.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Hern), chair of the Republican Study Committee.