Virginia Foxx

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chair, my amendment makes technical edits to the underlying bill while also clarifying certain language on gifts, enforcement, and the timeline for the subsequent Government Accountability Office study. The DETERRENT Act includes commonsense disclosure exemptions for industrial and intellectual property rights, except when they involve national security. My amendment clarifies the definition for intellectual property of national security concern by citing the existing Commerce Control List, which includes categories such as chemicals, avionics, and aerospace. If a transaction with foreign nations involves these sensitive industries, it should be disclosed. Chronic noncompliance of section 117 is the central motivation for this bill, so my amendment also includes language to ensure the Secretary follows the law and brings civil action against noncompliant entities. This means even a recalcitrant administration, like the Biden administration, would have to treat noncompliance with the seriousness it deserves. Lastly, my amendment adds language requested by the GAO to help it effectively measure the implementation and interagency coordination of provisions in the DETERRENT Act. Communication is key to combating malign foreign influence, and the GAO study will identify ways to improve that communication and coordination. Mr. Chair, with this amendment's simplistic nature, I hope for its easy passage, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chair, I rise to speak in opposition to the amendment in the nature of a substitute from Mr. Scott. Instead of taking the threat of foreign influence seriously, this amendment is a mere slap on the wrist for campuses and includes gaping disclosure loopholes. This is insufficient to protect our students and institutions from our worst adversaries. The amendment first makes it easier for foreign sources to be undetected, doubling the threshold for contracts to $100,000 and allowing gifts under $250,000 over a 3-year span to go unreported. Bad actors will seek any possible way to avoid transparency about their attempts to harm America through their influence over American postsecondary education, and a strict threshold is essential to stop that from happening. The annual thresholds in the DETERRENT Act are simple and align with other requirements in existing Federal law. Shockingly, this amendment includes no differences for America's biggest enemies: countries of concern and entities of concern. In my colleagues' minds, gifts from Russia and Iran are the same as gifts from England. I find it alarming that my colleagues are trying to make it easier for countries of concern to find ways to influence our universities. The DETERRENT Act uses a tailored list of countries and individuals, pulled from existing law, that have a proven track record of being security threats and actively working against the United States. The Democratic amendment in the nature of a substitute also has terrible carve-outs that provide gaping loopholes for cunning adversaries. The amendment prevents disclosure of the names of foreign sources and who at the institution is responsible for receiving the gift. These loopholes will make it easier for foreign sources to conceal their relationships and schools to feign ignorance, rendering disclosures all but useless. Finally, the Democrats provide no real incentive for schools to comply. Their fines for violations go as low as $250. After three consecutive years of violations, the Democrats' fine only goes up to the full amount of the gift. This is a laughable drop in the bucket compared to the billions in foreign contributions. Money talks, and institutions need to know section 117 cannot be ignored. We have already seen institutions fail to disclose billions in the past, and this paltry fine has no real consequences. Mr. Chair, it is time to take foreign influence seriously. I stand against this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chair, my friend from Virginia and I have been doing really very well in working in a bipartisan manner recently, and I hate for things to come between us, but his amendment in the nature of a substitute really does do a lot of damage to the underlying bill. There is no enforcement mechanism. There is no difference for malign actors. We have evidence to show that these foreign gifts are having an impact on the number of anti-Semitic demonstrations on the campuses. We know that foreigners are doing a lot to undermine our beliefs and values in this country. We need to be aware of where money is coming from, from other countries and particularly from those countries that we know want to destroy us. Mr. Chair, I have to very strongly oppose the amendment in the nature of a substitute, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on it.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 5933.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, anti-Semitism has reared its ugly head on our very shores. It should be extinguished entirely. Over the past few weeks, we have seen anti-Semitic demonstrations take place across the country. Turn on the television, open a newspaper, or go online and you will find a litany of examples. As Rabbi Moshe Hauer mentioned in his testimony before the Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Development recently, the plague of anti-Semitism has afflicted the United States. Mr. Speaker, I agree with Rabbi Hauer's assessment, and it is incumbent upon us all to stand with the Jewish community, push back on anti-Semitism wherever and whenever it crops up, and rid our country of this scourge. Anti-Semitism has no place in any civil society, especially the United States--not now, not ever. I include in the Record a letter of November 14, 2023, from Rabbi Moshe Hauer. Orthodox Union, New York, NY, November 14, 2023 Rabbi Moshe Hauer Testimony--House Education and the Workforce Committee Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Development ``Confronting the Scourge of Antisemitism on Campus'' Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and Members of the Subcommittee: My name is Rabbi Moshe Hauer. You have heard and will hear individual stories of what life has been like for Jewish students on America's university campuses. I would like to share with you the bigger picture. While I come to you today as the Executive Vice President of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, also known as the Orthodox Union, the largest organization serving Orthodox Jews in the world, in this testimony I hope to represent the entire Jewish community, every Jew and every Jewish student on a university campus. Across the entire Jewish communal and religious spectrum, my colleagues and I work together daily to address the plague of antisemitism that has struck us all, a plague that is afflicting our beloved United States and that is firmly centered in its institutions of higher learning. I want to share with this committee three points. 1. The Orthodox Union, along with Hillel, Chabad, and others, directs significant resources and attention to our future, to our youth and students. Each of us places full- time educators on university campuses who seek to provide a Jewish home for those students on campus, creating a place where they can come to connect warmly to their faith community, to celebrate the Sabbath and holidays, to socialize, study, eat, and pray together with their religious peers, and to be supported and guided by nurturing mentors. Today, this entire community is in crisis. Jewish students on campus no longer need a home; they need a fortress. Religious educators who have dedicated their lives to providing students with warmth, nurturing, and a stronger Jewish identity find themselves thrust into the role of trauma counselors and security advocates, even as they experience their own trauma and fear. On too many campuses, everywhere they go the students and their mentors encounter protests, chants, and signs that express the goals of eliminating the world's one Jewish state and killing Jews and that baselessly accuse Jews of unspeakable crimes. These messages of hate and intimidation come from students and from professors, and they are tolerated if not encouraged by many university administrators. Decades ago, Jews were not admitted to these universities. Now they let us in and expose us to hostility and intimidation. Which situation is better? Every person in this country should have access to the resources that the federal government provides. Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination based on shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics, applies to all programs and activities supported by federal financial assistance, including--of course--both public and private universities. Those universities are tolerating and often supporting faculty and student groups whose vocal and virulent antisemitism create discriminatory environments inhospitable to Jews. The Jewish experience on campus is a case study in Title VI non-compliance. This hearing you are holding today gives us hope that the fundamental right to religious liberty enshrined in the Bill of Rights will be honored and enforced on these campuses. 2. This intimidation and hostility are experienced by every Jewish student, Orthodox, Reform, or unaffiliated, whether identifiably Jewish or not. The 17,000 non-Orthodox teens that we serve in American public schools through our Jewish Student Union clubs experience it as well, as the plague of brazen and appalling antisemitism has spread from higher education to public middle and high schools. It is, however, important to highlight for a moment the specific experience of Orthodox students on campus. The Orthodox Jewish students on close to 100 campuses. Orthodox Jews are usually very visibly Jewish, identifiable by religious symbols and recognizable modes of dress, and have not surprisingly been the victims of a significant share of the antisemitic hate crimes. This makes life very difficult in the university environment where the term ``Jew'' is an epithet, where anger and hate are a constant, and where protection and support from the administration are absent. Our kids cannot circulate anonymously on campus and cannot go undercover by tucking the star of David necklace into the shirt or by removing the kippah. Their strictly kosher diet and their desire to practice their faith mean that if they want to eat or pray--which they do daily--thev need to go to the center for Jewish life on campus. The Orthodox Jewish student on campus is a walking billboard: it is me, the Jew, the one you harass, demonize, and intimidate. I can neither run nor hide. 3. Finally, it is critical that you understand how what is happening in our universities is being experienced by the broader Jewish community. The Jewish people are the people of the book, and that book teaches us both our values and our story. We know our history, and it goes like this: For more than three thousand years we have lived in a great many places, where we thrived and contributed to the host country, and then we had to leave. Sometimes we were expelled by laws and sometimes by fear, by the sheer danger of the hate that grew towards us. That is our story. We always end up having to leave. We all believed that the United States was different. The current tsunami of antisemitism that has surged in the United States and that is centered in its universities has shaken us. And now, as of October 7th, I do not know if there is a Jew that has not said to themselves, ``here we go again.'' We never imagined it. Five years ago, one year ago, if someone would tell you or me that we would be sitting in this room discussing this kind of open, blatant, and vile antisemitism in the United States of America, we would have thought they were crazy. America is different. America was supposed to be different. We were sure that this land of liberty and civil rights would be the exception to the rule. Jews would never be chased from here, neither by law nor by fear. That is what we thought. We are less convinced of that now. We are shaken, we are doubting, and we are wondering, ``here we go again.'' We are worried for the present, for the safety of our kids on campus. And we are worried for our future in this country and--quite frankly--for the future of a country whose institutions of ``higher learning'' appear utterly incapable of teaching basic values, right from wrong. You are our elected leaders. It is in your hands to restore our faith that America will be the exception to the rule of our history. It is in your hands to clarify that the true blessing of free speech does not include speakers who ``direct a threat to a person or group of persons with the intent of placing the victim in fear of bodily harm or death.'' It is in your hands to ensure that Title VI is respected and enforced, as those same hateful words that may be chanted in our streets may not be part of the government funded environments of our educational institutions that have tragically become discriminatory environments inhospitable to Jews. It is in your hands to take a step back and to consider the big and frightening picture of what this country is starting to look like. For us in the Jewish community, America is feeling a lot less free and a lot less safe. We need you to restore our sense of freedom and safety in this blessed land. Thank you for your attention today and for your actions tomorrow and in the future. Rabbi Moshe Hauer, Executive Vice President, Orthodox Union.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, this week marks the ninth annual National Apprenticeship Week, a time when we can give our Nation's workforce development programs their annual physical. Right now, there are more than 6 million Americans who are unemployed and more than 9 million job openings in our country. That is a real problem, Madam Speaker, and it is because the education-to-work pipeline is clearly fractured. I have said time and time again that we need to promote workforce development programs that actually work. Let employers be the ones to lead the way on this front. Let free market solutions lead the way, as well. Madam Speaker, earn-and-learn programs offer workers a viable path to pursue the American Dream on their own terms. We should do everything we can to support them.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment to prohibit the Office of Management and Budget, OMB, from implementing its April 6, 2023, revisions to OMB Circular A-4. These revisions are an attempt to rewrite and water down the regulatory guardrails currently in place so that the Biden administration can promulgate regulations that dramatically overstate the benefits and underrepresent the costs. The Biden administration has big plans to spend your hard-earned money and reshape your way of life. They are working to concoct all manner of massively expensive regulations, including rules on climate change, social equity, income redistribution, and creating a ``social cost of carbon.'' However, even the profligate Biden administration has realized that it faces checks and guardrails on its regulatory authorities as a result of OMB's Circular A-4, which provides objective and nonpartisan guidance to agencies for considering the impacts of different regulatory actions. OMB Circular A-4 came from a 1993 Clinton-era executive order providing agencies with a framework and guardrails for considering different regulatory approaches that truly maximize benefits for the American people and minimize costs. The April 6, 2023, revisions to OMB Circular A-4 are a departure from bipartisan and widely accepted practices and principles and are a thinly veiled attempt to push through the radical leftist agenda by stacking the deck in favor of extremely costly regulations. Perhaps the most egregious part of these revisions to Circular A-4 is that they will allow agencies to consider not only the benefits of regulations to Americans, who are the ones footing the bill, but benefits that accrue across the entire world. This would surely result in agencies dramatically overstating the purported benefits of regulations that can be seen as having global benefits, such as anything invoking the phrases ``climate change'' or ``social cost of carbon.'' In order to enact its radical agenda, the Biden administration needs to rewrite OMB Circular A-4 so that the cost of its regulatory regime can be minimized and the benefits dramatically overstated. We must reject the attempt to ``stack the deck'' so the Biden administration can radically reshape our lives and reach even deeper into our pockets. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, we do not need this concoction of ``social cost of carbon'' visited upon us in this country that will cost us lots and lots of money. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, again, we need to stop the Biden administration from implementing its revisions to OMB Circular A-4. We don't need to water down the regulatory guardrails currently in place and dramatically overstate the benefits and underrepresent the costs of their rules. This needs to be stopped. Mr. Chairman, I urge a ``yes'' vote on my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 798, a resolution condemning anti-Semitism on college campuses and encouraging campus leaders to speak out in support of their Jewish students, faculty, and guests. One word that comes to mind is ``regression.'' The extreme rhetoric on college campuses is, sadly, yet another chapter in the troubled history between Jewish students and American universities. It started with quotas. In 1922, Harvard President Abbott Lowell proposed a cap on the number of Jewish enrollees each year. Many other universities adopted similar policies. Out of Jewish quotas, alternative Jewish education opportunities were born. In 1948, Brandeis University was founded. It was named after Lowell's great enemy, the first Jewish Supreme Court Justice, Louis Brandeis. The initial 107-student class at Brandeis was overwhelmingly Jewish and just 12 miles down the road from Cambridge. It stood as a stark reminder of ethnic discrimination. The world progressed greatly in the post-war period, but the events of the past month have ripped open a wound in American postsecondary education that had been festering. There is no better example than modern Harvard. The coalition student group letter from Harvard was the first anti-Semitic demonstration on campus to make the news after Hamas' October 7 attack, hearkening back to Harvard's Jewish quotas. Harvard is a bellwether, for better or for worse. H. Res. 798 condemns the support of terrorists and condemns anti- Semitism behavior. I thank Representative Owens for putting this important resolution forward, and I pray that it is a step toward reversing the abhorrent behavior that has taken over college campuses. Madam Speaker, we must throw anti-Semitism into the dustbin of history where it belongs.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, medical education based on competency and merit is necessary to lead the world in healthcare and medical innovation. Americans sign up for a healthcare system free of racial discrimination. Medical schools must instill this fundamental precept in our country's future healthcare professionals. That is why the Education and the Workforce Committee pressed the Liaison Committee on Medical Education, the medical school accreditor, on its diversity, equity, and inclusion standards for applicants and its mandate for diversity. LCME responded to the committee inquiry and publicly clarified that accredited medical schools will not treat applicants differently on the basis of race. With lives on the line, racial discrimination must play no part in our Nation's healthcare system. The committee will continue to push for merit-based education standards for all professions in the American workforce.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment. My amendment is simple. It would prevent taxpayer funds from paying for State Department employees to travel to or attend events hosted by the Clinton Global Initiative. The rationale is quite simple. The Clinton Global Initiative has engaged in blatant corruption and influence peddling that would make even Hunter Biden blush. In perhaps its most famous episode in 2014, Hillary Clinton approached the Moroccan Government about hosting a Clinton Global Initiative conference in Morocco. The Moroccans fronted the money for the event by funneling it through a state-owned enterprise that was extracting and exploiting phosphates from a non-self-governing territory: Western Sahara. This sleight of hand amounted to condoning Morocco's sovereignty over this disputed land. You heard that right. It was a cash-for-sovereignty deal, formulated just as former Secretary of State Clinton began her run for President of the free world. This deal was so rotten that even Huffington Post deemed FOX News' investigation into this matter, ``a brutal, clean hit on Hillary Clinton's campaign.'' Indeed, the Clinton Global Initiative's scandals are myriad and include an episode uncovered by The New York Times revealing undisclosed donations linked to the sale of U.S. uranium production to a Russian Government agency. As expected, the Clinton Global Initiative was unable to withstand the scrutiny and shuttered shortly after the 2016 campaign. That is, until late last year when the organization reconstituted itself. Its operations are no longer dark, and this is the first State and Foreign Operations appropriations bill considered since its resurrection. It has since morphed into a factory of radical elitist woke schemes. Just last week, the Clinton Global Initiative convened in New York to discuss how to reshape our economy to tackle the left's pet projects that will make life for ordinary Americans more expensive and worse. Given the State Department's enmeshment with the Clintons and the Initiative, we need to send a clear message: No more coordination with the U.S. Government. No more conferences with corrupt governments at the expense of the oppressed peoples of the globe. No more representation and participation by the State Department--an end to its commingling with official policy. And hopefully, the beginning of the end of this corrupt organization's influence on U.S. policymaking. Mr. Chair, Americans simply can't afford more radical policies purveyed by an organization that allowed the global elite to buy and influence American foreign policy. Join me in condemning the Clinton Global Initiative's misconduct. Mr. Chair, I ask my colleagues to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I see that my colleague has not refuted any of the things that I have said about the Clinton Global Initiative. Why in the world, again, would we ask American taxpayers to pay for people from the State Department to attend these conferences when they are likely not to gain anything positive from them and support a corrupt organization? Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chair, we have a terrific debt on our hands in this country. We don't need to be spending any money that is not absolutely necessary to spend. Curbing attendance at meetings such as the Clinton Global Initiative is a good way for us to chip away at that debt and to save the American taxpayers some money. I think this is an excellent amendment. I believe that my colleagues will see that it is an excellent amendment, and I will continue to advocate for its passage. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the opportunity to offer this amendment. I believe, again, that it is good for us to highlight this organization and the fact that we do not need people from the State Department attending its meetings. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding. Mr. Speaker, the Biden Department of Education shares a distinct and familiar trait with every government agency in Washington right now: It has a habit of making crackpot decisions. One such decision made by the Department recently was to block funding for hunting and archery education under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, ESEA. Nobody at the Department of Education can truly believe Congress sought to block this funding, yet they refuse to interpret the law consistent with congressional intent. The idea that schools should offer valuable educational enrichment activities like teaching hunting, archery, and culinary skills have never been a partisan issue. Mr. Speaker, that same magnitude of support should be on display when the House passes the bipartisan Protecting Hunting Heritage and Education Act. This legislation clarifies that the prohibition on the use of ESEA funds for certain weapons does not apply to learning in activities like archery, hunting, other shooting sports, or culinary arts. It is a simple bill that would safeguard learning opportunities for millions of American students every year, especially those who live in rural areas across our country. Hunting and archery programs teach America's schoolchildren self- esteem, responsibility, and, ultimately, how to use these recreational tools safely. The National Archery in Schools Program has served over 18 million students since 2002. Mr. Speaker, there is no logical reason why anyone should oppose this legislation because there is no logical argument to be made in doing so. It is just that simple. I am proud to support the bipartisan Protecting Hunting Heritage and Education Act. I look forward to its swift passage in the House.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize America's 3.5 million truckers during National Truck Driver Appreciation Week. Truckers are the unsung heroes of our supply chain. Each year they drive over 320 billion miles--the equivalent of nearly 13 million trips around the globe--to deliver 11.5 billion tons of freight. Every one of those miles represents a stocked store shelf, a package placed on a household doorstep, materials delivered to a manufacturer, and equipment conveyed to a construction site. I am proud of America's dedicated truckers, including the 66,830 professional drivers in North Carolina. Today, 23 North Carolinians from the trucking industry are on Capitol Hill sharing their stories. Additionally, a North Carolina driver with over 2 million accident- free miles is demonstrating a simulator to staffers and my colleagues to share the perspectives of truckers. I look forward to thanking these individuals in person for the work they do. Bowman Middle School

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, I recently had the pleasure of visiting Bowman Middle School in Mitchell County to view the school's International Space Station, ISS, contact project. Thanks to the diligent work of Dan Hopson, a STEM teacher at the school who has a penchant for securing these kinds of opportunities, this project was able to come to fruition. Students were able to ask a variety of questions in real time via ham radio to Warren Hoburg, a NASA astronaut who successfully traveled to the ISS on March 3 of this year. This impressive event was one that these students will surely remember as they continue their educational journeys. Hopefully, some will be inspired to engage in careers in STEM areas. Congratulations to Dan Hopson, Principal extraordinaire Amber Young, and the dedicated staff at Bowman Middle School who made this event and this learning opportunity such a success.