Markup of 10 Bills on Title IX, K-12 AI, Workforce, RURAL Healthcare, Franchise

i'm a professional hmm

The committee will please come to order. A quorum is present. The committee meets. today pursuant to notice to consider ten 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 the committee rule fourteen B. Without objection, the chair may recess the committee at any point. Uh, today the committee will consider ten bills that aim to strengthen the American workforce, prevent harmful regulations, hold union leaders accountable, protect the rights of students and parents, encourage healthy habits among children, and ensure students and educators are prepared to use AI tools safely and effectively in the cra- classroom. First, the committee will consider HR eighty-seven eighty-one, Title nine clarification act of twenty twenty six. This bill codifies the Supreme Court ruling, a recent ruling that the term sex under title nine refers to biological sex. Next, the committee will consider HR forty-nine eighty-six, Parents Opt-in Protection Act, introduced by Representative Mary Miller. Uh, this common sense bill strengthens student and parent consent provisions under the Protection of People Rights Amendment, and contains in General Education Provisions Act. The committee will also uh consider HR eighty-seven forty-seven, K-twelve AI Literacy and Readiness Act of twenty twenty-six, introduced by Representative Randy Fine. The bill helps schools direct federal funds where they will have the greatest impact while ensuring teachers and students get the AI training and support they need. Next we'll consider H R eighty-one eighty-three, Modernizing Access to Talents, Careers, and Hiring Act of twenty twenty-six, or Match Act. This bill introduced by Representative Owens helps uh states modernize outdated workforce data systems and build talent marketplaces that better connect workers with jobs and training opportunities. The next bill is HR ninety-seven twenty-three, Fit Future Act, introduced by Representative Ryan McKenzie. This bill codifies the President's counsel on sports, fitness, and nutrition and restores the presidential fitness test, making youth fitness a national priority. Additionally, the committee will consider HR eighty-six sixty, Value in Employee Stock Today Act or VEST Act, Introduced by Representative Ryan McKenzie, this bill clarifies that restricted stock units are excluded from nonexempt exempt uh, make that clear, nonexempt employees' regular rate of pay, providing employers with much needed clarity under Fair Labor Standards Act. Next, the committee will consider H. R. eighty-three forty-seven, reinforcing underserved rural and local health care act, or Rural Health Care Act, introduced by Representative Burgess Owens. Uh, HR eighty-three forty-seven is a common sense bill to clarify that locum, tenens, eh healthcare, uh providers are in fact independent contractors. The committee will also consider HR sixty-two thirteen, Heat Workforce Standards Act of twenty twenty five, which was introduced by Representative Mark Messmer in the last months of the Biden administration, OSHA proposed an overly burdened Next we'll consider H. R. eighty-seven seventy-five, ending predator access to union power act, introduced by Representative Joe Wilson. This bill prohibits individuals convicted of sex offenses against minors from serving in union leadership or as employer labor consultants or representatives in collective bargaining. Finally, we'll consider H. R. fifty-two sixty-seven, American Franchise Act. This legislation codifies the direct control joint employer tests for the franchise industry, guaranteeing future administrations cannot destroy franchise businesses, which will help Americans to start and grow their franchise business with less fear and uncertainty. I look forward to today's debate. With that, I yield to the ranking member for an opening statement.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, here we here we go again. Considering a package of bills that reflect your col- your priorities, but not the priorities of the American people, Americans are struggling to cover the cost of groceries, housing, child care, health care, and others. Gas has again jumped up to four dollars a gallon. Everyday Americans are working hard, stretching every paycheck, and looking to Congress for solutions that will lower costs, strengthen economic security, and create opportunity. But this uh uh response uh in these bills uh devotes valuable committee time to legislation that in many cases advances cheap slogans and sound bites instead of solutions to the problems plaguing plaguing our constituents. For example, the first bill we'll consider today, the Title Nine Clarification Act amends Title Nine to define sex to mean biological sex assigned at birth. It should be noted that less than one tenth of one percent of the total US population identifies as trans, and yet this Congress, we've already considered five bills focused on this less than one tenth of one percent of the population, while ignoring millions who are suffering from an economy that has only worsened under this administration. Now the Supreme Court has already stated in its majority opinion in PBJ versus West Virginia that sex and title nine had the meaning biological sex at birth. Importantly, the court's majority left intact prior rulings that Title nine's prohibition against sex discrimination could include discrimination based on gender identity, even while ruling that schools could separate men's and women's sports teams based on biological sex. So this bill really doesn't clarify anything. For these reasons, I'll oppose the uh uh I'll oppose the um bill, particularly as it just, uh, only I think it really does is narrow the scope of existing civil rights laws by writing transgender students out of the title and protections. The next bill before us would the Parents Opt-in Protection Act, similarly pri- prioritizes slogans over solutions. It would amend the protection of p- of protection of pupil rights amendment to require that schools obtain written consent from parents for each individual survey covering sensitive toc- topics. Current law already requires schools to obtain an annual written consent, provide advanced notice to parents, and allow parents to review the surveys. This bill places that balanced approach with the burdensome opt-in requirement for each individual survey. This bill would make it harder for schools to collect critical information on student mental health school climate and safety while offering no new rights for parents for these reasons I'll be voting no and urge my colleagues, Next bill before us, the K through twelve AI literacy and readiness act of twenty twenty six amends title four A of the every student succeeds act to add artificial intelligence as an allowable use of student support and academic enrichment grants. It's curious because current law already allows title four A funds to be used for artificial intelligence. Title four A has a wide variety of allowable use. that allow states and districts the flexibility they need to meet the needs of their communities. In fact, districts are already using title four A funds to incorporate AI literacy into their schools. What sk- states and districts actually need is clear federal guidance on how to safely and effectively integrate AI while protecting students and supporting educators. Lack of guidance is particularly troub- troubling given that the Trump administration has just eliminated of Educational Technology, the very office that was best positioned to provide that leadership and guidance. While I'm in favor of ensuring the title foray clearly and accurately describes allowable uses that meet the needs of states and school districts, I'm concerned that this bill's broad language could in- unintentionally create an environment where AI tools could cause more harm than good, because the bill does not include any protection for student privacy. The fourth bill will consider some modernizing access to talents, credentials and hiring. With a match act it would help states develop uh talent marketplaces using learning and employment records to better connect workers with education and employment opportunities. There's been a bipartisan negotiations uh going on led by Representatives McPath and Owens and so the bill was revised into a five-year pilot program with stronger requirements and important worker protections. By helping workers better demonstrate their skills and credentials, this legislation has the potential of expanding access to quality jobs and strengthening our workforce system and for those reasons I support the bill and urge my colleagues to do the same. Fifth bill before us, the Fit Future Act, codifies the President's Council on Sports, Fitness and Nutrition. the council currently exists through executive order while the bill largely codifies an existing advisory body I believe that the democratic amendments on affordability accessibility and inclusion will um in in inclusivity will strengthen this bill by ensuring that efforts to promote youth fitness are more equitable despite students differing abilities and disabilities and while the bill is a necessary since the Council has already existed for decades with the improvements offered by my colleagues have planned to support the bill. The sixth bill before us is Valuing Employee Stock Act. This bill will allow employees to pay employees less for overtime work by excluding restricted stock units, RRSUs, when calculating overtime pay. RSUs are companies' promise to issue stock to employees through a vesting plan, typically after the employees remained with the company for a certain amount of time. RSUs are not the same as stock programs, which are currently excluded when calculating workers' overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act. And there's been no policy basis established at any committee hearing in this Congress, for adding RSUs to the list of exclusions by which an employer can reduce the amount of overtime they pay. I oppose this bill and urge my colleagues to oppose it as well. The next bill and seventh next and seventh bill we'll consider is the reinforcing underserved rural and local health care act, the rural health care act. This bill would allow employers to misclassify health care workers as independent contractors, and effectively strip them of their worker protections and benefits that their coworkers enjoy, such as access to overtime pay, unemployment insurance, workers' compensation, and the right to collectively bargain. Rural America faces serious and unique health care challenges, and too many uh communities struggle with provider shortages, hospital closures, and limited access to care. These problems deserve serious discussion and real solutions, and unfortunately this bill does not offer any. Stripping employees of their rights and reducing their compensation is not a solution. Instead it is a distraction from the very real harms to rural health care, the big ugly bill which will result in rural hospitals and clin and clinics closing. For the sake of workers and patients, I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing H R eighty-three forty-seven. Next we'll consider the Heat Workforce Standards Act, which would block occupational safety and health administration from OSHA from finalizing and enforcing a nationwide heat standard, uh heat safety standard. According to Bureau of Labor Statistics, heat stress killed nine hundred and seven US workers between nineteen ninety two and twenty nineteen but the true death toll is likely much higher and will continue to climb this should go without saying but workers should not have to risk their lives in order to uh get it to do to perform their jobs the Biden administration addressed this problem with a proposed rule that will require employees to recognize the risk and to provide workers with access to things like drinking water, periodi- periodic uh rest breaks in shaded or cooler areas, heat illness training and emergency response plans. Mr. Chairman, after experiencing heat domes that have settled over large segments of this country, workers are more at risk now than ever. This bill would prevent the Department of Labor from finalizing a rule to do anything to address heat stress and therefore I oppose the bill, strongly urge my colleagues to do the same. Uh the ninth bill we will consider is ending predator access to union power act. This bill would prevent those convicted of sex offenses against a minor from serving as a union official staff in labor relations positions with employers employers or other related roles. I'd be remiss if I did not point out that the ti- title inaccurately implies that the restriction only Reply us to unions. Reply us to anyone working in union management, either on the union side or the employer side. Any individual in a position of trust must be held to a high standard, so I'll support the bill and urge my colleagues to do the same. Finally, we consider the American Franchise Act. This bill narrows joint employment roles for franchisees and franchisors under both the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Nation National Labor Relations Act. More specifically, it would limit the finding of joint employment liability for a franchisor's direct and immediate control over their franchisees' workers' conditions, and even goes so far as to carve out an exception, even when direct and immediate control might be found in certain cases. This is despite the fact that many large franchisor franchisors require their franchisees to uphold strict standards. that affect the day-to-day lives of the franchisees empl- uh franchisee employees and actually cause many of the violations that this bill will require the franchisee to pay for pay for. This bill would protect large franchisors from any liability for violations that their franchisees may may make based on the franchisor's uh standards, policies and direction, and strip workers of their right to collectively bargain with the franchisor. It m- lets the real decision-makers off the hook and makes it harder for workers to fight back when they are underpaid, mistreated, or ignored at the bargaining table. And for those reasons, I urge my colleagues to uh I'll b- be voting no and urge my colleagues to do the same. As we've discussed today, there are areas where the committee can work together, but too many of the other bills before us failed to address the challenges that the families are actually facing. Worse, the bills today will move us away from policies expand opportunity, protect workers and support students. As we head into the August recess, our constituents expect us expect us to be focusing on lowering costs, supporting public education and improving the lives of workers. And these bills do just the opposite. I hope uh that when we return this fall, the committee will uh redirect itself and devote its time to the appropriate priorities. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.

I thank the gentlemen. Without objection, all other members who wish to insert written open statements in the record may do so by submitting them to the committee clerk electronically by the end of the day today. Pursuant to 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, and the chair will allow uh members to offer amendments in a manner prohibited by the 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 eighty-one for amendment the bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are available. The clerk shall designate the bill.

H R eight seven eight one, a bill to clarify that for purposes of federal nondiscrimination requirements applicable to education programs, or activities receiving federal financial assistance, discrimination prohibited under title nine of the education amendments of nineteen seventy-two is based on the biological reality of sex.

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? Miss Miller, uh, for what purpose do you seek recognition?

Mister Chairman, I've 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 eight one, offered by Miss Miller of Illinois, identifier H eight seven eight one A and S underscore zero zero one.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, I want to thank Congressman Jody Errington for introducing HR eighty-seven, eighty-one, the title nine clarification act of twenty twenty-six. And I'm proud to offer this ANS which makes minor technical changes to the underlying bill. Mister Chairman, no one in nineteen seventy-two thought Congress was enacting a law that would be used to force girls into the same bathrooms as boys, and change clothes in front of boys, and shower with boys, and compete with boys in athletic events. But this is exactly what happened when the Obama and Biden administrations turned Title Nine into a weapon that exposed women and girls to danger, stripped them of their dignity and robbed them of opportunity. Thankfully, President Trump restored Title Nine to its original intent, first in his executive order titled "Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism" and " Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government", and then through the Department of Education's announcement last year, that it would interpret, quote, " on the basis of sex, to mean biological sex. And just last month the Supreme Court definitively confirmed Congress's original intent in West Virginia versus BPJ. Writing for the majority, Justice Kavanaugh wrote, quote, "The term sex in title nine cannot plausibly be interpreted to refer to anything other than biological sex." The ordinary meaning of the term " sex" at the time of enactment in the early nineteen seventies was biological sex. Today, we have an opportunity to advance H. R. eighty-seven, eighty-one, which codifies President Trump's executive order and the Department of Education's guidance. We have an opportunity to permanently secure the protections for women and girls, that Title Nine has always promised. The Supreme Court put an end to the madness last month, and today we have an opportunity to do our part. I urge my colleagues to support Title Nine, Clarification Act of twenty twenty-six, and I yield back.

The gentlelady yields. Are there any members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment and the nature of a substitute? I recognize the gentleman from California, Mister Tucano, uh for purposes of of comments.

Uh, Mister Chairman, I move to strike the last word and rise in opposition to the amendment in the nature of substitute.

You are recognized for five minutes.

Let's call this bill what it really is, the Bully Empowerment Act. I know every single member of this committee has seen a child being harassed for being gay. Every single person here has seen the fear, suffering, and anxiety LGBTQ plus kids face when walking into a classroom, a hostile classroom. I cannot imagine any member here would wanna look a parent in the eye and tell them to send their child into a school that is not safe. We know what this bill will do. It will empower the bully to harass LGBTQ plus students just for being who they are. It will empower the bully to force LGBTQ plus students out of classrooms because they fear for their safety. It will empower schools to ignore the rights of the very students they are supposed to protect. Every student deserves to be protected from discrimination, no matter who they are. No student should be attacked, get beat up, or miss out on their education because another student or adult targets them for who they are. And no responsible lawmaker, and I repeat, no responsible lawmaker should take the guardrails off of their legal protections. It seems every time Republicans bring up Title IX, it's to undermine Title IX's protections. Last Congress they voted to overturn regulations that explicitly clarified Title IX's protections on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, sex characteristics, sex stereotypes, and pregnancy or related conditions, which had made it, which had made significant positive changes in how schools address Since then, Republicans took control of the White House and gutted the entity that enforces Title Nine the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights. Let me tell you what that has resulted in. The Office of Civil Rights has resolved only two hundred and sixty-nine of nearly twelve thousand pending civil rights complaints of twenty twenty five. That's one percent, the lowest number of case resolutions in a decade. It cost taxpayers thirty-eight million dollars to pay for OCR employees to sit on administrative leave for ten months while these cases went uninvestigated. Since Republicans gained control of the Department of Education, it has has it has reached zero, zero resolution agreements related to sexual harassment and sexual violence. And now with this bill today, they're trying to make it easier for schools to discriminate against students and turn a blind eye when students are being harassed and LGBTQ plus students already face challenges in school. According to a twenty twenty five survey, more than fifty percent of LGBTQ plus students report facing discrimination at school. This bill would undermine LGBTQ plus students' protections under Title nine and make it harder for schools to be held accountable when discrimination against LGBTQ students occurs. Republican's attempts to narrow, narrowly define Title nine's prohibitions on sex discrimination to only refer to quote-unquote biological sex will undermine long-standing legal precedents that protect all students, all students, all students depend, their safety depends on not changing the definition. This is just one of seven anti-LGBTQI uh LGBTQI plus bills Republicans have marked up in this committee over the past year and a half. The majority is wasting everyone's time by attacking children, instead of focusing on real solutions that would make our public age uh uh public education system better, much less address the more pressing concerns of Americans related to the cost of living. A vote on this bill is a vote for uh a a vote to remove the protections that exist to keep kids safe and able to go to school without fear. It is a vote to strip the consequences for students and adults that target kids

Gentlemen Yales, are there any other members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment and nature of the substitute? Uh, does the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Scott,

Mm.

wish to be recognized?

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Chairman, we'll strike the last word.

You're recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This bill is by no means a clarification. Last month at the end of their term the Supreme Court clarified to all that the definition of sex in Title nine means biological sex at birth. In the case that's already been uh mentioned, Justice Kavanaugh, uh writing for the nine zero majority, noted that both the appellant and appellee conceded sex as defined in title nine meant biological sex at birth. So it would appear unnecessary to add this to the law. That'd be until you realize that the enacting of the bill could threaten the rights of transgender students to be free from discrimination on the basis of sex in educational settings. Over the last two congresses, the majority of this uh committee said that their goal was to protect women's and girls' sports. Well the Supreme Court did that, ruling that states could pass laws that limit participation on women's and men's schemes on the basis of biological sex at birth. Nine justices agreed to that, and and agreed that it did not a title it did not agree t- it did not violate uh title nine. And six justices went so far as to say that it specif- it was specifically allowed under the Constitution's equal protection clause. But the court did not go as far as the majority on this committee would like. The court limited their decision to sports, and did not say what the majority apparently needed to say, and that is that transgender students are not protected by Title Nine whatsoever. Since transgender students may ha- still have some rights under Title Nine, after the Supreme Court's rulings, the committee Republicans have brought up HR eighty-seven, eighty-one, and just like the President's executive order on so-called gender ideology uh extremism, H R eighty-seven eighty-one attempts to write transgender students out of existence. Um, Mister Chairman, for that reason I oppose A- the ANS and the underlying bill and urge my colleagues to vote no on both and yield back.

The gentleman yields. Are there any other members who wish to be recognized? The gentlelady from Connecticut, Mrs. Hayes. Do you be wish to be recognized?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move to strike the last word.

Recognized for five minutes.

I rise in opposition to this amendment in nature of a substitute. Um, this is really exhausting that we continue to revisit this on this committee. The representative from Illinois is hyper-focused on this topic and brings it up a lot. She talked about how when this law was passed, uh, what it meant, but I remind you that when the Civil Rights Act of nineteen sixty-four was originally passed it did not include discrimination on the basis of sex. That was added after, and there's been many court decisions and, um, administrative guidance that talked about what that meant. I'd like to ask the gentlelady from Illinois, because she presented this as a clarifying amendment. My question is, what do you propose we do with these students. Uh, this legislation, no court decision, is going to stop a young person from being gay or um the the feelings that they have. Are are you proposing that educators, that programs, that federal funding, that legislation just erases these young people and say that we don't have an obligation to keep them safe as well? I'll yield if the gentlelady would like to respond.

First of all, we should be honest with our children and tell them the truth. This is not about gay, this is about trans men going into girls' safe spaces and on their athletic teams, and it has definitely diminished our girls' opportunities, equal opportunities in athletics. They are not getting equal opportunities when they are participating against a man. who we all know can have way more bone mass muscle mass and it's one hundred percent not fair I mean you know it you guys are a bunch of liars you're deceivers first of all this

Call me a liar again

this is not about case

Mr. Chairman

Chairman I demand the ladies'

it's

Mr. Chairman I

this is not

Call me a liar again Call me a liar again

this is not this is not true

The the the ladies will suspend

Call me a liar again

you say the truth

the ladies

Call me a liar again

this bill is about truth

and the ladies will suspend

men girls

Representative Miller, uh, you will suspend.

M- Mister Chairman, and I move the words be taken down.

I move that her words be taken down, and that we not move on until they are.

I move that you say the truth.

Uh, the lady the ladies will be suspended.

This is about trans men in girls' sports spaces.

We will we will we will recess from Oh, this is yes. Mmm. Oh, excuse me. Oh, I know I know. Can you wrap? we have outstanding hmm points of order The committee will come to order. Does the gentlelady from Illinois withdraw the her words?

Yes. Withdraw your words.

The gentlelady from Illinois may resume. under the gentlelady from Connecticut's time and yielding.

My intention was to speak the truth. This bill is not about being gay and lesbian. This is about protecting female spaces. Men should not be allowed in female spaces. Title nine must protect the safety and dignity of women and girls.

Reclaiming my time.

Women lose opportunities because of the trans agenda.

Reclaiming my time.

We must

I'm claiming my time.

The gentlelady,

The truth.

gentlelady will suspend.

Thank you.

The gentlelady from Kinetic reclaims her time.

Thank you. I wanna make sure we keep the main thing the main thing. My question was about what do we do with these children?

Sure.

The Supreme Court has already decided that states should be able to uh rule on sports in their state. They should be able to rule on leagues, and those are local decisions. The Supreme Court has already said that. So there is no need for Congress, for this committee, to keep pressing this point. Our job, the job of educators, is to create inclusive environments where all students can learn, even trans students. And we're not talking about men, we're talking about youth. We're talking about young people. My question remains, what do we do with those young people? That's the thing we need to figure out. If we are going to keep having hearings on this committee, meant to erase the existence of youth, whether they are LGBTQIA, trans, gay, whatever. My question remains, where is our obligation to make sure that those students also have an inclusive educational experience? That was the question I asked then, that's the question I ask now, that the que- that is the question that remains unanswered. This is not about men in youth sports. This is about youth in youth sports. What do we do with those children? I've asked this question many times, and as an educator I will always pursue an answer to that question, because we have an obligation, a responsibility, to make sure that every student, no matter how they identify, every student, no matter where they live or what school district they attend, every student has access to an appropriate educational experience.

And with that I yield back.

The gentlelady yields. Does the gentlelady withdraw her point of order?

I withdraw.

The gentleman from California, Mister Tucano, do you withdraw your point of order?

I withdraw my point of order.

Point of orders are withdrawn. Are there any other members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment in the nature of a substitute? I recognize the gentlelady from Oregon, Miss Bonamici, for five minutes.

Uh, thank you, Mister Chairman, I move to strike the last word and speak I'm so sorry to interrupt this, sorry.

I don't re- recognize him.

Thank you. I do not understand Republicans' continued obsession with attacking transgender individuals. Only about one percent of Americans identify as transgender, and there are more than five hundred thousand athletes in the NCAA, and how many of those athletes are transgender? Fewer than ten. Keep in mind also that Title IX applies to educational programs. Not just athletics. Do you wanna discriminate against trans students in chess clubs? Dance classes? I don't understand it. This hysterical fixation with villainizing a small group of our nation's youth has become predatory and frankly is dangerous. The number of hearings we have had and bills that we have marked up on this subject is staggering. Just last week my colleagues peppered medical school professionals with questions about uteruses pronouns, and how pregnancy works. Title nine was created to prevent discrimination. This bill turns the landmark federal statute into a tool to discriminate against a select few who are already underserved and under attack. According to the Trevor Project, more than forty percent of transgender youth seriously attempted considered attempting suicide every year.

Mm-hmm.

That's two in five trans kids and young adults. It's abhorrent, and bills like this make things worse. Sadly, in this committee we've heard too much hate and prejudice. Why does it matter so much to you how someone identifies and presents themselves How does another person's identity harm you? I can't believe I have to say this, but no human being is less worthy of respect and opportunity than any other human being and no human being is inherently dangerous because of their gender identity. I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill and end the hatred toward individuals who happen to be different from you. I hope this committee can get back to focusing on education and making lives better for working people and I yield back the balance of my time.

General Lady Yales, are there any other members who wish to be Seeing none, I claim my five minutes in trying to bring bring this legislation back to what it really is. Not an attack on anyone, but a clarification of reality. Before continuing my statement, I yield to the gentlelady from Illinois, Mrs. Miller.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My intention was to speak the truth. This bill isn't about being gay and lesbian. This is about protecting female spaces. Men should not be allowed in women's spaces. Title nine must protect the safety and dignity of women and girls. Women lose opportunities because of the trans agenda. We must tell our children the truth. And we must protect our children. We must defend biology. God created males and females. And we must accept that simple truth.

Amen. Easy, right?

My characterization of the bill is accurate, and the gentlewoman's characterization of the bill is inaccurate. And I yield back to the gentlewoman. Or to the chairman. To the chairman.

Thank you. Having seen no others,

Okay.

uh, I will go to my statement, fi- my final statement. I reiterate the fact that this legislation is not about gay or lesbians. Not at all. There's actual biology there. Fact and science. They're not left unprotected in this legislation. They're not mentioned really in this legislation except that we define male and female according to biological science. That's it. We saw the ridiculous error and the performance of esteemed medical college leaders last week who couldn't even answer directly if a non-biological woman could give birth. Or a non-biological woman had a uterus. I understand the concept of love. I'm a grandfather. I understand the concept of love without truth is not love at all. And while some would want to continue loving without truth, trans children, without truth it isn't love. Affirming who they are. Encouraging them to understand. giving them the opportunity to grow and really come to a point of accepting who they are and moving through life with that reality of biological science, of DNA, of all that those esteemed professors in medical colleges were trained in when they went to school, I'm certain, and now have deviate, deviated away from it. because of pressure from a small pressure group that's out there, but nonetheless. This committee isn't based upon that. This is the education committee, and education is based upon fact and truth. For that reason, this legislation is necessary, and I believe this necessary, it's necessary to protect biological females. from being put in spaces that we would have never countenanced before. And we shouldn't be doing that now. With that, I yield. There be no further discussion on the amendment in the nature of a substitute. For what purpose does Miss McBath seek recognition at this point in time?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move to strike the last word.

You're recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm so sorry to see the de-evolving of this committee as such as it has happened today. Um but um I'm I'm glad that we're kind of hashing this out. And with that I am more than happy to relegate the rest of my time to my esteemed colleague from Connecticut Representative Johanna Hayes. I yield to her.

Thank you. I'm gonna go on the record again because we couldn't just leave it at that, taking the words down, striking it. We have to go back for another bite at the apple on this same topic. There needs to be some consistency on this committee. Decorum on this committee, the same expectation, the the same thing that is expected for Democrats on the dais should also be expected of Republicans on the dais. I'm very disappointed that it wasn't enough to just leave it alone and move forward. that the chairman had to then take time and yield to continue this discussion. I'm gonna say it over and over and over again. I will always, on this committee, fight so that all children, all children, every single one of them, receives a high quality education. And if we're talking about truth, I think that there needs, some people who need to accept the simple truth that there are children who are different. There are young people who think different, who feel different, who are different, and that's okay. And this fixation with that is absurd. To keep bringing people for, before this committee, to have hearings on DEI and trans youth, and all of these culture war issues while we are doing nothing, nothing to, I don't know, fully fund IDEA, to make sure that students with disabilities have the resources that they need, to hold not only our Department of Education, but even l- local education agencies accountable for improving student success and outcomes, to make sure that teachers have the resources that they need. Nothing. Just the same hearings on the same topics over and over and over again. And this committee has gotten used to being able to say and do whatever they want, unchecked. Not today. Not any day moving forward. The respect I give is the respect I demand. We can debate on the issues, we can have differing opinions, we can have different viewpoints, we can have different pathways to the solution. But what you will not do is disrespect me and call me out of my name in pursuit of that path. So once again, I rise in opposition to this amendment. I encourage my colleagues to vote against this amendment and understand exactly what it's calling for. And then to brace yourself for next week or the next time that this comes up because it will come up again. Because when you have no policies, When you have no ideas, when you have no solutions, you punch down. I yield back to Mr. Bath.

I yield.

There being no further discussion on the amendment and nature of substitute, the committee will move to consideration of amendments.

Mr. Chairman? Any manips considered request?

Uh, for what purposes did a gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member,

Uh,

request?

I'd like to enter into the record a press release from the sponsor of the bill, Mister Harrington, who um says that it restores the in original intent in title nine and prevents future administrations from reinterpreting aloud and include gender identity or sexual orientation without congressional approval. Uh, that's um not what the bill actually does.

Without objection, it'll be entered. 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 substitute to H R eighty-seven, eighty-one. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, no.

No.

In the opinion of the chairs, the ayes have it, and the amendment in nature of a substitute is We'll now move to consider the next bill.

Nope, we didn't request. There were no local ones, so.

I don't know where to stick.

There were no amendments, so then we already did the anna-

The committee will now proceed to consideration of Bill HR forty-nine eighty-six for amendment the bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are available. The clerk shall designate the bill.

H R four nine eight six, a bill to amend the General Education Provisions Act to ensure that a student is not required to submit to a survey analysis or evaluation that reveals personal information about su- about such student or their family without prior written consent.

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? Miss Miller, for what purpose do you seek recognition?

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

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

Amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R four nine eight six, offered by Miss Miller of Illinois, identifier four nine

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 Mrs. Miller for five minutes to explain the amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, I am proud to sponsor both H R forty-nine eighty-six, the Parents Opt-in Protection Act, and this ANS which makes technical and clarifiable changes to the underlying bill. This bill strengthens consent requirements to ensure that parents and students are fully informed before disclosing sensitive information through school administered surveys and evaluations. The Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment, or PPRA, prohibits educational institutions that receive federal funding from requiring students to submit to a survey, or evaluation without the parent's consent, should such a survey or evaluation ask for sensitive information about the student. This includes the student's sexual behavior, income, political affiliations, or religious beliefs. This bill aligns consent provisions to ensure that any consent, whether offered by the parent or appropriate student, is in writing. This is a small but important change to ensure that parents and students are empowered by law to be fully aware of what they are consenting to when a child is offered a student survey or screening. Separately, PPRA also requires school districts to have policies in place that govern general administration of these student surveys. However, those policies only allow parents to opt their children out of the surveys, not in. My bill inverts this practice by making the default opt out of current law and opt in, giving parents more control over the information collected about their students. Finally, this bill clarifies that prior written consent must be obtained each time a sensitive student survey is conducted. This will ensure that busy parents do not in- inadvertently expose their children to inappropriate evaluations if the school sends home a one-time consent request that the parents don't understand. Thank you again, Mister Chairman, and I urge my colleagues to support this common sense legislation, and I yield back.

The gentlelady yields. Are there any members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment in nature of a substitute? The gentleman from California,

Uh, Mister Chairman, I move to strike the last word and rise in opposition to the bill.

You're recognized for five minutes.

Mister Chairman, uh school surveys provide critical insights into the experiences of students. So school districts, researchers and policymakers can better understand and address the challenges students face. For example, a twenty twenty-three survey found that nearly three in ten high school students report experiencing poor mental health in the previous thirty days. That survey revealed a crisis. That very same survey found dramatic disparities between the experiences of LGBTQ plus students and their peers. That survey found that twenty-five percent of LGBTQ plus students were bullied online, or uh uh bullied online via or via social media during the previous year, uh compared to thirteen percent of non-LGBTQ plus students. that nineteen percent of LGBTQ plus students did not go to school because of safety concerns during the previous thirty days compared to ten percent of LGBTQ plus students. This is just a small sample of the challenges uh LGBTQ students uh face as revealed by such a survey. Now, some advocates of this bill have specifically highlighted that this bill is meant to target survey demographic questions about sexual orientation and gender identity, as well as mental health screenings. That is the goal of this bill, to decrease our understanding of LGBTQ plus students and student mental health. And let's be clear, this includes not only trans students but gay and lesbian students. Uh, the animus behind this I find reprehensible. Do you fo- do - do my colleagues on the other side of the - of the aisle really think that we shouldn't know about these kids' experiences in school? I wanna be very clear. As a former teacher, I know the critical role parents play in their children's education. I strongly support parents' rights. Our current federal system preserves their right to dictate when their child can participate in a covered survey requiring schools to have uh, out opt-out policies. Put it another way, parents already have a say in what surveys their child takes because they can opt their child out of covered surveys. This bill, by switching to an opt-in model, will just create more paperwork and more hurdles to administrative surveys, also inhibiting our understanding of what students experience in school. For example, the CDC estimates that using an opt-in system as opposed to an opt-out system will reduce student survey response rates by about fifty percent in a youth risk survey, a youth risk behavior survey. The CDC says you can prevent this decrease by telephoning and emailing parents to follow-up directly on the forms among other actions. This suggests that this d- the this suggests this d- the the decrease isn't because parents don't want their children to participate, it's because filling out another school form isn't always at the So let me be clear. This bill is just creating more work for schools, more work for parents who want to who want their children to participate in these surveys. Those parents uh who used to ha have to take no action will now have to fill out a form for every survey. For me, this also comes down to who should make these decisions. Politicians in Washington DC or states and local school districts. States and school districts are best positioned to understand what permission system works best for their schools. As I have highlighted, opt-in systems require increased costs and create burdens on both parents and staff. States and school districts better understand if they have the resources and time to administer those systems. Schools are already facing rising costs and a dep- and an education department that's abandoned them. Uh, parents already have enough on their plates. We don't need politicians in Washington DC mandating a one size fits all approach that will lead to more school forms for parents and schools. I urge my colleagues to vote no on HR forty-nine eighty-six and I yield back.

Gentleman yields. Does the gentleman from California, Mister Kiley, seek recognition?

Uh, yes, Mister Chair.

You're recognized for five minutes.

Uh, thank you Mister Chair. Um, I think this is a very important bill and, uh, one that I'd be happy to cosponsor. Uh, it follows, uh, a hearing that we held the k twelve education uh subcommittee about a recent supreme court uh ruling uh upholding the c- constitutional right of parents to opt their children out uh of objectionable content in schools and uh i don't want to minimize the issues at play here because uh there have been very fierce debates uh across the country about what content is appropriate uh in public school classrooms uh whether that comes in the form of instruction uh or surveys. And uh I personally think there are a number of examples uh of uh schools and classrooms uh where uh things have gone too far in terms of curriculum uh that shouldn't be in schools, but I recognize that there are edge cases, there's a legitimate debate, different states, different districts uh will decide these questions uh differently. Uh but the very important uh fall back option uh that families have in order to assure that their kids are not exposed uh to content, uh interferes with uh the right of parents to to raise their kids uh with the values uh that they choose uh is number one the ability to exercise choice as far as where your child goes to school uh within the traditional public school system uh in the broader public school system including the charter sector uh as well as options outside of that system uh and the second important uh fall back is the ability to opt your child out of objectionable curriculums uh curricula uh a at your at at their school uh and this is the right that the courts uh the supreme court recently upheld we've seen some examples where districts uh are not adhering to the spirit perhaps not even the letter uh of that decision uh so this bill is very simple and it's something that i think the vast majority of parents uh would agree with it says that if your child is going to be uh exposed to uh material that that you as a parent find objectionable, uh then you should have the right at to opt them out and uh in order for them to participate there should be a requirement of written uh consent and this also expands uh this standard for uh for uh students who have the ability to consent, uh on their own behalf uh as well. Uh so uh I'm happy to support it today, I think it's a common sense measure, it doesn't require anyone to take a position on the propriety of a particular type of curriculum,

Gentlemen yields. Does the gentlelady from North Carolina seek recognition?

Uh, yes, Mister Chair, I I move to strike the last word in opposition to the bill.

Recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. Uh, parents should know what is happening in their child's school. They should be informed, they should be involved, and they should have a voice. But let us be clear about what this bill actually does. Current law already protects parents and students. Schools must provide notice before certain surveys are administered. Parents have the right to inspect those surveys. They may not, they may opt their child out. And for surveys involving sensitive subjects, schools must have already obtained written parental consent. So this bill is not filling some major gap in the law. Instead, it would require a separate opt-out opt-in for every survey, involving topics such as mental health, student safety, bullying, substance use, or or school climate. That may sound simple here in Washington, but anyone who has worked in a school knows what will happen. Forms will be sent home and never returned. Working parents will miss an email. Families who speak another language may may not receive information in time and students whose parents simply forget to sign a form will be left out. The CDC has warned that active opt-in requirements can reduce student survey participation by by roughly half. When participation participation drops that sharply, schools lose the information that they need to understand what students are facing. They may not see a rise in in depression or suicidal They may miss patterns of bullying or violence. They may not know whether students uh feel safe in the classroom or supported by the adults around them. As an educator for more than forty years, I know that teachers and school leaders cannot address problems they cannot see. These surveys help schools identify where support is needed. They help districts decide whether to hire more counselors, expand mental health services, improve school safety, or respond to a growing crisis before it becomes a tragedy. This is not about forcing students to answer personal questions. Participation is voluntary, and parents already have rights under the law. This is about whether schools will have reliable information to protect children and to help them succeed. I'm also concerned that this bill will not affect every community equally. Parents with more time, reliable internet access and familiarity with school paperwork are are more likely to return consent forms. Students from working families, families with limited English proficiency, or families facing housing instability are more likely to be excluded. And that means the student with the greatest needs may be the least visible in the data school, We can respect parents without making it harder for schools to understand the health and safety of their students. Current law already provides notice, transparency, access to survey materials, and the right to decline participation. This bill goes beyond protecting parents. It creates another barrier between students and the support uh they may need.

Mm. The gentlelady yields. Are there any other members who wish to speak on the amendment in nature of a substitute? Uh, gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mrs. Scott, you wish to be recognized.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and move to the last word.

You're recognized for five minutes.

Mr. Chairman, I oppose H. R. e- forty nine eighty six, the parents opt in protection act. This bill would amend the protection of student of pupil rights um amendment, the PPR. to make it more difficult for schools and districts to conduct surveys, including mental health surveys, under the guise of parents' rights. Under current law, the PPRA protects both parents' rights and student data, employing a balanced approach between this responsibility and the need for schools, districts, and schools and states to conduct surveys to better serve students. Current law prohibits students from being required to take a survey that touches on eight enumerated sensitive topics, including political affiliations or beliefs, mental or psychological problems, sex uh uh sex behavior or attitudes, religious practices, affiliations, or beliefs. The law requires that school districts provide advance notice to parents about such surveys, allowing parents to review such uh surveys and provide parents the right to opt their child out of such surveys or provide annual written consent for such surveys. This uh bill would replace the balanced approach with an opt-in requirement which schools uh would need to obtain written consent from parents for each individual survey conveying sensitive topics making it harder for schools to collect critical information on student mental health school climate and school and safety, while offering no new rights for parents. Sponsor of the bill, specifically stated when introducing it for the first time in the hundred and eighteenth Cong- Cong- uh Congress, that its purpose was to, and I quote, "create a barrier between our nation's school children and inappropriate influence from radical transgender ideology and big tech, including sexual orientation, sexual identity, and woke politics," unquote. And while the majority claims the bill is necessary to protect parents' rights, the bill pert- uh represents yet another attempt to target transgender students, but in fact It will harm all students by reducing the school, district and state awareness of school climate, mental health and other issues, and it would limit the ability of schools and districts and states to support students in addressing their needs. Research shows that students who feel safe and supported at school have better educational outcomes, achieve more in school, and have better attendance and graduation rate rates, and are better behaved. Uh, efforts to improve school climate have been supported over the years, by the US Department of Education and Institute of Educational Science. The danger in this bill is it could significantly reduce survey responses on school climate surveys and other surveys, including the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, voluntary biennial uh youth risk behavior survey, the YRBS, which has been conducted since nineteen ninety-one using sampling of ninth through twelfth graders, The CDC uses a survey to understand health and mental he- mental health related behaviors as well as issues such as weight, ob- obesity, and asthma and to identify and evaluate programs uh to improve adolescent health. Opt-in requirements hinder participation in surveys in general and also affect who participates in the survey. In a school setting, the opt-in requirement for each survey may make it less likely that working parents, who speak a different language, it's a better written consent form. According to CDC, requiring opt-in uh surveys could have significant detrimental effects. CDC stated that it expects the opt-in requirement to reduce the student response rate by about fifty percent. Excuse me. Research shows that students who feel safe and supported in school have better outcomes as I indicated and when you have less information you have less ability to uh create those better situations. And while it's imperative that step- parents be aware of what is happening in the schools, current law finds a reasonable balance between parental oversight of these surveys and the importance of conducting such surveys. The bill uh is opposed by the National Women's Law Center Action uh Fund, Advocates for Trans Equality, and the Human Rights Campaign. So I ask unanimous consent that letters in opposition from the Women's uh Women National Women's Law Center and the Human Rights Campaign be entered into the record.

Without objection, hearing none, they'll be entered.

And I yield back.

The gentleman yields. Are there any other members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment in the nature of a substitute? Seeing none, there being no further discussion on the 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. There being no amendments, the question now occurs on the amendment and the nature of a substitute to HR forty-nine, eighty-six. All in favor say 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. We'll now move to consider the next bill. The committee will now proceed to consideration of Bill HR eight seven four seven for amendment. The bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are available. The clerk shall designate the bill.

H R eight seven four seven, a bill to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of nineteen sixty-five to include certain curriculum expenses as permissible uses of funds 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, for what purpose do you seek recognition?

Mister Chairman, I have amendment in its na- in nature of substitute at the desk.

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

Amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R eight seven four seven, offered by Mister Owens of Utah, identifier eight seven

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. Um, artificial intelligence is coming as fundamental to our economy as computers and the internet were in the previous generations. A question is no longer whether students will use an account of a a AI, is whether and schools will prepare them to use it responsibly and effectively. If America wants to remain the global leader in innovation, our educational system must keep pace with technological change. Schools, educators, industrial leaders report growing demand for AI literacy programs. Districts want to move forward but often lack clear authority to scale implementation and use existing federal education funds to prepare the students and educators for this transformation transformation. Title four A already offers schools broad flexibility, but it's not clear whether AI education is allowable use of those funds. In many cases, schools' attorneys may advise caution if federal funds are being used for activities that are not specifically mentioned in law. The aim of this bill is to clarify that AI instruction is allowable is allowable use for federal funds by amending title four A of ESEA. It will give states and local districts flexibility to use existing federal educational funds to prepare. students and educators for the ai driven future the bill focuses on safe effective and responsible implementation emphasizes educators uh leadership rather than replacing teachers uh with technology the bill does not create any new spending nor does it impose any federal mandates on schools or state districts uh h r eighty five forty seven does not require schools to adopt ai it does not create a federal curriculum It simply allows states and school districts to use existing federal education dollars if they choose to invest in AI education and education and educator preparation. Successful implementation requires preparation preparing educators and students together. This bill supports students. Students need to learn not just how to use AI, but how to think critically about it, evaluate its output, and use it responsibly to learn, create, and solve problems. This bill supports educators. One of the largest barriers of AI adoption in schools is educator Teachers cannot teach students how to use AI responsibly if they themselves lack access to training and professional development. H R eighty-seven forty-seven allows schools to invest in teachers, parafe- uh professionals, librarians, uh institutional support staff, and school leaders. AI s- has enormous potential in education and schools need to approach it thoughtfully and responsibly. America led the computer revolution because we prepare students for the

The gentleman yields. Are there any members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment? I recognize the gentlelady from Oregon, Miss Bonabici, for five minutes.

Uh, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Uh, I want to speak in opposition to the bill on the ANS. Uh, this bill and the ANS amend the Student Support in Academic Enrichment Grant program that's title four A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which already gives school districts flexible funding in three very carefully negotiated areas. Providing a well-rounded education, improving school conditions for learning, including safety, and supporting the use of technology. I know this because I worked on drafting, negotiating, and passing title four A, and I lead the title four A appropriations letter. Title four A was bipartisan when we passed it and remains so today. Current law already gives districts the flexibility they need to use these funds for artificial intelligence and AI literacy and readiness. But what the student support and academic uh enrichment title four A programs need is funding, but that doesn't address the challenges of AI. What AI literacy and readiness need is a comprehensive strategy. The challenge is not a lack of flexibility in title four A. Artificial intelligence is changing how Americans learn, teach, and work. Many students are using these tools without consistent standards or guidance. Educators need professional development to teach AI and to use these tools responsibly. Workers need opportunities to develop the skills required for an economy that is changing because of AI. Our education and workforce systems need to keep pace, but that's not what this bill does. I'm leading the AI Education and Workforce Readiness Act. This draft legislation would establish a coordinated strategy to prepare students educators and workers, to use artificial intelligence safely, responsibly, and age appropriately. It would coordinate efforts across the departments of education and labor and federal science agencies to support career pathways, evidence-based educational tools, research, and technical assistance. My bill recognizes that AI literacy is about more than learning how to use a new tool. Students and educators need to understand the ethical questions that artificial intelligence raises. They need to consider its implications for civics and democracy. And with concerns about AI leading to cognitive stunting, especially in young children, we must grapple with how to protect critical And perspective. Putting an AI tool in a classroom does not by itself improve learning. Artificial intelligence should help students learn, create, and solve problems. It should not replace the productive struggle that helps students develop these skills. Artificial intelligence should be one of the many tools in the hands of a skilled educator, not a replacement for teaching. My bill would support professional development in AI literacy to address these issues and it would also provide grants to support learners from communities that have historically faced barriers to educational and economic opportunity. We must not let artificial intelligence widen existing gaps in opportunity. Innovation requires responsibility. Artificial intelligence is here. The question is whether we will prepare people to shape this technology or allow technology to shape their future without them. Students need to be prepared for the AI world, and they need to be protected from its risk. The bill we're considering today simply duplicates flexibility that schools already have without providing comprehensive strategy, investments, and safeguards that are so important for students, educators, and our future. So instead of passing this bill, we should work together on careful policies that recognize the complexity and risks involved with AI in educational settings. Thank you, and I yield back the balance of my time.

The gentlelady yields. This is gentleman from California, Mister Kiley, seek recognition.

Yes, Mister Chair.

You're recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, I'll be supporting today the uh K-twelve AI Literacy and Readiness Act of twenty twenty six, uh, because I think it will uh reinforce uh the work of our subcommittee, which has now held uh two hearings on the topic of the use of AI uh in schools. One focused on how it's being used to assist students and another on how uh teachers are using it to assist with their own uh lesson planning uh instruction assessments, uh, and so forth. And uh, you know, we have highlighted in our hearings examples of how AI is being used at schools and in districts and in states uh across the country. And we've highlighted both the extraordinary opportunity and the very real perils. I personally uh believe that these tools have the ability to make uh, to give every child in America access to a kind of ex- education that no child had uh you know not that long ago. So there is just extraordinary extraordinary opportunity, but we also see uh various issues connected with academic honesty, with uh increased screen time, uh with uh the potential to uh erode critical thinking skills, uh and uh and many other issues uh that come up when we're dealing with uh tools that are continuing to advance at a very rapid pace. So uh I don't disagree with uh the ranking member of our subcommittee's comments about how we need to be uh doing more on this topic, but I think that this bill uh is really helpful in the following sense, that the way that we're gonna come up I think with the best solutions here, the best use cases, uh are empowering teachers and school leaders uh and districts uh to really uh respond to the challenges they're seeing in their classrooms and deploy uh, the latest tools as they become available. And then we can see what is working and we can do what we've been doing, on our subcommittee and in this full committee uh which is to highlight the examples that have been really helping students uh and helping teachers and so that's what this bill will do it will allow for greater flexibility in the use of funds uh in order to uh assist teachers with uh training related to ai and in order to uh assist students with being able to use ai uh in productive ways i'm also working on legislation that will uh provide uh greater opportunities

Gentlemen yields.

Thank you.

Are there any other members who wish to speak on the amendment in nature of a substitute? I recognize a gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Scott, uh for the purposes uh of discussion.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, HRA eighty-seven forty-seven would include professional development instruction on safe responsible and effective use of artificial intelligence as an allowable use of funds under title four A of the elementary and secondary education act and that title four A was carefully negotiated under every student succeeds act to ensure the school districts can two districts can use the funds to support safe and health s- safe and healthy students well-rounded education, and effective use of technology. These are broad categories that allow the school districts a wide range of flexibility to meet the needs of their students. Mentioned many districts across the district are already using title four A funds to support a um AI um and lit um literacy as it's already in allowable use. Now the last year the center on reinventing public education released revealing that the number of districts surveyed are that are early adopters of ai uh jumped from forty percent in twenty twenty four to twenty twenty five to seventy nine percent to the twenty twenty five twenty six school year that shows the schools and educators are opening to the use of updated technology but they need support and guidance to ensure coherent usages that it insure educators and students understand the risks and potential dangers of AI. Um, and I have concerns about, first of all, the attempt to specify a particular allowable use of 4A funds, as this bill does, highlighting AI in this way does nothing to help states figure out the approach uh to AI and may inadvertently lead states and districts to believe that this is a preferred use of the funds over other allowable uses. Additionally, it's not lost that we sit here today as the Office of Education Technology at the Department of Education is being dismantled. Uh, that office could be working directly with states and local districts to provide guidance and support needed to nega- navigate the AI landscape safely. However, this administration has dismantled that office, leaving states and districts to fend for themselves. And while I fully support flexibility in for in title four,

The gentleman yields. Are there any other members who wish to be recognized? There being no further discussion on the amendment in the nature of a substitute the committee will move to consideration of amendments.

Mm.

Are there any members

Mm. Mr. Chairman.

I recognize the gentleman, uh the ranking member from Virginia, Mister Scott, for purpose of amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment to the desk, eight seven four seven AMD underscore O two.

Clerk will uh report the amendment.

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

Does the gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order?

Yes.

A point of order is reserved.

Yes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would maintain the office of education technology and restore the staffing ca- uh capacity. As AI continues to expand and become more integrated into educational settings, it's important to recognize that OET had a had played a critical role in helping states and districts understand and evaluate these new technologies, including artificial intelligent and intelligence to improve student learning and teaching. It's worth noting that OET had developed key resources that help states and districts navigate effective and responsible uses of AI, including a report, Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Teaching and Learning, which provided recommendations on AI integration in the classroom. However, this administration has since dissolved OET. These and these actions eliminated the primary source of expertise and guidance at the department, that has helped states and districts integrate AI. This amendment would re-establish that office and that capacity to provide critical resources and guidance that states and districts need to address the opportunities and challenges in integrating AI into education. So I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this amendment and yield back the balance of our time.

The gentleman yields. Does the gentleman from Utah withdraw the reservation?

I withdraw, my support of order.

The reservation is withdrawn. Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment?

Who? Oh no. Okay.

The question then is on the amendment by the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Scott.

Aye.

All opposed no. No. In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it and the amendment is not agreed to. A roll call vote is ordered pursuant to 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? I recognize a gentle lady from Connecticut, Miss Hayes, for the purposes of amendment.

Yes, Mr. Chair, 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 four seven, offered by Miss Hayes of Connecticut, identifier Hayes underscore H A Y E C T underscore zero seven one.

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

I reserve a point of order.

and I'll recognize the gentlelady from Connecticut for five minutes in support of her amendment.

Thank you. I fully support preparing students to navigate an AI driven world. recognizing that AI literacy is an essential skill. And I understand the intent behind this legislation. My amendment to HR HR eight seven four seven, the AR Lit AI Literacy and Readiness Act would ensure that federal funds used to implement AI tools in classrooms, come with fundamental safety guardrails. According to the CDC, firearm related injuries are the leading cause of death for children and teenagers in the United States aged one to nineteen. And seven months into the year twenty twenty six, we have already witnessed fourteen school shootings resulting in injury or death at K-twelve schools across the country. AI has found its way into this disturbing trend. The Center for Countering Digital Hate indicates that eight out of ten AI chatbots are regularly assisted have regularly assisted teenage users in planning school shootings and other violent attacks. Hundreds of users user tests have shown that these chat boxes a actively provide information that is directly applicable to planning and executing violent acts. For example, chat GPT provided maps of a high school campus in Virginia to a user who had already engaged with content related to school shootings and misogyny. Additionally, meta-AI suggested nearby gun stores and shooting ranges without questioning the My amendment requires any AI tool funded under this provision to have a documented policy disclosing uh their policy for notifying law enforcement when a user shares a credible plan to harm others. It also requires notification of school mental health professionals when a user discloses su- suicidal ideation or self-harm. Every school counselor who hears a student say they want harm themselves is required to act. Every teacher who hears a student threaten someone else is required to act. By law, in all fifty states and Washington, D. C., educators are mandated reporters. Teachers must report reasonable suspicion. These requirements exist because we recognize the responsibility schools have for the safety and well-being of children. Teachers see children daily and are often the first adults to notice warning signs. We hold every counselor, teacher, and staff member in a school building to a basic reporting standard. AI funded, AI tools funded by federal dollars should be no different. This amendment will make this bill stronger by ensuring the tools being funded are safe for the children using them. I know this committee does not want to address the issue of school shootings and what harm it does to children. But as we move forward with new legislation, we have to face this daunting reality. that our children are dying because of firearm-related injuries, and we have a responsibility to do something, or at least I know I do. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back.

The gentlelady yields. This gentleman from Utah.

I withdraw my s- point of order.

Point of order is withdrawn. Are there any other members who seek recognition on this amendment? I recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to second last word.

You're rec- you're recognized for five minutes.

Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman, this um, Mr. Chairman, this amendment would require um AI's those um w- would would, excuse me, would prevent any funds from being used for any AI purpose, unless there is in place a protocol that um would reveal information about someone trying to harm themselves, Bill a- also adds a reporting clause and also limitations on what the AI can do. Now, we all know uh situations where school shootings have occurred, and many of these involve information that should have been reported to law enforcement. Unfortunately, this um amendment is not limited to situations where AI may be um involved with interaction with students It covers all AI situations, and these protocols would have to be uh done whether or not the individuals um or whether or not the AI is involved with students. Um, furthermore, we have to be cautious about deploying law enforcement in situations involving students, preemptively involving law enforcement, before you have all the necessary information, could lead to unnecessary harm. For example, there've been reports of students being entangled with law enforcement unnecessarily because AI claimed to have caught something it believed to be suspicious when in fact, it was innocuous. AI does not always have the ability to understand nuances and according to the um uh amendment, uh key words would have to be used, and if a key word is triggered then that information is revealed, and results can results can wreak havoc on student lives. This amendment also implies that some kind of surveillance of students will be taking place otherwise the you you wouldn't have the information and the breadth of research shows that school surveillance measures disproportionately harm black and brown students instead of keeping them so instead of keeping them safe. So I appreciate the sentiment, it's imperative that we provide funding for mental health supports for students, resources for educators, counselors and other school officials, as they work with students among others. However, such an amendment needs to be narrowly tailored to achieve that goal, and um I'd - I would oppose this bill as it's over broad. Uh, you're back.

The gentleman yields. Are there any others who wish to speak to the amendment? Seeing none, I recognize myself for five minutes to speak. on the amendment brought by the gentlelady from Connecticut. Uh, student safety is paramount, period. That's why HR eighty-seven forty-seven already requires that funds may only be spent for safe effective and responsible use of AI. That said, there's much to support in this amendment, and I would be happy to work with the gentlelady going forward to reach agreement on the language. Unfortunately, I must oppose the amendment because of its unclear implications for FERPA. The rule of construction at the end of the amendment initially ensures that none of the amendment's disclosure requirements would violate FERPA, but then adds an exception for federal and state laws. I'm not sure what the intent of that language is, apply FERPA but then accepting any federal mandatory reporting obligations, which would include reporting obligations under this very amendment, will create confusion. Additionally, this language would allow state mandatory reporting laws to preempt FERPA. As I said before, I'm happy to work with the uh gentlelady going forward to work out language that adequately protects student safety, but we need the opportunity to vet implications of this amendment on FERPA. Uh, protecting student safety and student privacy is a priority of this committee. So I urge my colleagues to vote no on the amendment at this time, and I yield back. Are there any other members who wish to speak to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment by the gentle lady from Connecticut. All in favor say aye. All opposed, no. No.

No.

In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the amendment is not agreed to. Are there any further amendments to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR eighty-seven forty-seven? Seeing none, further action on HR eighty-seven forty-seven is per postponed. We'll now move to consider a consider the next bill. The committee will now proceed to consideration of Bill HR eighty-one, eighty-three for amendment. The bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are available. The clerk shall designate the bill.

H R eight one eight three, a bill to amend the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, to provide for the establishment of talent marketplaces.

Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. Without objection, the bill will be considered.

Does Chairman have amendment in nature of substitute of this?

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

Amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR eight one eight three, offered by Mister Owens of Utah, identifier HR eight one eight three underscore ANS underscore two.

Without objection, the amendment shall be considered at 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. I'm thrilled to offer the amendment in the nature of a substitute, H. R. eighty-one eighty-three match act. This bill will help our workforce system keep pace with the rapidly changing economy. Too many Americans have valuable skills they cannot easily articulate, while too many employers struggle to find the talent they need. This bill helps close the gap by supporting modern, workforce data systems, talent marketplace, portable skill records, and voluntary job-related skills assessment. For a veteran, this could mean translating military training and hands-on experience into skills a civilian employer might need. For a student, it could mean much fuller an understanding of what skills they possess and how those skills in other lead in uh in others lead to a dynamic career pathway. The NS makes several changes to the original bill. It converts what was a permanent codification of the workforce data quality initiative into a focused five-year pilot program with annual reports to Congress, independent evaluation by the Government Accountability O- Office. It also strengthens strengthens uh learning and employment records by requiring skills to be supported by verification or world-world experience as uh voluntary eval uh evaluated skills assessment tools and it reforces privacy, protections by requiring an individual's consent before personal information may be disclosed. The amendment gives individuals greater control over their information, protects privacy, and helps employers hire based on demonstrated abilities. The current version of the bill was crafted in in a spirited part by a partnership and I would like to express my thanks to my friend, Rep. McBeth, for reaching across the aisle and working in good faith to find common ground on this legislation. Her partnership reflects the bipartisan commitment we share in assuring that every American has a fair opportunity to demonstrate his or her skills, and succeed in the workforce, and that every child has a clear skills pathway to the dream uh career. Match Act is recognizing that people can do and give what people can do and giving them a fair shot at opportunity. I urge my colleagues to support this ANS and the underlying bill, and I yield back.

The gentleman yields. Are there any other members who wish to be recognized? Uh, the gentlelady from Georgia, Miss McBath, do you wish to be recognized?

Thank you, Mister Chair, I wish to speak in strong support of the amendment and

You are recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Mister Chair, and thank you to my good friend and colleague, uh, Chair of the Higher Education and Workforce Development Subcommittee, Burgess Owens. My staff and I, uh, are really proud to have worked with you and your team over these past few months on the Match Act a bill that will ensure workforce data is interoperable, and portable, between states. Explore and evaluate talent marketplaces and make it simpler for every working adult in our country to get a good job and to keep it. Almost every good job today requires some sort of credential after high school. But even though most Americans will not go to college, our workforce system relies more on four-year traditional i- universities than it does on programs that working people are more likely to participate in. Things like apprenticeships and competencies and other short-term licenses and credentials. Our workforce system has become too reliant on sixteen to twenty-four year olds making one time difficult to reverse dis decisions involving loans that they may never be able to pay back decisions that are exorbitantly expensive, decisions that students and workers are told to make without knowing all of their options. Credential registries and talent marketplaces help solve this problem by putting everything together in one place for students families, workers, and employers. Whether you're a seventeen year old deciding what degree is going to set you up to pay back your loan at UGA or Georgia State or fifty year old with a family that needs to know what short-term programs you can take part in as soon as possible to get back to work, there will be one uniform place that everyone can go see and compare credentials so that they can make the best decision for themselves. Getting a good job and keeping it takes time and effort. It is something that takes constant upkeep. It can't be solved by focusing too heavily on the front-end of a person's working career, as we have seen. Regular people will spend their entire working lives trying to keep up and stay relevant. We need a workforce system that meets people where they are and helps them adapt to the world around them. Talent marketplaces, credential registries, and bipartisan efforts like this make it so there's a single place for people to go, to make these instead of having to jump from place to place looking for what classes or jobs might show up on a quick Google shirt Google search. It shows people exactly where to go to find good employment and helps them get there. No more just hoping that your credential will get you where you wanna go. Now people can see and compare the full universe of options that they have, that they've always had but they didn't know about them. As I've said so many times before in this committee, you don't have to go to It certainly helps, though, but there are so many other viable options and pathways to building a successful and fulfilling life for yourself in this country. This bill helps put all of these options together in one single place where people can make the best decision for themselves. I ask for unanimous consent to enter into the record this letter of support for the match act from Scott Chaney of Credential Engine, who testified before the committee during the higher education and workforce subcommittee hearing on labor and employment records late last year.

Without objection and hearing none, it'll be entered.

Thank you. I know that this committee can be contentious. But that does not mean that we can't find ways to work together to make life better for the American people. That is our charge. And my staff and I tried to extend the same benefits of the doubt that we hope would be extended to us when working with offices belonging to the opposite party. And this is what happens when members really listen to each other and not attack one another. I mean, actually listen to hear what the other person is saying and working to comprehend what they're saying, not just itching to come up with the best retort or waiting for a slip to take advantage to prove your point. but really listening to what is being expressed. So Representative Owens, I know that you don't have very many more months here left on this committee, but I wanna thank you and I do wanna commend you for working with me and my staff, and I encourage all of my colleagues to support this bill. I hope that we can pass this unanimously through this committee today and I um hope that all members, all of us would work to make sure that we get this signed into law before the end of this Congress, and I yield.

The gentlelady yields. Are there any other members who wish to speak on this amendment in nature of a substitute? I recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Scott, for purposes of speaking to this amendment in nature of substitute.

Thank you, uh, Mister Chairman. Just very briefly, I just wanted to thank the gentlelady from Georgia, Miss McBath, and the gentleman from Utah, Mister Owens, for their work together on this bill. They made significant improvements on the original bill, including converting the bill's grant program into a five-year pilot, adding a substant- substantive program evaluations, standardizing terminology to ensure that systems can work across states and institutions, and adding provisions that will give workers con- more control over what information is in their learning and employment record, and how it's used. Um, I would hope that we'd pass the bill and you're back.

The gentleman yields. Uh, there being no further discussion on the an amendment in nature of substitute, the committee will move on to consideration of amendments. Are there any members who wish to offer amendments? There being no amendments, the question now occurs on the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR eighty-one eighty-three. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the gentlelady from Georgia, Miss Macbeth, has her wish, unanimous. And the amendment in the nature of a substitute is agreed to. We'll now move to consider the next bill. The committee will now proceed to consideration of Bill HR ninety-seven, twenty-three for amendment. the bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are available, the clerk shall designate the bill.

H R nine seven two three, a bill to establish the President's Council on sports, fitness and nutrition, 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? Mister McKenzie, for what purpose do you seek recognition?

Mister Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk titled ANS underscore zero one.

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

Amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R nine seven two three, offered by Mister McKenzie of Pennsylvania, identifier H R nine seven two three, ANS 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 McKenzie for five minutes to explain the amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Today I offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute, or ANS, to HR ninety-seven twenty-three, the Fit Future Act. The amendment makes a minor technical edit to the introduced text. America's youth face a growing crisis of declining physical fitness and increasing rates of chronic disease, undermining the health, strength, and future of our nation. A range of factors, including reduced school-based opportunities for physical activity, are pulling kids away from the exercise that they actually need. Research has affirmed that what we have always known is true, that regular physical activity builds stronger bodies, sharper minds, greater confidence, and lifelong resilience. For generations, our leaders have recognized that youth fitness is a cornerstone of national strength. President Eisenhower first created the President's Council on Youth Fitness in nineteen fifty-six. After reports showed that American children were falling behind, President Kennedy later famously warmed in an essay, uh, this titled " The Soft American" that physical vigor was one of our nation's most essential resources, and that neglecting it would actually weaken our ability to meet great challenges. Most recently, our nation has grappled with rising rates of chronic disease, threatening the quality of life of tens of millions of Americans, and contributing to the rise health care costs for everyone. To restore a national focus on youth fitness, H R ninety-seven twenty-three codifies President Trump's executive order reviving the President's Council on Sports Fitness and Nutrition as an advisory body focusing on improving youth physical activity, fitness, and nutrition. The Council advises the President and the Secretary of HHS on progress toward improving youth health and recommendations uh for ways they can have better outcomes. My bill directs the council to recommend strategies to implement the presidential fitness test, with appropriate improvements, extend opportunities for sports participation and physical fitness, set bold and innovative fitness goals to build a healthier, more active generation, and also launch campaigns and events that highlight American sports traditions. Additionally, to ensure that youth fitness remains a national priority, H R ninety-seven twenty-three permanently establishes the council. Mister Chairman, this is common sense and it's a measure that will help build a stronger, healthier, brighter future for millions of American children. I urge my colleagues to support H R ninety-seven twenty-three, and with that, I yield back.

The gentleman yields. Are there any members who wish to be recognized for further discussion?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, uh, HR ninety-seven twenty-three establishes the President's Council on Fitness uh Sports, Fitness and Nutrition. The bill requires the council to make recommendations related to youth fitness and importance of an active lifestyle. For decades, versions of the President's Council have been expanded. and rebranded through various executive orders since the initial creation of the President's Council on Youth Fitness under President Eisenhower in nineteen fifty-six. Uh notably under the Obama administration the name of the council was changed from the President's Council on Physical Fitness and Sports, to the President's Council on Fitness, Sports and Nutrition, expanding the mission of the council to focus on healthy eating. The Trump administration's current executive order and the legislation follow President Obama's lead, maintaining nutrition as a focus of the of the council. We all agree that lack of physical exercise leads to and exacerbates health disparities, so well documented, including heart disease, depression and obesity. Given the benefits of increased access to recreational sports and physical activities, it is critical that we ensure consideration for all children including those with differing abilities and disabilities. So amendments offered by my democratic colleagues today will further ensure that students of all abilities are considered by the council, and I welcome those improvements to the bill. So I'll support the bill and I yield back the balance to my time.

The gentleman yields. Are there any others who wish to speak to this amendment in the nature of substitute? Does the gentleman from California, Mister Kiley, wish to be Recognized?

Yes, Mr. Chair.

You're recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, uh I'm very happy to support the Fi- Future Act today, uh I think this is a very important legislation on an issue that hasn't quite got, I think, enough uh attention, which is uh putting uh our young people on a track for uh on a path to uh to healthy lives. I think we've seen a uh diminishing emphasis on things like uh fitness uh and uh and truly uh meaningful uh physical education uh and uh encouraging young people to be involved uh in youth sports and other forms of recreation uh it's become uh even more of a an issue as we've seen uh the amount of screen time that is spent by young people uh absolutely uh skyrocket and so uh I think this is very solid legislation that will help to reverse uh that trajectory and it's really almost impossible to overstate uh the the benefits that would accrue to uh to young people to our health care system to our country if we could establish these habits uh early uh in life. And um this bill will encourage that in a number of ways. I'd also note that we've been looking in our subcommittee uh now at a couple hearings on uh the uh issues of affordability in connection with youth sports uh across the country. And so I think that another piece of the equation here is assuring that we can make access to youth sports uh affordable for all families and broaden participation. uh as much as possible. But I think this is uh a very good piece of legislation. Uh thank my uh colleague from uh Pennsylvania for introducing and I'll be happy to support it today.

The gentleman yields. Are there any others who wish to speak on this amendment in nature of a substitute? There'll be no further discussion on the amendment in 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 gentlelady from Georgia, Miss Macbeth, for purpose of an amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Uh, the clerk will report the amendment.

Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R nine seven two three, offered by Miss Macbeth of Georgia, identifier Macbeth underscore nine seven two three, AMD underscore zero three.

Does a gentleman from Utah reser- does the does a gentleman from uh Indiana reserve a point of order?

I reserve a point of order.

Point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentlelady from Georgia for five minutes in support of her amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chair, um I'm really proud to offer this bipartisan amendment to help ensure that every child, regardless of how much money their parents make, can afford to play the sports that that that they all love. Ozzie Smith, a Hall of Fame shortstop and thirteen time winner of Major League Baseball, Golden Glove Award. He learned to play as a child, but uh he used a paper bag instead of a baseball mitt. Uh that's all that they could afford. He did that because his family just couldn't afford to buy him a baseball mitt. And while that story is a testament to his commitment, that isn't something that any child should have to go through, just to take part in America's um favorite pastime, as they say. uh, just play baseball. Before I came to Congress, I was a single mother working as a flight attendant, and during the Great Recession, I wasn't fired, but I took a pretty hefty pay cut. It was about ten thousand dollars a year, and ouch, that really hurt. I remember worrying about being able to make ends meet. I had to pull my son Jordan out of baseball in the fall and swimming in the summer, just because I couldn't afford all of those activities anymore. So instead, he and I uh would every Monday night for about five years, I, we would go to the local skating rink, Sparkles. And I'd take him and his friends, I was known as the skate mom, I picked up all the boys in the neighborhood. Uh, I was a single mom, but you would have thought I had about five or six kids, cuz they were always in the SUV with me. And um, these were our home school kids, uh, our home school group, and we would all go to roller skating rink, cuz it was a dollar to get in, it was a dollar for your skates, and it was a dollar for for Coca-Cola and dollar for uh pizza. So they were cheap dates for me. So when families have to make tough decisions about their budgets, sports and other activities like music lessons, those are usually the first to go. Kids are often the first to feel the squeeze. And that's just simply wrong. Kids should be able to play the sports that they love without having to worry about their parents' finances, without having to worry about something that they are forced to deal with, but have absolutely no control over. This amendment would direct the council to develop strategies to assist families with the rising costs by expanding access to recreational sport and athletic opportunities offered by non-profit organizations like the YMCA or the Boys and Girls Clubs of America and so many other youth uh leagues um that are run by Jewish community centers and churches and church groups all around the country. So I think we really need to to emphasize making sure that our children are allowed to just be kids. Just let them be kids. Let them do what they love to do. And so I hope everyone would be in acceptance of this amendment and I yield back.

The gentlelady yields. Does the gentleman from Indiana wish to withdraw?

I withdraw my reservation.

The reservation is withdrawn. Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment? I recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Scott.

Thank you, uh, Mister Chairman. Uh, most respect the last word.

You're recognized for five minutes.

And, uh, just to follow up with the gentleman California, we know from our recent hearings that the involvement of private equity in youth sports is only added to the expenses associated with youth sports as these entities prioritize profits over participation. As a result, families are left with fewer affordability options for their children to participate in sports. And so we believe that supporting increased access to recreational sports programs and other physical activities run by non-profits, of all for all children, should be a priority. So I'd urge my colleagues to join in supporting the amendment and yield back the balance of my time.

Gentlemen yields, are there any others who wish to speak on the amendment? Recognized myself, we uh will be accepting this amendment. The question is on the amendment by the gentlelady from Georgia. Miss McBath, all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the gentlelady from Georgia gets another unanimous vote.

Hmm.

And the amendment is agreed to. Further action on

No, no, it's back to page twenty eight. More amendments. More amendments.

I apologize, I was basking in the sweet success of Does anyone else uh h have an amendment to offer? The gentlelady from Connecticut uh do you wish to offer an amendment?

Yes, Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The clerk will report the amendment.

Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR nine seven two three, offered by Miss Hayes of Connecticut, identifier Hayes underscore HAYECT underscore zero seven two.

This gentleman from Utah, wish to reserve a point of order. Point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentlelady from Connecticut, Miss Hayes, for five minutes in support of her amendment.

Thank you. The Fit Future Act establishes the Council on Sports, Fitness and Nutrition. This council is directed to make recommendations on reducing childhood obesity, improving nutrition and promoting healthy lifestyles. There are impor- these are all important goals that I fully support. However, there's a fundamental contradiction at the heart of this legislation that is being overlooked. You cannot ask a hungry child to be fit. Currently, more than four million Americans face the risk of hunger and over seven hundred thousand children have already lost access to federal food assistance. This situation directly results from H. R. one, legislation that was passed and celebrated by my Republican colleagues. In Connecticut, since July twenty twenty five, more than thirty-two thousand people have lost SNAP benefits, and it's projected that fifty-eight thousand additional Connecticut families will lose an average of a hundred ninety-four dollars in benefits each month. For millions of children in this country, proper nutrition depends entirely on whether their families can afford food. The National School Lunch Program, the School Breakfast Program, WIC, SNAP, and other federal nutrition programs form the foundation for any serious conversation about childhood nutrition. My amendment requires the council to make recommendations recommendations on strategies to address food insecurity as a barrier to physical fitness and healthy nutrition. It also suggests ways in which federal nutrition programs can support these If my colleagues are genuine genuinely serious about improving the health and nutrition of children in America they will accept this amendment. I cannot understand how we can create a council promoting nutrition while simultaneously undermining the programs that keep children fed. Mister Chair, you can continue the sweet success of unity by supporting my amendment. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and I yield back.

General Nedeals, are there any other members who wish to speak on this amendment? I recognize a gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, for purposes of speaking to the amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, uh, Mr. Chairman, we um very well know that healthy nutrition and physical activity work in tangent and both are key to improving life-long health. And since the big ugly bill was under the law last year, there's been a drastic decline in the number of children receiving SNAP benefits, with more than seven hundred thousand children no longer participating in the program. Uh, taking away access to federal nutrition extact nutrition assistance uh programs, including free and reduced price meals is antithetical to our goals today of getting more children involved in recreational sports and physical activities. That's why I support this amendment that would require the council to make recommendations on how federal nutrition programs such as SNAP supplemental winter uh supplemental nutrition uh

Uh gentlemen yields, are there any others who wish to s- speak on the amendment? Seeing none, I recognize myself, uh this amendment asks the council to take on a food insecurity policy. and coordinate major federal nutrition assistance programs. These responsibilities are well outside the scope and congressional intent of the Fitness Council. The council was established to provide recommendations on sports, physical fitness, and nutrition in the context of promoting active and healthy lifestyles, not address food insecurities and equ inequalities. In fact, this amendment proposes to utilize the Fitness Council to duplicate efforts of programs that Congress created to help address these issues. The very nutrition program this amendment wishes to analyze, SNAP, WIC, school meals, are already focused on helping communities with limited access to food. Furthermore, not all the nutrition programs cited here are within the committee's jurisdiction. Let's not put too many cooks in the kitchen, so to speak. For this reason, I oppose the amendment and I yield back. The question is now on the amendment by the gentlelady from Connecticut. Uh, all in favor say aye. All opposed, no. No.

No.

In the opinion of the chair, the amendment is not agreed to. 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 ninety seven? Uh, I recognize the gentleman from New York, Mister Mannion, for purposes of amendment.

Thank you, 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 nine seven two three, offered by Mister Mannion of New York, identifier Mannion underscore nine seven two three, AMD underscore zero one.

Does the gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order?

Yes, reserved order.

A point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman from New York, Mister Mannion, for five minutes and

Thank you, Mister Chair, and thank you to my colleague from Pennsylvania for bringing this bill through the committee. Uh, I have an amendment that I believe makes sense to some important and includes some important additions to this bill to ensure that all kids regardless of ability, can lead healthier and more active lifestyles. In this committee we've talked before about the important physical, mental and social benefits of youth sports participation. I want to thank my colleagues today for continuing that Oh, we're discussing this, true. The bill we're discussing establishes a federal advisory council focused on school-based programs that improve physical fitness and address issues like childhood obesity and chronic disease. Those are important goals that I share. My amendment simply builds on this legislation by adding recommendations to address barriers to participation, so that many kids that face challenges, including children with disabilities, uh can meet these recommendations. We know that the lack of access to sports and fitness at a young age can lead to lifelong habits. According to the CDC, nearly half of all adults with disabilities get no leisure time aerobic physical activity. For this reason, my amendment would require the council to make recommendations related to adaptive physical fitness, ensuring that exercises and activities are accessible, and that kids with disabilities It also includes the promotion of recreational sports, which are not only healthy, but are often a formative part of a child's upbringing. In some communities, however, recreational sports programs have been crowded out or have struggled with gaining local funding so protecting and promoting these should be the focus of this council. Lastly, my amendment recommends that uh we encourage participation in a wide range of sports activities, guarding against the sedentary lifestyles or excessive early specialization that research says is harmful in the development of our youth. I kindly urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this amendment, and I yield back.

The gentleman yields. Are there uh does the gentleman from Utah

I'll withdraw.

I'll withdraw, yes.

draw his points of order? Are there any other members who wish to speak on the amendment? I recognize a gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Scott, to speak on the amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, as my colleague mentioned, the amendment includes a requirement that the council recommend strategies to increase access to recreational sports and other physical activities for all children including those who have barriers to access and youth with disabilities. It's imperative that we consider opportunities for our youth that are inclusive and adaptive to meet the variant needs of of our of our students. This specifically includes kids with disabilities. Overall, this amendment makes an important improvement to the legislation by adding focus on children who face barriers to sports, be they finan- be they be financial, physical or otherwise. So I support the amendment and give back the amounts at my time.

Gentlemen yields, are there any other members who wish to speak on the amendment? Seeing none, um I recognize myself to uh note that uh we plan to accept this amendment.

Thank you, sure.

The question, the question is now on the amendment by the gentleman from New York, uh, Mister Mannion. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. Are there any further amendments to the amendment in the nature of substitute to H R ninety-seven twenty-three? Seeing none, further action on HR ninety-seven twenty-three is postponed. We'll now move, consider the next bill. The committee will now proceed to consideration of Bill HR eighty-six, sixty-four amendment. The bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are available. The clerk shall designate the bill.

H R eight six six zero, a bill to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of nineteen thirty-eight, to protect worker access to employer equity 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?

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 six zero, offered by Mister McKenzie of Pennsylvania, identifier eight six six zero, ANS 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 Mr. McKenzie for five minutes to s- to explain the amendment and the nature of the substitute.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, since two thousand hourly employees have benefited from the provisions of the Worker Economic Opportunity Act, WA WE OA, which exempts the value of employer-provided stock options, stock appreciation rights, or bona fide employee stock purchase programs from employees' regular rate of pay. This means that Congress unanimously concluded that hourly employees who are considered non-exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Acts, or FLSA, should be eligible for the same equity compensation as their exempt counterparts, and employees should be able to exempt such equity compensation from the employee's regular rate of pay. Otherwise, the incentive for employers to provide this benefit is minimal, and comes with significantly increased overtime costs. Unfortunately, there is uncertainty regarding the application of WIOA to restricted stock units, or RSUs. These are a modern form of equity compensation arrangements in which employees receive c- uh, company uh stock upon meeting certain tenure or performance requirements. Current law is unclear about the treatment of these modern equity compensation arrangements when calculated an employee's overtime and many employers choose not to offer them to due to the uh to their non-exempt workers because of this lack of clarity. H R eight six six zero clears up that confusion, expands workers' access to this important benefit, and aligns it with current compensation practices. A federal judge in California recently explained this perfectly during litigation in a related case. Judge William Ulrich, appointed by President Obama, wrote that, quote, " It is hard to imagine that Congress would exclude stock options from SL uh FLSA overtime rate calculations but would choose not to exclude RSUs which are almost identical in purpose form and function." The amendment, in the nature of a substitute, makes a technical change and adds clarifying language from WEOA. I urge the adoption of the amendment, and

The gentleman yields. Are there any members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment and the nature of a substitute? I recognize gentleman for Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Scott, for purposes of discussion.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, uh Mister Chairman, under current law employers must pay their non-exempt workers time and a half overtime premium for working more than forty hours in a work week. That's just not one and a half times their hourly wage, it's one what's called regular rate of pay, which includes some non-wage compensation. The bill would amend the Fair Labor Standards Act to remove the value of restricted stock units from the regular rate of pay calculation. As I mentioned in my opening statement, RSUs are a company's promise to issue stock to an employee in a future in the future, after the employee satisfies the requirement to stay with the company, for a specified period. When overtime was re- was originally established in the FLSA, the overriding purpose of overtime provisions was not to reward excessive work, but instead to discourage employers from demanding it. Any bill that exempts forms of compensation from the regular rate of pay chips away at the distance incentive that makes a forty hour work week the rule, rather than the exception. The bill's proponents say that RSUs should be from the overtime calculation because stock options and two other stock programs are already excluded from the uh FLSA's regular rate of pay. But S uh but RSUs are different from the other programs. For exen- for example, unlike stock options, employees do not purchase RSUs or pay a price when exercising them. RSUs function as a future promise that materializes or, what's if the employee meets a continued service requirement. Republican rep- uh, committee Republicans have failed to hold a hearing focusing on this bill and demonstrating any policy rationale for it, and at least the last time I checked, the bill had zero cosponsors. Unfortunately, committee Republicans continue to think that bills like this are worth pursuing. But earlier this year, committee Republicans advanced legislation that would exclude certain job training programs from the regular rate of pay. Fortunately, the bill was defeated on the House floor in January. Committee Republicans also advanced legislation that would exclude child or dependent care services from the regular rate of pay, under the guise of incentivizing uh more employers to offer child or dependent care services but fortunately the House Republican leadership pulled it off the floor when it was obvious it wasn't gonna pass. This bill follows the same pattern and it should be similarly rejected. Mr. Chairman, I hope we defeat the bill and I yield back the balance of my time.

The gentleman yields. Are there any further members who wish to speak on the amendment? There being no further discussion on the amendment and the nature of substitute, the c- um, the committee will move to consideration of amendments. Are there any members who wish to offer amendments? There being no amendments, the question now occurs on the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR eighty-six sixty. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, no.

No.

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, an amendment in the nature of a substitute is agreed to. We'll now move to consider the next bill. The committee will now proceed to consideration of Bill H R eighty-three, forty-seven for amendment. The bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are available. The clerk shall designate the bill.

H R eight three four seven, a bill to classify qualified locum tenants, professionals, and advanced care practitioners as independent contractors for the purposes of

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 Owens, uh, for what purpose do you seek recognition?

Miss Mister Chairman, have an amendment in s in a

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

your desk.

Mm-hmm.

Without objection, 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. Local attendance, Latin for placeholding, refers to arrangement in which the medical providers temporarily fill critical workforce gaps at hospital hospitals and health systems around the country. Uh, these workers choose to operate as independent contractors, much like millions of other self-employed American workers. While independent work varies greatly across many uh more than a hundred occupations, what all independent workers have in common is that their classification is constantly in question due to a vague definition of employee in the Labor, Fair Labor Standards Act. Last week, the f- uh, Workforce Protection Sub- Subcommittee, directly from expert witnesses on local tenants. We heard from an expert in Utah's healthcare inst- industry, who works to place local tenants, medical providers and health facilities to fill critical workforce gaps that occur more frequently than we would like to see. The reality is that physicians, nurse nurse practitioners, and other medical profi- providers offer our communities a critical service, but burnout in healthcare is a serious issue. These are stressful workplaces So personnel need to have an ab- ability to step away, spend time with family, and recharge. When that happens, the need for health care services does not disappear or decrease. We need temporary local tenor con coni- coni- clinicians to hold the place of full-time medical providers as needed, to allow hospitals and self and health systems to continue treating patients and delivering high quality care, particularly in rural and underserved communities. Importantly, s- Uh, studies show little difference in patient satisfaction or health c- outcomes, whether it's patients see a full-time provider or a local tenants cl- clinician. Uh, frequently the choice is not between local tenants providers and a full-time provider, but rather between local tenants provider and no provider at all. Unfortunately, the lack of clarity in FLS A makes it more difficult to work as local tenants uh provider. H R eighty-three forty-seven, Rural Health Care Act, is a logical solution The bill simply defines local tenants, medical providers as independent contractors under FLSA and prevents them from being reclassified as employees. Upwards to eighty percent of independent contractors prefer their current status, and well over ninety percent of local tenants, medical providers, have access to benefits. This bill is pro-worker, pro-patient, and supports healthier communities. The amendment in nature of its substitute makes a technical change to the bill, I really support for the amendment and the underlying bill. Now you're back.

The gentleman yields. Are there any members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment to the nature of substitute? The gentleman from New York, Mister Manion, who wish to be recognized.

Thank you, Mister Chair. I move to strike the last word. This is yet another bill that concerns me, related to weakening essential labor laws by carving out certain types of workers. This time, it's locum tennis providers, including physician, nurse practitioners, PAs, and CRNAs who are contracted to work in temporary staffing arrangements. This is not solving any real widespread problem, nor is it solving any of the rural health crises on the other side that the other side has created over the last year. Most of the time providers in these temporary staffing arrangements are independent contractors, anyway. So what this bill really does is remove any labor protections and collective bargaining rights from these providers when their employers violate the contractual relationship and are in fact treating them as employees. In cases like this, the providers can depend on our existing labor framework to provide them with a legal recourse. Arbitrarily carving them out from these laws is unnecessarily and unnecessary and certainly does nothing to support rural health. If anything, it just fills our hospitals and clinics with more temporary staff rather than full-time

The gentleman yields. Are there any oth- any others who wish to be recognized on this amendment? Uh, the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mr. Scott, you're recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Although the bill is titled Rural Health Care Act, the bill will not actually improve access to health care in rural communities. It'll simply allows employers to misclassify health care workers as independent contractors and effectively strip them of their rights and protections under our labor and employment laws such as access to overtime pay, employment ins- unemployment insurance, workers' compensation, and the right to collective bar- bargaining. Those benefits go to employees. Once they're misclassified as independent contractors, they m- they lose access to overtime unemployment insurance if they lose their job, workers' compensation, and the right to collective bargaining. And they don't agree to lose those benefits, they agree to get the job, and if the job doesn't if they say they have to be an independent contractor to get the job, they want the job, they have to forego the benefits. Uh this reach covers any temporary assignment of a doctor, nurse, a practitioner, a physician, a physician assistant anywhere in the United States. But then it defines uh the position as a temporary position, counting temporary as continuous up to a year at one place. As a result, it could shield a health care business in New York or Boston or telehealth provided anywhere in the United States from accountability, from misclassifying medical professionals as independent contractors. It would allow big health care conglomerates to some of the highest paid uh paying jobs in the permitims. Uh for example, although the bill limits its coverage to placements of less than less than a continuous year at a single site of service, keep in mind that they're very large health care networks with multiple sites. Large health care networks could as a result create permanent staffing lines occupied exclusively by independent contractors, provided only that a staffer be shuttled around at once a year. In fact, um, some may actually form out the human resources office and make everybody a, uh, temporary employee. All you gotta do is change the site once a year or lay them off for a few days once a year to end the continuous service. And they could be working side by side. The people working exactly the same job except, uh, those working the same job ha- get benefits, these uh independent contractors lose all of those benefits. And additionally the bill could allow these large powerful businesses to undermine organizing and collective bargaining effort efforts. If you're an independent contractor you do not have the right to join a union. The nation's labor laws do not apply to independent contractors, enabling enabled by this bill to set aside any number of staffing positions for any period of time for any reason, just by calling them independent contractors. Uh in that case the large health care businesses could effectively be able to divide and conquer an organizing effort uh effort by pushing many positions outside of the reach of the labor law. Ultimately this builds a distraction from the very real health care crisis in rural communities which are reeling from the aft- aftermath of the Republican big ugly bill attack on the Affordable Care Act and Medicaid coverage. and professional education, which which will jeopardize the financial viability of many hospitals and clinics in rural areas. Meanwhile, by giving health care businesses the power to erode job quality, the bill could also erode quality of health care itself. Experience of nurses placed in through gig platforms is instructive. Some of these gig nurses report being given no orientations, leaving them in the dark about such essential facts as where supply closets are located, how to access patient information, know whom to contact, and the chain of command. Patients deserve better, rural communities deserve better, and the nation's health care professionals certainly deserve better. I urge my colleagues to oppose the bill and yield back the ballots at my time.

The gentleman yields. Are there any any other members who wish to speak on the amendments in the nature of a substitute? Seeing that there be no further discussion on the amendments in the nature of a substitute,

Aye. Aye.

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the amendment in the nature of a substitute

H R six two one three, a bill to prohibit the secretary of labor from finalizing,

H R six two one three.

A bill to prohibit the secretary of labor from finalizing, implementing, implement, uh, any other action.

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 Messmer, for what purpose do you seek recognition?

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 six two one three, offered by Mister Mesmer of Indiana identifier heat underscore safety underscore ANS.

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

Thank you, Mister Chairman. At the end of the Biden-Harris administration, OSHA proposed a terrible rule to establish an all-encompassing federal heat injury. The misguided intention was to create a one-size-fits-all framework for all workers and all businesses across all fifty states for those performing work in outdoor and indoor environments where heat fluctuates. The Biden-Harris suggested rule must be stopped before it causes significant harm to American businesses without any evidence that it will create one iota of improvement for existing workplace safety efforts. It's not fair to propose a one size fits all federal mandate that applies to varied disparate industries, climates, and workplace environments. A construction company in South Florida should not face the same requirements as a manufacturer in Indiana or a landscaping landscaping business in Michigan, because they all operate under very different conditions. The Biden-Harris administration's proposal also ignores the collaboration already going on between workers and businesses to address any work part, workplace challenges. The number one focus for any responsible employer is the safety of their most important resource, which of course is their workforce. Responsible employers already take heat related safety very seriously, and for any business which does not do so, states already have strict regulations in place to deal with those bad actors. OSHA already has a general duty clause which requires employers to protect workers in heat situations with needed flexibility for climate setting industry and other circum circum More than fifty organizations, re- representing millions of small businesses across the nation, have voiced their concern over this destructive proposed rule. Support of H. R. sixty-two thirteen sends a clear message that the Biden-Harris proposal is a bad approach to a problem that doesn't it doesn't need solving. The amendment in nature of su- you know, uh the amendment in nature of a substitute makes a technical change to the bill, and I urge the committee to adopt it and approve the underlying bill, and I yield back.

The gentleman Yiels. Are there any members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment in the nature of a substitute? The gentleman from New York, uh, Mister Manion, is recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move to strike the last word. Uh, in the middle of the summer, just after a dangerous heat wave earlier this month, the committee is now marking up legislation that actively makes workers less safe on the job while exposed to extreme heat. Specifically, this bill prevents OSHA from finalizing, implementing, or enforcing a proposed standard with respect to heat injury and illness prevention. And not only does it object to the basic protections proposed under the previous administration, but it also prevents any similar rule from taking effect in the future. Let's be clear on exactly what we're talking about here and what the majority objects to. Simply, that employers have a plan in place to protect workers from excessive heat, and that includes things like drinking water, rest breaks in the shade, and fans to control indoor heat. Basic standards around occupational heat exposure are just a common sense measure to keep workers safe. This is critical for construction, agriculture, and other industries where workers are spending significant time outside or around heavy heat generating machinery. Instead of advancing this bill, we should have approached this in a bipartisan way and talked through any concerns with the heat standard. When it comes to any OSHA standard, I too want to make sure that it's workable for businesses to understand and to follow. But throwing out the entire standard altogether is wrong and puts people at continued risk. I oppose the bill and urge my colleagues to do the same, and I yield back.

The gentleman yields. Are there any other members who wish to speak on the amendment in nature of a substitute? I recognize a gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Scott, for purposes of discussion.

Thank you, Mister, Mister Chairman, all over the United States we've had one record breaking high temperature after another. According to the Washington Post, for every low temperature record set this year, there've been around nineteen high temperature records. Exposure to heat stress in the United States has increased twenty-one percent since the nineteen forties, this say according to one new study, and the same study found that if global warming reaches two degrees Celsius above the twentieth century levels exposures could increase tw- two hundred and seventy-three percent. As always, if everyone is suffering in the heat, workers feel the brunt of it, and people are dying every year because of heat stress, And there are thousands more who were injured or made ill because of occupational heat stress. This is nothing new. People have recorded the dangers of heat stress going back to ancient Greece and the Old Testament. For centuries people have realized that there are simple steps to prevent to prevent heat illness. Rest, water, shade, taking care to gradually get used to the heat conditions. And this bill would make requiring these simple life-saving steps The ver- the American military has taken the threat so seriously that it has invested for decades in research and policies to protect our troops. The Biden administration stepped up in twenty twenty-four with a proposed OSHA rule so that we can apply these simple measures for workers at risk. This Republican bill, however, would take us backwards. Instead of allowing OSHA to complete work on the Biden pro proposal, this bill would flatly forbid OSHA from getting the job done. Worse, it would prohibit OSHA from ever developing a workplace heat rule that looks anything like the Biden proposal in the future. And we can do better than that. We can't just sit back and ignore the risks, especially when they are so easy to address. So I urge my colleagues to oppose the bill and yield back the balance of my time.

The gentleman yields. Are there any other members who wish to be recognized for discussion? Seeing none, there being no further discussion on the amendment in the nature of substitute, the committee will move to consult

Mr. Chairman.

I recognize the gentlelady from North Carolina, uh Miss Adams, for purposes of amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I I have an amendment um six two one three AD AM

Clerk will report the amendment.

Amendment in the to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R six two one three offered by Miss Adams of North Carolina identifier Adams underscore AD AM and C underscore six one two.

Does the gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order?

I reserve a point of order.

Point of order is reserved. I now recognize a gentlelady from North Carolina, Miss Adams, for five minutes in support of her amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, uh let me start by saying that this bill, uh the Heat Workforce Standards Act is cruel and it's deadly. Every year, tens of thousands of workers experience heat-related injuries in the U S. And every year there are around fifty confirmed heat-related deaths in American workplaces. And that's almost certainly an an underestimate. When a worker dies on the job, their health their death certificate lists the immediate cause of death. Well, maybe it's kidney failure or maybe it's cardiac arrest, but these conditions are too often brought on by heat stress. Mister Chairman, I'd like to submit for the record a report from Public Citizens uh entitled " Balling Point", which estimates that between six hundred and two thousand workers die from heat-related illness. in the US every year.

Without objection and hearing none, the report will be submitted.

Thank you. Whether it's fifty cents uh um fifty deaths a year or six hundred or two thousand, all of these deaths are preventable. They are policy choices. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle are condemning working Americans to to death so that big corporations can save a few dollars. Working Americans like Winzie Johnson, she was a a postal uh supervisor from Fayetteville, North Carolina, who lost her life to heat ill heat illness in twenty twenty four after spending hours in the back of a postal truck on a ninety-five degree day without air conditioning. She was a mother of five, a grandmother of four, and a dedicated public servant, and now she's gone. If we had a heat safety standard, she would still be here today. She could give advice to her children and spoil her grandchildren. And if this bill is passed, it will leave more dead mothers, grandmothers, fathers and grandfathers in its wake. By supporting this bill, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are reminding the American people of who they stand for. They'll do whatever they can to save big business a few dollars, even if that means sacrificing workers' lives. Frankly, that's pretty sickening. At a time when every summer seems hotter than the last, my colleagues are telling working Americans that they don't even deserve a cool glass of water. As everyone in this room knows, it's a hot week in Washington, and it was last week as well. I encourage everyone in this room, go outside and stack boxes on Independence Avenue for a few hours without water and without shade. Come back after you're done and tell me how you feel about the heat standard. My amendment is simple. It would replace the text of this cruel and senseless bill with the text of the uh uh Shunzei uh Valdivia, uh heat illness, My men would direct OSHA to continue its work on the heat safety standard and would establish common sense requirements on what the standards should contain. For example, employers must provide workers with cool water, periodic rest breaks, and access to shade. Is that so radical? And we know these policies work. California implemented heat standards in two thousand five and expanded its standard to include indoor workplaces in twenty twenty four after implementing its standard heat related work injury injuries declined by thirty thirty percent and businesses still thrive in California. The research is clear. We know heat standards save lives and we know that heat illness reduces economic productivity. My amendment supports workers It supports the economy and supports any American who values the sanctity of human life over corporate profit. I encourage all of my colleagues to oppose the underlying bill and support my amendment like their constituents' lives depended on it, because they do. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.

The gentlelady yields. Does the gentleman from Utah withdraw?

I would I withdraw.

The point of order is withdrawn. Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment? For what purposes? The gentleman from Texas, seek recognition.

I seek recognition to, uh, speak for Miss Adams' amendment and, uh,

You're recognized for five minutes.

uh, We're here in the Education and Labor Committee, where House Republicans are voting to try to kill protections for Americans who are working in extreme heat, and I think We need to clearly uh lay out what we're trying to talk about. The rules that we've been advocating to get put in place, or if it's ninety or a hundred degrees out, workers should have a right to get a little bit of water, or sit in the shade every once in a while. And I'll admit, uh it's strange to be talking about getting rid of those baseline protections here in Congress uh where it's hundreds of us being paid six figures to work inside, feel the need to kill these kinds of basic worker protections. Uh, but I want to um uh ask uh Mister Messmer, the the author of the bill, um questions if he uh wants me to yield him uh some time. Because for example, uh when we recently had a hearing on this question, one of the Republican witnesses, Jack Parson from the National Association of Manufacturers, said he would not oppose rules. like making sure workers could get water uh and a break when they're working a ninety plus degree heat and so I'm interested to hear from the sponsor of this bill that would block those sorts of rules whether the sponsor would agree that we should require that workers get some water and a break if it's ninety degrees or a hundred degrees outside. Mister Mesmer.

It's already acquired under the general duty clause.

The the general duty clause in your view requires regular

Yes.

water breaks in ninety degree and one hundred degree.

With with flexibility for the employers in h on how they do it, not not strictly mandated uh standards that apply across all industry all industry sectors uh and and all fifty states.

My question, Mister Mesmer, is is there reason for there to be any OSHA rules then, if you think the general duty clause just applies clearly to everything.

Uh, that's not appropriate question.

I think my question, sir, is you recently said in your in your testimony, and I understand, you know, that we may have disagreements beyond, uh, different sides of the aisle, but you s- laid out that you think that there is that this is a trying to address a problem that doesn't exist. But Colin Bondy, American citizen, died while working in ninety-five degree heat in Glendale last year.

They would already be in violation of the gender duty clause.

And so what you're laying out here is that you think that because you think that this is already against the law. So, sir, could you lay out why you think we should pass a bill then to block these rules to make that make it specific and clear that at ninety degrees workers need a water break. Why, if you think this is already against the law, are we passing an entire law in the United States Congress to try to get rid of these

It doesn't prohibit OSHA from adopting rules in the future, but it has to be done with congressional authority.

Well, that congressional authority has been passed through the OSHA act. Your bill actually says that it stops OSHA from putting out a quote substantially similar rule without defining what that means. It seems to me that this bill

It also says without congressional authority.

So what you are doing, essentially, just to lay out here clearly, is that the executive branch is moving forward a rule to make it illegal against the rules to to say a worker has to stay up on a scaffold all day. You could put forward a bill to clearly say that that's not allowed, but instead what we're doing is just wiping out the executive's authority to protect workers. Mister Mesmer, I respect your ability to bring forward this bill. I see all of the large lobbying industry associations trying to wipe out these heat protections for decades. For decades workers have been asking for protection from heat and the sun. And to me it's just so sad to see here in Congress where we get to work indoors, get paid a fat salary, um us prioritizing wiping out those heat protections basically because industry lobbies are asking for it. I yield back.

The gentleman's time has expired. Uh, a vote has been called in the house pursuant to previous order. The chair declares a committee in recess, subject to call of the chair, will plan to plan specifically to reconvene promptly ten minutes after the last vote has been called, has been called, not finished, but has been called in the series. The committee s- now stands in recess.

Twenty minutes.

I think we're coming to the end of the meeting. I just have to ask you all a question. We have a couple of questions. And then, if we get, we get to go we can start all over again and, you know, what I've been thinking, like, I know some people, you know, they, they, they, they, I think, they, probably, maybe, uh, maybe we need to change a little bit, but it happened, uh, food is uh is at a point of yeah yeah i don't eat food though for example if you go to a restaurant and you eat ham or something i'll get a meal from a food they don't get they don't grill it they don't grill it they just grill it they just grill it for you cause i'm not able to hold that for a long time oh no i mean i mean yeah i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean i mean yeah where do you go in there you go ah yeah yeah yeah i feel like it's a little bit too much for me

ok

yeah and then you know all of the uh things that i've to handle but i think it's a little bit too much for me yeah yeah yeah i think it's a little bit too much for me do you get like a new user or like you get like a new employee or like new client right yeah mmm oh yeah we did a couple of these and then we had a little dinner at a restaurant and we had a little dinner with a couple of our friends and we had a little dinner at a restaurant and then we had a little dinner with a couple of our friends and then we had a little dinner at a restaurant and then we had a little dinner at a restaurant and then we had a little dinner at a restaurant and then we had dinner at a restaurant and then we had a little dinner at a restaurant and then we had our dinner at a restaurant that's pretty cool maybe maybe like two or three at a time so

yeah

i'm gonna go to the storage i'm gonna go to the storage i'm gonna go to the storage until i get there i think it's a good idea to have a good way of like setting up your own restaurant to set up your own menu uh to set up your own menu hmm ok yeah i think it's really good idea to set up your own menu yeah i like i like how how you set up your own menu and then set up your own menu mmm hmm oh yeah i know you don't like hot chocolate but i don't think it's too spicy for you

no

yeah oh my god uh yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah

hmm The committee will resume. We were on the Adams amendment, um, to HR sixty-two, thirteen. The amendment in the nature of a substitute. Are there any

No, there is, we're on the Adams amendment.

Yeah, we're on the Adams amendment.

To the amendment, yes.

To the amendment, yes. Does anyone wanna s- else want to speak on the amendment, the Adams amendment? Uh, I recognize the gentleman, the ranking member from Virginia, Mister Scott, for five minutes.

Thank you, Miss, Miss, Miss Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the General Lady from North Carolina, Ms. Adams, for this amendment because it protects workers from excessive heat with sensible measures like insuring breaks and cool spaces and access to water. There's nothing radical about offering a little rest shade and water to workers when it gets hot. If this um if this amendment passes it will be protected and I'd urge my colleagues to support the amendment and yield back the balance, madam.

Gentlemen yields, are there any other members who wish to speak on the Adams amendment? Seeing none, then the question is on the amendment by the gentlelady from North Carolina. All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed no. No. In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it.

This chair had come 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 HRA? Seeing none, further action on H R sixty-two thirteen is postponed. We'll now move to consider the next bill.

H fifty-one is the franchising.

The committee will now proceed to consideration of bill H R fifty-two sixty-seven for amendment. the American Franchise Act. The bill was circulated in advance. And printed copies are available. The clerk shall designate the bill.

H R five two six seven, a bill to preserve the franchise business model.

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. Does anyone seek to be recognized? Mr. Moylan, for what purpose do you seek recognition?

Mr. Chair, 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 five two six seven, offered by Mr. Moylan of Guam, identifier H R five two six seven 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 Mister Moylan for five minutes to explain the amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Thank you, Mister Chair. Over the last decade, the Na- the National Labor Relations Board, NLRBS, joint employer role has changed four times and the Department Labor Standard has been revisited three times. The Biden-Harris NRRBS role Consider the business to be a joint employer if it shares a co-determines the employee's essential terms and conditions of employment even when that power had was indirect or reverse, reserved. By creating a liability for in entities with indirect or reserved control of another entity's employees, the twenty twenty-three rule raises costs for franchisers. This means thousands of franchisors share legal liability for the actions of people they do not actually supervise or even see on a regular daily basis. It means that franchisees, many of whom are first-time business owners, get less support from their franchisors because more support might mean more liability. And it means that fewer Americans get to own their own business and be their own boss. Basically, the American dream becomes harder to obtain. While the twenty twenty-three role harm businesses across the country, we are here today to discuss its impacts on the franchise industry specifically. Franchises are critical to our economy, and the franchise model is an engine of upward mobility for many Americans who would not be able to own their own businesses outside the We must protect this industry and its workers from massive pendulum swings of joint employment standards. The American Franchise Act provides that clarity and stability. This is why I'm proud to support HR fifty-two sixty-seven, the Ameri- the American Franchise Act. This bipartisan bill amends the National Labor Relations Act and Fair Labor Standards Act to establish that franchisor may only be considered a joint employer with franchisee if it shares the employees with them and directly, actually, and immediately exercise significant control over the essential terms and conditions of employment for those shared employees. This direct and immediate control standard is standard that the Trump administration and administrations of both parties both have traditionally used. I thank the rep- I thank Representative Hearn for his leadership on this important bill, and I urge adoption of the Americ amendment and the nature of a substitute, which makes a technical change to the bill. I yield back.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the American Franchise Act seeks to radically rewrite the long-standing law by narrowing the standard for finding joint employment liability for franchisors. This bill would severely curtail workers' ability to enforce their rights under the Fair Labor Standards Act or the FLSA, and the Nap- National Labor Relations Act, the NLRA, and frustrate the ability of workers' unions to bargain with all the companies that control their working conditions, in the franchise industry, but also harm small business franchise owners by leaving the franchisees liable for unlawful practices and procedures that are outside of their control and set by the large corporate franchisors. The bill would limit the funding of joint employment liability to a franchise's direct and immediate control over the franchisee's workers' uh working conditions such as pay, hiring, firing and scheduling. While this extremely narrow standard is problematic enough, the bill goes a step further in also creating explicit safe harbors in which certain actions that could normally be considered direct and immediate control are explicitly carved out from being indicators of joint employment. It's common practice for franchisors to indirectly set to set to indirectly set the working conditions for the franchisees' workers even if they do not directly supervise These commonly take the form of operational requirements, franchise agreements, and brand standards. While these sorts of agreements may not reflect, quote, direct and immediate control, unquote, over the franchisee's workers, they do allow a franchisor to set up operat- operating hours and scheduling practices, mandate staffing levels, require specific payroll software, and provide detailed rules and restrictions on how work must be performed under the franchise agreement. It stands to reason that this level of control and supervision would be meaningfully would meaningfully constrain and direct how franchisees conduct their day-to-day businesses and worker supervision. Yet the American Franchise Act explicitly states explicitly shields the franchisees from any sort of liability for these sorts of practices when determining joint employment liability. The bill would weaken enforcement under the FLSA which includes federal wage theft and child labor laws, but limiting FLSA's liability to only to franchise ores that that exercise direct and immediate control. The American Franchise Act would allow franchise ores to evade liability for unlawful business practices and technology requirements, they mandate that their franchisees follow, which would result in wage theft wage theft and child labor violations. This bill would also severely limit how unionized workers could effectively bargain. By narrowing joint employment liability, the only franchisors that exercise quote " direct and immediate control", workers at a franchise would be unable to bargain with the franchisor over any conditions they have indirect or direct control over, such as wages, store hours. The franchisee would be unable to meaningfully bargain with the employees. The American Franchise Act would also create a f- safe harbor for franchisors to engage in worker retaliation. The bill allows franchisors to supervise a franchisee's workers and inform the franchisee of their opinion on the performance of employees and whether they meet acceptable standards. Uh, through this safe harbor, a franchisor could make strong could strongly encourage a franchisee to terminate a worker engaged in union org org organizing, or who raises concerns about unlawful practices in the workplace and faces zero consequences. In some, the American Franchise Act is bad for workers, bad for small business franchisees, and writes a blank check to big businesses to control small businesses and their workers without any acc- without any accountability. So I purr uh oppose the legislation, urge my colleagues to do the same, and yield back the balance of my time.

Gentlemen Yales, are there any members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendments in the nature of a substitute?

Mister Chairman.

The gentlelady from North Carolina, Miss Fox, is recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. I very much support this piece of legislation. Franchising is one of America's greatest success stories. It empowers entrepreneurs to own and operate businesses. create jobs and strengthen local economies. Unfortunately, over the past several years, uncertainty surrounding the federal government's interpretation of the joint employer standard has threatened that opportunity. When franchisors are held responsible for employment decisions, they do not make or control, it discourages investment, increases cost, and makes it harder for entrepreneurs to open or expand their businesses. This is also a problem with how the courts are interpreting the joint employer standard. The American Franchise Act provides certainty for franchisee employers and employees by making clear that a franchisor may only be considered a joint employer of the employees. of a franchisee if the franchisor exerts direct control over one or more essential terms and conditions of employment. The bill preserves the independence of locally owned franchise businesses while ensuring that the actual employer remains responsible for employment decisions. This common sense legislation protects small business owners supports job creation and reinforces the franchise model that has helped so many Americans achieve the dream of owning a business. I urge my colleagues to support H. R. fifty-two sixty-seven and I yield back the balance of my time.

The gentlelady yields. Are there any other members who wish to be recognized for further discussion on the amendment in the nature of a substitute. Seeing none, 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 wish to offer amendments? There being no amendments.

It's gotten, it's gotten a bit

Pardon?

Mm-hmm.

Does the uh gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Scott, wish to offer an amendment?

I don't remember the desk um

The clerk will report the amendment.

Identifier AMD O one.

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

Does the gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order?

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

Thank you, Mister Chairman. Mister Chairman, H R fifty-two sixty-seven allows large corporate franchisors to evade accountability when they violate labor and employment laws and leave small business franchisees on the hook, even if the franchisees were following mandated franchisor policies, but also weaken the ability of workers unions to negotiate a full unfair contract to improve their working conditions because franchisors who are controlling the terms and conditions of employment, in one way or another, would have no obligation to come to the bargaining table, leaving the franchisee with little to say or authority to effectively bargain. My amendment replaces the narrow joint employment standard in the bill with the more robust and even-handed stand uh standard established in the bipartisan protecting the right to organize act, the PRO Act. In particular, my amendment qualifies the joint employment standard under NLRB's twenty fifteen Ferris, Browning-Ferris decision, which considers direct control, indirect control, reserved authority to control and control exercise in fact when determining joint employment liability under NLRA. My amendment also strikes the bill's joint employment uh standard under the Fair Labor Standards Act which keeps its current and it keeps its current fact specific and holistic test for establishing joint employment liability. Labor and employment laws of long protected workers who have joint employers, and a strong joint employment standard under the NLRA ensures that workers can collectively bargain with all of the parties that control the terms and contracts of their employment maintaining a strong pro-worker joint employment standard, under the FLSA, ensures that French can be held accountable for maintaining policies that result in violations pertaining to everything from wage theft to equal pay to oppressive child labor. Strong joint employment standards also protects small business franchises by ensuring that franchisors will be held liable for any policies or practices that could coerce a franchisee into potentially breaking the law. A strong joint employment standard will provide an effective deterrent to franchisees or is placing pressure on their franchisees to engage in low road and potentially illegal practices. So I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this amendment which serves the interests of workers in small business franchises rather than large corporate franchisors. You're back.

The gentleman yields. Does the gentleman from Utah withdraw the reservation?

I withdraw.

Point of orders, which are on. Does anyone seek recognition on the amendment?

Mister, Mister Chairman.

General Lady from North Carolina, do you wish to speak to the amendment?

I do.

You're recognized for five minutes.

Thank you. Uh, Mister Chairman, this is not a good amendment. We need to go with the uh, Bill And um I w- I want to express opposition to the amendment and say we need to have a really strong vote on the original bill. Thank you very much. I yield back.

The gentlelady yields. Are there any other members who seek recognition on the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment by the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Scott. 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 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 HR fifty two sixty seven? The gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Scott, do you offer an amendment?

Uh, yes, Mister Chairman, I have it remembered at at the desk. Uh

Clerk will uh report the amendment.

This is AMD O four.

Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR five two six seven, offered by Mister Scott of Virginia, identifier Scott underscore AMD underscore zero four.

Does a gentleman from Utah reserve a point of

Reserve, reserve point of order.

point of order is reserved. I now recognize the gentleman from Virginia uh for five minutes in support of the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, my amendment would refer the franchisees with the right to sue their corporate franchisor for damages. when the franchisee is found to have violated the NLRA or the FLSA as a result of their finite f- uh franchisors mandated policies of guidance. Franchisors are regularly engaged in a level of control over their franchisees' businesses that meaningfully impact workers' terms and conditions of employment through operational requirements, franchise agreements and brand standards. Franchisors can set operating expen- set can set operating hours scheduling practices, mandate staffing levels and require specific payroll software, or provide detailed rules and regulations on how the work must be performed under the franchise agreement. With the level, with that level of control, franchisees are left with little to say on how they conduct their day-to-day businesses and work uh worker supervision. So if enacted as written, this bill would create a situation where a franchisee who h is obligated to follow unlawful practices mandated by the franchisor if he wishes to keep his agreement, he is left fully liable for any damages or other consequences under the N NLRA or FLSA caused by the franchisor's required policies and guidance. My amendment would correct this injustice and guarantee that franchisees may hold franchisors li accountable for their illegal behavior. No business should be above the law and we should not require our small businesses or franchisors to take all the blame for the lawful practices forced upon them by their franchisors. I urge my colleagues to vote for the amendment and protect the uh franchisees. Uh you're back.

Uh does the gentleman from South Carolina

Mister Chairman, I withdraw my point of order.

Okay. Okay. So, we're away. Does anyone seek Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment? Yes.

Yes, I would like to speak in favor of Mister Scott's amendment.

Okay, uh General Wyman is recognized from Washington, Florida,

Uh, thank you, thank you, Mister Chairman.

guys.

I want to s uh in support of ranking member Scott's amendment. Um some of you know that um before I came to Congress I was a lawyer and what I, one of my roles was to represent franchisees in disputes with franchisors. Um I've I've also said many years over many years on this committee um that uh the franchise model is a good one it helps um oftentimes individuals who wanna start a small business it helps them get into the business um but if the franchise franchisor is acting like an employer, they should be held responsible like an employer, which is the reason why I uh do not support the underlying bill, but I absolutely support this amendment, and I think back to the clients I represented who were franchisees, who had invested sometimes their life savings and put everything on the line because they wanted to have a small business. If they are held responsible because they were directed to do something by the franchisor, there is no way in the world that we should hold these small business owners responsible for uh whatever they were directed to do by a franchisor. This is an amendment that's about fairness. Uh, think about the small business owners who run franchises. They should not be held responsible for being directed to do something in violation of the law by a franchisor. So I support the amendment, I do not support the underlying bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Okay, does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment? The question on the amendment, hmm.

Mr. Morley?

Oh, I'm sorry.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Paul.

I object I object to the amendment, uh, franchisees operate their own businesses and make their own management decisions. The American Franchise Act reinforces this independence by clarifying that fa- franchisors and franchisees are joint employers, only if they directly control essential employment matters. This targeted fix brings back stable, predictable legal framework that empowers local entrepreneurs and protects the integrity of the franchise model. Thank you, Mister Chair.

Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment? The question on the amendment by the gentleman from Virginia. 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.

Quarter block.

The chairman, the uh term uh roll calls is ordered pursuant to the chair's previous announcement this vote will be postponed. Are there any other amendments to the amendment in nature of a nase a substitute for HR fifty-two sixty-three, sixty-seven?

Okay.

Okay. Further action, HR fifty-two, sixty-seven is po- is postponed.

Take a short, sorry, yeah. No, no. This is my order. Yeah, no, we went out of order with the proposals.

Okay.

Sorry, just a minute.

Great.

Thank you.

Further action on H R Eighty seven. Um, fifty two s- yeah, fifty two s- fifty two sixty six. No, that, okay. Fifty six, fifty two sixty seven is postponed. We'll now move to consider the next bill.

Fifty six.

Yep.

And now we're gonna move to this, this is our last bill to mark.

Okay. It's right here. The meeting will now proceed to consideration of bill HR eighty seven seventy five, for amendment. The bill was circulated in advance and printed copies are available. The clerk shall designate the bill.

H R eight seven seven five, a bill to amend the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of nineteen fifty-nine to provide that individuals who have been convicted of sex offenses against minors may not serve in certain positions.

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. Any amendment offered shall be considered as read. Does anyone seek to be recognized? Ju- Mister Wilson, what's the purpose for you, for your application?

I have an amendment at the desk.

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

Amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R eight seven seven five, offered by Mister Wilson of South Carolina, identifier H R eight seven seven five underscore A N S.

Without objection, the amendment shall be considered original text for purpose of the for further amendment. Amendment in the nature of substitute has already been distributed. I now recognize Mister W- Mister Wilson for five minutes to explain

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. H. R. eighty-seven seventy-five, the ending predator access to union power act amendment amends the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, LMRDA, to prohibit individuals convicted of sex crimes against minors from being employed by labor organizations. Specifically, the bill bars these individuals from serving in leadership decision-making roles within labor organizations, acting as employer labor consultants or representing employers in collective bargaining. This prohibition applies for thirteen years after conviction or the end of imprisonment. Critics might say this bill is unnecessary or fixing a problem that doesn't exist. But sadly, just recently the committee investigated a service employee's u- International Union's SEIU local chapter which hired a convicted child molester and a longtime registrant of California's sex offender registry to be a member of the leadership team. This is particularly troubling because SEIU represents public service employees who work closely with children including public school employees, bus drivers and child care providers. In this case, holding a union leadership position could provide a child molester access to children. The hiring practice of unions and their leadership are important to the committee, as it relates to the integrity of a union. Union dues should not fund the salaries of those convicted of these horrible crimes. The LMRDA already prohibits individuals convicted of many crimes, including rape and serious forms of assault from holding office in labor unions. So it only makes sense to add sexual abuse of a minor to the list. The bill closes this loophole in current law by adding sex offenses against minors to the list of disqualifying crimes. The bill ensures that union power cannot be exploited by those who have committed serious offenses against children. I urge adoption of the amendment in the nature of a substitute which makes a technical change to the bill and passage of the underlying bill. I yield back.

Are there any members who wish to be recognized to for further discussion on the amendment in nature of a substitute?

Chairman?

Yes, um.

I have an amendment after this.

We're on ANS to debate.

Oh, it's on the down there. No no no no, oh.

We're on dep- we're on ANS to debate, it's just a second.

I'm sorry.

Yeah, we're on, we're we're still debating this.

Mister ch-

Okay, we're still we're still debating.

Mister Chairman.

Yes, I recognize lady from Granskneve.

Thank you. I I just want to lend my s-

No, my my my second, my second.

sorry.

This can't recognize the the number from um Virginia.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, speaking to the member of the National Substitute, we know that labor unions are we know that labor unions are one of the most regulated industry ind- indices uh entities in the country, and the Labor Management Reporting Disclosure Act requires unions to submit extensive financial disclosures of their assets, liabilities, payroll and other expenses.

Regulatory expenses.

That uh uh do that act also regulates internal governance of unions,

Next.

including restrictions on who can hold office or be employed. Specifically, section five O four of the act prohibits individuals convicted of certain crimes from holding union office, being employed by a union or serving as a consultant to a union among other positions. Disqualifying conditions convictions include robbery, bribery, embezzlement, murder, sexual assault. Other defenses include violations of the uh of the law's union disclosure and trustee requirements. But the bill does not just apply to unions. It also imposes certain requirements on employers and their labor relations consultants. These requirements include transparency around union busting consultants, hard to fight unions organizing efforts, which employers and their which their employers and consultants often fail to comply with, and follow the restrictions of section five O four for labor relations positions and roles. The bill we're considering today, H R eighty seven seventy five, would amend section five O four to include sex, a sex offense against a minor to existing lists of convictions that bar individuals from serving in union and employer side positions and roles. As written The bill is balanced by having to having it apply to both sides, both unions and employers. However, Republicans often unfairly criticize the labor movement, exaggerate the prevalence of a little problem this bill addresses, by highlighting a singular incident from four years ago regarding an individual who was imme- immediately fired by a local union. But the reality is that this is not widespread issue among among unions. The reality is that this is not a widespread issue as unions remain subject to section five O four conduct background checks for job applicants and have codes of conduct nevertheless uh remains imperative that any individual in a position of trust must be held to a high standard which is why I intend to vote in favor of the bill uh you're back.

Thank you. Are there other members who wish to be recognized for the discussion? General Hader from North Carolina.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to lend my support to the bill from the gentleman from South Carolina and um and in response to my friend from Virginia, um one of these um situations um deserves being corrected. We don't need children being sexually abused. Thank you.

Any other members who wish to be recognized for the discussion on the amendment and nature of the substitute? General Leader from Washington.

Uh, thank you, uh, Mister Chairman, I I I just wanted to state that nobody here wants a sex offender in any pos position of leadership and as ranking member Scott said the individual who was named was uh separated from SEIU as soon as the union learned she was a registered sex offender that was taken care of I I also want to note um, Mister Chairman and committee members, that we still not have all the Epstein files. We were sitting here talking about one instance years ago about a situation that was corrected but we're here in Congress still without the Epstein files. So, uh, let's, let's be real here about what we're looking at. Again, nobody wants sex offenders in office, but also we wanna know, uh, the connection of, uh, everybody who was involved, uh, with Mister Epstein and all of his horrific, horrific abuse. Um, and I also noticed that we have

Are there any other members 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 sus- substitute the committee will now move to consideration of amendments. Are there any other members who would like to offer amendments?

It's the chairman.

Yes. And the meeting is from North Carolina.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, I have an amendment at the desk. Um, eight seven seven five underscore zero three.

The clerk will report the amendment.

Amendment to the amendment and the nature of a substitute to H R eight seven seven five, offered by Miss Adams of North Carolina, identifier Adams underscore H R eight seven seven five AMD.

There's a gentleman from uh North Carolina.

Mis- Mister Chairman, I reserve a point of order.

Point of order is reserved. Uh, I now recognize a gentlewoman from uh North Carolina. Five minutes.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. Uh, I I do support the underlying goal of the bill, to prevent sexual predators from managing collective bargaining and labor relation processes. Having said that, my amendment builds on the underlying bill by ensuring that all business associates of Jeffrey Epstein and Glenn Maxwell are barred from serving in labor relations roles for employers and from serving in labor unions. By including business associates of Maxwell and Epstein in section five O four of the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, we can disqualify individuals from leadership who have no place representing the interests of workers or corporations. Because as I hope everyone in this room can agree, business associates of Jeffrey Epstein cannot be trusted with positions of power, I do know, or I believe, that my colleagues on the other side have discussed a case in California in which a union local unknowingly hired a sexual predator who was promptly terminated once their history became known. To me, this incident shows an organization taking accountability and moving quickly with corrective action to address an abuser who had infiltrated their I wish that Congress and the administration showed the same urgency in rebuking a sexual predator who had infiltrated the highest offices in our government, a predator who hosted business and political leaders at his home, who enabled powerful men to abuse women and even young girls, in the privacy of his estate and his island. But this amendment presents an opportunity to continue seeking accountability and to ensure that the labor relations process is not dominated by individuals uh affiliated with sex trafficking. Those associated with Jeff Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell cannot be trusted to manage anything, let alone Americans' working conditions. And while I support adding convicted sex offenders to section five O four, those involved in the most notorious sex trafficking ring in recent history shouldn't get a whole pass. Sexual predators do not deserve special treatment because their wealth, their power, and their status shield them from legal accountability. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I I withdraw my amendment.

Gentlelady yields. Uh, does the gentleman from uh South Carolina reserve or withdraw?

I I withdraw my reservation.

The reservation is withdrawn. Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment? For what purpose is gentlelady from Oregon, Miss Bonamici,

Uh uh uh th- thank you, Mr. Chairman.

seek recognition?

Um, I I understand that my colleague has withdrawn her amendment, but I I want to clarify a comment that I made, uh, just so the record is clear. Although the president has been found, uh, criminally liable for financial crimes, he was found civilly liable for sex abuse, and I just want the record to be clear. Uh, and I yield back.

Gentlelady yields. Are there any other members who wish to be recognized of uh to uh to introduce an amendment? Gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Scott, do you wish to offer an amendment?

Uh yes, Mister Chairman, um AMD O two. Anybody remember the desk?

The clerk will report the amendment.

Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R eight seven seven

This is a gentleman from Utah. Reserve a point of order.

Reserve a 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, Mister Chairman. Uh, as I mentioned before, section five O four of the LMRDA currently prohibits those convicted of certain crimes, such as bribery, extortion, embezzlement, arson, murder from serving as a union, office and staff, and in specific roles for employers. Underlying bill adds sex offense against a minor to the current list of disqualifying offenses. It is vital that any anybody in a position of trust and power should be held to a high standard which is why this amendment would prohibit individuals convicted of certain crimes detailed under the LMR d a from serving as executives of corporations that are dealing with labor organizations director of the office of labor management standards secretary of labor inspector general of the department of labor any other appointee uh political appointees at the department of labor and the president this bill this uh act holds union officials and labor relations advisors and consultants certain standards corporate executives including and public officials, including the president, who are dealing with the law should be held to the same standard. So I urge my colleagues to support the amendment and I yield back.

The gentleman yields. Does the gentleman from

I withdraw my preservation.

Reservation is is withdrawn. Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment by the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, Mister Scott.

Aye.

Aye.

All opposed no. No. In the opinion of the chair,

No.

the no's have it, an amendment is not agreed to.

It's sure.

Are there further amendments to the amendment in the nature of substitute HR eighty seven seventy five?

Uh, I remember the desk.

The clerk will report the amendment.

Um, O one. AMD O one.

Gentleman from Virginia.

And we just did a little test. And we have a spot in the second.

Seven.

Can you ask them?

We'll pause for a moment.

We'll pause for a moment.

Yeah. Can I pass the clerk to clarify which amendment was previously passed?

Will the clerk clarify which amendment was passed previously?

That was Scott underscore HR eight seven seven five AMD underscore zero one.

It was the previous one?

Yes.

Okay, I'd I'd said O two.

This one O two.

No, the the

Yeah.

past one was O two. This one is O one.

We don't have a Scott O two amendment.

No, there was an O cross O two.

Okay, we need to

Okay. Remember that the desk we want brought up now

We need to make sure that the plan is complete.

is

Ho- hold this.

Could the clerk um redesignate the former, the bill we just voted on? Can you redesignate that amendment? Yeah.

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

Zero two. Okay. That's right.

So now let's read a vote on it. Is it too Is that the one we voted on? a bold one we're gonna

cancel the previous one

that's where we voted on

yeah but it has to we have to designate it

is he did parliamentary inquiry mr. chairman

parliamentary inquiry

was that how how it was designated before ok um mr. chairman i'd would we uh reconsider the vote by which we defeated the previous previous amendment

I can do that.

In light of that, we call for the vote again. All those in favor of the s

This is a motion to reconsider. You you're gonna accept the motion re reconsider by unanimous consent?

Uh Accept the motion to reconsider by unanimous consent. And now to revote on the Scott r identify the amendment again.

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

The question is on the amen-

No no no no. Zero two is what we want to be voting on right now.

Zero two.

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

All aware? The question now 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. In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it.

No.

An amendment is not agreed to. A roll call vote is order pres-

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

No.

Okay. We did that.

Where we going now?

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

Are there any other members wishing to offer an amendment?

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. This is AMD O one.

The clerk will Report the amendment.

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

Understore zero one. Uh. Does a gentleman from Utah reserve a point of order?

There's a point of order.

Point of order is reserved. Um, I now recognize the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member, to address his amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I'm proposing a simple amendment to eliminate uh potential misinterpretation about what this bill accomplishes. My amendment would simply strike the short title of the bill, because it is misleading and inaccurate. This bill amends section five O four to add another offense to a list of disqualifying convictions. It does not apply only to unions. It also applies

Gentlemen yields, this is a gentleman from Utah, reserved

I withdraw my

I withdraw mine.

withdrawn, point of order. Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment? I'm gonna see those. Seeing none, the question is on the amendment by the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member. All in favor say aye. Aye.

Aye.

All opposed no. No. In the opinion of the chair,

No.

the noes have it, and the amendment is not agreed to. A roll call vote is ordered pursuant to the chair's previous announcement this vote will be postponed. Are there any further amendments?

Sir, I need to get you to the the page where we talk about um going to uh how to you know, going to the end of the debate. Yes, you can. uh i think it's just like a family thing and like a family like a family like a family would be like a family would be like a family like a family hmm would be like a family would be like a family like a family would be like a family would be like a family would be like a family would be like a family family would be like a family would be like a family would be like a family would be like a family would be like a family would be like i think it's pretty much the same as before but i think it's a little bit more ok So we don't We're good.

We'll pause.

Yeah, but that's what they have.

Further action on H R eight seven seven five is postponed. Pursuant to previous order, the chair declares a committee in recess, subject to the call of the chair. We expect to reconvene at uh three thirty. The committee stands in recess.

Mm. Yep.

The committee will reconvene and come to order following our recess. We'll proceed to postpone requests for recorded votes. I hereby move the committee report the Bill HR eight seven eight one to the House 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.

Opposed, no.

No.

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the motion is agreed to.

Recall vote.

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 or wish to be recorded?

Not yet.

Do any members wish to change their vote? Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally.

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

The A's have it and the motion is agreed to, H R eighty-seven, eighty-one as amended, and accompanying material shall be transferred. Aye. Aye. No. No. Recall vote.

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

The ayes have it and motion is agreed to. H R forty nine eighty 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.

Okay, I'll do these.

How many votes?

Just one.

We will now be voting on one amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR eighty-seven forty-seven. The an- amendment offered by uh Mister Scott of Virginia titled Scott under slash eight seven four seven AMD under slash zero two. 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 fifteen nays and eighteen nays.

The amendment is not adopted. The question now occurs on the amendment

Aye. Aye. No.

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

Uh-huh.

Aye. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes.

R

Okay. I guess I have to go back. All opposed, no.

No.

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, the motion is agreed to.

Recorded vote.

Recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using 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 eighteen nays and fifteen nays.

The ayes have it and the motion is agreed to, H R eighty seven forty seven 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 H. R. eighty-one eighty-three to the House of Representatives with amendment, and with recommendation that the amendment be agreed to and the bill do pass. The question now occurs under chair's motion. All in favor say aye.

Aye. Aye.

Aye. All opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, the motion is agreed to.

Record a vote.

Record a 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 Curr Clerk please close the vote and announce the telly.

Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are thirty-three ayes and zeroes nays.

The ayes have it, and the motion is agreed to, H R eighty-one, eighty-three 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 do have one amendment.

We'll now be voting on one amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR ninety-seven twenty-three, the amendment offered by uh, 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 eighteen nays.

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

Aye.

All opposed, no.

Aye. Yep.

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. The motion is agreed to. A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes, uh, uh, using the electronic voting system. The clerk will open a 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 the tally.

Mister Chairman, on this vote there are thirty-three ayes and zeroes.

The ayes have it, the motion is agreed to, H R ninety-seven, twenty-three, as amended, and the accompanying material shall be transmitted to the House Representatives' chair notes for the record that a quorum is present. I hereby move that the committee report the Bill H R eighty-six, sixty to the House of Representatives with amendment and with the recommendation that the amendment be agreed to.

Aye. No.

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, 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 eighteen nays and fifteen nays.

The A's have it and the motion is agreed to, H R eighty-six, sixty, 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.

There's no amendments here.

I hereby move that the committee report the Bill H R eighty-three, forty-seven, to the House of Representatives with amendment and with the recommendation that amendment be agreed to and the bill to be passed. 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.

Recorded vote.

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.

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

The A's have it and the motion is agreed to, H R eighty-three forty-seven as amended, and the accompanying material shall be transmitted to the House of Representatives. The chair notes for the record a quorum is present.

There is one.

We'll now be voting on one amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R sixty-two, thirteen, uh, numerated as Adams under slash Adam NC under slash six one two. 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?

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

The amendment is not adopted. The question now occurs on the amendment and the nature of a substitute to HR sixty-two thirteen. 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 is in the nature of a substitute is agreed to. I hereby move that the committee report the bill HR sixty-two thirteen to the House of Representatives with amendment and with the g- recommendation that 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.

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the motion is agreed to.

Recorded vote.

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 or 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 eighteen yeas and fifteen nays.

The ayes have it, then the motion is agreed to, H R sixty-two, thirteen, 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 skipped to eight eighty-three. There's one more, were we? We have two amendments.

We'll now be voting on two amendments, to the amendment and the nature of a substitute to H R fifty-two, sixty-seven. Amendment offered by Mister Scott, title Scott under slash AMD under slash zero one. 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 or 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 eighteen nays.

The amendment is not adopted.

We have no more minutes.

We'll now be voting on a second Scott amendment, title Scott under slash AMD under slash zero four. A recorded vote is requested. Members will record their votes using electronic voting systems.

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

Can I finish? The question now occurs on the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR fifty two sixty seven. All in favor say aye. Aye.

Aye.

All opposed no.

No.

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, an amendment is in the nature of a substitute is agreed to. I hereby move that the committee report the bill HR fifty two sixty seven to the house of representatives with amendment, and with the recommendation that the amendment be agreed to and the bill do pass. All in favor say uh 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 it, then 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 the tally.

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

The ayes have it and the motion is agreed to, H R fifty-two, sixty-seven 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.

Material page one. Eight zero.

And we have one amen-

We'll now be voting on one amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H R eighty-seven, seventy-five. Amendment offered by Mister Scott, uh, titled Scott under under slash HR eight seven seven five AMD under slash zero one. 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 eighteen nays.

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

Aye.

All opposed, no.

No.

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, the amendment and the nature of a substitute is agreed to. I hereby move that the committee report the bill H R eighty-seven seventy-five to the House of Representatives with amendment and with 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 it. And the motion is agreed to.

We're done.

A recorded vote is requested. Oh, yeah. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. The clerk will open the vote.

I'm gonna check.

Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded?

Good grief, man.

Oh, um, look at this.

Look at this. I wonder where your logo is.

Do any members wish to change their vote?

Can I have the Can you hold on this for a second? Um, this is the one I'm reading.

Hearing none, will the clerk please close the vote and announce the tally.

Mister Chairman, on this vote there are thirty-three ayes and zeroes.

If the ayes have it, then motion is agreed to, H R eighty seven seventy five as amended and accompanying materials shall be transmitted to the House of Representatives the chair notes for the record that a quorum is present.

Can turn to page eighty six.

I ask in them as consent that staff be authorized to make necessary technical and conforming changes to today's bills without objection so ordered pursuant to 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. I would request that we take the joyous celebrations off the floor. Without objection, any members who wish to insert materials in the record may do so, 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.