Speak Out Act

Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1464 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Fischbach), 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

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

Madam Speaker, yesterday the Committee on Rules met and reported a rule, House Resolution 1464, providing for consideration of S. 4524, the Speak Out Act, under a closed rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary as well as one motion to commit.

The rule further provides the majority leader or his designee the ability this week to en bloc requested roll call votes on suspensions. The rule also provides roll call votes on suspension bills considered on November 14 or 15 may be postponed through November 18.

Lastly, the rule provides standard recess instructions for the district work period from November 21 through November 28 and deems passage of House Resolution 1463.

Madam Speaker, today's rule provides for consideration of the Speak Out Act, a straightforward, bipartisan bill, that passed the Senate unanimously, to prevent nondisclosure agreements from silencing victims of sexual assault and harassment.

Over the past 5 years, we have seen numerous cases of women and men disclosing their experiences of sexual harassment in the workplace. As more people came forward, others felt empowered to share their experiences, and offenders who had long gotten away with such reprehensible conduct increasingly faced consequences to their actions.

While many high-profile cases focused on movie executives, actors, TV personalities, professional athletes, and elected officials, sexual assault and harassment has been endemic in American workplaces for a very long time. The silencing of survivors with nondisclosure agreements has played a significant role in allowing such misconduct to continue.

Over the span of multiple congressional hearings, we have heard firsthand accounts of how harassment affects workers in all industries, from farms to offices to restaurants to colleges. Sexual harassment is pervasive in U.S. workplaces. It is not a problem unique to athletes and celebrities that we see on TV.

However, the one thing that many of the stories have in common is that the perpetrators are often people in positions of power, CEOs, bosses, managers, and executives, and these people have access to expensive lawyers and PR teams to exploit flaws in our legal system to protect themselves and silence those they have abused.

Now, thanks to the courage of survivors and the increasing power of women and other historically underrepresented groups in the workplace, there is a newfound recognition of the social and economic consequences of a status quo that enables or excuses such misconduct, and there is new momentum to ensure that the American workplace environment is safe and fair for all.

I am so encouraged that this Congress has been able to come together and pass legislation to address this problem. Earlier this year, Congress passed bipartisan legislation that now prevents companies from using forced arbitration agreements to resolve cases of sexual assault or harassment.

Forced arbitration clauses are widespread in employment contracts and generally prevent workers from suing their employer in court. Arbitration proceedings overwhelmingly benefit the employer because the employer decides the venue, terms of mediation, and even the arbitrators themselves. Forced arbitration, combined with nondisclosure agreements, meant that victims were kept silent and forced into settlements over which they had little control and kept predators from facing accountability for their actions.

Even more concerning, the silencing of survivors of abuse through forced arbitration and nondisclosure agreements thwarts an important tool for preventing future misconduct. Abusers

who are not held responsible are free and, in a sense, encouraged to offend again. Given the stigma that victims of such abuse often encounter, they are less likely to come forward if they think the abuse they endured was an isolated incident.

With the passage of the Speak Out Act, both of these legal gimmicks will be banned in cases of sexual assault in the workplace, freeing workers and making corporations take responsibility for actually creating a safe work environment. These laws won't end sexual harassment and abuse in the workplace overnight, but it will now make it easier for victims to seek justice and deter bad behavior.

As a woman, and the mother of a daughter, like at least a third of women in the American workplace, both of us have experienced or witnessed such workplace behavior, so I wholly support this legislation.

In my view, passing the Speak Out Act should be an easy task for the House of Representatives. It is a simple, sensible bill, and it passed unanimously in the Senate, an institution not always known for finding consensus.

Here in the House, the Speak Out Act should receive similar treatment, passage with an overwhelming, if not unanimous, majority. But we have been forced by the obstruction of a number of our more extreme Republican colleagues to expend the time needed to pass a rule, engage in hours of debate, and take four votes to pass the bill in the House, when we have numerous pressing items demanding Congress' attention before year's end.

The fact that the bill passed with all 100 Senators in support, in an evenly divided Senate, should tell you that if there were serious problems with the bill, they have already been resolved. Anyone who has actually read the legislation knows that.

NDAs are meant to protect trade secrets and business dealings. Why would anyone try to enable their use in covering up sexual assault?

I am here to get results for my constituents, and that includes measures to ensure that our workplaces are free from sexual assault and abuse.

Madam Speaker, I strongly encourage all my colleagues to support today's rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I am looking forward to the fact that by the end of the week, the Speak Out Act will be signed into law.

While these reforms to the nondisclosure agreements and forced arbitration agreements will only go so far, they will create a more even playing field for survivors of sexual assault and harassment. Thousands of people will be freed from the unfair burdens of NDAs, and I sincerely hope this brings justice and closure to those who need it.

I also recognize that there is a lot more this Congress should do to support both workers and victims of sexual assault.

We can't ignore the disproportionate power that most employers hold over their employees, which can often lead to unfair outcomes for workers. Whether it is NDA agreements that silence victims, contracts that undercut workers' pay or rights, forced arbitration clauses, or egregious noncompete agreements, there is much more work to do to guarantee an even playing field for all workers in this economy.

I am proud of the work House Democrats have accomplished for workers this Congress. Although the Senate filibuster has greatly curtailed the scope of what we should do, Democrats and President Biden have secured multiple wins for workers over the past 2 years, and the Speak Out Act is another victory in that column.

Madam Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support today's rule.

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

The previous question was ordered.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 1464, the rule providing for consideration of S. 4524, The Speak Out Act.

I commend you and Rules Committee Chairman McGovern for providing this rule to allow The Speak Out Act to be brought before us for debate and a vote, as it reflects our priorities for the American people.

Our Democratic Party Caucus deeply believes in women's rights, from reproductive rights to workplace rights, including the right to engage in one's career without being subjected to sexual harassment or abuse that impairs lives and livelihoods.

By bringing this rule to the House, and allowing consideration of The Speak Out Act, our leadership emphatically asserts that women's rights are American rights; that the right to be treated with dignity and respect in the workplace is a priority of Democrats, and that those rights must not be deterred.

The Speak Out Act would limit the judicial enforceability of predispute nondisclosure and nondisparagement contract clauses relating to disputes involving sexual assault and sexual harassment.

This bill is critical to ending the culture of silence that quiets the voices of survivors of sexual harassment. Ending the cycle of abuse starts with eliminating the power that perpetrators have over their victims.

Currently, companies can sue workers for breaking an NDA. The threat of legal retaliation is daunting enough to keep workers from coming forward with stories of abuse.

These NDAs have become commonplace in many industries. Harvard Business Review has estimated that over one third of the U.S. workforce is bound by NDAs.

These NDAs not only appear in settlements after a victim of sexual harassment has raised their voice, but also have become routinely included in standard employment contracts that are used at the time of hiring.

Typically, NDAs work to provide confidentiality and protection, but they have increasingly been used to protect power dynamics that enable abusers to continue their dangerous and disgusting behavior.

One in 3 women has faced sexual harassment in the workplace during her career, and an estimated 87 to 94 percent of those who experience sexual harassment never file a formal complaint.

The reality is that many of these women have no voice because the system rewards male manipulators and penalizes women who challenge the status quo. This is institutionalized abuse.

The Speak Out Act can change this reality by preventing employers from enforcing nondisclosure or non-disparagement agreements (NDAs) in instance's when employees and workers report sexual misconduct.

In the wake of the #MeToo and #TimesUp movements, our country has become acutely aware that men in power frequently leverage that power abusively to exploit women.

Sexual abuse and harassment can destroy a victim's financial security, mental health, and career path.

By standing up for their rights, the women who have been subjected to abuse often become mired in a lengthy and costly lawsuit that drains their finances, imposes a heavy psychic toll, and impairs their future job prospects by creating a misimpression that they are disruptive workers.

Women face a disturbing choice when sexually assaulted in the workplace: report the abuse publicly and face litigation, leave the company and abandon their income, or the choice that many are forced to make, put their heads down and pretend it did not happen.

Passing this rule to allow consideration of The Speak Out Act aims to provide victims with a third option to pursue justice.

It is time to amend the NDA system to strip the power from abusive employers and give it back to the employee.

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

Today, we are here to consider House Resolution 1464, providing for the consideration of the Speak Out Act, among other provisions.

Let me be clear: House Republicans agree that victims of sexual harassment and assault deserve justice. Unfortunately, due to the fact that this bill is poorly drafted and questionable findings from the Senate bill remain that were specifically stripped out of the House version during Judiciary markup, there are still several legitimate concerns surrounding the unintended consequences of H.R. 8227, the Speak Out Act.

We must maintain respect for the victims and their privacy. Making settlements less valuable to defendants by making confidentiality provisions unenforceable could leave victims worse off.

This bill may force victims of sexual assault and sexual harassment to take their claims to court in a public process, but some victims may be reluctant to speak out in any form if they know that their stories will be public.

Furthermore, removing the benefit of confidentiality may remove the incentives that defendants have to settle and give them more reason to fight harder in court, which may not be in the plaintiff's best interest.

The bill is also worded in a way that may also apply to certain post- dispute nondisclosure and non-disparagement clauses, broadly making both predispute and post-dispute nondisclosure and non-disparagement clauses unenforceable and may affect existing settlements.

This begs the question: What is the point of drawing up a contract if Congress will eventually step in after the fact and invalidate it? What is more, this bill would effectively impose a new regulatory floor that comes from the top down, overtaking the role of the State. Republicans do not believe in a one-size-fits-all approach, especially in this case, where it may do more harm than good for these victims.

This legislation should remind us all to think carefully about federalism and when Congress should enact Federal regulatory floors.

States have traditionally decided how to regulate contract clauses, and some have already passed laws to regulate these specific clauses relating to sexual harassment and assault.

The bill even uses State and Tribal laws to define terms within it, but this bill should supersede those State decisions in some cases.

Though I believe this bill is well-intentioned, it would be a mistake to rush to pass it as is, where significant concerns need to be addressed.

Madam Speaker, it is for those reasons I oppose this rule and ask Members to do the same.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, as I said in my opening remarks, the bill under consideration by this rule is well-intentioned but flawed. It deserves additional time to thoughtfully consider legitimate concerns. House Republicans are committed to ensuring victims of sexual violence receive the justice they are entitled to, but that does not mean the flaws outlined should be ignored.

Madam Speaker, again, I oppose the rule, and I encourage Members to do the same.

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

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