Harriet Hageman

Ms. HAGEMAN

Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding me this time. I rise in favor of S.J. Res. 38 to rescind the Biden administration's careless rule, which waives Buy America requirements for federally funded EV charging infrastructure projects. Instead of abandoning this crackpot environmental project that has wasted billions of taxpayer dollars with no tangible benefit, the Biden administration is now doubling down, waiving the Buy America requirements in a desperate attempt to save the floundering EV industry. Under this change, hard-earned taxpayer dollars will not only be wasted on useless charging infrastructure; no, now these funds will be squandered on useless charging infrastructure produced from foreign materials. Meanwhile, China continues to maintain an outsized hold on EV manufacturing and the critical materials required to construct them. In other words, rather than invest in domestic energy resources and infrastructure, the Biden administration will prop up a failed industry whose entire existence is dependent upon government subsidies while increasing our reliance on China and other adversarial nations. These actions will force millions of more Americans into a state of energy poverty and undermine American sovereignty all to kowtow before the climate gods. Mr. Speaker, we must resist the Biden administration's forceful attempts to transition us to an electric future, whatever that means, while also advocating for solutions that empower America to restore its energy and manufacturing independence. It is for these reasons that I sought to defund one of these useless EV programs through an amendment amid our appropriations process. The fact is that this rule is wrongheaded at the wrong time and should not be implemented. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Ms. HAGEMAN

Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life and legacy of Alfred Hill, Jr., a Wyomingite who courageously defended our country and whose life was marked by a track record of accomplishments and deeply rooted compassion for others. Born and raised in San Antonio, Texas, Alfred made the selfless decision to serve his country as a member of the U.S. Sixth Army from 1963-1966, completing a tour of duty in Korea and earning a promotion to the rank of specialist. Following his time in the Army, he earned a degree in business administration and accounting from the Universities of Texas and Montana. Alfred and his wife, Barbara, moved to Sheridan, Wyoming, in 2010 where he dedicated his time to supporting others and bettering the community. Alfred was an active member of the Rotary Club, served as a Scoutmaster, volunteered to deliver Meals on Wheels, and arranged hunting trips for disabled veterans through the Hunting with Heroes Program. Alfred valued his Christian faith and family above all else and cherished every minute he could spend with his grandchildren and great- grandchildren. Alfred passed away peacefully on the morning of October 20, leaving behind a legacy of selfless service in his community that will be forever cherished by his friends and family. I urge all my colleagues to join me in remembering the life of Alfred Hill, Jr.

Ms. HAGEMAN

Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, as if Biden's border crisis isn't bad enough, this administration is now seeking to convert our national parks, America's most cherished national treasures and historical sites, into tent cities for illegal aliens. Such actions not only debase our national heritage but blatantly violate numerous Federal statutes, including those covering management and protection of our national parks, NEPA, and the Administrative Procedure Act. How bad is this latest move to convert our national parks to ungovernable tent cities? While Wyoming's efforts to prevent catastrophic wildfires destroying our national forests are met with intensive scrutiny from the unelected bureaucrats in this administration, President Biden is categorically exempting the housing of thousands of individuals in our national parks from any type of environmental review. This double standard is indefensible, and the Biden administration's refusal to engage with Congress on this bill only confirms that fact. We need serious reforms to end the flood of illegal immigrants into our Nation, not half measures that fail to correct the disaster of this administration's own making and endanger what is the very best idea America ever had. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to protect our national parks by voting in favor of the bill.

Ms. HAGEMAN

Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment No. 105, which prohibits the Department of Labor from providing so-called climate literacy training. In September 2022, the Department of Labor released a ``Climate Adaptation Plan.'' This plan identifies the Department as the agency that developed the climate training and discloses that it is exploring collaboration with other agencies for the purpose of promoting climate literacy training. Madam Chair, this climate literacy training is yet another example of the extent to which radical climate hysteria has permeated every agency and subagency within the Biden administration. The Department of Labor's mission statement actually says that it is responsible ``To foster, promote, and develop the welfare of the wage earners, jobseekers, and retirees of the United States; improve working conditions; advance opportunities for profitable employment; and assure work-related benefits and rights.'' Perhaps it would be a surprise to the Department of Labor, but creating a Climate Adaptation Plan is not listed as either part of the agency's mission or priorities, yet here we are. It is time for the Biden administration to stop catering to a politically radical agenda and actually focus on governing. It is time for the Department of Labor to focus on its mission of fostering, promoting, and developing the welfare of the wage earners, jobseekers, and retirees. The purpose of my amendment is to ensure that the Department of Labor does just that, that it focuses on its true mission and leaves the politics of global warming out of it. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment to send a message to the DOL that we will no longer tolerate its foray into this nonsense. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, since President Biden took office, the American worker has suffered a 3.1 percent pay cut caused in large part by this administration's obsession with all things climate change and its war on affordable energy. The dramatic increases in energy costs have translated into higher costs for everything else, including food, housing, clothing, entertainment, and travel. This administration's war on affordable, domestic energy has thus dramatically and negatively affected the very people that the DOL was created to serve--the American worker. In short, American energy independence is good for the American worker, but the converse is also true; dependence on foreign-produced energy is bad for the American worker. Yet, that is the very outcome of these wrongheaded programs such as the DOL's climate literacy training. Such training won't improve the lot of the American worker, it will hurt it. Last year, U.S. inflation-adjusted household income fell by the most in over a decade. This reduction in income is the direct result of the inflationary pressures caused by the Biden administration's energy and climate policies. These policies have also impacted our labor force participation rate, which remains low and has never fully recovered since the pandemic. There are serious labor issues to address in this country, and while I would argue workforce development and job creation are not a role of the Federal Government at all, so long as the Department of Labor exists, it should be focused on how it will work with American industries to foster a strong labor market. Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, I rise in support of my amendment 106, which prevents the Department of Labor from carrying out the Environmental Justice grant activities described in its 2022 Climate Adaptation Plan. Similar to my previous amendment on climate literacy training, this is climate change political capture inside the agencies of the Federal Government. Since taking office, President Biden has issued several executive orders directing Federal agencies to address climate change and environmental justice--whatever that means. The DOL has been very busy in implementing that directive, and in the process it has deflected resources away from its mission and wasted taxpayer dollars on trying to implement the Green New Deal--with its Climate Adaptation Plan and Environmental Justice grant activities just being part of those efforts. The fact is that we don't need any such plan, and the justice that the DOL is peddling isn't justice at all. It is government-imposed wretchedness dressed up with nonsensical language, the very purpose of which is to pursue an agenda that has never been approved by this body. Madam Chair, I encourage my colleagues to vote for my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, while the Workforce Opportunity for Rural Communities does fund rural grant opportunities, this amendment would simply prevent the Department of Labor from infusing environmental justice priorities into the program and return its focus to building economic opportunity for rural Americans. In other words, it uses the money the way that it should. My amendment would block using money for things that it should not be using it for. While the YouthBuild program does on face value sound like a beneficial program for development of vocational skills, the 2022 climate plan outlines how skills can be developed for demand in industries, including the clean energy sector. The reality is that it is a misapplication of funds, and it is being used inappropriately. When outlining its so-called environmental justice work, the DOL's climate plan references a strategic investment, but such a waste of resources isn't an investment at all. It is a colossal waste of taxpayer money. Madam Chair, the Department of Labor is dedicating limited resources, manpower, and money towards implementing the left's climate change agenda while the very American citizens on whose behalf it is supposed to be advocating--the working man--lose ground every day, with inflation eating away at their buying power, individuals having to give up on work, and intergenerational government dependency being some of the fallout related to those policies. A vote for my amendment is a vote for sending a message to the Department of Labor and any Federal agency engaged in pushing radical climate change initiatives. It is time for the DOL to focus on the job the American people expect it to do. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment No. 107, which prohibits the Department of Education from carrying out strategies listed in the Department's report titled: ``Strategies for Increasing Diversity and Opportunity in Higher Education.'' In June 2023, the Supreme Court through the decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard rightfully ended affirmative action and processes related to the admission of students into higher educational institutions based upon racial factors. This landmark case has finally ended affirmative action, an agenda that its supporters lauded for maintaining equity and inclusion, was actually founded upon, implemented, and pursued for the purpose of furthering racial discrimination. As Justice Roberts has previously said: ``The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.'' I agree. That, however, is not the way that the Biden administration sees it. The Biden administration and the Federal Department of Education don't seem to care what the Supreme Court says and have every intention to continue implementing programs that directly violate the Fair Admissions decision. The current Federal Department of Education has done what agencies like this do best: They release a report that, while having no force or effect of law, provides a roadmap for colleges and universities to effectively continue their race-based admission practices. The Federal Department of Education, in other words, is simply continuing with its race-based discrimination, just calling it by another name. My amendment is designed to block the Department of Education's efforts in that regard, and I encourage my colleagues to vote in favor. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, this report, released in September of 2023, describes the strategies that colleges and universities may use to continue their discriminatory diversity, equity, and inclusion agenda by suggesting admission procedures including a holistic review of student candidates emphasizing such factors related to their experiences with hardship, including racial discrimination, sources of inspiration or demonstration of resiliency, and other qualities with clear racial undertones. Let me be clear. Admission practices and professional recruiting standards are areas in which merit should be the sole and primary focus when selecting new candidates. My amendment prohibits the Department of Education from carrying out its strategies listed in the Department's report and ensures compliance with the Supreme Court's decision. Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes,'' and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, I rise in support of my amendment 108 which prevents the Department of Education from carrying out its ``American History and Civics Education'' priorities referenced in the Federal Register titled: ``Proposed Priorities-American History and Civics Education.'' Under this 2021 proposed rule, the Department of Education sought to institute a variety of priorities under the National Activities program and within American History and Civics Academies seeking to promote a divisive educational curriculum. The real agenda behind these priorities is to attack our Nation's history and pursue an agenda to allegedly address what it refers to as systemic marginalization, biases, inequities, and discriminatory policy and practice to allegedly help students understand their own biases when reviewing information. What complete and total hogwash and drivel. While the Department was forced to abandon its efforts to institute its offensive agenda, it has also disclosed its intent to maintain what it refers to as invitational priorities, meaning it will encourage others to do what it cannot. Madam Chair, our children deserve to be educated on history, mathematics, English, science, and other programs that are accurate, robust, educational, and that will prepare them to join the workforce and be productive members of society. They do not deserve to be indoctrinated into far-left hatred of America. My amendment would block the Department of Education from instituting these insidious priorities. I encourage my colleagues to vote in favor of it, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, as I have said numerous times before, critical race theory and related programs are simply a mechanism utilized by the radical left to assert their control and to further divide Americans. Madam Chair, my amendment is one small effort in combating the left's effort to turn our educational system into indoctrination camps, pushing racist policies that are not grounded in reality. Once again, my constituents are fed up with the failures of the Department of Education in actually educating our children while using our taxpayer dollars to destroy America from within. Support for my amendment will send a message to the Department of Education and other Federal agencies who pursue implementation of critical race theory initiatives that their time is up; that we are no longer going to allow them to use our educational system to implement policies that are not only based on lies but that put Americans against Americans. Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote for my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. HAGEMAN

Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3496 makes technical amendments to update statutory references to certain provisions in title 25, U.S. Code, and corrects related technical errors. According to the Office of the Law Revision Counsel, or OLRC for short, the purpose of editorial reclassification is ``to reorganize areas of law that have outgrown their original boundaries, or to eliminate organizational units that are no longer efficient.'' Without altering any statutory language, OLRC relocates and rearranges provisions to make the organization of titles more logical and accessible. As a result, statutory references in other titles of the code must also be updated. In September of 2016, the OLRC moved provisions from chapter 14 in title 25 into four new chapters toward the end of title 25. The reauthorization was necessary because more than 900 sections had accumulated in this chapter over years of legislating. Another small number of provisions within chapter 14 were transferred to other locations within the code. The text and some provisions in chapters 14 and 19 were omitted in order to bring the coverage of the code into line with current classification practices with respect to general and permanent laws. This is a routine exercise as these bills were prepared by OLRC pursuant to its responsibility under section 285(b) of title 2, U.S.C., and under the Judiciary Committee's responsibility for laws pertaining to the codification and revisions of the U.S. Code. No substantive statutory text was repealed or altered and this bill merely improves the organizational structure of the material in the U.S. Code. In the 115th Congress, Representative Issa sponsored a bill, which the Judiciary Committee ordered reported, making the necessary changes to cross-references in other titles of the Code affected by this editorial reclassification. The Committee similarly favorably reported this bill during the 117th Congress. H.R. 3496 is an updated version of this legislation, which the Judiciary Committee passed this Congress by voice. Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this legislation.

Ms. HAGEMAN

Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, I rise in favor of my amendment No. 43, which would prohibit HUD remote work agreements when the employee is working within 50 miles of a HUD office. Madam Chair, HUD's handbook defines remote work as an arrangement where the employee is not required to report to an agency worksite on a regular or recurring basis. It then defines two forms of remote work, one being near HUD office, which is within 50 miles of a HUD office, to work remotely. As an example, it cites an employee who would normally be based in HUD's Robert C. Weaver headquarters in Washington, D.C., who is allowed to work from their home in Arlington, Virginia. Now, Madam Chair, they are not even trying to hide it anymore. The agencies are baking into their policies unseen benefits and perks for bureaucrats who quite frankly aren't entitled to them and for which the taxpaying public is paying, yet we are not receiving an adequate return on our investment. Thousands of congressional staffers commute to the Capitol building every morning from the surrounding neighborhoods, whether they live in Arlington, Alexandria, or cities in Maryland. Why can't the agency employees do the same? Pre-COVID, the oversight of Federal agencies was slim, as was the accountability that the American people are entitled to. Today, it is even harder to monitor the efficacy, the efficiency, and the legal compliance of many agency employees because we don't even know where they are. Are they at home doing laundry when they should be processing applications? Are they picking their children up from school during work hours? Are they taking a 2-hour lunch because there is no oversight? We don't know. I believe that if you are being paid by the American people, you should work for the American people. My amendment is designed to bring some semblance of accountability back to HUD. Madam Chair, I encourage my colleagues to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, HUD's remote work policy shows that its employees are not showing up to work at the Robert C. Weaver building but are instead spending their days in the homes, coffee shops, and other locations across the greater D.C. area. My amendment addresses that situation and requires the employees to show up at their job. Bureaucracy already moves way too slowly, even when the employees are working in the same building, down the hall from one another, and with access to all of the work accoutrements that are necessary for them to do their jobs. HUD's policy means that today we are not even sure if they are working in the same State. That is unacceptable. The basic principles of oversight and accountability require that employees go to work. Basic principles of avoiding further waste, fraud, and abuse means not leaving Federal agency buildings barren. COVID is over. It is time to return to work. The Republican majority has made clear that we believe government employees should be working at their places of employment. My amendment furthers that policy. Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment No. 57 to H.R. 4820, which would prevent DOT from carrying out the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program. The Biden administration's stated goal for this latest government boondoggle is to utilize taxpayer funding to strategically deploy electric vehicle charging stations across America. Not only is such an endeavor not the Federal Government's responsibility, but this program also doesn't work, won't work, and will end up wasting massive amounts of Federal money. You need no further evidence than Secretary Granholm's recent experience of trying to take an electric vehicle out for a spin, a trip that ended in disaster and confirmed that EVs are overpriced, unreliable, and infeasible without massive Federal subsidies. Mr. Chairman, the Biden administration through this policy and others that were buried in the so-called Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act is attempting to use taxpayer money to implement the Green New Deal, a pie-in-the-sky idea that is not only destined to fail but will waste massive amounts of money and further impoverish American citizens. The Biden administration is pursuing such boondoggles despite the fact that we are already facing out-of-control inflation, increasing energy costs, and bone-crushing grocery bills, all because of Bidenomics, all because this administration is economically illiterate and obsessed with furthering the agenda of the U.N. and the World Economic Forum. My fellow Wyoming citizens and Americans as a whole are more concerned with the prospects of heating their homes, putting food on the table, and taking care of their families. Yet, what is the Biden administration focused on? Banning the internal combustion engine and forcing everyone into electric vehicles that won't work effectively in the vast majority of the country. My amendment is designed to stop the Biden administration from continuing its wasteful and profligate spending on projects that do not provide a benefit to the American public. Mr. Chair, I urge my fellow Members to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time. Rather than supporting our domestic energy production and investing in much-needed roadway infrastructure projects, the Biden administration has opted to continue skewing the definition of infrastructure to pursue its electric vehicle and renewable energy subsidy programs. The Biden administration, in other words, continues to do the bidding of the Chinese Communist Party and the richest among us who can afford electric vehicles while leaving everyday Americans behind. Let me be clear. This technology that DOT is pursuing and implementing has a track record chock full of failure, particularly within my State as the freezing temperatures wreak havoc on batteries while also severely limiting the range of these vehicles. We have story after story of electric vehicles being limited to less than 100 miles in range as they are driven over our high mountain passes in freezing temperatures. This effort to force everyone into electric vehicles is not only wrongheaded and not within the purview of DOT but downright dangerous. It is also important to note that under this program, State recipients are expected to construct vehicle charging stations within 50 miles of each other on major highways. This requirement alone is not feasible when confronted with the reality of Wyoming's vast rural terrain and wide-open spaces. There are 80,000 vehicles a day that drive across I-80 in Wyoming. I- 80 is the most important commercial transportation link from the East to the West Coast, and in Wyoming it varies in elevation from 4,000 feet to 8,000 feet. Electric passenger cars and electric 18-wheelers are simply not feasible in Wyoming. Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, let me be clear. This is yet another attempt by the Biden administration to force us to transition to an electric future, whatever that may mean. It can only do so if it uses our money to artificially prop up the electric vehicle industry that could otherwise never survive in a free market system, at least not in its current space. Mr. Chairman, it is past time for this administration to halt its wasteful allocation of billions of hard-earned taxpayer money on the infrastructure that is destined to fail. Mr. Chair, I urge all my colleagues to support my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in favor of my amendment No. 58, which would prohibit the Department of Transportation from funding remote work agreements. The DOT defines its telework agreements where an employee performs work away from the typical office location and is not expected to report to the agency official work site on a frequent, regular, or recurring basis. Mr. Chairman, as I have stood in this Chamber and said before on numerous occasions, it is time for our Federal Government employees to return to work. Under the panic related to COVID-19, we watched as our Federal agency buildings occupancy dwindled to almost nothing. What was the consequence? A substantial reduction in the timely provision of Federal services to the citizens of this country. It should not come as a surprise to anyone that when our Federal employees don't show up for work, the work of the Federal Government doesn't get done. Now, some may say that is okay, but what it means in practice is that our tax refunds are not timely processed, our passport office effectively shuts down, creating enormous backlogs for this important service, and our veterans suffer. I have now filed several of these let's make our government employees return to work amendments to other appropriations bills. This is a priority of the Republican Members of the 118th Congress and a priority of mine. I know how hard our miners, farmers, ranchers, waitresses, nurses, construction contractors, home builders, grocery store clerks, and others in the private sector work. They didn't have the luxury of working from home, COVID or no COVID. They have powered our economy over the last couple of years, and we owe them a debt of gratitude. We also should have enough respect for them to demand that the people who earn a paycheck because of their tax dollars actually show up for work. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.