On the recordSeptember 30, 2020
The gentlewoman will not yield, no. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Michigan raises a couple of points in his argument saying that H.R. 6270 is redundant because of the McGovern bill. None of the disclosures that are required by this bill are required under H.R. 6210, the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act. There is no overlap. In fact, we worked very hard to make sure that the two bills were complementary. H.R. 6210 imposes a disclosure obligation for certain activities the issuer is knowingly engaged in, which is appropriate in certain circumstances. Import-related activities are covered under H.R. 6270. The issuer would have an affirmative obligation to know their suppliers, so they would have to engage in due diligence to determine whether they were engaging in supporting these forced labor practices. Companies that continue to import from the region despite the overwhelming evidence of forced labor practices should, at the very least, be required to actively audit their supply chains, and that is what this legislation would require. Another issue that was brought up by the gentleman from Michigan is that this is like a supply chain disclosure requirement under Dodd- Frank. Rule 1502 had required publicly traded companies to disclose whether their products contained certain minerals that have been known to finance violent conflicts in sub-Saharan Africa, but that comparison misses the point.…
Source
govinfo.gov




