BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 988 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: H. Res. 988
Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2988) to amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to specify requirements concerning the consideration of pecuniary and non-pecuniary factors, 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 Workforce 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 Workforce or their respective designees; (2) the further amendment printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, if offered by the Member designated in the report, which shall be in order without intervention of any point of order, shall be considered as read, shall be separately debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question; and (3) one motion to recommit.
Sec. 2. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2262) to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to exclude certain activities from hours worked, 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 Workforce now printed in the bill, modified by the amendment printed in part B 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 Workforce or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
Sec. 3. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House any bill specified in section 4 of this resolution. All points of order against consideration of each such bill are waived. The respective amendments in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Education and Workforce now printed in each such bill shall be considered as adopted. Each such bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in each such bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on each such 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 Workforce or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
Sec. 4. The bills referred to in section 3 of this resolution are as follows:
(a) The bill (H.R. 2270) to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to exclude child and dependent care services and payments from the rate used to compute overtime compensation.
(b) The bill (H.R. 2312) to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to revise the definition of the term ``tipped employee'', and for other purposes.
(c) The bill (H.R. 4366) to clarify the treatment of 2 or more employers as joint employers under the National Labor Relations Act and the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez), 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
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, we are here today to debate the rule providing for consideration of H.R. 2262, the Flexibility for Workers Education Act; H.R. 2270, the Empowering Employer Child and Elder Care Solutions Act; H.R. 2312, the Tipped Employee Protection Act; H.R. 4366, the Save Local Business Act, under a closed rule; and H.R. 2988, the Protecting Prudent Investment of Retirement Savings Act, under a structured rule.
One hour of debate each for H.R. 2262, H.R. 2270, H.R. 2312, H.R. 2988, and H.R. 4366 shall be equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Education and Workforce, or their designees. The rule provides for a motion to recommit for all five bills.
Mr. Speaker, the bills before us today are about one thing: getting the Federal Government out of the way of the American worker.
For too long, outdated definitions and woke regulatory overreach have stifled opportunities and created a paperwork trap for the job creators on our Main Streets. Today, we take a stand for common sense and economic growth.
We begin with H.R. 2262, the Flexibility for Workers Education Act. Under current law, many nonexempt workers, the very people who could benefit most from upskilling, are often excluded from voluntary training because the Fair Labor Standards Act treats those sessions as hours worked. This creates massive inconvenience for employers, who ultimately choose not to offer the training at all.
This bill levels the playing field, allowing workers to pursue voluntary professional development outside of regular hours without triggering burdensome overtime costs for their employers.
In the same spirit of support, H.R. 2270, the Empowering Employer Child and Elder Care Solutions Act, addresses the childcare crunch facing so many families. By excluding childcare and eldercare benefits from the regular rate calculation for overtime, we remove a major financial barrier for some small business owners who want to help their employees balance work and family life. This is a pro-family, pro- worker solution that requires no new Federal spending.
We must also protect the flexibility that makes the service industry so vital. H.R. 2312, the Tipped Employee Protection Act, clears the regulatory fog that has long surrounded tipped workers.
The Biden administration attempted to micromanage every minute of a server's day through the unworkable 80/20 rule, a standard that is virtually impossible to monitor or enforce. This bill provides a clear and simple definition for tipped employees, an employee who receives tips plus other cash wages that meet or exceed the Federal minimum wage for a work period.
This provides stability for restaurant owners and protects the hiring potential of our servers and bartenders.
Similarly, H.R. 4366, the Save Local Business Act, restores the joint employer standard that served our economy for decades.
The Obama and Biden administrations weaponized the National Labor Relations Board to target the franchise model, creating a scheme that cost the franchising sector an estimated $33 billion annually. By codifying that an employer must exercise direct, actual, and immediate control over workers, we restore the certainty that small business owners, contractors, and franchisees need to grow and hire more.
Finally, we must protect the hard-earned savings of the American people.
H.R. 2988, the Protecting Prudent Investment of Retirement Savings Act, ensures that Employee Retirement Income Security Act, or ERISA, fiduciaries are focused on one thing, the financial bottom line.
We cannot allow woke fiduciaries to gamble with a worker's pension to satisfy a political agenda. This bill reinforces the duties of loyalty and ensures that investment decisions are based solely on maximizing returns for the benefit of the retiree and not a social experiment.
Mr. Speaker, the American people are tired of the regulatory noise coming out of Washington. They want a government that works for them, not against them. These five bills deliver on our promise to cut red tape, empower families, and protect the American Dream.
Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ.
Mr. Speaker, America is suffering. Americans don't recognize the country we live in. Trump's tariffs have caused prices to soar. We have the highest unemployment rate in 4 years so fewer people have jobs. Those out of work can't even afford those expensive groceries, housing, and appliances.
Republicans refused to extend the health insurance tax cuts in time, so now millions of Americans have health insurance premiums that are double and sometimes even triple what they were 1 year ago. In their big, beautiful bill, Republicans took a sledgehammer to our fragile healthcare system to give permanent tax breaks to their political donors, the billionaires, and the biggest corporations.
Our President bombed boats and then the capital of a foreign country for oil, and now he says he is acting President of that country.
He wants our military to invade a NATO ally. Remember, Mr. Speaker, America and our NATO allies fought fascism together in World War II. Republicans claim we don't have money to keep healthcare costs down, yet they are going to keep spending billions of taxpayer dollars for Trump's reckless military action in Venezuela and everywhere else he decides to invade or bomb.
Trump and Kristi Noem have militarized our streets. Masked men in full military gear roam the streets of our cities. These masked men invade church properties and schools, knock down doors without warrants, ram cars, and assault pastors and people of faith. These masked, armed men have arrested hundreds of citizens just for looking Latino.
Last week, they killed a citizen. They shot a mother of three in the face three times. Her last words were: I am not mad at you. His words, after shooting her to death, are too obscene to say on this floor.
Kristi Noem and the President have now demonized this dead mother. Trump wants Americans to deny what we can see with our own eyes: the killing of a mother, Renee Nicole Good.
In the face of all this pain, chaos, and economic hardship, the American people expect Congress to do something, to ask hard questions of the administration, to be the check and balance that we were taught about in school, conduct oversight, lower prices, and protect our healthcare.
So what are Republicans doing?
Last week, following the invasion of Venezuela and the expiration of the healthcare tax credits, their priority was a bill about showerheads. This week it is worse. They are actively putting their thumb on the scale in favor of big corporations and against workers, lowering what parents get paid in overtime, reclassifying workers so they can pay them less, or make it easy for corporations, like those big meatpacking plants, to get away with hiring child labor or wage theft. They want to block financial managers from even considering environmental risks like flooding and wildfires.
Yes, Americans want Congress to do something. The problem is that Republicans control the House and the bills we consider in the Rules Committee and vote on.
However, Democrats can force votes, like we did on the healthcare tax credits and like we will soon do on the War Powers Resolution. On the floor of the people's House, we will call out Republicans who always seem to stand with the biggest corporations and against workers.
Despite what the titles of their bills say, they do the opposite.
Mr. Speaker, we will force Republicans to face the consequences of ignoring the economic struggles of everyday Americans.
Mr. Speaker, I want to clarify a few things, one in particular about the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
The narrative that the One Big Beautiful Bill Act only gives tax cuts to billionaires is just false. The bill cuts taxes for working-class families who need it most. As a result of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the top 1 percent will pay more in Federal taxes than they did before the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017.
It ends $500 billion in Biden-era tax breaks and special interest giveaways to wealthy individuals and large corporations. It stops a Biden-era $1,700 tax increase.
Working families making between $15,000 and $30,000 will have their taxes cut by 21 percent under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Mr. Speaker, 66 percent of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act's tax cuts benefit families making less than $500,000. Just because they keep saying it doesn't make it true. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act does help working families.
Mr. Speaker, I do have to address, because my colleague has decided to bring ICE into this debate, or this discussion, regarding small businesses and help that we may be able to give small businesses. I just want to give a few examples of what ICE is actually doing in Minnesota, because I am someone who is here from Minnesota.
They have arrested a registered sex offender from Somalia with 17 prior convictions, including domestic violence and threatening terroristic acts.
They have arrested an illegal El Salvadoran alien convicted of sexual assault on a child.
They have arrested an illegal alien from Mexico convicted of selling cocaine and methamphetamine and multiple illegal aliens from Laos convicted of rape, assault, kidnapping, and sodomy of children under the age of 13 and domestic violence.
They have arrested convicted murderers from Mexico, Sudan, Burma, Laos, Sierra Leone, Guatemala, Somalia, and El Salvador.
That is what ICE is doing in Minnesota. They are making it safer for everyday people.
I ask my colleague to simply allow the investigation to take place over what happened last week and to stop the inflammatory rhetoric that is unnecessary at this point.
Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ.
Mr. Speaker, what is amazing is that on the floor of this House we heard my colleague talk about the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, and I guess they are going back to calling it that. They were trying to change its name because they know that the American people know it is not beautiful. It is only beautiful, Mr. Speaker, if you are a billionaire and you have benefited from those tax cuts for the millionaires, the billionaires, and the biggest corporations.
Remember, Mr. Speaker, that Democrats wanted to make permanent, and offered amendments, so that we could continue tax cuts for middle-class Americans. We wanted to do something more than what they did on tipped workers.
Are you kidding me, Mr. Speaker? Republicans made tipped worker tax credits temporary but gave permanent tax cuts to the billionaires. The predominant benefit of that big, beautiful bill went to the richest Americans, and there is no denying that.
There is no denying that $1.4 trillion went to the wealthiest Americans. There is no denying the fact that they keep talking about deficits, $4 trillion, that they are forcing our children and grandchildren to pay because they wanted to give those tax credits to the biggest corporations and millionaires.
Now, the other thing that is interesting that got raised is Minnesota. She talked about a couple of immigrants who have been arrested. We don't have any problem about enforcement and arresting people who commit crimes. In fact, we have had Democratic Presidents do that. Obama deported more people than Trump has, but he went after people with criminal records.
Mr. Speaker, 80 percent of the people in ICE custody have committed no crime. Hundreds of citizens have been arrested for no crime by ICE, which has no jurisdiction. Why were they arrested? Is it just because they look Latino? Is it just because they speak Spanish? That is not okay.
Let's talk about criminal activity. Trump pardoned the January 6 insurrectionists who beat law enforcement right outside these doors, violently beat the law enforcement officers who were protecting us.
What has happened since then? Do you want to talk about people who have been arrested? Talk about all of those violent offenders who were arrested, and what did they get? They got a pardon from this President. We have dozens who have gone on to reoffend, who have gone on to assault, who have been engaged in child pornography, in egregious crimes because this President pardoned them. When you want to talk about going after criminals, let's look at what this President has failed to do.
Mr. Speaker, not to belabor the point, but I feel like I need to repeat myself and remind others about what ICE is actually doing in Minnesota. They have arrested a registered sex offender from Somalia with 17 prior convictions, including domestic violence and threatening terrorist acts, and convicted murderers from Mexico, Sudan, Burma, Laos, Guatemala, and Somalia. I wish I didn't have to continue to repeat myself about what ICE is really doing. What ICE is about is making sure that our streets are safer.
As for the claim about the One Big Beautiful Bill Act not doing what it is supposed to and only giving tax cuts to billionaires, I had mentioned, I had explained what actually happened in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, and I would ask the other side, I would just ponder or wonder out loud why they didn't do it in their Inflation Reduction Act. If it was that important, when they were in control and they passed the Inflation Reduction Act, why didn't they do all of these things that they talk about being so important right now?
It is a little confusing when they continue to repeat. They believe that if they just continue to say the same thing over and over and over and over, it makes it true, and it does not, if you take a look at the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and what ICE is doing in Minnesota.
Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ.
Mr. Speaker, I find it interesting that in response to this litany and this long list of criminal activity and the criminals who were pardoned by Trump, we heard the same thing, there was a sex offender. What about all those sex offenders that have now been pardoned?
What about all of the egregious actions that ICE is conducting in Mrs. Fischbach's very own State? She won't stand up for the law enforcement officers who she walks by every day and the attacks that they faced, but she will stand up in favor of ICE activity that has killed one of Minnesota's own citizens?
Let me read one of the President's latest posts: ``Do the people of Minnesota really want to live in a community . . . '' His last sentence: ``Fear not, great people of Minnesota, the day of reckoning and retribution is coming.''
Retribution? We should not live in a society where we have a President who goes after cities and States because they have Democratic leadership. There are Republicans who live in that city. There are Democrats who live in that city, Independents. It should not matter.
However, this President and Republicans who support him and refuse to condemn him seem to think it is okay to beat up law enforcement officers in our own Capitol, but it is not okay to question excessive, egregious abuses by ICE not only in Minnesota, but across this country.
Hoyle).
Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 20, the Richard L. Trumka Protecting the Right to Organize Act of 2025, a bipartisan bill that would expand workers' rights to organize and collectively bargain in the workplace, hold employers accountable for violating workers' rights, and allow for free, fair, and safe union elections.
Mr. Speaker, in addition to the slate of partisan bills that Republicans want us to vote on this week, which lower overtime pay for workers, cut workers' wages, give corporations more loopholes to mistreat workers without consequence, and mess with workers' retirement savings plan to combat supposed wokeness, whatever that is, Democrats simply want to add another bill for consideration, one that actually helps workers and is cosponsored by 214 Members of Congress, including several Republicans.
The PRO Act was one of the first bills I got to cosponsor in committee and in Congress when I joined in 2021. That was back when the committee was called the Education and Labor Committee because Democrats are not afraid of saying ``labor,'' and we will always protect workers' rights. That is why when we held the majority, we passed the PRO Act to support workers.
Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, I will address something in one of the bills that is about childcare and the care economy.
We all know the care economy is what makes all other work possible. Women can go to work when they know their babies will be well taken care of. When a parent or grandparent gets ill, we know that it is women who step in to fill the gap. In fact, because it is so expensive to get care, we have seen a record number of women fall out of the workforce. It is up to about 350,000 women, I think, who have left.
This is a problem because we need women to be able to participate in our workforce, to be able to contribute to their own household's income. We know that this is something that can be fixed with governmental action.
In New Mexico, we now have universal childcare. It is something we can get done, and the reason why we do this is because it is important to allow women and parents to work. It is often men who stay home as the father. It is also important for the child because when you get good early childcare, you grow up to have more opportunities in life.
On average, though, parents spend between $6,500 and $15,000 per child for 1 year of childcare. That is eating up more and more of families' budgets. People can't afford this.
What we know that people have done is negotiate. They talk to their employers, and those employers have often provided childcare as one of the elements of compensation. This is why unions are important. They have negotiated this and fought for this as part of compensation.
For decades, when you get paid overtime, you include all of your compensation, including if you were getting assistance for care expenses.
Now, they have named their bill and added ``childcare'' to it, and they say this is to increase the availability of childcare. What it actually will do is that it is going to decrease people's overtime pay. You are no longer going to get paid overtime based on your full compensation. This is overturning decades of precedence.
Once again, they are acting in a way that makes life more expensive, that makes sure that parents who receive this benefit will get paid less if they are forced to work overtime. Guess what. If you are forced to work overtime and have to keep your kids in childcare, it is going to cost you more.
Their spiral of increased costs for American families is always looking out for the big guy, always looking out for those big corporations. That is why Democrats oppose this bill.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I will clear up some of the rhetoric on H.R. 2270. It is called the Empowering Employer Child and Elder Care Solutions Act, but just to make it clear, this bill makes it easier for employers to provide childcare benefits for their employees.
It excludes childcare and eldercare benefits from the regular rate calculation for overtime, so we remove a major financial barrier for some small business owners who want to help their employees actually balance work and family life. It would be a helpful thing for those employers and employees to help provide childcare.
Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ.
Mr. Speaker, I will point out that Americans know that Trump has been horrible on the handling of their economy because he has done nothing to lower the cost of living. In fact, everything he has done is the opposite.
His tariffs have increased prices. Their failure to address the healthcare crisis and extend tax credits for health insurance premiums has increased the cost of healthcare for Americans. In fact, Americans know this.
Mr. Speaker, I am so happy to get back to actually addressing the rules and the bills that are before us, instead of listening to Democrat talking points over and over.
I have listened to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle during this debate. It seems that they are once again choosing to prioritize Federal bureaucracy and woke social agendas over the actual needs of the American worker.
They claim to be the party of the worker. Yet, they oppose H.R. 2262, which simply increases opportunities for hourly employees to voluntarily take training classes to better their careers. They claim to support families. Yet, they oppose H.R. 2270, a bill that makes it easier for small businesses to offer childcare benefits.
The American people are tired of a government that treats every voluntary interaction between an employer and employee as a potential crime. They are tired of the 80-20 rules that make it harder for small businesses. They are tired of joint employer standards that were designated by union lawyers in Washington to destroy the franchise model that has provided a path for the American Dream for millions.
With H.R. 4366, the Save Local Businesses Act, we are finally bringing stability back to our Main Streets. We are telling the small business owners in my district and across the country that if they do not have direct, actual control over the worker, the Federal Government is not going to pretend they do just to satisfy a political agenda.
We cannot ignore the retirement security of our constituents. H.R. 2988 is a commonsense safeguard. When an American worker hands over their hard-earned paycheck to a fiduciary, they expect that money to be invested to maximize their return and not to fund a political experiment or a green energy fantasy. This bill ensures that pecuniary factors are the only things driving retirement investments.
The legislation in this package represents a fundamental shift back to the principles that made our country and our economy strong, which are clarity, flexibility, and individual opportunity. We are removing regulatory hurdles that have stifled upward mobility for far too long.
Mr. Speaker, it is time to put the interests of the American worker, the small business owner, and the retiree ahead of the interests of Washington bureaucrats. I am proud to support this rule, and I am glad that I was able to speak about the rule and about the bills, instead of talking points. I urge my colleagues to do the same.
The material previously referred to by Ms. Leger Fernandez is as follows: An Amendment to H. Res. 988 Offered by Ms. Leger Fernandez of New Mexico
At the end of the resolution, add the following:
Sec. 5. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the bill (H.R. 20) to amend the National Labor Relations Act, the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, and the Labor- Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The bill shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and on any 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 Workforce or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
Sec. 6. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX and clause 8 of rule XX shall not apply to the consideration of H.R. 20.
Sec. 7. The Clerk shall transmit to the Senate a message that the House has passed H.R. 20 no later than three calendar days after passage.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT