Protect America's Innovation and Economic Security From Ccp Act of 2024
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 1398. This legislation, which would establish a so-called CCP Initiative within the national security division of the DOJ, is simply a rehash of the Trump administration's failed China Initiative by another name. Resurrecting this misguided program, as this bill would do, represents a clear step backwards.
When the Trump Justice Department launched what it called the China Initiative in 2018, it claimed its purpose was to counter efforts by the Chinese Government to steal American intellectual property. This might have been a laudable goal, but what actually resulted was little more than a series of unsupportable cases against Chinese academics at the height of their careers that left their reputations in tatters.
The government was forced to drop many of these prosecutions. Others failed in court. Even more were overturned on appeal. No matter how you look at the data, a postmortem analysis shows that the China Initiative was an undisputed failure. From the flimsy cases brought under this program to the so-called brain drain of scientists of Chinese descent who left American research labs, the China Initiative hurt our interests here at home.
The Trump DOJ devoted significant resources to targeting professors of Chinese descent working in the United States, diverting crucial funding and personnel that could have been used to combat actual economic espionage and trade secret theft.
However, the China Initiative did not just waste valuable resources. If you were a person of Chinese descent working in American higher education, you were a suspect. Rather than keeping America safe, the China Initiative divided workplaces, ruined careers, and contributed to anti-Asian hate at the height of the pandemic.
The resulting chilling effect hampered American innovation by discouraging foreign talent from moving to American companies and disincentivizing Chinese researchers from accepting positions at our institutions of higher learning.
It is foolhardy to punish China by harming American innovation, but by discouraging researchers from working here, that is exactly what the Trump administration did with the China Initiative. Countries around the world send their best and brightest to the United States for education and to perform valuable research in our academic institutions.
Instead of welcoming their contributions to our economy and to our society, programs like the China Initiative encouraged them to take their training and their talents elsewhere.
We cannot quantify those missed opportunities. There is no way to know what inventions never came to be, but we can realize when we made a mistake and move on. This bill would prevent us from doing so.
Despite its well documented failures, reviving the China Initiative is a key plank of the ultraconservative Project 2025 agenda, the blueprint for a potential new Trump administration. Republicans cannot credibly argue that resurrecting this program is about keeping Americans and our business secrets safe because we know that racially profiling professors of Chinese descent was unsuccessful. It did, however, contribute to an us versus them mentality that divided Americans and heightened tensions across the country.
It is particularly disappointing that we are engaging in this partisan exercise because the fact is that Democrats and Republicans largely agree that China poses a threat to the United States. There are bipartisan bills ready for markup, ones that could pass on suspension today, but instead the majority has chosen to take up bills that divide us.
Since the end of the China Initiative, the DOJ has embraced a broader strategy to counter threats from hostile nations, not just China, but Iran, North Korea, and Russia. For example, the Disruptive Technology Strike Force has been lauded by both sides of the aisle for doing what the China Initiative failed to do. It collaborates across agencies to prevent nation-state actors from illicitly acquiring our most sensitive technology by successfully investigating and prosecuting illegal procurement networks.
We are on the right path to protecting our Nation's secrets and keeping Americans safe. This legislation would take us in the opposite direction.
I oppose this legislation.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Johnson), a member of the committee.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Chu).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chair, I have two comments before I call on the next speaker. Number one, I wouldn't count on the next Trump administration--maybe, but I wouldn't count on it.
Number two, during the Trump administration, anti-Asian crimes spiked, and as I recall, we passed an anti-Asian crimes bill, which was signed into law by President Biden.
Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Veasey).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chair, I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Krishnamoorthi).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Tokuda).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chair, it has been said that figures don't lie but liars figure. The figures are very clear. Crime has gone down under the Biden administration. I don't care what anybody in this Chamber says. Those are the statistics. Consult the FBI and crime statistics. Crime has gone down every single year since the Biden administration took office. No one can debate that, at least no one can debate that if you believe the FBI statistics or any other statistics, unless you are getting your information from the Trump campaign or from Project 2025 or other less than honest sources.
Having said that, I urge the defeat of this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time to close.
Mr. Chairman, using fear and division for political benefit while pushing policies that hurt American innovation and American ideals is irresponsible and dangerous. However, that is exactly what we are doing here today.
The China Initiative was a divisive program that made Americans afraid of one another and produced zero benefits. Donald Trump and the MAGA movement had 4 years to come up with new policy solutions, but they decided to play politics instead.
Just last week, we learned that the Russian Government was paying conservative influencers in an attempt to manipulate our elections. We also know that they are not the only hostile foreign nation trying to do so.
We should be working to address that threat. We should be working to protect our elections. Instead, we are taking part in a partisan exercise that does nothing except take our eye off the ball to the real dangers to our people, our government, and our businesses.
There is so much we could do together. Under the Biden-Harris administration we enacted the bipartisan Chips and Science Act which has sparked tremendous investment in domestic manufacturing of computer chips crucial to national security. That is what actual leadership and that is what actual policy solutions look like. Unfortunately, Republicans have chosen the politics of division.
Instead of looking forward and developing new strategies for taking on the threats that face this Nation, the Republican majority wants to take us back to the failed policies of the past. The Chinese Government poses real threats, but this bill would do nothing to address them while setting back our efforts to take meaningful action.
The China Initiative failed to address any of the actual threats posed by the Chinese Government and only succeeded in ruining the careers of academics and scientists of Chinese descent while stifling American innovation.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, even though I am not opposed to the amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chair, this amendment would add to the annual report a study on the impact of hacking and trade secret theft by the PRC on the United States economy.
If anything, this amendment highlights the magnitude of agreement between Republicans and Democrats on the danger from the Government of China to our economy and our security. I have no problem with the Department of Justice increasing its reporting to us. I, too, would like to know how hacking by PRC-affiliated groups impacts the United States economy.
For that matter, I would like to know how it impacts our elections and our national security, too. If this bill only consisted of its annual report section, we could all agree and move on. Agreement, however, is not a possibility under this partisan exercise.
The China Initiative is part of the Trump Project 2025 agenda not because of its potential for good bipartisan work, but, rather, when the China Initiative was an active program, it divided Americans and encouraged foreign scientists to leave our research labs.
This bill would do the same, and improving the reporting section unfortunately will not change that.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, even though I am not opposed to the amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chair, this amendment would require agencies to identify intellectual property theft of small businesses by the CCP. I have no concerns with adding this to the legislation, and I agree that it is important that we root out instances of intellectual property theft of small businesses.
Unfortunately, adding this provision to H.R. 1398 does not make small businesses any safer from IP theft by the Government of China. In fact, it puts them in even more danger.
Since the end of the China Initiative, the Department of Justice has implemented the Strategy for Countering Nation-State Threats and the Disruptive Technology Strike Force, which have been effective at rooting out economic espionage and trade theft by nation-states, including China.
The China Initiative was a total failure. Adding this well- intentioned amendment to Frankenstein's monster is not going to make this program less of a failure when we resurrect it.
Moreover, by requiring the DOJ to create a duplicate program and then attempting to impose limitations on the use of resources, this bill dilutes and ultimately reduces the ability of prosecutors and investigators to respond to the range of foreign threats faced by the United States.
Again, I support this amendment and the spirit with which it is offered, even though it would not improve the underlying bill.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, even though I am not opposed to it.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would require an analysis of the use of unmanned aircraft by the PRC, as well as related elements, such as communication links and components required to operate safely and efficiently in national airspace.
I appreciate that the gentleman from Florida is curious about spying by the PRC in the United States. I think we all are. As with all of these other amendments, even if, by themselves, they were a good or even just neutral idea, they cannot make the China Initiative redux any better. I have said this repeatedly throughout this process. We agree on the threat from the government of China, so what is the purpose of bringing up a bill that divides us?
I would also note that the investigation into the PRC's use of CUAS to spy on the United States is being conducted by multiple agencies, including the Pentagon, the Department of Homeland Security, and the FBI.
Some Republicans in Congress have fought to defund the FBI and CISA over the past 2 years. Agencies that are working to counter nation- state threats are the very same ones that some of my colleagues across the aisle want to destroy.
If we want to keep America safe and our economy strong, the best action we can take is to fund the government entirely and in a bipartisan fashion, but, instead, we are here in this Chamber playing politics instead.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chair, this amendment would require prosecutors to investigate investments made by Chinese companies and subsidiaries listed on the Bureau of Industry and Security's Entity List and the DOD's PRC Military Companies List.
Mr. Chair, I oppose this amendment primarily because the language here exemplifies the broader problem with the entire legislation. By requiring an agency to investigate certain parties, the China Initiative did not give prosecutors leeway to prioritize cases or to choose where to expend resources. This all-or- nothing approach resulted in a culture of fear in research labs across America with few successful prosecutions to show for it.
This approach is what led to investigations of grant applications for paperwork errors. Rather than looking for the individuals seeking to commit trade crimes, the requirement to investigate relegated many DOJ prosecutors to the role of meter maids handing out parking tickets.
Mr. Chair, I am also opposed to this amendment because we already do something very similar. The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States already looks at all pending Chinese investments into the United States.
This amendment would duplicate this work, causing a further strain on the limited resources available at the Department of Justice.
Finally, the language is unclear as to the limit of these investigations. This broad mandate for investigations into existing investments without any clear objective, again, could lead to the kind of overreach the original China Initiative suffered from.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source