Dhs Restrictions on Confucius Institutes and Chinese Entities of Concern Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1516. While I support the spirit of Mr. Pfluger's bill, which seeks to help address the threat posed by the People's Republic of China and the Chinese Communist Party, I cannot support this bill as it is presently written.

H.R. 1516 is fatally flawed. This bill denies critical homeland security funding to U.S. universities, puts American students at risk, and harms our national security.

H.R. 1516 would prohibit any DHS funding from going to any U.S. university that has any relationship with virtually any Chinese university. That means no FEMA funding, no disaster preparedness funding, and no terrorism prevention funding. In fact, this bill is totally divorced from the very real concerns we all have when it comes to Chinese espionage and national security.

In all likelihood, universities across this country will have to shut down student exchange programs, deny students study-abroad opportunities, and stop hosting guest lectures, panel events, or sporting events with Chinese universities if this poorly written, overbroad bill becomes law.

For example, under this bill, Colgate University, located in the district of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Williams), would be prohibited from receiving FEMA grants simply because Colgate has a program that gives students an opportunity to get firsthand experience abroad while being hosted by a university in Shanghai.

The same goes for Cal State Fullerton, located in the district of the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Steel). Cal State Fullerton pioneered international partnerships with Chinese universities back in 1984 so that students could collaborate on educational and cultural exchanges.

Because of these bilateral agreements with partner institutions in China, this bill would prohibit DHS from helping students or CSU Fullerton if an earthquake strikes Orange County.

What about Niagara University, where Mr. Langworthy went to college? Niagara signed an exchange agreement for MBA students from a university in China, which is the world's second largest economy. Would Niagara University be prohibited from receiving FEMA grants if a major blizzard or flood sweeps through Niagara County? Under H.R. 1516, the answer is yes.

SUNY Binghamton, located in the district of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Molinaro), has an exchange program with a Chinese university so that SUNY Binghamton students can learn the Chinese language, a critical foreign language for the military and for business leaders.

Because of that exchange program, SUNY Binghamton would be denied funding and contracts for something as basic as DHS renting a room to host a hiring event or as serious as DHS providing help responding to a flood.

The same goes for Valdosta State University, located in the district of the gentleman of Georgia (Mr. Austin Scott). Since Valdosta State has a Chinese exchange program in urban planning and land resource management, it would lose any shot at DHS funding for research, hurricane preparedness, or terrorism prevention.

Supporting this bill also means that the University of Iowa, located in the district of the gentlewoman from Iowa (Mrs. Miller-Meeks), would be cut off from DHS funding to help it prepare for a tornado or acts of violence just because Iowa has an informal requirement that its Chinese majors study abroad in China and because Iowa has programs housed at universities in China.

It also means that Hofstra University, located in the district of the gentleman from New York (Mr. D'Esposito), would not be able to apply for FEMA grants because Hofstra has a dual-degree program with Dongbei University of Finance and Economics in China.

I could go on listing how this bill, as it is written, could hurt universities and students in each of our districts. The bottom line is that this bill is not just absurd; it is cruel.

H.R. 1516 is so poorly written that neither its author, Mr. Pfluger, nor Committee on Homeland Security's chairman, Mark Green, were able to answer even the most basic questions about the bill during our committee markup.

Democratic Members pointed out at markup that the definition of ``relationship,'' which triggers the funding prohibition in this bill, would incorporate all sorts of agreements, including student exchange programs and other cultural programs that help American students.

Mr. Pfluger, the bill's author, told members of our committee that the type of relationship is very important. You have rightly pointed that out. It is a monetary relationship.

Well, that is not what the bill says. It says that any institution of higher education that ``has a relationship with a Confucius Institute or Chinese entity of concern is ineligible to receive any funds from the Department of Homeland Security.''

If the bill's sponsor meant monetary relationship, the word ``monetary'' would be in the definition.

Then there is this overbroad term, ``Chinese entity of concern.'' During the markup, the bill's sponsor said something about DHS works with the university to deem an entity of concern.

Well, DHS does not deem entities of concern, so I don't know where that idea came from. Chairman Green tried to clean up the definition by saying, as I understand it, by the definition, it would only be those with ties to the military. Once again, that is not what the bill says.

Madam Chair, I cannot support a bill drafted so poorly that even its author and committee chairman do not know what it bans and do not know what it allows. I especially cannot support a bill that does all the damage I just described.

It is not just that this bill was poorly drafted. This bill has been mismanaged from the start. The bill's sponsor rejected bipartisan language agreed to by the Homeland Security Committee last Congress and reverted to the same bad language the committee had to fix in 2022.

Then the committee chairman reported the wrong text out of the committee, and not a single Republican noticed for 9 months. That is why the bill on the Union Calendar is not the same one in the Rules Committee print now under consideration.

Madam Chair, if we were voting on the language the Republicans actually reported out of committee, the language all of our committee staff probably read when the committee went to congress.gov, we would be having a different conversation.

I oppose H.R. 1516 because it is a poorly written and mismanaged bill that demonstrates a lack of seriousness among Republicans when it comes to the bipartisan desire to address the threat posed by the People's Republic of China and the Chinese Communist Party.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Chair, this bill does not provide the Secretary of Homeland Security authority to issue a waiver from funding restrictions if it is in the interest of America's national security.

Without this waiver, we just cannot get behind this bill. We need to allow the experts, those at DHS, to determine what is in the best interest of our national security. This waiver was part of this bill when it was reported out of committee last Congress and supported by Democrats. Its absence in this bill today is a fatal flaw.

Madam Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Magaziner) to discuss better versions of this bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Chair, this bill does not ban China from influencing our institutions of higher education. It just makes universities choose between relationships with Chinese universities and the Department of Homeland Security funding.

This bill will not stop China's practice of exploiting the open and collaborative nature of American academia to conduct industrial and military espionage. I know that this is something that the sponsor of this bill, Mr. Pfluger, cares about because those are his words. Unfortunately, this bill does not get us there.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, we should not be on the floor today on this fatally flawed bill. Congressional Democrats recognize threats posed by China and the Chinese Communist Party. In fact, we worked with Republicans last Congress to craft a bipartisan bill on this very issue.

Instead, today, House Republicans have decided to reject their own past work and try to make up for their do-nothing Congress with this absurd and extreme measure rammed through just ahead of an election, despite multiple procedural and policy errors.

Governing by theme without any thought to very real negative outcomes in no way makes policy.

This bill would deny all Department of Homeland Security funds to all U.S. colleges and universities with any relationship whatsoever to practically any Chinese university.

This bill's author and my Homeland Security Republican colleagues did no factfinding. They could not answer questions about the bill during markup. They repeatedly said the bill does not do things that the bill says it does. If this bill's author doesn't know what the bill does, then how can he expect it to become law?

This whole thing is a cruel disservice to American universities, academics, and students. It puts them and DHS in horrible positions.

In addition to forcing American colleges and universities with any relationship with any Chinese university to choose between that relationship and DHS funds for disaster relief or terrorism prevention, this bill does not provide the Secretary of Homeland Security with any strategic flexibility to waive the funding prohibition when in the national security interests of the United States.

This House previously granted the Secretary of Defense a similar waiver on a bipartisan basis, but congressional Republicans do not think the Homeland Security Secretary should be given the same authority.

Mr. Chair, the Committee on Homeland Security has not produced a single law this Congress. In contrast to a proud record of bipartisan cooperation and legislating over the last 20 years, House Republicans have turned our committee, which I have served on from its beginning, into a partisan press release factory and done nothing to make the homeland more secure.

I repeat: We have not passed or produced a single law this Congress.

H.R. 1516 is another sad example of the extreme MAGA Republican failure to deliver for the American people.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to reject this flawed, extreme partisan messaging bill and vote ``no'' on H.R. 1516, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chair, I include in the Record President Biden's Statement of Administration Policy opposed to H.R. 1516. Statement of Administration Policy H.R. 1516--DHS Restrictions on Confucius Institutes and Chinese Entities of Concern Act--Rep. Pfluger, R-TX, and 18 cosponsors

The Administration supports the intent of H.R. 1516, the DHS Restrictions on Confucius Institutes and Chinese Entities of Concern Act, which would prohibit institutions of higher education that have relationships with certain institutes funded by the government of the People's Republic of China (PRC) or located in the PRC from receiving Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funds. The Administration appreciates Congress's efforts to ensure that DHS funding is made available only to partners that advance U.S. interests, homeland security, and democratic norms. However, there may be more appropriate ways to prevent DHS funding from being directed toward academic institutions that are vulnerable to the PRC's increasing monetary influence. The Administration looks forward to working with Congress to refine this bill as it moves through the legislative process.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to Mr. Cline's amendment. This amendment is impractical and infeasible, like the bill he is trying to amend.

This amendment will require the Department of Homeland Security to identify and report on any U.S. college or university that has any relationship with a Chinese entity of concern.

The Republican author of H.R. 1516 and the Homeland Security Committee Republicans who rammed this partisan bill through committee should have done a little factfinding before bringing this bill to the floor. Had they done so, then Mr. Cline would not be asking for this impractical amendment because his colleagues would have been able to tell him which universities in the United States have a relationship with a Confucius Institute or Chinese entity of concern.

The problem at the heart of this amendment is the Republicans' made- up, overbroad definition of ``Chinese entity of concern.'' It requires a multipart test to identify Chinese universities that participate in military-civil fusion, the Chinese defense industrial base, and receiving funding from the Chinese Communist Party.

I agree that those sorts of relationships between Chinese universities and the Chinese Communist Party are a problem, but the term ``Chinese entity of concern'' goes way past actual security risks and deems every Chinese university a threat without regard to actual national security concerns.

For example, it encompasses any university in China that provides any support to the police. As a result, if a university in China were to provide support for a criminal investigation, such as a crime against a U.S. study-abroad student, suddenly the university in China would qualify as a Chinese entity of concern.

Even American university campuses located in China would be deemed a Chinese entity of concern if they were to provide any sort of support to the police in China. If an American student at an American university's branch in China gets stabbed, that branch campus would become a Chinese entity of concern if it as much as provided translation services to the police to catch the perpetrator. This is absurd.

This amendment would drain DHS resources and require DHS to dedicate teams of staff to gain considerable insight into internal Chinese Government functions in order to identify which of China's 3,000 universities are an entity of concern. DHS has acknowledged that this would be a struggle.

If that wasn't enough, DHS would then have to figure out which universities it provides funds to have a relationship with the Chinese university that meets the entity of concern definition. Those relationships would include perfectly innocent and valuable agreements, including student exchange programs and other cultural programs that help American students get a well-rounded education.

H.R. 1516 is already poorly drafted and fatally flawed, so it is not surprising we are adding impractical into the mix with this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source