▶ 0:04:50Good afternoon. The committee will come to order. Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare recess at any time. Today, the rules committee is convening to consider two separate HR276 and HR881.
▶ 0:05:07Despite the claims that I'm sure will will be inundated with the entirety of today's meeting that Republicans are wasting time, the truth is that we're moving forward with legislation that defends American interest. HR 276, the Gulf of America Act, renames the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America and directs federal agencies to update their documents and maps.
▶ 0:05:37accordingly to incorporate the new name. This legislation codifies President Trump's actions to rename the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America. In short, this legislation recognizes the strategic influence America has over this geography, not to mention the existing economic, cultural, and commercial might that we passively exert on the Gulf.
▶ 0:06:06Gulfs across the world are recognized by their geographic linkages. This is true of the Gulf of Oman, the Arabian Gulf, or even the Gulf of Alaska. The nomenclature of this Gulf goes back to mid600s before the United States was even a thought and when Spanish influence over Central America and the Caribbean was at its zenith. Now, the United States interest in the Gulf of America outpaces Mexico's.
▶ 0:06:36The entirety of Mexico's economic activity related to the Gulf pales in comparison to even some of our counties economic activity. The necessary renaming made by the president did not end the world as some would like us to believe, nor did it cause a single bit of harm to the American people.
▶ 0:06:58I'd be curious to know from our Democrat colleagues if they have found a single concrete data point that this decision was detrimental to the American people. They can't because there's not a single data point that exists regarding that. Having the realities of the Gulf's link to America reflected in government records makes sense.
▶ 0:07:22We shouldn't let certain allergic reactions to decisions made by the Trump administration stand in the way of good public policy. Instead, we should support this decision and codify demonstrating our art article one HR881, the DHS restrictions on Confucious Institutes and Chinese entities of concern act establishes funding restrictions
▶ 0:07:52via the Department of Homeland Security and on institutions of higher education that have an established relationship with Confucious Institutes. For years, the CCP has executed sophisticated and targeted propaganda and espionage campaigns across the globe.
▶ 0:08:13The CCP exploits the open and collaborative nature of American academia to conduct widespread industrial and military espionage inside the United States.
▶ 0:08:27Although there are fewer than five active Confucious Institutes left in existence in the United States, the GAO found that 43 out of 74 schools surveyed still maintain a relationship with an entity that supported their previous Confucious Institute. This must be addressed immediately. The federal nexus of HR881 is taxpayer funding.
▶ 0:08:55Taxpayer dollars are privileged and provided through Congress's article one powers. Congress can and should safeguard this funding and ensure that the dollars are appropriately used while encouraging universities to end relationships with partners who do not have America's best interest in mind. Today, we will advance these two bills that put American interests first.
▶ 0:09:25That's where they should always be placed. I'll happily extend the invitation for our Democrat colleagues to join us in supporting both. While I look forward to today's discussion, I now yield to Miss Scandlin for any comment she wishes to make. Thank you, Chairwoman Fox. So, today we debate two bills. another tired Confucious Institute bill and a bill to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America.
▶ 0:09:54I thought the bills to make the world safe for household appliances were as low as this House majority could go, but I underestimated their creativity. The issue of Confucious Institutes in America seems to be a largely settled issue. Congress has taken multiple steps over the years to limit the presence of these institutions on American campuses, and by most accounts, those efforts have worked.
▶ 0:10:17If but if my colleagues want to beat a dead horse to get in some talking points because there's no legislation of consequence on the floor this week, enjoy yourselves. Which naturally brings us to HR276. Ever since the beginning of Trump's term, House Republicans have been tripping over themselves to find new and more embarrassing ways to suck up to the president and indulge his peculiar obsessions. They've introduced bills to name highways, airports, and even schools after the president. They've pushed to make his birthday a federal holiday.
▶ 0:10:48They've proposed putting his face on the $100 bill and carving him into Mount Rushmore. And every time he posts on Truth Social, no matter how bizarre or petty the post, Republicans eagerly line up to be the one to make it happen. I'm sure by the end of the week, someone will have introduced legislation to turn Alcatraz back into a federal prison, even though it's been a museum for decades. I'm not going to mince words in case you thought I was.
▶ 0:11:15This bill to rename the Gulf of Mexico is a stupid, unserious waste of time and taxpayer dollars. It's an embarrassment to the nation that it was ever introduced, let alone that it's being brought to the floor for a vote. We don't want a country where decisions are made by tweet or cable news interviews. And we definitely don't want Congress to waste its time on nonsense like this.
▶ 0:11:37Americans want us to work on real issues, not wasting time and money on bills that have no value other than creating a fresh opportunity for the Trump family empire to make money on merch. $40 to $50 per hat for those on display at the cabinet meeting last week. Congress needs to work on real issues, not just enriching the Trump family fortunes. We need to lower the cost of living. We need to help families and children and working people navigate the real problems they face in daily life.
▶ 0:12:07Americans are struggling with the soaring cost of groceries, rent, health insurance, prescription drugs, strollers, lumber, drywall, and the economy is in a tail spin thanks to this administration's reckless tariffs. These are the issues we should be working on. It says a lot about our Republican colleagues and their priorities that instead of working on the issues they campaigned on, they'd rather waste our time with embarrassing bills like these.
▶ 0:12:36We are a nation of laws, not men. Our country was founded in direct opposition to kings, not service to them. It's a disgrace to our history and our country's legacy for Congress to spend another second of legislative time graveling in this way. I urge my colleagues to find the courage to dispense with this bill and bills like it before we do more damage to this institution. As was mentioned, the Gulf of Mexico was so named over 500 years ago.
▶ 0:13:06If we want to update that name to reflect our current American culture, maybe we should rename it the Sea of Aoluments, you know, a place where one can board the ship of fools and navigate from a state of ignorance to the Confederacy of Dunes because that appears to be where this legislation is heading us. I yield back. Thank you, Miss Scandal. Without objection, any prepared statements that our witnesses may have will be included in the record.
▶ 0:13:36I now welcome our first panel, Representative Hegman and Representative Hy from the Committee on Natural Resources. Your full statement will be submitted for the record and we ask you summarize your statement in five minutes. Representative Hegman, I welcome your testimony. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. First, I want to thank my colleague, Representative Green, for working with the Natural Resource Committee team to advance this legislation.
▶ 0:14:05The Committee on Natural Resources remains committed to advancing President Trump's agenda to put America first, and passage of this bill is an important symbol of that effort and a step in the right direction. HR276 will codify President Trump's historic action to rename the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America.
▶ 0:14:27HR276 seeks to put into law a portion of President's Trump, President Trump's Executive Order 14172, quote, "Restoring names that honor American greatness." End quote. By enacting this legislation, we ensure consistency in references to laws, maps, regulations, and records of the United States. Throughout our country's history, presidents have changed the names of America's lands and waters.
▶ 0:14:52The change we are discussing today signals to the world that America is standing tall and that we are proud of our country. We are proud of our accomplishments, our history, and our future. It is nearly impossible to overstate the Gulf of America's critical role in achieving not only American energy independence, but dominance.
▶ 0:15:12President Trump has made it a priority of his administration to reassert America's role as a global leader in energy production and the Gulf of America is a critical part of that agenda. The American people support these policies and we must deliver on the promises that we have made. I am proud to support President Trump in this bill and I urge the committee to report an appropriate rule to allow for its consideration in the House. Thank you and I yield back. Thank you, Representative Hoy.
▶ 0:15:43You're Thank you, Chair Fox, and and members of the committee. I I'd like to wish everybody a happy Cinco deio. We could be celebrating the victory of the Mexican army over the French, but we're here renaming a bottle a body of water. And um let's be clear, this is a waste of taxpayer dollars.
▶ 0:16:07When we change the name of Fort Bragg numbers of times and back to Fort Bragg, it costs $6 million. But who is going to pay for the maps, for the books, for the signs that municipalities, schools, and libraries have to replace? Who pays for that? We do as taxpayers. So, this is a waste of taxpayer dollar. And this is not what the American people want.
▶ 0:16:34My phone isn't ringing off the hook with people saying, "Please rename the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America." Over 70% of Americans oppose this bill and spending time on this. My phone's ringing off the hook with seniors who can't get through to Social Security are on the phone waiting four, six, eight hours and then getting disconnected.
▶ 0:16:58with veterans who can't access services, with private citizens and elected officials whose grants have been frozen. Grants that we with Congress with the power of the purse um said should be spent and projects are dying and we are getting lots of calls from manufacturers and farmers and small business people who are being devastated by ownorous and erratic tariffs.
▶ 0:17:27That's what that's what's people are talking about when they're calling our office. The founders of this country set up our democratic republic with three separate and equal branches of government specifically so that the United States would never have a king, never be ruled by one person. We took an oath to obey the Constitution, not to bend the knee to the president, no matter what party they're in.
▶ 0:17:57And yet here we are again wasting taxpayer dollars. This was proposed in 2010 by Steven Colbear, a comedian when he was uh making fun of actions like this. Um and now here we are. It has become a reality. went from a comedy show and now we here are in Congress with everything else going on focused on this.
▶ 0:18:23I'm gonna read a quote from uh a Guardian editorial because I think it's it's it's it's it says everything. Why stop here? How about declaring by fiat that the Washington Monument is now to be called the Trump Monument? Why not chisel another presidential face onto Mount Rushmore and call it Mount Donald? the great renaming has begun and George Orwell would understand exactly what's going on.
▶ 0:18:50I urge my colleagues to reject this bill and get back to work on things that benefit our constituents and the taxpayers of America. Thank you very much. And with that, I yield my time. Thank you very much, Miss Fishbach. I'm sorry, Mr. Griffith. You're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. I greatly appreciate it. I I think it's interesting that Orwell was brought up was double speak.
▶ 0:19:19What's interesting about that is is the actual history of the body of water previously known as the Gulf of Mexico because my colleague on the other side said it, oh, it was been settled for 500 years. That's just not accurate. The great Spanish from the Spanish Netherlands at the time, the great Ortilius labeled it on his maps and I have one of those maps is disputed map.
▶ 0:19:46Uh but I collect antique maps and one of his maps or on his maps he referred to it as the sea of the north. It's been called the sea of the north. Cortez liked that name. Others have called it the Gulf of Cortez. Others have called it the Gulf of Yakatan. There have been a lot of different names. Now, here's what's interesting. When we take a look at this, and one can question the timing, and it, you know, one can argue, is this the right time?
▶ 0:20:16I would argue it should have been probably 1803 when uh Louisiana, which was once part of the Spanish province, uh provinces in the New World, uh was was sold by the Spanish to the French and then to the French. And the French had had it before and then traded with the Spanish.
▶ 0:20:36But the Spanish at one time in their territories of New Spain or Mexico had what are now the states of Florida claims to Alabama, Mississippi, clear title to Louisiana, and of course Texas. And as time went on, the United States in 18 02 made a treaty with the Spanish to get Florida.
▶ 0:21:04So, one could argue in 1802 it probably should have been changed to the Gulf of America. One could argue 1803 uh when the French got it back or when they sold the Louisiana territory of the United States, it should have become the Gulf of America. One could certainly argue that when uh Texas seceded from Mexico at that point, more of the of the shoreline belonged to territories other than the country of Mexico that it should have been changed. And one certainly should argue that James K.
▶ 0:21:34Pulk missed this one because when he when he came along and they had the Spanish uh the excuse me the Mexican-American War and brought in those territories and you had Texas then joining the Union um a little bit later. Certainly by that point in time it should have been the Gulf of America. I'm trying to figure out why we waited so long. And when it was first proposed I'd never thought of it.
▶ 0:21:56when it was first proposed, I thought, you know, this is something that should have happened in the 19th century when a greater portion of the waters or the shores of what is today called the Gulf of Mexico touched parts of the United States of America, but further, and this oftenimes drives the Canadians and uh some folks in Mexico crazy, it we're all part of North America. This is the great north.
▶ 0:22:25This is the great North American continent and we're naming it Gulf of America. That seems to be a much better name. Now, I I I posited, Madam Chair, perhaps, and I don't know the answer to this, that perhaps they didn't do that because until the name was changed, there was somewhere in the Arctic in in what is now Russian territory, a small Gulf that was known by some ctographers as the Gulf of America. and maybe they thought they'd create confusion.
▶ 0:22:55I don't know if that's accurate or not, Madam Chair. I just submit that when you look at the history of the body of water, the name should have been changed in the 19th century and we're way behind times. And unless my colleague uh would like to respond and tell me I got something wrong in there, I think I got that pretty good. I think you've given us an excellent history lesson today. Thank you. Well, if anybody ever wants to see some of my old maps, they're in my Thank you, Mr. Griffiths for always giving us a great history lesson.
▶ 0:23:25Miss Scandlin, you're recognized. Thank you, Madame Chair. Um, Representative Hoy, is there a CBO score on this bill? There is. Do we know about what the score is? Anyone? I can get you that information.
▶ 0:23:47I think I heard it was about 500,000 to change some federal maps, but of course that doesn't impact the schools that have to pay for maps and books and changing all for sorry
▶ 0:24:17who is paying for for all of these things to be reprinted. This is a burden on on my constituents on your constituents on taxpayers on localities all because right now somebody decided this is the most important thing that we can be doing at this point in time. And um so there is a cost and it will be borne by our constituents. The cost of actually changing I have additional information in response to your question.
▶ 0:24:47Thank you. Uh based on the cost of similar activities, CBO estimates that updating federal documents and maps would cost less than $500,000 over the next 5-year period. Any related spending would be subject to the availability of appropriated funds. goes on to say that uh HR 276 also could affect direct spending by some agencies that are allowed to use fees, receipts from the sale of goods and other collections to cover operating costs. So, okay.
▶ 0:25:16So, that's the impact on the federal government, but not and I and I also think that we have consistently questioned CBO scoring uh in this particular uh uh committee for many reasons. So, I think that there's probably questions about the validity of that as well. Okay.
▶ 0:25:31But obviously no no uh assessment of what would happen in the costs to our local school districts or the costs to US prestige across the country for an absolutely ridiculous act of indulgence of some sort.
▶ 0:25:46Um I do want to thank Representative uh Hy for pointing out that it was Steven Colbear who first proposed this in 2010 proposed it because um at the time the country was dealing with the aftermath of the Deep Water Horizon oil spill and the justification for renaming uh the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America was because the US had so fouled it should take responsibility and given the attacks we're seeing on the EPA right now. Uh maybe maybe there's some merit to that now. Okay, thank you.
▶ 0:26:17I yield Gentle lady yields back. Now recognize um Mr. Langworthy for his time of question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's very sad to see my colleagues on the other side of the aisle get so upset about a simple name change to a major artery of American commerce and economic investment. A change that has already been reflected in the geographic names information system in the geographic name server.
▶ 0:26:43If only they had been quite this animated over the millions of illegal immigrants that crossed our borders in the last four years. Maybe they should have taken some of that misplaced worry about taxpayer dollars about reprinting a few maps into what actually happened with the most historic violation of our sovereignty that the the world has ever seen over the last four years. That happened. They didn't worry about the cost to the American taxpayer.
▶ 0:27:08Then uh I have nothing further to add other than to say that I support this legislation and I'm a I am a proud I think day one co-sponsor and with that I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Now recognize Miss Ledger Fernandez for her time of question. Uh thank you. Thank you. And um well thank you.
▶ 0:27:32Uh, so you know, for months my phones have been ringing off the hook and I know everybody's phones have been ringing off the hook because Americans have been calling us because they are freaked out. In fact, Americans have been calling us so much that they have shut down the phone system at times because they're so upset about what Trump is doing, what Doge is doing, what Musk is doing.
▶ 0:27:57Uh, and you know, I don't think I've not fielded a single call asking for this uh, name change, but Americans really disapprove of what Donald Trump and the Republican leaders are doing to their pocketbooks, their social security, their health care. They don't like the fact that Trump is ignoring the Constitution and doesn't believe in the basic value of due process.
▶ 0:28:24Hell, on the interview and NBC, he didn't even seem to know that due process was guaranteed under the Constitution and had to be honored. And the reality is Americans thought that Trump and they voted for him and they feel betrayed because they thought he was going to address costs on one. But what have we seen instead of Trump addressing costs on day one?
▶ 0:28:52We've already had the first quarter of negative growth. That's the beginning of a recession. And everybody says a recession is coming because of Trump's policies, because of Trump's tariffs. You know, Madame President, I ask for unanimous consent to enter into the record the Fox News poll, the Fox News poll.
▶ 0:29:15There's lots of other news polls out there, but just so that people know, this is coming from the Republicans, the Fox News poll that shows 56% of Americans disapprove of Trump's handling of the economy, 58% disapprove of his tariffs, and 59% disapprove of how he's handling or not inflation. And it's this idea that he's not handling what's important that has Americans upset. Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry.
▶ 0:29:43I said, Madam Chairman, gentle ladies asked to have the Fox polling put into the record without objection. So ordered. So according to a poll published by the Washington Post newspaper and ABC News, only 39% of Americans approve of how Trump is handling his presidency and they think he is going too far because he keeps doing things like this and like the terrorists which are serious.
▶ 0:30:10I mean, I'm sorry if I reacted to the idea that part of this may have come out of a comedian, but that tariffs are hurting people. And most Republicans, not all, I recognize that Representative Hegman has had a town hall. Uh, most Republicans don't even want to hold town halls because their voters are so mad at them. I did a town hall in one of Ken Calvert's towns on Saturday.
▶ 0:30:39They were so disappointed that he hadn't showed up to answer their questions about Medicaid, about Social Security. But you know who was particularly upset in that audience? The veterans. We had multiple veterans get up and say, "He's not showing up to answer our questions." And you know what else is upsetting? The idea that he could just say, "We are going to rename Veterans Day Victory Day.
▶ 0:31:05We're going to rename the Gulf of Mexico, the Gulf of America. We're going to rename things. The fact that he is acting like a tyrant and saying we're going to do, you know, we're going to do things that I want because I want them to and that Republicans are then going to go along. So, these are just a bunch of ego trips. His birthday parade, $45 million that he says it's going to cost, but we should all be happy.
▶ 0:31:31another idea about this is about ego, not about caring for your community. And you know what? The Gulf of Mexico doesn't need a new name. It's been that name for a long time. Yes, it may have been have other ideas, but over from 1552. And let me tell you, I'm from Mexico. I am from New Mexico. New Mexico doesn't need a new name either. New Mexico.
▶ 0:32:01Our name reflects that there is a complex history and that when you understand the complexity of history, the diversity of your history, you are better off for it. So, let's leave the Gulf of Mexico at as the Gulf of Mexico. But if you re want to rename it, since you were not doing what everybody wants us to do, how about naming it the Gulf of Plunder? because you're here from natural resources, but we know that tomorrow we're going to take a bill tomorrow, aren't we?
▶ 0:32:31And it's going to be about plundering the Gulf of Mexico. It's going to be about giving oil and gas companies more more power, more money, and more control over our lives without any consequences. It's going to let them lower the royalty rates. Take more money of our resources that belong to the American people. Let them have them for cheap on the cheap.
▶ 0:33:00Let them not have to be accountable for the pollution they leave. That is called plundering America's resources. And we should be protecting those resources in the Gulf of Mexico. Uh, and with that, I don't know if uh, Representative Hoy, you want to add anything to anything you've heard today. Uh, I am the last Democrat, so this is your last chance if you want to just add anything. Uh, thank you, uh, Mr.
▶ 0:33:30Chair and, uh, Miss Leisure Fernandez. I think that you said it exactly right. Again, I have done 12 town halls and throughout my district in the most conservative and the in the most progressive and there's standing room only and people are concerned about Noah about tariffs about veterans care about um you know FEMA about wildfire response about all the things they want
▶ 0:34:00government to work and yes we should work on waste fraud and abuse absolutely And that's not what this is. And this is going to the costs are going to be borne by our local schools. And you may say it's just it's just a little bit, but every little bit counts, especially in our rural communities.
▶ 0:34:20So, I think uh you and Miss Scanland said it well and I really wish we could be focusing on things that we could do together and um there's a lot that can be done and this seems like a waste of time and taxpayer dollars. Uh thank you very much. And it is absolutely true. The voters want us to be taking up those tariffs and I keep saying it. If they believe the tariffs are great, take them up, debate them. Uh but that's our job.
▶ 0:34:49That's what we should be doing, not renaming uh the Gulf of Mexico. Uh so, thank you very much. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Gentle lady yields back now. Recognize Miss Fishbach for her time of question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I and I I just have a question. you're so concerned about the money that um were you concerned when Biden's Department of Education put about $3.9 billion worth um rules and paperwork that cost our school districts that much money.
▶ 0:35:19Were you concerned about that? Uh thank you through the chair, Miss Fishbach. Yes, I spoke up when my when Democratic presidents did things that cost my constituents taxpayer dollars. I wasn't afraid to stand up and disagree with a president who was of my party. Nor should you because there are three separate and equal branches of government and we need to do our job. And this is time because that's because I had a simple question.
▶ 0:35:49But $3.9 billion worth of rules and regulations and paperwork that was put on our um our schools under the Biden administration seems incredibly significant. And I just and I also was wondering I know that uh that um you found the information regarding what CBO said about less than $500,000 and I was just wondering if they could go back and find how much it cost when um President Obama changed the name of Mount McKinley. Um because this is not a new phenomena.
▶ 0:36:18I mean we there's lots of lots of drama coming from the other side regarding a a simple change in a name and I think we should be proud to call the Gulf of America the Gulf of America because it is that that's brings back pride in the US and I I just it just seems like there's a lot more drama coming from the other side than is necessary on this and you know if if a if a school district can't afford to purchase an entirely new map you know what sticker
▶ 0:36:48would do, you know, just put that over the top and put Gulf of America. I mean, there are a lot of simple ways to deal with this, but um Miss Hagman, I know that you had things you wanted to add. Well, I I would also say that the schools uh purchase textbooks almost on a yearly basis. That's why it is such a lucrative business. So, I don't think that there's nearly the expense associated with this. They're constantly updating textbooks. I just that's that's what they do. I also wanted to make sure that we corrected a statement by Miss Scandlin.
▶ 0:37:17She referred to America fouling the Gulf. And that's why Mr. Cobear was joke joking that it should be named the Gulf of America. It was not America that fouled the Gulf. In fact, the Horizon Deep Water well blowout was done during the Obama administration and I believe it was British Petroleum that held that particular permit. So, I just wanted to make sure that we clarified that it was not America that did that at all. I I would agree with you. I think that there's a lot more drama associated with this.
▶ 0:37:46I'm excited about the fact that under this administration, we have pride in our country. We have pride in our past and our future. Uh it is very clear that in terms of the geographic location that we are discussing, there is much more influence from America, much more of an economic impact and a driver from America than there is Mexico. This makes sense to me. I think everyone's made very good points in that regard. With that, thank you. Thank you very much. And with that, I yield back. Gentle yields back now. Recognize Mr. Scott for his time of questioning.
▶ 0:38:18Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don't have a whole lot of questions, but I would just like to say that I'm glad that we can fish in the Gulf of America again because I would just remind you that the Obama administration had uh shut the sniper season down to three days. Three days out of the whole year. That's where that's where the crazy people that ran National Marine Fishery Services were were taking us to where the American citizens couldn't fish in the Gulf anymore. Now, I went fishing out there on February 28th with my son and a bunch of his friends.
▶ 0:38:48And you you know where we went? Straight to the oil rigs because you know what? There's a whole lot of fish on those oil rigs. It's just been great for the habitat and and for and for fishing in in the Gulf of America to have all those oil rigs out there. And I I guarantee you this, if you want to catch fish, that's a good place to go. And uh so we do energy cleaner and better than anybody else. And I hope we are issuing more permits out there.
▶ 0:39:12Uh, the other thing I would tell you is unfortunately some of the legacy Nash Marine Fishery Services rules from the uh, wacky left that's apparently distraught by anything and everything that we do that give the American citizens the right to hunt and fish and uh, enjoy uh, the the oceans that we have. U, you know, we still can't we still can't fish much in in the South Atlantic. Did you know that, Miss Hegman?
▶ 0:39:39that that yeah they they had this is this is how stupid I shouldn't use that term probably but hopefully my kids aren't watching uh Nash Marine Fishery Services recommendations were they were just going to shut down bottom fishing on in the South Atlantic for uh recreational fishing and where do these ideas come from? Where who who where do these ideas come from?
▶ 0:40:05It's the people that wake up in the morning and just wacky crazy and somehow they end up in these federal agents. He's telling the rest of us what we can and can't do and and that's why President Trump's one of the reasons he's he's here today. People are sick and tired of that madness. So I if Representative Hagman, if you've got anything to say, I'll turn over to you. Other than that, I'll yield my time back.
▶ 0:40:25As chairman of the uh water, wildlife and fisheries subcommittee for natural resources, I can assure you that we are working on the very issue that you have identified and for the very reasons that you've explained. Uh the fisheries should not be shut down. Uh it is an abundant part of of and very important part of our heritage and our culture and our economy. Which brings up one other point and this is something that has been in the news more recently.
▶ 0:40:50you've indicated that we do that we we have created such phenomenal fisheries and we've done that for a variety of reasons. But I think another reason why we should change this to the Gulf of Mexico of of America versus the Gulf of Mexico is for over 40 years the country of Mexico has been dumping raw sewage into the area near San Diego, California. And the head of the EPA, Lee Zeldon, was just there approximately two weeks ago.
▶ 0:41:15I was just in San Diego San Diego meeting with some folks down there and they described the situation. It's absolutely a horrific horrific situation. It is an environmental catastrophe and disaster created and the country of Mexico absolutely refuses to address it and fix it uh and has been fouling our waters for decades upon decades. It needs to be resolved.
▶ 0:41:38But that is another reason why we need to retake and and claim ownership of of of this area and make sure people do know that it is the Gulf of of America. We should not be rewarding Mexico for their bad acts. And that's just one example. That sounds like a real issue that that if the Democrats would actually join the Republicans and working to resolve, we could work to resolve it. But they're they're opposed to anything that Donald Trump's for. So if he wants to clean up what what Mexico is doing to the Gulf of of America now, I mean, they'll oppose us on that. So well, they shouldn't.
▶ 0:42:08It is absolutely a horrific situation and it needs to be addressed and the country of Mexico needs to be held accountable for dumping raw sewage into the ocean on a regular basis. You can't you can't you can't make make that seem right no matter how crazy you are on the left. With that, Mr. Chair, I yield. Gentleman yields back. Normally, we would we would flip sides, but Mr. Nagus has asked if he could have just a minute. Just a minute. So, I'll go to Mr. Norman next.
▶ 0:42:40Um, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, did you have a question for Mr. Langworthy? I was able to cl I was able to clarify the situation about British Petroleum actually being the owner of the Horizon Deep Water Well rather than the country of America. Well, I don't really have any questions. It's it's interesting the matter of cost come up. Where was the effort on the cost of illegal immigration and the millions it's cost us?
▶ 0:43:08Where was the u where's the cost of leaving all the uh military equipment in Afghanistan? Where was that cost? Is that taken from children? Um where's the cost of the fentanyl that came across this border? That's not taken from children. That's killing children. Um, you know, and the left is just is is really hypocritical when it comes to this on a name change to America.
▶ 0:43:36Uh, he loves the country and I really don't have any other questions other than it's unbelievable that we're having to keep the push back, but it doesn't surprise me. The only comment I would The only comment I would make is that illegal immigration cost our country $150 billion dollars last year alone. How about to deport them, to put them back? We're paying three times then. Cost to feed them. Cost to haul them over here in the middle of the night. Cost to take them out of here.
▶ 0:44:06You know, this country is in in a bind because of what this administration what the past administration has done. And to ignore somebody that that was cognitively gone is uh unbelievable. Anyway, I yield back. Thank you for doing it's a good bill. Thank you. Gentlemen yields back now. Recognize Mr. Nagus for his time of question. Thank you. Oh, excuse me. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your courtesy. And uh thank you, Miss Hegman and Miss Hy for being here and for your testimony.
▶ 0:44:36I appreciate you all coming before the rules committee. Uh, Mr. Hegman, I thought I want to perhaps spend a bit of time unpacking some of the conversation you just had with Mr. Norman. We both represent western states, Rocky Mountain West, of course, from congressional neighbors, uh, if you will. I represent northwestern Colorado, as you know, a long border with Wyoming. And I understand, uh, that you held a town hall pretty recently in Wyoming.
▶ 0:45:05Uh, I don't know if I 10 of them. What was that? 10. 10 of them. So I am curious you so you've held a lot of them way more than a lot of your colleagues on that side of the aisle I will say. So I appreciate that. Um we I've held 10 as well my district but I'm wondering what are you hearing at those town halls? What do folks I mean I just give us a sense of the flavor of what folks are concerned about in in the state of Wyoming?
▶ 0:45:32They're concerned about energy production, making sure that we get back to energy independence, which is part of the the reason why I think it's so important to name that rename this to Gulf of America in light of the amount of production. It accounts for about 15% of our oil and gas production in the country. So that's one of the big issues that you hear wherever you go, whether you're in town halls or meetings, is the importance of protecting our energy industry.
▶ 0:45:56I hear a lot about ensuring that we are implementing the agenda and the policies that Donald Trump ran on. Okay. Um this being one of them. I think people are again Can I just ask you a question on that? Let me just make sure I because I I understood the first part. You said energy dominance protecting the energy industry is something you hear from uh folks that you represent in Wyoming. Uh and I appreciate that. And then you said implementing President Trump's policies.
▶ 0:46:21So you you're saying that there are people at your town halls who were demanding that you rename the Gulf of Mexico? I think it's across the entire board. Has that come up at any of your town halls? Actually, it has. And it also Yes. And it's also come up in the meetings. The people of Wyoming were demanding that you rename the Gulf of Mexico. You use the word you use the word demand. Very few people come to me and demand anything.
▶ 0:46:42Well, what I I guess what people say what people say is that they want us to implement the agenda that Donald Trump includes renaming the Gulf of Mexico because it has to do with pride in America and what and and what America stands for. Representative, I would just simply say, well, you can argue with me. I'm not talking about an argument. I would love to attend one of these. I I I would welcome you to attend one. I'm asking you an honest question and you know, you're you're welcome to answer it any way you'd like.
▶ 0:47:08You're telling me and this committee that at one of your town halls let me finish. Let me finish my questions and my meetings. You'll have an opportunity to answer. Let me finish my question. You've held town 10 town halls across Wyoming. Yes. And at those town halls, Wyoming residents, constituents have said to you, I would like you to rename the Gulf of Mexico. Has that happened? Yes.
▶ 0:47:33at the meetings at the meetings that I have held as I have said as I have said to you repeatedly now I not only am holding town halls I'm holding meetings with my constituents the entire agenda that President Trump ran on they've talked to me about no taxes on tips that's not tax you're testing the Gulf of America they have talked to me about the pro the the the oil and gas developers that we have down there they have talked about exporting energy I'll reclaim my time because I I think it's a shame.
▶ 0:48:04So, you're calling me I think what you're saying is you don't believe what I'm saying. I'm saying that I would love to come to a town hall and so I'll certainly look forward to I what we may do is uh we may just consider doing a town hall in Wyoming myself so that I can get a better sense from Republicans, Democrats, affiliated people of Wyoming as to what their priorities are.
▶ 0:48:24My sense is I don't I'm not disagreeing with you that there are many folks in Wyoming who believe that the Congress ought to be pursuing policies that President Trump supports. What I am suggesting is that I find it a little bit unbelievable that of all the issues that the American people are dealing with, that my constituents are dealing with, that your constituents are dealing with, that at these town halls, renaming the Gulf of Mexico was a top priority.
▶ 0:48:52I suspect that the people of your state, one of the things that you're talking I'll have you'll have an opportunity to to respond. I don't believe that the people in your state nor the people in mine would identify renaming the Gulf of Mexico as their top priority.
▶ 0:49:06And and I I just I find it absurd that we have to engage in this this discussion to act as though this is anything but abnormal that that this is sort of just regular order that that yes, in the first four months of the 119th Congress, the Republican majority has decided that this is so important that we ought to take floor time to rename the Gulf of Mexico.
▶ 0:49:31notwithstanding all of the other policies that I suspect many of your supporters, many of the citizens that you represent are passionate about. I I just I find that hard to believe and apparently I'm the only one or at least you and I disagree about this, but I suspect my colleagues maybe on this side of the aisle concur in that assessment. But anyway, I am happy to give you an opportunity to respond. And so one of the things, Mr.
▶ 0:49:54goose that you are ignoring is the fact that the state of Wyoming and my constituents in Wyoming have a very close connection to the Gulf of America because we are one of the largest energy producers in the nation. We are the largest coal producer. We're the la eighth largest oil and gas producer. Our resources, our uh oil and gas and coal are actually exported out of the Gulf of America. So, it is something that is at the forefront of the minds of the people in the state of Wyoming. I also want to point out one thing.
▶ 0:50:23I I want to I want to point out one other thing that you did which is a very clever trick which is that you asked me if I'd been asked any questions and I told you that I had and when you did your soliloquy there at the end you accused me of being dishonest and disingenuous by then converting that to being the top priority.
▶ 0:50:43I didn't say that it was the top priority but I did say that I was asked questions and there has been discussions not only in that not only in the meetings that I've held but when I have met when I have met with people who actually have a direct connection to the Gulf of America. So I think what you're trying to imply is that Wyoming has no interest in the Gulf of America when in fact the state of Wyoming with our resourced in front of this I've been generous with my Have you testified in front of this committee yet this year?
▶ 0:51:14Is this your first time testifying in front of this committee? Uh probably this year but not last year. No I'm asking you this year I'm saying in the last four months since the 119th Congress has started. This is your first time testifying right? You're chairwoman of the water, fisheries, and wildlife subcommittee, are you not? Yes. And this is the first bill that you have decided to present on the to this committee on behalf of the state that you serve.
▶ 0:51:37So this notion I'm I'm saying to you, you whether you or the Republican majority have picked this as a priority is besides the point. Clearly, this is what you all have decided to spend your time on in the opening months of the 119th Congress. Maybe uh that's what the people of I guess is what you're testifying to today is the people of Wyoming expect that from you and they support that.
▶ 0:51:59I can certainly tell you that in Colorado of all of the issues that are important to the residents of my state, Gulf of America renaming does not crack the top three, the top 10 of issues that my constituents care about. You clearly feel differently. That's your prerogative. I'll yield back the balance of my time. Gentleman yields back now. recognize gentleman from Texas, Mr. Roy, for his time of Thank you, chairman. Uh, thank the gentle ladies for appearing before the committee.
▶ 0:52:29I assume the gentle lady from Wyoming loves America. Is that a fair statement? Yes, I do. Um, is it true that this Congress has passed a number of um, meaningful bills? For example, the Lake and Riley Act. Yes. Which has now been signed into law. Yes. To make sure we protect Americans from the dangers of wide open borders. Is that true? Yes. And the Save Act is another one. Have we also passed the SAVE Act, which uh they've not brought up for a vote yet, but which Democrats killed last Congress. Is that correct? Yes. In order to get through 60 votes in the Senate.
▶ 0:52:57Is also true that we passed a piece of legislation to uh carry out what was a bipartisan ask to deal with the injunction issue. Elena Kagan has done so. The former solicitor general and a Democrat. We passed a bill that would have dealt with the issue of a single judge issuing nationwide injunction, temporary restraining orders. We passed it out uh of the of the House. That's correct. Um and then we'll see what happens in the Senate. But we know that there's some opposition in the Senate from our Democratic colleagues. Is that a fair statement? Yes.
▶ 0:53:23And it is true that the president of the United States has been issuing executive orders to defend our country to secure the border and that the the rate has dropped from basically uh about 94% year-over-year March to March in terms of apprehensions at the border. Yes. Is it true that we were able to do that without the supposed bipartisan bill last year that Democrats said we needed to pass in order to secure the border? That's correct.
▶ 0:53:42uh are the American people that you represent, the Wyomans, people in Wyoming that you represent, uh are they, uh happy with what is occurring with respect to a secure border and then also the executive orders that reopen American energy as you described for your home state as I do for Texas? Critical both two of the top issues, right?
▶ 0:53:58So in terms of executing for the American people, would you say that this administration combined with this Congress given narrow majorities is uh we are collectively carrying out the wishes of the American people who gave uh Republicans control of the White House House and Senate in November. No question about it. Uh do we have much more to do? Gentle would agree. And now we talk about this bill that's in front of us, the Gulf of America. It has been uh discussed, I think, on both sides of the aisle. Does the gentle lady agree that words matter? Yes, they do.
▶ 0:54:26Does the gentle lady agree that when you have something like the Gulf of America versus the Gulf of Mexico that there's something about that that it does in fact evoke imagery about what is in fact America and that you've got waters that are um central to certainly what we call the Gulf Coast from Florida all the way to Texas. Is that fair? Yes. Um and then the to the extent that words matter that that um recognition is something that would be important to Americans generally.
▶ 0:54:54And is it not true that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle uh tend to focus on words a lot? For example, uh focusing on issues involving transgenderism, uh issues involving so-called birthing parents, uh pronouns, uh in their social media. Is that a fair statement? Yes, it is. Uh is that done on purpose? Do you think the gentle lady believes that our colleagues on other side of the aisle who focus on these names, who focus on these phrases that they do so on purpose? Very purposeful, right? And that purpose is to advance an agenda. Would you agree?
▶ 0:55:24Yes. Right. And do you think that the agenda of advancing the Gulf of Mexico, Gulf of Mexico naming to Gulf of America is also an agenda by the president and and and Republicans? Do you believe that that agenda is in line with the people that you represent in pride in the United States of America? Very clearly. So, do you think the president shares that pride in the United States of America?
▶ 0:55:43And thus that led him to say that maybe we should take the time and the energy to name the Gulf of Mexico, which is surrounded by multiple states in our country, uh, and it's an enormous American interest, that that would be something that would be important for pride in our country for the American people. Yes. Um, are there other words that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle tend to use and belabor uh in terms of trying to advance their agenda?
▶ 0:56:06Whether it's something like burtherism or for example going after historic monuments and we can have debates about the monuments and so forth, but going after and spending a great deal of time and energy and expense and cost changing monuments, changing mods at the tearing them down and and tearing down statues. Is that correct? Yes. All at great cost to advance an agenda. Is that correct? Correct. And here we have the president of the United States wanting to extol the virtues of America. That's correct. I yield back. Gentleman yields back now.
▶ 0:56:36Recognize Mr. Jack for his time of questioning. Well, I want to echo uh Mr. Royy's line of questioning. I think those very effective talking about why words matter. But just to help me understand um Representative Hegelman, I think I guess the the the way I see this bill is it it really enables us to be efficient and bring into line what the administration has already done.
▶ 0:56:56So if you could just help me understand there's two or three agencies that have already is a National Geographic information space or something that there already executive branch agencies that have codified Gulf of America into existence on that side. So help me understand is this bill just bringing us into line with what the executive branch has already done within and throughout its administration. That's absolutely correct and it is just following uh actions that have been taken by other presidents in the past. Very similar.
▶ 0:57:27And could you just for the the committee describe how this initiative would prioritize American interest and nationalism as well as promote President Trump's America first agenda? Well again and it goes back to what I was indicating to Mr. Nagus. The Gulf of America is actually very important to the state of Wyoming and our energy producers and that's why it would be a topic in my state because they also believe very strongly in America and love America.
▶ 0:57:52I just want to give you some some quick statistics of why the Gulf of America is so important to our country. The United States has been producing oil offshore in the federal Gulf of America waters since the 1940s and production from the Gulf has been steadily increasing over the past 30 years. Production today is at nearly 1.8 million barrels per day and we hope new projects will soon allow us to get over the 2 million mark which is where we were prior to the pandemic.
▶ 0:58:20The Bureau of Ocean Energy Man management or BOEM found that the region contains an estimated technically recoverable resources in the range of 23.31 billion barrels of oil to 36.27 billion barrels of oil. A 2021 report commissioned by the National Ocean Industries Association found that the Gulf of America Oil and Gas Industries supports an estimated $412,000 jobs throughout the country.
▶ 0:58:50Offshore oil and gas jobs have an average industry raise of $69,650, which is 29% higher than the national average. I can go on and on and on about describing the importance of the Gulf of America. That's just looking at the energy side of it. If you look at the fishery side of it, as was brought out by Mr. Scott, it's huge. Also, the recreation industry is so important to the United States.
▶ 0:59:17So, there are many, many reasons why we would want to clarify and correct what's probably been a historical anomaly in terms of the name of this particular body of water. So, I think it makes perfect sense to uh uh uh actually name this the Gulf of uh America and move on so that we can address some of the other things that are important to our constituents as well. Well, thank you very much. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Thank you very much.
▶ 0:59:45Gentleman yields back unless somebody's come in that I'm unaware of. That concludes our questions on this. Thank the witnesses for being here today and we will take a minute to get the next panel Thank you.
▶ 1:01:15Yeah. I now welcome our second panel, Representative Fluger and Representative Thompson from the Committee on Homeland Security. Your full statement will be submitted for the record and we ask you summarize your statement in five minutes. Representative Fluger, I welcome your testimony. Thank you, Chair Fox, and to the ranking member.
▶ 1:01:34We appreciate the opportunity to testify in front of you um to discuss my bill HR881, the DHS Restrictions on Confucious Institutes and Chinese Entities of Concern Act. This is a bipartisan bill that has been worked on for several congresses, but has been negotiated within the subcommittee first uh and then to the full committee.
▶ 1:01:57It's no secret that the Chinese Communist Party represents one of the most significant existential threats to the United States and has demonstrated time and again that they are willing to use any tool at their disposal to jeopardize our national security. Originally marketed in 2004 as a mechanism to promote the Chinese language and facilitate cultural exchanges, Confucious Institutes were quickly discovered to be another extension of the CCP global influence apparatus.
▶ 1:02:22The CCP has used Confucious Institutes and their offshoots to conduct espionage, surveillance, intellectual property theft, transnational repression, influence academic institutions, and promote military civil fusion programs. At their peak, the United States hosted approximately 118 institutes primarily at colleges and universities. There are fewer than 14 active Confucious institutes today.
▶ 1:02:46But the danger remains and many of these programs have rebranded themselves within universities with the same mission as before to subvert national security and expand CCP influence operations. HR881 is simple. It prohibits DHS from fund from providing funds to American universities that host a Confucious Institute or maintain relationships with Chinese entities of concern. This legislation will ensure that our students, our intellectual property, and our national security are all protected from the malign influence of the CCP.
▶ 1:03:17HR881 passed through the Committee on Homeland Security on Voice. And last year, this legislation passed 249 to 161 with overwhelming bipartisan support. I'd like to thank Chairman Green for prioritizing this legislation from ARCUP and all of my colleagues who have co-sponsored this bill. Again, Chairman Fox, thank you for the opportunity to uh to testify and to bring 881 up for discussion. I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Thompson. You're recognized. Thank you very much.
▶ 1:03:46Uh Chairwoman Fox, Ranking Member Scandlin, and members of the Committee on Rules. Thank you for the opportunity to speak HR881, the DHS Restrictions on Confucious Institute and Chinese Entities of Concern Act. Before I begin, I'd like to extend my deepest condolences to ranking member McGovern and his family on an unimaginable loss of his daughter, Molly.
▶ 1:04:12Molly McGovern was a bright light that was taken from us far too soon. And during this very difficult time, my thoughts and prayers are with the McGovern family and the entire rules committee who would like an extended family.
▶ 1:04:27Now turning to the bill before us today, HR881 requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to ensure that institutions of higher education that have relationships with Confucious Institutes, Thousand Talent Programs or vaguely defined Chinese entities of concern do not receive any funds from the Department of Homeland Security.
▶ 1:04:50This type of funding prohibition is on the lines of those found for the Department of Defense in the 2019 and 2021 National Defense Authorization Act and the National Science Foundation in the Chips and Science Act of 2022 as it is intended to limit the potential for intellectual property theft, theft, espionage or curtailment of academic freedom that could happen when certain Chinese
▶ 1:05:20educational institutions partner with US institutions of higher education. The committee on homeland security has marked up a version of this bill in the last two congresses and last congress a different version passed along house largely among along party lines.
▶ 1:05:39This Congress, the bill sponsor, Representative Fluga, has Democratic, his Democratic counterpart on the counterterrorism and intelligence subcommittee, Representative Magazina and our staffs work together to find compromise language that addresses some of the Democratic concerns with the bill that passed the House last year.
▶ 1:06:00First, HR881 as reported now contains a waiver provision that allows the secretary to permit DHS funding to go to US institutions of high education that maintains a relationship with a Confucious Institute thousand talent program or Chinese entity of concern.
▶ 1:06:20If the relationship is either in the national security interest of the US or has no bearing on the national security interests of US or allies. Second, the bill now includes a provision that requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide outreach and upon request technical assistance to US institutions of higher education relating to compliance with the bill.
▶ 1:06:47The technical assistance provision should help ensure that a US college or university has the information it needs to know whether its relationship with Chinese colleges or universities may trigger the funding prohibition in the bill. I appreciate Representative Fluga's willingness to work with us on improving the bill and I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Thompson.
▶ 1:07:13I do have a question or two, but I'm going to defer my uh questioning right now. I do want to give credit where credit's due, and that is to Joe Wilson for having brought this issue up a long, long time ago and raised people's awareness of it. U Mr. Griffith, I recognize you for any Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh it is a concern, Mr. Mr.
▶ 1:07:43Fluger, is this is this not part of what China's doing worldwide to try to gain influence whether it be within our country or other countries as well? Similar things to this. Is this is this a pattern we're seeing from the Chinese to try to manipulate opinions? Uh absolutely. And you look at the belt and road initiative and this is similar to that. You look at the 2017 intelligence gathering law that the Chinese Communist Party passed.
▶ 1:08:10um and and they really their soft approach if you want to call it that non-kinetic approach it is part of a larger worldwide scheme to gain influence um and really to embed themselves in our universities uh for for many purposes uh that I think this bill addresses and and are you saying we just need to make sure we put a stop to this once and for all and forever that that is absolutely right this addresses a much needed vulnerability that we have seen in our universities which is why you've seen it go from 118 to less than
▶ 1:08:41I I really appreciate your efforts and I yield back, Madam Chair. Miss Scandlin, you're recognized. Thank you. Um Mr. Langworthy, you're was investigating
▶ 1:09:11this very topic. one, the first one in the country that was unveiled was in my district at Alfred University. And here was uh a very small private university who happened to receive DoD uh grant funding to u to do important research in the area of ceramics and materials was hosting this Confucious Center right there a mere matter of yards from where this research was committed. This this is a a backdoor opportunity.
▶ 1:09:40these organizations uh should not be welcome on US campuses. Uh and we need to continue to to take efforts. So, Mr. Fluger, thank you for your leadership here and I yield back my Thank you, Mr. Scott. You're recognized. Mr. Norman, you're recognized. Thank you for putting this up. U Congressman Fluger, question.
▶ 1:10:07We had one of the schools in my in South um the University of South Carolina had Confucious Institute. My alma m Presbyterian did as well. What's the is there any safeguards that y'all have in that stop them from really continuing to have students who change them? They come in under one guys change the major. Is any safeguards on that?
▶ 1:10:38When it comes to the the waiverss that this bill now includes, um this is something that the director of homeland security, the secretary of homeland security looks at with how strong each university is. If you're speaking to, you know, individual students, I what I think we have seen is a lot of these students actually are being they don't even know that they're being brought into uh this this program.
▶ 1:11:07They're being used by whoever's running the Confucious Institute and they'll change their name. That's why we have this entity of concern and they'll just use this rotating namechanging game. Uh but they're still there for the malign purposes. So, um I think I can speak less to the individual student and what they're doing on their major and more to the entities that the Chinese Communist Party is using.
▶ 1:11:29Um whether it be for intellectual property theft or whether it be uh to to place pressure upon a university such as some that you may represent to not produce certain reports or certain research or certain things that could make the CCP look bad. And then then that's where they get into the game of uh actually pressuring their own uh their own citizens who are studying abroad.
▶ 1:11:54I hope that answers uh your Well, what they're doing with buying land in South Carolina and all over the country is putting it in different LLC's with Americans. In South Carolina, they bought a part that been made for the military under the guise of an American businessman hiring the people away. It was the CCP.
▶ 1:12:19And so it's a ser it's a and I don't know whether universities are aware of that um of what they're doing particularly. You're right, students don't understand it, but when they go back to China, they do. So anyway, if if there's any safeguard in that, I think it would make a get the job done or it would help verify what they're assumingly trying to to stop. I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Jack. You're recognized. Thank you very much.
▶ 1:12:47And and I also want to echo my colleagues uh comments on your leadership, Mr. Fluger. And and you being before us today and the issue at hand reminds me, I was hoping you could refresh my memory. In 2020, I believe the Chinese consulate in Houston had to close down because of um you know, tons of threats to to not just, as you were saying, some of our intellectual property, some of our energy research. Any any thoughts and comments on that? Yeah, that I'm glad you brought that up.
▶ 1:13:17Um this is the way that they like to do they they take a foothold say at the consulate um or at a university and they have this money that's coming in and this specifically at the universities now where I'm talking about uh the the entities that we're concerned about and they use that money as uh to hold to to hold at risk any number of things to further their own interest
▶ 1:13:47and in the case of the consulate uh we know that they had and stealing um a variety of documents, a variety of sensitive um types of information um and then basically holding holding at risk holding hostage uh those that you know wanted to do the right thing or not be not succumb to that pressure. So um this bill specifically addresses it at universities where we would stop the money flow uh not so much at a consulate but it's a very similar concept. Yeah, it just reminded me of the the issue we faced five years ago.
▶ 1:14:17And the only other comments I'll make because I know how close you are to um and your experienced Nellis Air Force Base, but I understand of the schools that this impacts, some of which are very close to military installations, including uh Nellis. So, any closing thoughts from you on that? Similar to Mr. Norman's question, um that is a concern, the CPHAS process that this does not necessarily address. This bill doesn't go into the CPHAS process, but it is a concern.
▶ 1:14:43Um and these universities that have a proximity, you know, close to a Nellis Air Force base or close to uh quite quite frankly any sort of national security um whether it be a DoD or or otherwise is obviously very concerning and the proximity we have seen all across the United States uh be very concerning. This specifically stops the money from going to universities uh regardless of their proximity. So I want to make that clear that it doesn't draw a line there.
▶ 1:15:12I think we can all sit here and agree and go, "Yeah, if the University of Nevada at Las Vegas has a which I I don't think is true, but if they were to have an entity that we're talking about, the proximity to Nellis Air Force Base would be extremely concerning without question." With that, Madam Chair, I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Jack. Miss Leisure Fernandez, you're recognized. Hello there. Thank you so much for coming. Thank you so much for being here. It's wonderful to see both of you.
▶ 1:15:36Um, so I understand your concern about the Chinese having access that they shouldn't, right? That's your big concern that we want to be careful about that. Uh, because we agree that the Chinese are not our friends, right? How would you describe the Chinese?
▶ 1:15:56I mean the not the Chinese the Chinese Communist Party and the the the state uh that that will require a lot a lot of time uh to answer that fully but I'll summarize it by saying that I believe we are in a in a state of a relationship that has exceeded um friends has exceeded competitors and has moved moved into the
▶ 1:16:26gray space, the gray zone of trying to undermine Chinese Communist Party trying to undermine American interest domestically and all across the world. Right? So the the Chinese Communist Party is trying to undermine the United States. So if that is what they are trying to do, we should do whatever we can to not facilitate that. Correct. That's absolutely right.
▶ 1:16:53so it would seem to me that we would also want to prevent the Chinese from getting control of some of our key resources. Would you agree? Um I I think that the resource that I'm talking about here specifically today is the resource of education in the university system. Yeah. Do you think that a key key resources could also include I think minerals if we Sure.
▶ 1:17:23I think it's a good conversation. I'm sorry that my bill does not cover uh that aspect. It has more to do with the resource of education. But do you think that we should try to make sure that the Chinese don't uh get their hands on rare minerals that might be within the United States? I think that is a very worthwhile uh goal in a in an appropriate committee. Yes.
▶ 1:17:45uh that we would not want them getting a hold of other resources like rare earth, copper, silver, key things that we need to compete in the world. Correct. I I don't disagree.
▶ 1:17:58Again to point back to I would just point out I would just point out that one of the things that I have tried to raise over and over again is in the committee of jurisdiction that when we do mining laws that allow mining companies to take American resources without paying the American public a dime for those resources that we should prevent the Chinese from being able to do do that.
▶ 1:18:29Uh, and unfortunately, there are a couple of Republicans who've been willing to sign on to that effort, but we haven't been able to get Republicans to say, "Listen, we're not going to change the mining laws. We're going to continue to allow people to mine our resources for free, but we should at the very least say no to people like China and Russia and Iran that that their companies, their subsidiaries should not be able to take those resources.
▶ 1:18:59I'm I'm sorry that I did not come prepared to have that conversation with this uh with with the scope of this bill. However, I would love to have that conversation with you. I will have that conversation with you afterwards because I think it's a thing the concept of not giving away to our not a friend, not a competitor, not yet an enemy, but definitely a country of major concern that we should not be giving away uh resources like lithium and other things to such
▶ 1:19:29a country and it should be an easy fix that you would think would be bipartisan. With that, I yield back. Uh, Madam Chair, thank you very much, Miss Leisure Fernandez. Uh, I thank the witnesses for being here today and um, seeing no further questions and you are excused. This closes the hearing portion of our meeting.
▶ 1:19:57The chair will be in receipt of a motion from the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Scott. Madame Chair, I move the committee grant HR276 the Gulf of America act a closed rule. The rule waves all points of order against consideration of the bill. The rule provides that the amendment in the nature of the substitute recommended by the committee on natural resources now printed and the bill shall be considered as adopted and the bill is amended shall be considered as read.
▶ 1:20:24The rule waves all points of order against provisions in the bill as amended. The rule provides one hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on natural resources or their respective design. The rule provides one motion to recommit. The rule further provides for consideration of HR881 the DHS restrictions on Confucious Institutes and Chinese entities of concerns act under a closed rule. The rule waves all points of order against consideration of the bill.
▶ 1:20:51The rule provides that in lie of the amendment in the nature of substitute recommended by the committee on homeland security now printed in the bill an amendment in the nature of substitute consisting of the text of rules committee print 119-2 shall be considered as adopted and the bill is amended shall be considered as read the rule waves all points of order against provisions and the bill is amended the rule provides one hour of general debate equally divide and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on home security
▶ 1:21:21or their respective designates. Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit. Thank you, Mr. Scott. Um, you've now heard the motion. Any discussion or amendment to the rule? Miss Leger Fernandez. Madam Chair, I have an amendment to the rule. I move to add the following two new sections to the rule which would allow the House of Representatives to vote to end President Trump's reckless tariffs.
▶ 1:21:50First, a new section stating that House Resolution 211 is amended by striking section 4. This amendment shall take effect as of including in the ad adoption of House Resolution 211. Second, a new section stating that House Resolution 313 is amended by striking section two. This amendment shall take effect as of including in the adoption of the House Resolution 313. As we have been going about uh uh holding our town halls and having discussions with people across our district, Americans are very upset with the tariffs. And why not?
▶ 1:22:20Those tariffs have caused price increases. They are causing to supply chain point of order. Yes, sir. How is this gerine to the bill that what that we're voting on? I've just gotten the the amendment in front of me. Sheriffs have nothing to do with what we're considering today. It's not germaine. What I mean it's out of order. Well, give us just a second.
▶ 1:22:50I I would madam, I would note that uh if they don't want to vote on it, they can vote down the amendment, but the chair correctly ruled on this question last week. So, I'll simply add that this week's rule should cover this matter as well as something as disperate as the Gulf of Mexico and Chinese fine.
▶ 1:24:08The gentleman makes a point of order that the amendment is not germaine. The amendment is not germanine. So the point of order is sustained. U madame chair I appeal uh I appeal the ruling of the chair and request a vote. The the gentle woman appeals the ruling of the chair and we'll we Madam Chair, I make a motion to table the appeal. The gentleoman uh makes a motion to table the appeal.
▶ 1:24:38We will vote on the motion from the um gentleoman on tableabling the uh appeal of the ruling of the chair. The clerk will call the role. Mrs. Fishbach. Yes. Yes. Mrs. Fishbach, yes. Mr. Norman, Mr. Norman, yes. Mr. Roy, yes. Mr. Roy, yes. Mrs. Sin, yes. Mrs. Hin, yes. Mr. Langworthy, yes. Mr. Langworthy, yes. Mr. Scott, yes. Mr. Scott, yes. Mr. Griffith, yes. Mr. Griffith, yes. Mr. Jack, yes. Mr. Jack, yes.
▶ 1:25:09Mr. McGovern. Miss Scan, no. Miss Scan, no. Mr. Negus. Miss Ledger Fernandez. Yes. No. No. Sir, Miss Ledger Fernandez, no. Madam Chair, yes. Madame Chair, yes. The clerk will report the tally. Nine yays, two nays.
▶ 1:25:30Uh the um motion to table the appeal of the chair, the ruling of the chair uh relative to the gerainess of the amendment is the the upheld. Are there is there any further discussion on the um amend on the um rule? Madam chair. Yes. Madam chair.
▶ 1:26:00I have an amendment to the rule. Since the committee is unwilling to even vote on whether they should vote on having tariffs. I have I move the committee to additionally provide as an amendment to the rule for consideration of a resolution to be introduced by myself debatable for one hour equally divided between the chair and the ranking member of the committee on rules. The text of the resolution is as followed resolved that house resolution 211 is amended by striking section 4.
▶ 1:26:27This amendment shall take effect as of included in the adoption of house resolution 211. Section two house resolution 313 is amended by striking section two. This amendment shall take effect as including the adoption of House Resolution 313. You are clearly determined to avoid to avoid a vote on the tariffs even though it is our constitutional duty to require that and these tariffs are tanking our economy and the public wants us to take action. Prices are about to skyrocket.
▶ 1:26:57Uh, I believe that my previous amendment was gerine, but under your logic, it fell outside the scope of the rule because it did not provide for consideration of a measure like the other sections of the rule did. I've solved that problem and look forward to having a vote on this motion. And once again, if you don't agree with the motion, you can vote against it. Madam Chair, do you have the language for How HR?
▶ 1:27:27No, we'd like to have the language of the amendment. Yeah, it's publicly available. And that is the section that said a new section saying that House resolution 211 is amended. HR211 is equal access to contraception for veterans. The rule. Oh, the rule. The rule uh for HR211. And that might be the one where you actually stop the clock.
▶ 1:27:52And so that Congress has said time does not move with regards to voting on the resolution on the tariffs. I'm just suggesting that we are not in a time machine, but that we should indeed allow the clock to actually continue uh to uh in its uh march through time and that we should be allowed to vote on the resolution with regards to the tariffs.
▶ 1:28:21Um, you've heard the amendment by the gentle lady from New Mexico. All those in favor say I. I. I. All those opposed? No. No. No. In the opinion of the chair, the nose have it. The amendment is not agreed to. Recorded vote. Madam chair. Uh, the gentleoman has asked for recorded vote. The clerk will call the role. Mrs. Fishbach? No. Mr. Fishbach? No. Mr. Norman? Mr. Norman? No. Mr. Roy? No. Mr. Roy, no. Mrs. Houchen. No.
▶ 1:28:52Mrs. Houchin. No. Mr. Langworthy. No. Mr. Langworthy. No. Mr. Scott. No. Mr. Scott. No. Mr. Griffith. No. Mr. Griffith. No. Mr. Jack. No. Mr. Jack. No. Mr. McGovern. Miss Scan. Hi. Miss. Scan. I. Mr. Nagus. Miss Ledger Fernandez. I. Miss. Ledger. Fernandez. I. Madam Chair. No. Madam Chair. No. The clerk will report the tally. Two. Yay.
▶ 1:29:209A's the U amendment is not agre the nos have it the amendment is not agreed to are there further is there further discussion or amendment to the rule hearing none hearing no further discussion the question is on the motion from the gentleman from Georgia all those in favor signify by saying I I those opposed say no no in the opinion of chair the eyes have it the motion's agreed to Miss Scandlin
▶ 1:29:51requests a recorded vote. The clerk will call the role. Mrs. Fishbach, yes. Mr. Fishbach, yes. Mr. Norman, yes. Mr. Norman, yes. Mr. Roy, hi. Mr. Roy, yes. Mrs. Hchin, hi. Mrs. Hutchin, yes. Mr. Langworthy, hi. Mr. Langworthy, yes. Mr. Scott, Mr. Scott, yes. Mr. Griffith, yes. Mr. Griffith, yes. Mr. Jack, yes. Mr. Jack, yes. Mr. McGovern. Miss Scan, no. Scan, no. Mr. Goose. Miss Ledger Fernandez.
▶ 1:30:21No. Ledger Fernandez. No. Madam Chair. I. Madam Chair. Yes. The clerk will report the tally. Nine yays. Two nays. The eyes have it. The motion to report is agreed to. Accordingly, the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Scott will be managing this rule for majority and Miss Scandlin will re will manage the rule for the minority.
▶ 1:30:49Madam Chair, I missed the very beginning of the meeting and I just wanted to express my continued prayers and thoughts for Mr. McGovern uh noting his absence and why he's absent and um the loss of Molly and continue keeping in our prayers. Uh thank you, Mr. Roy. And I think Mr. Roy speaks for all of us on our side of the aisle. Uh and we will continue to pray uh for the McGovern family. Without objection, the committee is adjourned.