Dhs Restrictions On Confucius Institutes And Chinese Entities Of Concern Act
Madam Chair, I thank the ranking member for yielding. Madam Chair, while the bill before us attempts to address a real and serious issue, I must oppose it in its current form because it is drafted in a way that is unnecessarily broad and…
Madam Chair, I thank the ranking member for yielding.
Madam Chair, while the bill before us attempts to address a real and serious issue, I must oppose it in its current form because it is drafted in a way that is unnecessarily broad and would have a chilling effect on research and scholarship at American universities.
Let's be clear: Intellectual property theft by the Chinese Communist Party is a serious problem that costs United States companies billions of dollars and threatens our national security. We should be working together on a bipartisan basis to address this matter as was done in the Homeland Security Committee in the 117th Congress under then- Chairman Thompson's leadership.
However, unlike the bill that passed through the committee last Congress, this bill before us today would essentially prohibit any collaboration between U.S. and Chinese universities even when that collaboration has no national security or commercial significance; for example, creative writing programs, history, anthropology, or researching lifesaving cures for diseases.
I know that is not the intent of this bill and that is why the bill needs more work.
Let me clarify. This bill uses a definition of ``Chinese entity of concern'' that is so broad that it would include any Chinese university or college that has a relationship with the Chinese Government, which is basically all of them.
By definition, ``Chinese entity of concern'' in this bill is defined as virtually any university in China. U.S. universities that collaborate with these Chinese universities, including on cultural exchange programs or engagements on subjects like history or creative writing, not related to national security, not related to U.S. commercial interests, would still be punished under this bill.
My colleagues on the other side might point out that the definition of Chinese entities of concern in this bill is the same as the bipartisan bill in the last Congress, and this is true, but, importantly, the version in the last Congress had a waiver provision to allow the Department of Homeland Security to provide exceptions to allow collaborations between American and Chinese universities that bear no risk to our country's security or commercial interests.
Crucially, the version of the bill we are being presented with today has no waiver provision.
By the way, my colleague, Mr. Pfluger, mentioned that a similar law is in effect for the Department of Defense. That is true, but guess what? That law has a waiver provision. This bill does not.
In effect, any collaboration between American and Chinese universities would be prohibited under this bill with no possibility for exceptions.
For this reason, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to recommit this bill back to committee so that it can be refined and improved to strike the right balance between protecting America from CCP surveillance and IP theft without stifling research and learning opportunities for American students that pose no threat.
If the House rules permitted, I would have offered this motion with this important amendment to this bill.
This amendment will include a waiver provision for DHS to waive, on a case-by-case basis, restrictions on institutions of higher education if the Secretary determines that the activities are of a benign nature, while still restricting research and development funding from going to institutions of higher education that have Confucius Institutes or other relationships with the CCP that are at risk of compromising U.S. interests.
We can strike the right balance between protecting America's security and allowing research and innovation at American universities to be competitive with the rest of the world.
Madam Chair, I include in the Record the text of the amendment.
Motion to Recommit
Offered by Mr. Magaziner of Rhode Island
Mr. Magaziner of Rhode Island moves to recommit the bill
H.R. 1516 to the Committee on Homeland Security with
instructions to report the same back to the House forthwith,
with the following amendment:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
Madam Chair, I hope my colleagues will join me in voting for the motion to recommit.