Erin Houchin

Mrs. HOUCHIN

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, even in 2021, there were double the amount of overdose deaths than firearm deaths in the United States, and the dramatic increase in overdose deaths, particularly due to fentanyl, are a direct result of Joe Biden's broken border policies. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I just have two words to say. H.R. 2, we passed that 8 months ago. That was the Secure the Border Act. The Democrats own that. Mr. Speaker, 211 Democrats voted against that legislation. I would also note that, since Joe Biden took office, we have had record numbers of crossings. There has been 7.5 million people who have crossed into the United States illegally and been paroled into the United States under Joe Biden's watch, and that has been going on for 3 years under the Biden administration. Therefore, it is not Republicans that own this issue, but it is Democrats. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy).

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, we have before us the opportunity to move legislation that could unleash growth and increase prosperity for Americans across the country in the Expanding Access to Capital Act. This bill empowers Americans with the tools they need to grow their small businesses and secure their financial futures. We need to focus on initiatives that strengthen our economy and combat inflation. However, time and time again, this administration's policies seem to hinder rather than facilitate business in America and it defies logic. In contrast, this legislation streamlines regulations, expands opportunities for economic growth, and enables more Americans to invest in their future. Turning to H.R. 7511, the Laken Riley Act, it aims to strengthen our immigration laws. In H.R. 7511, we mourn the death and honor the life and memory of Laken Riley and other victims of the Biden administration's open-border policies, and we denounce President Biden's open-border policies. We are not politicizing. This is a response to a tragedy in the hope that we would prevent a similar tragedy moving forward. No family should have to endure what Laken's family has experienced. We owe it to Laken's parents and parents nationwide to ensure something like this never happens again. This border crisis is real. It has devastating consequences. Laken's story is sadly not unique. As the Speaker has documented, there are over 100 stories across the country just like Laken's. Mr. Speaker, I hope the House can speak with one voice on this bill and together do what the American people have been asking us to do, which is secure the border and institute policies that will protect Americans and American families. I look forward to moving these bills out of the House this week, and I ask my colleagues to join me in voting ``yes'' on the previous question and ``yes'' on the rule.

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mrs. HOUCHIN

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 947 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, last night, the Rules Committee met and produced a rule, House Resolution 947, providing for the House's consideration of several pieces of legislation. The rule provides for H.R. 788, the Stop Settlement Slush Funds Act, to be considered under a structured rule. It provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary, or their designees, and provides for one motion to recommit. Additionally, the rule also provides for H.J. Res. 98, a joint resolution related to a rule submitted by the National Labor Relations Board relating to the ``Standard for Determining Joint Employer Status.'' H.J. Res. 98 would be considered under a closed rule, and it also provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, or their designees, and provides for one motion to recommit. Finally, the rule provides for consideration of S.J. Res. 38, a joint resolution nullifying the final rule of the Federal Highway Administration relating to ``Waiver of Buy America Requirements for Electric Vehicle Chargers.'' It also provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, or their designees, and provides for one motion to commit. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and in support of the underlying pieces of legislation. Beginning with H.R. 788, the Stop Settlement Slush Funds Act, Mr. Speaker, we have picked up right where we left off in the first session of the 118th Congress, stopping this administration from overstepping. During the Trump administration, the Department of Justice went about ending the practice of allowing these third-party settlement agreements. Because the focus of the Justice Department should be delivering justice and doing so under equal application of the law, the Justice Department should not be picking winners and losers. The DOJ should not be in the business of choosing parties far removed from the taxpayer and not directly related to the case at hand to be benefiting from a settlement. Sadly, from the very onset of the Biden Presidency, this administration has been laser focused on undoing the progress of the previous administration. This administration has consistently and simultaneously overstepped their authority in rulemaking and underdelivered for the American people. That is why we are here. Following the President's day-one directive to review reinstating Obama-era policies, the Biden administration began rescinding Trump-era policies. I think most Americans would agree that the Federal Government should not be requiring settling parties to make donations to unrelated third parties. I think most Americans would be shocked that these settlement payments don't go to the U.S. Treasury but to liberal wish-list recipients. Justice is not best served by this practice and it is why the Trump administration ended the process. Just as important, ending this practice ensures accountability from the government by preventing those in power from rewarding political allies, as well as protecting this body's constitutional responsibilities. We have seen this practice used to push funds to far-left organizations that use the money to support out-of-touch or woke ideologies. We should put an end to this egregious practice by the Biden administration. Moving on to the workforce. As a member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, I am glad to see consideration of H.J. Res. 98, of which I am an original cosponsor. This legislation is meant to protect small businesses, particularly franchisees from the Biden administration's assault. This resolution is meant to preserve the job opportunities these leaders create and to protect their freedom to run their businesses as they see fit. It also preserves choice and flexibility for prospective employees. This joint resolution will ensure a predictable and rational legal standard for what qualifies as a joint employer. For an administration that can't seem to put far-left ideology aside long enough to get our economy on track, I suppose this rule fits in with a larger pattern of stifling economic growth and driving the cost of doing business even higher. We should be taking up policies that empower employers, not finding ways to make it more difficult to do business in America. Finally, on to S.J. Res. 38. Similarly, and it seems there is a pattern here, Mr. Speaker, this joint resolution fights back against the Biden administration's policies that hurt American manufacturers in favor of the Communist Party of China. S.J. Res. 38 will ensure Buy America requirements are applied and that this misguided Biden rule does not strengthen China over American companies. We understand the administration wants to force electric vehicles on the American people, and that in order to make these chargers less expensive and to meet their unrealistic green goals, they want to rely on Chinese manufacturers, but we cannot let those political objectives hurt our own American manufacturing while strengthening China at the same time. Mr. Speaker, as we all have said and highlighted before on the floor, we know the Biden administration's priority is to pour billions into green energy and clean cars. By rushing to reach arbitrary green and climate agendas, the United States is more likely to solidify China's control of our energy future rather than save the planet. Mr. Speaker, we must be strengthening our American manufacturers. I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting S.J. Res. 38 as the Senate, including Senate Democrats, have already done. If the President really wants to veto this bill, despite his administration's flawed approach, then we should give him that opportunity. I look forward to consideration of all of these three pieces of legislation, and I urge the passage of this rule. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, these arguments merely are misdirection. The executive branch has the power under the Constitution to enforce the laws. When wrongdoers violate Federal law, any settlement with the government should be focused on three things: compensating victims, redressing harm, and punishing or deterring unlawful conduct. Settlement agreements that require donations to outside parties do not accomplish those goals. Required donations do not compensate victims, as the funds go to outside third parties not involved in the litigation, and they do not punish and deter unlawful conduct, particularly as settling parties can reduce their fines from $2 to $1 for each dollar donated. Moving on to criticisms against H.J. Res. 98 about franchisees. It is a hysterical argument that broadly misses the mark. Employees of franchisees are still entitled to protection under the National Labor Relations Act. They are still able to organize labor unions if they so choose. Franchisees are subject to collective bargaining laws, worker safety laws, fair wage laws, and franchisors, just as other large companies are. One of the concerns that we have is that there will be disastrous consequences under this rule. I just find that is not the case. We are promoting small business owners and franchisees above these woke policies that harm the American employer and the American worker. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. Mr. Speaker, I would note that with Republicans being in the majority, one major accomplishment is that we have stopped a lot of bad things potentially from happening that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle might wish to push forward. We have before us the opportunity to move legislation here that could have a positive effect on the everyday lives of all Americans, whether that is pushing back on overreach of the bureaucratic state or protecting job creators. The choice before us in this rule is clear, and we must take action. We must be taking actions that improve this economy and fight inflation, but, again and again, we see this administration making it harder and not easier to do business in America. It defies logic. Apparently, there is no cost too high for this administration or my Democratic colleagues when it comes to this pursuit, not even the fact that China stands to benefit from one of these rules and the American manufacturer stands to lose. The American people know better. Mr. Speaker, I look forward to moving these bills out of the House this week. I ask my colleagues to join me in voting ``yes'' on the previous question and ``yes'' on the rule.

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, if I had one word to describe what I hear from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, including the administration, it would be gaslighting. My colleagues claim that we don't want to help everyday Americans. My colleagues claim that we are offshoring American jobs when the very bills we are considering here today are trying to fight against doing precisely that. They claim that we are trying to hurt businessowners. We are trying to help businessowners by giving them more flexibility to engage in employee relationships as they see fit. We are trying to bring American jobs back by supporting our American manufacturers over Chinese manufacturers. We are trying to compensate victims over woke ideological groups. It is more gaslighting from our colleagues on the left. I hope that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will recognize that and will join us in support of this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mrs. HOUCHIN

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, today, on the very day Hunter Biden ignored a subpoena from this body, we will vote to take the next critical step in formalizing the House's impeachment inquiry into President Biden. For months, the White House and Hunter Biden have been stonewalling our investigation trying to hide the truth, and this stonewalling is what has caused us to be here today. Like Chairman Cole said yesterday, it is deeply sad and not something any of us want to be doing on this House floor, but it has become necessary. Following today's floor vote on H. Res. 918, the committees on Oversight and Accountability, Ways and Means, and Judiciary will have greater legal position and subpoena power to fully investigate allegations of influence peddling and wrongdoing by President Biden, his family, and his associates. The American people deserve transparency and accountability. They deserve the truth, and that is exactly what they are going to get from this Republican House.

Mrs. HOUCHIN

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 906 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Last night, the Rules Committee met and produced a rule, House Resolution 906, providing for the House's consideration of several pieces of legislation. The rule provides for H.R. 4468, the Choice in Automobile Retail Sales Act, or the CARS Act of 2023, to be considered under a structured rule. It provides for 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their designees and provides for one motion to recommit. The rule also provides for two measures related to education: H.R. 5933, the Defending Education Transparency and Ending Rogue Regimes Engaging in Nefarious Transactions Act, or the DETERRENT Act, and H.J. Res. 88 related to income-driven repayments for educational loans. H.R. 5933 would be considered under a structured rule with eight amendments made in order. It provides for 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce or their designees and provides for one motion to recommit. Finally, the second education measure to be considered under a closed rule is H.J. Res. 88, a joint resolution nullifying the final rule submitted by the Department of Education on income-driven repayment published on July 10, 2023. It also provides for 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce or their designees and provides for one motion to recommit. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and in support of the underlying pieces of legislation, beginning with H.R. 4468, the CARS Act. Mr. Speaker, it seems like every week we are here talking about another bureaucracy under the Biden administration overstepping their bounds. Again and again, these out-of-control agencies under this administration are chipping away at our personal freedom. This time, it is the EPA. Specifically, their proposed new standard is for two-thirds of all new vehicles to be electric by 2032. Last night, at the Rules Committee hearing, the bill's sponsor, Representative Walberg, laid out why this legislation is very clearly necessary. This misguided EPA rule takes away consumer choice. Americans should be able to have every option available to them in what vehicle they choose to drive, specifically because automobiles vary greatly in both reliability and cost, and consumers have different wants and needs. Market demand, not government mandates, should drive this industry. If nothing else, our colleagues should support this legislation because it is also not ready for prime time. Electric vehicles are more expensive. Until the cost comes down, we shouldn't be forcing these purchases on consumers. While Americans are experiencing crushing inflation, the infrastructure needed to support EVs does not exist. This rule disadvantages rural communities like mine and so many others across the country. Mr. Speaker, we all know it is a Biden administration priority to pour billions into green energy and clean cars. The President even recently invoked the Defense Production Act, spending $169 million in green energy handouts for electric heat pumps for water heaters. That doesn't seem like a top priority to meet the needs of our national defense. This EPA rule simply ignores the practicality, cost, and choice for Americans, and it is wrong. One doesn't need to look further than Secretary Granholm's recent failed and taxpayer-funded EV road trip. This PR stunt was ridiculed for highlighting the shortcomings of EVs rather than their potential and also resulted in a probe by the House Oversight and Energy and Commerce Committees. Most egregiously during this trip, the police were called when Secretary Granholm's staff blocked a charging station from use by a Georgia family with an infant in the middle of summer. It is unbelievable, really, but under President Biden's EPA, this would be reality for everyone everywhere in America. In addition, with the forced and accelerated transition to EVs, this EPA standard prioritizes benefits to China over the needs of the American people. As we all know, China controls many of the raw materials necessary for batteries and other components for EVs. By rushing to meet arbitrary green and climate agendas, the United States is more likely to solidify China's control of the energy future rather than save the planet. Mr. Speaker, we must be measured, trust market forces and American consumers, and not push top-down and expensive mandates. I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting H.R. 4468. Moving on to education, as a member of the Education and the Workforce Committee, I am glad to see floor consideration of H.R. 5933, the Defending Education Transparency and Ending Rogue Regimes Engaging in Nefarious Transactions Act, also known as the DETERRENT Act. This legislation would bring much-needed transparency, accountability, and clarity to foreign gift reporting requirements for colleges and universities across the Nation. I know many of our colleagues share our concerns over foreign adversaries infiltrating college campuses. Foreign adversaries like the Chinese Communist Party have been leveraging ties with institutions of higher education in order to further soft power goals for many years, including by shaping public narratives, influencing academic curricula, sowing social divisions, and undermining faith in our public institutions and our very system of government. It must stop. While it is clear that global partnerships and academic collaboration can be beneficial for U.S. students at our universities, it is our responsibility to carefully monitor foreign partnerships, particularly with countries of concern, and we must be steadfast in doing so. We must ensure our adversaries are not given a platform in our classrooms to work against the United States' values and interests. The Biden administration doesn't seem to take this responsibility seriously, though. They have not opened a single new investigation since taking office. Just this week, the Department of Education updated their section 117 FAQs. This was their first update to these FAQs since taking office 3 years ago, and it was undoubtedly a result of pressure from our work on the Education and the Workforce Committee in passing the DETERRENT Act. Because of the Biden administration's failure on section 117, the University of Pennsylvania alone took $14 million from unnamed contributors in China and Hong Kong and $2.4 million from unnamed contributors in Saudi Arabia since 2021. These amounts are well over the threshold of concern and are reasons alone to pass the DETERRENT Act. Back home in Indiana, our own Valparaiso University was home to a Confucius Institute. These institutes are funded and arranged by the People's Republic of China and have raised concerns about improper influence over teaching, espionage, and undermining Taiwan and its relationship with the United States. Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita investigated this Confucius Institute, and though it has now been closed, the need for oversight remains. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be an original supporter of this legislation, and I urge its passage. Finally, H.J. Res. 88 is a joint resolution nullifying President Biden's reckless income-driven repayment plans that would effectively forgive nearly half of the student loan debt and cost taxpayers at least $138 billion over the next 10 years. It would be a direct cost to taxpayers because this proposed student loan debt plan simply transfers the burden of paying these loans away from student loan borrowers and onto those taxpayers who have chosen not to go to college. A 2019 Government Accountability Office report found that 95,100 income-driven repayment plans were held by borrowers who reported zero income yet earned enough wages to make monthly student loan payments. Borrowers with these 95,100 income-driven repayment plans owed nearly $4 billion in outstanding direct loans. As to their family size, about 40,900 income-driven repayment plans were approved based on large family sizes of nine or more, which are atypical for income-driven repayment plans. GAO also found two income- driven repayment plans that were approved in which the borrower reported a family size of 93. Borrowers with atypical family sizes of nine or more owed almost $2.1 billion in outstanding direct loans. Given all of this reported fraud, I have significant concerns with the Biden administration's income-driven repayment plans. Since I went to college, tuition and fees have increased almost three times more than the rate of inflation, many due to subsidized tuition in the form of grants and loans that are already largely paid by taxpayers. Student debt in the U.S. is now over $1.6 trillion, with the average borrower owing over $37,000. Since 1980, the average cost of college attendance has risen 180 percent. We can't keep writing blank checks to universities, particularly when many are failing our students and graduation rates are poor. We need solutions that will drive down the cost of college. The income-driven repayment plan doesn't address the root cause of this issue, and it places an unfair burden on the taxpayer. I look forward to the consideration of this legislation that will actually address the underlying issue here, and I urge the passage of this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Langworthy).

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Van Orden).

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to note that Congress has provided $7.5 billion for electric vehicle chargers, and they have built zero so far. According to this article recently published by Politico, the United States has around 180,000 chargers today according to the Energy Department, including 41,000 of the type of chargers that can alleviate what they are calling range anxiety. They expect that the U.S. will need 1.2 million public chargers by 2030 to meet the demand, including 182,000 fast chargers. Again, I would say this rule is not ready for prime time. We don't even have the vehicle charging stations available, and we don't expect that if zero have been built, we will meet that demand. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include this article in the Record.

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time, if the gentleman is prepared to close.

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Moran).

Mrs. HOUCHIN

Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committees on Rules and House Administration be discharged from further consideration of H. Res. 731, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.