Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

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

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

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

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

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

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to call up H.R. 471, the PAUSE Act, to protect all Americans from Biden's border crisis.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend and colleague from New Jersey. It is an honor to join my colleagues here during this special week.

Mr. Speaker, 3 years ago, I approached the podium for the first time to give my speech on the House floor. I chose my topic intentionally as it is an issue that I will always champion: protecting the lives of the unborn. There is no effort more worthy than supporting life. This issue defines our culture, our society, and our value system.

Every year, I am overwhelmed at the outpouring of effort, energy, and support that floods this cause. So thank you, and thank you to my colleagues in the House and Senate who join me in this fight. Thank you to the health practitioners working nonstop to provide resources to help new mothers choose life. Thanks to our advocates on the ground, from the airwaves to in-person, for continually showing your support. And thank you to our pastors and religious organizations for seeking divine guidance and strength in this effort.

I am inspired by you all and will keep doing everything I can to continue this fight to protect the unborn.

Mr. Speaker, there is no question that pregnant workers should be treated fairly and be provided with reasonable accommodations in the workforce. We are all in favor of commonsense guidelines to ensure this.

Serving as a subcommittee ranking member in the Education and Labor Committee, I had the opportunity to dive deeply into this bill and participate in the full committee markup.

While much of this law is redundant to the two laws that currently protect pregnant workers, I agree with many of the provisions in the bill, and it was substantially improved from the version introduced in 2019.

During our markup, I asked for an amendment to clarify one specific provision before lending my support. My provision singles out religious organizations by removing the exemption found in nearly every civil rights bill, including the Civil Rights Act.

Because each religion has its own unique customs, requirements, and traditions, it is not reasonable to mandate employment decisions that conflict with people's faith.

By not including this longstanding Civil Rights Act provision, H.R. 1065 is likely to create legal risk for religious organizations. Pregnancy-discrimination or pregnancy-accommodation laws in at least 16 States and the District of Columbia also include a provision similar to the Civil Rights Act religious organizations protection.

By adding a simple reference in H.R. 1065 to the Civil Rights Act, we can harmonize the bill with current law and ensure that religious organizations receive the same protections as outlined in the Civil Rights Act. This is the only reasonable thing to do.

Madam Speaker, I am honored and humbled to acknowledge the service provided to our Nation's Capital by the men and women of the Idaho National Guard. The presence of ldaho's Army and Air Guard contributed to the safety of our legislative process. I am so thankful to be blessed by the always optimistic American spirit that guides this divinely inspired country. Not only did our Guard protect the U.S. Capitol, they also protected the Members, staff, and employees of the legislative branch, and the constitutional process we follow. Idaho's National Guard worked alongside the Capitol Police and other law enforcement personnel to ensure that constitutional process could move forward uninterrupted. I extend my gratitude and include in the Record the names of the men and women of the 124th Fighter Wing and the 101st Civil Support Team:

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 842, the so- called PRO Act. This bill undermines worker privacy, forces independent contractors to become employees, and overturns right-to-work laws in 27 States, including my home State of Idaho.

The bill obstructs workers from getting rid of corrupt unions by blocking or delaying elections from taking place due to frivolous lawsuits.

Now, I have an amendment. It is unlikely to see the light of day. So I will mention it here. It protects the worker's right to vote. Under my amendment, if an unfair labor practice charge

is made, the election still takes place, with ballots secured by the National Labor Relations Board until the charge is resolved.

Now, make no mistake, H.R. 842 would still be a bad bill, but at least my amendment would ensure union elections take place as scheduled, prioritizing worker rights over the unionization process.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to call up H.R. 682, the Reopen Schools Act, to get our kids out from behind screens and back in the classroom.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Westerman for yielding me the time.

Mr. Speaker, as has been mentioned, this bill would add 1.5 million new acres of wilderness area, monument expansion, and scenic rivers. That sounds pretty good. Now, here is the rest of the story, and it is coming from someone whose home State is two-thirds federally owned.

This bill also comes with a critical mineral ban on things like uranium. China and Russia will thank us for that.

This bill also comes with a ban on any active land management, which is a welcome mat for wildfires. It is simple. If we don't manage, a lightning strike will. Now, that is too bad for wildlife, the environment, and productive use, but at least we get the privilege of spending taxpayer dollars for fire suppression.

Mr. Speaker, we can't rationalize the contents in this bill to the objective American taxpayer, but that is what happens when legislation gets rammed through without one markup or adequate bipartisan review.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 447, the National Apprenticeship Act.

This bill invites continued Federal rules that hinder Idaho's ability to use industry-based standards.

There is a lot of success with apprenticeships in Idaho. From companies like Idaho Power, Micron Technology, and St. Luke's Hospital to small businesses of all types, apprenticeships are crucial to job growth in the Gem State.

These businesses partner with colleges and universities across my State, connecting skill development to college degrees from regionally accredited schools.

Whether it is Idaho Power partnering with the College of Southern Idaho or the many small entrepreneurs working with schools like College of Western

Idaho, North Idaho College, Lewis-Clark State College, and others, businesses need the flexibility to use approved third parties to certify apprenticeship programs.

Make no mistake, Idahoans are used to dealing with heavy-handed Federal bureaucracy. Despite long wait times for approval by the Federal Department of Labor, our State officials continue to succeed in setting up apprenticeship programs. But often, Idaho's labor officials must use existing occupations because the Federal Department of Labor doesn't have standards for new ones.

Why make it harder by removing qualified third parties that can approve industry-recognized apprenticeship programs needed for our economy?

Why eliminate the opportunity for employees to participate in industry-based programs where they can go to school, get paid work experience, and earn an industry credential?

Idaho's economy has been resilient, despite government intervention due to COVID. Last year, I said if the government shut down the economy, it had an obligation to help open it back up.

We should not hamper companies trying to create apprenticeship programs for the types of jobs they need. We should help industry by freeing them to develop high-quality, high-paying jobs for the future.

We should give jobseekers more opportunities to grow and succeed, not with Federal boundaries, but only by the limits of their imaginations.

It is for these reasons I vote ``no'' on H.R. 447.

Madam Speaker, election law and regulations must be developed and administered at the state and local level. To that end, I believe criteria and engagement from all Idahoans must be included in this debate and want to enter the Committee's recommendations into Congress' current debate on free and fair elections.

The Citizen's Committee for Election Integrity's findings

and recommendations:

All political power rests with the people.

Our Constitutionally guaranteed Republican form of

government relies on free, fair, and honest elections to

select our representatives and leaders.

To ensure equal protection and equal representation of the

people, laws governing our elections must meet certain

minimum standards.

It is the purpose of this Citizens Committee to concisely

articulate the minimum standards for free, fair, and honest

elections. These standards shall then be used by our local,

state and federal legislators as a metric for reviewing and

revising election law to ensure free, fair, and honest

elections where the outcome is accepted by all citizens of

good will.

Minimum Standards for Fair and Honest Elections

Our Constitutionally guaranteed republican form of

government relies on free, fair, and honest elections to

select our representatives and leaders. The standards listed

here shall be used by our local, state, and federal

legislators as a metric for reviewing and revising election

law to ensure free, fair, and honest elections where the

outcome is accepted by all citizens of good will.

All voting processes, other than those needed to preserve

the privacy of a citizen's vote, must be open and available

for direct observation, with no minimum distance

requirements, and audit by agents of the candidates or

parties.

All election materials must have a secure chain of custody

at all times. Election officials must be accompanied by

observers when accessing any election materials. Records of

the chain of custody shall be complete and available for

audit.

All votes, regardless of voting method, shall be held to

equal standards.

Voters shall only be qualified electors that are able to

verifiably provide their government issued photo identity

before being issued a ballot. Voters who provide false

information, including information of voter qualification,

should face severe penalties.

As a condition of being issued a ballot, the voter's

identity and signature must be recorded in a permanent record

(Poll Book).

Original Ballots must have a physical form that allows

voting choices to be examined and properly interpreted by the

naked eye.

Ballots must have features designed to prevent

counterfeiting.

An auditable system for tracking the status of all ballots

must be implemented and maintained in the State of origin.

The total number of printed ballots must equal the sum of the

number of cast ballots, spoiled ballots, and unvoted ballots.

Ballot tabulation must be conducted by two independent and

unrelated systems. The difference in totals between the two

systems must be less than one half the margin of victory or

0.1% of the vote total, whichever is less. Tabulating

machines must only tabulate and not modify ballots in any

way, or be connected to the internet.

Before the results of an election can be certified, the

ballot counts must be reconciled with the voter records. The

margin of uncertainty must be less than one half the margin

of victory or 0.1% of the vote total, whichever is less.

Lists of qualified electors must be purged of unqualified

persons 180 days before an election. Voter Rolls should be

vetted and compared with available government records to

identify duplicate or Ineligible registrations.

Laws and regulations governing an election may not be

changed for 180 days prior to that election.

All election records should be retained and preserved for

not less than 22 months.

Voter identification for provisional ballots must be

verified, with information provided by the voter, prior to

that ballot being counted.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table H.R. 3401, with the Senate amendment thereto, and concur in the Senate amendment. This bipartisan bill passed the Senate with 84 votes and could be sent to the President's desk for his signature today.