This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Procedure · 9 wordsI yield myself such time as I may consume.ProcedureMr. Speaker, Positioning · 56 wordstoday, we find ourselves here, again, purportedly to address anti-Semitism in American higher education.While we should be able to agree that there is no place in higher education for anti- Semitism, the fact is my colleagues on the other side have been curiously quiet, Unearned certaintyor selectively quiet, about addressing anti-Semitism when it actually does occur.PositioningClaims · 192 wordsRecall when President Trump declared that there were fine people on both sides when a bunch of White supremacists and their Unite the Right rally marched on the University of Virginia’s campus chanting: 12``Jews will not replace us.’’3My colleagues on the other side were also silent as numerous reports regarding chapters of the College Republicans openly promoted their hated of Jewish people among other groups.All the while this has been going on, my colleagues have not told the President to stop firing lawyers at the Office for Civil Rights of the Department of Education, the agency responsible for investigating claims of anti-Semitism in education.4My colleagues on the other side of the aisle are certainly mum about how this administration is dismissing Title VI disparate impact analysis, the very tool necessary to address practices and policies that may appear facially neutral but, in fact, discriminate against protected classes under the law.I have not heard them comment on the whistleblower allegations, and many investigations into anti-Semitism on college campuses, led by the Department of Justice’s Anti-Semitism Task Force, were based not on fact patterns or legal analysis but political priorities.5Off pointProcedure · 17 wordsWith that said, we have the bill before us, the so-called Protect Economic and Academic Freedom Act, ProcedureClaims · 48 wordswhich would amend the Higher Education Act by imposing new conditions on colleges and universities that receive higher education funding.6Under the bill, institutions receiving Title IV Federal student aid would be legally required to certify that they are not engaged in a nonexpressive commercial boycott of Israel.7Procedure · 7 wordsI will begin with an important distinction: ProcedureReasoning · 57 wordsthere is a difference between actions, or views of students, or even recognized student organizations and the official policy of the colleges and universities they attend.Students have the right to express their political views, but that does not mean that their university has adopted those views, such as the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions, or BDS, movement.Claims · 60 wordsWe have yet to see a single college or university in the United States adopt the BDS movement or institutional boycott policies contemplated in the bill.8Simply put, the bill does not address any ongoing or existing higher education policy boycotting Israel.Nonetheless, this would create new Federal requirements intended to prevent institutions from adopting such policies in the future.Procedure · 1 wordsMoreover, ProcedureReasoning · 95 wordsas we examine the bill, Members should be careful to consider how these Federal requirements would operate in practice, the potential of negative effect on institutions receiving Federal funds, and whether the bill is misusing the power that we have from the Constitution’s Spending Clause to illegally sanction First Amendment- protected speech, particularly those of students.As written, the bill presents serious First Amendment problems and improperly limits academic freedom.I had hoped these problems could have been resolved before we got to the floor, but they weren’t, so I will be opposing the bill.The ask · 17 wordsFor these reasons, I ask Members to vote ``no,’’ and I reserve the balance of my time.
