Part of the letter reads: ``While we understand the concern regarding foreign funding to U.S. institutions in higher education is bipartisan, we believe the DETERRENT Act is duplicative of existing interagency efforts, unnecessary, and puts in place a problematic expansion of the data collection by the U.S. Department of Education that will broadly curtail important needed international research collaboration and academic and cultural exchanges.'' Mr. Chairman, I think that applies to this amendment, too. Mr. Chairman, I hope Members vote ``no'' on the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time. The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry). The amendment was agreed to. Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Scott of Virginia The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8 printed in part B of House Report 118-298.
Share
More from Bobby Scott
We strongly urge you to abandon any plans of dissolving the work of the Community Relations Service.
the assumption is that regulations that these Secretaries will get together and provide will be better than what is already there. We don't know what they are going to come up with. We do know, however, that if the State, if the local…
Preventing federal student aid fraud and protecting taxpayer dollars is always a good idea, but the bill’s creation of vague enforcement standards and punitive mandates without clear guidance could make it more difficult for legitimate…
What is the amendment that we are considering? Could the Chair give the page and line number? The Acting CHAIR. It is amendment No. 1 and printed in House Report 119-38, page 57, line 10.





