Providing for Consideration of H.R. Equity and Inclusion Enforcement Act of Providing for Consideration of H.R. Strength in Diversity Act of Providing for Consideration of H.R. Pregnant Workers Fairness Act; Providing for Consideration of H. Res. Condemning All Forms of Anti-Asian Sentiment As Related to Covid-19; and for Other Purposes

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1107 and ask for its immediate consideration.

The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: H. Res. 1107

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2574) to amend title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to restore the right to individual civil actions in cases involving disparate impact, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Education and Labor, modified by the amendment printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Labor; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Sec. 2. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2639) to establish the Strength in Diversity Program, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Education and Labor now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 116-62 shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Labor; (2) the further amendments described in section 3 of this resolution; (3) the amendments en bloc described in section 4 of this resolution; and (4) one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Sec. 3. After debate pursuant to the second section of this resolution, each further amendment printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules not earlier considered as part of amendments en bloc pursuant to section 4 of this resolution shall be considered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, may be withdrawn by the proponent at any time before the question is put thereon, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question.

Sec. 4. It shall be in order at any time after debate pursuant to the second section of this resolution for the chair of the Committee on Education and Labor or his designee to offer amendments en bloc consisting of further amendments printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution not earlier disposed of. Amendments en bloc offered pursuant to this section shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Labor or their respective designees, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question.

Sec. 5. All points of order against the further amendments printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules or amendments en bloc described in section 4 of this resolution are waived.

Sec. 6. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2694) to eliminate discrimination and promote women's health and economic security by ensuring reasonable workplace accommodations for workers whose ability to perform the functions of a job are limited by pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Education and Labor now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Labor; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Sec. 7. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order without intervention of any point of order to consider in the House the resolution (H. Res. 908) condemning all forms of anti-Asian sentiment as related to COVID-19. The resolution shall be considered as read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the resolution and preamble to adoption without intervening motion or demand for division of the question except one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Sec. 8. House Resolution 967, agreed to May 15, 2020 (as most recently amended by House Resolution 1053, agreed to July 20, 2020), is amended--

(1) in section 4, by striking ``September 21, 2020'' and inserting ``November 20, 2020'';

(2) in section 11, by striking ``calendar day of September 20, 2020'' and inserting ``legislative day of November 20, 2020''; and

(3) in section 12, by striking ``September 21, 2020'' and inserting ``November 20, 2020''.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Woodall), my distinguished colleague from the Rules Committee, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 1107, providing for consideration of H.R. 2574, the Equity and Inclusion Enforcement Act, and H.R. 2694, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, under closed rules.

The rule provides for 1 hour of debate for each of the two bills, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Education and Labor. The rule also self-executes a manager's amendment to H.R. 2574.

Additionally, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2639, the Strength in Diversity Act, under a structured rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Education and Labor and makes in order 12 amendments. The rule provides that the chair of the Committee on Education and Labor may offer amendments en bloc, debatable for 20 minutes.

The rule also provides for consideration of H. Res. 908, Condemning All Forms of Anti-Asian Sentiment As Related to COVID-19, under a closed rule.

Finally, the rule extends recess instructions, suspension and same- day authority through November 20, 2020.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to begin debate on four bills today that will protect workers, encourage diversity and inclusion in the workforce, and demonstrate Congress' support for our Asian-American communities in the face of anti-Asian rhetoric by the administration and right with respect to COVID-19.

COVID-19 has infected over 27 million people worldwide and claimed the lives of over 900,000, including almost 200,000 of our fellow Americans. This pandemic brought the world to a standstill economically and socially. Virtually everything in our daily lives has been affected in some form.

There was no coherent national strategy to deal with this deadly pandemic when it started, and now, 6-plus months in, Americans are still being left behind by an executive branch more focused on downplaying the virus' severity than getting it under control and our economy and way of life back on track.

In Congress, we find ourselves having to deal with a Senate majority that has even less interest in controlling the virus and helping American families than the President. The House has passed numerous pieces of legislation that would directly help American workers, small businesses, families, and children; but, in the midst of a pandemic, Leader McConnell is more interested in packing the judiciary than he is in passing legislation to help the American people. The HEROES Act has sat on Leader McConnell's desk collecting dust for exactly 4 months to the day.

In the absence of leadership by the White House and Senate, our cities and States are desperate for resources to combat the pandemic. The American people are calling out for relief, but Republicans are willfully ignoring them. Instead, they are trying to divert attention from their abject failure to take prompt or effective action earlier this year when tens of thousands of lives could have been saved. Instead, this administration is using the playbook of fear-mongering autocrats through the ages by demonizing a marginalized group.

In recent months, we have seen a marked rise in anti-Asian sentiment and rhetoric. Racist and xenophobic names for COVID-19 have been spouted by elected officials, and these terms have had damaging, far- reaching impact on Asians and Asian Americans.

As we have seen over the past 4 years, the endorsement of racist language by national leaders has led to well-documented increases in racist speech and hate crimes across the country. This harmful rhetoric has resulted in physical attacks, verbal assaults, workplace discrimination, and online harassment against our fellow citizens. These are our friends and neighbors, essential workers, nurses, law enforcement officers, and teachers.

The vitriol against our fellow Americans must be forcefully and overwhelmingly condemned, Mr. Speaker.

In the midst of this pandemic, reaffirming American values is more necessary than ever, whether it is condemning hate speech or making sure that our government is working for all Americans and not just Wall Street tycoons or real estate developers. Therefore, I would recommend to my colleagues that they encourage Senator McConnell to quickly take up the HEROES Act or come to the table with good-faith negotiations to address COVID-19 in a thoughtful and people-focused way.

I thank my colleague, Congresswoman Grace Meng from New York, for introducing this necessary resolution and the House Judiciary Committee for quickly getting this before the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, it has been more than 65 years since the Supreme Court made racial segregation in public education illegal, but over the past several decades, racial and socioeconomic segregation in our schools has dramatically increased. This didn't happen by accident.

In many counties across the U.S., children are assigned to schools based on where their home is located. If your parents can afford to live in a more affluent area and pay higher property taxes, the school you attend will reflect this.

The opposite, of course, is true for students in poorer areas, and centuries of systemic racism have relegated far too many students of color to poorer neighborhoods and school districts.

School districts that predominantly serve students of color receive $23 billion less in funding than predominantly White school districts. The result of this undeniable gap in educational funding is that students of color have fewer resources, older equipment, and aging--if not crumbling--facilities that make learning more challenging compared to their peers in higher-income areas.

In a 2001 Supreme Court decision, Alexander v. Sandoval, a conservative majority stripped away four decades of statutory protection against discrimination by disallowing victims of these unjust policies from bringing disparate impact claims under title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Fortunately, the bill we are considering this week will restore the rights of students, parents, and communities to address this systemic harm by allowing those impacted to seek enforcement in our courts.

The Equity and Inclusion Enforcement Act is critical to reforming how education is accessed in the United States. It is long past time for Congress to step in and ensure that the law can address discriminatory policies and practices, and that is exactly what this bill will do.

Similar to the Equity and Inclusion Enforcement Act, the Strength in Diversity Act addresses the importance of increasing diversity in education and eliminating socioeconomic and racial segregation. Once again, educational opportunities for our children largely depend on their home ZIP code.

Unsurprisingly, segregation has a detrimental impact on learning and educational outcomes. Research shows that students educated in integrated schools have higher test scores, are more likely to enroll in college and are less likely to drop out. Moreover, integrated classrooms have been found to encourage critical thinking, problem solving, and creativity.

Consistent with the primacy of local control of education, many school districts around the country have implemented innovative strategies to address school segregation. Strategies to support more diverse and inclusive learning include the development of state-of-the- art magnet schools, open enrollment policies, and changes in feeder patterns to promote diversity. Research suggests that diverse settings reduce stereotypes and promote cross-racial understanding which is especially important as our country moves towards a more ethnically and culturally diverse society.

The Strength in Diversity Act supports communities in developing, implementing, and expanding diversity initiatives to promote higher levels of social cohesion and reduce racial prejudice. There is no one solution to make education more equitable for our students, but different data clearly shows that increased diversity in classrooms is one of the best ways for all students to receive a quality education. This bill will promote those solutions.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, we have the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.

COVID-19 has exposed and exacerbated the hurdles women continue to face in the workplace, so let's start out by stating one obvious fact: women shouldn't be forced to choose between financial security and a healthy pregnancy.

It has been illegal to discriminate against pregnant women for decades, but we know that this damaging practice remains widespread.

Women make up nearly half of the labor force in this country, yet pregnancy discrimination persists, including losing a job, being denied reasonable accommodation, or not being hired in the first place. In fact, the number of pregnancy discrimination claims filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has been steadily rising for two decades and is hovering near an all-time high. These practices aren't new, and they must end.

This is an issue that spans the political spectrum and affects women in every corner of this country. Estimates indicate that over 20 percent of pregnant workers are employed in jobs that are both low wage and physically demanding. Women of color are heavily overrepresented in these estimates, with nearly one in three employed Black and Latina women working in low-wage jobs.

Though the Pregnancy Discrimination Act has been law since the seventies and despite a 2015 Supreme Court decision allowing for reasonable accommodation claims, an unreasonably high standard of proof is still allowing discrimination against many pregnant workers.

The bipartisan Pregnant Workers Fairness Act helps change this practice by strengthening Federal workplace protections and promoting the health and well-being of pregnant women and their families. This important legislation requires public-sector employers and private- sector employers with more than 15 employees to make reasonable accommodations for pregnant employees and individuals with known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.

It is 2020. We should not have to have this debate or lay out an entire argument as to why we should protect pregnant workers. But here we are. It is past time that pregnant workers have fair and equal opportunity in employment. It is past time that the protections of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act become law.

When more women work, the better the economy performs. Women are not asking for special treatment or handouts, just the workplace protections they deserve so that they can do the jobs they need to do.

Mr. Speaker, I thank all of my colleagues who helped craft these superb pieces of legislation. I look forward to supporting this rule, I urge my colleagues to do the same, and I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I thank my learned colleague for his input. It certainly would be refreshing to see anything pass the Senate these days.

Mr. Speaker, we have been talking about shared American values. Certainly, one of our strongest shared American values is that we condemn violence, particularly violence against our law enforcement officers. That is not open to question. What happened in California this past week is horrific, and we all condemn that.

But that is not what we are talking about here. What we are talking about is an attempt to hijack the rule that we are here to debate.

I mean, I have just listened to a very eloquent argument by the gentleman from Georgia about the need for bills to go through regular order and to follow the process. If these are the noncontroversial items, as warranted by my colleagues, then they can go through the suspension process.

We just voted on two suspension bills last night. We can do more. We can be here longer than anticipated if the news I am reading is correct. So, let them go through the suspension process. Let them be marked up.

Let's get back to the business of why we are here today and the four bills that are under consideration as part of this rule.

Matsui), another distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, we are prepared to close if the gentleman from Georgia has no further speakers.

We are in the midst of some of our country's most challenging times. Millions of Americans are facing eviction. They are food insecure. They don't know where their next paycheck is going to come from. 200,000 Americans have died, and that number is likely to double by the end of this year. We have a President wholly indifferent to the pandemic, other than its impact on his political future, and Senate leaders aiding him every step of the way.

Months ago, the House passed the HEROES Act, which would be a lifeline to the people we serve. However, that bill remains untouched on Senator McConnell's desk, with hundreds of others.

Included in that bill are lifelines for small business and working Americans, critical aid to State and local governments just trying to keep the lights on and to defend our citizens against the pandemic when national leadership is so lacking, and much-needed money that would go a long way to developing a vaccine for COVID-19.

The HEROES Act is money for our healthcare providers, our schools, our caretakers, and essential workers. It is a dereliction of duty for the Senate to refuse to engage in good faith on this critical legislation, and the American people will remember.

But while this bill remains in Senator McConnell's legislative graveyard, we will continue to push for the protections that Americans need, deserve, and are calling out for. Each of the four pieces of legislation in our rule today will help our country and Americans all over.

From the beginning of the 116th Congress, this House has shown that it is up to the task of legislating for the people while exercising oversight and other critical constitutional duties.

While we have passed critical COVID-19-related legislation, we will not stop passing the legislation necessary to make this country a more equitable place for all Americans. We won't stop working for the American people, despite attacks by those who would prefer to posture.

There is no place for violence against law enforcement. There is no place for violence against our fellow citizens, whether that violence comes from the left or the right. There is no place for discrimination. Most of all, there is no place for stoking division between Americans, and we will beat that back at every opportunity.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and the previous question.

The material previously referred to by Mr. Woodall is as follows: Amendment to House Resolution 1107

At the end of the resolution, add the following:

Sec. 9. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the House shall resolve into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1325) to amend title 18, United States Code, to punish criminal offenses targeting law enforcement officers, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. All points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. When the committee rises and reports the bill back to the House with a recommendation that the bill do pass, the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. If the Committee of the Whole rises and reports that it has come to no resolution on the bill, then on the next legislative day the House shall, immediately after the third daily order of business under clause 1 of rule XIV, resolve into the Committee of the Whole for further consideration of the bill.

Sec. 10. Immediately after disposition of H.R. 1325, the House shall resolve into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 8251) to amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit preventing access to lifesaving medical procedures and treatments, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. All points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. When the committee rises and reports the bill back to the House with a recommendation that the bill do pass, the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. If the Committee of the Whole rises and reports that it has come to no resolution on the bill, then on the next legislative day the House shall, immediately after the third daily order of business under clause 1 of rule XIV, resolve into the Committee of the Whole for further consideration of the bill.

Sec. 11. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the consideration of H.R. 1325 and H.R. 8251.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source