Today, as a matter of fact, I am reintroducing with Chairman Green and Congressman Brad Wenstrup the DHS restrictions on Confucius Institutes and Chinese Entities of Concern Act.

Division and rancor is the goal of the CCP. We must stand together and work in a bipartisan fashion to show that we stand united and prepared in the face of their efforts to weaken our Nation.

Dr. Jost, in your written testimony, you mention that the Chinese government 'is interested in using its capabilities to . . . promote narratives that are consistent with its interests.'

It is imperative that Members of Congress and political leaders do not allow our legitimate critiques of the CCP and China's government to veer into anti-Asian stereotyping and prejudice that fuels hateful violence.

Just briefly, we were at that Twitter hearing when the former general counsel of Twitter and of the FBI suggested that there needs to be legislation in order for social media companies to properly coordinate with law enforcement, and we…

Today, I am reintroducing with Chairman Green and Congressman Wenstrup the 'DHS Restrictions on Confucius Institutes and Chinese Entities of Concern Act,' which passed out of this committee with bipartisan support last Congress.

The problem with these civil penalties is not that it is going to bankrupt any government officials, but it has a tremendous chilling effect on anyone trying to do their job, on any Federal law enforcement or intelligence community…

Accountability matters, says my friend from Tennessee, and his amendment would place further penalties in the hands of the Office of Special Counsel which, as he mentions, is the office that also adjudicates the Hatch Act. Well, if you…

It is unclear to me at all why this amendment is here because Federal officials are not allowed to censor lawful speech in their official capacity, which is also what the bill says. This is a completely redundant, unnecessary amendment, I…

My esteemed colleague from North Carolina says that lawful speech on the internet should never be prohibited by Federal agencies, by the government. We agree. It is called the First Amendment. It has existed long before H.R. 140 was…

I am very happy to hear that my colleague from Arizona is concerned about domestic terrorism.

what was clear under the former Administration under President Trump, is that there was no regard for the violation of the Hatch Act and for using government offices for political purposes.

The fact is Democrats are focused on investing in border staffing, infrastructure, and technology.

the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Gonzalez, a Republican Member of this panel who represents a border district, called the bill 'anti-American' and 'not Christian'--and I agree.

I hope that's not the case. We are better than that, or at least we should be.

The fact is the Biden administration is working to deal with the fallout of the prior administration's failed border policies while treating people humanely and with dignity.

That kind of talk may score political points in certain circles, but it flies in the face of good, old-fashioned common sense.

Turning our backs on asylees would be turning our backs on who we are as a country.

the witnesses said that that was not a direction from the FBI.

if this bill that we are addressing today is purportedly designed to prevent the government officials from engaging what the Majority alleges to be partisan political censorship of speech, then we ought to include the whole panoply of laws…

Ms. Conway's violations, if left unpunished, would send a message to all Federal employees that they need not abide by the Hatch Act's restrictions.

H.R. 140 creates several law enforcement exceptions to the prohibition on, any government speech on, I guess, computer services.

I don't understand why it is OK for the government to be required to determine lawful speech, but it is not OK for the government to determine what is violent speech.

I expect that we will get full bipartisan support to add this exception for foreign interference in our elections.

Interestingly, the law enforcement exceptions in the ANS, as drafted in this bill, does not include foreign interference in our elections.