Providing for Consideration of H.R. Forced Arbitration Injustice Repeal Act of and Providing for Consideration of H.R. Creating A Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair Act of 2021

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I thank the Representative from California for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Today, we are here to discuss H.R. 2116, which would clarify that it is a Federal crime to discriminate based on an individual's hair. But we are also here to discuss H.R. 963, the FAIR Act, which bans arbitration clauses in private contracts.

H.R. 963 makes it clear: The intention is to remove arbitration as a legal tool for the American people while preserving arbitration with an exemption for labor unions. The belief is that the American people need Washington watching over their private contracts. I assure you, those in Minnesota's Seventh District do not need them.

The bill purports to ban forced arbitration. This is misleading rhetoric. Forced or involuntary agreements are already illegal. So, what would this bill really do?

It would insert the Federal Government into the private contracts of citizens and remove their ability to settle disputes outside of the courtroom through predispute arbitration agreements.

This bill pretends to empower plaintiffs, but by voiding arbitration clauses in the context outlined in the bill, it would effectively end most arbitration entirely, even when that arbitration would benefit those most impacted.

Because the bill fundamentally changes an arbitration clause from a mutual commitment to use an alternative dispute resolution method into a one-sided election for an injured party, contracts will be far less likely to include the option to arbitrate.

If parties cannot agree in advance to arbitrate, the plaintiff may never have access to arbitration. These unintended consequences will have real-life implications, especially for those who lack deep pockets and do not have the possibility of a high-dollar settlement that some of the more affluent individuals do.

Democrats are also ignoring how arbitration is generally a good way to resolve disputes. They seem to assume that all arbitration is secret, that arbitration automatically keeps individuals from going to the authorities or publicizing their experiences. But agreeing to resolve a case outside of court is different than agreeing to silence.

That distinction matters here because much of the push for this bill comes from concern about secrecy rather than whether justice can be served in the arbitration context. And despite that emphasis, the bill does not actually address confidentiality or nondisclosure agreements.

Additionally, arbitration is often less expensive and more efficient than litigation. It tends to be less adversarial, which allows parties to continue doing business together after the dispute is resolved. That is why so many Americans choose to enter into contracts with arbitration clauses in them.

Voting for this rule is a vote for a bill empowering Washington to micromanage the business life of Americans. Voting for this rule is to take away freedoms from Americans. Congress should stand ready to improve the legal system, and we must make sure that whatever we do will actually be an improvement for the American people.

I urge my colleagues to oppose the rule and the underlying bills.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. If we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to provide for consideration of Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers' and Congressman Westerman's American Energy Independence from Russia Act.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, while the majority is continuing their agenda of misguided woke policies, constituents in my district continue to send me photos of their energy bills and prices they are paying at the pump.

Since President Biden took office, gasoline prices are up more than 50 percent, natural gas is up more than 25 percent, and diesel fuel is up more than 47 percent. These price increases are on top of crippling, unprecedented inflation. They are attacks on Americans of every stripe, class, and creed.

When adjusted for these factors, wages and salaries are actually below prepandemic levels. My constituents are pleading with the majority to focus on this issue rather than the idealism filled with Green New Deal pipe dreams.

To further explain the amendment, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Duncan).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, under the Trump administration, the U.S. became a net exporter of petroleum for the first time since 1958.

Under President Biden's leadership, starting with the revocation of the Keystone XL pipeline, the U.S. is back to being a net importer of petroleum and is expected to continue through this year. This is unacceptable, and our constituents are paying dearly for it.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from South Dakota (Mr. Johnson).

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Madam Speaker, I oppose the previous question so that we can, instead, consider the American Energy Independence from Russia Act.

In recent weeks, we have all seen Europe struggle to navigate its dependence on Russian energy. It is terrible to be beholden to, to be dependent on an adversary. And so, like so many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, I pushed to ban Russian energy imports into this country, and I am grateful that we have done that.

But rather than look to other countries to fill that gap, we should be looking here at home. The resources that we need for energy security are already located right here. Now, yes, of course, renewables will play an important role, but so will North American oil and gas.

The President made a terrible decision on day one to cancel the Keystone XL project. But this bill will move us back in the right direction by, once again, allowing the permitting and the leasing of oil, gas, and mineral development on Federal lands and waters.

Developing a plan for that energy security, which this bill would also do, to better utilize North American oil and gas, it would reduce prices; it would increase energy security; and it would increase national security as a result.

Now, of course my colleague on the other side of the aisle is right. Passing this bill would not reduce energy prices overnight. But the reality is, the second best time to plant a tree is today. The second best time to make this kind of an investment in energy security would be right now.

We did miss too much time. We lost too much time during the first year of the Biden administration, but we can get it right now. And doing that doesn't just bear security benefits, it is also cleaner.

Giving the world an opportunity to displace dirty Russian oil with 23 percent cleaner North American oil would save the equivalent of 100 million cars' worth of emissions. We can do that. Our stuff is cleaner.

And so, Madam Speaker, we know that we can build a cleaner, a better, a safer energy future, and we can do it by focusing right here at home, and that is what H.R. 6858 would do.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, every action the Biden administration has taken since Keystone's cancelation has increased our foreign dependency on oil. June 2021, 5 months after canceling Keystone, the Biden administration suspends leasing of ANWR. Three months later, the White House calls on OPEC to boost oil production. Two months after that, the Biden administration stopped efforts to modernize the NEPA permitting process for domestic extraction.

Every action this majority has taken is directly responsible for the prices consumers are seeing today. Fortunately, the solution to this problem is very simple.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Johnson).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, the prices American consumers are paying at the pump is directly affected by how much oil is produced domestically. Canceling American oil production jobs, while seeking it from dictators, is not only nonsensical, but it also is against our national interest.

I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gooden).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

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

Madam Speaker, how long will the House continue to attack the basic freedoms of the American people? It is not for Congress in Washington or some bureaucrat to tell the American people what they can and cannot do when revolving disputes. That is, frankly, none of their business.

If they want to agree to an arbitration clause before a dispute arises, that is for the American people to decide and not Washington, who think they know better than the American people.

It is not our job to micromanage the lives of our constituents. It is our job to safeguard their freedom.

We need to consider the unintended consequences of this legislation. There are many policies in this well-intentioned bill, but if it becomes law, contracts will be far less likely to include the option to arbitrate. This may not be an issue for people with deeper pockets and the ability to hire attorneys, but it will be a concern for those who do not have the option of a high-dollar settlement.

We must also keep in mind that sometimes arbitration is the best way to solve disputes. This is just one of the many aspects of this bill that needs to be reconsidered before we can move forward.

I oppose this bill, and encourage my colleagues to do the same. Everyone has the best intentions.

Madam Speaker, 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

Source