Kevin Kiley

Mr. KILEY

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, we have some good news in the bill that has just been released that is a major tax bill here in the House of Representatives that will be moving through the House and likely coming up for a vote very soon. The good news is that several measures that I have cosponsored that provide important tax relief have made it into this tax bill. I wanted to provide a few examples because these are significant ways in which we are now using the tax code in order to stimulate the right kinds of economic activity. One of the measures that made it into the bill is H.R. 2673, the American Innovation and R&D Competitiveness Act. What this does is it eliminates the 5-year amortization requirement for research and experimental expenditures thereby allowing continued expensing of such expenditures in the taxable years in which they are incurred. What this does is it enhances the competitiveness of U.S. companies particularly when it comes to competition with China and otherwise across the board. Another provision that is very important that has found its way into this bill is H.R. 2406, the ALIGN Act. What it does is it makes permanent the expensing of certain new business equipment. This expensing allows the deduction of the full amount of an expensable item in the same taxable year instead of being depreciated under the current IRS rules. Once again, this is a very important provision for stimulating manufacturing and enhancing our competitiveness here in the United States. A third measure which has made its way into this tax bill is H.R. 4970; that is the Protect Innocent Victims of Taxation After Fire Act. This measure which I have cosponsored excludes from gross income for income tax purposes any amount received after 2019 and before 2026 by an individual taxpayer as a qualified wildfire relief payment. It defines such payment as compensation for expenses or losses incurred as a result of a federally declared forest or range fire disaster. So this is just common sense and much-needed. It corrects an injustice for Californians who had suffered greatly because of our State's catastrophic wildfires and then found they were going to be taxed on the settlements and compensation that they received. Finally, within this broader tax bill is another measure that I have cosponsored, H.R. 3238, the Affordable Housing Credit Improvement Act. Now, this does a number of things to stimulate housing production that we so direly need in the State of California. It increases the per capita dollar amount of the affordable housing credit and its minimum ceiling amount beginning in 2023, and it extends the inflation adjustments for such amounts. The low-income housing tax credit subsidizes the acquisition, construction, and rehabilitation of affordable rental housing for low- and moderate-income tenants. That is what we are talking about here. This measure that has now been included in the broader tax bill extends and updates it to create new housing opportunities in California and across the country. It also increases the number of credits allocated to each State; that is, the legislation would increase the number of credits available to States by 50 percent for the next 2 years and make the temporary 12.5 percent increase secured in 2018 permanent which has already helped build more than 59,000 affordable housing units nationwide. It also increases the number of affordable housing projects that can be built using private activity bonds. This provision would stabilize financing for workforce housing projects built using private activity bonds by decreasing the amount of private activity bonds needed to secure housing credit funding. As a result, projects will have to carry less debt and more projects will be eligible to receive funding. Finally, this improves the housing credit program to better serve at- risk and underserved communities. This legislation would also make improvements to the program to better serve veterans, victims of domestic violence, formerly homeless students, Native-American communities, and rural Americans. I look forward to the opportunity to support this bill and enact these provisions into law that will stimulate our economy, will stimulate housing, and will provide the full measure of compensation for wildfire victims in our State. Tax Relief for Fire Hardening Homes

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, we recently received some good news, as the United States Supreme Court has decided to hear a case called City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, which could mark a turning point for the homelessness crisis in California. Just to provide some context, let's consider the full breadth of that crisis. It has been 20 years since Governor Newsom rolled out his plan--he was then the mayor of San Francisco at the time--to end homelessness in San Francisco within a decade. It has now been 20 years since he announced that, and this anniversary happened to coincide with the Department of Housing and Urban Development's annual homelessness report to Congress. Among the findings of the HUD report are that California has the highest homelessness rate of any State. California has had a 30.5 percent increase in homelessness from 2007 to 2023. That is the highest increase of any State. California accounts for 28 percent of America's homeless and about 50 percent--that is half--of the Nation's unsheltered homeless. San Francisco, for its part, has the second highest percent of unsheltered homeless youth and unsheltered veterans of any city in the country. So there are a lot of reasons for these appalling statistics and the tragic realities that they represent. It is political failure where we have had policies dealing with crime, for example, that have released many people from prisons too early and don't have appropriate consequences for criminal activity. There is our State's soaring cost of living that is a result of many different political failures. There is the inadequacy of our State's approach to mental health and substance abuse. Then there is the complete wastefulness and lack of accountability when it comes to the billions and billions and billions of dollars that are being spent at the State and local level to address the homelessness crisis. In fact, as the State has continued to spend more and more--many, many times more--than it has ever spent, the homelessness problem has only continued to get worse, and, there is, in fact, an audit coming in California that is finally going to look at homelessness spending. Nonetheless, on top of all of these political and policy failures, there have been significant judicial impediments to dealing with the homelessness crisis; that is, a series of decisions by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals beginning with the Boise case and its progeny that have made it difficult, if not impossible, to enforce anti-camping ordinances and to otherwise clear out homelessness encampments from public spaces. Mr. Speaker, if you talk to city leaders, county leaders, and leaders of municipalities across California, they will tell you that this line of cases is the bane of their existence and that it is a significant obstacle in the way of commonsense policies for dealing with homelessness. So the Supreme Court has now taken up this case, and I am very hopeful that the Court is going to do the right thing and that it is going to restore the proper authority to local officials to deal with homelessness in public spaces. The initial line of cases that the Court will be examining is based on a very distorted view of the Eighth Amendment, and so I believe that the legal argument here is one that will coincide with what is best from a policy perspective. So I will be urging the Court to make the right decision here, but at the same time, if and when the Court does that, when it provides these new tools to folks at the local level, we will finally have the political accountability for our State leaders to address homelessness in the right way so that we don't another 20 years from now continue to set the standard for having the most homelessness of any State in the entire country. Important Tax Relief

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, the Biden administration's Department of Labor has announced a new independent contractor rule that amounts to one of the most potentially harmful economic policies that has come out of this administration or any administration in recent history. It is estimated that this new rule, which restricts significantly the ability to be an independent contractor, to work as a freelancer, to be your own boss, could cost upwards of 3.2 to 3.6 million full and part-time jobs. Also, here is the thing. This is not a matter of speculation. Sometimes, when you have a proposed policy, you can do an economic analysis and try to forecast what the effects might be. However, in this case, we know exactly what the effects are going to be, because we have already seen them play out in California. This new independent contractor rule is based upon California's infamous AB5 law, which was signed by Governor Gavin Newsom in 2019. The effects of that law have been absolutely devastating. In fact, a study out of George Mason University just a few weeks ago found that the law, in and of itself, has reduced self-employment in California by over 10 percent and has reduced overall employment by over 4 percent. That is potentially hundreds of thousands of jobs that have been lost in California because of this one law. That is what really makes this law uniquely devastating. California has a lot of very harmful labor and economic policies, and we are seeing a lot from this administration, as well. Oftentimes, as a worker, as an entrepreneur, as a small business owner, there is a death-by-a-million-cuts effect where the costs imposed on your enterprise just add up to the point that things don't pencil out and you have to close down shop, lay people off, or move out of the State. Well, AB5 was different in that it was one particular law that, by itself, cost many, many people their livelihoods, completely upended their whole career with a stroke of a pen. We saw this effect immediately after AB5 passed in 2019. Before it had even taken effect, we heard countless stories of people who all of a sudden had no ability to earn a living. The careers that they had built over years, over decades, were snatched from them, were taken away with the effect of this one single law. Therefore, after the law went into effect, in a matter of weeks, we compiled a whole book full of stories, AB5 stories, and many, many more have been added since. As this new rule is about to take effect, I am planning to share some of those stories with the American public so that folks who are outside California know what is in store if and when this new Biden administration labor rule takes effect. For today's story, this is from John, who is a guest orchestral conductor. Very shortly after AB5 took effect, he said: I depend on my contractor status to maintain sustainable fees while not fleecing orchestras. He says: Because of this bill, AB5, I just lost my first scheduled job with an orchestra. That is $9,000 that would have put a dent in my student loans or helped pay my insurance, or paid for food and shelter is now gone, all because of AB5. There are countless other stories that I will be sharing from this floor. If you are an independent contractor in California who lost your livelihood because of AB5, please feel free to reach out and share your story with my office so that I can share it with folks across the country and certainly folks here in this House of Representatives as a warning about what the effects of this legislation are going to be. Now, we are fighting against this policy, this new independent contractor rule, which will destroy millions of livelihoods. We are fighting against it in every way that we can, using every tool available. First, I am introducing legislation under the Congressional Review Act to nullify the new rule. This is a fast-track procedure where Congress can override an executive agency. Second, I have secured language in the Labor Appropriations bill providing that no funds may be spent to enforce the rule. This would effectively render it a dead letter. Third, I have joined with Representative Elise Stefanik to author the Modern Worker Empowerment Act, which creates a clear legal standard to protect independent workers. Fourth, I have endorsed the Department of Labor Succession Act, which has already passed through committee, which is going to stop Acting Secretary Julie Su from remaining in that position indefinitely. Julie Su is Biden's nominee to be Secretary of Labor. She was rejected by the Senate. Her nomination was returned after almost a year last year in the face of bipartisan opposition, yet President Biden has insisted on keeping her at the helm of the Labor Department as an unconfirmed Secretary. Why is that? Because Julie Su was the architect of AB5 itself. She was Gavin Newsom's Secretary of Labor in California and was the chief enforcer of AB5. That is why, for anyone who questions that the new national policy is based on AB5, why in the world would they promote, of all people, the architect and lead enforcer of AB5 into this new role, if not to do the exact same thing for the whole country? Fifth, as chair of the House Subcommittee on Workforce Protections, I will continue to conduct rigorous oversight of the Department of Labor, and we will do everything possible to protect American workers against this independent contractor rule and other administration overreaching policies. Finally, it is worth mentioning that there are now two different lawsuits, as we anticipated, challenging the independent contractor rule. One is reviving a previous challenge to a previous version of this rule on procedural grounds. The second, which was recently filed by a group called Fight for Freelancers that has partnered with Pacific Legal Foundation, is challenging the rule itself on a few grounds--on the ground that it doesn't comply with the statutory authority that has been granted to the agency, that it violates a statute that prohibits arbitrary rulemaking by an agency, and, finally, it is a constitutional challenge saying that the vagueness of the law essentially amounts to a violation of due process. That is all to say that we have hope of stopping this destructive policy from taking effect, and I will continue to share the stories of those who have already been affected in California in hopes that we can save millions of American workers the same fate. Homelessness Crisis in California

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commend a new initiative by the business community and law enforcement in Placer County spearheaded by the district attorney's office called the Placer County Retail Theft Initiative. You can see here a printout of window signs that businesses in Placer County can now display. It says: ``This business is protected by Placer County's Retail Theft Initiative. Warning, Placer County is invested in holding those who steal from our residents and businesses accountable to the greatest extent the State law allows.'' Now, the reason this is necessary is that there has been an epidemic of retail theft in California, owing to very misguided changes to the State's criminal laws, as well as very misguided choices by certain jurisdictions to defund police and to have prosecutors who refuse to enforce the law. What Placer County, a county in my district, is doing is saying that we are not one of those jurisdictions. We are a pro-public safety county and, what's more, even though the State's criminal laws around retail theft are very weak, the county is using the full authority that exists in those laws, maximizing the accountability that can be brought to bear on those who choose to steal. Therefore, these signs have been distributed. You can actually get them from the district attorney's office. My office has some, as well, if you are a business and would like to display one in your window. It serves as a real deterrent. What is making this possible is: the Placer County Board of Supervisors has voted to accept a $2 million grant for the Placer County District Attorney's Office new retail theft vertical prosecution team. With these grant funds, the DA's office will add a full-time deputy district attorney, a district attorney investigator, and a crime analyst to work on the investigation and prosecution of retail theft crimes. The vertical prosecution structure provided by the grant allows for cases to be handled by the same investigator and prosecutor from case filing through adjudication. You can see here the broad coalition that is behind this initiative. It is not just the DA's office. It is the sheriff's office; it is the Roseville Police Department; it is the Rocklin Police Department; the Auburn Police Department; the Lincoln Police Department; Colfax, as well as the business community of the Roseville area chamber. You have the Lincoln chamber, you have the Rocklin area chamber, you have the Auburn chamber, the Foresthill chamber, Colfax chamber, Loomis Basin chamber, an entire coalition that has come together in order to make this a very clear deterrent. Again, this is an actual sign that businesses can have in their window so that thieves who are walking by will see that, if they choose to prey upon this business, if they choose to steal, then that crime is going to be reported, and they are going to be held accountable to the full extent that the law allows. In this way, I believe Placer County is setting a model for jurisdictions across California. In fact, this isn't the first time that Placer has done this. Placer County was also the first county in the State of California to obtain a murder conviction for fentanyl. Again, the State's laws, similar to retail theft, on fentanyl are not as strong as they should be. The legislature and Governor have refused to act to pass stronger laws, but the district attorney's office has managed to use the authority within existing law to bring the full measure of accountability on those who prey on the public. As Placer County District Attorney Morgan Gire said: ``Placer County is known as a problem solver on key issues affecting our State. Our county's collaborative and innovative approach to statewide problems, coupled with our ability to address those problems proactively, makes Placer County a leader in addressing challenges affecting our quality of life. This retail theft initiative shows that we are united and dedicated to fighting retail theft in our region.'' It is one reason, by the way, why folks want to come to our county. While the population of California has been steadily declining, it has actually been increasing in our county, and a major reason is the dedication of those who are in public safety roles and support that exists in our community for supporting law enforcement as a key facet of maintaining our quality of life. Now, of course, you can look at other parts of the State, like San Francisco, where you are seeing precisely the opposite, where there is this downward spiral of retailers continuing to close. It is like a new business every day seems to shut down. The city itself is losing population faster than any major city in U.S. history. Ultimately, the State of California needs to reform its broken criminal justice system. Initiatives like Prop 47 have dramatically reduced the consequences that are available for retail theft, and for open drug use. Other policies like Prop 57, Realignment, and many more have weakened our ability to hold offenders accountable. What Placer County has shown is that, even with being dealt a bad hand by the State, it is still possible for the community to come together to insist on accountability, and I think that what they are doing is a great model. I would certainly encourage any businesses within Placer who are seeing this to pick up one of these signs in order to protect your establishment. Independent Contractor Rule

Mr. KILEY

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. KILEY

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, the situation at the southern border is utterly untenable. It is an urgent national security and public safety crisis. Everyone knows it. The American people know it. Members on both sides of the aisle in this House know it, and the President sure ought to know it. What we have seen is absolutely beyond anything we have ever seen before. In the 3 years of this administration, there have been 6.7 million illegal border crossings and 1.7 million got-aways, folks that just evaded detection by Border Patrol. In the last month, we had days where there were 10,000 illegal crossings in a single day. These numbers are staggering, and they are unprecedented, but what is the meaning of those numbers? On the one hand, it has been an absolute bonanza for the cartels. On the other hand, it has been an absolute tragedy for the American people, as we have truly incredible amounts of fentanyl coming into the country, taking the lives of young people in every community in our country every day. We have more and more people suffering through the horror of human trafficking and being victimized. We have growing national security risks every day with the increasing likelihood of terrorists coming into this country, putting all Americans at risk. Mr. Speaker, this isn't brain surgery. We know what a secure border looks like. The House has passed legislation, the Secure the Border Act, with commonsense reforms, beefing up our border security with physical barriers, with technology, with Border Patrol, with commonsense legal reforms to the parole and the asylum process, even reinstating remain in Mexico. That one simple step would solve a good portion of this problem. This should not be a political issue. It is not a partisan issue. It is a basic matter of governance. It is the most basic thing that Americans ought to be able to expect from our government. It is the most basic responsibility of a civil society and of a nation-state. That is why Americans--Democrat, Republican, Independent, it doesn't matter--are urgently calling for change. This resolution gives voice to that call for change, and I am proud to support it.

Mr. KILEY

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his remarks. I again thank Mr. Raskin for working with me on this legislation, as well as Chair Jordan and Ranking Member Nadler for helping to get it through the Judiciary Committee with unanimous bipartisan support. I very much look forward to seeing this bill get to the President's desk and get signed into law this year. I urge all of my colleagues here in the House to support it. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers. I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today, I am presenting bipartisan legislation to protect vital First Amendment freedoms from being infringed and chilled by overreaching government actions. I thank my colleagues across the aisle for their support of this issue. This bill prohibits the Federal Government from compelling a journalist to disclose documents, communications, or other information obtained or created as part of the journalist's job. Our Founders chose to enshrine the freedom of the press in the First Amendment of the Constitution, alongside freedom of speech and other fundamental freedoms, because it is a lynchpin of republican government. It is vital to the functioning of a free and democratic society. As James Madison said: ``A popular government without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy; or, perhaps both. . . . And a people who mean to be their own governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.'' Well, the most commonly understood form of potential abuse involves the output of a free press; that is, censorship. It is also critically important to protect the input; that is, the work of journalists in reporting on the affairs of the Nation. A key aspect of freedom of the press is the pursuit of the truth without government entanglements or intimidation. If the government forces journalists to reveal sources or work product, it could undermine the gathering of information that is in the public interest. That is why 32 States and the District of Columbia have expressly protected this right with statutory shield laws, and 49 States have either a statutory or common law privilege that protects journalists from compelled disclosure. These laws allow journalists to do their jobs without fear that the government will unreasonably seize their records. Today's legislation, the PRESS Act, does the same thing at the Federal level. Administrations from both parties have been guilty of unjustly targeting journalists and using compulsory processes to obtain information from them and their sources. Now, over the years, versions of this very bill have received widespread support from across the political spectrum, and indeed, this bill passed through the Judiciary Committee on a unanimous, bipartisan vote. Mr. Speaker, liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and journalists are often the first to expose government fraud, waste, abuse, and encroachments on personal freedoms. In a free country, we need to make sure that the government cannot unmask journalists' sources without good cause, and that is why the need for this legislation is so strong. This bill provides those protections, and it is long past time for this legislation to be signed into law. I will close by again thanking my Democrat colleagues for their support and especially my fellow Judiciary Committee colleague, Mr. Raskin. This bill is proof that it is possible for Congress to set politics aside and act to protect the rights of all Americans. Mr. Speaker, I urge support, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous material on H.R. 4250.

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4250) to maintain the free flow of information to the public by establishing appropriate limits on the federally compelled disclosure of information obtained as part of engaging in journalism, and for other purposes.

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. KILEY

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, the Department of Labor has just announced its so-called independent contractor rule which severely restricts or even eliminates gig work, freelancing, self-employment, and alternate work arrangements that 70 million Americans have chosen. With this unilateral action, the Biden administration has taken a sledgehammer to the American workforce putting millions of livelihoods at risk. This is not a matter of speculation. We have already seen the damage this policy has caused in California. Biden's rule is modeled on California's infamous AB 5 law which was signed by Gavin Newsom in 2019 and which Newsom's own deputy chief of staff called ``one of the most destructive pieces of legislation in the past 20 years.'' Countless livelihoods have been destroyed with the law's victims coming from over 600 professions. That is the stark reality, and that is what is now in store for workers across the entire country. As a warning to those who could see their life's work taken from them by this new policy, I wanted to take a few minutes to highlight each and every one of those 600 professions, 600 professions that have been devastated by AB 5 in California and that the Biden administration is now targeting Nationwide: 3D animators; 3D designers; accompanists; actors; acupuncturists; adjunct faculty; adult performers; aerobic instructors; after-school program vendors; animal shelter consultants; animal trainers; animators; announcers; antique property appraisers; appointment setters; architectural designers; architectural rendering illustrators; art appraisers; art consultants; art curators; art teachers; art therapists; artists; ASL/CDI interpreters; athletic coaches; auctioneers; audio engineers; audio mixers; audio techs; audiovisual techs; authors; babysitters; ballet companies; ballet dancers; ballet musicians; balloon artists; bandleaders; barbershop quartets; bartenders, beekeepers; bloggers; boat captains; boat hull divers; body painting artists; body piercers; bookkeepers; brand ambassadors; brand advertising and design professionals; bubble fairies; bubbleologists; bug bounty programs; building inspectors; burlesque dancers; CAD designers; cake decorators; cam girls; camera directors; camera operators; camera techs; cancer registrars; captioners; caricature artists; caregivers; cartographers; cartoonists; casino night dealers; casting assistants; casting directors; catastrophe adjusters; caterers; celebrity impersonators; certified athletic trainers; childbirth educators; children's theater companies; chiropractors; choir directors; choreographers; Christmas carolers; churches; cinematographers; circus performers; clergy; closed captioners; clowns; club industry; college admissions consultants; color guard instructors; columnists; comedians; commercial drone pilots; commercial producers; community playhouses; composers; computer consultants; computer programmers; computer technicians; computer validation; computer independent testers; concealed carry weapons instructors; construction workers; consultants; content artists; content developers; contract reviewers; contract tech writers; contributing editors; convention booth installers; convention decorators; copyeditors; copywriters; costume designers; costumed characters; counselors; court reporters; digital court reporters; notaries; CPR/first aid instructors; creative directors; crop dusters; crowd funding specialists; cultural music and dance groups; dance studio owners; dance teachers; dance troupes; dancers; dental billers; dental consultants; dental technicians; deposition reporters; designers; dieticians; digital animators; digital imaging technicians; digital marketing consultants; digital marketing specialists; directors of operations; disaster cleanup services; DJs; dog groomers; dog trainers; doulas; drafters; drag queen performers; dress designers; drivers; editors; education counselors; education specialists; embroiders; emcees; emergency/disaster response services; engineers; entertainers; environmental engineers; environmental inspectors; environmental planning consultants; environmental technicians; equestrian professionals; ESL teachers; estheticians; ethical hackers; event carpenters; event coordinators; event crew; event EMT/paramedics; event florists; event planners; event producers; event production assistants; event production managers; event riggers; event staff members; event technologists; executive coaches; executive recruiters; exhibit installation technicians; fabricators; face painting artists; family caregivers; farm consultants; farriers; festival producers; festivals. In film, TV, and presentations you have animators; art directors; assistant cameramen; assistant directors; assistant video editors; boom operators; cameramen; casting personnel; colorists; composers; costumers; COVID compliance officers; crafts services; deck managers; dialect coaches; drone operators; editors; electricians; executive producers; foley artists; foley engineers; gaffers; grips; hairstylists; jib and crane operators; line producers; locations scouts; makeup artists; narrators; producers; production assistants; production coordinators; production managers; prop personnel; script supervisors; script writers; set construction personnel; set designers; set medics; sound design artists; sound recordists; special effects artists; special effects personnel; stage managers; stunt coordinators; stuntmen/women; talent agents; teleprompter operators; transportation personnel; visual effects artists; voice teachers; wardrobe artists; storyboard artists; digital info technicians; and finally within film and TV presentations, directors. Also included in the list are finance experts; fire performers; fitness instructors; fly fishing guides; food deliverers; forensic cleaners; forensic nurses; foresters; franchisee business owners; funeral officiants; game developers; genealogists; golf caddies; grant researchers; graphic designers; handymen; health coaches; healthcare IT professionals; hearing reporters; high school and college sports reporters; holistic healers; home health care providers; home health rehabilitation therapists; home health social workers; home organizers; home school program vendors; home services providers; horse ranches; horse trainers; horseback riding instructors; hypnotherapists; illustrators; independent filmmaking crews; independent owner-operator truckers; indie film documentarians; indie film producers; insurance adjusters; insurance brokers; insurance inspectors; interpreters; interventionists; IT consultants; IT techs; journalists; audio journalists, radio journalists, TV; film and theater productions; jugglers; keynote speakers; lactation consultants; landscape designers; legal support; legal transcriptionists; life coaches; lifeguards; lighting designers; lighting directors; lighting technicians; live caricaturists; livestreamers; loan agents; loan officers; location managers; logging-based owner operators; luthiers (guitar makers); magicians; makeup artists; manicurists; mariachi bands; market analysts; marketing and ad agencies; marriage and family therapists; massage therapists; medical billing specialists; medical models; medical transcriptionists; medical translators; meeting and conventions planners; mental health professionals; metal fabricators; midwives; model builders; models; mold makers; mortgage bankers; mortgage brokers; mortgage field inspectors; movement instructors; Mrs. Clauses; multimedia artists; museum consultants; museum mountmakers; music arrangers; music composers; music contractors; music copyists; music directors; music producers; music tour managers; music transcribers; musical instrument makers; musical instrument teachers; musical theater; musician production crews; casual musicians; church musicians; musician headliners at venue with 1,500 attendees; musical theater, musicians - not more than once a week at same venue; musicians orchestral; musicians symphony; musicians theme parks; musicians touring; newspaper delivery carriers; non-profit assistants; notaries; nude models; nurse anesthetists; nurse educators; nurse midwives; nurse practitioners; nurses; nutritionists; occupational therapists; off-duty security; online event producers; online teachers; opera; opera companies; opera singers; optometrists; orchestra conductors; orchestra managers; orchestrators; PA announcers; paralegals; party planners; pattern makers/accessory designers; pediatric therapists; performing arts instructors; personal assistants; personal chefs; personal property appraisers; personal trainers; pet sitters; pharmacists; phlebotomists; photo booth operators; photo digital techs; photo editor; photojournalists; photo shoot animal trainers; photo shoot assistants (first, second, third); photo shoot digital techs; photo shoot hair stylists/groomers; photo shoot location managers; photo shoot makeup artists; photo shoot nail techs; photo shoot on-set teachers; photo shoot PAs; photo shoot photographer; photo shoot post- production; photo shoot producers; photo shoot production design; photo shoot set construction; photo shoot set dressers; photo shoot wardrobe; photo digital techs; photo stylist assistants; photographers; photographers' assistants; physical therapists; physiology specialists; pianists; piano teachers; picture editors; pilates instructors; pilates studios; placenta encapsulators; podcast producers/managers; political petitioners; pool cleaners; post-production captioners; premium auditors; presentation designers; presentation specialists; press photographers; princess parties for children; process servers; production assistants; production managers; production runners; programmers; projectionists; proofreaders; property inspectors; property managers; psychic readers; psychotherapists; public relations practitioners; public relations spokespeople; publicists; publishers; puppeteers; pyrotechnicians; rabbis; radio engineers; real estate appraisers; real estate photographers; real estate stagers; realtime captioners; recipe developers; recording studios; recruiters; referees; rehab specialists; reiki therapists; reiki/meditation/mindfulness teachers; remediators; researchers; resin casters; respiratory therapists; rig welders; rural residents; S Corps; safety and loss control inspectors; Santa Clauses; Santa's helpers; school picture photographers; scopists; screenwriters; seamstresses; seasonal festival crafters/performers; security officers; seniors/retirees; set designers; sheep shearers; sheetmetal workers; ship dismantlers; shorthand reporters--certified; show caller; sign makers; signature gatherers; singers; single mothers; small business owners; social media managers; social workers (licensed clinical); software developers; software product management; sommeliers; songwriters; sound designers; sound engineers; sound mixers; sound practitioners; special education services; special effects artists; special inspector--construction; speech language pathologists; speech therapists; speechwriters; spoken language interpreters; spokesmodels; sports psychologists; sports registrars; stage directors; stage manager; stagehands; State contractors; statisticians; stay-at-home moms; stenographers; stilt walkers; story tellers; storyboard artists; strike crews; strike crews (theatrical); strippers/exotic dancers; students (college/university); studio owners; stunt specialists (auto, combat, water, aerial, etcetera); stylists; substitute teachers for private schools; subtitlers; summer day camps; survival skills experts; tailors; talent agents; talent managers; Tarot card readers; tattoo artists; tax preparers; teaching artists; tech support technicians; tech startup founders; technical directors; technical writers; telemarketers; telephonic interpreters; teleprompter operators; tennis coaches; tennis pros; terminal managers; test proctors; testers (independent); theater actors; theater companies; theater designers; theater directors; theater electricians; theater stage managers; theatrical technical designers; timber cruisers; timber fallers; tour guides; tour managers; transcribers; translators; travel directors; traveling butchers; truckers--independent owner-operators; tutors; TV post producers; umpires; vacation rental cleaners; vacation rental site managers; variety artists; ventriloquists; venue owners; video crews; video editors; video engineers; video game developers; video production companies; video switchers; videographers; virtual assistants; virtual call center agents; virtual office managers; vocal coaches; voiceover artists; wardrobe stylists; web designers; web developers; wedding caterers; wedding florists; wedding makeup artists; wedding officiants; wedding photographers; wedding planners; wedding stylists; wedding videographers; window/door installers; women's self-defense instructors; workshop leaders; writers; yacht captains; yoga instructors; yoga studios; youth athletic coaches; youth orchestras; youth theaters; and YouTube creators. Mr. Speaker, those are the 600 professions where people in California have had their livelihoods taken from them by AB 5 and where people across the United States will have their livelihoods taken from them under this new regulation that has just been issued by Joe Biden's Department of Labor. In fact, the long and short of it is an economic analysis by the Chamber of Progress shows that the full-time or part- time jobs that between 3.2 and 3.8 million independent contractors could be lost because of this new rule. That is equivalent to roughly one-half of the jobs lost in the Great Recession, and up to 70 million Americans who engage in independent work could be negatively affected and lose the workplace flexibility that they have chosen. Now, because AB 5 is so toxic, there has been an effort to try to disassociate this new rule from AB 5 by saying: No, this is not the same thing. In fact, Julie Su, when she testified before our Education and Workforce Committee, when I asked her if AB 5 was a good law, she couldn't even say one way or the other even though she herself was the architect and chief enforcer of that law. Nonetheless, the reality is this: We know that the independent contractor rule just announced by the Biden Labor Department is designed to do the exact same thing as AB 5. How do we know that? First, President Biden has cited AB 5 expressly as his ``model'' for labor policy nationwide. Second, Biden tried to get the exact language of AB 5 through Congress with the PRO Act and only resorted to agency rulemaking when that failed. Third, the factors set forth in the independent contractor rule are plainly designed to mimic AB 5 as closely as possible while giving the enforcer of the rule maximum discretion to enforce it as they see fit. Fourth, and perhaps most tellingly, Biden has nominated the architect and chief enforcer of AB 5 itself, Julie Su, elevating her from her State role in California to be his Secretary of Labor and enforce the new independent contractor rule. Biden, in fact, is so desperate to nationalize AB 5 that he has even lawlessly installed Julie Su as permanent Acting Secretary despite the Senate rejecting her nomination. Once more, the damage from this rule would be even more far-reaching than AB 5, not just in terms of the scale and scope of a nationwide policy but also because AB 5 contained many exceptions. Well over a hundred professions were exempted from being subject to the law. There are no such exceptions in the new DOL rule, meaning many more professions will be ensnared. We are going to fight this new rule in every way that we can. First, as soon as the rule gets transmitted to Congress, which will be any day now, I am introducing legislation under the Congressional Review Act to nullify it. This is a fast-track procedure by which Congress can override a rule imposed by an executive agency. Second, I have secured language in the base text of the Education and Labor appropriations bill providing that no funds may be spent by the Department of Labor to enforce the rule. That would effectively render it a dead letter. Third, I have joined with Representative Elise Stefanik to author the Modern Worker Empowerment Act, which creates a clear definition and standard across Federal laws to protect independent workers. Fourth, I have introduced the Department of Labor Succession Act, which has already passed the Education and the Workforce Committee, to stop Julie Su, the architect of AB 5, from continuing to act as Secretary of Labor despite the Senate rejecting her nomination. Fifth, I expect there will be legal challenges to the new rule, based both on the dubious legality of Su remaining in power and the overly broad nature of the rule itself. Finally, as the chair of the House Subcommittee on Workforce Protections, I will continue to conduct rigorous oversight of the Department of Labor, and we will do everything possible to protect workers against overreaching policies, which is going to become especially necessary now because we know the way that Julie Su handled AB 5. She even previewed it. This is what she said after the law had been signed, but before it went into effect. Su said: ``We will be doing investigations and audits.'' She threatened fines and penalties so that, and this is a quote, ``those who want to comply with the need to reclassify can do so and those who don't will understand that is not the kind of economy we want in California.'' ``Not the kind of economy we want in California.'' Julie Su didn't want an economy in California where you can pursue your calling, support your family on your own terms, and thrive. She doesn't want that for America either. That is why Joe Biden has selected her for Secretary of Labor, to wage his war on independent contractors. Our committee has a very different vision for the American workforce. We believe in promoting work and supporting workers. We believe independent contractors are critical to the 21st century economy. We will protect the freedom of Americans to earn a living as they choose. We will fight every effort to take that right away. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, I take a moment tonight to share with people across America a little bit about the life of an extraordinary person from my district, Bob Hren. There are so many things I could say about Bob. He was a great friend of mine. He had the best sense of humor. He was an extraordinary leader, and he was just a great man. In the world of politics, you will not find a better man. He was just so clearly in it for the right reasons. He believed in this country. He wanted to do everything that he could to make his community in Nevada County a better place. There are so many things I could tell you about Bob that whatever I might say would actually pale in comparison to a beautiful tribute that was prepared by his wife, Cindy, as well as his friend and associate and successor, Mac Young. Cindy is a wonderful, wonderful woman who was always by Bob's side at events. They were truly a team. In addition, Mac worked very closely with him on everything he did in Nevada County and is now doing a tremendous job of filling his very, very big shoes as the head of the Nevada County Republican Party. This is the tribute that was prepared by Cindy and Mac: Robert Ralph Hren was an outstanding citizen who dedicated his life to making a positive difference in the world. A loving husband of 50 years and father of two sons, he was a beacon of light for his family and community. Born in Chisholm, northern Minnesota, on September 19, 1948, and passed away peacefully from multiple strokes on September 26, 2023. Bob had a way of seeing the goodness and the potential in people. Even when facing adversity, Bob gained respect from others for his fair and calm manner. He was a mentor and guidance counselor to many. He approached life with his dry sense of humor, kindness, determination, and forward thinking. Bob gained more than 40 years of experience in the electric power generation field. He combined his technical expertise as a mechanical engineer and legal knowledge with his law degree to work as a project development manager for Bechtel Enterprises, Incorporated. He focused on the development, construction, ownership, and operation of electric- generation facilities. He traveled worldwide to develop projects in Japan, New Zealand, Brazil, Mexico, Canada, and across the United States. Bob joined International Generating Company, Intergen, as vice president in 1999 and opened an office in Sacramento in 2001 to respond to the California energy crisis and develop new power projects. His two notable natural gas projects that he legislated and oversaw the development of are now bringing power to citizens through Roseville Electric and the Ocotillo plant in Palm Springs. In 2002, Bob became an independent consultant through his company, Vista Enterprises, and brought his expertise to advise solar energy companies, such as NextLight and Eight Minute Energy--that is the amount of time it takes to receive energy from the Sun. He retired from the energy consulting business in 2016 to dedicate his time to his family, hobbies, and traveling to favorite destinations in the U.S. and abroad. Bob loved gardening and was known for growing an abundance of large, luscious tomatoes. He would plant up to 98 plants in raised beds, creating a tomato forest. When his wife objected after processing them, he said: Okay, I only planted 49 this year. Bob was passionate about making his award-winning wines that he distributed and enjoyed with family and friends. Having sampled some myself, Mr. Speaker, I can tell you they are truly outstanding. In 2017, Bob was elected chair of the Nevada County Republican Party. He dedicated over 6 years to growing the party into what it is today. He recruited candidates for local county offices and supported their efforts to win. He led fundraising events by organizing and presenting dinners and other events to establish the largest reserve fund in our local party's history. He recruited volunteers to help at events, established a Republican headquarters, and managed the daily activities, meetings, and issues of the party. Bob was good at managing people, keeping calm and order, even when debates became heated. He could subdue controversy in disputes and recognized the innate good in people. Bob used his practical experience in negotiations with both friends and adversaries to advance the prospects for Republican candidates and issues. His colleagues at the Nevada County Republican Party knew Bob as a thoughtful and reasoned leader who carefully weighed the ramifications of each decision. He applied his engineering mindset in planning large and impactful projects. His technological mind understood the value of digital campaigning for the 21st century. He was a key figure in several Statewide initiatives that fundamentally changed the political dynamic in California. Bob left a legacy that made a positive difference in many, many lives and in our entire community. His presence is greatly missed, and his legacy will be felt for a long, long time to come. Independent Contractor Rule

Mr. KILEY

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. KILEY

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, as a freshman Member, I haven't had as much time to work with Speaker Emeritus McCarthy as some of my colleagues have, but I am grateful for this year, working with him as part of the California delegation. Just observing his leadership of the Conference and of the House has really been something to behold. I think it is clear to everyone that he is a once-in-a-generation political talent. The millions of things that you have to do, large and small, to build a majority, to manage the Conference, to run the House, to exercise leadership on the national and international stage, he made it look effortless and was always cheerful in the way he went about it. I think that everyone in this House and across the country, whatever their politics, recognize that he is someone who is a leader in a way that transcends whatever position he holds, even a position as high as Speaker of the House of Representatives. When I think about what he has meant to this institution, I think about the famous essay by Max Weber, ``Politics is a Vocation,'' where he talks about the need to both have principles, but also to have a sense of responsibility when you are in the political arena; that this isn't just a philosophy class. I think Speaker Emeritus McCarthy really embodies that sense of political leadership, of being firmly grounded in your principles, but also having an appreciation for the consequences of our actions and the unique responsibilities that we have when it comes to exercising political power. It was also a great benefit to have a Californian leading this House. I know that Kevin understands, as well as anyone, the challenges we face in California. I know that he and our delegation will continue to be a check there. I know he will continue to be in the fight to turn around California and this country. Mr. Speaker, I thank Speaker McCarthy for his service, which will be felt by this institution for a very long time.

Mr. KILEY

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, for nearly four centuries Harvard has been known for many great things: as America's first college, as the alma mater of eight Presidents, as the most fertile of ground for new ideas and cutting-edge research. Yet now, in this moment, Harvard has become known for a truly terrible thing--for anti-Semitism, for leading a 21st century American resurgence of one of the world's most ancient and retrograde prejudices. This is in large part because of the words and action, as well as the silence and inaction of President Claudine Gay. We have all now seen the shocking testimony from last week, but to borrow a phrase from Dr. Gay, we need to also look at the context, the context of Harvard having the very worst ranking in the entire country for protecting free speech; the context of President Gay initially refusing to condemn the Hamas terrorist attack and then refusing to condemn the student groups that blamed Israel; the context of Harvard's woefully inadequate measures to protect Jewish students both before October 7 but especially after, to the point that at the hearing, President Gay refused to even answer the question as to whether a Jewish student can feel safe and welcome on her campus. That Harvard has declined to remove President Gay, even after Penn forced out its president, speaks volumes about the singular failures of that university. Yet, Harvard also offers a broader window into what ails higher education in our country. This is a moment of reckoning for American higher education. Our universities cost too much, deliver too little value to graduates, and have become the most intolerable places in American life. Now is the time for fundamental change to reform the American university, and this resolution is a first step.

Mr. KILEY

Mr. KILEY. Madam Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. KILEY

Mr. KILEY. Madam Speaker, I wish to recognize and congratulate the Folsom High School football team on winning the 2023 CIF Division 1A State football championship, beating St. Bonaventure this weekend 20- 14. This is Folsom's fifth State championship since 2010, their first since 2018. Head coach Paul Doherty got his team to buy in, and together they were able to achieve remarkable things, with Defensive Coordinator Sam Cole taking the reins and making life for the St. Bonaventure offense rather difficult. Sophomore quarterback Ryder Lyons opened the score in the first quarter, and Folsom held the lead at halftime. St. Bonaventure battled back and led 14-13 with less than 3 minutes left. Then Folsom's defense stopped the St. Bonaventure offense and took over with a little more than 2 minutes to go. Lyons led his team downfield and completed a touchdown pass to Jameson Powell with 20 seconds to go. Coach Doherty and Coach Cole's defense held from there, and the Folsom High School football team won the championship, capping off an amazing 12-2 season. Coach Doherty and the Folsom Bulldogs should be congratulated on winning the championship of the entire State. We know how hard they have worked. This team brings so much pride to the city of Folsom, and I congratulate all the players on a very well-deserved victory and amazing end to your season. Free Speech on College Campuses

Mr. KILEY. Madam Speaker, Harvard University's leadership today announced that they will be retaining President Claudine Gay, despite acknowledging President Gay's repeated failures to adequately condemn terrorism and anti-Semitism. Now, the university will have to answer for why it takes these matters less seriously than the University of Pennsylvania, which recently forced out its president. As disappointing as this is, the refusal of one university to make a needed personnel change is not going to stop the momentum for far-reaching reform that we are seeing in higher education. This is a moment of reckoning for higher education in this country, where the true character of our universities has been laid bare for the world to see. Even before last week's shocking testimony by the presidents of Harvard, MIT, and Penn, many in this country were asking the question: How is it that our leading academic institutions have been gripped by such an ancient and retrograde prejudice as anti-Semitism? How is it that institutions that have been suppressing free speech for years suddenly discovered the First Amendment as a reason not to condemn terrorism or to stop Jewish students from being bullied and harassed? How is it that university leaders who have waded into every political issue of the day suddenly felt bound by institutional neutrality when it came to the murder of children? How is it that bureaucracies devoted to diversity, equity, and inclusion turned a blind eye to the targeting the Jewish students and, in some cases, even contributed to that hostile environment? Yes, this is a moment of reckoning. Our universities cost too much, their degrees deliver too little value, and they have become among the most intolerant places in American life. This is a time to rediscover the purpose of higher education so that our universities are once again leading lights in American life, are national assets, are places of community and belonging and truly higher learning. Tonight, I would like to take a moment to suggest a path forward by identifying 10 principles for a fundamental cultural change at our universities. I want to say first that this is a process, a conversation, that should be taking place at universities themselves with alumni, with students, with faculty, with administration, with all stakeholders. Congress does have a role to play. The Education and the Workforce Committee has already announced a congressional investigation into the three universities that we heard from last week and others about their failure to adequately address anti-Semitism on campus. In a broader sense, Congress has a role to play because of the large amounts of Federal funding that go to even private institutions. The founder of OpenTheBooks reported that Harvard and Penn are now more Federal contractor than educator, collecting more on government contracts and grants than undergraduate student tuition. The group discovered that between 2018 and 2022, Harvard received $3.13 billion in total Federal payments, which includes Federal grants and contracts, while Penn received $4.38 billion in payments. Yes, Congress has a clear interest in what is happening at our universities and not just from the perspective of oversight of our funds but also because universities are incubators for our broader culture. So many of the problems in our country today--censorship, the explosion of DEI, a redefinition of merit as something unaligned with excellence or even at odds with it--had their origins on campus, which brings us back to the present crisis of anti-Semitism. By now, the world has seen the shocking testimony of President Gay and her counterparts at Penn and MIT, refusing to condemn a call for genocide against the Jewish people as a violation of campus policies. Even prior to that testimony, over the last 2 months, President Gay's inaction created an environment on Harvard's campus where at the time of our hearing, she could not even say if Jewish students will feel safe and welcome. I asked her that several times, and she refused to answer: Could you look the family of a prospective Jewish student in the eye and tell them that their son or daughter would feel safe and welcome on your campus? She refused to even answer the question. In the aftermath of October 7, President Gay's carefully parsed statements, her silence, her Orwellian use of the passive voice, made it very clear that she sees the forces of anti-Semitism as a constituency that needs to be catered to--that sends a signal on her campus. It sends a signal that was clearly received by the forces of anti-Semitism on her campus, that reverberated across American higher education and seeped into our broader culture. We can't simply say that this problem has only taken hold in the last couple of months. The reality is that anti-Semitism has been growing on college campuses and prior to October 7 had reached an all-time high. Many have been speaking about this issue with a growing sense of alarm. For me, the extent of the problem, and the extent to which the universities themselves are serving to exacerbate the problem, really hit home for me in early 2020 when California released a proposed ethnic studies curriculum. This was a 550-page curriculum that was designed by ethnic studies leaders from various school districts and universities appointed by the State's board of education. It received support from 22 California State ethnic studies departments and education leaders throughout the State. The curriculum was broadly, universally condemned on both sides of the aisle, from people of all points of view. Indeed, Governor Gavin Newsom said at the time that it was offensive in so many ways and would never see the light of day. Among the problems with the curriculum, the biggest, the most deeply problematic, was the many instances of anti- Semitism. This is what was written by the California Legislative Jewish Caucus, a group of legislators in our State legislature, in response to the proposed curriculum. They wrote that the curriculum: Erases the American Jewish experience, fails to discuss anti-Semitism, reinforces negative stereotypes about Jews, singles out Israel for criticism, and would institutionalize the teaching of anti-Semitic stereotypes in our public schools. The letter goes on: Jews are essentially excluded from the curriculum. We have been advised that this exclusion appeared to be intentional and reflected the political bias of the drafters. They called it deeply insulting, fundamentally inconsistent with the purposes of ethnic studies, harmful to Jewish and non-Jewish students, and indicative of an anti-Jewish bias in the curriculum that would be dangerous to institutionalize. The letter goes on: In the few instances where the curriculum acknowledges Jews, it does so in a denigrating and discriminatory manner. For example, it recommends song lyrics that inappropriately delve into the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with a strong bias and little nuance. The curriculum asserts that Israelis ``use the press so they can manufacture'' a classic anti-Semitic trope about Jewish control of the media. The letter states: It is difficult to fathom why the State of California would want to actively promote a narrative about Jews that echoes the propaganda of the Nazi regime. This was a few years ago where you had a panel of university leaders proposing, at the behest of the California State legislature, a curriculum that, by the way, was going to be a graduation requirement for every high school student in the country, and the State's own Legislative Jewish Caucus said that it echoes the propaganda of the Nazi regime. This has been a problem growing at our universities for some time, and the failures of President Claudine Gay the last 2 months, and her shocking testimony at our hearing last week, simply put the deeply anti-Semitic currents in our universities on stark display. Now, at the same time that we have seen this rise in anti-Semitism on college campuses, there have been many other deeply troubling trends. Indeed, what made President Gay's tolerance for anti-Semitism all the more morally abhorrent was that this was coming from a president whose university ranked dead last, 248 out of 248, in free speech rankings released earlier this year. Yet, here she was at our committee hearing talking about her university's ``commitment'' to free expression. The rankings that found Harvard to have come in dead last--in fact, Harvard got the worst score in the history of the rankings--cited surveys of Harvard students where just over a quarter of students reported that they are comfortable publicly disagreeing with their professor on a controversial political topic--just over a quarter comfortable disagreeing with a professor on a political topic. Only a third of students said it is very or extremely clear the administration protects free speech on campus. Even 30 percent said using violence to stop a campus speech is at least acceptable on some occasions. Truly shocking statistics. These problems have both been getting worse. As anti-Semitism has risen, so has the suppression of free speech. Indeed, even President Obama, several years ago, spoke about this issue. In 2016, Obama said: There has been a trend around the country of trying to get colleges to disinvite speakers with a different point of view or disrupt a politician's rally. Don't do that, Obama said, no matter how ridiculous or offensive you might find the things that come out of their mouths. There will be times when you shouldn't contradict your core values, your integrity, and you will have the responsibility to speak up in the face of injustice. But listen. Engage. If the other side has a point, learn from them. If they are wrong, rebut them. Teach them. Beat them on the battlefield of ideas. That is what President Obama said in 2016. That same year, the head of the University of California, Janet Napolitano, discussed this in an editorial where she wrote that the sanctity of free speech in our country is hardly guaranteed, at least not on our college campuses. Napolitano, by the way, was a member of President Obama's cabinet and the Democrat Governor of Arizona. She went on to warn how far we have moved from freedom of speech on campuses to freedom from speech. She said we have moved from freedom of speech on campuses to freedom from speech. Indeed, the rise of anti-Semitism and the suppression of free speech on college campuses has gone hand in hand. I saw the degree of this when I was a State legislator and proposed the Free Speech on Campus Act. That legislation got support from dozens of Jewish-American groups who had seen how the suppression of free speech was used to exclude people, to shut down speakers who represented their point of view or were of their background. In fact, earlier this year, we saw California university student groups actually say they were not going to allow speakers based upon their views on the State of Israel. This is a very important point. It is the same university culture that has given us speech code, safe spaces, microaggressions, bias reporting systems, and all of the other threats to free speech and free inquiry that we see on campus today. That same university culture has also given us widespread prejudice of a kind we never would have expected to see in America in the 21st century. Something has gone terribly wrong with higher education in this country. There is a particular culture in higher education that is in many ways detached from reality, a world unto itself, divorced from the norms of frankly either political party, as we saw in the bipartisan condemnation of the university presidents last week, or even basic American institutions. Now is the time to uproot that culture and to reform higher education in America, to return our universities to their guiding purposes. Figuring out the path forward is going to take a lot of different perspectives. I want to list, very briefly, 10 basic principles that I think can guide that process. If pursued in earnest, it can return our universities to being national assets rather than institutions that are accelerating our country's decline. The first principle, of course, is a commitment to freedom of speech. This should be codified in a statement like the University of Chicago's. It should be aligned with the principles of the First Amendment with narrowly defined exceptions, as the Supreme Court has defined. Importantly, one of those exceptions is bullying and genuine harassment. A second guiding principle is academic freedom so that students and professors alike do not have to fear negative repercussions based upon the type of research they choose to undertake or the points of view that they choose to express. A third principle is institutional neutrality. Fareed Zakaria, in a widely shared clip from CNN, has said: ``The American public has been losing faith in these universities for good reason.'' He said there has been a ``broad shift'' as universities have gone from ``being centers of excellence to institutions pushing political agendas.'' Universities themselves should not be political actors but rather should be forums where ideas can be debated and discussed and where students can be exposed to a wide variety of views and come to their own conclusions. A fourth guiding principle is upending the DEI bureaucracy, which has given us safe spaces and trigger warnings. It has taught students to look at each other through the lens of distrust, which has bred hate and division and taught students to hate our country. A recent op-ed in The Washington Post by Danielle Allen said this: ``I was one of three co-chairs of Harvard's Presidential Task Force on Inclusion and Belonging, which in 2018 delivered a strategic framework for the campus.'' She said, ``Many are chalking up current controversies to diversity, equity, and inclusion work, and the task force's report was a contribution to that field broadly understood.'' But, she said, ``Across the country, DEI bureaucracies have been responsible for numerous assaults on common sense.'' A fifth guiding principle is to allow for ideological diversity among administrators, students, and faculty. One report showed that 1 percent of Harvard professors identify as conservative. That is not a healthy environment for the flourishing of a free exchange of ideas. A sixth guiding principle is eliminating foreign influence at our universities so that our universities are not being funded by China and other adversaries of the United States. A seventh guiding principle is to return to core and real academic disciplines and to get rid of those that do not have any academic value or merit or adhere to the traditional norms of scholarship. This would include redefining core curriculums in such a way that students have a common set of knowledge that they come out of universities with. An eighth guiding principle is to revive trade schools and the teaching of practical skills, crafts, and professions at our universities as well as, by the way, in our secondary and primary schools. This is so every student doesn't feel like they have to go to university in order to get the skills and qualifications to get a good- paying job. A ninth guiding principle is to make our universities more affordable so that tuition does not continue to skyrocket in a way that the Federal Government has fueled and so that students are not left hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt in some cases. A final principle, which in many ways encapsulates all the others, is to return to excellence as the real, true, overarching guiding principle of our universities--excellence in all of its forms. This would mean getting rid of grade inflation. It would mean revisiting admissions standards. It would mean restoring standardized tests, which have given people from all walks of life an opportunity to choose their excellence. It would mean having a culture of debate and discussion on campus where the better idea wins, and each student can make that decision for themselves. If our universities truly come to value excellence again, then that will be the characteristic of their graduates and the future leadership of our country, as well. This is a moment of reckoning in higher education. It is a moment to rediscover the purpose of a university as a center for research, as a place to explore cutting-edge ideas, and as a place to prepare young people for the task of citizenship, which goes to the heart of what our country is all about, this great experiment that our Founders started in self-government. Rethinking our institutions of education and higher learning is going to be vital to making sure that that experiment continues to flourish in the years and decades ahead. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KILEY

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 894) strongly condemning and denouncing the drastic rise of antisemitism in the United States and around the world.

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, since the October 7 terrorist attack by Hamas against Israel, anti-Semitism has surged in the United States and around the world. Reports show that there was a nearly 400 percent increase in anti- Semitic incidents in the weeks after the attack. These incidents include harassment, vandalism, and assault. Americans have been punched, beaten, and forced to flee for their lives from swerving cars simply because they are Jewish. A Jewish cemetery in Brooklyn, Ohio, was vandalized with swastikas. On college campuses, Jewish students have been subjected to harassment, threats, and forced to hide from violent protests. In a recent survey, 73 percent of Jewish college students said they had experienced or witnessed some form of anti-Semitism this academic year. In the same survey, just 39 percent of Jewish students said they felt comfortable with their peers knowing they were Jewish. Less than half of Jewish students surveyed said that they felt safe on campus. At a hearing before our committee last month, a college student testified that she now thinks twice before wearing any sign of her Jewish faith. This was a young woman who is maybe 20 years old. She had the courage to come and testify before Congress, but she can't safely wear something that would suggest to her fellow students and her teachers that she is Jewish. She testified that her family and friends who live in Israel--people who are under nearly constant rocket attack from Hamas--and others check in with her every day to see if she is safe. They are in a war zone. She is in the United States, and they are checking to make sure that she is safe. These incidents are absolutely horrifying, Mr. Speaker. They are unacceptable in the United States and in any civilized society. Members of the Jewish community should not have to hide their faith in order to safely go about their lives or receive an education. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support this resolution, and I reserve the balance of my time. House of Representatives, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Washington, DC, November 30, 2023. Hon. Jim Jordan, Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Jordan: Thank you for consulting with the Foreign Affairs Committee, which agrees to be discharged from further consideration of H. Res. 894 (Strongly condemning and denouncing the drastic rise of antisemitism in the United States and around the world), so that the measure may proceed expeditiously to the House floor. I ask that you place our letters on this resolution into the Congressional Record during floor consideration. I appreciate your cooperation regarding this legislation and look forward to continuing to work together as this measure moves through the legislative process. Sincerely, Michael T. McCaul, Chairman.

Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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