Markup on Disability Employment, Civics History, Form 5500, PBMs, Billing

The committee will please come to order. A quorum is present. The committee meets today pursuant to notice to consider five bills. The chair announces that requests for recorded votes may be postponed pursuant to clause two of rule eleven of the rules of the House of Representatives and committee rule fourteen B. Without objection, the chair may recess the committee at any point. Good morning and welcome to the committee on education and workforce. Today, the committee will mark up H R eighty-seven thirty-six, restoration of employment choice for adults with disabilities act, H R eighty-seven O five, civics and history advancement to restore learning, integrity and education act, H R seventy-three, sixty-two, Form fifty-five hundred filing simplification act. H R seventy-eight ninety-five PBM kickback pro- prohibition act. And H R eighty-six eighty-four transparency in billing act, which takes the prize for the shortest title. H R eighty-seven thirty-six restoration of employment choice for adults with disabilities act introduced by Representative Glenn Grothman will increase employment opportunities for people with disabilities. In twenty twenty-five nearly eighty percent of people with disabilities were unemployed, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. And the unemployment rate for people with disabilities was more than double that of those without disabilities.

Mm-hmm.

For people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, some estimates place unemployment rates near twenty percent. At a time when we should be removing the barriers to work and promoting greater independence, outdated federal policy too often stands in the way. H. R. eighty-seven thirty-six helps reverse that trend by increasing access to employment opportunities and empowering more people with disabilities to participate in the workforce. H. R. eighty-seven O five, Civics and History Advancement to Restore Learning, Integrity, and Education Act. introduced by Representative Burgess Owens ensures that the American history and civics program stays true to its purpose, educating students about America's rich civic inheritance and, uh, the importance of our founding and the value of respectful civil dialogue through the free exchange of ideas. The Biden-Harris administration attempted to radicalize this bipartisan program. Today's bill sends a clear message that it was wrong, Children should be educate educated in civics, not indoctrinated. H R seventy-three sixty-two, form fifty-five hundred filing simplification act introduced by Representative Grossman, streamlines the annual reporting requirement for employee benefit plans under the Employer Retirement Income Security Act of nineteen seventy-four, or ERISA. This bill reduces unnecessary red tape, while maintaining strong reporting standards and transparency for employment benefit plans, or employee benefit plans. The bill also eliminates outdated and deplicate- deplicative requirements, including the need to file certain extensions and, in some cases, manually sign or initial schedules that are part of form fifty-five hundred. H. R. seventy-eight ninety-five, PBM Kickback Prohibition Act, introduced by Rick Allen cracks down on kickbacks and helps ensure health care decisions are made in the best interest of patients and employers, not pharmacy benefit manager middlemen. This committee is focused on lowering health care costs and bringing accountability and transparency to a system that has become too powerful and too secretive. H R eighty-six, eighty-four. Transparency in Billing Act of twenty twenty-six, introduced by Representative Virginia Fox and ranking member Bobby Scott, uh, protects workers and families from predatory pricing practices and reaffirms a simple premise you should pay for the care you receive, not inflated charges. Increasingly, hospitals buy up outpatient clinics, then turn around and charge hospital facility fees and higher rates as though the care was provided at the hospital. Patients are left without clear information about where services were delivered, or why they are being billed at significantly higher rates. This legislation promotes greater transparency, encourages honest billing practices, and helps lower health care costs for workers and families. Taken together, these bills are focused on real concerns facing American families, from finding meaningful work to access assessing uh affordable health care and high quality education. They reflect uh practical common sense reforms that will expand opportunity and improve everyday life for the people we serve. I thank the members who have worked diligently on these reforms in some cases for multiple congresses and I hope uh and I look forward to the committee considering these bills today um and and these measures, having a positive outcome. With that, I yield to the ranking member for an opening statement.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this committee has a responsibility to pass legislation that ensures that students will receive a quality education, that uh protects workers, expands access to affordable quality care. And while I appreciate the bipartisan work reflected in some of the measures before us, several of these bills unfortunately continue a pattern of advancing divisive political priorities and weakening protections that workers, students and families rely on. First bill we'll consider is H R eight s eighty-seven thirty-six, the restoration of employment choice for adults with disabilities act. Under present law section five eleven of the rehabilitation act is amended by the workforce innovation and opportunity act. Establishes safeguards for workers, particularly for workers under the age of twenty-four. It prevents workers operating under section fourteen c certificates from paying sub-minimum wage to disabled workers until certain conditions have been met this bill would weaken those requirements by allowing younger disabled workers to be paid sub-minimum wages without first completing all existing transition and vocational rehabilitation steps legislation also creates an additional exception to the counseling and referring requirements of individuals already working at sub-minimum wage employment. Fourteen C, employment wage is a relic of the past where employees where employers are legally permitted to discriminate against individuals with disabilities in the workplace and workers with disabilities did not have access, do not have access to federal protections. It is a pastime that we phase out this harmful provision that denies equal opportunities for workers. And one strategy to facilitate that transition would be to adopt legislation that I've introduced, the transformation to competitive integrated employment act, which would support workers as they transition from fourteen C sub-minimum wage to regular employment. So instead of making it easier for employers to pay disabled workers less money, Congress should be working to fully integrate disabled workers into the general workforce, so we can fulfill the core goals of the Americans with Disabilities Act, And that is equal opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic s- s- self-sufficiency. And so for those reasons I'll be recommending a no vote. Next we'll consider the HR eighty-seven O five, the Charlie Act. Under current law, title two of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, promotes history and civics education, uh funding grants for teacher training, student resources, and innovative instruction in history, civics, government and geography. This legislation would prohibit federal funds from being used for what the bill defines as discriminatory equity ideology or gender ideology, and will also prevent the Department of Education from prioritizing race, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or immigration status when awarding grants in this program. Moreover, the bill is named to honor Charlie Kirk, who is known for regressive politics and hateful rhetoric including statements such as quote "We made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act of the mid-nineteen sixties." Or quote "Large dedicated Islamic areas are a threat to America." And refer to trans-individuals as quote "the throbbing middle finger to God and an abomination." I strongly condemn the manner in which Charlie Kirk's life was taken, but he is not a role model for our children and we should not be advancing This bill is in part a broader political agenda targeting how history and identity are discussed in educational settings. Students should learn accurate and comprehensive American history, including the Civil Rights Movement, immigration history, and other f- and foundational movements in our nation's history. This bill does not advance those objectives, and for those reasons I'll be recommending a no vote. Form fifty five hundred f- uh Filing Simplification Act is the um uh subject of the third bill that we'll consider, H R seventy three sixty two. The form fifty five hundred is an important source of information on the funding, investment, fees, and operation of pensions and other employee benefit plans. Congress and federal agencies and researchers and many private sector stakeholders use and rely on form fifty five hundred data. Hundreds of thousands of pension plans and tens of thousands of oth- other employee benefit plans meet the current form fifty five hundred filing deadline and for those plans that need a little extra time to file particularly large ones that must complete an annual audit, there's already an easy way for plans to obtain an automatic ext automatic extension for up to two and a half months. It doesn't appear to be a problem that needs to be solved here, yet seventy three sixty-two would automatically extend the statutory deadline for all fifty five hundred filers even those meeting the current deadline so as my colleagues may know there's already a multi multi year lag in compiling and stu in publishing form fifty five hundred data I worry that this bill would corp would cause further delays. Now further the um bill is drafted in a way that at best leaves it unclear whether plans would also receive an additional extension on the top of the already delayed statutory deadline provided under the bill. It's regrettable that committee of Republicans needlessly rushed this bill to mark up, believing that the legislation hearing box was checked after one member mentioned the bill during questions in a recent help subcommittee. Um the um HR sixty-three s uh seventy-three sixty-two deserves far more attention and scrutiny than it has received and I plan to oppose the bill, The last two bills before us relate to health care. They address important issues impacting both consumers and employers alike. Pharmacy benefit uh managers, PBMs, play an important role in negotiating prescriptive drug prices and administering pharmacy benefits. While we've made progress in important uh in improving transparency regarding PBMs, concerns remain about their business practices and potential conflicts of interest. Currently, PBMs pay referral fees to brokers, consultants, or other similar entities and may believe, and many believe, influence their recommendations to health care plan sponsors regarding which PBM they should choose. Under the bill, the PBM kickback prohibition act, that would amend the employee retirement uh income security act, or ERISA, to prohibit PBMs from playing paying such referral fees to brokers and consultants. I support the goal of the legislation. I regret that we were not given the opportunity to engage in a bipartisan process during the creation of the legislation nor an opportunity to strengthen the bill to ensure that it achieves its intended policy objectives. And finally, we'll consider H R eighty-six eighty-four, the transparency and billing act of twenty sixty-two under changes enacted by the consolidated Appropriations Act in twenty twenty-six, Medicare will soon require hospitals to obtain unique national provider a unique national provider identifier to allow payers to accurately determine the setting where the care care was delivered. This will address the often opaque and exorbitant fees charged by hospital outpatient departments that contribute to higher health care costs. However, those same transparency requirements will not apply to p to the private insurance market including ERISA covered health plans. This bill is bipartisan legislation that I introduced with Doctor Fox last uh Congress. It would amend ERISA to extend similar transparency standards to the private sector by requiring hospitals to include the unique identifier for hospital outpatient departments before billing consumers or health plans. This is an important bipartisan effort to improve transparency and accountability in health care billing and I support the legislation. That, Mr. Chairman, and you're back.

I thank the gentlemen. Without objection, all other members who wish to be uh wish to insert written opening statements into the record may do so by submitting them to the committee clerk electronically by the end of the day today. Pursuant to the House rules, a copy of the text to be marked up was made available to members and the public at least twenty-four hours in advance. The bills being marked up today shall be open to amendment at any point

I'm just

And the chair will allow members to offer amendments in a manner not prohibited by house or committee rules. Without objection, members who have more than one amendment to the bills and wish to offer their amendments en bloc may do so. The committee will now proceed to consideration of Bill HR eighty-seven thirty-six for the am- for amendment. The bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are available. The clerk shall designate the bill.

H R eight seven three six, a bill to amend the Rehabilitation Act of nineteen seventy-three to ensure workplace choice and opportunity for young adults with disabilities.

Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. Without objection, the bill will be considered as read and open for amendment at any point, and any amendment offered shall be considered as read. Does anyone seek to be recognized? Uh, Mister Grothman, well, for what purpose do you seek recognition?

I have an amendment at the desk, uh, amendment ANS eighty seven thirty six underscore zero one.

Uh, the clerk shall designate the amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR eight seven three six, offered by Mister Goffman of Wisconsin, identifier ANS eight seven three six underscore zero one.

Without objection, the amendment shall be considered original text for purposes of further amendment. The amendment in the nature of a substitute has already been distributed. I now recognize Mister Grothman for five minutes to explain the amendment and the nature of a substitute.

Sure. Uh, what we're doing here is we're amending out some damage that was done under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, the WIOA Act, uh, in twenty fourteen. Um, in order to understand this bill and the discussion that's gonna follow, one has to familiarize yourself with fourteen C certificates. I hope most congressmen uh on this committee at some point in their life have toured facilities that use fourteen C certificates. These are facilities which have employees which have certain what used to be referred to as disabilities. They might have Down syndrome, they might have spina bifida, they might have severe autism. And for these reasons, it is, when you tour them, obvious that most of these uh, employees would not be capable of making a regular minimum wage. These employees also are frequently or al- almost always on some sort of social security disability, so that's what their - their primary form of income is. Nevertheless, it provides a great deal of self-esteem uh, to provide these people employees frequently light manufacturing packaging that sort of thing. uh there are some people who philosophically um don't feel uh people should be able to make four fifty or five dollars an hour even with severe disabilities and um as the result they inserted things uh a few years ago in uh in twenty fourteen saying that you uh had to try and fail at three jobs in the community before they allowed you to work for below minimum wage. First of all, you're taking freedom away from these people, but in addition, you're creating a very, very difficult, arduous process in which people have to somehow get hired uh to jobs that they obviously are not qualified for, and then fired from jobs they are obviously uh not capable of doing. a horrible thing to do to people who already were dealt a tough lot in life. In in order to take the job that you want, you have to find a way to get hired three times and fired three times. OK. Uh, so um this bill, uh, gets rid of these changes that were made in twenty fourteen and goes back to the time when people can freely work at sub-minimum wage jobs if it can be shown they cannot work for uh for an average average income. Uh I'll repeat, my bill lowers the age from twenty-five to eighteen, allowing people to make the choice that works best for them, while finding a fulfilling job opportunity they might not get otherwise. Fourteen C is about choice. Nobody is forcing people to work here. But I strongly beg all members of the committee, by the way we're in election season, I think uh uh a good thing to do would be to tour uh one of these facilities, and it will make you feel very good about people who are smiling and very happy, and have been dealt a diff- a difficult lot in life. If we wind up getting rid of these fourteen C jobs, we wind up in a situation in which these folks will not be working. They will wind up in what they call day services, in which they do puzzles or watch TV. and uh don't get the satisfaction that you get when you are working and getting a paycheck so it it will we're we're ruining these people's lives I recently talked to a facility that the current burden uh caused them to get rid of their fourteen C jobs they found none of their employees who had been making sub-minimum wage found another job uh for thirty hours in a week, none. So in other words, it was back to the day services. Um and uh I urge all members to vote yes on ANS, which makes a technical change to the bill and support HR eighty seven thirty s- six, and one more time give these people who've been dealt a lot in life the freedom to work under a fourteen C certificate. Thank you.

Gentlemen Niels, uh are there any members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment in the nature of substitute, the gentlelady from Georgia?

Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman.

Is recognized.

Thank you very much. I mean, I really do appreciate my colleague from Wisconsin's stated intent to make it easier for Americans with disabilities because I most definitely have the same sentiments. We want them to help. we wanna help them to find meaningful employment. But I don't see why employees should be able to legally pay those workers below the federal minimum wage of seven dollars and twenty-five cents an hour, just because they have a disability, especially when the minimum wage is as low as it already is today. A recent study from the Government Accountability Office found that the average wage for fourteen C employees was just three dollars and fifty cents. Three dollars and fifty cents won't even get someone a a gallon of gas today. And some employers are legally paying people just twenty-five cents an hour. That's a quarter for an hour of work. That's not fair. That's not right. This is a direct quote from the Department of Labor where they say the wage must be proportional to the workers' productivity compared to a non-disabled worker doing the same job, end quote. You know, that is a demeaning process that people without disabilities aren't even subjected to. At every job site, workers in the same positions are more productive than others, they still get the minimum wage, and they have the same base pay. It's a totally different standard that only disabled workers have to deal with, and that's just not fair. Also, who is deciding that their work is so worth so little? I don't believe that there are any situations where someone's time and their effort are worth less than the minimum wage and certainly not for twenty-five cents an hour. Just as I believe there is dignity in work, I believe there is more dignity in being paid your worth for the work that you do. I would like to submit for the record a a deeply disturbing story that I had a chance to read from the New York Times. about a group of sub-minimum wage employees found living in a bug and rat infested house in rural Iowa in two thousand nine where they worked at a turkey processing plant in return for food a place to stay and sixty-five dollars a month for over thirty years thank you thank you very much.

Without objection, it'll be you.

Sixty-five dollars a month to get up before dawn and work at a poultry plant, pulling gizzards by hand on an assembly line, doing the jobs no one else wants. to do because the work is hard and the pay is low, and gutting turkeys is messy. They were abused and treated like children. They had their wages and their personal property taken away from them and were physically beaten for perceived infractions on the job and at the house. They were kept in these conditions for decades until someone did something about it. It led to the largest jury verdict in the history of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Over two hundred and forty million dollars they were awarded in damages, but no amount of money in the world can give these men back the years that were taken from them. Many of them went on to live better lives, getting a pay raise and using their newfound freedom to work where they want to, and do the things that they want to do, like go on a date, garden, or watch NASCAR, simple things that these men were denied for decades. This is exactly why these guardrails were put in the program. For every story shared where we heard about how good these programs are, I wanna respectfully remind everyone that there are also stories like this, and this is just one that we know of. These are the stories Congress should be trying to stop before they eat up people's entire lives. States across the political spectrum have outlawed or are phasing out the sub-minimum wage including my home state of Georgia as well as South Carolina, Tennessee, Alaska, California, Illinois, Washington, and many others. We should spend this time getting more people with disabilities employed with decent wages in integrated settings. But this does just the opposite. It removes important guardrails on a highly controversial program and will make situations like what I just described more likely to happen again in the future. So I do encourage my colleagues to vote no, especially those of us that are representing states that are already getting rid of these programs, and I yield.

I thank the gentlelady. Does the gentleman from Pennsylvania seek recognition?

I do.

You're recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Chairman. I'm uh uh speaking in favor of of this uh of this bill. Um it's incredibly important. You know, a fourteen seat program comes with oversight, and so I appreciate what the the gentlelady from from uh Georgia um talked about, what happened in Iowa. But the fact is that um the um the system failed. Whoever was responsible on that stage for regulating um, if those individuals were employed under fourteen C, I'm not sure, I don't know if they were, but let's just speculate and say that they were, the fact that uh the - they work all those years under fourteen C and not be um uh i- the - the re- the overs- It was the folks that uh that provide oversight that failed. That should have never occurred. Um, the fact is, H. R. Um, well the fact is, this amendment makes sure that no individuals with especially severe disabilities are left behind. And that's what's happening. I've spent my entire, uh, adult working career, um, prior to coming to Congress working with individuals who were living with life-changing disease and disability. And H. R. eighty-seven thirty-six is about, it's not so much about the amount of pay, it's about the dignity of work. And individuals with disability deserve work options that meet their needs and interests. But more importantly they need - they - they want to be just like their friends and families and have a job and I would say where you artificially push somebody into competitive wages you take away opportunities for dignity um and they're not able to sustain that that - that extra income that may be temporary because of their performance, you're gonna threaten any financial assistance that that they rely on to live on. You know, they have an income, uh, if they have disabilities, and significant disabilities, uh, they have support systems. So, but according to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics data in two thousand twenty-five nearly eighty percent of people with disabilities were unemployed uh the unemployment rate for people with disabilities was more than double that of people with disabilities. At a time when we should be doing everything we can to provide more work opportunities for people, disabilities. Current federal law does the opposite. And section five eleven of the Rehabilitation Act of nineteen seventy-three was written with good intentions. But it is not working as intended. Some states require individuals with disabilities to be fired multiple times from competitive integrated employment, before accepting fourteen C employment. Some states are also failing to fulfill their obligations under section five eleven to provide ongoing services to individuals with disabilities further placing roadblocks in front of these workers and their families. This bill fixes those problems. Democrats argue that f- some Democrats argue that section fourteen C amounts to discrimination but they shy away from the impact on real people when section fourteen C opportunities are are taken away. The um the Government Accounting Office, Accountability Office reported last year on outcomes for former fourteen C workers in Colorado, Oregon, two states that have eliminated fourteen C employment options. The um of the individuals in those two states were able to track less than half of the former fourteen C workers found other employment. The data is clear, without these opportunities many of those with disabilities would be forced to sit at home all day. Uh they would be forced to separate from their s- from their peers, their their friends, uh the the the uh the family that they develop in these work settings. The reality is that for some workers with disabilities, those employment opportunities are lifesaving. Many families have told me how Fourteenth City has given individuals and their families the opportunity to socialize, make friends, learning valuable skills, and take home a paycheck in the process. If you have never been in one of these settings on payday, um, I strongly encourage you to do that. Uh, it doesn't matter what the size of the of the check is or the number. uh the um i- i- there's there's something just human about the dignity of work and the celebration that occurs on pay day it it it's a great experience actually. Uh for individuals with disabilities and their families who want access to fourteen C employment options, we should eliminate the barrier that section five eleven has created. HR eighty seven thirty six does just that and and I'm appreciative to my good friend from Wisconsin and I urge my colleagues to support uh this bill and I yield back.

I thank the gentlemen and I recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Scott, for five minutes.

Thank you Miss- thank you Mister Ch- Mister Chairman. Mister Chairman, under section fourteen C, the Fair Labor Standards Act, employers have a special certificate, may pay workers with disabilities less than the federal minimum wage of seven twenty-five an hour. As my colleague from Georgia has pointed out, the GAL has Estimated the average wage on a fourteen C is approximately three dollars and fifty cents. Fourteen C is antithetical to the Americans with Disabilities Act, which seeks to ensure equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for people with disabilities. In contrast, the subminimum wage employment concerns dis- people with disabilities to a lifetime of poverty and segregation. Section five eleven of the Rehabilitation Act limits the use of fourteen C by requiring individuals with disabilities who are twenty-four years or younger, to complete requirements designed to improve their access to competitive integrated employment, including transition services, vocational rehabilitation, and career counseling services before they are employed at a sub-minimum wage. Section five eleven also requires all workers with disabilities of any age who are paid under fourteen C certificate, receive regular career counseling and information about self-sufficiency, self-determination, and peer mentoring training opportunities in their local area. This bill would weaken these sensible provisions that support the goal of making investments in competitive integrated employment for people with disabilities, um and uh that were enshrined in the twenty fourteen reauthorization of the uh Workforce Innovation and Opportunities Act, or WIOA. Section five eleven ensures that individuals will not be employed at sub-minimum wage, unless they have explored other avenues of competitive integrated employment, and then voluntarily make an informed uh choice to engage in sub-minimum wage employment. This bill eliminates the necessity of all of those uh safeguards And so then uh what we need to so they lets them work at the m minimum wage and it's um so-called choice um to work at the minimum wage, that's an interesting use of the word choice, they get relegated to the minimum wage without all of those safeguards. For those reasons, Mister Chairman, I will ask people who both know on the bill, unless it's uh amended, to provide uh significant um uh transformational services. You're back.

The gentleman yields. I recognize the uh Vice Chairman of the committee, the gentleman from Utah, and Mister Owens.

Thank you, thank you so much. Um, first of all, my highest recommendation is to visit one of these facilities before we make a a decision that it's not working. Uh, we're not now in two thousand nine. We're now in tw- uh, twenty twenty six. Uh, we have uh, good people. Well, first of all, there are bad people in every industry. let's not look at those who take advantage of people to say that no one else have these opportunities. Um, there are good people who s- who - who actually look not - don't look at the return on investment but just want to give people the dignity of work. The vill- the facility I - I - I - I - I visited in Wisconsin, um, I - I remember one particular person, um, middle disability, blind, he's picking a pig in a hole. He's getting paid. Later on I had a chance to ask him what his dreams were, he had dreams. This is something John Deere could do by robots if they wanted to. But they're trying to give back to community, these folks the opportunity that many of us take for granted, to be able to go out there and work and and overcome and have communities, have people we can, can, that we can relate to, instead of staying at home or looking at TV or just taking trips, day trips doing absolutely nothing with other than that. So, I will say this. Experiencing it, seeing it firsthand uh is one of the things that I think will be a a really good job for, for a good for everyone here. Uh the bill is simple, it gets federal government out of the way so individuals can make opportunities to work for themselves. Uh by the way, these are folks that were asking to go out and compete in a business where they know they're not gonna get a job. They're not gonna get the job because they can't do the job. So they're supposed to fail, get a job, fail three times and then all of a sudden they can be part of something that will allow them to have the the the self-esteem they need. By cutting through the regular red tape, we help these workers find jobs early in their lives and get them building up their skill set and dignity that comes with having meaningful employment. Having spoken to families who love uh their whose loved ones utilize the fourteen seat employment I know the impact of this work is having anyone who goes and visits these facilities can see the excitement the the pride the idea that they're respected, they're with their friends Let's not take that away from folks, uh, just because, uh, we think we know better. So with that, I'd like to, uh, deal back.

Thanks, gentlemen. Does the gentlelady from Oregon wish to be recognized?

Yes, uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wish to speak in opposition to the bill.

You're recognized for five minutes.

Uh, thank you, I, I, I first want to say that, um, I align myself with the the comments that have been made about the importance of the dignity of work. and the recognition that people with disabilities deserve that opportunity, without a doubt. And I wanna align myself with the comments of my colleague from Georgia, Representative McBath. Uh, my state of Oregon, because also because it was mentioned, uh, here today, has phased out sheltered workshops, in part because of a decade-long litigation, but also because of a recognition that to send somebody the message of " you deserve the dignity of work but you don't deserve to even make minimum wage" is inconsistent and wrong. So I just wanna note that my state of Oregon does support uh job uh search and helping people wor- find an appropriate job for them and they are paid at least a minimum wage and I and I just wanted to to quote the Director of Disability Rights of Oregon who said at the end of the day what real really matters is knowing that there are thousands of Oregonians who now see themselves in their work as having value. having equal value and that level of confidence and dignity and sense of self-worth. So that's what this is about. We absolutely agree that people should have opportunities to participate in work, but I don't agree and I seriously uh dispute the the message that that dignity is arrived by saying you are less than and we are going to pay you less than, uh even minimum wage, which as uh Representative McBath uh uh noted for States with out of state minimum wages only seven dollars and twenty-five cents an hour. So uh I encourage uh my colleagues to vote no on the bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

I thank the gentlelady. Does the gentleman from South Carolina seek recognition, Mister Wilson?

I do.

You are recognized for five minutes.

Thank you very much, Mister Chairman, for your leadership on this very important issue. And I'm very grateful to uh provide my time to the distinguished Congressman from Wisconsin the author of the bill, Congressman Grothman.

Uh, first I'd like to enter into the records uh sixteen letters of support for H. R. eighty-seven thirty-six. They come from Project CU, Inc., uh, Kandu Industries, Inc., Black Hawk Technical College, remarkable Chippewa Valley, Chippewa River Industries, eighteen Arkansas, eighteen USA, and over a hundred and thirty parents and guardians and loved ones. who signed a letter urging this bill be passed out of committee.

Without objection?

Um.

Hearing none, they are entered.

Um, it's all fine and good to say that these people are gonna find a job in the community. The, um, facility I'm most familiar with, because of the current burdensome regulations, shut down. They had at that time thirty employees working at sub-minimum wage, not one. found a job of at least thirty hours a week in the community, which should be obvious if you tour these. You know, there are not a lot of things that we do here in Congress that really make you feel good, really make you feel good about great things going on in America. And maybe the one of the few things that really makes me feel good is when I tour these facilities in my district. We have eight in my district. They are all wonderful. facilities, the employees there are very happy to be working there, and really their whole life uh to a degree is built around their job, uh particularly because they get to know all sorts of new people. If I had a handicapped child, one of my concerns would be, you know, does they have any friends outside the home? These facilities provide situations with friends and the dignity of work the chance to earn some money, buy your own gifts for your parents, buy your own clothes for yourself. These people all have s- are all, virtually all, have separate sources of income on social security disability. But in any event, I suppose this debate is gonna go on. I beg members on the other side of the aisle to tour some of these facilities and see how happy these folks are and see how obvious it is, you are not gonna find uh genuine minimum wage jobs, unless it's a very short term thing, more in the nature of charity. So uh I beg members on the other side of the aisle, rather than recount talking points that somebody gave you, see these facilities. Uh, Mister Owens over there, he saw a facility in Wisconsin, it's tremendous. Whenever I see my s- facilities like this, it makes my makes my week to see so many people who've been dealt a difficult lot in life so wildly happy because they can now go to work just like everyone else and like i said if you get rid of these fourteen c certificates they're not gonna find a job for fifteen fifteen thousand a year they'll get no job at all they'll be restricted to putting together puzzles and watching tv what a horrible mean thing to do to these people who've been dealt a difficult lot in life. But in any event, thank you, Mister Chairman.

I thank the gentlemen.

I I yield back.

Gentlemen yields? Are there any others who wish to speak on amendment in nature of a substitute? There being no further discussion on amendment in the nature of a substitute, the committee will move to consideration of amendments. Are there any members who would like to offer amendments? I recognize the gentleman, the ranking member from Virginia, Mister Scott, for the purpose of amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. I have the amendment at the desk, Scott VA underscore O sixty-three.

The uh the the clerk will identify the The clerk will identify the amendment.

Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R eight seven three six, offered by Mister Scott of Virginia, identifier Scott VA underscore zero six three.

This gentleman from Utah wish to reserve a point of order.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.

A point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Scott, for five minutes in support of his amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, Mister Chairman, before I begin my remarks, I'd just like to let the gentleman from Wisconsin know that I've been visiting these facilities for at least four decades. one of the um facilities is getting rid of fourteen c certificates altogether and Virginia is phasing out um the uh fourteen c certificates but in recent uh decades sub-minimum wage employment for those with disabilities has actually declined as rights, access to education and employment opportunities have expanded the f- twenty fourteen workforce innovation and opportunity act, WIOA, the law governing public workforce system prioritized competitive integrated employment, referred to as CIE for those with disabilities. CIE is con- defined as a job where the worker earns a prevailing minimum wage, works alongside nondisabled workers, and receives the same benefits as nondisabled workers, and has the opportunities for advancement. Seventeen states and the District of Columbia have laws and policies that phase out the use of fourteen C certificates, and these States including, the bound state of Virginia have moved beyond this ninety year old exception to the Fair Labor Standards Act, and it's past time to update the federal policy. Uh, this bill moves the country in the wrong direction. But my par- bipartisan bill, the transformation to competitive integration, Integrated Employment Act, which I mark, which I'll be offering as an amendment, provides for the federal grants to enable states and fourteen C employers to transform their services and business models, to foster opportunities for competitive integrated employment. This legislation phases out the use of fourteen C in the remaining states that have not already done so over roughly four f- uh roughly five year time-line bringing the entire country into the twenty-first century where disability employment policy is concerned. There are many challenges facing workers with disabilities. Uh many need home and community-based services to remain in their communities. For example, Medicaid home and community-based services provide the critical supports that many individuals need to live safely in their homes, participate in the life of their communities, and succeed in competitive integrated employment. However, the draconian cuts to Medicaid and the big ugly bill passed last year, threaten these services across the country, slashing Medicaid funding by about a trillion dollars over the coming decade, even as many states are already struggling with rising costs and shortages of direct care workers, job coaches and others who provide these services. At the same time, Health and Human Services Secretary Kennedy and others in the Trump administration have, without offering any evidence, asserted that Medicaid home and community-based services are rife with fraud and abuse and raised questions whether the government should pay family c- caregivers at all. Instead of making it easier for eighteen to twenty-four year olds to begin their working life, in sheltered workshops, we should be providing funding so that states and current fourteen C employers can create greater opportunities for competitive integrated employment including by providing wrap-around services that help individuals succeed in real jobs at real wa- wages in their communities. The transformation to competitive integrated employment act does that. I'm offering it as an amendment to the bill, and it does a much better approach than the underlying bill, and so I urge Support of my amendment. You're back.

The gentleman yields. Uh, does the gentleman from Utah insist on a point of order?

I withdraw my point of order.

Point of or- reservation is withdrawn. Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment?

Mister Chairman.

Does the gentlelady from North Carolina, Miss Adams, se- seek recognition?

Yes, Mister Chairman, I move strike the last word and support it,

You're recognized for five minutes.

the Thank you. I I want to speak in support of uh Ranking Member Scott's amendment. Uh, three dollars and fifty cents. Uh, that's the average hourly wage for disabled workers operating under fourteen C vouchers in sheltered workshops. In this economy, eight hours of work at that wage would would barely cover a a day's worth of food. Regardless of ability, every working person in this country deserves to be treated with dignity, respect and and fairness in the workplace. And while I understand the value that the sheltered workshops have provided to, to workers with disabilities and their families, the fourteen C program has failed to provide disabled workers with the dignity they deserve. Employment in sheltered workshops is designed to be temporary. Disabled workers are meant to learn valuable skills and transition into competitive integrated employment. But that's not what's happening. Less than five percent of those making sub-minimum wage will will transition to competitive integrated employment in their lifetime. And the underlying bill would would only make the pathway to integrated employment more difficult for disabled workers. We should be working toward phasing out, not expanding, fourteen C. Opponents of this amendment will claim that that phasing out fourteen C will will take opportunities from disabled adults. That couldn't be further from the truth. And and frankly, I find the idea that disabled adults are only employable at starvation wages to be patronizing and and dehumanizing. Mr. Chairman, I would like to insert into the record a twenty twenty four study published in the JAMA Health Forum titled " Repeal of subminimal wages and social determinants of health, among people with disabilities."

Without objection, it'll be inserted.

Uh, this finds no decrease in employment outcomes for workers with cognitive disabilities following the repeal of fourteen C waivers. I think that the most important part of any plan to phase out fourteen C is a gradual transition and investment in wrap-around services to ensure that that no one is left behind. And this amendment does that. Uh, over a five year period the subminimal wage would would be eliminated. current fourteen C certificate holders would be given the resources they need to to transition to an integrated employment model. This amendment takes a careful approach that ensures disabled workers and and current fourteen C employers are participants in not subjects of the transition to competitive integrated employment and rather than expanding a program that has failed to deliver for disabled workers I encourage all of my colleagues to work toward a system that that respects the dignity of disabled workers, uh labor to support uh this amendment. Mister Chairman, uh I yield back.

I thank the gentlelady. Does the gentleman from Utah s- seek to be recognized?

Mister Chairman, uh for the consideration I insist on the point of order.

Point of order is re-reserved. Does the gentleman from Wisconsin, Mister Grothman, seek to be recognized?

Yeah, I'd like to speak to the amendment.

You are recognized for five minutes.

Again, I wish the folks on the other side of the aisle, and I I know Bobby Scott has, I don't know how you can not see these thing and not tour these things and feel good about them. These people are not starving. They are almost uniformly on some sort of SSI. so this supplements their other income. Um, one thing that hits you about touring these facilities is how happy people are, in part because they have a satisfaction of finding a job. There have been studies done and very few of these people find jobs in the community at regular minimum wage. I talked to a one of these facilities that did close in the last year, it breaks the heart of the people who ran the facility but they tell me none not one person of the thirty people who were left on the floor when they closed found a job for over thirty hours a week you can sometimes find a charity job in which some employer makes themselves feel good by hiring somebody for five or six hours a week but these people are not gonna find another job right now these places provide uh socialization for people who've been dealt a difficult lot in life. And nobody is forcing them to be there. They've got themselves, they've got their guardians, they've got their parents, and they are making this choice because it's what they like the best. And the fact that the law that we passed in what was twenty fourteen um takes away this option from people is just so horrible. I mean we do all sorts of stupid things here in Washington, but the idea, I mean I think one of the dumbest things is to take away an option from people who built the who've been dealt this difficult lot in life and saying you cannot have the happiness that comes with having a real job, with real fellow employees. Um, in any event I I encourage people to vote against the amendment.

I thank the gentleman. Does the gentleman from Utah insist on his point of order?

Yes, uh, Mr. Chairman, I insist on my point of order.

Yeah. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for five minutes.

Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I don't know procedurally where this is in the point of order, uh, but I I just wanted to speak in favor of Mister Scott's amendment, huh, and a and again reiterate that that um everyone in this room, I'm sure, understands the importance of the dignity of work and having people have opportunities to get that dignity from a job. But what does not give dignity is saying to someone that you do not deserve to be adequately paid for the work that you're doing. And I and I just wanna note according to the organization New America, They ranked states overall on subminimum wage and employment policies, and I'm proud that my state of Oregon has a high score of eighty-eight. I'll note that the state of Wisconsin has a thirty-six score. Uh, we have done a lot of work to make sure that people have uh employment, and that they are paid at least a minimum wage. And I'm and I I just I think this is an important conversation to have about that dignity of work and it is not dignified to say someone you you work but you do not deserve to be paid even minimum wage. Uh, that is to me seems like exploitation. There are better ways to address this by doing all we can to place people in employment that's appropriate for them, and for which they are paid uh for the work that they are doing. So I support the amendment and I yield back the balance on my time.

Gentlelady yields. I recognize a gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member.

Well, did um gentleman insist on his point of order?

The gentleman from Utah, do you still insist on your point of order?

Uh, mister

He insists on his point of order.

Mister Chairman, I understand the um uh technical problems with the amendment, and so I won't object to the um ruling that it's um not in order, and I'll be supporting Mrs. Macbeth's amendment that does much of what's in this amendment. I would point out however that it's Uh, the um, ruling is a little late. So if it happens subsequently, we don't wanna use this as a precedence.

The gentleman withdraws his amendment.

With, withdraw.

The gentleman withdraws his amendment. Does anyone else seek recognition to offer an amendment? I recognize the gentlelady from Georgia, Miss McMath, to sp

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I do have an amendment at the desk, McMath, and

The clerk will report the amendment.

Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR eight seven three six, offered by Miss McBath of Georgia, identifier McBath underscore AMD underscore EMPTA.

Does the gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order?

Yes, I reserve a point of order.

A point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentlelady from Georgia, Miss McBath, for five minutes in support of her amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know, we've heard a lot this morning about the dignity of work and making individuals with disabilities have the opportunities that should be afforded to them for equity. We've heard a lot about that this morning, but there again, to reiterate, let's make sure there's equity and let's enhance that opportunity of the dignity of work for them because they do at least deserve a minimum wage. Um, I'm gonna kinda go off script here. I actually have a family member that has processing disabilities. I have a family member He, you know, has was born a preemie and we recognized very early on that, you know, he was having processing, learning disabilities, all those kinds of things, and some, to some extent, a physical disability. But I assure you, he is working uh a full-time job and he is working in an environment that they are paying him a fair wage, the minimum wage. So I don't want us to discredit people because of their disabilities and say that they don't deserve a fair minimum wage. If we're talking about the dignity of their ability to be able to work and be a a a thriving part of society, that is their right. So let's enhance that. And so as I said before, the underlying bill rolls back progress towards equal opportunity for people with disabilities that was made in the twenty fourteen uh WIOA. And WIOA not only codified competitive integrated employment, CIE, as the appropriate goal of vocational re rehabilitation services for disabled job seekers section five one one insured that young adults who were aged eighteen through twenty four receive appropriate services to help them successfully transition to adulthood with the necessary tools and experiences to succeed in competitive integrated employment before they receive sub-minimum wages and work in segregated environments. This amendment builds on the success of those bipartisan efforts and the path was charted by the states and employers across the country that have stopped allowing the payment of sub-minimum wages to disabled workers. This language is taken from the bipartisan version of WIOA that had been negotiated and agreed to by Republicans and Democrats on this committee. Similar language can also be found in the version of WIOA that was voted out of committee just a few weeks ago with the unanimous support of my Republican colleagues. It would support the creation of a technical assistance center with the Office of Disability Employment Policy, ODE P, at the Department of Labor that would provide technical assistance to employers and states who have chosen to or want to phase out the use of fourteen C certificates and instead provide a real path to opportunities for competitive integrated employment. I encourage my colleagues to support this amendment because truly, as I said, I have someone in my family that has both physical and emotional mental disabilities. And I assure you, he has deserved every ounce of responsibility that he gets in the work that he does every single day. And yes, he is very much integrated into the community, and he is very well loved and received, and is an integral part of the work that he does in his community and on his job. But that business saw fit to make sure that he was equally and equitably cared for and treated, and he receives a fair wage. And I think that everyone, everyone deserves a fair wage for the work that they do. So I encourage my colleagues to support this amendment and I yield back the balance of my time.

The general lady yields. Does the gentleman from Utah insist on a point of order?

I reser- I withdraw my point of order.

Uh, the reservation is withdrawn. Is there further discussion on the amendment? I recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member.

Mr. Mr. Chairman, without going into any more detail, the general lady from Georgia has outlined the amendment. I'll just point out that the amendment was based on language that was agreed upon by both Democrats and Republicans, and the um, we owe a bill we negotiated in the last Congress and that the same language was part of the bipartisan um Um, uh, the uh, we owe a bill that the committee um, considered a few weeks ago. So um, hopefully it can be adopted in this bill. You're back.

The gentleman yields. Uh, does a gentleman from Wisconsin speak, wish to speak on this amendment?

Uh, no, I think I've, I've kind of made the major points here. Um, I, I guess the one thing I'll add is they think by hiring a bunch of bureaucrats to go in and meet with these people you're gonna take somebody with obvious disabilities and change what you have you're not going to i just one more time beg all the other members of the committee to tour one of these facilities to see how happy these folks are and to see at least in some cases how obvious it is that um you're not gonna find an employer in the community give people a forty hour a week job at a minimum wage. But, uh, and again, I'd beg people on the other side of the aisle cuz it'll come up to tour these facilities. Thanks.

The gentleman yields. Are there any others who wish to speak on this amendment? Seeing no other members wish to speak on the amendment. The question is on the amendment by the gentlelady from Georgia. All in favor say aye.

Aye. Aye.

All opposed no. No.

No.

In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it and the amendment is not agreed to. A recorded vote is requested. Roll call vote is ordered pursuant to the chair's previous announcement this vote will be Are there any further amendments to the amendment in nature with substitute to H R eighty-seven thirty-six? There being no further amendments, uh the question now occurs on the amendment um Further action on a uh on H R eighty-seven thirty-six is postponed. We'll now move to the cons to consider the next bill. Yes. Mm-hmm.

So, where'd we go with this? Oh.

mmm hmm i think maybe too many people are gonna be more involved in this mmm oh i like this well i think i'm gonna end up eating a lot of food so i'm gonna end up eating a lot of food The committee will now proceed to consideration of Bill HR eighty-seven O five for amendment. The bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are available. The clerk shall designate the bill.

H R eight seven zero five, a bill to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of nineteen sixty-five to prevent the American history and civics program from funding radical indoctrination and for other purposes.

Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. Without objection, the bill will be considered as read and open for amendment at any point. and any amendment offered shall be considered as read. Does anyone seek to be recognized? Uh, Mister Owens,

Yes.

for what purpose do you seek recognition?

Uh, I have an amendment at the desk. I have an amendment in the nature of a substitute at the desk.

The clerk shall designate the amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R eight seven zero five, offered by Mister Owens of Utah, identifier MUANS eight seven zero five underscore zero one.

Without objection, the amendment shall be considered original text for purposes of further amendment. The amendment in the nature of a substitute has already been distributed. I now recognize Mister Owens for five minutes to explain the amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, the NSS, uh, to the Charlie Act, s uh, simply makes a technical change to the bill. I'm proud to champion this bill, named that to my friend, Charlie Kurt, who dedicated his life to encouraging civil discourse and, uh, political engagement. This common sense legislation prohibits ideological capture of the ESAIA history and civics program, ensures that there's no uh prioritiz- prioritiz- prioritiz- prioritization of funding on the basis of race, sex, gender ide- ideology, uh or immigration status. Currently, American students are woefully ignorant of basic civics and history. A two thousand twenty-four survey of over three thousand undergraduates conducted by the American Council of Trustees and alumni in College Pulse Pulse, found that forty percent of students believe that senators serve four terms. Seventy-five percent of students did not know that the Constitution does not specify the number of justices on the Supreme Court. Half of the students surveyed believed that the Constitution was written in seventeen seventy-six. Clearly, students are not well informed of the fundamental civics and history concepts. Unfortunately, the previous administration attempted to weaponize the program to prioritize funding for projects that incorporate racially, um, ethically, culturally, and logistically diverse perspe- perspectives into teaching and learning. After receiving criticism from then-ranking member, Virginia Fox, the Department of Education decided against officially prioritizing funds based on bias uh criteria described in their proposed priorities. However, in twenty twenty-three, the department again announced that it would prioritize funds on project promoting equity in student access for underserved students. That includes categories as nonwhite, English learning, uh LGBTQ uh students, uh and illegal aliens. Um federal federal federal education dollars should help students learn how American government works, and prepare them for to be responsible citizens, not steer children toward radical political agendas. At the time when political violence is on the rise, we should be strengthening shared values and and national unity, I urge my colleagues to vote yes on the Charlie Act, which restores sanity and fairness to the ESEA civics and his history programs. With that, I yield back.

I thank the gentlemen. Are there any members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment in the nature of substitute? This is General Lady from Oregon, Miss Bonamici, seek to be recognized.

Yes, uh, Mister Chairman, I move to strike the last word and speak in opposition to the uh

Recognized for five minutes.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I'm a strong supporter of history and civics education, and it was interesting to hear my colleague uh talk about how little students know. I just had an amazing visit with Abernathy Elementary School in Portland. Uh, their fifth graders knew how many members of Congress there are. They knew the separate branches of government. They were in fifth grade and they knew that. And then the same week I visited with a high school uh class at Lincoln High School, yeah, also in Portland, Oregon, public high school, and they just came in sixth. in the nation in a civics competition, they can discuss const- the history of the constitution, all of the amendments, and apply contemporary issues to the constitution, and they are at a public high school. So I am a strong supporter of civics education and we have a lot to be proud of. Yes, we have work to do, uh but again, as we say in this committee many times, curriculum decisions are up to states and local uh uh governments, not uh not Congress. But this bill is counter-productive and frankly absurd, and it seems like once again my Republican colleagues are more interested in cultivating some kind of hysteria and demonizing teachers than in actually legislating. The grants under this program are intended to improve the quality of teaching and instruction and American history and civics education. If that's what they actually did, that would be great. But my colleagues have provided absolutely no substantive evidence that funds are being used to quote, radically indoctrinate " children" or perpetuate " discriminatory equity ideology." Instead they cite heckin' s- second- cite second-hand anecdotes and use sweeping generalizations about what they imagine is going on in schools to justify what appears to be a political witch hunt. The hypocrisy is truly staggering here. The majority repeatedly and rightfully asserts that the federal government should have no role in setting school curricula. Then they turn around and introduce yet another book-banning bill to tell teachers what they can and can't teach. What happened to local control? What happened to returning education to the States? This administration's obsession with so-called gender ideology is also disgusting and frankly harmful. It's reprehensible to attack transgender individuals, especially transgender youth. This came up on the floor yesterday as well. As I've said before, the goal here is not an elimination of ideology but of people. people who are just as deserving of dignity, respect, and love as you are. So if my colleagues are truly interested in strengthening the American history and civics education program, I encourage them to look into the bipartisan constitution and civics education is valuable in Community Schools, or Civics Act, which is uh pending in the Senate. Representative Bacon and I will soon be introducing a bipartisan house companion of this bill to promote hands-on civic engagement

Does the gentleman from North Carolina,

Thank you. Mm.

Mister Harris, seek to be recognized?

Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. I seek recognition to speak on the bill.

You're recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm proud to support the Civic and History Advancement to Restore Learning, Integrity and Education Act, also known as the Charlie Act, and express my gratitude to Representative Owens for leading out in this. I want to take just a moment to highlight one aspect of this bill that should be important to every member of this committee, and that is restoring civics to the classroom. This bill would ensure that federal civics funding focuses on teaching the Constitution, American history, and principles of self-government. When you look at the alarming number of students and adults who cannot identify basic civics this is what you will find. In one survey with the Annenberg Public Policy Center in twenty twenty three, it found that thirty-three percent of respondents, of whom six in ten had taken a high school civics course focusing on the constitution or judicial system, could not name all three branches of government, while seventeen percent of respondents could not name a single branch. In another survey from the US Chamber of Commerce foundation in twenty twenty four, it found that seventy percent of the two thousand registered voters surveyed failed a civic literacy quiz on basic questions of American government. Half of respondents could not, and I quote, "correctly name the branch of government where bills become laws." In one last survey from the American Bar Association in twenty twenty four, it was found that only forty-one percent of the respondents could correctly identify the Constitution as the document that begins with the words, "we, the people." Now these findings are alarming. and raise questions about the state of civics education in schools across this country. Every American should be able to correctly answer basic questions about our system of government, the unique history of the United States, and the civic structures that are essential to our democratic republic. It's long past time that we address this problem and ensure that schools do a better job of teaching students about the blessings of American liberty, and the responsibilities of citizenship. And so with that, I urge all my colleagues to support the Charlie Act. And, Mr. Chairman, with that, I yield back.

I thank the gentlemen. Are there any others who wish to be identified? This is the gentlelady from Georgia, Miss McBath. You wish to be recognized.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wish to speak in opposition to the amendment and the nature of substitute.

You're recognized for five minutes.

Thank you. Naming a censor censorship bill, the Charlie Act, is a level of irony that should not be lost on my colleagues. This is another bill about pressuring schools and teachers into conforming to this Republican majority's specific world view. While Republicans want to say that they are fighting to preserve the free exchange of ideas and diversity of thought, they regularly do just the opposite. Schools and teachers are being targeted with funding cuts and personal attacks just for having different opinions than the president, just for disagreeing with the administration about highly controversial topics, topics that are meant to be discussed and debated freely in academic settings at the appropriate time. This majority claims to be protecting diversity of thought while they actively go out of their way to get people fired and punish schools for using, simply just using the word diversity. while they fail to see the irony in getting rid of viewpoints that they only view as bias due to their own personal biases. Time and time again, Republicans in Congress say one thing but they then do the other. The American people are not naive. They know that the Republicans claiming to be warriors for freedom of thought are the very same ones stopping conversations and banning books and classrooms around the country at both universities and high schools. They are the same ones who will call you un-American for trying to push this country to live up to its founding ideals that all men are created equal. You can't have it both ways. It is not possible to defend free speech while preventing discussions, because you disagree with them and don't want them happening. That is hypocrisy. This refusal to have difficult conversations, to refuse to discuss history just because it makes someone uncomfortable, to attack people's character and ideals directly instead of debating these things, so people can decide what they think for themselves, is a disservice to our students. It is a disservice to those who lived this re- these realities and to the people who put their lives and reputations on the line to help our country live up to its promise. I can assure you I spent many years with my family on the front lines, fighting for the civil and human rights of all Americans so that everyone would be able to be engaged in the d- diversity of thought and ideas. Whether they agreed with mine or not. I engage with my Republican colleagues all the time, whether we agree or not. But it is that diversity, it is that interfacing, it is that interaction, it is the freedom of thought and opinions and ideas that make this country great. So we shouldn't be hampering the ability for people to directly debate ideas. and talk about things that they believe are important, especially our students. So I'm opposed to this bill and I yield.

Recognized gentlelady from Illinois, Miss Miller, f- for five minutes.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, and a special thanks to Representative Owens for leading this important bill. America is the greatest nation on earth. We have a wonderful history, filled with rich stories and enduring legacy. But for decades, Democrats have hijacked our schools and turned them into indoctrination stations, misrepresenting our history and manipulating it to serve their own political ends. In my home state of Illinois, the Chicago Public School District has fully embraced the sixteen nineteen project, a curriculum that distorts historical facts and perpetrates lies about our history to push a political agenda. Let me remind my colleagues, President Lincoln was from Illinois, he healed the nation and ended slavery, and that is a history worth celebrating. The Charlie Act doesn't ban the teaching of American history. Instead, it safeguards hard-earned taxpayer dollars from being used to indoctrinate our children. And I do wanna say to my colleague on the other side of the aisle, in light of funding cuts, um, under Joe Biden, Joe Biden threatened to cut school lunch programs if we didn't, if the public schools didn't push radical transgender policies. And we wanna protect our children. We are not banning appropriate books. We want perverted, indecent, and inappropriate curriculum out of our schools. They're wasting this students' time and hypersexualizing our students. That's what we want removed from our public schools. The Charlie Act codifies two of President Trump's executive orders. It acknowledges the biological reality of male and female, and ensures K through twelve students are shielded from radical leftist ideologies such as these radical transgender policies, and perverted, indecent, and inappropriate curriculum. The bill also prohibits selecting federal grant recipients based on DEI crit- criteria making school districts compete for federal money based on merit, meritocracy, and not diversity status. I am proud that this legislation is named after Illinois native Charlie Kirk, a national hero who as many know was a lover of American history and wanted civil discourse. It has been said that the more a society drifts from the truth, the more they will hate those who speak it. The Charlie Act is an appropriate way to remember our friend and to ensure radical leftist ideologies are removed from our schools. I am proud to stand beside Congressman Owens and I urge all my colleagues to support H R eighty-seven O five. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.

Gentlelady Eales, does a gentleman from California, Mister Takano, s- seek recognition?

Uh, I do, yes, Mister Governor.

You're recognized for five minutes.

I'm going to strike the last word and sp- uh rise in opposition to the amendment. Um, we do have a great and glorious history, um, as Americans. Um, but I, I always put that in the context of, uh, the first, the opening words of the Constitution, we, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union. Uh, there were debates during the Constitutional Convention over the original sin of our country, uh, which was slavery. And, um, and in fact, uh, parts of the Constitution, uh, pay, uh, homage, uh, to, uh, the institution of slavery, uh, by the mere fact that um uh uh slaves were counted as three fifths of a person. Um it took a bloody war, a bloody civil war uh and a great president like Lincoln from a great state of Illinois uh to be a part of uh of reconciling the contradictions between uh our st- our founding principles of freedom and equality um, against the contradiction of slavery. So, uh, an order to form a more perfect union implies that we were not a perfect union. And the greatness of our country, uh, is, uh, the consequence of, uh, generations and generations of Americans fighting to make the country more perfect than when it began. Um, along these lines, let me talk about, uh, my parents and grandparents. who spent four years as prisoners in American concentration camps during World War Two. They were forced from their homes by the government. My mother and father spent their childhoods in tar paper barracks in the deserts of Wyoming and California before starting over from nothing once the war ended. And by the way, these camps were not uh, you know, were not uh meeting OSHA safety standards. My father suffered very serious burns on his legs after falling into a burn pit. Uh, years later, President Ronald Reagan formally apologized for Japanese-American incarceration and acknowledged that it was a grave mistake, quote, based solely on race, unquote. This is a conservative president who also I think came from Illinois. But today, one, on one such incarceration camp, the Trump administration had posted signs making visitors uh report quote " any signs or any information that are negative about either past or living Americans" unquote. Japanese Americans like my family fought to preserve those incarceration sites so that they would teach future generations about the dangers of prejudice and racism. This administration has put up signs warning docents and park rangers not to make America look bad. I tell this story because that is what this bill does. It prohibits the leading government-funded history and civics programs from discussing racism, systemic discrimination, the existence of transgender people, or any other history the administration doesn't agree with. This isn't civics history. This is censorship. And no matter how this administration and this majority may try, you cannot erase the facts of American history. As a former teacher, I ask, how can we accurately talk about the realities of the American experience if teachers can't discuss how slavery and the Jim Crow era shaped American life today. How can we talk about Japanese American incarceration without talking about the racism and moral failures that led to American prison camps? Or discuss the uh state violence that led to Stonewall without being uh without being to quote the administration too negative. This bill seeks to erase transgender Americans entirely from American history and civics curriculum. This is not only harmful, it's inac- it's inaccurate. Transgender people have existed throughout American history, and we need more education about their stories, not less. And while the majority is busy policing what teachers say, they're ignoring the actual crisis in the classroom. The administration has already canceled six hundred million dollars in teacher training grants. One in eight teaching positions are unfilled or filled by a teacher who is not certified for the role. It's estimated that six million students are impacted by this shortage nationwide. This bill doesn't offer any support for that crisis. This bill does not authorize a single dollar toward educate uh toward educator profe- professional development. It just executes on the administration's orders to clean up any history it doesn't like. Like Joseph McCarthy before them, the authors of this bill give politicians the unilateral power to censor the ideas they don't understand or don't agree with. It doesn't take long before politicians' ideologies begin to creep further and further into our children's freedom to learn. I yield back, Mr. Chairman.

I thank the gentlemen. I now recognize the gentleman from Guam, Mr. Moylan, for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and not wanting to throw the baby out with the bathwater, I request a point of clarity on the bill and scope of how history can be taught, uh, which a definition that includes the United States is fundamentally racist, sexist, or otherwise discriminatory. So I have a question on how, if at all, the bill might impact teaching constitutional law, specifically the insular cases. Uh, Mister Chairman, I'd like to enter into record a letter from members of Congress, forty-three of them, a bipartisan letter letter to the Attorney General, uh, regarding the Justice Department should similarly recognize the racist logic, uh, that insular cases, doctrine of territorial incorporation, represents and expressly rejects this case law, Mister Chairman.

Without objection,

Uh, Mister Chairman,

we'll answer it.

I also uh like to enter into the record that a Department of Justice reply uh when the depart to this letter uh that the department emphatically agrees with the letter.

Without objection.

And finally, Mister Chairman, I also wish to enter into the record uh Justice Gorsuch uh his decision on the Supreme Court decision regarding the insular cases

Without objection, it'll be inserted.

OK. And, Mister Chairman, all th- all these letters and, uh, decisions all - all agree with the insular case were based on race's ideologies, to include, Mister Chairman, a final, uh, enter into the record the, um, Justice Manual, uh, that regards the applicable and constitutional provisions of the U. S. territories.

Without objection, you're perceived.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. And because the insular cases are now uh, law of the land and the interpretation of constitution or fundamental law, I wanna know if this will be - how this would impact and what can be taught on it. And my understanding and the staff's decision in staff's discussion is that nothing in this bill would prohibit teaching about the flaws in our past. So, my question is for my good friend, Mister Owens, Would you mind kindly elaborating on how your bill might affect teaching about our complex history and some of the current issues Americans in the territories might face?

Well, thank thank you so much for uh for this opportunity to to clarify this. Uh first of all, uh this has nothing to do with covering past mistakes. Matter of fact, the beauty of our country is the fact that our history shows our past mistakes. Uh we start off with the concept of becoming more perfect union. It can't say how powerful that is to have humble uh founders who realized they were not perfect but in time we can be much much better and that's exactly what our country has become um it's important that as we move forward that we not only tell the history of our country uh tell the history of my my history of of segregation of coming through that process, of of how my race dealt with that uh all that's important and the most important thing from that is how far we've come. I'm sitting here now with my friend from uh from Guam, from territory of Guam, and I'm and I'm from Utah with a history, if you go back far enough, they would say we would never be here. But here in this country because we believe in a more perfect union, because we believe that all men are created equal, cuz we believe that we the people become one in time with history, then we can truly give our kids a great uh much much greater opportunity to have vision ahead of us. So it's important that we do not teach our past history, as if it's our pres- present path. And that's what this is all about. Let's be honest. Yes, we made mistakes, but look how far we've come. Look at what we're doing together as we the people today. If we have teachers, we have uh uh folks who understand that process, we give our kids more hope, more vision, more opportunity, and they can become even more perfect than we are today, if given the opportunity that uh they see our path for what it is, what it is. So uh thank you for that question. Just know um This is to give our kids, no matter where they are in this great nation, a chance to see that they can truly have uh even something better to pass on to their kids.

I thank my colleague very much for that clear explanation. Mister Chairman, I support this measure. And I thank you uh very much. I yield.

Gentlemen yields. Does the gentlelady from North Carolina wish to be recognized? Miss Adams?

Yes, Mister Chair, I I move like the strength of last words, speaking honestly,

Be recognized for five minutes.

it's a good bill. Thank you, um, Mr. Chairman. Let me first of all say, uh, uh, that I support strong civics education. I support teaching our students American history, government, geography, and the ongoing work of democracy in this country. But this bill does not meet the moment our schools are facing right now. Schools need stability. They need clear guidance. They need resources. And they need teachers, counselors, and and civil rights enforcement and a department of education that can actually answer the phone when states, districts, students, and families need help. Instead, this bill gives them another political fight. The American History and Civics programs were created to - to help teachers teach history well and - and prepare students to understand our democracy. These programs support teacher training, student resources, and - and academics, uh, that - that help young people better understand our institutions and their responsibilities as citizens. Rather than strengthen that work, this bill would restrict those grants by using vague and politically loaded terms from President Trump's executive orders. This bill can limit what history can be taught in classrooms and and may cause schools to to pull back from from certain instructional materials or or teach preparation because they are worried about keeping access to to federal funds. Well, that's not helping schools. That's putting one more burden on schools already dealing with too much. At the same time, this administration has has cut the Department of Education's workforce dramatically. Committee staff noted that the administration's reduction in in force cut the department's staff in half, reducing the staff available to answer questions from state and local education leaders. And so we know these cuts have real consequences. When the Office of Civil Rights is weakened, students and families are left waiting. Students with disabilities, students facing harassment, students experiencing discrimination, and families trying to get help are left wondering whether anyone at the federal level is still there to protect them. The Government Accountability Office reported that the administration announced a reduction in force and and reorganization that would cut OCR's work by work workforce by about half, and that from March to September, twenty twenty five, OCR received more than nine thousand complaints of alleged discrimination and resolved more than seven thousand, about ninety percent, through dismissals. Well, that should concern every member of this committee because civil rights enforcement is not paperwork. I- i- it is not bureaucracy, it- it's how we make sure that a child with a disability gets the services they're entitled to. It's how we make sure that a student is is not denied opportunity because of race, sex, disability, religion, or national origin. It is how we make sure that schools are safe and fair places for for every child. So I have to ask, why are we spending time on this bill when OCR needs support? Why are we debating another culture war bill when schools are not providing them with the same services? asking for help with with staffing shortages and learning loss and chronic absenteeism and student mental health and special education services, and funding uncertainty. Why are we telling teachers what not to say instead of giving them the tools to do their jobs? My colleagues on the other side of the aisle often say that they want to return education to the States, but this bill does the opposite. It inserts Washington politics into teacher training and civics insta- instruction while schools are already trying to navigate the chaos created by federal cuts and uncertainty. And so if we truly care about civics education, then we should invest in it. We should support teachers. We should protect the office for civil rights. And we should make sure that the Department of Education has the staff and the capacity to serve students and families and schools. And what we should not do is pass a bill that creates confusion, chills, honest instruction, and distracts from the real problems that schools are facing. So for those reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote no on this bill. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

I thank the gentlelady and I recognize the gentlelady from Connecticut, Mrs. Hayes, for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm going to strike the last word.

You're recognized.

As I sit here and hear debate on this piece of legislation, this does not do anything that it says it is supposed to do. As a history and social studies teacher, I s- taught civics and government and many of the things that we're discussing here for close to fifteen years. two thousand seven hundred days in the classroom, not counting before and after school work or any of my summer work. And I can tell you that this committee talks more abo- about sexual orientation and ideology and and gender ideology than I ever heard in all of those years in the classroom. That's just not what teachers do, that's not what teachers talk about, that's not what teachers focus on. But what I will say, when we're talking about the teaching of these things, many of my colleagues have referenced our founding documents and what our founding fathers uh may have put in these documents. But over those two hundred and fifty years, we didn't just evolve to be the more perfect union that we are striving to be. People challenged those ideas. People showed up and asked questions. So the idea that young people today can't do that is just not what education is supposed to do. Teachers operate under, as a social studies teacher I had to work under the social studies framework, um, our standards, the C three framework, which you teach children how to recognize bias, uh write persuasively, uh examine critical ideas. You don't te- tell them what to think. You give them the tools in order to evaluate the information that they're receiving. So this, what we're hearing today is that people are afraid of students having all of the information. And it's really hard to defend this piece of legislation at a time where we're seeing the gutting of the Voting Rights Act, a piece of landmark legislation that was borne out over time and and challenge, and sacrifice, and civil rights movements. Kids should learn all of those things in the classroom. And then I think probably the most egregious of all of this is the naming of the bill. The the person that this bill is meant to uplift, while he was entitled to his own ideas, there are many people who do not feel the same way as my Republican colleagues, and that's just not the work that we should be engaged in on this committee. If you want to make sure, if we want to, as my colleague Miss Adams said, there are many ways that we can support teachers and the education of students in making sure that they have the resources that they need making sure that I remember as a a first year teacher photocopying and making copies of primary source information to give to my students because my I I didn't have it in the classroom. Taking money out of my pocket to make sure that students had all of these things, and we can have robust conversations, subscribing to, you know, different mediums just so that my c- my students in my class could have access to all of these things that weren't provided by the district those are some of the things that we could work on in order to improve civic education. But limiting access to information is not how we do that, and it is it is remarkable. It is remarkable that in the same sentence that we talk about how far we've come as a nation, that this piece of legislation is being put forth that takes us decades back. Um, I I respect, uh, the author of this bill, uh, uh, who is submitting this, but I have to say that I disagree because I guess my experience has been a lot different, a lot different than than Mister Owens. My experience has been a lot different. It doesn't mean I I love this country any less. It doesn't mean that, um, I, I am not proud of the work and the progress that, that we have done. It means that I am honest about our history and I know that I cannot take it for granted, and I know that the work and the sacrifices of others before me requires, requires my participation in our civic society so that we can continue to move forward towards the idea of a more perfect union. We are not there yet. We have work to do. We have come a long way, but this is not the piece of legislation that does this, and I think that it really it really dismisses the hard work of teachers and educators every day by thinking they can be reduced to just indoctrinating students and not really investing in the profession and the future that they believe in and they love and care about and the students who they know deserve it. I will be voting no, and with that I yield back.

I thank the gentlelady. There's a gentleman from Virginia who wishes to be recognized.

Yes, Mr. Chairman.

Recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this bill would prohibit federal teacher training um and preparation funds for American history and civics education provided through the Elementary and Secondary Education Act from being used to teach discriminatory equity, ideology and gender uh ideology. I think it should be said that federal government should want children to be taught the full breadth of our country's history including the parts that are hard to talk about and our teachers should be able to access training that helped them do just that. But this bill is just another example of the majority promoting its view of history and frankly why the federal government needs to stay out of the curriculum. um diverse discrimin discriminatory equity ideology means different things to different people the gentleman from Guam went to great went to great lengths to talk about um discrimination in um in in uh in our history and the gentleman from Utah talked about slavery I don't know how you can talk about those without talking about discriminatory equity ideology the gentleman from Utah said well you that's in the past, let's talk about the present. Well how do you talk about the uh recent Louisiana versus Calais case uh on redistricting where the Supreme Court said you could have discriminatory districts and prove it. Prove that the districting plan discriminates against African has the effect of discriminating against African-Americans but you have no recourse unless you can show it wasn't partisan as well as racial. It does no recourse to a racially discriminatory plan if um the people who did it claimed that it was um uh partisan rather than racial. I don't know how you I mean did i- i- it's just different things to different people. This bill would prohibit teaching um that kind of discrimination and other subjects that uh I think most people think ought to be taught like how to teach discrimination and how to teach uh diverse student bodies. Those are the kinds of things that teachers may need training in, as Bill would prevent it. And while we should be addressing science, math, special education shortages, a majority is promoting anti-trans legislation that does nothing to get highly trained highly qualified professionals into our classrooms, It limits the training around history and civics that an educator can receive, and for those reasons we should defeat the legislation in a year back.

I thank the gentlemen. Are there any others who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment and nature of the substitute? There being no further discussion on the amendment and nature of the substitute's committee we'll move to consideration of amendments. Are there any members who would like to offer amendments? I recognize the gentlelady from Oregon, Miss Bonamici.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk to the underlying text.

The clerk will report the amendment.

Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R eight seven zero five, offered by Miss Bonamici of Oregon, identifier BONAMI underscore one zero zero.

Does a gentleman from Utah, reserve a point of order?

I w- reserve a point of order.

The point of order is reserved and I recognize the gentlelady from Oregon, Miss Bonamici, for five minutes in support of her amendment.

Uh, thank you very much, Mister Chairman. I agree and I know all of my colleagues here agree with the need for accurate civics and history uh education, but this bill uh is about censorship. It's not about accurate history and civics education. It seeks to define what history is taught and how, and it seeks to limit what history is is taught and how it is taught. Uh and and, Mister Chairman, should this bill pass, I would expect to see legal challenges, chilling of free speech, and also some chaos and confusion in classrooms across the country. What can you say? What can you talk about? Um but I'm I'm gonna try uh to make it a little bit better, it's not gonna fix the bill, but I'm gonna try to make it a little bit better with this amendment that would guarantee that no funds under this bill would be used to promote hate or discrimination, both uh of which we are seeing uh a lot these days. When people say things like quote "Black women do not have the brain-processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously" end quote or quote "The transgender thing happening in America is a throbbing middle finger to God" close quote, statements like that add to the division in our nation. And although viewpoint diversity is important, there is no place for hate speech in our schools and in our society. And recently we've even heard someone say we need more Islamophobia. end quote, " Fear of Islam is rational," close quote. These statements send a message that discriminating against someone for their religious beliefs is acceptable and let me be clear, it is not. Just this week we saw a violent attack at an Islamic center in San Diego that left three people dead. Hateful rhetoric like the remarks above emboldened these kinds of attacks. Political violence is unacceptable, period, and hatred is unacceptable, period. So my amendment would insure that funds used to support our public schools do not go to those who support hate against any historically marginalized communities. So I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance on my time.

General Lady Yields, does the gentleman insist on a point of order?

I resor- withdraw my point of order.

Reservation is withdrawn. Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment? Uh, the gentleman from North Carolina, Mister Harris, do you wish to be recognized?

Yes, Mister Chairman, I'd like to speak in opposition to this amendment.

You're recognized for five minutes.

Mister Chairman, I - I rise to speak against this amendment primarily because it is totally unnecessary. The - the core implication of this amendment is that the bill that's been introduced without this amendment would somehow otherwise ban teaching about racism, ban teaching about misogyny, or ban treatment about mistreatment of minorities. But the facts are nothing could be further from the truth. Instead, this bill prohibits civics funding from being used to teach that the United States is fundamentally racist, sexist, or otherwise discriminatory. Listen, critical race theory, as espoused, for example, in the sixteen nineteen project, holds that the entire system of American self-government is irreparably shot through with racism, or systemic discrimination. Critical race theory attacks, actually, colorblind and race neutral, such as the Constitution, as being inherently inequitable. It assumes that every element of government was established to benefit the privileged. That's very different from teaching that slavery is real, that racism is real, and that misogyny is real. America has had, as As the uh lead on this bill already, Mister Owens pointed out, America has had and still has many flaws. And this bill would do nothing to prohibit teaching that. However, America's story is one of progress. The American experiment in self-government is unique in world history. American self-government combined with capitalism has been maybe the greatest engine in world history. for expanding opportunity and lifting marginalized communities out of poverty. I just think again, the core implication of the amendment is that without it, that somehow we're gonna ban teaching on these important issues. That, that is just not the truth. And so I rise in opposition uh to this amendment and uh urge my colleagues to vote it down. With that, I yield back.

The gentleman yields. Are there any others who wish to speak on this amendment?

No.

Seeing none.

Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman.

Uh, does the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, wish to be uh recognized?

Yes, Mr. Chairman, I'll speak to the amendment.

You are recognized for five minutes.

Mr. Chairman, I just wanna read the amendment. It says that um We're adding a provision that says no funds may be used for anti-trans, anti-reb, anti-immigrant or racism, including anti-black hate, anti-semitism or misogyny or hate against other historically marginalized populations. Um, if it doesn't pass that would as- I guess funds could be used for that. So I guess we have a choice. You're back.

Gentlemen, are there any others that wish to speak on the amendment? Seeing none, uh the question is on the amendment by the gentlelady from Oregon, Miss Bonamici. All in favor say aye.

Aye. Aye.

All opposed no. No. No. In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it, an amendment is not agreed to. Mister Chairman, I request a re-vote. A roll call vote is ordered pursuant to the chair's previous announcement this vote will be postponed. Are there any further amendments to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R eighty seven O five? The gentlema- lady from North Carolina, Miss Adams, do you wish to be recognized for an amendment?

Uh I wish to be recognized, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk, AMD underscore five eight seven.

The uh clerk will identify the amendment.

Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R eight seven zero five, offered by Miss Adams of North Carolina, identifier Adam NC underscore five eight seven.

Does gentleman from uh uh uh from Utah wish to reserve a point of order?

Yes, I will reserve a point of order, please.

Point of order is reserved. I now recognize generally from North Carolina, Miss Adams, to speak for five minutes on her amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, uh I rise in support of my amendment which makes one simple clarification. Nothing in this act shall be construed to prevent the teaching of the horrors of slavery in American history. That should not be controversial. Uh, if we're gonna talk about American history and civics, then we have to be willing to tell the truth about American history and civics. We cannot teach the founding of this country without teaching the the contradiction that existed at the very beginning. We cannot teach freedom without teaching slavery. We cannot teach the Constitution without teaching the millions of people who were excluded from its promises. And we cannot teach reconstruction, civil rights, voting rights, or the long struggle for equal justice without teaching what made those struggles necessary in the first place. And that's not in in contradiction. Uh, that's history. And our students are are strong enough to to learn the truth. The concern with this bill is that its broad and politically charged language may create confusion for Uh, committee staff has already warned that this bill may limit what history can be taught in classrooms and and may influence local decisions about instructional materials and teacher preparation because schools do not want to risk federal funding. As a retired educator for forty years, I know what happens when politicians write vague restrictions and teachers are left to interpret them. Teachers start to avoid hardship uh hard subjects and districts start to pull back and lessons get watered down and students lose access to the full story of this country we should not put teachers in a position where they have to wonder whether an honest lesson about slavery Jim Crow, segregation, redlining, or the civil rights movement could be labeled political or divisive. This amendment does not require any school to adopt a particular curriculum. It does not tell s- states or - or local districts how to teach. It does not force one political viewpoint into the classroom. It simply says that - that nothing in this bill, nothing in this bill should be used to stop schools from teaching the horrors of slavery in American history. Slavery is not a side issue in American history. It is central to American history. It is, it shaped the nation's founding. It shaped our constitution. It shaped our economy. And it shaped the fight for freedom that continued long after emancipation. Our students deserve to learn that history honestly. They deserve to learn about the cruelty and the violence of slavery, but also about the resistance, the courage, the faith, the the family and and and humanity of enslaved people who fought to survive and be free. And they deserve to understand that democracy is not something that we inherited perfectly. It's something generations of Americans had to fight to make real. If this bill is truly about strengthening civics and history education, then this amendment should be easy to accept. Because civics is not just about memorizing the three branches of government. It's about understanding who had power, who was denied it, and how people organized, protested, legislated, and and sacrificed to expand the promise of America. So, again, my amendment is straightforward. It gives teachers and and and school districts clarity. It protects the the teaching of the horrors of slavery in American history, and it it makes clear it makes clear that this act should not be used to erase avoid or sanitize one of the most important and painful chapters in our nation's story. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment. With that, Mr. Chairman, uh I yield back.

General Lady Yales, uh does the gentleman from Utah insist on his point of order?

Yes, th- thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh the Democrat amendment is totally unnecessary.

Do you do you insist on your point of order?

Oh yeah, sorry. Um

Point of order is withdrawn.

Yes, I had, yeah, withdrawn.

Point of order is resurrection is withdrawn.

Oh, yes.

Now I recognize a gentleman from Utah

Thank you.

for the purpose of speaking to the amendment.

Uh, the Democrat amendment is totally unnecessary. Uh, the core implement implementation of this amendment is that our bill without this amendment would otherwise ban teaching slavery. Nothing could be further from the truth. No one, I would suggest again, no one is suggesting that slavery cannot be taught under this bill. Instead, the the bill prohibits civil s- funds from being used to teach that the United States is fundamentally racist, sexist, or otherwise discriminatory. As I mentioned before, the rate of uh critical race theory, which was taught for decades, says that America is systemically racist, uh critical race theory attacks colorblind and race-neutral laws, such as the Constitution, as being in- inherently inequitable. It assumes that every element of our government is established to benefit the privileged. That's very difficult, that's very different from the teaching that slavery is real. We should be honest about America's history and acknowledge that we haven't lived up to all our values. That's one of the blessings of living in this country, is we have rights and freedoms to speak up when we see gross and ju- and just injustice such as slavery. Our country is undergirde- er undergirded by fundamental values, such as inherent dignity of every person, and we should teach that. That's very different from saying American values themselves are corrupt.

Gentlemen yields, are there any others who wish to speak on the amendment? I I recognize the gentleman, uh, the ranking member from Virginia, for five minutes.

Oh, Mr. Chairman, this m- this amendment does not mention critical race theory. It just says that nothing in this act or the amendments made by this act may be construed to prohibit the teaching of the indignities of slavery, including with respect to rape, physical abuse, and mutilation of enslaved people, and the subsequent harm that enslaved people faced after slavery. Now, if the bill does not um prohibit the teaching as this amendment suggests, then OK, but there may be some that don't want that taught. This amendment will make it clear that it can be taught. And so again, we have a choice. We can let the uh teaching of slavery go forward accurately, or we can use this bill to prohibit that teaching. I would uh agree with the General Lady from North Carolina and agree with her amendment. And you're back.

Gentlemen Yales, are there any others who wish to speak on this amendment? Since there are none, the question is on the amendment by the gentlelady from North Carolina, Miss Adams. All in favor say aye. Aye.

Aye.

All opposed no. No.

No.

No. In the in the opinion of the chair, the no's have it, an amendment is not agreed to.

Yes. Chairman, I ask for a recorded vote.

A roll call vote is ordered. Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote will be postponed. Are there any further amendments to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HRA? I recognize the gentlelady from Arizona, Miss Grijalva, for the purposes of offering an amendment.

Um, Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The clerk will report the amendment.

Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R eight seven zero five, offered by Miss Grijalva of Arizona, identifier GRI JAZ underscore one one four.

Does the gentleman from Utah wish to reserve a point of order?

I reserve a point of order.

Point of order is reserved. I now recognize gentlelady from Arizona, Miss Grijalva, for five minutes in support of her amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like like to offer an amendment to the underlying text, but I have to say this has been a surreal discussion in this committee um hearing room today the fact that we are debating teaching the true history and present of this nation we have to know where we have been to move forward together My amendment specifically would ensure that teaching about the history and contributions of immigrants to developing our country and the discrimination many immigrant communities have faced is protected. By adding this clarification, we prevent the bill from being used intentionally or unintentionally to suppress or exclude historical topics related to immigrant communities, including, but not limited to, the migration, to Ellis Island in New York, Angel Island in San Francisco, the cultural and economic contributions of migration from Latin America, acro- and community across the US southern border. Banning the teaching of immigrant contributions in school at a time when ICE enforcement is ripping students and teachers out of classrooms and is tearing families apart does nothing to increase academic outcomes in American history and civics. it is an attempt to further silence an already marginalized community. Beyond the substance of the bill, the decision to name this bill after a polarizing political figure unnecessarily injects partisanship into what should be a thoughtful and serious discussion about education policy. We have already seen in Arizona that efforts to commemorate Mister Kirk through measures such as a highway renaming proposals, or specialty license plates, generated more division than value for the public. Our focus should be on expanding educational opportunity and ensuring students receive a complete and honest understanding of American history, not an advancing political symbolism that distracts from the mission. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back.

We've got a lot of yields. Uh, now I recognize a gentleman from North Carolina, Mister Harris, for five minutes.

Yeah, Mister Chairman, I would like to speak in opposition to this amendment.

You're recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. As mentioned with the other amendments previously, um, this amendment is totally unnecessary. Again, like the others, the core implication of this amendment is that our bill without this amendment, would somehow ban the teaching about immigration. So let me just say again, nothing could be further from the truth. Instead, as I've mentioned, this bill prohibits civic funds from being used to teach that the United States is fundamentally racist, sexist, or otherwise discriminatory. And that's very different from acknowledging that immigration is a real issue, and that there are benefits and there's flaws in our immigration system. So let me be clear once again, our bill does not mean that civic funds have to be spent teaching that America is perfect. In fact, we all know our constitution was written to form a more perfect union. Our founding fathers realized there was much more work to do. And listen, frankly, we should aspire to the same goal today, making our country better. There's nothing in this bill that will prohibit teaching that America can improve. But what is here is this bill prohibits teaching that America is shot through with oppression that it's fundamentally racist and that the American system of government is perpetually biased toward the rich and the powerful. Listen, if America were such a systemically racist country, I don't think any immigrant would be trying to come here.

Mm.

But immigrants themselves, at least the ones I've spoken with throughout my district, will tell you that America, for all of its flaws, is the best hope of the free world. No country in the world has ever been such an engine of economic opportunity, of liberty, and of hope for impoverished people. That's why so many people are wanting to get in. So, again, I come back to where I started. Um, this amendment is unnecessary and I stand in opposition to it. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

Gentleman yields. Does the gentleman from Utah continue to reserve a point of order?

Yes, I withdraw my point of order.

Point of order is withdrawn. Are there any others who wish to speak? Uh, I recognize a gentleman from Virginia. The ranking member, Mr. Scott.

Mr. Chairman,

For five minutes.

th- thank you, Mr. Chairman, this is a very simple amendment. Just make sure that you can discuss the teaching of the contributions of immigrants, including the discrimination they faced, and I don't know how you can do that without transgressing into quote discriminatory equity ideology. It just makes it clear that you can talk about the discrimination immigrants faced without um uh violating the provisions of the bill. Very simple. And uh Think history is history. Uh, we'll see um what happens to that history on this vote.

The gentleman yields. Are there any others who seek recognition on the amendment? Seeing none, then the question is on the amendment by the gentlelady from North Carolina, or excuse me, from Arizona, Miss Grijalva. All in favor say aye. All opposed no, no. In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it and the amendment is not agreed to.

Ask for a recorded vote, please.

A r- a roll call vote is ordered pursuant to the chair's previous announcement.

Thank you.

This vote will be postponed. Are there any further amendments to the amendment in the nature of substitute to H R eighty seven O five? I recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Skrat, for purposes of amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk, AMD underscore O four.

The clerk will report the amendment.

Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R eight seven zero five, offered by Mister Scott of Virginia, identifier Scott underscore AMD underscore zero four.

This gentleman from Utah, Reserva point of order.

Reserva point of order.

Yeah, yes.

Um,

And there, uh,

excuse me.

I don't know which amendment to clarify with the clerk.

Um, we're we're having a little confusion about

Here's come.

this number four. here

four O four AMD O four

ok so we have oh wait we are doing January sixth eight which one is it no the lgbtq two it's a pretty good one three it's seven Um just to make sure uh I'll ask I'll ask the uh gentleman to

Oh thank you. I'm the one uh

Yeah.

AM AMD O three.

AMD O three uh and I'll ask the clerk to identify the amendment.

Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R eight seven zero five. Offered by Mister Scott of Virginia, identifier Scott underscore AMD underscore zero three.

Good. Now that, now does the gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order?

Yes, I like to reserve point of order.

Point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Scott, for five minutes in support of his amendment.

Thank you, Miss. Uh, Mister Chairman, Mister Chairman, this is a very simple rule of construction. This is nothing in this act, but the amendments made by this act may be construed to prohibit the teaching the role of LGBTQ people in the history of the United States, including with respect to Harvey Milk, his contributions to the United States politics, and his assassination, of Marsha P. Johnson, her work as a transgender rights activist, and her role in the Stonewall Rebellion. Um. Amendment adds rule of construction, permitting the teaching of that history and historical figures when teaching American history. It's essential that when we teach LGBTQ history, it is contributed to the growth of our nation rather than erase it. Uh, r- uh, we'll ra- if we did that, we'd be erasing a community's past as and that's one of the most effective ways to marginalize them in the present. Legislation that attacks marginalized communities only increases discrimination and harassment, which leads to adverse mental health outcomes for members of the l b g t q community. In twenty twenty one, sixty eight percent of all l g b g q i plus students surveyed uh reported feeling unsafe in their school environment due to their perceived sexual orientations, uh gender identity or expression. In addition, more than three quarters of l g b t q students who attended school in person during the surveyed period reported experiencing in-person verbal harassment based on their sexual orientation, gender expression or gender at some point in the past year. This amendment protects educators' ability to be trained in teaching methods and support uh of inclusion and acceptance of students regardless of their sexual orientation

Mm.

or gender identity and for that reason I support the amendment and hope it's adopted. You're back.

Gentleman yields. Uh, does the gentleman from Utah

I withdraw my point of order.

Point of order is withdrawn. I now recognize the gentlelady from Illinois, Miss Miller, uh, for purposes of speaking on the amendment.

Thank you. The Democrat amendment misses the point of the bill. This bill bans teaching for radical gender ideology, and that term is clearly defined. President Trump's executive order says gender ideal ideology replaces the biological category of sex with an ever-shifting concept of self- assessed gender identity, permitting the false claim that males can identify as and thus become women, and vice versa, and requiring all institutions of society to regard this false claim as true. Gender ideology includes the idea that there is a vast spectrum of genders that are disconnected from one's sex. Gender ideology is internally inconsistent in that it diminishes sex as an identifiable or useful category, but nevertheless maintains that it is possible for a person to be born in the wrong sexed body. Prohibiting this teaching is good policy. Federal funds should support accurate biological information, not inaccurate teachings, such as that a man can become a woman or that a man can become pregnant. The Democrat amendment would directly contradict this goal. I oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to vote no. And I yield back.

General Lady Yales, are there others who wish to Uh, seeing none, hearing none. Uh, the question is on the amendment by the gentleman from Virginia, ranking member, Mister Scott, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed, no. No. In the opinion of the chairs, the no's have it and the amendment is not agreed to.

Is it more of an important vote, important, equivalent

A roll call vote is ordered pursuant to the chair's previous announcement. This vote will be postponed. Are there any further amendments to the amendment in nature of a substitute to H R eighty seven O five? I recognize the gentleman for Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Scott, for purpose of amendment.

Uh, yes, Mister Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk, AMD underscore O four.

The clerk

I think they have it now.

The clerk will report the amendment.

Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R eight seven zero five, offered by Mister Scott of Virginia, identifier Scott underscore AMD

Does the gentleman from Utah wish to reserve a point of order? A point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman from Virginia for five minutes in support of his amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this amendment adds a simple but essential clarification that the definition of discriminatory equity ideology does not include teaching about the January sixth attack on the US Capitol or the heroic actions of the Capitol Police who defended this institution. This clarification is necessary because under the bill's definition, teaching about January sixth could be mischaracterized as making white students feel blamed or stereotyped for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race, color, sex, national origin in which the individual played no part, since most of the rioters that day were white. We cannot allow this definition to be used to silence education. or to prevent students from learning about what happened on January sixth, including the lies that fueled the attack and the bravery of the officers who protected the Capitol. It is well documented that President Trump was reluctant to condemn the actions of his supporters, even as violence unfolded. And he has since claimed the rioters posed, quote, zero threat, saying, some of them went in and they're hugging and kissing the police and the guards They had a great relationship. In reality, many riot rioters violently clashed with the police, smashing windows, ramming doors, and assaulting officers. Dozens of officers were severely injured defending the Capitol and protecting the priest's full transfer of power. And they had insult to injury just a week uh just this week, a spokesman for Trump's legal team claimed that President Trump, his family, supporters, and countless other American were illegally targeted by law enforcement following the announcement that the administration had created a one point eight billion dollar lawfare fund in exchange for Trump dropping a ten billion dollar IRS lawsuit. Two Capitol Police officers who defended the Capitol in January have now filed suit to block that fund. The lawsuit states plainly that the January six rioters engaged in an insurrection by attacking the Capitol to prevent the lawful certification of a presidential election. These officers put their lives on the line to protect democracy. Students deserve to learn the truth about what happened that day, and nothing in this bill should be twisted to prevent that. This amendment ensures that teaching factual history is not treated as discrimination and that courage of the Capitol police is not erased, erased from the classroom. So I urge my colleagues to support the amendment. And yield back the balance of my time.

The gentleman yields. Uh, does the gentleman from Utah insist on a point of order? A point of order is withdrawn. Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment?

Yeah.

I I I recognize myself to speak to the amendment for five minutes. Um. I hate to say this, but I b- I b- I think this amendment is a solution in search of a problem. A discriminatory equity ideology is clearly defined and there's no need to further define what this means. The definition is President Trump's executive order, which says, among other things, and I quote, discriminatory equity ideology means an ideology that treats individuals as members of preferred or disfavored groups, rather than as individuals and minimizes agency, merit, and capability in favor of immoral general generalizations, including that members of one race, color, sex, or national origin are morally or inherently superior to members of another race, color, sex, or national origin. An individual by virtue of the individual's race, color, sex, or national origin is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously. The United States is fundamentally racist, sexist, or otherwise discriminatory." There's no need to further clarify the definition, I believe. And I believe this amendment is going totally off topic in an effort to score political points against the president. I oppose the amendment and urge my colleagues to vote no. Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment? Seeing none, uh, the question is on the amendment by the gentleman from Virginia, Mister Scott. All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed, no. No. In the opinion of the chairs, the no's have it and the amendment is not agreed to.

Mm-hmm.

A roll call vote is ordered pursuant to the chair's previous announcement. This vote will be postponed. Are there any further amendments to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R eighty seven O five?

Mister Scott. Mister Scott.

Uh, I recognize Mister Scott, uh, the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member uh to speak uh to uh

Mr. Chairman, I have an

present a new amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment to task AMD underscore O six.

The clerk will report the amendment.

Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R eight seven zero five, offered by Mister Scott of Virginia, identifier Scott underscore AMD underscore zero six.

This is a gentleman from Utah, reserve a point of order.

Yes, I reserve a point of order.

Point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman from uh Virginia, the ranking member, Mr. Scott for five minutes in support of his amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would ensure that the bill would not prohibit the educators from being trained to teach facts related to involvement of any member of the current presidential administration or any former presidential administration in investigations of childs of uh sexual trafficking of children or grooming children for sexual trafficking. Real world examples such as the case involving Jeffrey Epstein. matter because our children deserve to know a complete history based on facts, not just things that support certain political ideology or promote the belief that our political leaders are without flaws. This amendment assures that educators can be trained to teach history using facts even when there are uncomfortable truths. And now I guess on this amendment we'll find out whether this is gonna be hidden um and um hidden away and um and blocked by this um legislation. I would hope that it wouldn't, I would hope that the teachers could be trained on this difficult subject, but we'll see. Yield back.

The gentleman yields. Does the gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order?

I withdraw my point of order.

Point of order is withdrawn. I recognize a gentleman from Utah uh to speak on this amendment, five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Once again, the Democrat amendment uh is the solution in search of a problem. Discriminatory equity ide ideology is clearly defined, and there's no need to further define what this means. The definition is President Trump's executive order, which is worth reading again, says, among other things, discriminatory equity ide ideology means an ideology that treats individuals as members of a preferred or disfavored groups rather than individuals and minimizes agency, merit, uh capability in favor of immoral generalizations and that that include members of one race, color, sex, or national order that or origin that morally or inherently superior to members of another race color, sex, or national origin. An individual by virtue of individual's race, color, sex, or national origin is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously. United States is fundamentally uh racist, sexist, or otherwise discriminatory. There's no need to further clarify that definition or offer an off-topic rule of of construction. Democrats are going totally off topic in an effort to score political points. This amendment has nothing to do with the actual substance of the bill, nor is there is there anyth- anything in the bill that will make this amendment necessary. I oppose the amendment and urge my colleagues to vote no, and I yield back.

Gentlemen Yields, are there any others who seek recognition on the amendment? Seeing none, the question then is on the amendment by the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Scott. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed no. No.

No.

In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, an amendment is not agreed to. Uh, roll call vote is ordered pursuant to the chair's previous announcements. This vote will be postponed. Are there any further amendments to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R eighty seven O five?

Tell somebody.

Seeing none, further action on HR s eighty seven O five is postponed. We will now move to consider the next bill.

Sorry.

Okay. This one here.

Yeah. The committee will now proceed to consideration of the bill H R seventy-three sixty-two for amendment. The bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are available. The clerk shall designate the bill.

H R seven three six two, a bill to amend the employment

Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. Without objection, the bill will be considered as read and open for amendment at any point, and any amendment offered shall be considered as read. Does anyone seek to be recognized? Mr. Grothman, for what purpose do you seek recognition?

I have an amendment at the desk. I'm kind of surprised. I thought the room was gonna fill up.

Take take any benefits you can get, okay. The clerk shall designate the amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R seven three six two, offered by Mister Grothman of Wisconsin, identifier H R seven three six two underscore A N S.

Without rejection, the amendment shall be considered original text for purposes of further amendment. The amendment in the nature of a substitute has already been distributed. I now recognize Mister Grothman for five minutes to explain the amendment in the nature of a substitute.

H R seventy-three sixty-two f uh the form fifty-five zero zero filing simplification act is bipartisan legislation designed to modernize and simplify outdated federal reporting requirements for employer-sponsored benefit plans governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, ERISA. Specifically, H. R. seventy-three sixty-two establishes a single uniform filing deadline for annual reports requi- required under ERISA. Under current law, plan administrators do not have enough time to complete all necessary recording requirement- reporting requirements before the filing deadline. Uh, also there's a shortage of people to fill out these forms at that time due to other things going on. As a result, many are forced to submit an extension requirement using form fifty five fifty eight simply to file their form fifty five hundred on time. It's a redundant two-step process which increase paperwork and compliance costs without improving oversight or protections for the participants. H R seventy three sixty two provides a common sense fix by cutting red tape while maintaining strong oversight and accountability. Seventy three sixty two will allow employers to spend less time navigating Duplicative paperwork requirements and more time serving workers and beneficiaries. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on the ANS which makes technical changes to the bill. Um, you know, we all hear of of too much paperwork. Here we found something that we felt was bipartisan, at least until a couple days ago, just a way to Employers have one less form to worry about. And can I also uh And also without objection, I'd like to enter into the record seven letters supporting this bill from CHRO Association, the Arista Industry Council, the American Retirement Association, NFIB, the Small Business Council of America, the SPARC Institute, and the American Benefits Council.

Without objection, they'll be introduced.

Thank you.

The gentlemen yield. Are there any members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment in the nature of a substitute? I recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Scott, uh to speak on the amendment.

Thank you, Mister, Mister Chairman, Mister, Mister Chairman, the ANS makes technical changes to the underlying bill which primarily establishes a new statutory deadline for filing a form fifty five hundred. And the current Law Plan Administrator is typically required to file its annual form five fifty five hundred in the summer, but may request an extension of up to two and a half months. which pushes the deadline to mid-October. Most common way for a plan to request an extension is through filing a form fifty five fifty eight in the uh with the IRS. This is a simple one page document, here it is, that can be easily filed as long as form fifty five fifty eight is properly completed and filed before the deadline for fifty five hundred is initially due, the request extension will be automatically approved. In practice in practice that means the plan has close to ten months in total to file its fifty-five hundred form fifty-five hundred a Republican colleague has said that the bill establishes a single unified deadline for filing form fifty-five hundred and I'd like to ask the bill's sponsor, gentleman from Wisconsin, is is there anything in the bill that expressly prohibits a plan from requesting an extension beyond the newly established deadline of October fifteenth.

No, I don't believe so.

So there so there is a prohibition, so October fifteenth is it, period.

I believe so.

I'm sorry?

I believe so.

Do you have a do you have a section that points to that?

I'm sorry, I didn't hear you.

You ha- you have a you have right now a under the present law,

Right.

Is that uh is that repealed in the bill?

I believe the intent does intent was that it be repealed.

Well, reclaiming uh my time I thank the gentleman. So I think at best the bill is unclear as to whether the extension would be permitted beyond the newly established deadline. October fifteenth is a process for getting an extension. If it's not repealed then presumably you can extend under that same provision another two and a half months. One could make a very convincing case that an extension on top of the latter statutory deadline would still be possible unless there's some repeal in the law.

Yeah, the extension then.

And that thinks that just takes things in the wrong direction. It's already a significant issue with respect to the timeliness of form fifty five hundred data. The most uh recent um document called Private Pension Plan Bulletin, published in January twenty twenty six, summarizes form fifty five hundred data for planned years ending in twenty twenty three. Congress should be working together in leveraging technology to encourage plans to file the these forms sooner so data can be more relevant and usable for the public. By the time you get the data, some of these plans may already be so insolvent that nothing can be done.

Yeah.

It'd be nice to get that data on a more timely basis.

Yeah. I

Mit- Mister Ch- I yield to the gentleman.

Yeah, I'll I'll make that categorical. The bill says the IRS has to, in their instructions, make it clear that there that still that is the filing deadline. You don't get an additional an additional extension.

OK, I thank the gentleman for that clarification. Uh, Mister Chairman, hundreds of thousands of retirement plans and tens of thousands of other other employee benefit plans meet the current annual statutory deadline for filing and a similar number of plans seek an extension for those plans that need an extension there's an easy process it's automatic and I'm just seeing that uh no one has said that the total ten month period is um is too short What I am saying with respect to workers' ability to uh w- is with respect to workers' ability to save for retirement. Workers' retirement security starts with the their economic security, and right now many workers are struggling to pay bills and meet basic needs, let alone save for retirement. Committee Republicans should be focused on making life more affordable for these workers and their families and that starts with raising the minimum wage, reducing health care costs ensuring workers can join a union so they can negotiate for better wages unionized workers are are more likely to have access to retirement benefits through their employer the non-unionized um their counterparts and we need data to make sure these plans so we can find out what's going on these plans um we spent hundreds of um uh we spent billions of dollars saving plans from the multi-employer pension fund because they had gone broke. Um, be nice to get the data in a timely fashion so that we can take action maybe to save the plans before it's too late so I urge opposition to HR seventy-three, sixty-two because it's going in the wrong direction and I yield back the balance of my time.

I thank the gentlemen. Are there any other members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment and the nature of it? There being no further discussion on the amendment in the nature of substitute, the committee will move to consideration of amendments. Are there any members who would like to offer amendments? There being no amendments, the question now occurs on the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR seventy-three sixty-two. All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye. All opposed, no.

No.

In the opinion of the chairs, the ayes have it, and the amendment in the nature of substitute is agreed to. We'll now move on to to consider the next bill. The committee will now uh proceed to consideration of a bill HR seventy-eight, ninety-five for amendment. The bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are available. The clerk shall designate the bill.

H R seven eight nine five, a bill to amend section four O eight of the employment employee retirement income security act of nineteen seventy-four to prohibit kickbacks to pharmacy benefit managers.

Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. Without objection, the bill will be considered as read and open for amendment at any point, and any amendment offered shall be considered as read. Does anyone seek to be recognized? Mister Allen, for what purpose do you seek recognition?

Mister Chairman, I have an amendment to ask.

Uh, the clerk shall designate the amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R seven eight nine five, offered by Mister Allen of Georgia, identifier H R seven eight nine five,

Without objection, the amendment shall be considered original text for purposes of further amendment. The amendment in the nature of substitute has already been distributed. I now recognize Mister Allen for five minutes to explain the amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. Pharmacy pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs, or third-party intermediaries that wield enormous power over the pr- s- pr- prescription drug supply chain affecting ninety million patients covered by our ERISA health plans. Yet PBMs operate through a complex and opaque system of fees and rebates that drive up costs for patients and employers, while lining the pockets of PBM middlemen. To navigate this system, employers often hire consultants or brokers to help design and manage their health plans. These consultants and brokers are trusted to act in the best interest of employees and employers. Too often, however, consultants and advisers are incentivized to insteer uh employers to a particular PBM in exchange for significant financial kickbacks from those PBMs. These arrangements are rarely transparent, leaving employers in the dark about the financial incentives, influencing plan recommendations, while patients continue to face rising drug costs and higher insurance premiums. Employers deserve to know that their consul uh consultants and brokers independent unbiased guidance, uh not recommendations influenced by hidden financial incentives. That is why I introduced H R seventy eight ninety five, the PBM kickback prohibition act. It would prohibit PBMs from paying kickbacks to brokers or consultants in exchange for steering health plans toward preferred PBMs. This is a key element of President Trump's great health care plan, and will and will eliminate these opaque pricing tactics. which will help lower health care costs for patients and employers. Today I'm offering amendment in the nature of a substitute to strengthen the bill and ensure PBMs can not evade these prohibitions by simply calling the kickbacks something else. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on the A and S and the underlying bill. And with that, I yield back.

Gentlemen yields, are there any members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment in the nature of a substitute? Does a gentleman from uh California wish to be recognized?

OK.

Mr. Chairman.

I recognize the ranking member, the gentleman from Virginia, Mister Scott, uh to speak to the amendment in the nature of the substitute.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The amendment in nature of substitute makes extensive changes in the underlying text of HR seventy eight ninety five, the PBM kickback prohibition act. Well, we've only had twenty-four hours to examine this dramatically rewritten version as I assume this overhaul was in response to some of the criticisms we made to the earlier original legisl introduced legislation. Uh, many people noted that the introduced version of the bill suffered from serious loopholes that would have essentially allowed entities to mischaracterize referral fees to avoid compliance. Had we been uh included in the legislation, we could have worked to address that, but I want to thank the gentleman from Georgia for rewriting that provision and it seems that we have fixed that in the amendment in the nature of a substitute. This is an unfortunate way to address the issue. The committee has in the past worked in a bipartisan manner and hopefully we can do uh better in the future. Some of these reforms uh became some of the reforms that we've worked on, PBMs, have become law already, uh particularly in the consolidated appropriations act of twenty twenty six. Um That said, I support the ANS because it addresses a significant issue that is of concern to consumers, employers alike. In twenty twenty three um there was a publication that investigated um PBMs and found that they commonly pay referral fees to brokers and consultants that influence recommendations to employers when they are designing their healthcare plans this often raises costs for plan sponsors who receive conflicted advice from brokers and consultants. Prohibiting these payments is a positive step, but the bill re- still remains an incomplete product. Thanks to reporting from outlets like ProPublica, we have known for years that similar payments are commonly are common throughout the health care system, not just PBMs. Now this bill could be strengthened substantially by ensuring that the requirements uh that its requirements uh apply to all covered service providers. Um, I hope this deficiency can be addressed as the legislation goes forward. Thank you and I yield back.

I thank the gentlemen. Are there any members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment and the nature of the substitute?

Mister Chairman, I reserve a point of order.

It's too late for a point of order.

Um, I I I don't think we have a need yet for

Oh, OK.

point of order to be reserved. Um. There being no further discussion on the amendment in the nature of a substitute, the committee will now move to consideration of amendments. Are there any members who would like to offer amendments? I recognize a gentleman from California, Minister Desaulniers, for purpose of amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, um and I appreciate the discussion as the ranking member on the subcommittee. And I'm generally supportive of the ANS, which addresses a problem that has been well documented by outlets such as Stat, uh, PBMs commonly pay, what are essent-

Will the - will the - will the gentleman offer the amendment?

Uh, yes, I'm sorry.

Uh, the clerk -

I got ahead of myself on the

the clerk will identify the amendment.

Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R seven eight nine five, offered by Mister Desaulnier of California, identifier Desaulnier underscore H R seven eight nine five underscore AMD underscore one. your suggestion is

Gentleman from uh from Georgia, reserve a point of order.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.

Point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman from California, Mr. Dessolnier, for five minutes in support of his amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm sorry I get ahead of the clerk. Uh, so, as I said, I'm generally supportive of the amendment and nature of its substitute, the issues around PBMs. I won't repeat that part. Uh, but this conflicted advice can result in employers getting a bad deal on behalf of their workers raising health care costs for both workers and uh their families. I am concerned that the scope of the legislation is too narrow. By only focusing on pay payments made by PBMs to brokers and consultants, which is a good step, the bill ignores the vast range of other middlemen who may also engage in similar practices. There is nothing in the bill that it would address, for example, insurance companies or third-party administrators that might want to influence brokers and consultants for providing them with similar similar payments. This is not just speculation. As the ranking member of the full committee mentioned, we have known this is an issue for many years. In two thousand nineteen, Pro Publica published an influential report detailing payments to brokers and consultants from insurance companies. These include luxury vacations, large cash payments, and other compensation that have subs- substantial impact on employers deciding which insurer to contract with when designing their health plans. Congress took a small s- step toward addressing this issue by passing transparency requirements under the Consolidated Appropriations Act of twenty twenty-one. This has brought to light these payments in an unprecedented ways but did not actually prohibit them. As a result, this remains a major issues issue. My amendment would address this through a simple change. It would strike language in the uh ANS that limits the kickback prohibition to PBMs. This would ensure it applies to all covered service providers described in ERISA, including insurers, third party administrators and others. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment and yield back and thank that chairman.

Thank the gentleman. Does the gentleman from Georgia insist on a point of order?

Um, mis-

You wish to r- withdraw?

Yeah, Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my point of order.

The reservation is withdrawn. Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment? Um, I recognize a gentleman from Georgia. Five minutes to speak to the amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. PBM's wield immense power in the pharmaceutical drug supply chain influencing which drugs patients can access and at what price. PBMs operate through a convolted system of rebates, fees, and pricing mechanisms that drive up cost. Employers hire brokers and consultants to navigate this complex system. However, some brokers and consultants are being paid by PBMs to steer employers toward decisions that make more money for the PBMs but harm patients. Cracking down on PBM's paying kickbacks to consultants and brokers is a key feature of President Trump's great health care plan. Other entities may also be making steering payments to brokers and consultants. However, to address PBM's pharmaceutical uh monopoly, we must keep the scope of this bill focused on PBMs to lower costs as part of the President's the President's great health care plan. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to no vote no on the amendment. I really thought it

The gentleman yields.

was

Are there any others who seek recognition on the amendment? Seeing none, uh the question is on the amendment by the gentleman from California, Mister. All in favor say aye. All opposed no.

No.

No. In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it and the amendment is not agreed to.

Mister Chairman, I'd like to request a recorded vote.

A roll call vote is ordered. Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote will be postponed. Are there any further amendments to the amendment in the nature of substitute to H R seventy-eight ninety-five? There being no further amendments, further action on H R seventy-eight ninety-five is postponed. We'll now move to consider the next bill. The committee will now proceed to consideration of Bill HR eighty-six, eighty-four. The bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are available. The clerk shall designate the bill.

HR eight six eight four, a bill to amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of nineteen seventy-four, to require group health plans and health insurance issuers offering group health insurance coverage, to only pay pay claims submitted by hospitals that have in place policies and procedures to ensure accurate

Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. Without objection, the bill will be considered as read and open for amendment at any point, and any amendment offered shall be considered as read. Does anyone seek rec- to to be recognized? Uh, Mrs. Fox, uh, for what purpose do you seek recognition?

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The clerk shall designate the amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R eight six eight four, offered by Miss Fox of North Carolina, identifier H R eight six eight four underscore A N S.

Without objection, the amendment shall be considered original text for purposes of further amendment. The amendment in the nature of a substitute has already been distributed. I now recognize the gentlelady from North Carolina, uh the uh Chairman Emeritus of this committee, Mrs. Fox, for five minutes to explain the amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Thank you very much, Mister Chairman, I really appreciate your recognizing me and considering this bill or considering this amendment. Hospital prices are the number one driver of health care costs, and account for one of every three dollars pound health care in the United States. In recent decades, provider consolidation has skyrocketed, reducing competition and driving up costs for patients and employers. One way this happens is through hidden facility fees. Hospitals often purchase outpatient clinics and then build services provided of those clinics as if they were delivered in a hospital setting allowing them to charge additional facility fees to insurers with little transparency or accountability. Those higher costs are ultimately passed on to patients through higher premiums and increased out of pocket expenses. My bill, the Transparency in Billing Act, reaffirms a common sense policy. Patients and health plans should pay for the care that is actually provided, not hidden or inflated charges. H R eighty-six eighty-four requires hospitals to receive a separate, unique health identifier for each off-campus outpatient department and to use that unique number or identifier on all claims submitted from those facilities. This allows plans to see exactly what services they're being charged for. The bill also protects employers and plan sponsors from paying claims unless hospitals bill honestly for their services. H R eighty-six eighty-four increases transparency, ensures hospitals are honestly and accurately billing for services, and helps lower health care costs for American families. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. The amendment in the nature of a substitute is purely technical in nature, and makes no substantive changes to the legislation. With that, I yield back.

I thank the gentlelady. Uh, does the general amend the d- uh, from Virginia, the ranking member, wish to be recognized?

Yes, Mister Chairman, would you like the last word?

You're recognized for five minutes.

Thank you. Uh, Mister Chairman, I'd like to first thank my colleague, Doctor Fox, for working with me on this bill over the last two congresses. I'm glad they were continuing to move forward in a bipartisan way to address this important issue. As she, as she said, the ANS makes only technical changes to the underlying legislation, which improves billing in a commercial market to address opaque billing practices by hospitals at rise costs for both workers and businesses. According to CMS, the hospital industry accounts for thirty-one percent of overall health spending in the US, By addressing unfair billing practices, the legislation will help address this major driver of cost for all Americans. This is a parti- this is particularly important as across the country, hospitals are acquiring independent physician offices and converting them to hospital outpatient departments. Hospital outpatient departments often charge facility fees and receive higher reimbursement rates than physician offices or other lower-cost settings, even when they when the care provided may be essentially identical. And while it may be appropriate and necessary for care provided in certain settings to receive higher reimbursement rates based on a var variety of factors, this is not true across the board. In some instances, once a hospital acquires a doc- a physician's uh office, the only thing that changes is the sound on the door. The care provided is identical. This does not justify increased costs to the health care plan or the consumer. However, many hospitals do not obtain a unique provider identifier that clearly indicates the site of care. As a result, plans are unable to determine whether the higher reimbursements are warranted and often end up overpaying for care. Congress took a significant step toward addressing this issue in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of twenty twenty six when it i would, which was enacted earlier this year. This included a provision that will require hospitals to provide a unique provider inden- identifier when they build Medicare beginning in twenty twenty eight. However, this provision does not apply to privately insured individuals, including those covered through job-based health plans. This bill will address this gap by requiring unique provider identifiers when claims submitted to private health insurance plans. This will ensure this reform to the Medicare program will also

I thank the gentleman. Are there any other members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment in nature of substitute? The gentleman from Indiana, Mister Messmer, do you wish to be recognized?

Yes, Mister Chairman.

You're recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, I yield my time to Representative Fox.

Um, thank you, Mister Chairman, and thanks. um, Congressman Mesmer. I am very I was very negligent in not thanking the gentleman from Virginia for working with me on this issue of transparency over the last several years. I think it's one of the most important things we've done and, um, we're moving closer and closer and closer to true billing. Um, and I I'm really grateful to him. I think we were way ahead of the curve. Mister Scott, people are getting on to it now, and I I appreciate the the good work that we've been able to do on this issue. And thank you, um, Mister Mesmer, for, uh, yielding, and I yield back to you.

Uh, thank you. I yield back.

The gentleman yields, and I express appreciation, too, to the two members for working hard on this issue and working together.

Mister Scott.

Are there any other members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment?

Chairman.

Recognize the gentlelady from North Carolina, Miss Adams, to speak to the amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, I moved to strike the last word in support of the bill and

You're welcome.

Thank you. Let me let me fir let me also thank the la- the General Lady from North Carolina and the gentlemen from Virginia, uh, for the this bill, uh, I do want to start with the question that I've been hearing most from my constituents, what's Congress doing to meet the demands of our country's healthcare affordability crisis? I know that, uh, to truly address the crisis, need a massive amount of reform to truly change the industry for the better. But the transparency in billing act is an important step in the right direction to address the skyrocketing uh patient costs. And so as we are all aware, it's becoming more and more common for hospitals to buy up private physician practices. The American Medical Association estimates that the number of physicians working in private practices decreased from sixty percent in twenty-twelve. to forty-two percent in twenty-twenty-four. At least forty-seven percent of physicians were employed by or affiliated with hospital systems in twenty-twenty-four and that's up from less than thirty percent in twenty-twelve. I mention affordability because that's what the core concern of this bill is. Studies have found that following a private practice's consolidation with a hospital, the health care costs at this facility often go go up. And many hospitals receive a higher facility-based reimbursement for services provided at these outpatient facilities. This happens despite the fact that outpatient sites do not have the same overhead costs as a hospital. What does this mean for for patients? Well, for many patients, this means less affordable health care options in their community. So when we talk about the affordability crisis in health care, we we need to talk about this issue. The Transparency in Billing Act will make it so that hospitals with with separately located outpatient sites must bill commercial health plans using distinct national provider identified in in PI numbers. Establishing these identifying numbers will increase transparency in in claims data making it clearer where the services actually took place and decrease these inflated payments. This is the first step, uh, to creating more fair pricing for patient health care services and with bipartisan support for this bill with delivering on the needs of American patients. And for that reason, again, I thank my colleagues, but I urge my colleagues to vote yes on the bill. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

I thank the gentlelady. Are there any other members who wish to be recognized? Seeing none, there being no further discussion on the amendment and the nature of a substitute, uh, Committee will move to consideration of amendments. Are there any members who would like to offer amendments? There being no amendments, the question now occurs on the amendment and the nature of a substitute to HR eighty-six, eighty-four. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, no. In the opinion of the chairs, the ayes have it. And the amendment and the nature of the substitute is agreed to, pursuant to the previous order. The chair declares the committee in recess, the call of the chair. We expect to reconvene promptly at two p m. Thank you. The committee stands in recess.

Nice job.

The committee uh will reconvene and come to order. Following our recess we'll proceed to postpone requests for recorded votes. Um, for what purposes does the

Miss, miss

Gentleman for Virginia, the ranking member, seek recognition.

Mr. Chairman, I ask your management's consent to enter the record ten letters in opposition to H. R. eighty-seven thirty-six, one from the National Council on Disabilities, the rest from disability advocacy groups, the Alliance for Expanding America's Workforce, Association for People Supporting Employment First, ARC, Coalition to Promote Self-Determination, Melwood, Family of Companies, National Association of Councils of Developmental Disabilities, National Disability Rights Network, National Down Syndrome Society, and the National Organization on Disability.

Without objection, they'll be received.

Thank you.

We'll now be voting on one amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H. R. eighty-seven thirty-six. The amendment offered by Miss McMath, titled McMath under slash AMD under slash EMTA. A recorded vote is offered and requested. Members will record their votes using electronic voting system. The clerk will open the board. The view is getting better all the time,

Oh,

but we haven't seen the v-

there's more views.

I'm pretty sure I'm not gonna be honest with you. I'm pretty sure I'm not gonna be honest with you. I'm pretty sure I'm not gonna be honest with you. I'm pretty sure I'm not gonna be honest with you. I'm pretty sure I'm not gonna be honest with you. I'm pretty sure I'm not gonna be honest with you. Ideally this would be the first one in the middle of it but i know that they're gone. It's like gone like yet. Can i help her? yeah i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean yeah i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean i'm not sure i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean like i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean uh i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's a it's it's it's it's it's it's it's i mean it's it's it's it's it's it's a it it's it's it's it's it's it's it's hmm i'm glad you're here i'm glad you're here so far i've been very proud of what i've done so far and i'm very proud of what i've done i don't know well i don't know what kind of a wedding that's going to be but i think that a wedding that's gonna be more like a wedding where you have to wait for the bride to come back and then the bride can actually get married to the groom and then the groom can go and then the bride can go and then the groom can go and then the groom can go and then the bride can go and then the groom can go yeah. yeah. well i think it's better to have like a couple of people doing it, cuz i think it's better to have like a couple of people doing it because i think it's better to have like a couple of people doing it first. so we can talk about like how their way of like of living ok so like how their family grew like how they lived at the age of like thirty or forty right and that exactly ok and how they got into the industry and how they formed a family so i really like i think that's a very important question yeah they they they are really into uh like uh like uh like the actual game they like yeah it's pretty much like a bar, like a bar with a bar and a bar with a bar, Mmm. Mmm. you know, and then you go up to the bar and they have like a bar and you go up to the bar and they have like a bar with a bar, and then you go up to the bar and they have like a bar with a, you know, a bar with a bar with a bar with a bar with a bar with a bar, you know, and then you go up to the bar and they have like a bar, and then you go up to the bar and they have like a bar where they have like a bar with a bar with a bar, and then you go up to the bar and they have like a bar that they have like a bar with a bar with a bar, and then they have like a bar with a bar with a bar. oh my god oh my god i'm like oh my god i'm like i'm like oh my god i'm like

oh

i'm like oh my god i'm like oh my god i'm like i'm like oh my god i'm like i'm like oh my god i'm like i'm like oh my god i'm like oh my god i'm just like i'm like i'm like oh my god i'm like i'm just like i'm just like i'm just like i'm just like i'm just like i'm just like i'm just like i'm like i'm just like i'm just like i'm just like i'm just like i'm just like i'm so i'm just like i'm just like i'm just like i'm i'm just like i'm so i'm just like yeah yeah well it's true but i don't think it's a bad idea i think it's a good idea for a lot of people like me cause i'm not a fan of like you know like like like the old school old school age old school like the age of like the early eighties or the late eighties or the late eighties so i think you should get a good idea and then you can get a better idea and then hmmm you can get a better idea and then you can get a better idea and then you can get a better idea and then you can get a better idea and then you can get a better idea and then you can get a better idea and then ok i'm gonna get a ticket to the bar in korea where they have a bar where they have a lot of like uh like bar names and like oh uh they have like a menu and like a menu with like uh like a menu and like a menu and like a menu and like a beer and like a beer no ok oh i love the oh i love the the food yeah i don't know if you guys ever had a whole day of food so i really hope that you guys have a full day of food yeah i know that you guys have a full day but i know that you guys have a full day so i really hope that you guys have a full day of food um yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah we really like the food mmm um mmm but they are going to the malls and they will be paying like ten cents per person for the oh cute one morning workday yeah and i was like yeah we want like an hour and a half job and then like a day off and then like a day off and then like a day off and then a day off and then yeah and then like a day off and then like a day off and then uh and then like a day off and then like a day off and then and then like a day off and then like a day off and then yeah oh cute oh wow oh wow it's been a while oh oh interesting since i've had a chicken yeah yeah and i've had a chicken i remember when i first started working on my own i was like oh this is gonna be like it's been a while it's been a while yeah no we're not getting any more clients i think we're getting more clients yeah yeah it's not really easy to get clients oh yeah yeah i know i know yeah yeah hmm that's what i said that's what i said yeah oh look at it look at the top of the menu yeah mmm oh look at that look at that look at that yeah i'm getting shocked look at that yeah right we were talking about like how many people would be able to get paid for this like how many people would be able to get paid for this and then like what what are we gonna have for this for this party what are we gonna have for this meal what are we gonna have for this meal yeah yeah oh wow yeah i remember that yeah so i was just like oh i've never heard of this before so i was just like oh i've never heard of this before yeah yeah yeah yeah so i was just like oh i've never heard of this before so like i was just like oh i've never heard of this before so i was just like oh i've never heard of this before so then i was like oh i've never heard of this before yeah yeah i remember that so i was just like oh i've never heard of this before so and then i was like oh i've never heard of this before yeah so i was just like oh i've never heard of this before so it's like oh it's like a it's like a little different but like i don't know it's like a little different but like i don't know what it is you can get a free ticket to the hotel, you can get a free ticket to the restaurant, you can get a free ticket to the restaurant, Mmm. and you can get a free ticket to the restaurant. Wow. And then you can get a free ticket to the restaurant, and you can get a free ticket to the restaurant. And then you can get a free ticket to the restaurant. And then you can get a free ticket to the restaurant. And then you can get a free ticket to the restaurant. And then you can get a free ticket to the restaurant. And then you can get a free ticket to the restaurant. And then you can get a free ticket to the restaurant. And then you can get a free ticket to the restaurant. And then you can get a free ticket to the restaurant. And then you can get a free ticket to the restaurant. And then you can get a free ticket to the restaurant. And then you can get a free ticket to the restaurant. yeah do you know what kind of food like if you eat like pork or like meat or like meat i mean if you eat like pork or like meat then you'd rather have meat than meat yeah yeah yeah yeah but you know what i mean like i just don't eat meat so i just i just don't like meat so i just i just like meat so i just like meat so i just like meat so i just like meat then what about like the the the the the food so i just like meat so i just like meat so i just like uh meat so i just like meat so i just like meat so i just eat meat so i just like meat so i just like meat so i just meat mmm Well, I'm told that while this is refreshing w- It's not refreshing to me, but it's uh it's refreshing. We're gonna do it the old-fashioned way. And the uh clerk will be calling the roll. Uh, we'll be voting again on one amendment, amendment offered by Miss McBath. A recorded vote is requested. Members will respond as the clerk calls the roll. The clerk will call the roll.

Mister Wahlberg.

No.

Mister Wahlberg votes no. Mister Wilson.

No.

Mister Wilson votes no. Miss Fox.

No.

Miss Fox votes no. Mister Thompson.

No.

Mister Thompson votes no. Mister Goethman.

No.

Mister Goethman votes no. Mister Phonik.

No.

Mister Phonik votes no. Mister Allen.

Yeah.

Mister Allen votes now. Mister Comer.

Oh. I don't do that. I don't do that. It's in a Murphy's wallet. What? Ooh, yeah. There you go. It waited for us to get it in more way. Very bad. See, this is what happen when I give you voice. Missed vote, yeah. We'll go It's all about the votes. It's all about the votes. Members record their votes using the lect electronic voting system,

Mister Chairman, Mister Chairman, on this vote there are fifteen nays and eighteen nays. on this vote there are fifteen nays, and eighteen nays.

The amendment is not adopted. The question now occurs on the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R eighty-seven thirty-six. All in favor say aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye.

All opposed, no.

No.

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the amendment in the nature of a substitute is agreed to. I hereby move the committee report the bill H R eighty-seven thirty-six to the House of Representatives with amendment and with the that the amendment be agreed to and the bill do pass. The question now occurs on the chair's motion. All in favor say aye. Aye.

Aye.

All opposed, no.

No. No.

And depending if the chair, the ayes have it, and the motion is agreed to.

Read them.

Recorded votes is requested. Members will record their votes using electronic voting system. The clerk will open the open the vote. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? No. No. Do any members wish to change their vote? Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally.

Mister Chairman, on this vote there are eighteen nays and fifteen nays.

The ayes have it and the motion is agreed to, H R seven uh eighty th seven thirty six as amended. And the accompanying material shall be transmitted to the House of Representatives. The chair notes for the record that a quorum is present. We'll now be voting on six amendments to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R eighty-seven O five, the m- amendment offered by

Which one?

uh, Miss Bona- Bonamici entitled Bonami under slash one hundred. A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using the

Mister Chairman, on this vote there are fifteen nays and nineteen nays.

The amendment is not adopted. We'll now be uh voting on the amendment offered by Miss Adams, title Adam NC five eight seven. A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using an electronic voting system. The clerk will open the vote. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Do an- any members wish to change their vote? Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce a tally.

Mister Chairman, on this vote there are fifteen nays and nineteen nays.

The amendment is not adopted. We now move to the amendment offered by Representative Grijalva, uh, Grijas, underslash one one four. A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. The clerk will open the vote. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Do any members wish to change their vote? Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally.

Mister Chairman,

Okay.

on this vote there are fifteen nays and nineteen nays.

The amendment is not adopted. We now move to the amendment by Representative Scott, Scott, under slash AMD, under slash zero three. A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. The clerk will open the vote. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Do any members wish to change their vote? Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally?

Mister Chairman, on this vote there are fifteen nays and nineteen nays.

The amendment is not adopted. We now move to the next to Representative Scott, amendments Scott under slash AMD under slash zero four. A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. The clerk will open the vote. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Do any members wish to change their vote? Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally?

Mister Chairman, on this vote there are fifteen yeas and nineteen nays.

The amendment is not adopted. We now move to uh uh Representative Scott's amendment uh Scott amendment uh Scott under slash AMD under slash zero six. Recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. The clerk will open the vote. Have all members been recorded or wish to be recorded? Do any members wish to change their vote? Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce a tally?

Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are fifteen nays and nineteen nays.

The amendment is not adopted. The question now occurs on the amendment to the nature of a substitute to H R eighty-seven O five. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. All opposed, no.

No. Aye.

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the amendment in the nature of a substitute is agreed to. I hereby move that the committee report the bill H R eighty seven O five to the House of Representatives with amendment and with the recommendation, that the amendment be agreed to and the bill do pass. The question now occurs on the chair's motion. All in favor say aye. Aye.

Aye.

All opposed, no.

No.

No. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the motion is agreed to.

Mm-hmm.

Recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. The clerk will open the vote. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Do any members wish to change their vote? Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally.

Mister Chairman, on this vote there are nineteen yeas and fifteen nays.

The ayes have it and the motion is agreed to, HR s eighty-seven O five as amended, and the accompanying material shall be transmitted to the House of Representatives. The chair notes for the record that a quorum is present. I hereby move that the committee report the bill HR seventy-three sixty-two to the House of Representatives with amendment and with the recommendation that the amendment be agreed to and the bill do pass. The question now occurs on the chair's motion. All in favor say aye. Aye.

Aye.

All opposed, no.

Aye.

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. Then the motion is agreed to. For what pr- uh a recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using electronic voting system. The clerk will open the vote. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Do any members wish to change their vote? Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally.

Mister Chairman, on this vote there are twenty-two yeas and twelve nays.

The ayes have it, and the motion is agreed to, H R seventy-three, sixty-two as amended, and the accompanying material shall be transmitted to the House of Representatives. The chair notes for the record that a quorum is present. We'll now be voting on one amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R seventy-eight, ninety-five. The amendment offered by Mister De Saulnier, entitled De Saulnier, under slash H R seventy-eight, O six, under slash AMD one. A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system, the clerk will open the vote. Do any members wish to change their vote? Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally?

Mister Chairman, on this vote there are fifteen nays and nineteen nays.

The amendment is not adopted. The question now occurs on the amendment and the nature of a substitute to HR seventy-eight ninety-five. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. And the amendment and the nature of the substitute is agreed to. I hereby move that the committee report the bill HR seventy-eight ninety-five to the House of Representatives with amendment and with a recommendation that the amendment be agreed to and the bill do pass. The question now occurs on the chair's motion. All in favor say aye. Aye.

Aye.

All opposed, no.

We have to know the code.

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. Then the motion is agreed to. Recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using electronic voting system. The clerk will open the vote. All Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Do any members wish to change their vote? Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally.

Mister Chairman, on this vote there are thirty-four yays and zero nays.

The ayes have it, then the motion is agreed to. H R seventy-eight ninety-five as amended and the accompanying materials shall be transmitted to the House of Representatives. The chair notes for the record that a quorum is present. I hereby move that the committee report the bill H R eighty-six eighty-four to the House of Representatives with amendment and with the recommendation that the amendment be agreed to and the bill do pass. The question now occurs on the chair's motion. All in favor say aye. Aye.

Aye.

All opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have and the motion is agreed to. A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using electronic voting system. The clerk will open the vote. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Do any members wish to change their vote? Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce a tally?

Mister Chairman, on this vote there are thirty-four yeas and zero nays.

The ayes have it, the notions agreed to, HR eighty-six, eighty-four as amended, and the accompanying materials shall be transmitted to the heart of the representatives. The chair notes for the record that a quorum is present. I ask in animus consent that the staff be authorized to make necessary technical and forming changes to today's bills. Without objection, so ordered. Pursuant to the House Rule eleven clause two L, I give notice that all members have the requisite number of days to file supplemental minority additional or dissenting views without objection, so ordered. Without objection, any members who wish to insert materials into the record may do so by submitting them to the committee clerk electronically by the end of the day today. If there is no further business before the committee, without objection, the committee stands adjourned.

Roo.