[House Hearing, 119 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
MARKUP OF H.R. 5891, WITHHOLD MEMBER
PAY DURING SHUTDOWNS ACT; AND
H.R. 1329, SMITHSONIAN AMERICAN
WOMEN'S HISTORY MUSEUM ACT
=======================================================================
MARKUP
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON HOUSE
ADMINISTRATION
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MARCH 18, 2026
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
www.govinfo.gov
www.cha.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
63-193 WASHINGTON : 2026
=======================================================================
COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION
BRYAN STEIL, Wisconsin, Chairman
LAUREL LEE, Florida, Vice Chair JOSEPH MORELLE, New York,
BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia Ranking Member
H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia TERRI A. SEWELL, Alabama
GREG MURPHY, North Carolina NORMA TORRES, California
STEPHANIE BICE, Oklahoma JULIE JOHNSON, Texas
MARY MILLER, Illinois
MIKE CAREY, Ohio
Mike Platt, Staff Director
Jamie Fleet, Minority Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Opening Statements
Chairman Bryan Steil, Representative from the State of Wisconsin. 1
Ranking Member Joseph Morelle, Representative from the State of
New York....................................................... 2
Submissions for the Record
H.R. 5891........................................................ 5
Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 5891............. 11
H.R. 1329........................................................ 22
Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 1329............. 29
Torres amendment................................................. 41
MARKUP OF H.R. 5891, WITHHOLD MEMBER
PAY DURING SHUTDOWNS ACT; AND
H.R. 1329, SMITHSONIAN AMERICAN
WOMEN'S HISTORY MUSEUM ACT
----------
March 18, 2026
Committee on House Administration,
House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:12 a.m., in
room 1310, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Bryan Steil
[Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Steil, Lee, Loudermilk, Griffith,
Murphy, Bice, Miller, Morelle, Sewell, Torres, and Johnson.
Staff present: Mike Platt, Staff Director; Rachel Collins,
General Counsel; Abby Salter, Deputy General Counsel; Jordan
Wilson, Director of Member Services; Kristen Monterroso,
Director of Operations; Annemarie Cake, Professional Staff and
Deputy Clerk; Jamie Fleet, Minority Staff Director; Khalil
Abboud, Minority Deputy Staff Director; Matt Schlesinger,
Minority Senior Counsel for Oversight and Investigations; and
Owen Reilly, Minority Professional Staff.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BRYAN STEIL, CHAIRMAN OF THE
COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM
WISCONSIN
Chairman Steil. The Committee on House Administration will
come to order. I note that a quorum is present. Without
objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a recess at any
time.
Today, the Committee on House Administration will consider
two separate pieces of legislation. These bills will increase
transparency with the American people, establish a new location
for the Smithsonian Museum. In consultation with my colleague,
the Ranking Member, we will be pulling off the legislative
branch agency reform, but we are working to remedy that and
come back with what I think will be a great piece of
legislation that will address some of those concerns.
First, we will consider H.R. 5891, the Withhold Member Pay
During Shutdowns Act. This legislation prohibits Members from
collecting pay during a lapse in appropriations. Last fall, I
think as everybody here recalls, we had the longest Government
shutdown in history. We are now in a partial shutdown.
The Department of Homeland Security has not been funded
since February 14. It has been 32 days since TSA agents have
been fully and properly compensated. This is at a time during
which we should be securing and protecting the homeland.
Schumer and Democrats in the Senate are playing politics with
DHS funding.
We all know the spending process in Washington is broken.
The Withhold Member Pay During Shutdowns Act starts to fix the
broken system. The bill ensures that no Members collect a
paycheck while hardworking Federal employees are being forced
to work without their pay. I am thankful to my colleagues on
their feedback on this common-sense legislation, and I look
forward to discussing it further today.
Next, we will consider H.R. 1329, the Smithsonian American
Women's History Act--the Smithsonian Women's History Museum
Act. This legislation allows the Smithsonian to move forward
with construction of the future museum to recognize and honor
the contributions of American women. It is all the more
exciting that we are considering this legislation in our
Nation's 250th anniversary.
Finally, we were going to be considering H.R. 6028, the
Legislative Branch Agencies Clarification Act, which was
introduced by my colleague, Morgan Griffith. That process, in
consultation with my friend the Ranking Member, Mr. Morelle, we
are going to pull that legislation and work toward some
amendments and adjustments, and then come back to this
Committee with a final product that I think has a real
opportunity to pass in a bipartisan way. These are the types of
reforms that I think that this Committee, historically, has
done a great job of finding ways where all of us across the
aisle can look and determine how we can make improvements in
the operation of legislative branch agencies, from GPO, to
Library of Congress, and including the Copyright Office.
I thank my colleagues for being here today. I appreciate
their engagement in all of these important pieces of
legislation on both sides of the aisle. I look forward to
discussing the legislation further.
I will yield back, and I will now recognize the Ranking
Member, Mr. Morelle, for 5 minutes for the purpose of making an
opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH MORELLE, RANKING MEMBER OF THE
COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM
NEW YORK
Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for convening us
today. I will have a little bit more to say about the bills
that we are considering.
First, I want to thank you for your consideration and the
taking off, at least for a short time, the conversation around
the Library of Congress appointments, et cetera. I do note
that, even when we had a conversation about one of the bills on
the calendar today, the withholding pay of legislators during
shutdowns, that you were very helpful in pulling that, and I
think we were going to consider that several weeks ago, we
pulled it down and now have a bipartisan agreement. I think
wherever we can on issues that all of us care deeply about come
together in a bipartisan way and demonstrate that we can, in
fact, move ahead on many issues that our Committee, the
Congress and, more importantly, the American people care about.
I am really grateful to you for your continued indulgence.
Hopefully, we will have a product that I think we all can be
supportive of and that serves the needs, again, of the Congress
and of the American people.
I do want to take a moment, if I can, using my time just to
talk about congressional capacity, because some of the issues
that we are talking about involve that. You know, I think about
this a lot, and I appreciate the Modernization Committee
efforts led by Mrs. Bice and our Ranking Member, Mrs. Torres.
Because we are in an era, particularly given the Supreme
Court--and I talk about this probably ad nauseam--but the
decision in Bright Loper to end Chevron deference means that
the Court is really pushing us to offer more detailed and
technically precise laws, and we are doing it without more
legislative attorneys and without more subject matter experts,
and being forced to do more with less. Some day I would like us
to do more with more, and I will continue making that advocacy
here and in the Appropriations Committee.
Using the various agencies we are aligned with, whether it
is the Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service, et
cetera, do allow us to have that expertise and access to
information that maybe we cannot quite do right now given the
financial constraints that we face. It is going to become more
important. If we are going to fulfill the mandate that the
Supreme Court has given us, and we avoid having every
legislative decision determined ultimately in district and
circuit courts, and, ultimately, by the Supreme Court, we need
to be much more adept at utilizing outside resources when
available, and hopefully in some way, at some point, being able
to give more resources to the Congress itself.
A number of these touch on it, particularly the bill that
we are going to try to come back and see if we cannot get
agreement on. I think it is important, just looking at the big
picture, this institution of Congress, Article I, in which we
bear such responsibility to the American people. We are, as,
you know, no one on this panel needs to be reminded, closest to
the people. Every other year, they get to make a decision on
their Representatives. We are the closest thing to the people
in this Government.
While more is being asked of us, if we are going to fulfill
our obligations and our duties and our responsibilities, we are
going to need make sure we have access to the best minds, the
brightest minds, and we do it in a way that is entirely
consistent with our mission.
I appreciate that, I appreciate the time, and grateful,
again, for your willingness to continue working on these
important issues to reach compromise and make sure we have a
bipartisan agreement.
Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
I appreciate my colleague's comments. I think we--although
we do not always agree on all policy areas, I think we both
agree on the importance of Article I powers of the Congress,
and I appreciate your work in that regard.
I will now call up H.R. 5891, the Withhold Member Pay
During Shutdowns Act. The clerk will please report the bill.
The Clerk. H.R. 5891, to reduce the annual rate of----
Chairman Steil. Without objection, the first reading of the
bill is dispensed with. Also, without objection, the bill
should be considered as read and open to amendment at any
point.
[H.R. 5891 follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Steil. I have an Amendment in the Nature of a
Substitute at the desk. The clerk will please report the
amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 5891----
Chairman Steil. Without objection, the Amendment in the
Nature of a Substitute is considered as read and will serve as
base text for the purposes of further amendment.
[The Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Steil. I will now recognize myself to speak on the
ANS.
Let us set the stage. Last Friday was payday for millions
of Federal workers. Unfortunately, over a hundred thousand of
those hardworking Federal employees did not get paid, but they
were still required to show up for work. That is not a problem
for lawmakers, of course, who under the Constitution get paid
even when there is a shutdown.
While Federal workers are required to show up to work and
not get paid, Members of Congress are, under current law,
receiving their paycheck if they do not defer their pay. That
is not right. It is not fair. The Withhold Members Pay During
Shutdowns Act fixes it. This bill makes clear, your Member of
Congress will not receive a paycheck if hardworking men and
women of the Federal Government are required to show up for
work and not get paid.
Right now, as I think everybody knows, we are in a partial
Government shutdown. All the while, American Forces are
actively engaged in armed conflict with Iran, the world's
largest State sponsor of terrorism. Our homeland is under
serious threat, but the Department of Homeland Security has not
been funded since February 14.
Again, over a hundred thousand Department of Homeland
Security employees are working without pay. It is impacting
Americans across the board. It is impacting American travelers
who are showing up to airports and finding long lines, because
some of those TSA workers are calling in sick so that they can
go do another job and actually get paid.
Many of us, many of us likely felt the impact ourselves
when traveling to Washington, D.C., depending on what airport
you came in from. Some people are reportedly sleeping in their
cars to wake up early to get into the airport so that they can
make their flight. Some of these TSA workers have health
concerns. One is battling cancer; could not keep up with their
payments for their insurance. These are real substantive
problems that have been created by the Schumer shutdown.
Last fall, we went through the Nation's longest Government
shutdown in history. Federal law enforcement, then, in addition
to air traffic controllers and countless of other Federal
employees, went without pay for over a month. Again, unless
your Member of Congress asked for their pay to be withheld,
they still got paid. To me that is unacceptable.
Now, the spending process in Washington is completely
broken. This bill is common sense, and it is one step that we
can take to start to break the gridlock here in Washington,
D.C. While my colleagues and I, I suspect, disagree on the
cause of the shutdown, and probably viscerally so, I think we
can all agree that changes need to be made; that Members of
Congress should not be receiving their pay while hardworking
Federal employees are required to show up but are not receiving
their pay.
I want to just take a pause and reflect--and thank, not
only the Ranking Member for his work on this legislation--we
came forward before with similar texts, we dialoged through
this, and despite some of the partisan gridlock that exists on
the Hill, there probably are disagreements on why there is a
lapse in pay for hardworking TSA agents--I think we--I
appreciate his work on this--that we both agree, and I think
all of us here agree, that Members of Congress should not be
receiving their pay when hardworking Americans are required to
show up and not receive theirs. I think this is a real
opportunity for us to make real reforms, force Members of both
sides of the aisle to come together, reach a resolution on
behalf of the American people. The preventing Members from
receiving their paychecks while hardworking Americans are not
receiving theirs I think is a meaningful step forward in
breaking the gridlock in Washington, D.C.
I will yield back and ask if there is other Members to that
seek recognition.
I recognize the Ranking Member for 5 minutes on the bill.
Mr. Morelle. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I do support this measure, and I am grateful for the
opportunity to dialog with you. I know that Mrs. Bice had a
great deal of input into this as well. I want to thank her,
because we had conversations about some earlier drafts. I do
support this.
I want to make a couple of observations about it. I think
we do probably vehemently disagree on the reasons. My good
friends on the other side of the aisle control the entire
entities of the Federal Government, both--the White House, both
branches of the U.S. Congress. Despite that, we had one of the
longest shutdowns in American history, a shutdown that hurt
people and families in ways that I suspect we have not even
fully appreciated or realized yet, and we should do everything
we can to make sure it does not happen again.
I agree, I think the appropriation process is in many ways
broken, and maybe there is more that we can do in that space to
structurally change the way its done to avoid this.
Right now we are in shutdown because we cannot get Members
across the aisle to recognize that there needs to be reforms to
ICE and the agents which have caused no end to problems around
the United States that led to the deaths of U.S. citizens who
protest some of the worst abuses of ICE agents. We think there
are ways to get to a reasonable place here in reforming them
and having them act in ways that every single law enforcement
department across the United States behaves. I think we are
going to continue to push that.
In fact, the way to resolve the issues that my friend
talked about is to sign a discharge petition that Rosa DeLauro,
who is the ranking Democrat on the Appropriations Committee,
will have on the floor today, which will fund TSA, which will
fund the Coast Guard, which will fund FEMA, but still require
us to have a negotiation about the reforms that, not only we
believe on our side of the aisle, but the American people
believe ought to happen.
Anyway, that debate will continue outside of this room.
But--and, frankly, to your point, no one sitting in this
Committee room decided that Members should collect their
regularly scheduled salaries regardless of the operating
posture of the Federal Government. The Constitution made that
decision 239 years ago.
Personally, I do not like it, and I sympathize with our
staffs and other Federal employees who bear the financial
consequences of Congress' failing to do its most basic duty. In
the State legislature, when I was in Albany, I helped pass a
law which did the same thing at the State level and had my pay
withheld, as my colleagues did, during periods where their
budget impasse.
A number of us already have our pay voluntarily withheld. I
do it. I know a number of others do. This is our basic
responsibility, and we should have to bear the consequences
that our colleagues, whether it is our staff or other Federal
employees, do.
I will say this, just in--and I am using a little bit about
this, but I do worry a little bit about the other branch--
because this takes two branches of Government to have an
appropriation bill signed into law. If a President, not this
one, but any future President would make the decision that they
wanted to be punitive because they are upset about what is in
the appropriation bills or they are upset with Congress about
other things, could withhold, and then we would have done our
job, House and Senate agree, and send a congressionally
approved funding bill to the President who could be vetoed, and
only would have to veto one of the 12 appropriation bills in
order to make certain that Members had their pay withheld.
I would hope that would not happen, but suggesting some
things that I thought would never happen in America are
happening, and some things that I would never have thought a
White House would do is being done. It does not take a lot of
imagination anymore to think about things that are without
precedent. But--and I do think, ultimately, the American people
need to trust in this, and I think that trust only comes when
we are prepared to submit ourselves to the same rules that
other people are submitted to.
I support the measure. I recommend my colleagues vote
``yes'' on the issue, because damage to the country caused by
Government shutdown is significant, and the trust of the
American people is vital if we are going to continue to
function and serve in the manner that our Founders intended. I
will support it.
I appreciate, again, your indulgence and your hard work to
make sure that this was a bipartisan approach.
With that, I will yield back.
Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
Do other Members seek recognition for amendment or debate?
Ms. Lee is recognized on the bill.
Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I think it is significant to take just a moment and speak
to some of the factual underpinnings of the current Government
shutdown. It has been said that Republicans control both
Chambers of Congress and the White House and that somehow that
is related to the current shutdown. I feel it is very important
to clarify the actual factual background of what has got us
here. Because it is true that this shutdown is incredibly
damaging to the American people and, in fact, dangerous for the
American people. Because it is not just ICE that is affected.
It is not just the policy dispute about best practices and the
attempts to negotiate reforms. It is the fact that it is so
much deeper than that.
The Department of Homeland Security was created in the wake
of 9/11 to help protect the American homeland from future
attacks, to help protect the American people. There is no more
important job that we have. Embedded within the Department of
Homeland Security, it is not just ICE--and not even just ICE
and TSA. There are other places, other things that are
happening there, including CISA, the Cybersecurity and
Infrastructure Security Agency, including the Coast Guard. All
of those components are right now being understaffed and, in
many cases, not paid.
When we come to the discussion about why, facts matter. The
reality is that Republicans and Democrats in Congress
negotiated a bipartisan appropriations bill that funded the
Department of Homeland Security. If we go back and look at the
vote history, what has happened? Ultimately, we were able to
pass this bill out of the House because a handful of Democrats
voted with us. Look at the board. Who voted in support of
funding the Department of Homeland Security and who did not?
The same is true in the Senate. Who has supported funding the
Department of Homeland Security and who has not? The facts are
crystal clear. This is, from beginning to middle to end to this
moment, a Democrat-driven shutdown.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
Do other Members seek recognition?
Mrs. Torres seeks recognition for 5 minutes to speak on the
bill.
Mrs. Torres. Thank you, Chairman. I would not miss an
opportunity to be able to discuss this important issue.
I serve in the U.S. Congress, a body where a 9-1-1
dispatcher can be elected and hold the same voting power as the
wealthiest Member in Congress, someone who might have bought
their way to Congress because they could fund their own
campaign. Let us look at the bigger picture of what is
happening here.
It started with a falsehood of a SAVE Act, because
Republicans have said that there are cheaters, there are people
that are voting in elections and making changes that should not
be electing certain Members to Congress. Who are they talking
about? Are they talking about the richest Members of Congress
or are they talking about the 9-1-1 dispatcher who had to
struggle and campaign and go door to door to get here? Are they
talking about the teacher who in between teaching in a
classroom was able to get themselves here?
While we are talking about setting the stage, let us look
at setting the stage where the richest Members of Congress, who
have been allowed to trade in the stock market while
influencing bills that are passing--that are getting passed the
through the House and passed through the Senate, these are the
people that Republican--the Republican majority is prioritizing
yet again.
Now, let us set the record straight about why the
Department of Homeland Security has not been funded. Yes,
Democrats are fighting to bring back civility in the streets of
America, but Republicans have prioritized violence and the
murder of American citizens by Federal agents. Why? Because
dissent. Because these brave Americans dare to stand up against
the policies that they continue to shove down your throats. The
price of milk is up. The price of eggs is up. The price of
insurance is unaffordable. Here we are, sitting in Congress,
talking about things that are not the top priority of American
families.
While we can agree that no one should get paid during a
Government shutdown--and I have been to this dance before,
Chairman--as a former State legislator in California, for 7
months I took a payday loan to be able to pay for my mortgage
because we were in a Government shutdown.
I agree, these brave Americans that are on the front line
of security, keeping the flying, the travelers safe should be
getting paid. Shame on those who try to, once again, take a
cheap shot as to the reason why we are in a shutdown.
We are in a shutdown, absolutely, because I refuse to allow
the Federal agents to continue to murder Americans on American
soil.
With that, I will yield back to the Chairman.
Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
Does any other Member seek recognition for amendment or
debate?
Ms. Johnson seeks recognition for 5 minutes to discuss the
bill.
Ms. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
We are--I want to address a few points that were made. You
know, we are in a Government shutdown right now with the
Department of Homeland Security because ICE is out of control,
because Republicans refuse to rein them in, because they are
consistently violating the due process rights of Americans in
this country over and over and over again. Where Democrats
are--we are not going to fund it.
Now, this notion that FEMA, TSA, the Coast Guard deserves
to be funded, absolutely. Democrats have offered five different
times to fund these, independently, because these agencies are
important. They are fundamentally important. Our air traffic
control is important. Republicans have refused time and time
and time again. Today, we are going to have a discharge
petition by Representative DeLauro on the floor that funds all
of these very important agencies--that funds FEMA, that funds
TSA, that funds the Coast Guard. Republicans, I bet you every
single one of you are going to refuse to sign it.
This is just hollow notion to talk about how important
these agencies are when you are refusing to fund it, when you
have an absolute opportunity to do so. ICE must be completely
overhauled. Republicans have refused to engage in that
meaningful debate. That is why we are here and that is why we
are in a shutdown. Democrats are having pathways to get the
American people out of this process, and Republicans are
refusing to do it. That is the truth, American people, that is
why we are here. We are not going to tolerate the gross abuses
that are happening.
I had a man die in my district over the weekend. He is an
Afghan hero who served bravely alongside our American Forces
who was part of an Afghan evac program when the U.S. military
left Afghanistan. He has been here in this country. He was
picked up. He has no criminal convictions. He has six kids. He
was working in Dallas. He was picked up on a morning, driving
his kids to school, and he was dead 24 hours later. That is not
OK, and that is not supposed to happen in this country. As long
as that kind of stuff is happening, we will not fund ICE,
period, full stop. We will not do it.
We do want to fund FEMA, we do want to fund TSA, we do want
to fund the Coast Guard, and we have vehicles to do that, but
Republicans are going to refuse to do it, so their talk does
not mean anything.
Thank you, and I yield back.
Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
Do any other Members seek recognition for amendment or
debate?
There being no further amendment or debate, the question
now occurs in the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, nay.
In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it, and the
amendment is adopted.
The question now occurs on ordering H.R. 5891, as amended,
reporting favorable to the House.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, no.
In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it, the ayes
have it, and the motion to report is agreed to.
Mrs. Miller. Mr. Chairman, I request a recorded vote.
Chairman Steil. A roll call vote is requested, and the
clerk will please call the roll.
The Clerk. Chairman Steil?
Mr. Steil. Aye.
The Clerk. Chairman Steil votes aye.
Ms. Lee?
Ms. Lee. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes aye.
Mr. Loudermilk?
Mr. Loudermilk. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes aye.
Mr. Griffith?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
Dr. Murphy. Aye.
The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes aye.
Mrs. Bice?
Mrs. Bice. Aye.
The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes aye.
Mr. Carey?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mrs. Miller?
Mrs. Miller. Yes.
The Clerk. Mrs. Miller votes aye.
Mr. Morelle?
Mr. Morelle. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
Ms. Sewell?
Ms. Sewell. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
Mrs. Torres?
Mrs. Torres. Aye.
The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
Ms. Johnson?
Ms. Johnson. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Johnson votes aye.
Mr. Chairman, for this----
Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
All Members voted.
The clerk will report the tally.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, for this vote there are nine ayes
and zero noes.
Chairman Steil. Thank you very much.
H.R. 5891, as amended, is adopted.
A majority having voted in favor of H.R. 5891, as amended,
the bill is reported--is ordered favorably reported to the
House. Without objection, a motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
I will now call up H.R. 1329, the Smithsonian American
Women's Museum Act. The clerk will please report the bill.
The Clerk. H.R. 1329, to permit the Smithsonian----
Chairman Steil. Without objection, the first reading of the
bill is dispensed with. Also, without objection, the bill shall
be considered as read and open to amendment at any point.
[H.R. 1329 follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Steil. Representative Miller has an Amendment in
the Nature of a Substitute at the desk. The clerk will please
report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to
H.R.----
Chairman Steil. Without objection, the Amendment in the
Nature of a Substitute is considered as read and will serve as
base text for the purposes of further amendment.
[The Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Steil. Representative Miller is recognized for 5
minutes to speak on her amendment.
Mrs. Miller. Thank you, Chairman Steil, for hosting this
markup.
For 250 years American women have made significant
contributions to our Nation's history, economic prosperity, and
greater society. It is time that these women have a dedicated
museum in the Nation's Capital to honor their achievements.
The original bill allows the Smithsonian to move forward
with construction of the future museum. Importantly, the bill
also puts guardrails in place to ensure this museum does not
represent history in a partisan way. My amendment specifically
ensures that only biological women are honored and celebrated
in this museum. The accomplishments of real women should never
be overshadowed by biological men pretending to be women.
In addition to this important language--in addition to the
important language changes this amendment makes, it also marks
a specific location for the museum on The National Mall. The
American Women's History Museum is an important addition to The
Mall that will recognize the countless women who have given so
much to our country.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment to
begin the construction of the new Smithsonian American Women's
History Museum.
Thank you, and I yield back.
Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
Do other Members seek recognition for amendment or debate?
For what purpose does Mr. Morelle seek recognition?
Mr. Morelle. To offer comments on the amendment.
Chairman Steil. Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me begin by stating what I hope is obvious to everyone:
The Smithsonian American Women's History Museum is long
overdue, and it absolutely deserves a place on The National
Mall. I will say, you know, we call The Mall, it goes by the--
you know, the term is often used as America's front yard. I
personally, and I suspect I share the view of all the Members,
absolutely love The Mall. Walking late at night, sometimes you
can go by and see folks playing kickball or touch football, and
people just out with families, flying kites. The Mall is an
amazing place. Anybody who has not been to Washington to
appreciate it should come.
Of course, the memorials and monuments on The Mall are
breathtaking, as are so many Smithsonian institutes which are--
line The Mall. The National Mall is also where our Nation's
story gets told, the triumphs and the struggles, and American
women have shaped every chapter of that story, from my
hometown's hero, Susan B. Anthony, and Abigail Adams, to Rosa
Parks and Dolores Huerta.
That is why I support H.R. 1329, as introduced by my
colleague from New York, Representative Malliotakis, as well as
her companion bill, H.R. 1330, which would make the same
technical legislative text to the National Museum for the
American Latino Act.
Together, these bills correct the statutory anomaly that
have stalled both museums and allow them to move forward on The
Mall as Congress and this Committee intended. Unfortunately,
that is not the bill before us today, and I am extremely
disappointed that the majority has needlessly politicized what
has for years been bipartisan and a patriotic process.
The bill we are considering today fundamentally alters
Representative Malliotakis' legislation in four key ways. I
would like to take a moment to talk about the four different
things that have happened in this bill that make this far less
bipartisan and will lead me, sadly, to oppose the bill.
First, it completely omits the National Museum of the
American Latino, a egregious omission, which we will address in
more detail shortly, but it is so disappointing as both of
those museums have been moving alongside one another and both
are critically important to telling America's story.
Second, it grants the President unprecedented, unilateral,
unchecked authority to disregard the Smithsonian's recommended
site and pick his own. Frankly, the President has, I think,
contrary to the wishes of the American people, stepped into the
Smithsonian, he has tried to regulate history, he is trying to
whitewash history. I think letting the President make dissent--
determinations about America's history is something we
completely reject.
Third, it turns control over the museum's design and
construction over to boards that are stacked now with political
loyalists who have already shown they will rubberstamp whatever
the President wants, as we have seen with the desecration of
the White House and the destruction of the iconic East Wing.
Done without outside counsel, the President apparently thinks
that America's house is his house and he will do whatever he
wants to it. That is something we simply cannot allow here as
it relates to the Smithsonian.
Fourth, it is a politically charged poison pill intended to
dictate what the museum can and cannot say about women's
history. This is especially unfortunate in light of the bill's
legislative history.
In 2019, the Committee first authorized the Women's History
Museum. Democrats accepted an amendment from our colleague,
Representative Loudermilk, requiring the museum to, and I am
quoting, to reflect the diversity of the political viewpoints
held by women of the United States. That same language appears
in this bill and in the Latino museum legislation. We are
considering today makes clear what viewpoint diversity really
meant, only viewpoint that House Republicans agree with. It is
hardly diversity.
Let us be honest what is happening here. If the goal were
to truly move the museum forward, we would not be abandoning
the bipartisan process that has brought us to the brink of
construction. We would not be considering a bill with an
ideological poison pill. We would not exclude the Latino
museum. We would not be giving Donald Trump, of all people, the
authority to pick a location, building design, and dictate what
kind of history we remember and we reflect on.
Just consider the broader context for a moment. Last year,
the White House issued a so-called executive order pressuring
the Smithsonian to rewrite history, as the President sees fit,
suggesting museums should avoid telling the most uncomfortable
chapters of our history. It is Orwellian and it fundamentally
misunderstands about the role of museums and the preeminent
status of the Smithsonian Institute.
The question before us is simple: Who should decide what
appears in the Smithsonian? Who decides where the museum goes
and what it looks like? Should it be historians, scholars, and
curators? Or should it be somebody who complains publicly that
the Smithsonian focuses too much on how bad slavery was and who
has taken a literal wrecking ball to some of the most dignified
and important landmarks in America?
I will cut to the chase. I wish this was bipartisan. I wish
we could pass it. I wish we could support it. Sadly, these
amendments have made it impossible to do. Frankly, if this does
not become law, I promise you this, once the Democrats retake
the majority, we will pass both bills, and we will do it the
right way.
With that, I yield back.
Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
Do any other Members seek recognition for amendment?
Ms. Sewell--for what purpose does Ms. Sewell seek
recognition?
Ms. Sewell. I seek recognition to talk about this
amendment.
Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5
minutes.
Ms. Sewell. The significance of women in our Nation's story
has long been overlooked, underappreciated, and even outright
ignored. It was Eleanor Roosevelt who said, No one can give you
or make you feel inferior without your consent.
By having a women's museum, we are standing up and saying
we do not consent to the fact that the story of women--all
women--being told on The National Mall is so important that we
are moving forward with the bill that was introduced by Nicole
Malliotakis that would actually get this done.
I sit on this Committee because I know how important
administration is. You know, I have to say, I was very
disappointed in this particular bill because it did not have to
have a poison bill. It did not have to have--give the President
unilateral authority to choose a spot in which it is going to
actually be housed. That is just unacceptable, especially given
the fact that this particular President has already shown
himself to not really care about real history--I should say,
his--he is about his story, not her story or history, as we
know it.
The construction of the Smithsonian Women's Museum is an
opportunity to accurately capture and tell the full narrative
of how women have made real and indelible contributions to our
country at every turn and corner since its inception. Women
everywhere continue to break barriers and defy odds across all
sectors of our Nation, and we do so proudly as Americans.
I am glad to be a cosponsor of H.R. 1329, a bipartisan bill
that would actually put the women's museum on The National
Mall, very close to actually being passed. I feel like this
particular bill, as amended, would stymie that process. I,
unfortunately, will be voting ``no'' on this bill. I look
forward to getting back on the right track and supporting H.R.
1329, the bipartisan bill.
I think that when we think about The Mall, as my colleague
said, The Mall tells a story of America, and it should tell the
complete story of America. To do so would require us to have,
not only a women's museum on The National Mall, but a Latino
museum on The National Mall as well.
Mr. Chairman, it took so long for the African American
Museum that we now have on the Nation's Mall, for that bill to
be passed. I would hope that given the, I think, unanimous--you
know, support of having a women's museum, that we will not
have--take as much time to actually pass a bill to get that
done.
In fact, I just want to go on the record as saying that
this is an imperative. Getting a women's national museum on The
National Mall is an imperative, as well as a Latino museum. I
look forward to this Committee approving bills that are not
political statements but, rather, are really, really dedicated
to getting the job done of memorializing the amazing
contributions of women.
Thank you. With that I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
Do other Members seek recognition for amendment or debate?
Representative Lee, for what purposes do you seek
recognition?
Ms. Lee. Move to strike the last word.
Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5
minutes.
Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I speak today in support of the
creation of the Smithsonian museum dedicated to the history of
American women.
Before coming to Congress, I had the privilege of serving
as Florida's Secretary of State. In that role, I oversaw our
State's cultural and historical resources, including museums,
artifacts, and archives that preserve the story of Florida and
the people who helped shape it. That experience gave me a deep
appreciation for how important it is that we preserve our
history carefully and tell it well. Museums are not simply a
collection of objects. They are places where we remember who we
are, where we came from, and the values that guided our country
forward.
The story of America cannot be fully told without the story
of American women, because women have always helped shape this
Nation, even when their contributions were not fully
recognized.
From the earliest days of our country, women have
contributed in extraordinary ways, often without recognition,
and sometimes without even the right to participate fully in
civic life. Women led families, built communities, served in
times of war, advanced science and medicine, strengthened our
economy, and helped expand the promise of liberty for our next
generation. Yet for much of our history, their stories too
often have been told only in the margins.
Today, women serve in leadership roles across every field
of American life, but the progress has been a hard one. In
Congress, for example, the numbers tell a remarkable story.
Since the founding of our Nation, roughly 12,000 Americans have
served in Congress. Yet only about 450, a little less than,
have been women. That statistic is striking. It reminds us that
the full participation of women in our national institutions is
something that has largely unfolded within our lifetimes.
As someone who has spent much of her career in male-
dominated professions--as a prosecutor, as a judge, and now
here--I know personally how meaningful it is when young women
can look and see the stories of those who came before them.
Representation matters, but so does remembrance. The stories we
preserve shape what the next generation believes is possible.
A museum dedicated to the history of American women would
not simply celebrate famous names; it would tell the broader
story of the countless women, teachers, entrepreneurs,
scientists, soldiers, mothers, and public servants whose
perseverance and courage helped shape this Nation. Those
stories deserve a permanent place among the institutions that
tell the American story. When we preserve these stories, we are
not simply looking backward, we are helping the next generation
see what is possible.
As the mother of a teenage daughter, I often think about
the examples that she sees and the stories that she learns
about the women who helped shape our country. May they know us,
may they see what is possible, and may they go further than we
ever dreamed.
When young girls walk through the doors of the Smithsonian
and see the contributions of women woven into the fabric of our
national history, they will understand something important,
that they too are part of that story.
For those reasons I am proud to support this effort. I
commend my colleague on her efforts here today. I look forward
to the day when Americans from across the country can visit a
museum that honors the remarkable legacy of women in the United
States.
Thank you, and I yield back.
Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
For what purpose does Representative Torres seek
recognition?
Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
Chairman Steil. We will pause while the amendment is
distributed.
Chairman Steil. The clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to the amendment in the nature----
Chairman Steil. Without objection, the amendment is
considered as read.
[The amendment of Mrs. Torres follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a
point of order.
The gentlewoman is recognized on her amendment for 5
minutes.
Mrs. Torres. Thank you, Chairman.
My amendment combines two bipartisan bills authored by
Representative Nicole Malliotakis, H.R. 1329, the Smithsonian
American Women's History Museum Act, and H.R. 1330, the
Smithsonian National Museum of the American Latino Act.
Together they correct the exact same legislative anomaly that
has been used to stall both museums. The amendment removes
those barriers and finally allows design and construction to
move forward on The National Mall.
From their inception, Congress has treated these two
museums as paired efforts. They were authorized in the same
law, and every legislative fix has addressed them together
because they belong together.
We cannot tell the story of America fully or honestly while
treating the contributions of American women and American
Latinos as an afterthought. To advance one without the other or
delay both is a direct dismissal of the hardworking Americans
who build this country.
The National Mall is where Americans' stories belong. To
suggest otherwise or to let these bills languish ignores the
overwhelming bipartisan mandate this body has already
established. The original Women's History Museum authorization
had 293 cosponsors and passed the House on suspension with 374
votes. The National Museum of the American Latino enjoyed
similarly strong bipartisan support.
Today, the bills fixing the law restricting both museums
from being built on The Mall are led by a Republican and
include a combined 356 cosponsors, including 139 Republicans.
It is no secret that we are deeply divided as a country and as
a Congress, but this one should be easy. We hear a lot about--a
lot of talk about unity and bipartisanship in this room, but if
we cannot come together to honor the hardworking Americans who
shaped this Nation, then those words are hollow. This is an
opportunity, Members, for us to work together.
I urge the adoption of my amendment, and I yield back.
Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
Is there additional debate or amendment on the amendment?
The gentleman from New York, for what purpose do you seek
recognition?
Mr. Morelle. Yes. To speak on the amendment. I move to
strike the last word.
I just would note that in the amendment from Mrs. Miller on
page 2, the President may designate an alternative site for the
museum within 100 days of the date of the enactment of the
subsection. The whole point of it being on The National Mall,
which is the point of what we are trying to do, her amendment
actually takes that away from us. We would be agreeing to put
it on The Mall, except President Trump can, within 6 months of
the enactment of this, do whatever he wants. It basically
eliminates the whole point of the bill and what the bipartisan
agreement was and what Ms. Malliotakis, who I spoke to
yesterday--and I certainly would not represent what she said. I
said to her, the whole point of this was to make sure this
museum and the Latino museum are on The Mall.
The amendment--Mrs. Miller's amendment, which Mrs. Torres'
amendment seeks to strike, would remove the President's ability
to have unilateral say over where these extraordinary
institutions ought to go. For that reason, I will support Mrs.
Torres' amendment.
With that, I will yield.
Chairman Steil. Is there further debate on the amendment?
The gentlewoman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes to
strike the last word.
Ms. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I agree with Ms. Lee. Women need to be honored in this
country. The historic contributions that women have made should
be honored and should be on The National Mall. The historic
contributions of the Latino community should be honored and
should be on The National Mall. These are important stories to
contribute to the legacy of the American story.
The fact that we have bipartisan legislation, with hundreds
of cosponsors from both sides of the aisle, is demonstrative of
the significance of this effort. What is happening today in
this moment is the worst of partisan politics, where somebody
who is not the author of the bill swoops into a committee,
offers a very partisan poison-pill amendment to destroy the
intent of the legislation, to destroy the intent of the
bipartisan cooperation, to put in this--to stop in its tracks,
telling the story of women and Latinos in this community on The
National Mall. It is a disgrace to politics. It is something
that we should all be embarrassed about.
We should be passing out of this Committee the bipartisan
effort to get this important thing done. Indulging one Member
to come swoop in politically and sabotaging the efforts of
another is unacceptable.
I applaud my colleague, Mrs. Torres, for trying to fix this
and put this back on track. We should all adopt her amendment.
Put this--the intent of this legislation back in the forefront
in the bipartisan spirit by what has been so carefully and
painstakingly negotiated and present it to this Congress.
Because this work, the story of women, the story of the Latino
community, the story, the journey of how they contributed to
the robust fabric of our country needs to be told, and it needs
to be told by the Smithsonian, a nonpartisan entity that tells
the story fairly. The story should not be presented in a
partisan lens by either party.
That is why we have the Smithsonian, to tell the accurate
story, not from the viewpoint of a Republican and not from the
viewpoint of a Democrat, but from the viewpoint of the American
history. That is what we should all be supporting and that is
what we should all be fighting for.
I vehemently oppose Mrs. Miller's amendment that is trying
to sabotage this very, very important effort, and I strongly
support Mrs. Torres' amendment to restore the purpose of what
we have here to bipartisanly tell the story that is so
important.
I yield back.
Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
Is there further debate? Is there further debate on the
amendment?
Does the gentlewoman from Florida request a point of order?
Ms. Lee. No.
Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman withdraws her point of
order.
The question now occurs on the amendment offered by the--
Mrs. Torres--I apologize. I did not write it down in my notes--
by Mrs. Torres.
All those in favor of the amendment shall signify by saying
aye.
All those opposed, nay.
In the opinion of the Chair, the noes have it, the noes
have it, and the amendment is not agreed to.
The gentleman seeks a recorded vote. A recorded vote is so
ordered.
All those in favor of a recorded vote, raise your hand. Now
it is actually so ordered.
The clerk will please call the roll on the amendment.
The Clerk. Chairman Steil?
Chairman Steil. No.
The Clerk. Chairman Steil votes no.
Ms. Lee?
Ms. Lee. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
Mr. Loudermilk?
Mr. Loudermilk. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
Mr. Griffith?
Mr. Griffith. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
Dr. Murphy?
Dr. Murphy. No.
The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
Mrs. Bice?
Mrs. Bice. No.
The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
Mr. Carey?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mrs. Miller?
Mrs. Miller. No.
The Clerk. Mrs. Miller votes no.
Mr. Morelle?
Mr. Morelle. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
Ms. Sewell?
Ms. Sewell. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
Mrs. Torres?
Mrs. Torres. Aye.
The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
Ms. Johnson?
Ms. Johnson. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Johnson votes aye.
Chairman Steil. Have all Members voted?
Does any Member wish to change their vote?
The clerk will please report the tally.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, for this vote there are seven noes
and four ayes.
Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
Is there further amendment and debate on the underlying
amendment offered by Mrs. Miller?
Is there any further amendment or debate?
There being no further amendments or debate, the question
now occurs on the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, no.
In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it, the ayes
have it, the amendment is adopted.
The question now occurs on ordering H.R. 1329, as amended,
reported favorably to the House.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, no.
In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it, the ayes
have it, and the motion to report is agreed to.
Ms. Lee. Mr. Chair, I request a recorded vote.
Chairman Steil. A roll call vote is requested. The clerk
will please call the roll.
The Clerk. Chairman Steil?
Chairman Steil. Aye.
The Clerk. Chairman Steil votes aye.
Ms. Lee?
Ms. Lee. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes aye.
Mr. Loudermilk?
Mr. Loudermilk. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes aye.
Mr. Griffith?
Mr. Griffith. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes aye.
Dr. Murphy?
Dr. Murphy. Aye.
The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes aye.
Mrs. Bice?
Mrs. Bice. Aye.
The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes aye.
Mr. Carey?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mrs. Miller?
Mrs. Miller. Aye.
The Clerk. Mrs. Miller votes aye.
Mr. Morelle?
Mr. Morelle. Sadly, no.
The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes no.
Ms. Sewell?
Ms. Sewell. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes no.
Mrs. Torres?
Mrs. Torres. No.
The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes no.
Ms. Johnson?
Ms. Johnson. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Johnson votes no.
Chairman Steil. Have all Members voted?
Does any Member wish to change their vote?
The clerk will report the tally.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, for this vote there are seven ayes
and four noes.
Chairman Steil. H.R. 1329, as amended, is adopted.
This concludes the order of business for today's markup.
Without objection, pursuant to House Resolution 9, Clause 2(l),
Committee Members can file with the clerk of the Committee
supplemental, additional, minority, and dissenting views on
each of the items marked up today.
Also, without objection, the staff is authorized to make
necessary and conforming changes.
I am going to go back and realize that I did not note that
a majority having voted in favor of H.R. 1329, as amended, the
bill is ordered favorably reported to the House.
Without objection, a motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
That does now conclude our formal business. There is no
more formal business. I thank the Members for their
participation.
Without objection, the Committee on House Administration
stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:09 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
[all]