Providing for Consideration of H.R. Global Respect Act; Providing for Consideration of H.R. Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of Providing for Consideration of H.R. Bioeconomy Research and Development Act of and for Other Purposes

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I thank the representative from North Carolina (Ms. Ross) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, today we are being asked to discuss House Resolution 4445, a bill that will do nothing to bring justice to victims of sexual harassment, and it could be argued that it would make the process worse. We are also discussing H.R. 3485, a duplicative messaging bill on human rights. The most bizarre bill we are looking at today is the American concedes act.

This is yet another bill that was thrown together behind closed doors and with no bipartisan input, and now we are expected to hastily dig through this lengthy document on short notice. Luckily, it does not take long to see all that is wrong with this bill.

We are supposed to believe the intention of the bill is to counter China's economic aggression, but it does not even contain the word ``China'' in the title. This bill is actually just a long list of Progressive dream policies that have nothing to do with China at all. To illustrate, the words ``coral reef'' appears more times in this legislation than China does.

What is worse is that that bill contains certain policies that would help China because it will hurt American companies. The bill's $52 billion in subsidies for the semiconductor industry would allow for a chip company working with the Chinese Communist Party to be eligible for those funds. The bill that supposedly combats China's economic aggression could actually send taxpayer funds to subsidize CCP's semiconductor industry.

We could pass meaningful export and control policies. We could impose sanctions on the United Front Work Department, or even start with funding existing sanction enforcement at the Office of the Foreign Asset Control in the Treasury.

We could completely ban Federal funding for colleges and universities that host Confucius Institutes. Instead, we are here to consider a bill that may actually be more detrimental for America than it is for China. I have to highlight some of the contradictions in this bill that so perfectly sum up the hypocrisy of the House Democrats and the administration.

This bill includes the Reclaiming the Solar Supply Chain Act of 2021. My colleagues claim this will decrease energy reliance on China and will be better for the environment by subsidizing solar panel manufacturing. However, the left is also attacking domestic production of the minerals required to make these panels.

We saw this just last week when the Biden administration canceled leases for a Minnesota company mining for critical minerals vital to domestic production of solar panels. The result is the U.S. is being forced to outsource these materials to China. China, who is the largest emitter of greenhouse gases in the world and uses inhumane labor practices. How can we reclaim the solar supply chain while outsourcing these very jobs to China?

This bill also requires U.S. implementation of the Paris Climate Agreement, but does not require the same of China. Another provision that makes it harder for American businesses to compete with unregulated Chinese competitors.

This bill reflects the patterns of this administration. They claim we need to address climate change now, but then delay compliance with the renewable fuel standard that provides lower-emission fuel for our vehicle fleet. They cancel our domestic pipeline construction while allowing our adversaries to keep theirs. They don't mind activities that hurt the environment as long as the U.S. is keeping it in someone else's backyard, all while forcing American businesses to follow their restrictions.

The majority of Americans agree, China is our biggest threat. We need good legislation to counter that threat. This bill proves the Democrats do not take this threat seriously.

It has taken any decent policy options on the subject and buried them in a poison bills trying to push policy to cater to their Progressive base. We need to put forward a real bill that has gone through the appropriate committee process to include Republican input. Only then will we have legislation that deals with these issues seriously.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Reschenthaler), who is an esteemed member of the Rules Committee.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Kim), who is my fellow freshman.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule allowing for the immediate consideration of H.R. 6184, the HALT Fentanyl Act.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Over 100,000 people died from fentanyl overdoses in a 1-year span, according to the CDC. That is a 30 percent increase from the year before. I think we can all agree that something must be done to put a stop to this heartbreaking epidemic.

Fentanyl has been temporarily classified as a schedule I substance. This classification strengthens law enforcement's ability to prosecute fentanyl traffickers, and the DEA reports that it has acted as an effective deterrent. The temporary classification is set to expire on February 18, 2022.

The HALT Fentanyl Act would make the schedule classification permanent and would also promote research by removing regulation to streamline the research process. We should do everything we possibly can to put an end to the devastation caused by fentanyl in this country. And the HALT Fentanyl Act is one piece of the puzzle that could make a real difference.

To further explain this amendment, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Griffith), the author of the bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Cammack).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close unless the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Ross) has other speakers.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, this bill is another attempt to force the far-left agenda. Only this time, the Democrats are using the very real threats we are facing from China in order to do it. Rather than focus attention on real action that can be taken against China, this bill has been pumped full of policies around climate change and other progressive dreams.

My colleagues on the other side of the aisle need to open their eyes to the reality of the threat that China poses and not use important pieces of legislation to push their agenda.

Madam Speaker, I oppose the rule and the underlying bills, and I ask Members to do the same. I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

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

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source