Combating International Islamophobia Act

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I

call up House Resolution 849 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Reschenthaler), my good friend, 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

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. Speaker, today, the Committee on Rules met and reported a rule which would provide for the consideration of H.R. 5665, the Combating International Islamophobia Act, under a closed rule.

It provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. It self-executes a manager's amendment from Chairman Meeks and provides for one motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, we are here today at a time when anti-Muslim hatred has risen to epidemic proportions. That is not my opinion; that is according to the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Religious Freedom and Belief.

Epidemic proportions, we see it all around the world: in China, as the government there commits atrocities against the Uyghurs; in Sri Lanka, where its President silences dissenting voices; in India, as government-led crackdowns leave entire neighborhoods virtually empty; in Hungary, where anti-Muslim sentiment continues to build. Unfortunately, I could go on, all around the globe.

Mr. Speaker, this isn't about the actions or misguided beliefs of a few. The U.N. Human Rights Council has found that an average of 37 percent of the population in Europe held unfavorable views of Muslims. We are talking about millions of people and a rising tide of hostility, violence, and discrimination that we, the Government of the United States, must call out and condemn. To stand firmly and loudly for human rights demands nothing less.

Mr. Speaker, I am also proud to announce today that we have reached a bipartisan, bicameral agreement on the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act that will allow us to move quickly to get this bill through Congress and to the President because this isn't a partisan issue. It is a human rights issue, and America must lead.

Mr. Speaker, just as we hold other nations to account, we must hold ourselves to account as well because the United States is not immune to these trends. The Council on American-Islamic Relations has documented over 500 complaints of anti-Muslim bias nationwide in just the first half of this year. That includes things like hate crimes, harassment, school bullying, and antimosque violence.

Sadly, this uptick is part of a larger trend. A poll conducted by the AP and released this year ahead of the anniversary of 9/11 found that 53 percent of Americans have unfavorable views toward Islam. This is the reality of what is happening in America today.

Mr. Speaker, to be honest, we have even heard disturbing rhetoric from some right here in this institution. A Member of this House has told a completely fabricated story again and again that implies a Muslim colleague is a terrorist just because they are Muslim.

It may have rolled off her tongue like some kind of laugh line, but this is a deadly serious matter because it led to our colleague, Representative Omar, who has already been the victim of years of anti- Muslim bias, receiving even more heinous voice mails and even death threats. One man went so far as to tell her: ``There's plenty that will love the opportunity to take you off the face of this'' blanking Earth.

Mr. Speaker, I hesitated to even quote that here on the floor, but we all must understand the gravity of what we are dealing with. To hear a Member of this Congress say those things, is there no bottom anymore? Have things sunk that low?

Two decades ago, it was a Republican President, George W. Bush, who told the world: ``America treasures the relationship we have with our many Muslim friends, and we respect the vibrant faith of Islam, which inspires countless individuals to lead lives of honesty, integrity, and morality.''

Today, it is a Republican Congressperson who made headlines for comments that disrespect not only Congresswoman Omar and fellow Muslim Members but is a stain on this entire institution. And virtually the entire Republican Conference has said nothing.

Mr. Speaker, what on Earth has the Republican Party become?

I think this House is better than the worst actions of a few here, and I think the Government of the United States can still stand for human rights here and around the globe. This rule and the underlying resolution is our chance to show it.

Let's pass this measure so we can bring the full weight of our Nation in encouraging other nations to also confront and condemn the growing stain of Islamophobia.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I have great respect for my friend from Pennsylvania, but I want to provide a little bit of a history lesson on the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act.

We actually passed that bill a year ago in the last Congress, and the Republican Senate and President Trump killed it. I didn't hear a peep out of any of my Republican colleagues urging that the Senate take the bill up then.

Last week, the House passed by an overwhelming vote--only one Republican voted ``no''--my bill on the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act.

By the way, it is a stronger bill than the one that was passed in the Senate. Senator Rubio and I have come to an agreement on reconciling the differences. That bill will be voted on, perhaps even as early as today, and be sent over to the Senate, where I think they will take quick action on it and send it to the President's desk for signature.

That is real. That is the strongest bill to deal with the horrific treatment by the Chinese Government of the Uyghurs that has ever gone to any President's desk. I am proud of the bipartisan support for the bill in the House and the Senate. Let's not politicize an issue that I think we have come together on. My hope is it will be done today.

The bill that is before us is very similar to the bill that was passed in a previous Congress to create a post to deal with anti- Semitism in this country.

Mr. Speaker, I would urge my Republican friends, who I hope share our view, that anti-Semitism is intolerable wherever it may exist, and we need to do more to combat it. Please call your friends in the Republican Senate to stop holding up President Biden's nominee for special envoy.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a CNN story, ``Senate Democrats Say Republicans Are Holding Up Nomination For Anti-Semitism Post.''

[From CNN, Dec. 8, 2021]

Senate Democrats Say Republicans Are Holding Up Nomination for Anti-

Semitism Post

(By Jessica Dean)

(CNN) Democrats in Congress told CNN that GOP senators are

continuing to hold up the nomination of the woman President

Joe Biden tapped to become the next US Envoy to Combat and

Monitor Antisemitism, five months after she was nominated.

Biden nominated Deborah Lipstadt, an Emory professor of

Modern Jewish History and Holocaust Studies, on July 30.

Lipstadt has thus far not even been offered a hearing by the

Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Lipstadt has previously

worked with both Democratic and Republican administrations

and enjoys strong support from a wide range of Jewish groups.

``Our Republican colleagues have refused to give her a

hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations committee,''

Committee Chairman Bob Menendez, a Democrat from New Jersey,

told CNN. Typically both Democratic and Republican members of

the committee agree to have a hearing for a nominee.

Menendez said they're approaching a time when he may go

against tradition to bypass the committee and move to

discharge Lipstadt's nomination straight to the Senate floor

where Democrats hold the majority.

Republicans denied that they were stalling the confirmation

process.

``I wouldn't say we're holding it up,'' said Republican

Sen. Jim Risch, the ranking member of the Senate Foreign

Relations Committee, adding they are waiting on additional

materials from Lipstadt. An aide said they had spoken with

Lipstadt on Tuesday.

When asked if he thinks they will ultimately give Lipstadt

a hearing, Risch replied, ``I think so'' but offered no

timeline.

What's the hold up?

Risch said there has been some concern from members over

Lipstadt's previous tweets.

In one tweet from March 14, Lipstadt reacted to comments

from Republican Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, who sits on

the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, writing, ``This is

white supremacy/nationalism. Pure and simple.''

Lipstadt was referring to Johnson's comments that he might

have been concerned for his well-being during the January 6

attack had the protestors been affiliated with Black Lives

Matter instead of being a largely white, pro-Trump crowd.

When asked about Lipstadt's nomination and the tweet,

Johnson said, ``I feel like we have so many nominations

floating around right now, I really can't comment at this

point.''

Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, who is also a

member of the committee, said he was not familiar with

Lipstadt's nomination.

``I am not sure I have reviewed that nomination yet. To be

frank, it doesn't ring a bell,'' Rubio told CNN.

``I want to make sure that whoever is there is someone we

can count on to be heard around the world and whatever they

have said in the past won't undermine their ability to do

their job,'' Rubio said. ``But I just don't want to comment

on a nomination that I haven't fully reviewed yet.''

Menendez said there was nothing in her background that

should be a problem.

``If calling out anti-Semitism in the past is somehow an

obstacle to this nomination, and that would be an amazing set

of circumstances, because that's what we want this person to

do,'' he said.

Strong support from the Jewish community

In a rare joint statement, the Anti-Defamation League, the

Jewish Federations of North America, and the Union of

Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America sent a letter to

Senate Foreign Relations Committee on November 4 urging its

members to act.

``There is no question that Prof. Lipstadt has the

credentials to deserve a proper hearing before the Committee

on Foreign Relations--and that hearing is now overdue,'' the

letter read.

The unified support of Jewish groups is important to note.

``To find this level of agreement about someone on such a

contentious issue as anti-Semitism is rare,'' Yair Rosenberg,

a writer who covers anti-Semitism for The Atlantic, told CNN

in an interview.

``And it's very rare to see that and it's rare to see

people then say, 'Well, we don't care what all these Jewish

groups think,''' Rosenberg said.

In an attempt to move the nomination along, a number of

House Democrats who sit on the House Bipartisan Task Force

for Combating Anti-Semitism--led by Reps. Kathy Manning of

North Carolina and Ted Deutch of Florida--wrote a letter to

Menendez and Risch pressing them for a hearing for Lipstadt.

``In recent months, we have witnessed growing threats

against Jewish communities in our own country and

worldwide,'' the group wrote. ``We believe it is vital to

have a Special Envoy in place to confront these

threats and ensure that the United States continues to lead

the world in the fight against antisemitism.''

Rosenberg told CNN the stalled nomination is ``a much

broader effort to stall Biden's nominees and prevent their

confirmations.''

``It's typical partisan warfare, but this time, it's not a

victimless crime, right? There's the nominees themselves, and

then in this case, there's Jewish communities abroad that are

protected by the antiSemitism envoy position. And right now

that office is short-stringed because the Republicans will

not move forward on this confirmation.''

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Chu).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman from Texas an additional 1 minute.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, we are considering the Combating International Islamophobia Act right now, and my good friend from Pennsylvania in the very beginning made reference to the fact that Republicans are all united in condemning hate, prejudice, and bigotry wherever it exists. But I just want to point out why this bill is so important. It is because the last Republican President who we had, unfortunately, it was like gasoline on a fire in terms of promoting Islamophobia.

In 2015, Donald Trump said that he would look at closing mosques in the United States. That same year he was open to the idea of creating a database of all U.S. Muslims. As President, he instituted a Muslim ban. So that is the Republican Party's recent history in terms of combating Islamophobia. Instead of combating it, he, again, threw gasoline on the fire and fanned the flames.

So the reason why this is important is so that we can show the world that that is not who we are and that we reject bigotry, hatred, discrimination, and prejudice wherever it exists. The statistics are clear: we see a rising tide of Islamophobia all throughout the world.

This should not be controversial. This, quite frankly, should be a suspension. That it has been politicized by some of my friends on the other side of the aisle is unfortunate, but I hope that some of them will at the end join with us in voting to pass it.

I reserve the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a September 7 Associated Press article titled ``Two Decades After 9/11, Muslim Americans Still Fighting Bias.''

[From AP, Sept. 7, 2021]

Two Decades After 9/11, Muslim Americans Still Fighting Bias

New York (AP)--A car passed, the driver's window rolled

down and the man spat an epithet at two little girls wearing

their hijabs: ``Terrorist!''

It was 2001, mere weeks after the twin towers at the World

Trade Center fell, and 10-year-old Shahana Hanif and her

younger sister were walking to the local mosque from their

Brooklyn home.

Unsure, afraid, the girls ran.

As the 20th anniversary of the Sept. 11 terror attacks

approaches, Hanif can still recall the shock of the moment,

her confusion over how anyone could look at her, a child, and

see a threat.

``It's not a nice, kind word. It means violence, it means

dangerous. It is meant to shock whoever . . . is on the

receiving end of it,'' she says.

But the incident also spurred a determination to speak out

for herself and others that has helped get her to where she

is today: a community organizer strongly favored to win a

seat on the New York City Council in the upcoming municipal

election.

Like Hanif, other young American Muslims have grown up

under the shadow of 9/11. Many have faced hostility and

surveillance, mistrust and suspicion, questions about their

Muslim faith and doubts over their Americanness.

They've also found ways forward, ways to fight back against

bias, to organize, to craft nuanced personal narratives about

their identities. In the process, they've built bridges,

challenged stereotypes and carved out new spaces for

themselves.

There is ``this sense of being Muslim as a kind of

important identity marker, regardless of your relationship

with Islam as a faith,'' says Eman Abdelhadi, a sociologist

at The University of Chicago who studies Muslim communities.

``That's been one of the main effects in people's lives . . .

it has shaped the ways the community has developed.''

A poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public

Affairs Research conducted ahead of the 9/11 anniversary

found that 53% of Americans have unfavorable views toward

Islam, compared with 42% who have favorable ones. This stands

in contrast to Americans' opinions about Christianity and

Judaism, for which most respondents expressed favorable

views.

Mistrust and suspicion of Muslims didn't start with 9/11,

but the attacks dramatically intensified those animosities.

Accustomed to being ignored or targeted by low-level

harassment, the country's wide-ranging and diverse Muslim

communities were foisted into the spotlight, says Youssef

Chouhoud, a political scientist at Christopher Newport

University in Virginia.

``Your sense of who you were was becoming more formed, not

just Muslim but American Muslim,'' he says. ``What

distinguished you as an American Muslim? Could you be fully

both, or did you have to choose? There was a lot of grappling

with what that meant.''

In Hanif's case, there was no blueprint to navigate the

complexities of that time.

``Fifth-grader me wasn't naive or too young to know Muslims

are in danger,'' she later wrote in an essay about the

aftermath of 9/11. ``. . . Flashing an American flag from our

first-floor windows didn't make me more American. Born in

Brooklyn didn't make me more American.''

A young Hanif gathered neighborhood friends, and an older

cousin helped them write a letter to then-President George W.

Bush asking for protection.

``We knew,'' she says, ``that we would become like warriors

of this community.''

But being warriors often carries a price, with wounds that

linger.

Ishaq Pathan, 26, recalls the time a boy told him he seemed

angry and wondered if he was going to blow up their

Connecticut school.

He remembers the helplessness he felt when he was taken

aside at an airport for additional questioning upon returning

to the United States after a college semester in Morocco.

The agent looked through his belongings, including the

laptop where he kept a private journal, and started reading

it.

``I remember being like, `Hey, do you have to read that?'''

Pathan says. The agent ``just looks at me like, `You know, I

can read anything on your computer. I'm entitled to anything

here.' And at that point, I remember having tears in my eyes.

I was completely and utterly powerless.''

Pathan couldn't accept it.

``You go to school with other people of different

backgrounds and you realize . . . what the promise of the

United States is,'' he says. ``And when you see it not living

up to that promise, then I think it instills in us a sense of

wanting to help and fix that.''

He now works as the San Francisco Bay Area director for the

nonprofit Islamic Networks Group, where he hopes to help a

younger generation grow confident in their Muslim identity.

Pathan recently chatted with a group of boys about their

summer activities. At times, the boys ate watermelon or

played on a trampoline. At other moments, the talk turned

serious: What would they do if a student pretended to blow

himself up while yelling ``Allahu akbar,'' or ``God is

great?'' What can they do about stereotypical depictions of

Muslims on TV?

``I had always viewed 9/11 as probably one of the most

pivotal moments of my life and of the lives of Americans

across the board,'' Pathan says. ``The aftermath of it . . .

is what pushed me to do what I do today.''

That aftermath has also helped motivate Shukri Olow to do

what she is doing--run for office.

Born in Somalia, Olow fled civil war with her family and

lived in refugee camps in Kenya for years before coming to

the United States when she was 10.

She found home in a vibrant public housing complex in the

city of Kent, south of Seattle. There, residents from

different countries communicated across language and cultural

barriers, borrowing salt from each other or watching one

another's kids. Olow felt she flourished in that environment.

Then 9/11 happened. She recalls feeling confused when a

teacher asked her, ``What are your people doing?'' But she

also remembers others who ``said that this isn't our fault .

. . and we need to make sure that you're safe.''

In a 2017 Pew Research Center survey of U.S. Muslims,

nearly half of respondents said they experienced at least one

instance of religious discrimination within the year before;

yet 49% said someone expressed support for them because of

their religion in the previous year.

Overwhelmingly, the study found respondents proud to be

both Muslim and American. For some, including Olow, there

were occasional identity crises growing up.

`` `Who am I?'--which I think is what many young people

kind of go through in life in general,'' she says. ``But for

those of us who live at the intersection of anti-Blackness

and Islamophobia . . . it was really hard.''

But her experiences from that time also helped form her

identity. She is now seeking a seat on the King County

Council.

``There are many young people who have multiple identities

who have felt that they don't belong here, that they are not

welcomed here,'' she says. ``I was one of those young people.

And so, I try to do what I can to make sure that more of us

know that this is our nation, too.''

After 9/11, some American Muslims chose to dispel

misconceptions about their faith by building personal

connections. They shared coffee or broke bread with strangers

as they fielded myriad questions--from how Islam views women

and Jesus to how to combat extremism.

Mansoor Shams has traveled across the U.S. with a sign that

reads: ``I'm Muslim and a U.S. Marine, ask anything.'' It's

part of the 39-year-old's efforts to teach others about his

faith and counter hate through dialogue.

Shams, who served in the Marines from 2000 to 2004, was

called names like ``Taliban,'' ``terrorist'' and ``Osama bin

Laden'' by some of his fellow Marines after 9/11.

One of his most memorable interactions, he says, was at

Liberty University in Virginia, where he spoke in 2019 to

students of the Christian institution. Some, he says, still

call him with questions about Islam.

``There's this mutual love and respect,'' he says.

Shams wishes his current work wasn't needed but feels a

responsibility to share a counternarrative he says many

Americans don't know.

Ahmed Ali Akbar, 33, came to a different conclusion.

Shortly after 9/11, some adults in his community arranged

for an assembly at his school in Saginaw, Michigan, where he

and other students talked about Islam and Muslims. Akbar

poured his heart into the research. But he recalls his

confusion at some of the questions: Where is bin Laden?

What's the reason behind the attacks?

``How am I supposed to know where Osama bin Laden is? I'm

an American kid,'' he says.

That period left him feeling like trying to change people's

minds wasn't always effective, that some were not ready to

listen.

Akbar eventually turned his focus toward telling stories

about Muslim Americans on his podcast ``See Something Say

Something.''

``There's a lot of humor in the Muslim American experience

as well,'' he says. ``It's not all just sadness and reaction

to the violence and . . . racism and Islamophobia.''

He has also come to believe in building connections of a

different type. ``Our battle for our civil liberties (is)

tied up with other marginalized communities,'' he says,

stressing the importance of advocating for them.

For some, 9/11 brought a different kind of racial

reckoning, says Debbie Almontaser, a Yemeni American educator

and activist in New York.

She says many Arab and South Asian immigrants came to the

U.S. seeking the American Dream as doctors, lawyers,

entrepreneurs. ``Then 9/11 happens and they realize that

they're brown and they realize that they're minorities--that

was a huge wake-up call,'' Almontaser says.

Some racial tensions play out today in U.S. Muslim

communities. The racial justice protests sparked by the

killing of George Floyd, for instance, brought many Muslims

to the streets to condemn racism. But they also spurred an

internal reckoning about racial equity among Muslims,

including the treatment of Black Muslims.

``For me, as a Muslim African American, my struggle (in

America) is still with race and identity,'' says imam Ali

Aqeel of the Muslim American Cultural Center in Nashville,

Tennessee.

``When we go to (Islamic) centers and we have to deal with

the same pain that we deal with out in the world, it's kind

of discouraging to us because we're under the impression that

(in) Islam, you don't have that racial and ethnic divide.''

Amirah Ahmed, 17, was born after the attacks and feels like

she was thrust into a struggle not of her making--a burden

despite being ``just as American as anyone else.''

She recalls how a few years ago at her Virginia school's 9/

11 commemoration, she felt students' stares at her and her

hijab so intensely that she wanted to skip the next year's

event.

When her mother dismissed the idea, she instead wore her

Americanness as a shield, donning an American flag headscarf

to address her classmates from a podium.

Ahmed spoke about honoring the lives of those who died in

America on 9/11--but also of Iraqis who died in the war

launched in 2003. She recalls defending her Arab and Muslim

identities that day while displaying her American one and

says it was a ``really powerful moment.''

But she hopes her future children don't feel the need to

prove they belong.

``Our kids are going to be (here) well after the 9/11

era,'' she says. ``They should not have to continue fighting

for their identity.''

Mr. Speaker, a recent poll, as I mentioned earlier, found that 53 percent of Americans, unfortunately, hold negative views of Muslims--53 percent. Islamophobia isn't just a problem abroad. We need to combat it here at home as well.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a December 9 report released by the Department of Justice titled ``2020 Hate Crimes Statistics.''

2020 Hate Crimes Statistics

In August 2021, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)

released Hate Crime Statistics 2020, an annual compilation of

bias-motivated incidents in the United States. Though the

number of reporting agencies decreased by 452 since 2019, the

overall number of reported incidents increased by 949,

contributing to a total of 8,263 hate crime incidents against

11,126 victims in 2020. While annual law enforcement agency

participation may fluctuate, the statistics indicate that

hate crimes remain a concern for communities across the

country.

According to this year's data, 62% of victims were targeted

because of the offenders' bias toward race/ethnicity/

ancestry, which continues to be the largest bias motivation

category. Participating agencies reported 5,227 race/

ethnicity/ancestry-based incidents in 2020, a 32% increase

from 2019. Anti-Black or African American hate crimes

continue to be the largest bias incident victim category,

with 2,871 incidents in 2020, a 49% increase since 2019.

Additionally, there were 279 anti-Asian incidents reported in

2020, a 77% increase since 2019. The other largest categories

of hate crimes include anti-Hispanic or Latino incidents,

with 517, and anti-White incidents, with 869 in total.

Incidents related to religion decreased 18% from 2019, with

1,244 total incidents reported. The largest category

included:

683 anti-Jewish incidents, down 28% since 2019;

110 anti-Muslim incidents, down 38%;

15 anti-Buddhist incidents, up 200%; and

89 anti-Sikh incidents, up 83%.

Incidents related to disability decreased 17% from 2019,

with 130 total incidents reported. By category:

Anti-mental disability incidents decreased by 29% since

2019, and

Anti-physical disability incidents increased by 8%.

Incidents related to gender and gender identity increased

since 2019 with increases in gender-related incidents by 9%

and gender identity-related incidents by 34%. There were:

50 anti-female incidents, a decrease of 4% since 2019;

25 anti-male incidents, an increase of 47%;

213 anti-transgender incidents, an increase of 41%; and

53 anti-gender non-conforming incidents, an increase of

13%.

See the Hate Crimes website for more highlights from the

data: https://www.justice.gov/hatecrimes/hate-crime- statistics. The full data set can be found on the FBI's Crime

Data Explorer website at https://crime-data-

explorer.app.cloud.gov/pages/explorer/crime/hate-crime.

The FBI Hate Crime Statistics is an annual compilation of

bias-motivated incidents in the United States. For the

purpose of the report, a hate crime is defined as a criminal

offense which is motivated, in whole or in part, by the

offender's bias(es) against a person based on race,

ethnicity, ancestry, religion, sexual orientation,

disability, gender, and gender identity. The 2020 data

provides information voluntarily submitted from 15,136 of

18,623 law enforcement agencies around the country on

offenses, victims, offenders, and locations of hate crimes.

Mr. Speaker, according to FBI statistics, in 2020 there were 110 anti-Muslim incidents, and there were an additional 89 hate crimes against Sikhs who are often wrongly identified as Muslim.

We know that hate crimes often go under-reported, so the actual number is likely much higher, which is another reason I think passing this bill is important.

I include in the Record a September 10 Business Insider article titled ``House Republicans Mocked Ilhan Omar's Bill to Establish an Envoy to Combat Islamophobia Worldwide.''

[From the Business Insider, Dec. 10, 2021]

House Repubicans Mocked Ilhan Omar's Bill To Establish an Envoy To

Combat Islamophobia Worldwide

(Bryan Metzger)

In the wake of Rep. Lauren Boebert's Islamophobia comments

suggesting that Rep. Ilhan Omar was a suicide bomber, House

Republicans spent much of a Thursday hearing mocking a bill

put forth by the Muslim Minnesota congresswoman to combat

Islamophobia worldwide.

``I have many Pennsylvania Dutch that feel that they're not

treated properly,'' said Rep. Dan Meuser of Pennsylvania,

sarcastically calling for their inclusion in Omar's

Islamophobia bill. ``How about those that are gay, you know,

the LGBTQ community? That should be part of this bill.''

``Let's keep going, you know, there are people that are

overweight, and there are skinny kids that get picked on,''

Meuser added. ``Why aren't they included in this as well?''

Rep. Omar's bill, which she introduced in late October

alongside Democratic Rep. Jan Schakowsky of Illinois, would

require the State Department to establish a special envoy for

monitoring and combating Islamophobia and is modeled after a

similar position created in 2004 to combat anti-Semitism.

``For over a decade we have seen increasing incidents of

violent Islamophobia both in the US and worldwide--from the

genocide of the Rohingya in Burma, and Uyghurs in China, to

the attacks on Muslim refugees in Canada and New Zealand,''

Rep. Schakowsky said at the time.

``Hate crimes against American Muslims saw a 17% spike in

2017, when then-President Trump imposed a travel ban most

focused on majority-Muslim nations.

The bill ultimately passed the House Foreign Relations

Committee on Friday, with every Democrat voting in favor and

every Republican opposed, and is expected to head to a full

House vote on Tuesday. Democratic leadership is reportedly

considering a vote on the bill as way to respond to the

Boebert controversy, even as progressive lawmakers have

introduced a resolution to strip Boebert of her committees.

House Republican leaders, including Minority Leader Kevin

McCarthy and Minority Whip Steve Scalise, have declined to

forcefully condemn Boebert's Islamophobia rhetoric or take

any meaningful action against her.

`Shameful and embarrassing'

On Thursday evening, Republicans used both proposed

amendments to Omar's bill and comments during the hearing to

mock both the bill and Omar herself, in addition to

downplaying Islamophobia.

Republican Rep. Steve Chabot of Ohio, who accidentally

posted an image from an anti-Semitic website in 2017, said

that Omar's bill would ``trivialize'' anti-Semitism, given

the existence of another State Department post to combat that

form of bigotry. ``We should avoid such a dangerous false

equivalency at all costs, as it could be used by some

extremists to actually justify further anti-Semitic

activity,'' said Chabot.

``If you ask 20 different people what Islamophobia means

today, especially in the Democratic Party, you're going to

get 20 different answers,'' said the Florida Republican.

``And that answer is going to be what they decide best fits

their political narrative to go out there and attack you.''

And Republican Rep. Ken Buck of Ohio offered an amendment

to specify that it ``shall not be considered Islamophobia for

an individual to criticize a brother marrying a sister for

the purpose of committing immigration fraud in the United

States,'' an apparent reference to long-standing right-wing

conspiracy theories about the congresswoman.

As of publication time, the amendment was no longer

available on the House Foreign Relations Committee website

and was presumably withdrawn. Rep. Buck's office did not

respond to Insider's request for comment.

But other amendments by Buck, including one mentioning

female genital mutilation, remained online. Another amendment

offered by Republican Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania sought

to exclude ``any action (to include counter-terrorism

measures) taken by the Israeli Government'' from the bill.

In a statement to Insider, Omar condemned Republican

behavior during the hearing.

``It is shameful and embarrassing that the Republican

Party's response to blatant Islamophobia and incitement of

violence is

to double down on anti-Muslim rhetoric,'' she said. ``Instead

of engaging in a good faith discussion on how to address the

rise of Islamophobic violence, Republicans engaged in ad

hominem attacks, belittled Muslims, and minimized the pain of

Muslim communities around the world.''

And Democrats on the committee sought to defend Omar's

bill.

``One reason the United States is doing a diplomatic

boycott of the Olympics in China is because China's engaging

in a genocide of Muslims, of the Uyghurs, because of their

religion,'' said Rep. Ted Lieu of California. ``The Rohingya

in Burma were slaughtered because they were Muslims.''

He also called attention to Boebert's Islamophobic remarks.

``We had a congressmember from the Republican Party joke

about a congressmember in the Democratic Party, that somehow

she was a terrorist simply because of a religion,'' Lieu

said. ``That's Islamophobia.''

Mr. Speaker, I don't know what the hell is going on in some corners of the Republican Conference, but to have Republican Members mock this bill, as they did during a recent committee hearing, is disgusting. This is no laughing matter. In fact, it is a matter of life and death.

We are talking about violence, death threats, bullying, desecrating mosques, and worse. Instances like that just show why we need to pass this bill.

Again, my Republican friends, as they do oftentimes when we have important matters like this up, they want to talk about everything except what is on the floor. But the reason why this is important is because I think we should show the world that we speak with one voice; that we are against hatred; that we are against bigotry; that we will not stand by silently in the face of Islamophobia; that we want to be an example, and we want to lead the rest of the world.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

You know, we face a lot of challenges in this country and, in large part, we are still trying to come out of a pandemic that the previous administration tried to ignore.

We actually have done some good things. We passed a major infrastructure bill. In the previous administration we had infrastructure week and infrastructure month, and a press conference, but we actually passed a real infrastructure bill with bipartisan support over in the Senate and a handful of Republicans here.

I say to the previous speaker, to suggest that the American people don't care about Islamophobia, I think, is insulting. I mean, you say that to the Muslim student being bullied in a classroom because of their faith, or say that to a Muslim worshipper at a mosque that has been attacked, or say that to a Muslim family that has been belittled because of ignorances being promoted by some, including some in this Chamber.

I mean, please, the American people are good and decent. They do not want to accept prejudice and bigotry and hate and discrimination. They expect better.

We heard some talk earlier about the Uyghurs, and we need to do more for the Uyghurs, which we are doing, but I got a little whiplash saying that we need to move faster to combat the atrocities against the Muslim Uyghur population, but then on the other hand, we are told that nobody cares. You can't have it both ways.

But to suggest that the American people are indifferent to prejudice is something I won't accept.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I appreciate the fact that the gentleman yielded the gentlewoman more time because that made absolutely no sense to me.

Mr. Speaker, let me just say to the gentleman from Pennsylvania on the Uyghur thing; let me repeat the history again so it is clear to him. A year ago, we passed the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act in the House. It went over to the Senate. Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump killed it. Nobody said a word.

The bill that passed last week that the gentleman was referring to is my bill. The bill that we are going to take up later today is my bill that we negotiated the differences between the House and Senate with Senator Rubio. The gentleman will be happy to know that the bill that we are passing today is stronger than the Senate-passed version. Maybe he would prefer a weaker version because that is what a lot of corporations that are very friendly to my Republican friends are now lobbying very hard for: a watered-down bill.

So this bill is not watered down. It is a stronger bill than passed the Senate. I would even like it to be stronger. But please, don't politicize human rights in a way where I think, to be fair, my friend is mischaracterizing what the history of this issue is. I don't take a back seat to anybody when it comes to human rights or it comes to human rights with regard to the Uyghurs. We have been fighting for this for a long time and we finally have a Speaker of the House and a President of the United States who will sign this bill when it gets there. And I want to thank the leadership in the Senate. I want to thank Senator Rubio. I want to thank Congressman Smith here in the House, Ranking Member McCaul, and Chairman Meeks for their cooperation.

But we are moving a bill forward that has teeth, that is real, that is tough. It is the strongest bill we have

ever passed on this. But please don't politicize it. I have been working on this too long.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, let me just say again that this really shouldn't be controversial at all, and I am sad that it is being politicized by some of my friends on the other side of the aisle. We have heard one objection after the next to this bill which condemns Islamophobia as if somehow condemning Islamophobia is some sort of a radical idea.

I never thought I would yearn for the Republicanism of George W. Bush. But maybe things have gotten so out of control in the Republican Party today that Members cannot even stand here and publicly defend a Muslim from bullying or worse. I pray that is not the case.

Some things are about more than petty partisanship and towing the party line. This should be one of them.

We have kids being bullied in school, hate crimes on the rise, mosques targeted for violence. That is just here in America. Around the world, Muslims are being silenced from public discourse, forced into detention camps, or disappeared altogether.

We are a Nation founded on the right to freedom of religion and freedom of worship. It is a fundamental part of being the United States of America. We must stand up and say that this is not right, the rise in Islamaphobia that we see globally.

I want to recognize the leadership of Congresswoman Omar, Congresswoman Schakowsky, and Chairman Meeks. They understand that this is the right thing to do. It is the American thing to do. They have worked tirelessly to get this bill to the House floor.

Now, we must get this bill over the finish line and on to the Senate because even today, even in this highly partisan era, the United States must and can still stand for human rights at home and abroad.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this rule and the underlying legislation.

The material previously referred to by Mr. Reschenthaler is as follows:

Amendment to House Resolution 849

At the end of the resolution, add the following:

Sec. 2. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the

House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the

bill (H.R. 6235) to provide for the development of a plan to

increase oil and gas production under oil and gas leases of

Federal lands under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of

Agriculture, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of the

Interior, and the Secretary of Defense in conjunction with a

drawdown of petroleum reserves from the Strategic Petroleum

Reserve. 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 Energy and Commerce; and (2) one

motion to recommit.

Sec. 3. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the

consideration of H.R. 6235.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I thank my good friend and chairman of the Committee on Rules, Chairman McGovern, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, in 2018, southwestern Pennsylvania witnessed the deadliest act of anti-Semitism in our Nation's history when 11 Jewish worshippers were killed at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Squirrel Hill. That was the first time I ever spoke on the House floor; it was to condemn acts of anti-Semitism and hatred in all forms.

No one should ever be attacked and no one should ever be denied their human rights or dignity because of their religious faith. Republicans have opposed hate and discrimination of any kind, including Islamophobia, but the bill made in order under this rule is rushed. It is a partisan effort, and it fails to address real concerns highlighted by both committee Republicans and the Biden State Department.

H.R. 5665 creates a new State Department office and a new special envoy position to combat ``Islamophobia and Islamophobic incitement.'' Those terms are not defined in Federal statute. They are also not defined in the bill. Without clear definitions, even First Amendment- protected speech could qualify for an investigation.

Under this measure, it would be up to unelected career bureaucrats at the State Department to determine what constitutes this phobia and to single out groups, to single out governments, to single out individuals who do not share the political views of those unelected, career bureaucrats.

My Republican colleagues on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs rightly noted the lack of definitions in this bill, and that lack could be used to promote anti-Israel sentiment. Unfortunately, efforts to address those concerns were wholly dismissed by committee Democrats. Further, committee Republicans highlighted that this bill is absolutely redundant.

Mr. Speaker, the State Department already operates robust human rights and religious freedom efforts, and those include, and I will list: the Bureau of

Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor; the Office of International Religious Freedom; and the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom. We already have offices for what this bill seeks to do.

Creating a new envoy and office would simply duplicate those efforts; it would further fragment this important advocacy; it would increase the potential for conflict and delays; and it would thwart our efforts to actually help persecuted people.

Their concerns fell on deaf ears.

If House Democrats are serious about addressing anti-Muslim sentiment, then I encourage them to join the longstanding Republican efforts to hold the Chinese Communist Party accountable for their genocide against the Uyghur people.

Somewhere between 1 and 3 million Uyghurs are currently held against their will in modern-day concentration camps in Communist China. These people are subjected to atrocities that include forced labor, torture, and enforced organ harvesting.

Families are torn apart. The CCP even prohibits parents from teaching their Islamic faith to their children. Women are suffering forced sterilization and forced abortion to suppress Uyghur Muslim birth rates.

Anyone who truly supports religious freedom and stands against anti- Muslim atrocities should want to hold the CCP accountable for their genocide against the Uyghur people.

Yet, earlier this year Democratic leadership caved to the Biden administration and delayed a strong U.S. response to the Uyghur Muslim genocide, rather than sending the bipartisan, Senate-passed Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act to the President's desk. It was the Biden administration who slow-walked that.

Last week, we were finally given the opportunity to vote on that bill, only after the press highlighted Speaker Pelosi's inaction. Further, during the committee's consideration of H.R. 5665, Democrats voted down an amendment to focus the new office's efforts on the plight of the Uyghurs.

In closing, it is obvious this bill is not combating anti-Muslim violence and persecution. If it were, House Democrats would have worked with Republicans and the Biden State Department on this effort. Instead, the Democrats are advancing this rushed, partisan legislation that fails to address the religious persecution happening right now in China and across the globe.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I am glad it was brought up, the so-called Trump Muslim ban, because it gives me a chance to set the record straight.

Let's be clear, the seven countries that my colleague was referring to--the seven countries specifically targeted with travel restrictions in Executive Order 13769, they were actually countries that were determined by Congress in the Obama administration to be countries of particular concern for terrorism activity pursuant to the Visa Waiver Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015.

In fact, the policies in the administration's travel restrictions apply to just 8 percent of the world's Muslim population, and according to Pew Research Center, only cover one of the top 10 countries in the world with the largest Muslim population, that country being Iran.

The courts even found that Trump's travel ban was ``facially neutral toward religion.'' The court also ruled that Trump ``set forth a sufficient national security justification.'' So I thank my colleague for giving me the chance to put in the Record the truth about the so- called Trump ban.

Mr. Speaker, let's talk about something that the American people are focused on right now. Thanks to the Biden energy crisis, Americans are paying 56 percent more for a gallon of gas.

In Pennsylvania, families are facing a 50 percent increase in their energy bills. Biden's war on fossil fuels continues to devastate the Nation this holiday season.

That is why, Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will personally offer an amendment to the rule to immediately consider H.R. 6235, the Strategic Production Response Act.

This legislation would require the Secretary of Energy to develop a plan to increase oil and gas production on Federal lands if the President uses the Strategic Petroleum Reserve for non-emergency reasons.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment into the Record, along with any extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton), one of the authors of the legislation, to explain the amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman from Michigan an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, my good friend and colleague from Texas mentioned George W. Bush in her remarks. That is certainly a blast from the past. I was actually too young to even vote for President Bush when he was running in the primary. So I say that respectfully for my good friend from Texas.

But when we are talking about blasts from the past, the American people have not paid this much at the pump since the last time Biden was in the White House. It is true. The national average of gasoline is currently $3.32. Americans are paying 54 percent more nationally for a gallon of gas. In some parts of the United States the price for a gallon of gas has reached $7.59 a gallon.

So with Biden in the White House we are repeating ourselves once again--a blast from the past--and the American people are, unfortunately, paying every day at the gas pump.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Mullin), my good friend, who is going to talk about that.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), who is my good friend and fellow Rules Committee member.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Crenshaw), my good friend.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I didn't anticipate that we were going to talk about the pandemic, but since we are on the topic, let's just get one thing clear. There have been more deaths from this pandemic under President Biden than under President Trump. Remember, President Trump is the one that put forth Operation Warp Speed with our pharmaceutical industry to get a vaccine to market incredibly quick, in fact, in record-breaking time. So again, there were more deaths under President Biden than President Trump. So who is really ignoring the pandemic?

Let's talk about the Uyghurs. The Chinese openly and proudly refer to Uyghur concentration camps as reeducation camps. It is a sin how the Chinese are trying to cover up the modern-day concentration camps they have. They claim they are necessary to ``rid them of terrorists and extremist leanings.''

In these camps you have torture like sleep deprivation; people are being hung from walls; people are being locked in what is called a tiger chair, a steel chair with fixed leg irons and handcuffs that render their body immobile, often in very painful positions. Chinese officials have created a massive nearly week-long bonfire to burn documents that regard the oversight of these camps.

It is time that we call out the Chinese Communist Party for the atrocities they are committing on the Uyghurs.

When we are talking about legislation on this point it is actually the Speaker that slow-walked legislation by as much as 5 months. Let me explain the legislative history. The Senate passed the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, which bans imports of goods made with forced Uyghur labor, in July of 2021 unanimously. That was in the Senate. Top House Democrats pointed to a procedural issue and promised future action and then finally passed the bill in December. Again, a 5-month delay for what?

Well, according to reports, the Speaker slow-walked this bill at the request of the Biden administration, who prioritized climate change and climate reforms over human rights violations in China. Further, the Biden administration asked that the bill be watered down, which is truly disgusting when you look at the human rights violations going on in China.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Georgia (Mrs. Greene).

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 15 seconds to summarize.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time as I have no further speakers at this time, and I am prepared to close.

I applaud Chairman McGovern for his work on this piece of legislation. I applaud Senator Rubio, of course, and my colleague, Mr. Smith of New Jersey, for working on the legislation. And just to clarify, when I was talking about the watered-down version that the administration is trying to water down, I was talking about the Senate version of this bill. If I misspoke, I want to clarify the Record now. That is what I was speaking to.

But, again, I applaud anybody who is working on holding the Chinese Communist Party accountable for the atrocities they are committing on the Uyghurs. Let me be clear about something: House Republicans will continue to stand against all forms of hate and Islamophobia. We will continue to stand with Uyghurs in China and with all people experiencing religious persecution.

Unfortunately, H.R. 5665, this piece of legislation, is a rushed bill. It presents serious First Amendment concerns. It will complicate existing efforts to protect human rights and religious freedom around the globe. It is also incredibly duplicative. We already have the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. We already have the Office of International Religious Freedom. We already have the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom. We already have institutions and bodies that are focused on this.

For those reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question and ``no'' on the rule. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

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

Madam Speaker, let me just say to my good friend, Chairman Meeks, we all deplore anti-Muslim persecution. No one should ever be attacked or denied their human rights or dignity because of their faith. So, we actually agree on the intent and the spirit behind this. But I do have some concerns with the wording in many parts of this legislation.

Madam Speaker, the United States Government is rightly committed to opposing these monstrous acts of violence that we have seen directed at Muslims around the world. This includes the horrific mosque shootings in Switzerland, Quebec, and Christchurch.

Our commitment must also apply to anti-Muslim persecution by foreign regimes, especially when it amounts to genocide. I am proud of our bipartisan work to condemn and punish the Burmese military's genocide against the Rohingya Muslims that began in 2016.

We are also working in a bipartisan fashion to oppose the Chinese Communist Party's ongoing genocide against the Uyghur Muslims that we passed together in a bipartisan manner on this floor just the other day.

Today, more than 1 million Muslims and other ethnic and religious minorities are held in camps and exploited as slave labor. Muslim children are ripped from their mothers' arms to be raised by the Communist Party. Muslim women are suffering systematic sexual violence, forced sterilization, and forced abortion.

Members on our side are fully committed to combating these anti- Muslim atrocities. I am proud of the work, again, that Chairman Meeks and I were able to do together to hold the Chinese Communist Party accountable for their genocide, and I thank the gentleman for his efforts.

In addition, I am pleased that right after this bill, Chairman McGovern, who has worked so hard with this committee, and Senator Marco Rubio in the Senate will finally be able to send to the President's desk a bipartisan, bicameral bill to combat the forced labor that supports the CCP's Uyghur genocide.

Unfortunately, the rushed, partisan bill before us today does not live up to these two serious bipartisan efforts. Committee Democrats made no effort to work toward a bipartisan agreement before the markup, and the bill has no Republican cosponsors.

This legislation is dangerously vague and unnecessarily duplicative. It doesn't frame things in terms of anti-Muslim persecution, nor does it use the typical statutory language like ``gross violations of internationally recognized human rights.''

Instead, it uses the undefined, nonlegal term of ``Islamophobia.'' This word appears nowhere in the Federal statutes. It is so vague and subjective that it could be used against legitimate speech for partisan purposes. Even the term ``phobia'' connotes irrational fear, not discrimination.

The bill also completely ignores the State Department's extensive efforts already underway to protect the rights of Muslims. Regular monitoring and reporting are already carried out by human rights officers or embassies worldwide, as well as the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor; the Office of International Religious Freedom; and the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom.

The annual ``Country Reports'' on human rights contain detailed, country-specific narratives of human rights violations targeting Muslims. The ``Annual Report on International Religious Freedom'' details anti-Muslim abuses and U.S. Government policy to address such challenges.

In addition, the current nominee to serve as the Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedom, Rashad Hussain, is a prominent Muslim American.

Madam Speaker, the lack of a special envoy is not a sign of bigotry. In fact, there is no special envoy for the hundreds of millions of Christians who face dangerous persecution today. Also, there is no special envoy for the Hindus or the Buddhists or the Baha'is or the Yazidis or many other people of faith who experience persecution.

We have heard a lot from the other side about the office and special envoy on anti-Semitism, and I imagine that we will continue to hear about this during this debate. But while the wording of today's bill is modeled after the two prior anti-Semitism bills, the process has been completely different and inadequate.

Both bills, in 2004 and 2020, came after dedicated hearings showing the need for specialized legislation. The second bill is based on 16 years of experience before a Senate-confirmed special envoy was added.

In stark contrast, today's bill is the result of a hurried, partisan push over the last 6 days. This legislation was introduced less than 2 months ago. We have not held any hearings focused on whether the new State Department bureaucracy is needed or useful to counter anti-Muslim hate.

Finally, today we received the oddest Statement of Administration Policy that I can ever recall, basically saying that while the administration supports passage of the bill, it would like for this bill to be rewritten. This State Department would like for this bill to be rewritten. Why aren't we consulting with the State Department to get this bill right before we throw it on the House floor and pass it with such haste?

In it, the administration also says that it wants to include language to ``ensure the Secretary of State has the necessary flexibility and permissive authority to designate such an office and special envoy.'' In other words, the administration doesn't want to be required to create this office and position, as this bill mandates.

Combating religious persecution against all people of faith, including Muslims, is a serious issue, and it deserves the kind of serious attention that draws bipartisan support. I also believe that a definition for clarity as to what Islamophobia is and how it would apply should be done through the legislative intent of the Congress and not left up to the bureaucracy in the State Department.

Unfortunately, the text has been rushed to the floor. It is vague and redundant, as I have said. For that reason, I do oppose it.

I am going to get, later, into some definitions of Islamophobia from various scholars and lawyerly articles that really bring out how vague this term is. We are not saying we are protecting against persecution of Muslims or international human rights for Muslims. It is Islamophobia that I think draws the most scrutiny to this bill.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot), a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry), a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee, (Mr. Burchett), a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Barr), a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Van Duyne).

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman from New York is prepared to close, I am ready to close.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Let me just first say that all of us deplore anti-Muslim persecution. We are seeing a lot of that in Afghanistan today, especially the small children. We deplore violence on violence, Sunni against Shia. No one should ever be attacked or denied their human rights or dignity because of their faith. I believe both sides of the aisle agree on this, and I personally agree with the intent and the spirit of this bill.

The United States Government is rightly committed to opposing these acts of violence that we have seen directed at Muslims around the world. The State Department has an office to do so.

What I do object to, Mr. Speaker, is the unfortunate circumstance that the bill before us abandons the usual statutory language about violations of internationally recognized human rights. Instead, it uses this vague term, Islamophobia. Look it up on Wikipedia. It says it can mean many things.

This Islamophobia is not defined. It is not that we are against the anti-Muslim persecution or against international human rights violations against Muslims, but rather this Islamophobia.

In connection with that, I would like to quote a 2016 article from Columbia Law Review that states: ``There is no singular, cogent, or consensus definition of Islamophobia.''

Similarly, the University of Oslo's Center for Research on Extremism calls Islamophobia a ``contested term.''

These are law review articles, not mine.

It goes on further to say: ``The term conflates opposition to Islam with prejudice toward Muslims.''

These expert descriptions underscore the need for due diligence that this text has not yet received. I wish the minority had been given an opportunity to discuss this bill before it was thrown in on the markup, for we all oppose religious persecution against Muslims or any other faith. I am a Catholic. Any other believers in any faith should be protected from this hate speech and violence.

So for those reasons, because the definition is not provided, Islamophobia is a very broad term that can be subject to many interpretations.

If we don't define that in the Congress through legislative intent, who will?

That means we cede our authority over to the executive branch, and then they write what Islamophobia means. I wish we had used different terms, terminologies that are in statute under law rather than something that is sort of borne on a Wikipedia page.

To me, that is not the way we legislate here. I have done a lot of great legislation with the chairman and the previous chairman of this committee, and I intend to keep doing that with him. I

appreciate our joint efforts to advance strong, responsible bipartisan legislation to protect religious freedom.

We are going to have one of those bills coming up right after this one on the Uyghur Muslims, and I appreciate that. I know this has been a heated debate, and some things have been said today that could be offensive. This is not about one Member of Congress. This is about our ability to come together as Americans and come out with a strong bipartisan bill that makes sense so we can send the message around the world that this will not be tolerated, just as we are standing up for the Uyghur Muslims with the genocide bill and the bill that is going to follow this debate here today.

Mr. Speaker, it has been a rigorous debate, and we expected this. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 849, I call up the bill (H.R. 5665) to establish in the Department of State the Office to Monitor and Combat Islamophobia, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material in the Record on H.R. 5665.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5665, the Combating International Islamophobia Act.

Before I continue, let me insert in the Record a Statement of Administration Policy, which begins by stating: ``The administration supports passage of H.R. 5665, the Combating International Islamophobia Act.'' And ``Our country's commitment to defending freedom of religion and belief goes back centuries, and the administration strongly believes that people of all faiths and backgrounds should be treated with equal dignity and respect around the world.''

Statement of Administration Policy

H.R. 5665--Combatting International Islamophobia Act--Rep. Omar, D-MN,

and 56 co-sponsors

The Administration supports passage of H.R. 5665, the

Combating International Islamophobia Act. Religious freedom

is a fundamental human right. This freedom is enshrined in

the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and is also part of

the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Our country's

commitment to defending freedom of religion and belief goes

back centuries, and the Administration strongly believes that

people of all faiths and backgrounds should be treated with

equal dignity and respect around the world.

The Administration also supports language in H.R. 5665 that

calls attention to instances of forced labor, reeducation, or

the presence of concentration camps, such as those targeting

Uyghur and other minorities in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous

Region of the People's Republic of China.

The Administration looks forward to working with Congress

to ensure the Secretary of State has the necessary

flexibility and permissive authority to designate such an

office and special envoy and to provide for an annual report

monitoring concerning acts of Islamophobia in foreign

countries.

Madam Speaker, I could not agree more. The world is seeing an alarming rise in anti-Muslim sentiment and violence, and we are witnessing those same trends, unfortunately, here in the United States of America.

In recent years, anti-Muslim bigotry has been on the rise with mosques being vandalized and Muslims beaten and attacked and elected officials on the receiving end of death threats and other hateful rhetoric all due to their Muslim faith.

Bigotry is unacceptable, and it is incumbent on all of us to condemn it wherever and whenever it occurs.

The great Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., said: ``Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.'' Not only must we address anti-Muslim bigotry here in the United States, but we are also obligated to confront that bigotry wherever and whenever we see it happening around the world.

In 2019, New Zealand witnessed the worst terrorist attack in that nation's history when a white supremacist gunman killed 51 Muslim worshippers and injured 40 others at two mosques.

Just last week, here on the House floor, we discussed the horrific atrocities being committed against Uyghur Muslims in China and the Rohingya Muslims in Burma. We did it in a bipartisan way with my good friend and colleague Mr. McCaul. That is who we should be, and that is what we should represent because freedom of religion is a fundamental human right, and no one should be the target of discrimination because of their faith.

Prior to considering H.R. 5665, the House Committee on Foreign Affairs held numerous hearings, including with Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, U.N. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield, and leading academics across the country that discussed and better informed our understanding of anti-Muslim bigotry and Islamophobia.

With the passage of H.R. 5665, the establishment of an office at the State Department to help combat the scourge of Islamophobia, we take an important step toward addressing this problem. That is why I am proud to support the Combating International Islamophobia Act. This important legislation would do three very, very important but simple things. First, it would establish an office to monitor and combat Islamophobia at the State Department. Second, it would provide the authority to the executive branch to appoint a special envoy for monitoring and combating Islamophobia. And third, it will help to improve State Department reporting on threats to Muslims around the world.

Now, several of my colleagues on the other side have stated that they oppose this bill, that the bill does not define Islamophobia, but I believe, and I think they seem to have an awareness, as we all do, for Islamophobia when they criticize the bill for not doing enough to address Islamophobia against the Uyghur population in China.

Madam Speaker, discrimination and bigotry are abhorrent, and combating them is something which we should all be able to do together. That is why I am so heartened to see this important piece of legislation being led by a Muslim Member of Congress and a Jewish Member of Congress. I wish I could say by a Democratic Member of Congress and a Republican Member of Congress. That would be the right message to send to the world.

Discrimination and bigotry bring out the worst in humanity. I know that my friend and colleague feels the same way. I know he does, as do many of my colleagues on the other side. But we have to stand up and say it right here on the floor so the world knows what we stand for. If left unchecked, they can lead to terrible atrocities, to crimes against humanity, and even to genocide. So this legislation will help shine a light on this problem and help address the global rise of Islamophobia at a time in which Islamophobia remains rampant.

Madam Speaker, I strongly encourage all Members of this House to support this very timely and important bill.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. Omar), the sponsor of this most timely bill.

Madam Speaker, let me just reply to Mr. McCaul earlier that the anti-Semitism legislation was introduced on January 3 of 2019, passed the House on January 11 of 2019. There were no hearings that were held that last Congress before we passed the vote, and there was no markup, as we had in our committee this year at all.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), the cosponsor of this legislation.

Madam Speaker, we want to take down the words. I ask that the words be taken down.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis) a member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin), a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Speaker, clearly, we are not here to talk about criticism. We are here to talk about persecution. We are here to talk about anti-Muslim hate. We are even here to talk about genocide. And we should know it when we see it.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentlewoman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Dingell).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the Representative from the great State of Texas (Mr. Green).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Correa).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from the great State of Michigan (Ms. Tlaib).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi).

Mr. Speaker, I am ready to close.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. McCaul for his statements. Yes, we work very closely together, as well as many Members in this House, especially on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, strong fighters on both sides of the aisle for human rights.

The question that presents itself with this plain and simple bill that simply calls for us to establish an office to monitor and combat Islamophobia at the State Department is: Do we all agree? I think I have heard my colleagues on the other side say that Islamophobia is wrong. That means you know that Islamophobia exists.

You know it when you see it. You know it when you feel it. You know it when you talk about the Uyghurs, the Rohingyas, or right here in the United States of America. There is a definition right there. You see it. They have said it. We have said it. Islamophobia exists.

What we need to do is call it out. What we need to do is lock arms and stand together. This is an important bill. The camera of history is rolling on us. It is an important bill, and it is a bill of consequence. It should be of consequence to every human being on the planet, no matter your religion or no matter your race.

It is important to nearly 2 billion Muslims in the world. We need to focus on what this bill does. Some of the proudest moments of mine--I live in and represent one of the most diverse districts in all the United States, in the most diverse county in the United States. I have seen ugliness raise its ugly head, whether it is racism, anti-Semitism, or Islamophobia.

But the proud moment is when I see Muslims and Jews walking arm-in- arm against Islamophobia and against anti-Semitism, when I see people of all races and nationalities standing together and not being silent.

Inaction is unacceptable. We cannot stand idly by as atrocity after atrocity is inflicted on people of the Muslim faith, or any faith, for no reason other than bigotry against their religion.

Freedom of religion is a human right. We can and must do better at combating Islamophobia here at home and abroad. I wish it was today, but I keep dreams and hopes alive that we will lock arms--we have good people here--and say in unison, as I have seen people do in my district, that we are going to call out Islamophobia wherever we see it, the same with racism and the same with anti-Semitism.

Mr. Speaker, this bill that everybody is watching--we travel a lot on our committee. We know that people watch what is happening on this floor. They take it to their gut. I hope that they look at this bill and know that we are going to call it out and not accept it. Silence will not be accepted.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, when the heinous acts of 9/11 came, this Nation could have easily fell upon the splinters of divisiveness and begin to point fingers in a massive way toward our fellow human beings, Muslims around the world and in the United States.

Isn't it interesting that the President of the United States, a Republican, George W. Bush, took to the microphone to denounce that kind of divisive action--a Republican.

We came together, even though there were incidences that many confronted, to hold this Nation together. Even with the small percentage of Muslims in the United States, we recognize the 1.8 billion Muslims in the world, which makes up nearly one-forth of the world's population. It is the world's second largest religion.

I am proud to be able to serve or have served with former Member Keith Ellison, the first to be elected; Congressman Andre Carson, Rashida Tlaib, and Ilhan Omar. I am proud to chair the Pakistan Caucus, the Afghan Caucus, and to work with Muslims around the world; and I have visited the Middle East often, and engaged with Muslims who desired peace.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support the rule and the underlying bill, to create the position of special envoy for monitoring and combatting Islamophobia that would be responsible for tracking and coordinating efforts to combat Islamophobia abroad. It would require the State Department to encourage reports on human rights practices and an annual report on international religious freedom, and include, where possible, the assessments on the nature and extent of Islamophobia and Islamophobic incitement that occur abroad.

My colleagues on this floor might take heed to the importance of recognizing the humanity of all people. The hijab is a thing of beauty. Muslim women can choose to wear it, they wear it in front of men who are not their family members. Our Member, Ilhan Omar, wears that. It is not a sign of terrorism, and that kind of language should be denounced whether it is on the floor of this House or in some kind of private interaction.

We do not want the world to look at the United States as not caring about the rights of Muslims. America stands against the committing of acts of atrocities against the Uyghurs in China, or the Rohingya in Burma, or the brutal crackdowns on Muslim populations in other countries including Southeast Asia, scapegoating of Muslim refugees and other Muslims in Hungary and Poland, the acts of white supremacist violence against Muslims in New Zealand and Canada, or the targeting of minority Muslim communities in Muslim majority countries like those in Southeast Asia and Iran. I know that we are working hard to ensure that does not happen.

This legislation is crucial and important. The reason is because it speaks to who we are as Members of the most powerful lawmaking body in the world.

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to sit on the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission with Chairman McGovern and that we can talk about human rights for all people. And we need to get over it and recognize that it is important to unify the world. Let the United States be the leader for what is right and to be able to acknowledge the doctors, lawyers, and other leaders in our Nation who happen to be Muslim.

So this legislation gives the United States the right hand, the upper hand to be able to assess this around the world and be the leader against anti-hate or anti-Muslim hate. Let's be the leader rather than the provoker of it.

I end by saying this plea to my colleagues: Whether you are Republican or Democrat, is this, in essence, the reputation you want to give to this Congress, that we are attacking people for their religion and who they are?

Let this bill pass but let it be a symbol that we will stop this kind of Islamophobia, and it starts with each and every one of us.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to vote for the rule and the underlying bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Rule Governing Debate of H.R. 5665, the Combating International Islamophobia Act, which will address the increasing number of incidents of Islamophobia around the world.

Specifically, this bill will:

Create the position of Special Envoy for Monitoring and Combating Islamophobia, who will be responsible for tracking and coordinating efforts to combat Islamophobia abroad.

Require that the State Department's annual country reports on human rights practices and annual Report on International Religious Freedom include, wherever possible, assessments of the nature and extent of acts of Islamophobia and Islamophobic incitement that occur abroad.

As Islamophobia rises globally, it is vital that the State Department have senior personnel in place charged with understanding, reporting on, and combating this scourge worldwide.

In recent decades, we have seen a staggering rise in incidents of violent Islamophobia worldwide.

Whether it is the atrocities being committed against the Uyghurs in China and the Rohingya in Burma, the brutal crackdowns on Muslim populations around the world. The scapegoating of Muslim refugees and other Muslims in Hungary and Poland, the acts of white supremacist violence targeting Muslims in New Zealand and Canada, or the targeting of minority Muslim communities in Muslim-majority countries. It is time for us as policymakers to understand these problems as interconnected and genuinely global.

There are about 1.8 billion Muslims in the world, which makes up nearly one-fourth of the world's population. Islam is the world's second largest religion. Painfully, a staggering number of people have experienced anti-Muslim hate in their lifetime; a number that has only inflated since 9/11.

America is home to one of the most diverse Muslim populations in the world, including people of almost every ethnicity, country and school of thought.

Approximately one third of the community is African American, one third is of South Asian descent, one quarter is of Arab descent, and the rest are from all over the world, including a growing Latino Muslim population.

While exact numbers are difficult to establish, there are between 3-6 million American Muslims. About one half of this population was born in the U.S., a percentage that continues to grow as immigration slows and younger individuals start having families.

American Muslims are present in all walks of life, as doctors and taxi drivers; lawyers and newspaper vendors; accountants, homemakers, academics, media personalities, athletes, and entertainers.

Although American Muslims make up approximately one percent of the U.S. population, most Americans can name several famous American Muslims. Names like Muhammad Ali, Malcolm X, Mos Def, Fareed Zakaria, Shaquille O'Neal, Lupe Fiasco, Dr. Oz and Rima Fakih are part of our popular consciousness.

Important business figures like Farooq Kathwari (CEO of Ethan Allen), Malik M. Hasan (a pioneer in the field of HMOs), and Safi Qureshey (a leader in PC component manufacturing) are all American Muslims.

Many American Muslims are also civically engaged, working with their neighbors to better their communities. Well-known American Muslim leaders include Rep. Keith Ellison (DFL-Minn.), the first American Muslim to be elected to the U.S. Congress; Rep. Andre Carson (D-Ind.); Mohammed Hameeduddin (Mayor, Teaneck, N.J.); and Amer Ahmad (Comptroller, Chicago).

Nevertheless, levels of Islamophobia are so high that the United Nations Human rights Council has declared it an issue of ``epidemic proportions.''

Atrocities have been occurring across the globe, from hate-messages spray-painted on buildings in America to the violent genocide of the Uyghurs in China.

The United States State Department estimated that up to 2 million members of Muslim minorities have experienced a system on detention centers in Xinjiang, known political indoctrination, forced labor, torture, and sexual abuse.

The US, UK, and Canada have accused China of committing genocide and crimes against humanity against Muslim populations at Xinjiang.

In 2018, UN investigators accused the Myanmar's military of carrying out mass killings of Muslim populations with ``genocidal intent.''

There are reports of attacks on mosques in Southeast Asia and Iran, a history of anti-Muslim sentiments and attacks in Sri Lanka, police targeting against Shia Muslims in Southeast Asia again, massacres of Muslim people in New Zealand, and Islamophobic hate-speech in Canada. We have to demand justice for Muslims and better treatment for all religions.

This global injustice must be addressed and rectified and the United States must step up to spearhead the movement.

We need to establish a comprehensive plan for combating Islamophobia not only to ensure the religious freedom and human rights of Muslims, but to protect against a threat to international religious freedom and democratic principles.

The Combating International Islamophobia Act will require the State department to create a Special Envoy for monitoring and combating Islamophobia answering the call of the American Muslim community for the past two decades.

The envoy will work with domestic and international nongovernmental organizations and institutions to carry out its directives.

The special envoy will give reports on acts of physical violence or harassment against Muslim people as well as acts of vandalism of Muslim community institutions like schools, mosques, and cemeteries.

Regarding anti-Muslim government actions, the envoy will monitor instances of propaganda in media that attempt to justify or promote racial hatred or incite acts of violence against Muslim people.

With the new wealth of information this envoy will bring, policymakers will have a better understanding of the interconnected, global problem of anti-Muslim bigotry.

As part of our commitment to international religious freedom and human rights, we must recognize Islamophobia as a pattern that is repeating in nearly every corner of the globe.

It is past time for the United States to stand firmly in favor of religious freedom for all, and to give the global problem of Islamophobia the attention and prioritization it deserves.

I urge all members to join me in voting for the rule and the underlying legislation, H.R. 5665, the ``Combating International Islamophobla Act.''